ABSTRACT
Government advice in relation to ‘countering violent extremism’ (CVE) in English schools requires teachers to identify students ‘at risk’ of radicalisation whilst also encouraging them to facilitate open classroom discussions of controversial issues. Data collected in seven schools illustrate how teachers are responding to this advice and illuminate three tensions within ‘controversial issues’ pedagogy. First, we discuss the tension between depth and coverage in case studies, which risks treating history as parable. Second, we identify a problem with finding a genuinely open ethical dilemma to discuss, which entails the risk of adopting a hypocritical stance in the classroom. Third, we identify a tendency to perceive school as the antidote to undesirable social attitudes. The teachers’ responses highlight the usefulness of framing certain issues as ‘controversial’ but also illustrate how difficult this can be in practice, especially in the context of CVE, which is perceived by many as a controversial policy.
Acknowledgments
This paper draws on data collected by the authors during an evaluation project that was funded by the Association for Citizenship Teaching.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Additional information
Funding
Notes on contributors
Lee Jerome
Lee Jerome is an Associate Professor of Education at Middlesex University and has been involved in researching and teaching citizenship education for twenty years. Recent research projects have addressed how teachers construct medium-term plans, human rights education, and character education.
Alex Elwick
Alex Elwick is a lecturer at UCL Institute of Education and Middlesex University. He was previously research officer at Education Development Trust and his work is concerned with education policy at all levels. He has an AHRC-funded PhD from Newcastle University and has been a British Research Council’s Fellow at the Library of Congress.