Conference Agenda

Pring et al. (2009) state, one of the most valuable functions of education should be responsible for keeping young people’s learning constantly up to date. This means that education should be shaped according to the needs and requirements of the period in which we live. Increased diversity within societies has started to influence school history to prepare students for the new world settings, due to its inherent nature such as understanding and respecting different perspectives, appreciating the value of diversity, and questioning one’s own views (Zajda, 2015).

Therefore, now, teaching sensitive and controversial issues (SCIs) has crucial importance within history-teaching communities in the UK for both developing individual cognitive skills and preparing students for a pluralist, democratic society (Barton & McCully, 2010; Hess, 2002; Oxfam, 2006). That is why, these kinds of subjects should be encouraged, to provide students, the opportunity to appreciate differences, tolerate different values and perspectives, and the ability to live in peace with people from various backgrounds in society (Bourn, 2014). However, the relevant literature in the UK frequently shows that history teachers hesitate to teach SCIs in their lessons (Byford et al., 2009; Kitson & McCully, 2005; Oulton et al., 2004). According to the Historical Association’s T.E.A.C.H. report, history teachers’ reasons for avoiding emotive and controversial historical subjects can be varied such as their lack of knowledge and skills, delivering misleading messages, creating conflict and alienation among students, and potential issues related to parent and school complaints (HA, 2007). Therefore, according to the research of Byford et al. (2009), the vast majority of teachers (60%) avoid teaching SCIs within the community they teach in order to protect themselves. The reasons behind this avoidance seemed to be related to the potential disapproval of the parents, potential lawsuits, and students’ sensitivities (HA, 2007; Philips, 2008, Traille, 2007). Additionally, topics related to students’ cultural and religious heritages and subjects about the wider issues in societies such as terrorism, racism and Islamophobia (Philips, 2008) are the other factors making teaching SCIs difficult for history teachers. The aim of this research, therefore, was to conduct exploratory case studies in London among history teachers, to gain further insight and understanding regarding the situation of teaching SCIs among English history teachers.

For these reasons, the research question that this study will address is: “What are the thoughts of the history teachers for teaching SCIs in history classrooms?” To answer this question, the following sub-questions will be explored:

• What kinds of challenges do teachers encounter while teaching SCIs?
• What approaches, strategies, methods, and activities do teachers utilise to overcome possible challenges while teaching SCIs?

The global discourse on diversity and inclusion makes it imperative for educational researchers to revisit marginalization in education settings. Marginalization in education is a form of acute and persistent disadvantage rooted in underlying social inequalities involving cultural differences, knowledge gaps, and socio-economic status (Akin & Neumann, 2013). It can affect students’ academic performance, peer-to-peer interaction and sense of belongingness in school (Benner & Wang, 2014; Pendergast et al, 2018). Despite the call for inclusive and equitable quality education (SDG4) that promotes lifelong learning opportunities for all, children from rural and urban poor communities, ethnic and linguistic minority children, and children in displaced situations in Ghana and many parts of Sub-Saharan Africa have experienced marginalization in education for decades (Mfum-Mensah, 2018). Thus, to ensure inclusive and equitable quality education for all, it is essential for stakeholders in education to create learning environments that address educational inequities among students by empowering students to speak up and become actively involved in the teaching and learning process, particularly, those historically marginalized. Consequently, educational researchers advocate for better-informed practice with research that seeks to achieve social impact (García-Carrión et al., 2020).

Along these lines, research shows that dialogic learning has transformed classrooms and schools to provide high-quality education for all students (Flecha & Soler, 2013). This approach, according to Flecha (2015) increases academic performance, improves social cohesion, and enables participants to overcome educational inequality in diverse contexts. It dismantles deficit thinking and creates opportunities for participants to be confident and freely express themselves (Flecha, 2000; García-Carrión & Allotey, 2023). Thus, drawing on the social-cultural theory of cognitive development (Vygotsky, 1978) and grounded on the theory of dialogic learning (Flecha, 2000), research shows that Dialogic Literary Gatherings (DLGs), foster learning and inclusion of vulnerable populations (Soler, 2020). This approach to teaching and learning has been acknowledged by the European Commission for achieving social impact and benefiting historically marginalized communities in many diverse contexts (European Commission, 2011).

DLGs are an interactive dialogue-based learning environment where participants share and discuss the greatest literary works through egalitarian dialogue that fosters respect towards diversity, solidarity, freedom, and overcomes inequalities (Flecha, 2000). Implemented in over 7,000 schools in fourteen different countries across Europe and Latin America (Soler, 2020), the efficacy of DLGs has been studied in various contexts where positive impacts have been observed in reading and students’ prosocial behavior. DLGs encourage relations of friendship and respect, it fosters a sense of community and self-confidence (Díez-Palomar et al., 2020) and encourages participants to speak up and share their experiences in an egalitarian dialogic atmosphere (Flecha, 2000; Soler, 2020). Nonetheless, little is known about DLGs in Africa, particularly in Ghana. Thus, granted that the call for diversity is also a call for voice, influence and power (Biesta et al, 2022), the objective of this paper is to explore how the Dialogic Literary Gatherings empower historically marginalized students to speak up while they participate in DLGs in an 8th-grade classroom in southeastern Ghana.

Abstract: In contemporary discourse, sexuality is being presented as something fluid, with research persisting in framing sexuality as flexible and negotiable to some extent. This way of examining sexuality is problematic because as one discovers how identity changes and evolves, a certain terminology, such as ‘trend’ or ‘phase’ becomes prominent giving the illusion that LGBT+ pupils with SEND are easily influenced and too immature to form LGBT+ identities because of their cognitive impairments. Educators viewing sexuality and gender identity as a phase or a trend can result in providing inadequate support, which can be limited due to the misconception that information about LGBT+ concepts is not important for this category of pupils or that one can simply stop being LGBT+. This paper discusses the views and experiences of SEN teachers involving their pupils' ways of exploring and expressing their LGBT+ identities and examines how this links to the misconception of their sexuality and gender as a phase or a trend due to their SENDs. Being inspired by the work of scholars exploring sexual and gender identity, the paper is framed by intersectionality which allows for a detailed analysis of how identities interact and inform when used as an analytic tool. The paper calls for more nuanced thinking of sexuality and gender in the lives of LGBT+ pupils with SEND, which will help to decrease inequality.

Author of proposal: Klaudia Matasovska (email: kmata005@gold.ac.uk)

First choice network: Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)

Second choice network: Gender and Education Network

Keywords: childhood, youth, SEND, gender identity, sexuality, phase, intersectionality

General description:

This paper explores the opinions and experiences of SEN practitioners with work experience involving children and young people with SEND who also identify as LGBT+. This study asks the question: How do SEN practitioners’ views compare with wider society’s misconception of disabled LGBT+ pupils’ sexuality and gender as a phase or a trend due to being often viewed as too ‘immature’ to have LGBT+ identities? There is very limited information regarding the LGBT+/SEND intersection. In particular, research is very limited regarding the views of SEN teachers in relation to the LGBT+/SEND intersection and their views about the misconception that disabled pupils’ sexuality and gender identity is informed by their disability. This study is an attempt to fill in this gap in research and to talk about the intersections regarding gender, SEND and sexual orientation. Intersectionality is the chosen theoretical framework for this study as it is a suitable tool for highlighting social inequalities with regard to the protected characteristics of the Equality Act 2010, such as gender, sexual orientation, disability, age, etc. This framework is also used to highlight how individual intersections (disability, gender and sexual orientation in the case of this study) impact each other in terms of experiencing layered stigma.