F ACTOR 1 – A CTION LEARNING IDEALISTS : “T HE SKILL TO DO SOMETHING ELSE ”

Th is group of teachers is united around the notions of action, movement, process, change. Th ey are change-oriented, skills-oriented, and follow their students in shaping the learning process.

Th e teachers in this group are clearly oriented towards the needs and the development of their students:

“[it is important] to see the students as persons, not numbers.’ ; ‘that they work on some- thing that is not necessarily directed at money, they get to know something they did not know before, some also stay longer and keep doing it”

Th e group of Action learning idealists shares the hope that the students will ‘contribute actively [to society]’ Th e teachers do this most effi ciently through experiential learning: “let them experience, taste, and experiment.” However, this faith that learning will lead to action is also ‘idealistic’ in their eyes, as it is mixed with frustration with their actual practice:

“it is very important that they also do things, [when they are exposed to other sides of life] a kid who saw that actually cried, only then I see things happen, it changes me also as a teacher […] but are not there yet.”

Because they place so much value on practical experience, the Action learn- ing idealists strongly agree with the statement: »It is not enough to engage in discussions about how to improve the world, it is important to give young people the chance to participate in real life.« (10) Th is focus on action and practice is combined with the ambition to cultivate skills in discussion and research in their students (14), with the goal to form

“attitudes and instruments to explore the world, to fi nd their place in it and to be able to express it.”

Th e skills are necessary for a contribution to society in the future; knowl- edge is only instrumental to acquiring these skills (3). Th e teachers in this group are opposed to teaching ‘static’ knowledge (9). Instead, the Action Learning Ide- alists consider looking at systemic mechanisms, explaining the social dynamics, more important than ‘structures and regularities’ (12)

“Yes, [but] not in the sense of understanding what the names of the parties are and so on, but understanding what the system does to them, that they can make a better choice for themselves, what their place is; after they have discovered the structures, so I go further than the structure alone.”

Th e Action Learning Idealists guard and cherish student individuality (1, 17). Th ey do not wish to impose common interests on their students, without giving them the opportunity to make their own individual choice:

“In any case, they should know what it means if they follow only their self-interest; if they choose for their own interest, who am I to tell them that they should not do it? [...] they should realize that this has consequences. It will be nice if they also took the common good into account.”

“I think that [the lessons] confront them with the consequences of their own behaviour and make them think about their individual choices. For example, do you choose for high interest rate, even if you know that your bank is doing some morally wrong things with the money?”

Because they value free choice and openness so strongly, the Action Learn- ing Idealists insist on a place for controversial issues (19). Th ey insist on discuss- ing diff erent ideas and perspectives in the classroom:

“To the contrary, you have to discuss, [off er] a framework, which is diffi cult here: I have a homogenous class, they agree with each other on a lot of hot issues.”

In other circumstances, a certain amount of caution is important, to en- sure safety. One respondent mentions the longest discussion she had with a class about same-sex marriage, which took place under after assuring strict confi denti- ality. But most of all, the teachers in this group are not satisfi ed with just talking about the issues, but go beyond discussion:

“If it [becomes] too hot, then you should take action. I worked with a […] white school, the students were all against Muslims, so we got them in contact with black kids28 _{and they} softened their opinions eventually.”

Th e Action Learning Idealists are teachers with a mission; this is why they reject the idea that they could teach any subject (19). Th e subject is important to them, in a sense that they do not consider themselves just educators, but political educators:

“Th e subject is important, I would not just teach any subject: compared to physics, which is much more static subject, or biology […] the link to real life is interesting; also, you are sur- prised by what students bring in, it is a journey, and you do it together with students you do not know where you will end. Th ey challenge you to go deeper and this is a rewarding thing.”

Th e rewarding journey of discovery together with the students does not combine well with sticking to the ‘dry facts.’ Th is is why this group of teachers does not wish to accentuate too much ‘the anatomy of government’ (11). While they all agree that knowledge is important, it is only so as a basis for a deeper understanding and attitude change:

“Yes, but also discussion about, for instance, the disadvantages of democracy, that it is not that black and white. You have to show them that there are also bad systems; the most important is the why, why did things become as they are.”

Compared to the other teachers, this group does see some merit in the idea that “citizenship education is an emergency measure by the state against the obvi- ously growing lack of social tolerance.” (33). A number of explanations are off ered.

One teacher agrees that ‘it is not a bad thing [to use it to counter intoler- ance].’ However, he doubts that teachers have that much infl uence on young people and even if it is their responsibility to challenge the growing intolerance:

“Teachers cannot solve this. If a football referee gets beaten up, it is not my responsibility. I fi nd it logical to try to do it, but I should not be responsible for failing.”

Another teacher, on a similar note, stressing the limitations of a teacher’s job and the importance of subject knowledge, states that it takes very good social science teachers to succeed, not just ‘some history teacher who does this on the side,’ and even then, skepticism prevails.

Yet another teacher wonders if the idea of citizenship is linked directly to tolerance. Instead, she insists, it should be directed at

“[t]he lowest layer, the people who sink through the bottom [….] for these people who cannot participate for all kinds of reasons, citizenship is [made] by us all, [we need] to make sure that you participate and everyone participates.”

Th is focus on collective action, the main focus of the Action learning idealists, is also echoed by one of the younger teachers in the group. She insists that it all de- 28 _{Th e Dutch refer to anyone non-Nordic as ‘black’}

pends on the willingness of society as a whole ‘to do something,’ when discussing the relevance of citizenship education (15). Otherwise, the eff orts of the teachers would not lead to any eff ects and will just remain in the realm of the ‘beautiful goals’:

“Everything is about money these days and the human being is forgotten, I fi nd this dif- fi cult, because I am also in the system and thus cooperate.”

A striking feature of the Action Learning Idealists is their frustration about examination programs29 _{and the confl ict between what they see as important}

and what they ‘should’ teach for their students to pass the exam. Th is frustration stems from their strong preference for controversy in the classroom. While the other three groups also agree that controversial issues should be discussed in class, Action learning idealists put controversy and discussion at the center of their teaching. Knowledge and »facts« take second place, however at the end, »facts are on the exam. « Th ey also go on to explain that there is not always enough time to follow their students in more substantial discussion, because of the necessity to prepare them for the exam. Th is group, particularly the younger respondents, is concerned most of all with what they perceive as a mismatch between what they would like to teach and the program requirements they have to take into account. At the end of the day, the Action Learning Idealists turn out to be fi rst and foremost content knowledge teachers, some by choice, most by frustration. In sum, the Action Learning Idealists can be characterized as balanced indi- vidualists. Th e teachers insist that their students become independent (1); they also acquire the tools necessary to arrive at this personal choice. Th e student- focused attitude and the concern for growth (‘they have to walk through it by themselves’) and the use of school as a playground for democracy (27) makes the Action Learning idealists akin to an egalitarian position: similar, but less distinct than the one in factor 4. Th e concern about ‘society as a whole’ and about uphold- ing democratic principles is shared with factor 3 and adds a hierarchic taste to this group of teachers. Th is mixture explains the placement of the factor in the force-fi eld scheme, slightly off the center, towards individualistic.