Conference Agenda

With the alarming rise in extreme radicalization and hate crimes in recent years, the general public is becoming increasingly concerned about the pivotal role that schools play in shaping the moral and civic development of students. Cultivating students’ critical thinking and communication skills to navigate a rapidly changing world characterized by diverse opinions and contentious debates has become a pressing matter of societal importance. In this context, the teaching of controversial issues is promoted by educators and policymakers, which is essential for cultivating rational and democratic citizens.

Previous research showed that intentional classroom discussion of controversial issues helped foster students’ democratic participation, promote their civic responsibility, and develop critical thinking skills (Hess, 2009; Johnson & Johnson, 2009; McAvoy & Hess, 2013). Broadly defined, controversial issues are topics that cause conflict or dispute in the public sphere. These issues often involve conflicts in values and perspectives, making them particularly challenging to discuss in educational settings (The definition of controversial issues will be further elaborated in the following sections). Structured classroom debates on controversial topics such as climate change, immigration, or racial justice are associated with increased political awareness and active participation in the democratic process (Avery et al., 2014; Parker, 2003).

Given existing studies which acknowledged the pedagogical value of teaching controversial topics as an innovative strategy to reform traditional classroom practices (Ban & Mahmud, 2023; Chen & Xiao, 2021; Karisan & Zeidler, 2016), they often overlook or underestimate the inherent risks of teaching controversial issues, particularly how social-political factors interact with educational contexts in teaching controversial issues. For instance, the political turmoil and national sentiments following the 2016 U.S. election complicated the teaching of controversial issues. A California teacher was forced to retire after drawing rhetorical parallels between Trump’s and Hitler’s speeches in a classroom discussion (Dunn et al., 2019).

This study aims to systematically review the challenges teachers faced, alongside the positions and strategies they adopted, in teaching controversial issues—a practice that, while difficult, remains essential for cultivating the next generation. Specifically, this review addresses the following research questions: (1) How did political, societal, professional, and pedagogical factors shape the teaching of controversial issues? (2) How did teacher positions on controversial topics vary across different socio-political contexts? (3) What strategies did teachers use to manage emotional and cognitive conflicts in the classroom?

Contemporary society is often described as polarized, with numerous issues dividing the population and creating tensions between individuals and groups. Schools are also affected by this polarized social climate, and research shows that family values, migration, discrimination and racism, and sustainable development are examples of issues that may give rise to tensions in the classroom (Flensner, 2020). Controversial issues are often described as “issues which arouse strong feelings and divide opinion in communities and society” (Kerr & Huddleston, 2016, p. 11; cf. Dearden, 1981; Hand, 2008; Journell, 2017; Rawls, 1993). Research indicates, however, that what provokes strong reactions in one classroom may pass largely unnoticed in another (Flensner, 2020; Kerr & Huddleston, 2016). This study aims to contribute to scientific knowledge about the contextual aspects of teaching controversial issues by examining how students reason about the same issue in two Swedish upper secondary schools situated in different social contexts.

Sweden has experienced substantial immigration over the past twenty years, and approximately one in four residents has a foreign background (Statistics Sweden, 2024). This has led to intense public debate concerning issues of integration and segregation. One example is a relatively new tradition associated with upper secondary school graduation celebrations: students with a foreign background wrapping themselves in, and waving, the flag of their parents’ country of origin during the graduation parade through the city, rather than the Swedish flag. This practice has elicited strong emotional responses. Is it reasonable to celebrate an education and graduation financed by Swedish taxpayers by displaying the flag of another country? This question was selected by the teachers involved in the study as a case within the broader theme of segregation and integration. The case of foreign flags at graduation celebrations was deemed suitable because it is closely connected to students’ lived experiences; they are about to graduate and will need to take a stance on how they themselves wish to act in relation to flags. Furthermore, the case was considered relevant in relation to the broader societal issue of segregation.

The study is underpinned by theories of ethnic identity and the symbolic significance of flags. Research shows that national flags symbolize a nation’s core values and carry strong emotional meanings (Muldoon et al., 2020). A flag can be interpreted as an expression of an individual’s identity and of solidarity with a particular nation, which Callahan and Ledgerwood (2006) argue may become particularly problematic in multinational societies. Ethnic identity refers to the perception of belonging to a specific group characterized by shared ways of thinking, feeling, experiencing, and behaving. The development of ethnic identity is especially salient for individuals belonging to minority groups, who must decide whether to maintain loyalty to their own group, develop an identity in relation to the majority society, or construct a dual ethnic identity. Individuals belonging to the majority society, by contrast, often take their ethnic identity for granted (Phinney, 2003; Almqvist, 2020). The study also draws on theories of deliberative teaching (Hess & McAvoy, 2014), which emphasize the importance of exposing students to the full range of perspectives on an issue and assigning students a position to defend in a debate conducted in a respectful and attentive manner.

The study aims to answer the following research questions:

• What similarities and differences can be identified in students’ argumentation regarding the display of foreign flags during graduation celebrations in two Swedish schools located in different social contexts?
• How can these similarities and differences in argumentation be understood in relation to theories of ethnic identity?
• What implications for pedagogical practice can be identified?

Socio-political issues are ubiquitous. Despite their omnipresence, people are reluctant to deliberate on these issues because inherent disagreements make them uncomfortable, leading them to prefer conversations with like-minded individuals (Hess, 2009). However, deliberative theory holds that deliberation is an essential part of democracy. Deliberative democracy is “grounded in an ideal in which people come together, on the basis of equal status and mutual respect, to discuss the political issues they face and, on the basis of those discussions, decide on the policies that will then affect their lives” (Bächtiger et al., 2018, p. 2). In a deliberative democracy, dialogue becomes a democratic tool that, in an ideal situation, leads to inclusive decisions (Sant, 2019).

Education for deliberative democracy implies that schools should teach students the deliberative skills needed to participate actively in society (Sant, 2019). Students learn to be responsible citizens by discussing big questions. In contrast to the epistemic bubble, where like-minded people exchange similar ideas (Nguyen, 2020), class and school contexts are diverse, offering a unique setting (Hess, 2009). Students can engage with disagreement in a structured, constructive, and educative way. Because disagreement is inherent to deliberation, controversies are highly appropriate for teaching students how to talk about differences (McAvoy & Hess, 2013). Controversies are open questions with competing views (McAvoy & Hess, 2013; Schuitema et al., 2018) that examine social or political issues that affect personal beliefs and values (Hand & Levinson, 2012; Niemeyer et al., 2024; Schuitema et al., 2018).

Research on deliberation on controversial issues in education is growing (Larsson & Lindström, 2020; Nishiyama, 2021; Samuelsson & Bøyum, 2015), yet research on student responsibility is scarce, and conceptualizations are fragmented. However, shared responsibility and balanced roles between teachers and students are needed for productive deliberation (Alexander, 2018). Given the open-ended nature of deliberation on controversial issues, teachers cannot maintain full control and must make room for students’ substantive perspectives (Schuitema et al., 2018). Although student responsibility is needed to empower them to develop their own views and actively participate, it is also challenging for teachers to keep the deliberation open-ended and to step back (Schuitema et al., 2018). Teacher regulation during deliberation appears to lead to greater content quality, but it also diminishes students’ active role (Schuitema et al., 2018). Thus, there seems to be a paradox between teachers’ aspiration to control the learning situation and their goal of enhancing students’ active participation and responsibility (Bossér et al., 2015). This paradox has been little explored and seems to be a missed opportunity in the light of citizenship education, as students will not have the room to develop their own perspectives and truly engage with disagreements. Understanding student responsibility in deliberation, therefore, becomes a key educational response to contemporary conditions.

This systematic review aims to address the current gap in scientific knowledge with the following research questions:

1. How is student responsibility in deliberation on controversial issues conceptualized?

1. What strategies foster student responsibility in deliberation on controversial issues?

Current societal challenges in national, European and global contexts – such as the war in Europe and uncertainty in international economic and political world order – underscore the importance of preparing all students, regardless of age or field of study, for their roles as democratic citizens. In this context, democratic citizenship education is vital, as reflected in Cedefop’s (2025) goal of making citizenship a basic skill. We conceptualise citizenship education here through Bernstein’s (2000, xx–xxi) notion of pedagogic rights, namely: (i) individual enhancement (confidence for critical understanding), (ii) social inclusion, and (iii) participation, including the ability to take part in and act within democratic processes.

In the Swedish educational system, upper secondary vocational education and training (VET) is intended to prepare students both for the labour market and for participation in society’s democratic arenas. Within this framework, subject courses in History, Religious Education, Science Studies and Social Studies are ascribed a significant role. The study presented forms part of a larger research project (Swedish Research Council, dnr 2022-03572), which focuses on citizenship education for students in upper secondary VET in relation to knowledge, teaching and learning across these four subjects.

Previous research suggests that students in VET programmes are disadvantaged with regard to citizenship education in several respects. These include the proportion and character of the knowledge they encounter in the formal and realised curriculum (e.g. Nylund et al. 2017; Rönnlund et al. 2019), the conditions for and forms of teaching and learning (e.g. Kärnebro et al. 2025), and the expectations placed on them by teachers, school leaders and study counsellors (Panican & Olofsson 2020). Moreover, students’ identity processes and self-perceptions shape their learning and educational formation (e.g. Hedlin & Åberg 2013). At the same time, VET students have been found to value citizenship education, particularly the development of critical thinking (e.g. Asplund 2010) and opportunities for political discussion (Forsberg 2011). However, their expectations of future civic engagement vary considerably depending on the type of activity involved (Knekta et al. 2025).

The concept of the “citizen” is understood here as situated and contingent upon other attributed identities, such as gender and sexuality, age, social class and functional ability (Connell 2000; Yuval-Davies 2008). This perspective is particularly relevant to the present study, as VET programmes to a large extent are gender-differentiated contexts. Discourses of citizenship also often become gendered, as different forms of knowledge and abilities are associated with particular identities (Arnot 2009).

This sub-study is based on interviews with students (see methodology) and aims to shed light on vocational students’ citizenship identities by examining: (a) their perceptions of their own futures and that of society; (b) which issues or problems they consider important to engage with, and the means through which they believe they can exert influence; and finally, (c) how the results can be understood in relation to differences between various VET programmes, as well as how citizenship identities are interrelated with social positions (gender, class and ethnicity) and professional identities.