& Controversy

polarisation in the classroom

Suggestions for pedagogical practice

Maarten Van Alstein

1
 1. Tensions in society, controversy in the classroom .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

2. Practising the democratic conflict .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

3. Pedagogical practice in three scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Scenario 1: The classroom in turmoil ...................................................................... 7

Uproar in the classroom ................................................................................................ 8

Dealing with cases of polarisation ............................................................................... 10

Scenario 2: Controversial topics in the curriculum .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Scenario 3: Controversy as pedagogy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

4. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Endnotes .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

2
1. Tensions in society, controversy in the classroom

What if discussions about political and societal issues become

so turbulent that a class erupts into turmoil and chaos? What
if, on the other hand, topics are so sensitive or controversial
that students, parents or school authorities are reluctant to
even discuss them in an educational context? How should we
react when a student suddenly launches into an unexpected
provocative or hatefilled diatribe in class? What if students
voice extreme views or standpoints or condone terrorist vio­
lence? How should we react when a school finds itself sud­
denly in the grip of harmful forms of polarisation and groups
of students from different backgrounds start to turn on one
another?
Secondly, we need to be aware of differences in cultural and
Although the classroom and school are pedagogical spaces national contexts. Models and strategies that are meaningful
geared to constructive learning, they are, of course, not in one context might be inappropriate in another. What do we
closed off from society. On the contrary: instances like the do, for example, in countries where hostile forms of political
above indicate that societal conflicts and tensions can enter polarisation put a strain on open dialogue? In some contexts,
the classroom at any moment, sometimes quite violently.1 the idea of discussing controversial societal issues in schools
The pedagogical challenge across a wide variety of contexts is might in itself be controversial. Therefore, when thinking
how to deal constructively with these difficult situations. about strategies for pedagogical practice we need to pay close
What should we do? How should we react? How should we attention to the question of how pedagogical models and ap­
create a classroom and school climate in which controversial proaches work across a wide range of possible contexts.
issues and societal conflicts can be engaged with openly and
constructively, and heightened tensions and harmful forms And thirdly, in light of the idea that theory without practice
of polarisation can be defused or even prevented? is empty, but practice without theory is blind, it seems peri­
lous to recommend strategies for practice without critically
Over the years an impressive array of models and methods reflecting on a number of theoretical and normative issues,
have been developed to assist teachers and educational pro­ such as: what does it mean to bring ‘politics’ into the context
fessionals to deal with situations of this kind, such as dia­ of a classroom? What are the critical prerequisites for demo­
logue techniques, polarisation management methods, artis­ cratic citizenship education that aims to empower students
tic pedagogies and non-violent communication techniques. to find their voices? At the same time, we need to take care
It is of course good that such a wide range of pedagogical that theories and pedagogical insights do not remain ab­
models and approaches are available to teachers. Nonethe­ stract, but are meaningful and valuable to educational practi­
less, if we want these strategies and techniques to be imple­ tioners.
mented in a relevant and effective way, a number of ques­
tions need to be addressed before they are introduced in In this attempt at an inspirational guide we first highlight
classrooms and schools. some of the theoretical and pedagogical premises on which
our approach to dealing with controversy and polarisation in
Firstly, given the sheer number of didactic models and ap­ the classroom is based. In the second and most elaborated
proaches that are available to educational professionals, part we formulate a number of suggestions for pedagogical
there is a risk that teachers could become lost in the many practice based on these premises. These suggestions are
perspectives and strategies on offer and do not know how to based on what we call a ‘scenario-based approach’. In our
choose the best response for the specific situations they face search for answers to the question ‘What works best in which
in the classroom. A crucial question, therefore, is: which situation?’ (and thus avoid the pitfall of a ‘one-size-fits-all’
methods and resources are appropriate in what settings and approach), we distinguish among three scenarios in which
for which kind of conflict? On the other hand, there is also a conflicts and tensions may arise in a classroom. In light of
risk of teachers using a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach; i.e. they these distinctions we then discuss a number of useful tech­
might apply strategies that may be relevant and effective in niques and methods to deal with each of these situations.2
one context in situations where another approach might be
more effective. 3
 2. Practising the democratic conflict

When societal conflicts or tensions raise their head in the Theoretically, this approach to democratic citizenship educa-
classroom in the form of discussions about controversial is­ tion is underpinned by two key concepts:
sues, provocative student statements, or a concerning level
of polarisation among students, teachers are faced with a  The first is that of the open classroom climate, which
difficult and challenging situation. How do they react? refers to a classroom where students feel free to ex-
press their opinions and are actively encouraged to do
A number of studies indicate that some teachers opt for a so, even if these opinions diverge from those of their
strategy of avoidance. They ignore controversial issues, limit co-students or teachers. Another constitutive element
their teaching to ‘safe’ and stable knowledge, or try to sup- of an open classroom climate is that, when they explain
press societal conflicts in their classroom, either because and discuss topics, teachers draw students’ attention
they are afraid of losing control of the class, or that conflicts to a plurality of perspectives on the issue under discus-
might harm students, or that parents might react negatively, sion;4 in other words, that they actively and deliberately
or because they feel they lack the necessary skills or the incorporate multiple perspectives into their lessons.
proper training to deal with these kinds of situations. In
some contexts there might even be pressure from colleagues,  The second key concept underpinning our theoretical
school principals, school boards, parents or the authorities to framework is that of the political classroom. The idea
remain silent about particular topics and avoid issues reflect- here is not to ‘politicise’ teacher-student relations in a
ing societal conflicts and tensions.3 Our approach, however, biased party-political sense, nor to open the door to
starts from the belief that avoiding controversial topics and ideological indoctrination. In the view of Hess and
societal conflicts is not a good idea in educational contexts. McAvoy, the concept of the political classroom builds
Conflicts and tensions are seen as part and parcel of a demo- on the idea that schools are – and ought to be – politi-
cratic society, and they are not resolved (let alone trans- cal sites.5 The term ‘political’ refers here to the role of
formed) by ignoring or suppressing them. Drawing on in- citizens within a democracy. The political classroom,
sights from transformative conflict resolution and from a therefore, is one that helps students to develop their
critical perspective on citizenship education, we assume that ability to deliberate on political questions and discuss
it is better not ignore or try to ‘control’ these conflicts but, controversial societal issues. Underlying this approach
much more positively, to see them as opportunities for stu­ is the belief of the US philosopher and educational re-
dents to learn how democracy works in practice. The idea, former John Dewey that for citizenship to work, teach-
moreover, is that this approach can also have a preventative ers should try to see the classroom as a mini-demo-
effect. It is assumed that severe tensions and harmful forms cracy or, in other words, as a community for democratic
of polarisation are less likely to manifest themselves in practice.6 This conception of the political classroom
classrooms and schools that open up space for students to entails a number of observations regarding the position
constructively explore and work on controversial issues that of the teacher. In a nutshell, it suggests that teachers
are topical in society at large. should preferably adopt a position of neutrality and not
engage in partisan politics. However, they should not
be neutral on the issue of the value of democracy. On
the contrary, teachers have a crucial role to play in
creating open and democratic classrooms where
young people learn what democracy means and how it
works in practice.7

4
The rationale for creating an open classroom climate gies and techniques at hand to constructively manage these
difficult situations, stimulate open classroom discussions,
The idea of an open classroom climate – a classroom where and defuse harmful forms of polarisation.
students can voice a plurality of views and opinions – is a
constitutive element of any perspective that sees a school The classroom as a space for democratic discussion
class as a community for democratic practice. This idea is
theoretically well developed in the literature on democratic If the aim is to create open and democratic classrooms, a
citizenship education. An empirical case can also be made for number of theoretical and normative issues need to be fleshed
favouring an open classroom climate. Current research indi- out before we can introduce concrete didactic strategies and
cates that this kind of climate promotes the development of models. We argue that three basic questions need to be ad-
positive attitudes to citizenship among students. More dressed:
specifically, an open classroom climate has positive effects
on students’ political knowledge, political self-efficacy, and  Which frames of reference should teachers and stu-
political and generalised trust, while also promoting the dents share if they want to engage in fruitful demo-
understanding that conflict is an integral part of democracy. 8
cratic discourse and discussion?

At the same time, some research seems to suggest that when  How can teachers create spaces that are as open as
the open classroom climate is at risk of closing down, e.g. possible for dialogue and political discussion?
when tensions within the class are mounting, this may have
a negative effect. Once students perceive intergroup relations  Are there limits to what can be said in the classroom?
as antagonistic, attitudes such as tolerance are seen to dete­
riorate. On the other hand, if the atmosphere is positive be- On an abstract level, the first question refers to the basic
tween groups, this is associated with significantly lower le- principles of liberal democracy, such as freedom, equality
vels of prejudice.9 and reciprocity. But what does this mean for classroom prac-
tice? One approach is to agree on a number of ground rules
In short: the way in which teachers deal with societal con- for positive and fruitful interaction before starting with dis­
flicts as they are played out in school environments makes a cussions or efforts to resolve conflicts. Ideally, these rules
difference. If teachers succeed in transforming difficult dis- should be decided on in close consultation with the students
cussions and societal tensions into constructive learning op­ themselves. What rules groups eventually decide on will be
portunities and stimulate an open classroom climate, they quite similar in most cases, such as mutual respect, listening
can make a valuable contribution to democratic citizenship to each other, a ban on insults, etc.10 This shared ‘covenant
education. On the other hand, when the classroom climate for good interaction’ creates a connective framework that al-
becomes negative and tensions get the upper hand, the ef­ lows students to express different opinions in a constructive
fects on students’ political attitudes will likely be negative. way and in a safe space.

The second question deals with how dialogues and discus­

sions are allowed to play out in the classroom. This is not
only a practical issue: conceptions of ‘good’ classroom dia-
logue are also linked to more fundamental philosophical
choices. On the one hand, many authors writing on demo-
cratic citizenship education plead for a deliberative dialogue
model. Students should be asked to express themselves in a
reasonable voice and use rational and ‘valid’ arguments (i.e.
arguments based on expert knowledge). Preferably they
should keep strong emotions in check. In times of fake news
and increasing polarisation, a lot speaks in favour of this de-
Transforming heated discussions and conflicts into con- liberative model. It certainly seems worthwhile for teachers
structive learning opportunities and defusing tensions is not to try and teach this kind of dialogue to as many of their
easy. This is why it is vital that teachers have the right strate- students as possible.
5
 At the same time, the question can be raised as to whether tries, moreover, discrimination in schools is forbidden, and
this deliberative model is attainable in all classroom situa­ teachers are required to ensure discrimination­free class­
tions and contexts, and whether it is desirable in all cases. rooms. In a more general sense, not allowing discriminatory
Most teachers know that discussions about controversial remarks to go unchecked is an important aspect of demo-
topics can be quite heated and do not always live up to the cratic and pluralist citizenship education. Of course, in the
deliberative ideal of rational discourse. Is this necessarily a context of the classroom, ‘guarding’ the boundaries of free
problem? Emotionally charged controversies and societal speech is not only a question of coercive disciplinary action.
conflicts are typical of democratic politics. In this light, the On the contrary, teachers have a range of pedagogical tech-
crucial question is not how to ‘rationalise’ all classroom dis- niques at their disposal to deal with these kinds of challeng-
cussions, but rather how students can learn how to deal with ing situations. It is to these strategies that we now turn.
politically charged conflicts in a constructive and transfor-
mative way. Moreover, some research suggests that if teach-
ers attempt to impose the requirements of a deliberative dia­
logue too strictly, they may leave some students behind.11 Not
all students have the same levels of verbal skills or are as
knowledgeable about complex societal issues as others in
their class. Factors such as socio-economic background seem
to play a role in explaining why some students are less in­
clined to engage in deliberative classroom discussions. And
then there are also students who may want to express them­
selves in more emotionally charged language registers, e.g.
when they want to communicate ‘political’ emotions such as
anger, indignation or unease. Ideally, we should also allow
space for students to be critical about or challenge what they
perceive as unfair power relations in society. According to
Ruitenberg, all of this is a legitimate part of critical and
democratic citizenship education.12 Harking back to agonistic
pedagogies and theories of democracy,13 the central idea here
is that democratic citizenship education should aim to em-
power the greatest possible number of students to find their
own voices in the classroom.

All of this implies keeping the space for democratic discus-

sion in the classroom as open as possible. At this point, how-
ever, an important third question arises. Are there limits to
this open classroom; in other words, can anything and every-
thing be said in class? The question of the boundaries and
regulation of freedom of speech – which are important issues
in any democratic society – is also relevant in the context of
any classroom where political issues are discussed.14 Without
going into great depth on this issue, we argue that the space
for democratic discussion in the classroom is indeed a bound­
ed one. This is linked to the issue of classroom safety. Allow-
ing students to express racist or other discriminatory without
any constraints, for example, might severely threaten the
emotional or even physical safety of others in the class. Oth-
er students might feel targeted, threatened or insecure. Any
‘freedom of speech’ must therefore take into account stu-
dents’ right to basic safety in the classroom. In some coun-
6
3. Pedagogical practice in three scenarios

In the introduction to this guide we touched on possible pit­ Scenario 1: The classroom in turmoil
falls associated with the wide array of didactic strategies and
models developed for and introduced in educational systems Tensions can suddenly and rapidly mount in the classroom.
in order to deal with conflict and polarisation in classrooms In this scenario students make confrontational, discrimina-
and schools. On a practical level, the danger is that teachers tory or otherwise insulting remarks, or engage in fierce dis-
may feel overwhelmed by the many perspectives and strate­ cussions or intergroup quarrels. As a result, the classroom
gies on offer, and as a result may fail to identify techniques explodes.
and strategies that suit their particular needs. On the other
hand, there is the danger that teachers will adopt a ‘one- Teachers are then faced with a difficult and challenging
size-fits-all’ approach, and will apply a particular model to a situation. They must come up with an adequate reaction
wide range of very diverse situations. In order to avoid these within seconds – and with a second or third one if the first
pitfalls and assist educational professionals to find the ‘right’ reaction does not work. To do this they have to almost imme-
models and strategies that they can use to effectively deal diately find answers to a number of difficult questions:
with real situations in the classroom, we need to bring some
order to the numerous approaches that are currently on offer.  How do teachers assess the dynamics of the class-
room and the specific situation they are facing? Are
This, we argue, can be done by distinguishing carefully they dealing with a fierce discussion that they can
among the range of different scenarios in which contro- transform into a constructive classroom conversation
versial issues, societal conflicts and other kinds of tensions in which students exchange views and are encouraged
can arise in the classroom. The underlying idea of this ap- to listen to others? Or is it an instance of harmful polar-
proach is pedagogical common sense: before choosing a spe- isation that needs to be defused in order not to harm
cific technique or approach, it is vital for teachers to first as- intergroup relations? And what should they do in either
sess the specific situation they are confronted with. For most of these situations?
teachers this indeed is common sense: it is something they
do on a daily basis. The logic of training sessions and work-  Which position is the best one to take to deal with a
shops, however, often seems to be that particular models and particular situation? Is it best to engage in a fierce dis-
strategies are presented without elaborating extensively on cussion to make a point or try to start a multi-voiced
the specific situations in which they work best and how they conversation without taking sides?
relate to other possible situations and strategies.
 What about safety in the classroom? Are there stu-
In this paper, we distinguish among three scenarios in which dents who withdraw and keep silent – and who might
conflicts and tensions can occur in the classroom: experience the classroom as an unsafe or threatening
space?
 The class in turmoil: Teachers are confronted with con-
frontational remarks made by students, or with fiercely  How should teachers react when students’ discourse is
contested discussions or instances of polarisation. deemed unacceptable?

 Controversial topics in the curriculum: Teachers have to

teach subject matter that is sensitive or that can cause
controversy among students.

 Controversy as a form of pedagogy: Teachers want to

work proactively and constructively with students on
controversial or sensitive issues and use discussions of
these issues as a way to teach the principles and prac-
tice of democratic citizenship education.

For each scenario we suggest a number of useful pedagogical

strategies and didactic techniques.
7
 It is not easy to distinguish between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ re- and behaviour. An intervention to demarcate what is accept-
sponses to such a scenario. Much depends on the specificity able in the classroom and what is not should therefore ideally
of the situation. Nonetheless, a number of pedagogical be accompanied by an invitation to students to engage in a
strategies and techniques are available that can inspire and further conversation. In other words, teachers should tell
guide teachers in their reactions. We distinguish between two students that certain remarks are transgressive and unac-
situations: cases of confrontational remarks, controversy and ceptable, but simultaneously make clear that they are inter-
fierce discussion, on the one hand, and cases of harmful po- ested in discussing with the class the topic that has been
larisation, on the other. raised – but in a different way and using other language.15

Uproar in the classroom Reactions to confrontational remarks:

different options…
It can be utterly overwhelming when students suddenly make
inflammatory remarks or erupt in quarrels. Instantly a great Generally speaking, four options are available to deal with
distance seems to separate teacher from students, or stu­ confrontational remarks or heated discussions. Teachers
dents from one another. How should teachers react? can:16

Firstly, they have to assess whether they find a remark un-  ignore the inflammatory remark, abruptly break off the
acceptable. discussion, or exclude a student from class;

Responding to unacceptable remarks  engage in a discussion by offering counter-arguments

and trying to convince students of a different position
Situations may arise when teachers will feel that certain re­ or viewpoint;
marks or opinions are unacceptable or transgressive, either
because they are so hatefilled or discriminatory that they  allow students to vent their emotions without asking
might jeopardise the safety or peace of mind of others in the for further arguments;
classroom, or because they violate basic values inscribed in
educational laws or pedagogical school projects. In such cas-  listen carefully and ask open-ended questions in an
es, teachers first have to make clear to the student making effort to try and invite students to think about what they
these remarks that a boundary has been crossed and that have said and to probe them for their underlying argu-
some remarks will not be tolerated in class. ments, motives and needs.

None of these options is in itself ‘good’ or ‘bad’, and a lot

depends on the specific situation that arises. In some cases it
will be necessary to take coercive disciplinary action, such as
reprimanding or excluding a student, or to close down a fiery
quarrel in order to maintain a safe classroom climate. In oth-
er instances it will be appropriate to give students the space
to express their views and vent their emotions. If possible –
and in an ideal situation – teachers can try and open a dia­
logue in which students not only express their opinions, but
also substantiate them with supporting arguments while
listening to the arguments of others.
At the same time, it is important that teachers make clear
that their intervention is not targeted at the person who Although much depends on the situation that prevails, the
made the remark, but at the transgressive remark itself. It is pedagogical approach advocated here starts from the premise
possible that students are struggling with or become emo­ that consistently ignoring discriminatory remarks or avoid-
tional about specific topics, and that this expresses itself in ing difficult situations is not a good idea. It will do little to
unacceptable language or behaviour. Through open-ended address the root causes of conflicts and tensions. In the long
questions teachers should try to find out if this is indeed the term, moreover, the openness and democratic character of
case and explore what might lie behind remarks of this kind. the classroom climate will suffer. It therefore seems to be
This also makes it possible to keep the dialogue open and imperative to search for a more constructive and transforma-
8 encourages students to reflect on their discourse, attitudes tive approach.
When is it best to avoid a discussion? And when is it possible The importance of good dialogue and questioning
to open up a constructive conversation? This is not an easy techniques
judgement to make. Timing and a careful, realistic assess-
ment of the situation pertaining in the classroom are key. As good mediators and dialogue trainers know from experi-
This is a question of experience and trial and error. Nonethe- ence, open­ended and probing questions are capable of de­
less, teachers can take a number of clues into account to fusing explosive or tense situations. By asking an appropriate
make such a judgement: question, a teacher shows that he/she is sincerely interested
in his/her students, is willing to listen carefully to what they
 Identifying the emotional dynamic and level of escala- say, and wishes to find out more about their views and under-
tion is a vital factor in assessing the classroom situation lying motives and needs. This type of question could focus on
and deciding on a course of action. Clearly, the more a number of areas. Why are students so preoccupied with a
tense and charged the situation is, the more difficult it specific theme? Why does it make them emotional? Why do
will be to soothe tempers and facilitate an open, demo- they think it is controversial and arouses strong and contra-
cratic discussion. dictory responses among their fellow students? Through
careful listening and probing on the part of the teacher, stu­
 Time pressure is clearly an issue: if a situation becomes dents will feel that they are taken seriously, that their voice
explosive at the end of the lesson, teachers obviously counts, and that the classroom climate is open to their views.
have less time to steer the class into calmer waters. And when students feel they are being taken seriously, in all
probability they will also become more inclined to listen to
 If students are manifestly unwilling to engage in a other viewpoints. In many cases this pedagogical approach of
more fruitful discussion or dialogue (or are simply inter- questioning, listening and probing will substantially reduce
ested in creating an uproar in class), it can make sense tensions in the classroom. This approach, moreover, is cru-
to either close the discussion or just let them vent their cial to creating an open classroom and to encouraging stu­
views and emotions for a brief period without probing dents to learn how they can constructively engage with the
them for their underlying arguments or motives. Teach- conflicts that inevitably arise in a democratic society.17
ers should take care, however, to raise the subject
again – ideally, as soon as possible – and try to have a
more constructive conversation in a calmer atmo-
sphere.

 Some issues can be very sensitive for certain students.

The sensitivity of the subject at hand is an important
element in deciding on the course of action to take.

Addressing confrontational remarks and heated classroom

discussions by using transformative techniques is very chal­
lenging. But what do teachers do if this approach does not
work and tensions continue to mount, resulting in harmful
forms of polarisation?

9
 Dealing with cases of polarisation as a ‘threat’ or an ‘enemy’. How should we defuse this kind
of polarisation? Here the work of Dutch philosopher-trainer
Nowadays polarisation seems to have become a bit of a buzz- Bart Brandsma is inspiring. He suggests four gamechangers:22
word that as a result is in danger of becoming a catchall term.
What exactly do we mean by ‘polarisation’? The literature Change the target audience
provides a number of clues to help us reflect on the term’s  Change the focus from the views of the extreme poles
meaning. For example, social psychologists and political sci- and instead focus on students in the ‘middle’ who still
entists distinguish among various forms of polarisation, want to engage in a nuanced conversation.
such as real and perceived polarisation, affective polarisa-
tion, group polarisation, political polarisation and eth­ Change the topic
nic-cultural polarisation.18 In the context of the classroom, a  Move away from the identity issues the pushers want to
distinction among three forms of polarisation might prove talk about and start a conversation on the concerns of
useful. those occupying the middle ground.

Polarisation in like-minded groups Change position

 Move towards the middle ground, where students do
Firstly, we can see polarisation as a social­psychological not want to choose between the two opposing camps.
process in which a group of like-minded students, by talking
to one another, tend to become more extreme in their views Change the tone
than they were before. As Sunstein has shown, discussions  Use mediating speech and try to engage and connect
between like-minded people do not have to be very tense or with the diverse and more reasonable middle ground.
fiery, nor do they have to take the form of bitter us-versus-
them thinking to have real polarising effects. In this case,
polarisation results from social­psychological mechanisms Radicalisation and extremism
such as group dynamics, confirmation biases and motivated
reasoning; in other words, the like-minded individuals in- Thirdly, a polarised mindset might lead students to express
volved tend to support and reinforce the ideas of the others in radical or extreme viewpoints in the classroom. In light of
the group, with the result that the members of the group tend what has been said above, the first challenge for teachers
to believe in these ideas more and more strongly.19 It is clear when this happens is find out how deeply rooted these con-
that this type of polarisation is relevant in a classroom con­ victions are. To do this teachers can use the dialogical and
text. If a teacher asks a group of like-minded students to dis- questioning techniques highlighted above. Teachers should
cuss a controversial topic, it is likely that the individuals bear in mind that their young students’ minds are very much
making up the group will move collectively to a more ex- in a state of development, and that this sometimes involves
treme position than the one they held before. What can experimenting with radical ideas. Van San, Sieckelinck and
teachers do to counteract this dynamic when they think it De Winter therefore suggest that in the first instance teach-
might have negative consequences? Research suggests that if ers should try to understand the radical ideas that students
group discussions are properly facilitated and structured, and express from a pedagogical perspective.23 A security risk perspec-
participants are challenged to explore other perspectives, tive only comes into play when ideas and behaviour are in
polarisation can be avoided or lessened.20 danger of becoming extremist or violent.

Increasing tensions between groups

A second form of polarisation is characterised by the develop

ment of increasing tensions between political, ethnic or cul­
tural groups. ‘Pushers’ take the lead in pitting (the identity
of) one group against (that of) another, the groups of ‘join-
ers’ grow, while the ‘silent’ middle or centre becomes in-
creasingly smaller.21 This form of polarisation, which extends
beyond an ‘ordinary’ heated discussion, can become danger-
ous and harmful when any inclination to listen to other
voices or viewpoints is absent, when the ‘other’ is rejected or
excluded, or when groups of students begin to define others
10
Scenario 2: Controversial topics sensus on an issue (e.g. that racism is unacceptable)27 or
in the curriculum there is overwhelming evidence that certain views should not
be deemed as scientifically legitimate (e.g. creationism in a
Usually teachers have a fair degree of freedom to decide how science class on evolution).
they teach certain topics. In some cases, however, the
curriculum prescribes a particular content that they have to Case study: teaching evolution theory
convey to their students. Nonetheless classes dealing with
this content can cause heated discussions and meet with In the sense discussed above evolution theory is a ‘settled’
fierce resistance from students. A classic example of this kind issue. Scientists have reached broad consensus on its validity.
of content is evolution theory. Although the curriculum rests Nonetheless, teaching evolution theory can prove to be high-
on ample, widely accepted evidence and is supported by a ly controversial in classes containing students with strict re­
broad scientific consensus, classes about evolution can meet ligious beliefs. The conflict that propels contestation and re-
with resistance, especially from religious students who view sistance is not necessarily one between science and religion
scientific thinking on evolution as contradictory to their – at least not in a general sense. The contestation of evolu-
faith-based beliefs.24 tion theory mostly arises when students believe in literal in­
terpretations of religious texts about the origins of life on
‘Open’ and ‘settled’ issues earth. From a pedagogical perspective, the important ques-
tion then is how teachers can engage with these students
Before going into pedagogical strategies to deal with these who, based on their religious convictions, contest or resist
situations, it is useful to first reflect on different types of scientific insights into and explanations of evolution theory
controversial issues. Hess and McAvoy distinguish between when these insights/explanations are taught in a science
‘open’ and ‘settled’ controversial issues: 25
class.

 ‘Open’ issues are subjects about which a lively debate

is ongoing in science or society as a whole, either be-
cause no conclusive answers have been found to date,
or because diverging opinions are perfectly possible
and legitimate.

 By contrast, Hess and McAvoy consider issues as ‘set-

tled’ when either a widely shared consensus about a
particular issue has formed in society or when over-
whelming evidence suggests that contrary views
should not be deemed either correct or legitimate.

The definition of whether an issue is open or settled is not

fixed. As Hess and McAvoy argue, issues can ‘tip’ from open
to settled or vice versa (e.g. because of generational or demo- There are various ways of tackling this challenge. One option
graphic changes in society). Examples of ‘settled’ issues in- for teachers is to ‘simply’ convey the content of the subject
clude the inadmissibility of racism and gender discrimina­ matter, based on the premise that students just have to ac­
tion or, in science, evolution theory. cept what is being taught. This in itself is a legitimate stra-
tegy, but the question becomes how this approach will work
From a pedagogical point of view it is important to ascertain in practice. Will this strategy be able to overcome resistance
whether a controversial issue is open or settled. When they and lead students to understand evolution?
are teaching open issues, teachers can present multiple
viewpoints as being equally legitimate, and can adopt the role
of impartial facilitators of discussions on these topics. When
teaching settled issues, however, they have to convey specific
content. This does not necessarily mean that teachers cannot
create space for students to share their thoughts and con­
cerns, but it does imply that they cannot remain neutral.26
They should teach on the basis that there is a societal con­
11
 The following guidelines might be useful: Scenario 3: Controversy as pedagogy

 The literature suggests that when students feel that Controversies are a basic and inevitable feature of democrat­
their teachers are ‘pushing an agenda’ they are less in- ic societies. A plurality of opinions and perspectives will al-
clined to keep an open mind to hearing about evolu- ways be present in such societies, and from time to time this
tion. It can therefore be valuable for teachers to cre-
28
will lead to heated discussions or even clashes. Because
ate space for students to share their thoughts or schools are not sealed off from the outside world, at any mo-
concerns about the issue being discussed. Teachers ment societal conflicts and tensions can appear in the class-
should avoid ‘compromise’ or allowing relativism to room. Above we reflected on how teachers can react when
creep into their teaching of the science of evolution. this happens. There is, however, no reason why teachers
The aim is rather to allow students to share their views should only engage with controversial issues at these mo­
and concerns, which will open both the classroom and ments of tension. From the perspective of democratic citizen-
students’ minds and thus make for a constructive ship education, proactively working on ways to deal with
learning experience. This approach might have a high- various kinds of controversial issues offers promising ave-
er chance of defusing resistance and opening students’ nues to enhance students’ dialogical skills and democratic
minds about evolution than authoritatively and un- competencies.
questioningly pushing the subject matter.

 There is no reason why controversial scientific issues

should only be dealt with in science classes. In close
cooperation with colleagues teaching social studies,
civics, history, philosophy, ethics, religion or aesthetics,
it might be a good idea to set up cross-curricular pro-
jects in which students are encouraged to explore the
meaning of controversy in science and, more broadly,
the nature of scientific knowledge. Thus, students can
learn to understand the differences among various
ways of thinking, e.g. scientific, religious, philosophical
and artistic.
Schools are thus powerful sites where students can practise
 Studies indicate that some science teachers still teach dealing with differences of opinion and societal conflicts in a
science as a set of certainties and absolute truths ra- constructive and transformative way. A multi-perspective
ther than as a field of knowledge that thrives on uncer- approach to controversy is a key concept here. Because con-
tainty and discussion and that works through a continu- troversial issues inevitably entail a wide range of points of
ous process of empirically testing theories and view and perspectives, they offer pedagogical opportunities
hypotheses. 29
To open students’ minds for a learning to teach students how to discuss their views while keeping an
experience it might be useful to explain how scientific open mind about other perspectives, how to listen to and fa­
knowledge is generated. A historical perspective can miliarise themselves with other points of view, and how to
be useful here, e.g. a discussion of the history of evolu- democratically negotiate conflicts about political issues. In
tion theory. this way students can develop and enhance their critical
thinking skills and democratic competencies. At the same
time, teaching students how to engage with controversies in
a peaceful and non-violent way will make it more likely that
they will react less vehemently when sensitive issues sud­
denly pop up in classroom discussions. Thus, using contro-
versy as a form of pedagogy might help to prevent harmful
forms of polarisation.

12
Teaching controversial issues in a polarised political  In some contexts it might be useful to think about the
climate language used to describe the process of teaching
controversial issues. In a highly polarised political cli-
Despite its pedagogical value to democratic citizenship mate, for example, a multi-perspective approach and
education, teaching controversial issues can be sensitive and an open classroom might be perceived as more neutral
tricky. 30
In countries with a highly polarised and hostile than a ‘political classroom’. Equally, some might per-
political climate, for example, teaching controversial societal ceive the term ‘controversy’ as referring to a ‘black-or-
issues in schools is sometimes seen as controversial in itself. white’ issue on which two sides vehemently disagree.
In these contexts, teachers and educators wanting to work on Thus, the concept itself might have a polarising effect.
these topics can often run into opposition, which makes it In these cases alternative concepts might be used to
difficult to promote a multi-perspective approach. Thus, po- refer to what is being taught/discussed, such as ‘so-
larisation can pose a number of obstacles to the teaching of cially acute questions’.31
controversial issues:
 Although a whole-school approach is valuable across
 Teachers might be afraid or reluctant to talk about con- all contexts, it is useful to emphasise its value specifi-
troversial issues in the classroom. cally in a polarised political climate. A first aspect of this
approach is the importance of teacher-to-teacher
 Teachers bringing up sensitive issues such as current communication. When students see teachers with dif-
societal conflicts might even be threatened with sanc- ferent convictions talking to their colleagues in a calm
tions or even persecution by the authorities. and unaggressive way, they might follow their exam-
ple. Secondly, it is best if teachers inform their col-
 Educators who want to discuss controversial issues in leagues and principals when they plan to work on con-
their classes are confronted with myths such as that troversial issues. And thirdly and more broadly,
‘only partisan teachers talk about controversial topics’ a whole-school approach might entail that teachers, as
or that ‘teaching students about controversial issues a team, structurally try to embed talking about contro-
boils down to “doing politics” in the classroom’. versial issues as essential to the school’s broader ped-
agogical project. This approach might also be promis-
 In a polarised political climate many questions are ing to address the fears many teachers feel about
framed in simplistic terms of ‘good versus bad’. dealing with controversial subjects in the classroom.
The whole-school approach creates a safe climate for
teachers to take responsibility themselves and allows
How can teachers overcome these obstacles and move for­ them to work using a bottom-up approach. Ideally,
ward in their teaching? It is initially worth noting that even principals should be involved in these efforts. A whole-
in highly polarised contexts, educators find that many stu- school approach also involves engaging parents, in this
dents actually want to talk about controversial societal is- case by clearly explaining to them why the school
sues. There are a number of possible ways to do this: thinks it is important to work on controversial issues
and how teachers will do this. The basic point that
 It might be useful to think in terms of a spectrum from needs to be made to parents here is that the school
‘cold’ to ‘hot’ topics and start out with issues that lie wants students to deal constructively with differences
more at the ‘cold’ end of the spectrum. To find out of opinion of whatever kind. It might be useful to point
which issues are sensitive, it is helpful for teachers to out that this controversy-as-pedagogy approach is not
first deliberate among themselves as to what they con- about partisanship or indoctrination, but about learning
sider to be cold or hot topics in their classrooms. how differences of opinion and perspective are in-
evitable in a democracy, and how students can deal
with them constructively. It might help to clarify this
perspective by introducing an explicit and well-
thought-out pedagogical project that involves all the
school’s stakeholders (teachers, the principal, students,
parents, etc.).32

13
 Teaching controversial issues:  Work on controversial issues can serve a number of ob-
some suggestions and guidelines jectives, e.g. teaching students to listen carefully and
actively to one another, enhancing their critical thinking
Needless to say, in terms of the prerequisites for and objec- skills, encouraging them to explore a variety of differ-
tives of the controversy­as­pedagogy approach, good prepa­ ent ways of looking at an issue, teaching them to base
ration and a whole­school approach are not only valuable in their arguments on sound evidence, and so forth. It is
highly polarised contexts, but also make sense across na- important for teachers to decide in advance which spe-
tional and cultural contexts. Research on the effects of peace cific objectives they are aiming to achieve with a
education suggests33 that the effectiveness of a particular particular project or programme, because this will help
programme is enhanced when: to determine which method or didactic approach will
be most meaningful and effective.35
 a team of teachers is actively involved in and commit-
ted to supporting the programme;  At the same time, it is important to diversify and tri-
 the school principal actively supports and participates angulate methods, because not all students have the
in the programme; same learning style or preference, e.g. some students
 the programme’s objectives are consistent with the are more comfortable with oral discussion exercises,
school’s educational project and the overall targets while others may prefer artistic means of expression.36
that the national educational system sets for schools;
 both the classroom and broader school climates are  Teachers should think carefully about the specific to-
open and provide space for dialogue; pic they want students to work on.37 Elements to take
 students actively participate in the programme; into account are, for example, the profile and composi-
 various forms of active learning are combined in the tion of a particular group of students, as well as their
programme; and prior experience of discussing sensitive topics. Teach-
 the programme takes into account students’ diverse ers should take into account the fact that what causes
backgrounds (in terms of their socio-economic and strong emotions or is a sensitive issue might differ from
cultural backgrounds and gender). These factors, person to person, and will vary across cultural back-
which lie outside the educational setting itself, not only grounds. Similarly, concepts are understood differently
have an influence on the outcomes of a classroom and mean different things to students from different
intervention, but also on the strength of its effects on backgrounds or who speak different languages. There-
specific groups of young people. fore, it is important to be as context-sensitive as possi-
ble. As we mentioned above, it might be useful to dis-
Educators may also want to take the following suggestions tinguish between ‘colder’ and ‘hotter’ controversial
and possible guidelines into account: topics, and to start a programme with topics that are
‘open’ but lie on the colder end of the spectrum.
 Teachers should ensure that the classroom remains
open and safe for all students. Discussions about con-  Good preparation and active facilitation on the part of
troversial topics can cause uncertainty and even fear the teacher are important prerequisites for success. To
among students. This is why it is important that they
34
prevent the exercise from going off at a tangent or in
are reassured that differences of opinion and contro- irrelevant directions, lacking in substance, or hope-
versies are ‘okay’ and part of what it means to live to- lessly losing focus, students should be encouraged to
gether in a democratic society. carry out extensive preparation, while teachers should
play an active role in guiding and facilitating the work.38

14
Methodological inspiration Also, controversial issues are often suitable subjects for lon-
ger-term projects in which a group of students focus on a
When setting up and developing specific projects, teachers current ‘hot’ news item or explore a specific issue for a lon­
can utilise a wide diversity of methods and techniques. With­ ger period of time. The aim here is that students should
out discussing all of these in great detail, one can think of the gather and delve into various types and sources of informa­
following types: tion, and then explore the subject further in classroom dis­
cussions or essays. These collaborative projects can take
Dialogue, discussion or debate: Different types of classroom many forms. In history education one might think of a pro­
conversation can be distinguished, but the general idea of all ject where students compare textbooks dealing with a con­
of them is that teachers and students should discuss a troversial topic involving two or more different countries and
particu­lar topic in a structured and organised way.39 In all identify how national bias can mean that the topic is viewed
types of classroom conversations it is important that teach­ in quite different and often opposing ways. In science educa­
ers actively facilitate the conversation. Not only can discus­ tion, collaborative and interactional projects that involve
sions all too easily lose focus and drift off in irrelevant direc­ groups of students studying controversial socio-scientific is­
tions, it is important that the conversation should also entail sues seem to be a very promising approach. Research indi­
more than a mere exchange of opinions. 40
Through active cates that when students from various backgrounds work
questioning and probing, students should be encouraged to together to explore complex socio-scientific issues (climate
give reasons for their opinions and to critically examine their change, meat consumption, etc.), and do so by taking into
own views, while they should also be urged to actively listen account a plurality of interests and legitimate perspectives
to others’ points of view. The overarching idea is that a group (personal, social and cultural, objective-scientific), they not
of students should establish a community of research in order only enhance their socio-scientific reasoning skills, but also
to collectively explore and critically investigate a controver­ their democratic competencies. They learn that knowledge is
sial issue from a variety of different perspectives. complex, plural, uncertain and conditional on context; that
multiple positions can be justified depending on the values
and beliefs of those holding them; and that competing inter­
ests need to be managed through a democratically negotiated
process.41

Last but not least, artistic pedagogies are a promising way to

work with students on controversial issues. Arts in education
can open up fresh perspectives and offer possibilities for stu­
dents to express themselves in a variety of ways (including
non-verbal ways). By encouraging students to explore topics
related to identity and conflict through artistic expression,
teachers can invite them to share stories about themselves
and the world in an open way.

Although many courses still start from a given master narra­

tive or from a Eurocentric perspective, the curriculum often
offers numerous (explicit or implicit) clues as to how teach­
ers should teach a particular type of subject matter by using
a multi-perspective approach and focusing on some kind of
controversy. In principle, almost any topic can be presented
in a multi-voiced way or taught in terms of its ‘controversial’
aspects. In history, for example, teachers can actively search
for different perspectives on a specific historic event, using
different sources. In science, teachers can show how scien­
tists often spend long periods of time discussing theories,
methodologies and research results before any kind of con­
sensus is reached.
15
 4. Conclusion

Controversies and societal conflicts are inevitable in a demo-

cratic society. Nonetheless, in educational contexts they can
pose a number of pedagogical challenges, e.g. when they un-
expectedly and at times brutally raise their head in the class­
room or lead to increasing tensions in schools. Over the last
decades a wide array of models, interventions and strategies
have been developed to enhance teachers’ capacities to deal
with controversy and polarisation in educational contexts. In
this guide we attempted to bring some order into what is
currently on offer to teachers. We distinguished among three
scenarios – three types of situations – in which conflicts,
controversies and tensions can arise in the classroom. This
distinction, we argued, is useful if we want to enable teachers
to make informed choices on what pedagogies and models
they can apply in their classrooms and to tailor their didactic
approaches to what is needed in specific pedagogical situa-
tions.

At the same time, it has become apparent that the methods

and strategies presented above also have a great deal in com­
mon. What is striking, for example, is the overall emphasis
on dialogical and questioning techniques, a shared transfor­
mative approach towards conflict, and the importance of an
open classroom climate. Ultimately, all the approaches dis-
cussed have one key element in common: they perceive the
classroom as a laboratory for democracy – a place where stu­
dents are given the opportunity to exercise and develop their
democratic voices.

The question of constructively engaging with controversial

issues and polarisation in our classrooms and schools is topi­
cal in many European countries. In that light, educational
professionals and scholars from across Europe will find value
in working together on this issue and learning from one an-
other. Thus, they can share insights that are both meaningful
across countries and sensitive to the particularities of spe
cific national contexts. With this publication we hope to have
made a contribution to this exchange of insights, theoretical
frameworks, experiences and good examples of practice. We
also hope that our work will stimulate further comparative
research on the topic. Based on our prior research, we would
like to conclude by identifying two interesting and promising
avenues for further study: firstly, the possibilities inherent in
a whole­school approach to constructively dealing with con­
troversial issues and, secondly, the added value of engaging
teachers and educational professionals in peer­to­peer
learning communities.

16
Endnotes
The Flemish Peace Institute warmly thanks the participants in a 94(4), pp. 956-976; E.B. Godfrey & J.K. Grayman (2014),
workshop on controversy and polarisation in educational contexts ‘Teaching Citizens: The Role of Open Classroom Climate in
organised by the Institute and the Evens Foundation in Brussels Fostering Critical Consciousness among Youth’, Journal of Youth
on 23-24 May 2019. Special thanks are due to Marjolein Delvou, and Adolescence, 43(11), p. 1803; M. Persson (2015), ‘Classroom
Ilse Hakvoort and Olivier Morin for critically reading the Climate and Political Learning: Findings from a Swedish Panel
manuscript of this inspiration guide. Study and Comparative Data’, Political Psychology, 36(5), pp. 587,
594, 596; and E. Claes & M. Hooghe (2016), ‘The Effect of Political
1 In this inspirational guide the focus is on societal and political
Science Education on Political Trust and Interest: Results from a
conflicts, and not on interpersonal conflicts (although the latter
5-year Panel Study’, Journal of Political Science Education, May, p. 9.
can of course be inspired by the former). When we use the term
‘conflict’ in this guide we are therefore referring to societal and 9 Y. Dejaeghere, M. Hooghe & E. Claes (2012), ‘Do Ethnically
political conflicts. Diverse Schools Reduce Ethnocentrism? A Two-year Panel Study
among Majority Group Late Adolescents in Belgian Schools’,
2 This inspirational guide is based on a book published by the
International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 36(1), pp. 108-117.
Flemish Peace Institute in 2018 (in Dutch): M. Van Alstein (2018),
Omgaan met controverse en polarisatie in de klas, Kalmthout: 10 See D.E. Hess (2002), ‘Discussing Controversial Public Issues in
Pelckmans Pro. Secondary Social Studies Classrooms: Learning from Skilled
Teachers’, Theory & Research in Social Education, 30(1), p. 23;
3 Studies that have explored the reasons why teachers avoid
A.B. Lusk & A.S. Weinberg (1994), ‘Discussing Controversial
discussions about controversial themes include, among others,
Topics in the Classroom: Creating a Context for Learning’,
C. Oulton, V. Day, J. Dillon & M. Grace (2004), ‘Controversial
Teaching Sociology, 22(4), pp. 301, 305; and R.W. Evans, P.G. Avery
Issues: Teachers’ Attitudes and Practices in the Context of
& P. Velde Pederson (2000), ‘Taboo Topics: Cultural Restraint on
Citizenship Education’, Oxford Review of Education, 30(4),
Teaching Social Issues’, The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational
pp. 489, 499; A. McCully (2006), ‘Practitioner Perceptions of
Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 73(5), p. 300.
Their Role in Facilitating the Handling of Controversial Issues in
Contested Societies: A Northern Irish Experience’, Educational 11 See A. Hemmings (2000), ‘High School Democratic Dialogues:
Review, 58(1), pp. 52-55; J. Byford, S. Lennon & W.B. Russell Possibilities for Praxis’, American Educational Research Journal,
(2009), ‘Teaching Controversial Issues in the Social Studies: 37(1), pp. 67-91; D.E. Hess & P. McAvoy (2015), The Political
A Research Study of High School Teachers’, The Clearing House: Classroom: Evidence and Ethics in Democratic Education, New York:
A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 82(4), Routledge, pp. 5-7; and E. Claes, L. Maurissen & N. Havermans
pp. 166-169; S. Philpott, J. Clabough, L. McConkey & T.N. Turner (2017), ‘Let’s Talk Politics: Which Individual and Classroom
(2011), ‘Controversial Issues: To Teach or Not to Teach? That is Compositional Characteristics Matter in Classroom Discussions?’,
the Question!’, Georgia Social Studies Journal, 1(1), p. 41; and Young, 25(4).
R. Woolley (2011), ‘Controversial Issues: Identifying the Concerns
12 C.W. Ruitenberg (2009) ‘Educating Political Adversaries: Chantal
and Priorities of Student Teachers’, Policy Futures in Education,
Mouffe and Radical Democratic Citizenship Education’, Studies in
9(2), pp. 282, 288, 289.
Philosophy and Education, 28(3), pp. 269-281.
4 M. Hooghe (ed.) (2012), Jongeren, politiek en burgerschap: Politieke
13 E.g. see C. Mouffe (1999), ‘Deliberative Democracy or Agonistic
socialisatie bij Belgische jongeren, Leuven: Acco.
Pluralism?’, Social Research, 66(3), pp. 745-758; and C. Mouffe
5 D.E. Hess & P. McAvoy (2015), The Political Classroom: Evidence and (2013), Agonistics: Thinking the World Politically, London: Verso.
Ethics in Democratic Education, New York: Routledge.
14 M. Maussen & R. Grillo (2014), ‘Regulation of Speech in
6 D.E. Hess (2009), Controversy in the Classroom: The Democratic Multicultural Societies’, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies,
Power of Discussion, London: Routledge, p. 162. 40(2), pp. 174-193.

7 On the question of the teacher’s position, see T. Kelly (1986), 15 This strategy of delimiting and inviting is based on and inspired
‘Discussing Controversial Issues: Four Perspectives on the by the work of Dutch dialogue coach Leon Meijs; see www.
Teachers’s Role’, Theory and Research in Social Education, 14(2), factorveiligheid.nl/onderwijs.
pp. 113-138.
16 J. Patist & B. Wansink (2017), ‘Lesgeven over gevoelige
8 See C. Hahn (1999), ‘Citizenship Education: An Empirical Study of onderwerpen: Het aangaan van het moeilijke gesprek in de klas’,
Policy, Practices and Outcomes’, Oxford Review of Education, Kleio, 4, pp. 45-47.
25(1-2), p. 233; A. Perliger, D. Canetti-Nisim & A. Pedahzur
17 K. Goris & M. Van Alstein (2019), ‘Practising in the Democratic
(2006), ‘Democratic Attitudes among High-school Pupils:
Conflict: A Look at the New Citizenship Final Attainment
The Role Played by Perceptions of Class Climate’, School
Targets’, Yearly Report Flemish Peace Institute 2018, pp. 16-25.
Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17(1), p. 121; D.E. Campbell
In Flanders and Brussels the Democratische Dialoog, a project of
(2008), ‘Voice in the Classroom: How an Open Classroom Climate
Erasmushogeschool Brussel, is a pioneer of this approach; see
Fosters Political Engagement among Adolescents’, Political
http://democratischedialoog.be/.
Behavior, 30(4), pp. 437-454; D.E. Hess (2009), Controversy in the
Classroom: The Democratic Power of Discussion, London: Routledge, 18 E.g. see M.J. Hetherington (2009), ‘Putting Polarisation in
p. 30; R. Dassonneville, E. Quintelier, M. Hooghe & E. Claes Perspective’, British Journal of Political Science, 39(2), pp. 413-448;
(2012), ‘The Relation between Civic Education and Political and P. Valdesolo & J. Graham (2016), Social Psychology of Political
Attitudes and Behavior: A Two-year Panel Study among Belgian Polarisation, New York: Routledge.
Late Adolescents’, Applied Developmental Science, 16(3), 19 C.R. Sunstein (2009), Going to Extremes: How Like Minds Unite and
pp. 140-150; E. Claes, M. Hooghe & S. Marien (2012), ‘A Two-year Divide, Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
Panel Study among Belgian Late Adolescents on the Impact of
School Environment Characteristics on Political Trust’, 20 See ibid., p. 56; and K. Strandberg, S. Himmelroos & K. Grönlund
International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 24(2), pp. 208-224; (2017), ‘Do Discussions in Like-minded Groups Necessarily Lead
A.M. Martens & J. Gainous (2013), ‘Civic Education and to More Extreme Opinions? Deliberative Democracy and Group
Democratic Capacity: How Do Teachers Teach and What Works?: Polarisation’, International Political Science Review, June, pp. 1-17.
Civic Education and Democratic Capacity’, Social Science Quarterly,
17
 21 B. Brandsma (2016), Polarisation: Understanding the Dynamics of Us changing European realities. An important focus of the project
Versus Them, BB in Media. was on the uniqueness of each school context, as well as the idea
that the process of creating school communities for peace should
22 See https://insidepolarisation.nl/en/; Bart Brandsma (2017),
be co-designed with the school and its community in order to
Polarisation: Understanding the Dynamics of Us Versus Them, BB in
share ownership; see www.lcpeace.eu.
Media; and RAN Education Working Group (2017),
RAN Polarisation Management Manual. 33 B. Spruyt, M. Elchardus, L. Roggemans & F. Van Droogenbroeck
(2014), Can Peace Be Taught? Researching the Effectiveness of Peace
23 See M. van San, S. Sieckelinck & M. de Winter (2013), ‘Ideals
Education, Brussels: Flemish Peace Institute, pp. 83-84.
Adrift: An Educational Approach to Radicalization’, Ethics and
Education, 8(3), pp. 276-289. 34 E.g. see A.B. Lusk & A.S. Weinberg (1994), ‘Discussing
Controversial Topics in the Classroom: Creating a Context for
24 See B. Pobiner (2016), ‘Accepting, Understanding, Teaching,
Learning’, Teaching Sociology, 22(4), pp. 301, 305; and R.W. Evans,
and Learning (Human) Evolution: Obstacles and Opportunities’,
P.G. Avery & P. Velde Pederson (2000), ‘Taboo Topics: Cultural
American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 159 (suppl. 61),
Restraint on Teaching Social Issues’, The Clearing House: A Journal
pp. 234-274. Also see H. Swanson (2010), ‘Teaching Darwin:
of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 73(5), p. 300.
Contemporary Social Studies through Controversial Issues’,
Journal of Social Studies Research, 34(2), pp. 153, 156-157, 166; 35 D.E. Hess (2009), Controversy in the Classroom: The Democratic
and W. Journell (2013), ‘Learning from Each Other: What Social Power of Discussion, London: Routledge, pp. 56-70; D.E. Hess
Studies Can Learn from the Controversy Surrounding the (2002), ‘Discussing Controversial Public Issues in Secondary
Teaching of Evolution in Science’, Curriculum Journal, 24(4), Social Studies Classrooms: Learning from Skilled Teachers’,
pp. 499-506. Theory & Research in Social Education, 30(1), pp. 3, 6, 38.

25 D.E. Hess & P. McAvoy (2015), The Political Classroom: Evidence and 36 J. Byford, S. Lennon & W.B. Russell (2009), ‘Teaching
Ethics in Democratic Education, New York: Routledge, pp. 159-181. Controversial Issues in the Social Studies: A Research Study of
High School Teachers’, The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational
26 For more on the teacher’s position, see T. Kelly (1986),
Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 82(4), p. 165.
‘Discussing Controversial Issues: Four Perspectives on the
Teacher’s Role’, Theory and Research in Social Education, 14(2), 37 M. Hand & R. Levinson (2012), ‘Discussing Controversial Issues
pp. 113-138. in the Classroom’, Educational Philosophy and Theory, 44(6),
pp. 614-629.
27 E.g. see M. Hand (2008), ‘What Should We Teach as Controversial?
A Defense of the Epistemic Criterion’, Educational Theory, 58(2), 38 Ibid.
pp. 213-228; and M. Hand (2007), ‘Should We Teach
39 E.g. see W.C. Parker & D.E. Diana (2001), ‘Teaching with and for
Homosexuality as a Controversial Issue?’, Theory and Research in
Discussion’, Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, pp. 275, 279, 285;
Education, 5(1), pp. 69-86.
R.L. Healey (2012), ‘The Power of Debate: Reflections on the
28 See W. Journell (2013), ‘Learning from Each Other: What Social Potential of Debates for Engaging Students in Critical Thinking
Studies Can Learn from the Controversy Surrounding the about Controversial Geographical Topics’, Journal of Geography in
Teaching of Evolution in Science’, Curriculum Journal, 24(4), Higher Education, 36(2), pp. 239-257; and P.G. Avery, S.A. Levy &
pp. 499-506 and B. Pobiner (2016), ‘Accepting, Understanding, A.M.M. Simmons (2013), ‘Deliberating Controversial Public Issues
Teaching, and Learning (Human) Evolution: Obstacles and as Part of Civic Education’, The Social Studies, 104(3), p. 106.
Opportunities’, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 159
40 A. Harwood & C. Hahn (1990), ‘Controversial Issues in the
(suppl. 61), pp. 234-274; and.
Classroom’, ERIC Clearinghouse for Social Studies, ref. ED327453;
29 C. Oulton, J. Dillon & M.M. Grace (2004), ‘Reconceptualizing the A. Lefstein (2006), ‘Dialogue in Schools: Towards a Pragmatic
Teaching of Controversial Issues’, International Journal of Science Approach’, Working Papers in Urban Language & Literacies, no.
Education, 26(4), pp. 414, 416; R. Levinson (2006), ‘Teachers’ 33; M. Hand & R. Levinson (2012), ‘Discussing Controversial
Perceptions of the Role of Evidence in Teaching Controversial Issues in the Classroom’, Educational Philosophy and Theory, 44(6),
Socio-scientific Issues’, Curriculum Journal, 17(3), pp. 253-254, pp. 614-629.
257; P. Reis & C. Galvao (2009), ‘Teaching Controversial Socio-
41 O. Morin, L. Simonneaux & R. Tytler (2017), ‘Engaging with
scientific Issues in Biology and Geology Classes: A Case Study’,
Socially Acute Questions: Development and Validation of an
Electronic Journal of Science Education, 13(1), pp. 6, 15-16.
Interactional Reasoning Framework’, Journal of Research in Science
30 The insights in this paragraph are based on the discussions Teaching, 54(7), pp. 825-851.
during a workshop on dealing with controversy and polarisation
in education organised by the Flemish Peace Institute and the
Evens Foundation, 23-24 May 2019. Many thanks to Cecile
Barbeito Thonon, Ilse Hakvoort, Lexi Oudman, Olivier Morin, Tea
Maksimovic, Malina Baranowska-Janusz and Marjolein Delvou.

31 This term is used by Morin, Simonnneaux and Tytler; see

O. Morin, L. Simonneaux & R. Tytler (2017), ‘Engaging with
Socially Acute Questions: Development and Validation of an
Interactional Reasoning Framework’, Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 54(7), pp. 825-851.

32 An interesting and promising project on the value of the whole-

school approach is the Learning Communities for Peace project
funded by the Erasmus+ Programme of the European Union and
the Evens Foundation. The project aims to address the rise of
incidents of conflict in school settings as a consequence of

18
 Flemish Peace Institute Author
The Flemish Peace Institute was founded by decree of the Maarten Van Alstein is senior researcher in the ‘peace
Flemish Parliament as an independent institute for and conflict in society’ research cluster at the Flemish
research on peace issues. The Peace Institute conducts Peace Institute. He has published on peace education, the
scientific research, documents relevant information politics of memory and the remembrance of war and
sources, and informs and advises the Flemish Parliament political violence.
and the public at large on questions of peace.

Colophon
Controversy and polarisation in the classroom.
Suggestions for pedagogical practice
ISBN: 9789078864981
© Flemish Peace Institute, Brussels, December 2019

Author
Maarten Van Alstein

Lay-out and illustrations

www.hetgeelpunt.be, Ronald Heuninck

Publisher
Elke Devroe - Director Flemish Peace Institute, Leuvenseweg 86, 1000 Brussels

Disclaimer
While the Flemish Peace Institute has exercised the utmost care
in the redaction of this report, it cannot be deemed or held liable
for possible mistakes or oversights with regard to completeness.
At the same time, the Institute shall not assume any form of liability
for the use that a reader may make of this document.

www.flemishpeaceinstitute.eu / [email protected] / Leuvenseweg 86, 1000 Brussels

19
20