In this context Sim’s analysis of citizenship teachers in Singapore is both interesting and revealing . Despite a ‘strong’ atate expectation for citizenship education to play an explicit role in nationalistic education, Social Studies teachers play a role as ‘readers’ of the curriculum and pedagogical texts and practices and as curricular-instructional gatekeepers, making their own meanings in citizenship education. Sim’s qualitative study of eight Social Studies teachers shows that within the framework of a tightly organized state-oriented and prescriptive citizenship education, Social Studies teachers shows that within the framework of a tightly organized state-oriented and prescriptive citizenship education, Social Studies teachers’ views are not homogeneous. Instead, they conceptualise their own citizenship education, revealing four types of pedagogical approaches, namely expository and highly controlled, rationalistic and persuasive, interactive and participative, and constructive and experiential. Moreover, the teachers in her sample had different orientations to citizenship education, ranging from nationalistic orientations to socially concerned and personal orientations. Among those nationalistically oriented teachers, some were found to be conservative, while others were found to be progressive. The conservative teachers adopted expository and highly controlled pedagogies, while the progressive teachers adopted rationalistic and persuasive approaches. Teachers in her study who were more social-convern oriented adopted interactive and participative pedagogical approaches. Teachers who were more person oriented adopted constructive and experiential pedagogical approaches.