07. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Paper
Evaluation of a Mentoring Programme to Prevent Early School Leaving
Anikó Fehérvári1,2, Gergely Horváth2, Aranka Varga2, Krisztián Széll1
1Eötvös Loránd University, Hungary; 2University of Pécs, Hungary
Presenting Author: Fehérvári, Anikó;
Horváth, Gergely
The European Commission (2020a) and the Council of the European Union (2021) recommend that promoting quality and inclusive education and combating early school leaving will remain a priority in education and training in the coming years and decades. The new strategic framework calls for reducing the early school leaving rate to below 9% at EU level by 2030. According to Eurostat data (2023), the average rate in the EU in 2022 was 9.6%, compared to 12.4% in Hungary. However, the average rate varies significantly by region and ethnicity, almost doubling in rural areas of the country and with the rate of early school leavers among Roma youth being several times higher than in the majority population. According to research (Bocsi et al.), the early school leaving rate among Roma youth is 65%, which is worse than the European average. In the EU, 44% of Roma pupils are in segregated education. 28% of Roma young people have completed upper secondary education, compared to 83.5% in the majority population (European Commission 2020b). Education, the attainment of at least upper secondary education, has an impact on life chances, with a number of studies showing a link between employment and health and well-being and early school leaving (Gitschthaler & Nairz-Wirth, 2018).
Hungarian research (Paksi et al. 2023) describes the causes of early school leaving in harmony with international studies. In Hungary school factors play only a minor role in preventing early school leaving, with individual characteristics and family background factors being the most important determinants of early school leaving. Hungary is consistently among the countries with the highest explanatory power of the SES index in student performance (OECD 2019). Success in entering and progressing to secondary school, and thus preventing early school leaving, depends on informed career choices, which are often lacking for young people of lower social status and Roma youth (Bereményi, 2022).
Intersectionality is a perpetual situation in which multiple categories of inequality interacting with each other manifest as a new social category, in which the causes of oppression cannot be separated (Asumah-Nagel, 2014). It is characterised by being situated, with factors of social division interacting continuously and their significance strongly dependent on context (place and time) (Yuval-Davis, 2015). According to Howard and Vajda (2017), the most persistent forms of group-based disadvantage are linked to identities of origin (minority), with one form of inequality promoting or deepening another. The devaluation of cultural identity is more likely to be associated with economic and territorial disadvantage, resulting in persistent intergenerational poverty. In Hungary too, social disadvantage and its complexity (school exclusion, settlement disadvantage), as well as belonging to the Roma community and the negative social prejudice associated with it, are the most frequently intertwined categories (Forray-Pálmainé Orsós, 2010).
Our development programme was designed to increase the impact of school factors in preventing early school leaving, for the reasons outlined above. The focus of the four-year programme is to foster an inclusive learning environment (Varga, 2015) through targeted career guidance and close family contact with teachers and peer mentoring. The three main content dimensions of the programme are to develop the student's self-awareness and self-image, to foster parental involvement, and to learn about careers and related further education pathways. The mentoring programme targets one class in each of ten primary schools with a majority of Roma pupils and supports pupils from 6th grade for three years until they enter secondary school. The presentation will report on the first results of a research component accompanying the evaluation of the mentoring programme, the longitudinal student questionnaire.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedFour student questionnaires will be carried out during the development. The questionnaires are comprehensive, i.e., they are completed by all students participating in the development. To ensure traceability, the questionnaires are provided with a student ID. The first data collection took place in September 2022 and the second in May 2023. A total of 130 pupils participated in these data collections. The presentation will analyse the results of these two questionnaires.
In line with the objectives of the programme, the questionnaire-based student data collection is based on previous data collection (HBSC, ISCWeB, PISA, UNICEF) and measurement tools (Rosenberg Self-Assessment Scale, 10-point Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, Cantril Ladder) and examines 6 dimensions and themes: 1. family, family support (family structure, number of siblings, parents' education and labour market status); 2. School well-being, school-classroom environment (climate, teacher support, bullying); 3. Student well-being, self-image, self-awareness, resilience; 4. Academic engagement, academic effort; 5. Vision, career orientation, further education; 6. Individual and family background characteristics (family financial situation, student's nationality, health status). Starting with the second data collection, we also measure satisfaction with development.
The ethnicity of the students was measured in two ways, one based on the students' self-report and the other based on the teacher mentor's assessment.
The student questionnaire data were combined with the student's semester and end-of-year grades by subject, as well as their grade point average.
The research has an institutional research ethics licence, which details the information and rights of participants. All participants are involved in the development and research process with parental consent. The data was collected in a face-to-face format, with the assistance of the university's Roma students.
The research questions are the following:
How did students' self-concept change as a result of the intervention and how are these related to individual, family and school background factors?
How did the intervention change students' goals for further education and how are these related to individual, family and school background factors?
How did the intervention change the students' vision of their future and how are these related to individual, family and school background factors?
Descriptive and multi-variable (correlation and regression) statistical methods were used to analyse the data.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsAmong the results, it can be highlighted that the students' goals for further education have changed significantly between the two measurements, and these are fully in line with parents' opinions and expectations. Compared to the first data collection, the proportion of those who were uncertain about their career goals decreased significantly, i.e., the majority of pupils are more aware of their further education. Among the possible learning paths, the proportion of those who chose a training leading to a secondary school leaving certificate has increased significantly. This is an important benefit for the programme, as the target group concerned tends to underestimate themselves and this is also a feature of teachers' attitudes towards them.
As regards future work, students' perceptions of what is most important is that they love what they do, and perceptions of this changed significantly between the two study dates.
It is important to highlight that students' perceptions of their future success were significantly lower in the second data collection, which needs further explanation. The result is intended to be explored through qualitative research. The hypothesis is that this may be due to a more realistic perception of their situation, which may also help them to set more realistic goals.
The results so far have identified several (sub-)areas (teacher support, school climate, bullying, academic engagement, further learning, self-evaluation, resilience) that need improvement and support. Further analysis of the results of the second data collection will provide an opportunity to evaluate the development programme, monitor the development focus and adjust it where necessary.
ReferencesAsumah, S. N.& Nagel, M. (2014). Preface, In: Asumah, S. N. Nagel, M. (szerk.). Diversity, Social Justice, and Inclusive Excellence – Transdisciplinary and Global Perspectives, New York, USA: State University of New York Press, Albany, 9-13.
Bereményi, B. Á. (2022). Between choices and “going with the flow”. Career guidance and Roma young people in Hungary. International Journal for Educational and Vocational Guidance. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10775-022-09536-0
Bocsi V, Varga A, Fehérvári A. Chances of Early School Leaving—With Special Regard to the Impact of Roma Identity. Education Sciences. 2023; 13(5):483. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13050483
Cerna, L., Mezzanotte, C., Rutigliano, A., Brussino, O., Santiago, P., Borgonovi, F., Guthrie., C. (2021). “Promoting inclusive education for diverse societies: A conceptual framework”. OECD Education Working Papers, No. 260, OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/94ab68c6-en
Council of the European Union (2021). Council Recommendation of 12 March 2021 on Roma equality, inclusion and participation 2021/C 93/01
Eurostat (2023).
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Early_leavers_from_education_and_training
European Commision (2020a). Europe 2020. A European strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth
https://ec.europa.eu/eu2020/pdf/COMPLET%20EN%20BARROSO%20%20%20007%20-%20Europe%202020%20-%20EN%20version.pdf
European Commission (2020b). EU Roma strategic framework for equality, inclusion and participation for 2020 – 2030
https://commission.europa.eu/system/files/2021-01/eu_roma_strategic_framework_for_equality_inclusion_and_participation_for_2020_-_2030_0.pdf
Forray, R. K., & Pálmainé Orsós, A. (2010). Hátrányos helyzetű vagy kulturális kisebbség–cigány programok. Educatio, 19(1), 75-87.
Gitschthaler, M. & Nairz-Wirth, E. (2018). The individual and economic costs of early school leaving. In: Van Praag, L., Nouwen, W., Van Caudenberg, R., Clycq, N. & Timmerman, C. (szerk). Comparative Perspectives on Early School Leaving in the European Union. London: Routledge. 59-73. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315170404-5
Howard, J. – Vajda, V. (2017). Navigating Power and Intersectionality to Address Inequality. IDS Working Paper, 504.
OECD (2019). PISA 2018 Results (Volume II): Where All Students Can Succeed, Paris: OECD
Paksi B, Széll K, Fehérvári A. (2023). Empirical Testing of a Multidimensional Model of School Dropout Risk. Social Sciences, 12(2): 50. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12020050
Varga, A. (2015). The theory and practice of inclusion. Pécs, Magyarország : Pécsi Tudományegyetem Bölcsészet- és Társadalomtudományi Kar Neveléstudományi Intézet (2015) , 209 p.
Yuval-Davis, N. (2015). Situated Intersectionality and Social Inequality. Raisons politiques, 58, 91–100. https://doi.org/10.3917/rai.058.0091
07. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Paper
How do Student Teachers Perceive Education for Sustainable Development and Intercultural Education? Initial Findings from a Survey Conducted in Germany
Barbara Pusch, Michael Zimmer-Müller
RPTU Rheinland-Pfälzische, Germany
Presenting Author: Pusch, Barbara
Sustainable development and societal approaches to migration-related diversity are crucial for shaping our future. Various education policy documents at the international and national level address this challenge, including those of the UNESCO (2006, 2020), KMK/BMZ (2016) and KMK (2013). Additionally, several pedagogical concepts have emerged within the context of education for sustainable development (ESD) and intercultural education that are based on different societal views and goals. Approaches to intercultural education in German-speaking countries range from "assimilation/foreigner pedagogy" to "classical intercultural pedagogy", and more recent approaches include migration pedagogy, intercultural pedagogy of belonging and intersectional post-migration and postcolonial approaches (Nohl 2014; Allemann-Ghionda 2009). In the context of the environment and sustainability, ESD has replaced traditional environmental education and includes key aspects of global learning (Gräsel 2018). However, the understanding of sustainability (strong and weak sustainability) and the concept of ESD varies (Sinakou/Boeve-de Pauw/Van Petegem 2019; Vare/Scott 2007).
As teachers are regarded as “change agents” for developing awareness of sustainability, intercultural aspects and racism in schools in pluralistic societies (Koskela/Kärkkäinen 2021; Leeman/van Koeven 2019), teacher training increasingly emphasizes ESD and intercultural education. However, although sustainability and migration-related diversity are seen as central cross-cutting issues within the German school system (KMK/BMZ 2016; KMK 2013), they are rarely discussed together. The few discussions on both issues focus on social sustainability (Garcia-Arias/Corbetta/Baronnet 2023; Lasonen 2009), which ignores the interplay between social, economic and ecological sustainability, as conceptualised under "weak" and "strong" sustainability. This is not only the case in Germany, but also internationally (Catarci 2021; Pusch 2023a). Consequently, it is not surprising that these two future-oriented educational focuses are seldom considered together and linked in teacher education. This paper explores the perspectives of student teachers at the University of Kaiserslautern-Landau (RPTU) on sustainable development and ESD, migration and intercultural education.
The presentation is divided into six sections, beginning with a brief introduction, followed by an outline of the relevant ESD concepts (Section 1) and approaches to intercultural education (Section 2) in the German discourse. Section 3 summarises the current state of research on ESD and intercultural education in teacher education in Germany and relates it to findings from international comparative studies. In this context, the paper highlights the lack of consideration of these two cross-cutting issues together. Building upon this background, Section 4 presents the research question, outlines the study design and explains the methodology. Section 5 presents the preliminary research findings, which form the main body of the proposed paper. Finally, Section 6 provides a brief summary and outlook.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe methodology of the proposed paper is based on an online survey conducted with student teachers at the University of Kaiserslautern-Landau. The survey is part of a larger study called "Towards an intercultural ESD: Approaches for future-oriented teacher training". The first sub-project, which is the focus of the presentation, consists of an online survey investigating the knowledge and perspectives of student teachers on ESD and intercultural education.
The survey will consist of 32 open and closed questions/items and will be conducted at the beginning of the summer semester in 2024 using the web application SoSci Survey. All student teachers (around 5,000) in the 96 teacher education programmes at the University of Kaiserslautern-Landau will receive an invitation to participate via the university's internal mailing list. With an anticipated participation rate of 20 to 30 percent, we will gain insights into the attitudes of 1,000 to 1,500 students with regard to ESD and intercultural education as well as the meeting point where ESD and IC intersect.
The questionnaire is divided into four thematic blocks: (1) personal information and field of study, (2) student teachers' understanding of sustainable development and ESD, (3) student teachers' attitudes towards migration-related diversity and intercultural education and (4) student teachers' knowledge and attitudes related to ESD and intercultural education. The questions in Blocks 1 to 3 are based on previous quantitative studies, namely Grund/Brock 2018, 2022; Brock/Grund 2018; Merten/Yildirim/Keller 2014; and Funk 2017. The questions in Block 4 are based on the preliminary research results of two qualitative pilot studies (Pusch 2021, 2023a) and a small survey on ESD in extracurricular education programmes (Pusch 2023 b). The collected data will be analysed using descriptive statistics, specifically frequencies and cross-tabulations with the IBM SPSS Statistics software platform.
Group discussions with student teachers will provide the empirical foundation for the second sub-project, which aims to reconstruct the interconnected realms of student teachers’ experience related to ESD and the migration society using the documentary method (Bohnsack 2021). Drawing on the empirical findings from the first two sub-projects, the aim of the third sub-project is to develop potential areas for future-oriented teacher training related to ESD and the migration society.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe online survey aims to provide new insights into the nexus of ESD, intercultural education and teacher education, an area that has not been extensively explored yet. We hope to gain a statistical overview of the attitudes and knowledge of student teachers related to ESD and intercultural education. With these findings, we aim to contribute to the development of multidimensional and forward-looking teacher education in the light of the climate crisis and of the growing intercultural challenges in pluralistic societies arising from increasing migration-related diversity.
ReferencesAllemann-Ghionda, C. (2009): From intercultural education to the inclusion of diversity: Theories and policies in Europe. In: J. A. Banks (eds.), The Routledge International Companion to Multicultural Education. Routledge: 134-145.
Bohnsack, R. (2021): Rekonstruktive Sozialforschung. Budrich.
Brock, A./Grund, J.(2018): Bildung für nachhaltige Entwicklung in Lehr-Lernsettings-Quantitative Studie des nationalen Monitorings-Befragung von LehrerInnen. https://www.ewi-psy.fu-berlin.de/erziehungswissenschaft/arbeitsbereiche/institut-futur/aktuelles/dateien/executive_summary_lehrerinnen.pdf
Catarci, M. (2021). Intercultural Education and Sustainable Development. Social Sciences (10/24). https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10010024
Funk, B. (2017): Migrationssensible Lehrkräfteausbildung durch Praxiselemente an der Universität Bremen. https://media.suub.uni-bremen.de/bitstream/elib/4491/1/FUNCK_Migrationssensible_Lehramtsausbildung_durch_Praxisprojekte_Evaluation_Uni_Bremen_Mai_2017bb.pdf
Garcia-Arias, J./Corbetta, S./Baronnet, B. (2023): Decolonizing education in Latin America: critical environmental and intercultural education as an indigenous pluriversal alternative: British Journal of Sociology of Education, DOI: 10.1080/01425692.2023.2234088
Grund, J./Brock, A. (2018): Bildung für nachhaltige Entwicklung in Lehr-Lernsettings – Quantitative Studie des nationalen Monitorings – Befragung junger Menschen. https://www.bne-portal.de/bne/shareddocs/downloads/files/nationales-monitoring_quantitative-studie_lehrerinnen.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=1
Grund, J./Brock, A. (2022): Formale Bildung in Zeiten von Krisen – die Rolle von Nachhaltigkeit in Schule, Ausbildung und Hochschule. http://dx.doi.org/10.17169/refubium-36890
Gräsel, C. (2018). Umweltbildung. In: R. Tippelt/B. Schmidt-Hertha (eds.), Handbuch Bildungsforschung (S. 1093–1109). Springer VS.
Koskela, T./ Kärkkäinen, S. (2021): Student Teachers’ Change Agency in Education for Sustainable Development. Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability (23/1): 84-98.
Lasonen, J. (2009): Intercultural Education: Promoting Sustainability in Education and Training. In: Fien, J. et al. (eds.), Work, Learning and Sustainable Development. Springer: 186-202.
Leeman, Y. /van Koeven, E. (2019): New immigrants. An incentive for intercultural education?. Education Inquiry (10/3): 189-207, DOI: 10.1080/20004508.2018.1541675
Merten, M./Yildirim, D./Keller, C. (2014): Einstellungen zu Heterogenität und Unterrichtskriterien bei Lehramtsstudierenden. https://kobra.uni-kassel.de/handle/123456789/12588
Nohl, A.-M. (2014): Konzepte interkultureller Pädagogik. Klinkhardt.
Pusch, B. (2021). Pädagogische Ansatzpunkte in der Umweltbildung für Zuwanderer/-innen. Zeitschrift für internationale Bildungsforschung und Entwicklungspädagogik (44/2), 17-26. https://www.pedocs.de/volltexte/2021/23728/pdf/ZEP_2_2021_Pusch_Paedagogische_Ansatzpunkte.pdf.
Pusch, B. (2023a): Umwelt- und Nachhaltigkeitsorientierungen von Wiener Jugendlichen mit Migrationshintergrund? Zeitschrift für Bildungsforschung (13): 87–107.
Pusch, B. (2023b): Zusammenfassung der Online-Umfrage „BNE in der Migrationsgesellschaft“. https://zenodo.org/uploads/10254906.
Sinakou, E./Boeve-de Pauw, J./Van Petegem, P. (2019). Exploring the concept of sustainable development within education for sustainable development. Environ Dev Sustain (21): 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-017-0032-8
Ständige Konferenz der Kultusminister der Länder in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland/ Bundesministerium für wirtschaftliche Zusammenarbeit und Entwicklung (KMK/BMZ) (2016): Orientierungsrahmen für den Lernbereich Globale Entwicklung. Bonn: Engagement Global. https://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/Dateien/veroeffentlichungen_beschluesse/2015/2015_06_00-Orientierungsrahmen-Globale-Entwicklung.pdf
Ständige Konferenz der Kultusminister der Länder in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (KMK) (2013): Interkulturelle Bildung und Erziehung in der Schule https://www.kmk.org/fileadmin/veroeffentlichungen_beschluesse/1996/1996_10_25-Interkulturelle-Bildung.pdf
UNESCO (2020). Education for sustainable development: a roadmap? https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000374802
UNESCO. 2006. UNESCO Guidelines on Intercultural Education. Paris: UNESCO. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000147878
Vare, P./Scott, W. (2007): Learning for a Change. Journal of Education for Sustainable Development (1/2): 191–198.
07. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Paper
Designing an Innovative Professionalization Program for Social Justice Education: Exploring the Needs of Teachers
Kato Luyckx, Nele De Witte, Eva Dierickx, Hajjar Ben Sliman-Ghomari, Jan Ardies
AP University of Applied Sciences and Arts, Belgium
Presenting Author: Luyckx, Kato;
De Witte, Nele
The notion persists that children are too young to notice diversity en consequently, causing adults to hold back in engaging in conversations about identity, diversity and social justice (Beneke & Cheatham, 2019; Husband, 2012).
Contrary to these expectations, babies as young as 6-9 months old perceive ethnic-racial differences (Kelly et al., 2005), still showing a preference for the ethnic-racial characteristics of their primary caregiver (Kelly et al., 2007). However, preferences start to shift as young children begin to associate socialized value judgments with specific ethnic-racial features. From the age of three years old, children use racial and gender categories to include or exclude peers (Raabe & Beelman, 2011; Van Ausdale & Feagin, 2001). Three- to five-year olds also show a preference for thinner individuals and manifest negative attitudes towards individuals with a larger body size (Birbeck & Drummond, 2005; Su & Aurelia, 2012). These evolvements have a (negative) impact on both self image (‘how should I look’ or ‘where do I fit in’) as on children’s perspectives on (super)diversity (‘what is ‘normal?’). Hence, (early) childhood appears to be a crucial period to support positive intergroup attitudes and lay foundations for a strong self image (Birtel et al., 2019).
Social justice education
Research indicates that (Flemish) teachers encounter difficulties in comprehending and addressing diversity and social justice within their classrooms (Agirdag et al., 2012; Slot et al., 2019; Banjeree & Luckner, 2014; Dierickx, Luyckx, & Ben Sliman-Ghomari, 2023). Educators frequently hesitate to engage in conversations about equality, values, and diversity due to a lack of confidence, personal beliefs or knowledge, often exacerbated by limited available resources (Beneke & Cheatham, 2019; Boutte et al., 2011 ; Husband, 2012). When educators avoid discussions of identity, difference or (in)justice, this can be called a ‘diversity silence approach’ (Dierickx et al., 2023), thereby (unconsciously) creating an atmosphere in which the unique histories, cultures, values, and experiences of minoritized groups are overlooked or disregarded (Schofield, 2007).
This creates the need for social justice education. Within our research projects, social justice education is about creating empowering, democratic and critical educational environments (hooks, 1994), and focuses on enhancing the lives of all historically marginalized groups, based on (socialized) characteristics such as ethnicity, sexual orientation, disability and intersections between these characteristics (Dierickx, Luyckx, & Windzak, 2023). We specifically focus on antiracist, antiableist, body positive and gender sensitive education.
Supporting teachers in social justice education through video coaching
To promote a confident self-image, an open and respectful worldview, it is important to prioritize supporting teachers’ general and pedagogical diversity knowledge and skills (Dursun, Claes, & Agirdag, 2021; Sheridan et al., 2009). Previous professional development initiatives focus mostly on knowledge development and personal beliefs. However, changes in teachers' belief systems do not always result in an improved teaching practice (Romijn, Slot, & Leseman, 2021). For this purpose, we are co-constructing a professional development program that enhances in-practice learning and reflection through videocoaching. This innovative method for professional development deepens the understanding of (implicit) beliefs, offers schoolteams a methodology to strengthen a culture of reflection (Verschaeve et al., 2020) and supports sustainable professionalization within an embedded and contextual approach (Merchie et al, 2016; Romijn et al., 2021).
Research goals
The main goal is to investigate the effects of the videocoaching program on the competencies of early childhood teachers and primary education teachers in social justice education. As this program will be designed starting from research as well as opportunities and needs of the field of practice, a subgoal –and focus of this paper- is to have an overview of the current opportunities and needs for professionalization within social justice education in Flanders.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe videocoaching program is developed following the framework of Educational Design research (EDR, McKenney & Reeves, 2018). EDR focuses on dissemination throughout the whole process and incorporates an iterative process, consisting of three phases: analysis-exploration, design-construction and evaluation-reflection.
In the analysis and exploration phase, we gathered data to gain insight into current educational practices, exposing opportunities and needs of teachers that need to be addressed in the program. First, we conducted literature research on anti-racism education, social justice education, anti-bias education and about professional development programs and videocoaching. Second, to explore Flemish teachers’ needs, attitudes and competences on social justice education, we conducted a widespread survey, focusing especially on: anti-racism, body positivity, gender sensitivity and antiableism. Third, as the questionnaire only provides insights into perceived competences and needs, the data were completed with in-classroom observations and interviews. 10 early childhood teachers and 6 elementary school teachers participated through informed consent. A classroom activity was observed, in which they engaged in conversations about identity, diversity and social justice, related to one of the four main topics within social justice education. To increase reliability, each lesson was observed separately by two researchers. After the lesson observation, an interview took place where learning opportunities, doubts and difficulties were discussed in more detail. Finally, a focus group also took place, in which six teacher-experts offered good practices about social justice education and identified educational needs.
A qualitative thematic analysis on all data was conducted; the survey was statistically analysed.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsPreliminary results indicate that teachers are willing to broaden their diversity specific knowledge, critically examine their own social positions and strengthen their didactic competences in social justice education. However, they seem insecure to critically engage in conversations with pupils about diversity and social justice, thereby mainly starting from a ‘diversity silence approach’ and finding it difficult to adequately address these topics.
Based on these results, design principles for a professionalization program focusing on social justice education and implementing videocoaching are: (a) a focus on diversity pedagogical and diversity content knowledge (Dursun et al., X) (b) focusing on skills (c) providing resources (d) ensuring a community of learners (e) the central position of guided critical reflection (f) taking into account the conditions of school policy and vision.
The results are integrated in the aforementioned phases of the EDR cycle, making sure the professionalization program fills the current research needs as well as practice-oriented needs in Flanders.
ReferencesAgirdag, O., Loobuyck, P., & Van Houtte, M. (2012). Determinants of attitudes toward Muslim students among Flemish teachers: A research note. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 51(2), 368–376.
Banerjee, R., & Luckner, J. (2014). Training needs of early childhood professionals who work with children and families who are culturally and linguistically diverse. Infants & Young Children, 27(1), 43-59.
Birbeck, D., & Drummond, M. (2005). Interviewing, and listening to the voices of, very young children on body image and perceptions of self. Early Child Development and Care, 175(6), 579-596.
Birtel, M. D., Di Bernardo, G. A., Stathi, S., Crisp, R. J., & Cadamuro, A.,(2019). Imagining contact reduces prejudice in preschool children. Social Development, 28(4), 1054–1073.
Dierickx, E., Luyckx, K., & Windzak, Z. (2023). Sssst... dat mag je niet zeggen. Hoe we jonge zonder vooroordelen kunnen opvoeden en waarom dat dringend nodig is. Borgerhoff & Lamberigts.
Dursun, H., Claes, E., & Agirdag, O. (2021). Diversity pedagogical content knowledge: a new conceptual framework and assessment across different teacher education programmes. Multicultural Education Review, 13(4), 303-322.
Feagin, J. R., & Van Ausdale, D. (2001). The first R: How children learn race and racism. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York: Routledge.
Kelly, D. J., Quinn, P. C., Slater, A. M., Lee, K., Ge, L., & Pascalis, O. (2007). The other-race effect develops during infancy: Evidence of perceptual narrowing. Psychological science, 18(12), 1084–1089.
McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. (2018). Conducting educational design research. Routledge.
Merchie, E., Tuytens, M., Devos, G., & Vanderlinde, R. (2016). Hoe kan je de impact van professionalisering voor leraren in kaart brengen?. Departement Onderwijs en Vorming.
Raabe, T., & Beelmann, A. (2011). Development of ethnic, racial, and national prejudice in childhood and adolescence: A multinational meta‐analysis of age differences. Child development, 82(6), 1715-1737.
Romijn, B. R., Slot, P. L., & Leseman, P. P. (2021). Increasing teachers’ intercultural competences in teacher preparation programs and through professional development: A review. Teaching Education, 98, 103236.
Su, W., & Aurelia, D. S. (2012). Preschool children’s perceptions of overweight peers. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 10(1), 19-31.
Verschaeve, S., De Mets, J., Van Avermaet, P., Ślusarczyk, M., Rościszewska-Woźniak, M., Majerska, U., & Furieri, L. (2020). Toolbox: outlines for using video analysis and video coaching as a tool for professionalizing ECEC workforce and training future ECEC professionals: outcome of the TRACKs project.
|
