Blog

Do mock elections really matter?

12 May 2015
A general election ballot box. Image Courtesy: Northern Ireland Executive, Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic
Image Courtesy: Northern Ireland Executive, Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic

Why even casting your ballot in school elections can have a lasting effect on youth political engagement

Dr Avril Keating, Director, Centre for Global Youth, UCL Institute of Education
,
Director, Centre for Global Youth, UCL Institute of Education

Dr Avril Keating

Dr Avril Keating
Director, Centre for Global Youth, UCL Institute of Education

Dr Avril Keating is a Senior Lecturer in Comparative Social Science at the UCL Institute of Education's Department of Education, Practice and Society, Director of the Centre for Global Youth, and a Contributing Academic to the ESRC Centre for Learning and Life Chances in Knowledge Economies and Societies (LLAKES).

Avril's research focuses on the evolution of civic attitudes and agency during youth, and she is involved in a range of projects that explore this theme from a comparative, inter-disciplinary and mixed-method perspective.

Get our latest research, insights and events delivered to your inbox

Subscribe to our newsletter

We will never share your data with any third-parties.

Share this and support our work

The youth vote was an important theme in the run up to the 2015 general election, and it was heartening to see so many different organisations try to reach out to young voters. Whether it was Bite the Ballot or Channel 4’s E4, all worked to try to ensure young people got their say on May 7th.

These campaigns largely focus on young people who are over the age of 18 and eligible to vote in this election. But schools and teachers can play an important role even before their students reach the age of majority. In addition to formal Citizenship classes, schools also provide activities that give students a chance to learn about democracy through ‘hands-on’ experience. Some of the most popular (and effective) activities in this vein are school councils, debating teams, and mock elections, which the Hansard Society has been supporting for 50 years.

Analysis of the Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study in England (CELS) shows that hands-on activities like these can have a positive impact on young people’s attitudes towards politics. Moreover, these benefits are not temporary. We found that students who participated in mock elections, debating teams and/ or school councils were more likely to have positive attitudes towards political participation even after they had left school. And it’s not just voting that these activities encourage; our participants were also more likely to report that they had taken part in non-electoral types of participation, such as boycotting products, contacting politicians, and using social media for political purposes. These positive benefits were found even after we controlled for other factors that are known to boost political participation among adults (such as high levels of education and high socio-economic status). In other words, mock elections and school councils don’t just benefit middle class students or young people who are already politically engaged.

There are several reasons why activities like these provide such an important (and lasting) impression on youth attitudes. For one, these activities allow young people to acquire practical as well as cognitive skills. For example, mock elections give students an opportunity to participate in (mock) election campaigns and to run as candidates. In the process, students practice politically-relevant skills such as public speaking; formulating and communicating opinions about political issues; negotiating with others; and learning to work in groups.

Even simply filling in the mock ballot paper can be beneficial, as it not only allows students to become familiar with how to cast their vote, but it can get young people into the habit of participation. Many political scientists believe that voting is a habit and that people are more likely to vote if they have done so in the past. Young people typically do not get a chance to form this habit until after the age of 18, but mock elections can help to start the habit-formation process.

Schools also send an important message to young people when they give them opportunities to practice democracy at school. In particular, these activities help to reinforce the social norm that political participation is worthwhile. Exposing young people to this idea while they are at secondary school is particularly important. Adolescence is a formative period and the norms, identities and habits that are formed during this period persist into adulthood and help to shape political participation in later life.

More importantly, by offering these activities schools are also signalling that young people’s opinions matter. This can help young people to feel more included, and boost their confidence and sense of efficacy. Young people are more likely to take part if they feel that their voice will be heard, and that their efforts will make a difference.

Of course, simply holding mock elections in schools will not address all of the challenges surrounding youth political engagement. If only it were that easy. Families, political parties, NGOs and the media must also play their role in engaging young people with politics. And of course schools need to be given adequate support and resources in order to play their part. Politicians regularly pronounce their support for citizenship education, but if any type of citizenship education is to be effective, policy announcements in this vein must be backed-up with sustained political commitment, practical support for schools, and trained teachers. Without these vital resources, it will be difficult to live up to the potential that different types of citizenship education can have and give youth political engagement the boost it still clearly needs.

This post drew on a then-forthcoming paper in the Hansard Society's journal 'Parliamentary Affairs', since published as Avril Keating and Jan Germen Janmaat, ‘Education Through Citizenship at School: Do School Activities Have a Lasting Impact on Youth Political Engagement?', Parliamentary Affairs, Volume 69, Issue 2, April 2016, pp 409-429

News / Who really decides Immigration Rules: Parliament or the Home Secretary? - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 137

Who really controls immigration law when Ministers can rewrite key rules with minimal parliamentary scrutiny? Jonathan Featonby of the Refugee Council explains the Home Secretary’s far-reaching powers over Immigration Rules. We also discuss the Crime and Policing Bill, where amendments on AI and abortion highlight the challenges posed by rushed law-making and executive overreach. And we look ahead to the next phase of the assisted dying debate, as supporters in the House of Commons prepare for a renewed legislative push in the next parliamentary Session. Listen and subscribe: Apple Podcasts · Spotify · Acast · YouTube · Other apps · RSS

20 Mar 2026
Read more

News / Parliament Matters Bulletin: What’s coming up in Parliament this week? 16-20 March 2026

The Defence Secretary, John Healey, will face questions from MPs. The Grenfell Tower (Memorial Expenditure) Bill and the Ministerial Salaries (Amendment) Bill will be fast-tracked through all their Commons stages in a single day. MPs will debate online safety, an e-petition calling for automatic by-elections when MPs defect to another party, and the Conservative Party will choose the Opposition Day debate. The Justice Committee will hear from the Victims’ Commissioner on the Courts and Tribunals Bill, the Public Accounts Committee will question officials about the Restoration and Renewal of the Palace of Westminster, and experts will give evidence on the Representation of the People Bill. In the Lords, Peers will continue scrutiny of the Crime and Policing, Pensions Schemes, and Finance (No. 2) Bills. Lord Arbuthnot will ask about Fujitsu contributing to compensation in the Post Office Horizon case, and Peers will debate terrorism, abortion, AI, and assisted dying.

15 Mar 2026
Read more

News / Jury trials under threat? The Courts and Tribunals Bill explained - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 136

Plans to restrict the right to a jury trial have cleared their Second Reading in the Commons, but the proposals in the Courts and Tribunals Bill face growing resistance, including from Labour rebels. We discuss the legal and constitutional implications with barrister Lord Macdonald of River Glaven, examining what the reforms could mean for defendants’ rights and the criminal courts system. We also assess the passage of legislation removing hereditary Peers from Parliament, and the late compromise that eased opposition in the House of Lords. Meanwhile Sir Lindsay Hoyle clashes with the Chief Whip over delays in the division lobby, and newly released papers on Peter Mandelson’s Washington appointment raise fresh political questions. Listen and subscribe: Apple Podcasts · Spotify · Acast · YouTube · Other apps · RSS

13 Mar 2026
Read more

Briefings / Last-minute powers and limited scrutiny: Parliament and the risks of consigning online safety law to delegated legislation

Two late-stage government amendments to the Crime and Policing Bill and the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill would grant Ministers significant powers to reshape key parts of the Online Safety Act through delegated legislation. While the policy goals may attract support, the method raises serious constitutional concerns about parliamentary scrutiny and accountability. Using these amendments as a case study, this briefing explores the risks of relying on regulations to make policy and explains how the Hansard Society’s proposed reforms to the delegated legislation scrutiny system could better balance governmental flexibility with democratic oversight.

09 Mar 2026
Read more

News / Is the assisted dying bill being filibustered? - Parliament Matters podcast, Episode 135

Debate over the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill has been so slow in the House of Lords that opponents of the Bill are accused of deliberately running down the clock. Conservative Peer Lord Harper rejects claims of filibustering, arguing that Peers are undertaking necessary scrutiny of a flawed and complex bill. He contends the legislation lacks adequate safeguards and was unsuited to the Private Member’s Bill process and discusses whether MPs might attempt to revive it in a future parliamentary Session. Listen and subscribe: Apple Podcasts · Spotify · Acast · YouTube · Other apps · RSS

10 Mar 2026
Read more