34. Research on Citizenship Education
Paper
Balance within Limits: Examining Preservice Teachers' Approaches to Controversial Issues
Marcus Kindlinger1,2, Katrin Hahn-Laudenberg2
1University of Duisburg-Essen, Germany; 2University of Münster, Germany
Presenting Author: Kindlinger, Marcus
Short Abstract
We live in a time of increasing political polarization. This makes it important for teachers to be able to aptly navigate controversial issues within the classroom. This mixed-methods study examines the stances of preservice teachers regarding the limits of legitimate positions for controversial classroom discussions. The research questions focus on identifying and understanding the range of strategies preservice teachers anticipate adopting when confronted with controversial issues as well as the theoretical and practical implications of these stances for democratic education. As a normative approach to teacher education, we propose a strategy of "reflective balancing" by avoiding false equivalences between fundamentally unequal positions while maintaining a space for conflict and controversy where it is fruitful.
Objectives
To Develop and Validate a Questionnaire Instrument: Our first objective is to conceptualize and validate a standardized instrument that can detect preservice teachers' ideas about handling controversial discussions. This tool is intended to assist in the broader understanding and training of teachers regarding controversial issues.
To Explore Preservice Teachers' Stances on Controversial Issues in the Classroom: The study aims to unveil the array of approaches that future educators anticipate adopting in response to controversial topics in their classrooms. Through two convenience survey samples of 162 and 90 German preservice teachers and qualitative interviews with a subset, our study seeks to uncover the nuanced strategies ranging from avoidance to the emerging trend of committed balancing.
To Theorize 'Reflective Balancing': The study proposes and explores the concept of committed balancing, a method of addressing controversial issues that acknowledges the necessity of weighing different viewpoints while remaining committed to democratic and epistemic values.
Theoretical Framework
This study situates itself within the discourse of civic and citizenship education, particularly focusing on how teachers handle controversial issues in the classroom, a task critical to the practice of deliberative democracy as conceptualized by Gutmann & Thompson (2004) and, especially in educational contexts, Hess & McAvoy (2015). Prior research suggests that teachers, both novice and experienced, frequently hesitate to engage with controversial issues in the classroom. This reluctance may be particularly pronounced among younger educators, who often attribute their avoidance to a lack of confidence and preparedness for addressing these challenging topics (Bickmore & Parker, 2014; Gindi et al., 2021; Nganga et al., 2020). Empirical insights (Flensner, 2020; Pollak et al., 2017; Oberle et al., 2018) highlight the varied and often problematic strategies and attitudes teachers exhibit towards controversial discussions, reflecting a broader need to understand how preservice teachers approach these complex topics. In this context, our study builds upon Hess' (2004) typology of teacher strategies for controversial issues—avoidance, denial, privileging one side, and balancing—which are reassessed under the proposed model of 'reflective balancing.' This approach is particularly pertinent in light of the challenges of false balancing and the need for epistemic integrity in educational contexts (Barzilai & Chinn, 2018; Leiviskä, 2023).
To discuss questions surrounding the limits to classroom controversy, the study further engages with the debate around possible criteria for teaching about such issues in school contexts (Hand, 2008; Yacek, 2018; Drerup, 2021). Within this debate the teaching of controversial issues is often distinguished in ‘directive’ and ‘non-directive’ styles. In the attempt to distinguish issues that should be discussed in a controversial, non-directive fashion from those that require more active teacher steering, several criteria are often discussed – particularly the behavioral, political, and epistemic criteria. These three respectively relate to a) the degree of controversy in wider society, b) the compatibility with liberal-democratic norms, and c) rational, factual justification. This debate directly informs our methodological approach to develop a standardized way of capturing different stances towards these issues.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedParticipants and Procedure
Our study utilized a two-phase data collection approach. Initially, from October 2021 to February 2022, 162 students (MAge = 25.7; 49.4% female, 40.1% male, 10.5% other or not answered) enrolled in German teacher education programs completed a questionnaire as part of their coursework, focusing on the topics and positions they would discuss in a non-directive fashion. A follow-up survey in April 2022 involved 90 additional students from similar programs (MAge = 24.9; 56.7% female, 33.3% male, 6.6% other, 3.3% not answered). Participants ranged in their focus from social sciences to a variety of subjects, with the majority preparing to teach at middle or high school levels. Additionally, 27 students (MAge = 26.6; 44.4% female, 51.9% male, 3.7% other) from the initial cohort were interviewed by extensively briefed student assistants to gain deeper insights into their stances on handling controversial and discriminatory views in the classroom. These semi-structured interviews were aligned with the questionnaire responses through unique codes, ensuring anonymity. We used the results of our quantitative data analysis to select interviews with contrasting questionnaire response patterns for analysis. In total, we selected five cases from the 27 transcripts.
Questionnaire Development
The questionnaire was designed to map behavioral, political, and epistemic criteria (see above; BC, PC, and EC) for discussing controversial issues. Twelve statements, four for each criterion with equal numbers of exclusionary and inclusionary items, were presented for participants to rate on a six-point Likert scale. We conceived of the three criteria as complementary criteria, each of which excluded different kinds of positions from the space of acceptable controversial debate. The questionnaire aimed to explore how teachers decide what issues are suitable for non-directive, multi-perspective classroom discussion.
Data Cleaning and Analysis
Inconsistent responses and missing data led to the exclusion of a few cases from both datasets. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was applied to both sets of questionnaire data to test and validate the latent factor structure of BC, PC, and EC. The analysis adhered to standard assumptions like multivariate normality and absence of multicollinearity. For a nuanced understanding, interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) was used to analyze selected interviews, focusing on the participants' experiences and perceptions of controversial issues in the educational context. This mixed-methods approach aimed to provide both a broad quantitative overview and in-depth qualitative insights into preservice teachers' stances on controversy.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsQuantitative Results
Descriptively, we saw notable openness (10-20%) towards discussing extremist and anti-scientific perspectives in a non-directive way. CFA and internal consistency measures indicated an inadequate model fit for the three separate latent factors. After reorganizing the items and merging PC and EC into a single factor, the model showed adequate measures (χ2 (13) = 222.88, p = .04, TLI = .93, CFI = .96, RMSEA = .07, SRMR = .05, α1 = .67, α2 = .75). The two-factor structure was further validated with a second data set (χ2 (26) = 30.84, p = .23, TLI = .96, CFI = .97, RMSEA = .05, SRMR = .084, α1 = .73, α2 = .80).
Qualitative Results
Two ‘open’ participants saw their roles as teachers as those of neutral providers of information. One of the two represented a strongly permissive view, valuing freedom of opinion and non-selectivity. Two other participants with more restrictive responses were highly heterogenous, with one seeing herself as a fighter against misinformation, and the other one tending towards risk-aversion out of fear of marginalizing individual students. All four participants showed different forms of avoidance, denial, or privileging in their approaches to classroom controversy. One more participant, whose responses varied on the two factors, outlined a selective balance based on epistemic and normative grounds while maintaining openness to marginal issues.
Interpretation
The quantitative results indicated an overlap between political and epistemic criteria in preservice teachers’ stances. The interviews showed varied motivations for the questionnaire responses. Some preservice teachers showed tendencies towards avoidance or denial strategies; however, we saw different degrees of reflectivity around possible criteria and thus potential for professional growth. In our discussion, we outline how ‘reflective balancing’ can be understood as the creation of a space for controversy within epistemic and political-normative boundaries.
In the presentation, we will discuss implications for teacher training and citizenship education across Europe.
ReferencesBarzilai, S., & Chinn, C. A. (2018). On the Goals of Epistemic Education: Promoting Apt Epistemic Performance. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 27(3), 353–389. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2017.1392968
Bickmore, K., & Parker, C. (2014). Constructive Conflict Talk in Classrooms: Divergent Approaches to Addressing Divergent Perspectives. Theory & Research in Social Education, 42(3), 291–335. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2014.901199
Drerup, J. (2021). Kontroverse Themen im Unterricht: Konstruktiv streiten lernen. Reclam.
Flensner, K. K. (2020). Dealing with and teaching controversial issues – Teachers’ pedagogical approaches to controversial issues in Religious Education and Social Studies. Acta Didactica Norden, 14(4). https://doi.org/10.5617/adno.8347
Gindi, S., Gilat, Y., & Sagee, R. (2021). Who wants a political classroom? Attitudes toward teaching controversial political issues in school. Journal of Social Science Education, 20(2). https://doi.org/10.11576/jsse-3943
Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. F. (2004). Why Deliberative Democracy? Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400826339
Hand, M. (2008). What Should We Teach As Controversial? A Defense Of The Epistemic Criterion. Educational Theory, 58(2), 213–228.
Hess, D. E. (2004). Controversies about Controversial Issues in Democratic Education. PS: Political Science and Politics, 37(2), 257–261.
Hess, D. E., & McAvoy, P. (2015). The Political Classroom: Evidence and Ethics in Democratic Education. Routledge.
Leiviskä, A. (2023). Democratic education and the epistemic quality of democratic deliberation. Theory and Research in Education, 21(2), 113–134. https://doi.org/10.1177/14778785231187304
Nganga, L., Roberts, A., Kambutu, J., & James, J. (2020). Examining pre-service teachers’ preparedness and perceptions about teaching controversial issues in social studies. The Journal of Social Studies Research, 44(1), 77–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssr.2019.08.001
Oberle, M., Ivens, S., & Leunig, J. (2018). Grenzenlose Toleranz? Lehrervorstellungen zum Beutelsbacher Konsens und dem Umgang mit Extremismus im Unterricht. In S. Manzel & L. Möllers (Eds.), Populismus und Politische Bildung (pp. 53–61). Wochenschau.
Pollak, I., Segal, A., Lefstein, A., & Meshulam, A. (2018). Teaching controversial issues in a fragile democracy: defusing deliberation in Israeli primary classrooms. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 50(3), 387–409. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2017.1397757
Yacek, D. (2018). Thinking Controversially: The Psychological Condition for Teaching Controversial Issues. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 52(1), 71–86. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9752.12282
34. Research on Citizenship Education
Paper
European Student Teachers´ Approaches to Internationalization and Intercultural Learning
Charlotte Silander, Mattias Lundin
Linnaeus university, Sweden
Presenting Author: Silander, Charlotte;
Lundin, Mattias
Schools are important in the formation of a democratic society and teachers play a crucial role in in enhancing basic democratic values as equity, equality and tolerance and in fostering diversity and inclusion. In a globalized world the student population in European schools is becoming increasingly diverse. As recurring studies show that teachers’ attitudes and skills matter in creating structures of inclusion and opportunity for all students there are strong reasons to train future teachers in intercultural perspectives and diversity (Milner 2013). One way to strengthen intercultural perspectives among students is through different form of internationalization activities. However previous reseach indicate less mobility and international exchange among student teachers compared to other groups (Hauschildt 2015) as well as limited internationals features in teacher education (Alexiadou et al 2021). One reason put forward for this is that teacher education is primarly educating for a national labour market (Egron Polak et al., 2015; Alexiadou et al 2021) which limits the focus on intercultural and international competencies. At the same time, as issues of diversity and inclusion are increasingly pressing the European educational systems, the need for intercultural competences among teachers in order to to train cultural competence and responsiveness to better address the needs of today's diverse student populations is more important then ever (Banks 2021). Previous reseach indicates a number of obstacels for the lack of internationalization in teacher education (Hauschildt 2015), but provide less knowledge about how student teachers perceive their future work in relation to intercultural values and increasingly globalized and diverse school. Hence, in order to improve intercultural and international work in teacher education we need to understand how student teachers think and how they perceive their future work in relation to internationalization and intercultural competences.
This study aim to improve teacher education, by understanding how student teachers reason about global values and culturally diverse societies guided by the reseach question: How do student teachers approach to their studies and their profession from an international perspective?. By conducting focus group interviews with student teachers in Sweden, the Netherlands and France the study will add to increased understanding of national and cultural differences in the creation of the education for future democratic citizens
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedSchools are important in the formation of a democratic society and teachers play a crucial role in in enhancing basic democratic values as equity, equality and tolerance and in fostering diversity and inclusion. In a globalized world the student population in European schools is becoming increasingly diverse. As recurring studies show that teachers’ attitudes and skills matter in creating structures of inclusion and opportunity for all students there are strong reasons to train future teachers in intercultural perspectives and diversity (Milner 2013). One way to strengthen intercultural perspectives among students is through different form of internationalization activities. However previous reseach indicate less mobility and international exchange among student teachers compared to other groups (Hauschildt 2015) as well as limited internationals features in teacher education (Alexiadou et al 2021). One reason put forward for this is that teacher education is primarly educating for a national labour market (Egron Polak et al., 2015; Alexiadou et al 2021) which limits the focus on intercultural and international competencies. At the same time, as issues of diversity and inclusion are increasingly pressing the European educational systems, the need for intercultural competences among teachers in order to to train cultural competence and responsiveness to better address the needs of today's diverse student populations is more important then ever (Banks 2021). Previous reseach indicates a number of obstacels for the lack of internationalization in teacher education (Hauschildt 2015), but provide less knowledge about how student teachers perceive their future work in relation to intercultural values and increasingly globalized and diverse school. Hence, in order to improve intercultural and international work in teacher education we need to understand how student teachers think and how they perceive their future work in relation to internationalization and intercultural competences.
This study aim to improve teacher education, by understanding how student teachers reason about global values and culturally diverse societies guided by the reseach question: How do student teachers approach to their studies and their profession from an international perspective?. By conducting focus group interviews with student teachers in Sweden, the Netherlands and France the study will add to increased understanding of national and cultural differences in the creation of the education for future democratic citizens
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsPreliminary result indicate different discources relating to local, national and global settings. The most prominent discource relates to the national arena and the students future in a national labour market. In this discourse, specific national reqirements and national framworks are considered important features for success. The research provides examples of obstacles that explain why mobility and interest in internationalization in teacher education are negatively distinguished in comparison with other educational programs. This has implication for future construction of teacher education and integration of intercultural features as part of fostering democracy, human rights and the rule of law.
ReferencesAlexiadou, N., Kefala, Z & Rönnberg, L., (2021). Preparing education students for an international future? Connecting students’ experience to institutional contexts. Journal of Studies in International Education, 25(4) 443–460.
Banks, J. A. (2021). Diversity, group identity, and citizenship education in a global age. In Handbuch Bildungs-und Erziehungssoziologie (pp. 1-24). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.
Egron-Polak, E., Howard, L., Hunter, F., & de Wit, H. (2015). Internationalisation of higher education. Directorate-General for Internal Policies, European Union.
Foucault, M. (1993). Diskursens ordning (L’ordre du discours). Brutus Östling.
Hauschildt, K., Gwosć, C., Netz, N., & Mishra, S. (2015). Social and Economic Conditions of Student Life in Europe. Synopsis of Indicators. EUROSTUDENT 2012–2015. W. Bertelsmann Verlag GmbH & Co.
Jørgensen, M., & Phillips, L. (2002). Discourse analysis as theory and method. Sage.
Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (2001). Hegemony and socialist strategy. Towards a radical democratic politics. Verso.
Milner, H.R. 2010. What does teacher education have to do with teaching? Implication for diversity studies. Journal of Teacher Education 61 (1-2):118-131.
|
