To Örebro University

This contribution is based on an ongoing study on teachers' anti-racist actions. The project is based on John Dewey's moral philosophy with an interest in teachers' experiences of racism and anti-racism in education. In the 25 teacher interviews conducted so far, teachers express that they have a moral responsibility to counteract racism among the pupils. But what should they do when a colleague expresses racism?

Our study shows that this is a common experience among the informants, visible in colleagues’ racist jokes, speech and actions. In situation like this, there seems to be an uncertainty about their moral responsibility leading to professional ambivalence. On the one hand, the teachers feel that they are obligated to the values in the curriculum, on the other hand, they are uncertain about whether the moral responsibility could be applied in relation to colleagues.

The interviewed teachers act in relate to this ambivalence in different ways. Some describe their moral responsibility as general and choose to counteract all kinds of racism in school, even among colleagues. Other states that this is beyond their moral responsibility as a teacher, and choose not to act or to inform the principal. The choice not to act has in previous research also been explained in terms of loyalty between colleagues. The uncertainty that occurs among the informants shows how the boundaries of moral responsibility becomes erased when moving from classroom to staff room.

The aim of this article is to shed light on teachers’ actions to counter racism expressed by their colleagues. Based on qualitative interviews with teachers in Swedish upper secondary schools, the article presents a narrative analysis of three teachers. The article highlights the complexity of what it means to be a colleague in anti-racist work and argues that this brings different risks and possibilities for White teachers and for teachers of colour. By relating the narratives to research on racism and teacher professionalism, the article contributes to a better understanding of the prevalence and character of racism expressed by colleagues, and points at the need for further research.

Sessionen fokuserar frågor som berör rasism och antirasism i skolan. Här presenteras fyra papers som fokuserar hur lärare agerar när de upplever olika former av rasism, både bland kollegor och elever som i skolans organisering. Sessionen presenterar preliminära resultat från det pågående forskningsprojektet "How to counteract racism in education" (Vetenskapsrådet), men tar också avstamp i boken "Att motverka rasism i förskolan och skolan" (Arneback & Jämte, 2017). Sessionen är öppen för alla som är intresserade av frågor som berör rasism och antirasism i skolan. Det kommer också lämnas utrymme för gemensamma samtal och frågor kring forskningsfältet i stort.

Paper 1:

Att motverka rasism i skolan (Arneback & Jämte)

Presentationen fokuserar lärares antirasistiska handlingar och visar en palett av didaktiska arbetssätt lärare använder för att möta olika uttryck för rasism i skolan. Vidare fokuseras hur lärares egna erfarenheter av rasism påverkar deras agerande och förståelse av problemet.

Paper 2:

Mediediskurser om rasism och antirasism i skolan (Wiklund)

Lärares antirasistiska arbete är beroende av hur de förstår begreppet rasism och mediers sätt att använda begreppet är viktiga källor för denna förståelse. Dessa antaganden ligger till grund för denna presentation av hur rasism definieras i medietexter om händelser där rasism aktualiseras i skolsammanhang.

Paper 3:

Om kommunikationens möjligheter och begräsningar i arbetet mot rasism (Arneback & Englund)

Bidraget behandlar villkor för lärares agerande i bemötandet av elevers rasistiska uttalanden. Vår teoretiska referens är primärt John Deweys (1922) bok Human Nature and Conduct. Bidraget analyserar den deliberativa kommunikationens möjligheter och gränser i förhållande till elevers potential, klassrumsklimat samt lärares egna kunskaper och upplevda kapacitet.

Paper 4:

Har lärare ett ansvar att agera när kollegor ger uttryck för rasism? (Bergh & Tryggvason)

Uttryck av rasism är utmanande frågor som lärare möter och hanterar i och omkring undervisningen. Läroplanen är tydlig med att lärare har ett ansvar att motverka alla former av rasism i skolan. Men hur agerar lärare när kollegor ger uttryck för rasism? Den här presentationen utforskar ett ansvar som många gånger är osäkert och riskfyllt.

This paper sheds light on how teachers act and reflect on their actions in response to expressions of racism among colleagues. The empirical data consists of qualitative interviews with 27 high school teachers in Sweden, but, in order to dig deeper into the experiences of teachers, this paper focuses on three teachers (Tove, Fatima and Hannah). The result points at a professional ambivalence on how to act, since there is no common ground among teachers for how to act when colleagues express racism. To act against racism comes at high costs and very much depends on each teacher’s previous experiences of life and work. Consequently, each teacher is provided a unique space and resource base for reflection and action.

Uttryck av rasism är utmanande frågor som lärare möter och hanterar i och omkring undervisningen. Läroplanen är tydlig med att lärare har ett ansvar att motverka alla former av rasism i skolan. Men hur agerar lärare när kollegor ger uttryck för rasism? Den här presentationen utforskar ett ansvar som många gånger är osäkert och riskfyllt.

This paper seeks to bring John Dewey’s pragmatist philosophy of democratic education and the public into dialogue with Ernesto Laclau’s theory of populism. Recognizing populism as an integral aspect of democracy, rather than as its antithesis, the purpose of this paper is to provide a theoretical account of populism as being of educational relevance in two respects. First, it argues that the populist logic specifies a set of formal elements by which democratic education could operate as a collective enterprise. Second, it asserts that the notion of populism supplements any congenial understanding of democratic education by bringing political demands, conflicts and affects to the fore. Finally, the paper discusses the risks and possibilities inherent in visualizing populism as an educational modus.

Swedish students regularly take part in school partnership trips to Tanzania. Yet, little research looks at the extent to which these trips support global learning. This paper is interested in the discourses that enable and constrain ethical relationality in these educative encounters. It considers existing research on global citizenship education and school partnerships in relation to decolonial engagements then analyses interview data with four students who participated in an entrepreneurship themed trip to identify discourses available to them. Students articulated an overarching discourse of taken-for-grantedness. Several sub-discourses could enable but tend to constrain an ethical relationality in these educative encounters.

The question ‘What is to be done?’ underpins Chantal Mouffe’s agonistic theory of democratic politics. Yet, despite this affirmative tone that distinguishes her from other radical theorists, her theory neglects the cultural work required for hegemony-building. This omission has resulted in operational difficulties when agonistic democracy is put into practice. This article shows how academics inspired by Mouffe unintentionally depend on theoretical resources from competing democratic theories. As a result of this, agonistic practices risk to reinforce neo-liberal regimes instead of developing counter-hegemonic alternatives. To meet this challenge, and to expand the scope of Mouffe’s agonism, we draw on educational theory to provide a more developed theorization of the cultural work required for hegemony-building. We propose that only by embracing different conceptualisations of education, we can activate cultural interventions that facilitate counter-hegemonic ventures.

The aim of this article is to synthesize theoretical and empirical research on agonism in education into teaching principles. Agonistic theory underscores the role of conflict, emotions, and collective identities in democratic classroom discussions. Empirical studies on agonism in education provide empirical insights into how these aspects are played out in teaching practices. By synthesizing both theoretical development and empirical findings on agonism in education, this article suggests four principles for agonistic teaching. The suggested principles aim to function as a synthetization of research valuable to the research field of democratic education and as tools for teachers who want to explore the possibilities of agonism in their teaching.

Due to the current political challenges facing democratic societies, including an apparent presence of populist rhetoric, the question of how political discussions should take place in democratic education is as urgent as ever. In the last two decades, one of the most prominent approaches to this question has been the use of deliberative theory. However, the deliberative approach has been criticized from an agonistic perspective for neglecting the role of emotions in political discussions. Deliberative theorists have in turn responded to this critique and argued that the agonistic approach tends to put too much emphasis on students’ emotions and identities in political discussions. Recently, as a contribution to this debate, the idea of assimilating agonism with deliberation has been suggested as a way of overcoming the differences between agonism and deliberative theory.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the educational debate between agonism and deliberative theory by exploring the deliberative critique from the vantage point of agonism. I claim that the deliberative critique of agonism is unfounded and based on a misreading of Mouffe’s agonistic theory. Furthermore, I argue that the attempt to assimilate agonism with deliberation is not compatible with Mouffe’s agonistic theory

When an emotionally heated discussion erupts in the social science classroom, it can bring the teachers and students into a topic or question that none of them had foreseen. Within the research field of social science education there is a growing interest for these unexpected teaching situations. The aim of this theoretical article is to further develop didactical theory of the unexpected in social science education with an emphasis on the didactical why-question. By drawing on Hannah Arendt’s theory of the subject and action, the article outlines a perspective on the unexpected in social science teaching. This perspective highlights how students’ actions can be understood as a distinct revealing of the individual that is unique, risky, and unexpected. The article puts this Arendtian perspective in relation to the citizenship ideal of the “the reflective spectator” that has been formulated within the research field. The article ends with a discussion on how to understand the conflict between different ideals of citizenship in the research field of social science education.

By taking the vantage point of agonistic pluralism, the aim is to enter into dialogue with Samuelsson’s theoretical development of consensus as an educational aim for classroom discussions. The response highlights three points of interest in the deliberative conception of consensus. The first point relates to the problem of exclusion, which Samuelsson clearly framed as something that concerns deliberative theory and agonistic theory. The second point is about the relation between conflict and consensus and the kind of conflict that is compatible with Samuelsson’s idea of consensus. The concluding part of this response is an exploration of how the agonistic concept of hegemony could function as an alternative aim for ending classroom discussions.

Democratic education can be seen as being constituted by a political dimension in two senses. In one sense, democratic education is political because it has a politically formulated goal to educate citizens. In another sense, the practice of democratic education is in itself political, in that it constitutes a space in which students encounter different visions of and opinions about what society should be like. In the intersection of these two meanings of “the political” we find the teacher. How can teachers navigate and approach “the political” in their classrooms? Which conceptions of conflicts, emotions and identities are useful when approaching the political as an educational problem?

This thesis formulates an agonistic perspective on the political in social science education. In four articles, the thesis explores agonism and populism in relation to social science education. In focus are questions about the role that emotions, conflicts and identities should play in democratic education. Three of the four articles are theoretical investigations into the problems and potentialities of agonism and populism. The fourth article is empirically based on interviews with social science teachers and classroom observations. By synthesizing the results from these four articles, an agonistic perspective on the political in social science education is formulated. The agonistic perspective consists of four concepts: political emotions, hegemony, political presence and simplification. With these concepts, the agonistic perspective provides a theoretically informed starting point for teachers to reflect on and approach “the political” in social science education.

In recent years, an agonistic approach to citizenship education has been put forward as a way of educating democratic citizens. Claudia W. Ruitenberg (2009) has developed such an approach and takes her starting point in Chantal Mouffe’s agonistic theory. Ruitenberg highlights how political emotions and political disputes can be seen as central for a vibrant democratic citizenship education. The aim of this paper is to critically explore and further develop the concepts of political emotions and political disputes as central components of an agonistic approach. In order to do this, I return to Mouffe’s point of departure in the concept of the political. By drawing on Michael Marder’s (2010) notion of enmity, I suggest how “the presence of the other” can be seen as a vital aspect of the political in citizenship education. By not abandoning the concept of enmity, and with the notion of presence in the foreground, I argue that Ruitenberg’s definition of political emotions needs to be formulated in a way that includes emotions revolving around one’s own existence as a political being. Moreover, I argue that in order to further develop the agonistic approach, the emphasis on the verbalization of opinions in political disputes needs to be relaxed, as it limits the political dimension in education and excludes crucial political practices, such as exodus. 

Environmental and sustainability education (ESE) has a political dimension and is intertwined with questions of emotions and conflicts. When discussing sustainability issues in the classroom, heated emotions and conflicts between students can arise. But discussions about sustainability issues can also lack both engagement and emotional involvement from the students, even when the teacher brings up what s/he thinks is a burning sustainability issue. A crucial question is then how to approach emotions in ESE in a non-instrumental way and where the political dimension of emotions can be put to the fore. This chapter outlines two strategies to teach with and through political emotions in environmental and sustainability education. The first strategy is simplification, which simplifies the complexity and the conflictual aspect of sustainability issues. When a classroom discussion is characterised by an emotional indifference or a lack of engagement, simplification is a strategy to approach this indifference. The second strategy is circulation, which is a way to maintain the intensity of emotions, or to (re)orientate them toward other objects and issues. When emotions run high in a discussion, circulation is a strategy to approach these emotions as productive elements of a vibrant environmental and sustainability education.

Considering the current state of our planet, the need for a vibrant environmental and sustainability education (ESE) is arguably more pressing than ever. However, education at large has also become increasingly characterized by accountability, measurements, and high-stakes testing. Consequently, ESE presently finds itself caught in a tension between two competing educational logics, namely an existential one and an instrumental one.

There is undoubtedly a deeply existential dimension to ESE as the content of its educational practices have profound implications for continued human (and non-human) existence (Affifi & Christie, 2019; Vandenplas et al., 2023; Verlie, 2019). ESE involves issues about severe threats to our planet and the extinction of numerous species as well as vast global economic and social inequalities. As such, sustainability issues touch upon the very nerve of what it means to grow up in a society where dreadful visions of the future seem to be closing in. Such visions can spark strong moral emotions in students as well as ignite intense political discussions about the development of society (Sund & Öhman, 2014; Van Poeck et al., 2019). In short, the educational content of ESE carries profound existential implications for both teachers and students that need to be carefully handled in the classroom (Vandenplas et al., 2023).

At the same time, sustainable development is being taught within a broader system of schooling characterized by instrumentalism rather than devotion to existential concerns. Many European educational systems have moved in a direction of increased teacher accountability and a stronger focus on test results and measurable outcomes (Grek, 2020). Taken together, the changing institutional condition of schooling means that teachers and students today face a harsh educational reality where didactical autonomy is being reduced and knowledge requirements are to be met. This means that there is a risk that schoolwork is being presented to students in instrumental terms that encourages them to pursue good grades for the sake of personal benefit rather than a sincere commitment to the survival of life on earth. Put succinctly, teachers and students engaged in ESE are today caught in a tension between two fundamentally different logics – an existential and an instrumental – that pose a serious pedagogical challenge.

The aim of this paper is to theoretically specify the relation between the existential and the instrumental logic in ESE.

Environmental and sustainability education (ESE) consists of topical existentialand ethical issues. At the same time, these issues are taught ina school setting that is shaped by assignments, grades, and school tasks.The relationships between structures of formal education in a schoolenvironment and the characteristics of ESE has been described in dichotomousterms as a contradiction, known in the ESE research field as“Stevenson’s gap”, after Robert B. Stevenson. The aim of this article is toovercome this dichotomous understanding of the relation betweenschooling and ESE by providing a pragmatist perspective. Drawing onJohn Dewey’s notion of habit, two learning habits are outlined by whichstudents encounter environmental and sustainability issues in the classroom:the habit of schooling and the habit of inquiry. Empirical data fromSwedish upper secondary schools is used to illustrate their meaning inclassroom practice. Our pragmatist conceptualisation highlights howthese habits are simultaneously present in the same classroom. A conclusionis that teaching and learning in ESE should not be reduced toeither habit but that both can be valuable for a robust and vital ESE.

Discussions about environmental and sustainability issues in classrooms can bring different political visions, opinions and conflicts to the fore. From a pluralistic perspective on environmental and sustainability education (ESE), such political differences and conflicts can be seen as a suitable starting point for teaching, rather than as an obstacle to overcome. But how can teachers approach this political dimension of ESE? This chapter outlines deliberation and agonism as two different approaches to the political dimension of ESE. With a deliberative approach, the role of rational and respectful communication is underscored as is the ideal to reach for consensus in classroom discussions. With an agonistic approach, the role of emotions, and how they are intertwined with political visions in sustainability issues, are highlighted. From an agonistic perspective, the teacher should not aim for a consensus in classroom discussions, but instead aim at enabling conflicts and pluralism to have a democratic outlet in discussions. A main point of this chapter is that deliberation and agonism should be seen as two different approaches to the political dimension in ESE, as they draw on different ideas about classrooms and conflicts and have different educational consequences.

In this scholarly review we critically discuss the last 30 years of research on pluralism in environmental and sustainability education (ESE). Pluralism has been a focal point for a vast amount of theoretical and empirical studies in the research field. Since the journal Environmental Education Research (EER) was established, 158 articles have been published that to some extend refer to pluralism or pluralistic ESE. In this review we analyse the state-of-the-art of pluralism in relation to current societal changes and challenges. By placing three decades of research on pluralism in relation to key challenges that face democratic society and education, we outline prospects for future research and discuss what role pluralism can, and should, take in ESE research.

In this scholarly review we critically discuss the last 30 years of research on pluralism in environmental and sustainability education (ESE). Pluralism has been a focal point for a vast amount of theoretical and empirical studies in the research field. Since the journal Environmental Education Research (EER) was established, 158 articles have been published that to some extend refer to pluralism or pluralistic ESE. In this review we analyse the state-of-the-art of pluralism in relation to current societal changes and challenges. By placing three decades of research on pluralism in relation to key challenges that face democratic society and education, we outline prospects for future research and discuss what role pluralism can, and should, take in ESE research.