Teacher modelling as a way to foster Bildung in vocational education: a multi-method curriculum study

ABSTRACT

This study presents an inquiry into the relevance of Bildung for students in (pre-) vocational education. While Bildung has seen a remarkable revival in international educational theory, its relevance for educational practice(s) remains under-investigated, particularly in vocational education. This paper presents the insights offered by a multi-method curriculum study, conducted as part of a larger project in which (pre)vocational teachers in the Netherlands experimented with their own role as a model of and for their students’ Bildung. Building on a thematic analysis of teacher observations, teacher interviews and student focus groups, we explore how six teachers enacted and perceived their modelling role, and how their students experienced it. While all teachers modelled elements of what they found important for their students’ Bildung, the teachers actually perceived as models of Bildung by their students were those who shared their own experiences and stories with students, and who related to them on a personal level by offering them support, trust and inspiration to pave their own paths in life. Based on our findings, we suggest implications for broadening common understandings of Bildung and modelling, as well as practical implications for teachers, teacher education and policy to foster vocational students’ Bildung.

KEYWORDS:

• Vocational education
• Bildung
• modelling
• curriculum

Introduction

The language we use to describe the aims and functions of education and schooling can be considered a sign of the times. It tells us something about what education we consider appropriate for the society we live in, want to live in and how we can help young people to thrive in these (Biesta, 2002). From this perspective, the comeback made by the classical educational notion of Bildung in international educational theory and policies is telling. Since the end of the twentieth century, Bildung has been appealed to mainly in response to a perceived crisis in education (Reichenbach, 2014), caused by a predominant focus on individual learning trajectories, measurable learning outcomes, skills and competences for economic and societal employability in the global knowledge society (Ulvik et al., 2021; Willbergh, 2015). In response, attempts have been made to restore students’ personal growth and development in relation to society and the world as the centre of educational thinking. Some of these attempts have resorted to the notion of Bildung (Sanderse, 2021; Ulvik et al., 2021), which represents the idea that education should primarily be seen as a process of becoming human as a goal in itself. This educational aim, however, tends to be reserved or emphasized for students in more general, academically oriented tracks, whereas the primary task of vocational education often remains to be perceived to be qualifying students for the labour market (Sanderse, 2021). A substantial group of youth therefore runs the risk of being excluded from the fundamental pedagogical ideal that they, too, can and should be given opportunities to become full human beings through education.

This paper presents the findings of a study conducted in the Netherlands, as part of a larger research and development project which aimed at exploring Bildung as equally important and relevant for teachers and students in (pre-)vocational secondary schools. A curriculum study was conducted to explore how (pre-)vocational teachers (aim to) model Bildung in the classroom, and how their students experience this modelling. We will first introduce our main research interest and theoretical framework, which links Bildung, vocational education, and teacher modelling as one important way for teachers to foster students’ Bildung. We also situate our study in existing empirical research on Bildung and sketch its societal relevance in the context of the Dutch (secondary) education system. The article then sheds light on the design and methods adopted in this curriculum study, and the findings reflecting our exploration of how teachers in vocational education put Bildung into practice through modelling, and how both they and their students perceived this. We conclude by discussing implications of our exploration for both Bildung and modelling theory, as well as for educational practice(s).

Bildung as a theoretical concept

As an educational concept, Bildung has a long history that can be traced back to the Middle Ages, when it was understood as the formation of the human soul in the image of God. In the modern era, Bildung became a more secular notion, describing a process of self-formation in accordance with an ideal image (‘Bild’) of what it means to be human and to develop one’s full potential (Willbergh, 2015). In Germany, this ideal flourished between 1770 and 1830, when it became a guiding principle in the work of writers and poets such as Herder, Fichte, Goethe, Schelling and Schiller (Horlacher, 2017). As Prussian minister of education, Wilhelm Von Humboldt sought to realize his ideal of Bildung by establishing a new education system. This centrality of Bildung to education and schooling can be tied to the advent of democratic nation-states, which required people to become citizens who take care of and responsibility for oneself, others and society as a whole (Willbergh, 2015). Bildung has retained a prominent status in German and Nordic education up to today and has also gained traction in international educational theory, as a regulative idea re-igniting debate about the pedagogical function of schools (see e.g.Biesta, 2002).

This is also the case in the Netherlands, where Bildung took footing through the publication of an authoritative report by the Dutch Education Council (Onderwijsraad, 2011). In this report, the Council observed that growing up in an increasingly complex, pluriform and dynamic social and cultural world, may be confusing and demanding for young people, both in their personal lives and for their roles as future professionals and citizens. The Council drew on Bildung in its search for a kind of education that offers students the cultural and moral ‘equipment’ they need to orient themselves in this complex world. In our study, the Council’s definition of Bildung in the context of formal education was adopted: schooling can be said to promote students’ Bildung when teachers address insights, values and ideals that indicate something about what is true, good and beautiful, and enable students to discover what they themselves consider of value and important (Onderwijsraad, 2011). In line with this definition, we understand Bildung as a conscious, active and lifelong process of inquiry and discovery of what one considers of value and importance (the subjective aspect), through interactions with insights, values and ideals about what is good, true and important offered by e.g. science, philosophy, art and social relations (the objective aspect). This resonates with classical understandings of Bildung as the (subjective) acquisition of (objective) culture (Sørenson, 2015).

Is Bildung an appropriate aim for vocational education, too? Sanderse (2021) has provided an overview of how several German authors have thought about this relationship throughout the 19^th and 20^th century. Von Humboldt and kindred spirits made a strict separation between Bildung, which included the acquisition of knowledge ‘for its own sake’, and vocational education, understood as pursuing knowledge for practical (utilitarian) ends (Giesinger, 2012). While Von Humboldt wanted vocational education to commence only after students had completed a certain amount of general Bildung, he thought that real (higher) Bildung required the study of Latin, Greek, mathematics, literature and history, and therefore university attendance. This has led to a persistent association of Bildung with (serving) the broad and ‘freeing’ education of the elite; and vocational education with the narrow, instrumental education of ‘the masses of people destined to be servants rather than leaders’ (Tyson, 2016, p. 361). Throughout time, however, the relationship between Bildung and vocational education has been revised, expanded and reinvented continuously in response to changing societal and economic circumstances (Gonon, 2022). In the twentieth century for instance, Kerschensteiner, Spranger and Blankertz have rethought and anchored Bildung in vocational education (Gonon, 2009; Sanderse, 2021), respectively stressing the importance of social responsibility and versatility, the development of an inner vocation and cultural participation, or of autonomy and critical reflection as Bildung aims in and through vocational education. At present, contemporary educational theorists have rediscovered Bildung as a relevant ideal in the context of modern vocational education (e.g. Sanderse, 2021; Tyson, 2018; Zuurmond et al., 2023).

Nevertheless, the reputation of Bildung as elitist and unworldly continuously proves to be obstinate (Tyson, 2016), and has been solidified by the fact that the potential of Bildung for (vocational) education has mostly been studied from a philosophical perspective and rarely empirically, e.g. in classroom practices (Kim et al., 2019), let alone in vocational educational classrooms or practices. Situating Bildung within educational practices and exploring its meaning for teachers and students could therefore add to the existing, theoretical body of knowledge on Bildung, as well as to existing empirical insights and studies which can be divided into two strands. The first focuses on (auto)biographical, reflective accounts or case studies of Bildung, often based on written teacher narratives which study teachers as (vocational) Bildung practitioners (Kim, 2013; Kim et al., 2019; Tyson, 2015, 2016, 2018). The second strand studies Bildung within ‘natural settings’: as embedded in school relations and school organization (Plew, 2014), in (primary) teachers’ work plans (Bachmann et al., 2021), or in teachers’ accounts of their own teaching style (Moos, 2008) and teaching practice(s) (Avery & Wihlborg, 2013; Grimstad, 2017). Several of these studies have taken different curriculum levels into consideration: the enacted and experienced (Tyson, 2016) or the formal and informal curriculum (Plew, 2014).

However, what has not been conducted, to our knowledge, is a more complete curriculum study (Van den Akker, 2003) of Bildung: looking into how teachers (or other educational actors) intend to foster students’ Bildung, how they implement it in the classroom, and how these attempts are perceived by both teachers and their students. Moreover, except for a study conducted by Ulvik et al. (2021), students’ (and specifically, vocational students’) experiences and perspectives remain largely un(der)explored in existing empirical accounts of Bildung, nor have studies combined an exploration of both teachers’ and students’ accounts and perspectives.

Aims of the study

Our study aims to contribute to this existing body of empirical research in three ways. First, we are curious what there is to learn about Bildung in the understudied context of vocational education, by including vocational teachers and students. Second, we want to find out how Bildung is and can be embedded within and across several curriculum levels, including teachers’ ideals and practices, as well as their students’ experiences. Third, this study focuses on how teachers can foster students’ Bildung by functioning as a model of and for Bildung. Interestingly, modelling has been studied extensively as a teaching method in moral and character education (Kristjánsson, 2007; Sanderse, 2013) but has not yet been studied empirically in relation to Bildung. However, we believe it is interesting to explore Bildung in schools through the lens of teacher modelling for several reasons. First, modelling is closely related to Bildung conceptually, as ‘Bildung’ itself contains the notion Bild or image, and denotes the process—by which somebody or something becomes an image (Nordenbo, 2002, p. 341), for instance of what it means to be human (see p. 3 or Willbergh, 2015). This process of becoming, furthermore, assumes ‘that somebody or something is depicted’ (Nordenbo, 2002, p. 341). In other words, the process of Bildung also implies having images or models of Bildung. Therefore, modelling Bildung can be one way in which teachers address insights and ideals about what is important or valuable and foster students’ development of their own insights (Onderwijsraad, 2011). This modelling should not be understood as presenting students with an ‘ideal’ or a perfect example of Bildung to copy or imitate, as this would go against Bildung as a subjective process of inquiry and discovery which cannot be planned, nor its outcomes predetermined (Ulvik et al., 2011). We rather understand teacher modelling here as teachers demonstrating their own Bildung (being a model of Bildung) to encourage and inspire their students to shape their own process of becoming human in their own ways (being a model for Bildung). We build on a specific understanding of ‘good’ teacher modelling (Boyd, 2014; Geursen et al., 2012), which has its origins in teacher education. This approach assumes that, in order for modelling to have an effect, it needs to be recognized by students (Boyd, 2014). If teachers want their students to benefit from their (Bildung) modelling, they should not only pay attention to what they aim to model, but also explain this, justify why this is important, and help their students to apply this to their own lives.

Second, since Bildung concerns developing your own judgements of what is important or of value; the common agreement amongst teachers that modelling is an important explanation for how moral development unfolds (Sanger & Osguthorpe, 2013) could also hold potential for fostering Bildung. While Bildung cannot be reduced to moral education, offering young people sources of importance and value and encouraging them to explore and make their own judgements, has an important moral aspect to it (Gorodeisky, 2016).

This study is not only academically, but also societally relevant. While in theory, Bildung and vocational education can be (and have been) united (see above); in practice, Bildung continues to receive far less attention in vocational education. In the Netherlands, this ‘gap’ can be situated within the context of a tracked or streamed education system with high levels of inequality. Dutch students are transferred from comprehensive primary education (at the age of 12) to different track levels in secondary education, which vary in duration and access to further education (Timmermans et al., 2018). There is vwo, a pre-university track (of six years), which directly prepares students for university education. Havo, the higher general secondary education track (5 years) prepares for higher vocational education or applied sciences. Vmbo consists of four pre-vocational tracks (lasting 4 years) and prepares students either for havo or for mbo, senior vocational education and training (VET). About fifty percent of Dutch adolescents attend pre-vocational (vmbo) schools (Wielenga Van der Pijl & Hartgers, 2018) and within this group, students belonging to ethnic minorities and socio-economically vulnerable groups are overrepresented (Vogels et al., 2021). Generally, Bildung receives far less attention in vocational than in general education, and the ideal of helping these students to ‘become fully human’ tends to be underemphasized in comparison to qualifying them for the labour market (Sanderse, 2021). Therefore, young people who already face soci(et)al exclusions and disadvantages, run the risk of also being excluded from the fundamental pedagogical ideal that they, too, can and should be given the opportunities to give direction to their own lives. Such pedagogical exclusions have already been described as contributing to existing societal inequalities, for instance by Dam and Volman (2003), with the metaphor of youth in prevocational education being equipped with a ‘life jacket’ for economic and social survival while students in general education are prompted and prepped to develop a personal ‘art of living’ and contribute actively and critically to their own lives and to societal change. Against this background, the practical goal of this paper is to provide insights into how teachers in vocational education can and do foster their students’ full personal development, specifically by taking on a modelling role.

Design of the research study

Study context

This study was part of a larger integrated research and development project, designed to stimulate Dutch teachers in secondary (pre)vocational education to integrate Bildung in their lessons through modelling. A total of 28 teachers (from 16 schools) and eight teacher educators (from four teacher trainer institutes) collaborated in this project. Following the steps of a Design Thinking for Educators approach (IDEO, 2013), the participants met six times in four professional learning communities (PLC’s). During these meetings, teachers 1) were introduced to (modelling) Bildung by discussing academic and professional literature and meeting with experts, 2) built on these to develop their own ideas about modelling Bildung and 3) translate these to their own lesson plan. These lesson plans were 4) discussed, improved and put into practice and 5) evaluated by the teachers. Finally, 6) teachers shared insights and experiences with colleagues.

Research questions

All teachers who participated in the PLC’s were invited to take part in a multi-method empirical study, investigating the overall research question: How do teachers in prevocational secondary schools (aim to) model Bildung in the classroom, and how do their students experience this modelling? Drawing on Van den Akker’s (2003) overview of curriculum levels, we distinguished between the intended (ideal and formal/written), implemented (perceived and operational) and attained (experiential) curriculum. To investigate these levels, we developed a teacher questionnaire and a model for a written lesson plan, a classroom observation protocol and a guide for teacher interviews and for student focus groups. In this article, we only report findings from the operational, perceived and experiential curriculum because we wanted to describe the rich pool of data provided by the interviews, observations and focus groups in sufficient detail. We therefore focus on the following sub-questions:

• How do the participating teachers actually model Bildung in the classroom?

• How do these teachers perceive having modelled Bildung in the classroom?

• How do students experience their teachers’ attempts to model Bildung?

Sample

The overall project targeted teachers of all subjects in (pre)vocational education, but remarkably, only four of the 28 participating teachers taught vocationally oriented subjects. The other teachers specialized in general academic subjects (Dutch, history, civics or social studies, etc.) which are also taught in the (pre)vocational tracks (see p. 11). While we cannot give an explanation for this ratio with any certainty, the difference in participation could be taken as an indication that vocational subject teachers might not consider Bildung a relevant topic for their practice.

All participating teachers were approached by email to take part in our empirical study, and six teachers (including one team of two co-teachers) from four different schools agreed to participate. Participants differed in teaching experience and subject expertise, as well as in the (pre)vocational programmes and age groups they taught. Teachers helped to deliver information letters about the overall study and consent forms for participation in the focus groups to the class groups (and students’ parents) they would be teaching during the observations. Of these five class groups, four belonged to prevocational (vmbo) tracks: one to the ‘basic’ (lowest theoretical), one to the ‘mixed’ (intermediate) and two groups to the ‘theoretical level’ (highest theoretical level) (Timmermans et al., 2018). The fifth group belonged to the entry level of mbo (the lowest level of senior vocational education). Of these five groups, 29 students consented to participate in a focus group. This means that, on average, 5 students per teacher (team) participated (out of class groups of approx. 25 students). Table 1 below presents an overview of all the participants. As was indicated above, all teachers and students were informed about the study beforehand and gave their active consent for participation. Additionally, parental consent was collected for all students who participated in the focus groups, since they were all minors. Permission for the study was obtained from the ethical committee of the University of Humanistic Studies, under case number 2021.19.

Table 1. Overview of participants.

Teachers*	Age	Subject/course	School	Students	Age
Paula, Ann (co-teachers)	49 48	Project: inquiry-based learning	School 1	6	13–14
Kathy	41	History/citizenship education	School 2	8	13–14
Josie	35	Drama	School 2	5	12–13
Nichole	27	Dutch/citizenship education	School 3	8	16–17
Michael	Early 40’s**	Mathematics	School 4	2	14–15

*Pseudonyms.

**No specific age provided by participant.

Instruments

Observations

For every participating teacher (including one couple of co-teachers, see Table 1), two classroom observations were conducted (n = 10). These observations each concerned one class in which teachers put their Bildung modelling into practice. The observations were conducted either by one of the authors or in pair, according to a fixed observation protocol. The observations were also (video) recorded to enable the researcher(s) to refine the protocols afterwards and to improve inter-rater reliability. Based on the initial protocols and recordings, (anonymized) vignettes were written for every observation, and the video recordings were deleted. The vignettes were treated as the raw data for the observations. The observation protocol focused on the operationalization of two dimensions of ‘modelling Bildung’. First, we operationalized what teachers modelled or what teachers revealed about themselves and their own Bildung to students: (1) specific beliefs, e.g. values, convictions, norms, feelings, opinions, etc. signalling what they believe to be of value or important; and (2) references to their own experiences or to events which had changed or formed their lives and beliefs, as processes of personal, inner development.

Second, we operationalized how teachers modelled Bildung by including the four elements of good or ‘successful’ modelling identified by Geursen et al. (2012, P.9) Participating teachers were familiar with this approach, as it was also used and discussed during the first three steps of the overarching project. The DELA approach takes into account not only what teachers demonstrate (D), but also how they explain or render explicit (E) what they are modelling to their students, how they legitimize (L) or justify why they do so, and how they help their students to adopt this and apply (A) it to their own lives.

Interviews

After every observation, we conducted an interview with the teacher(s) to further discuss and clarify what was observed. In these interviews (n = 10), which varied in length from approximately 25 to 45 minutes, we discussed (1) what teachers believed were key moments of modelling Bildung, (2) what and how they were aiming to model and (3) how this related to their understanding of Bildung and the effects they aspired to have on students.

Focus groups

Finally, in every class group, focus groups were organized (n = 9) following the teacher observations, to include students’ perspectives on their teachers’ Bildung’ modelling. The voluntary and confidential nature of participating in these focus groups was emphasized in the letters delivered beforehand and by the researcher(s) during the first visit to every class and again at the start of the focus groups. In these focus groups, we inquired about (1) students’ Bildung, by asking them about encounters and experiences that inspired or changed them, how and why (Ulvik et al., 2021), (2) what it means to give form or direction to your own life, (3) students’ role models and teachers as models, and (4) their experiences with their teachers’ modelling in the observed classes.

Analysing the data

A thematic analysis was conducted to provide a sensitive and rich description of the data collected in classroom settings (Braun & Clarke, 2006). The analysis followed a hybrid approach, making use of both deductive and inductive coding and theme development (Xu & Zammitt, 2020). Our coding also combined semantic or explicit coding with efforts to identify latent meanings (e.g. understandings of Bildung implied in teachers’ behaviour or statements). An initial immersion into the data was established by transcribing and re-reading the interviews and focus groups, as well as writing summarizing vignettes of the observations. The coding and thematizing of these data were conducted using AtlasTi22. First, theory-driven codes and codebooks were created for every data source, to which inductive codes were added. The codes were then combined into groups to explore the relations between codes and to form themes capturing the most important elements and patterned responses within the data set (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Joint reviews of the code and theme names, as well as their descriptions and examples in the raw data, were conducted by both researchers to reach agreement (Xu & Zammitt, 2020).

Findings

In this section, we present our findings according to the three research questions mentioned above. First, we will describe how the participating teachers actually modelled Bildung, based on our observations. Second, we sketch the main themes in teachers’ perceptions of their own attempts to model Bildung, coming from the interviews. Third, we use findings from the focus groups to explain how students experienced these attempts. We conclude by discussing the similarities and differences between the different curriculum forms.

How do teachers actually model Bildung?

Our analysis of the classroom observations yields two major themes describing how teachers put their role of modelling Bildung into practice: (1) teachers’ display of their personal Bildung focus and (2) teachers’ different methods of modelling Bildung.

Surprisingly, while both the observed lessons and the overall project aimed at experimenting with one’s role as a model of and for Bildung; all but one teacher hardly relied on sharing beliefs, values and their own educational experiences for being a model of Bildung. We did find, however, that what teachers did share, indicated their specific, personal Bildung focus or what they deemed important for their students’ Bildung.

Overall, Nichole was the only teacher whose modelling relied on sharing both beliefs and values, as well as personal stories about her educational experiences and personal development with students. By doing both, she shared her personal Bildung focus on (encouraging) students’ self-reflection on their traits, qualities and challenges; to help them determine their own path in life. One story which Nichole shared about a personal educational experience, summarizes her focus well:

When I was your age, I also found it very difficult to choose. I had just finished my vmbo [pre-vocational track] and I really wanted to go to havo [higher general track], just like some people here would also really like to go to havo, or something higher, but I couldn’t do it then. (…) But then, at school, my mentor taught me to take a good look at what I can do. So then, together, we started looking at: what am I good at? And how could you take a different route to Rome? (…) Everyone has their own life course, yes? So it doesn’t matter so much where you come from, but how you get there.

Compared to Nichole, the other teachers disclosed far less or none of their own personal educational or Bildung experiences, but they did draw on their own values, convictions and beliefs, which revealed something about what they considered important for students’ Bildung.

Paula and Ann, for instance, both occasionally shared personal examples of their own convictions and beliefs (including f.i. the importance of sustainable consumption and ‘coming out of your comfort zone’ in order to learn) to support their students in exploring their own interests and in directing and reflecting on their own learning processes.

In Kathy’s and Josies classes, who participated in the project as a team but taught different subjects (history and drama), we also identified one shared focus: to help students develop and express their own opinions, and to become aware of how these affect others. Kathy appeared to actively avoid sharing her own personal stories or experiences with students, referring to the importance she attached to them being able to form and defend their own, personal opinions in her class (‘of course I have an opinion, but it’s you who has to do the assignment’). She did, however, occasionally express beliefs and convictions, such as the importance of treating others with respect, by putting a swift end to students’ rude or racist comments to other students. Josie on the other hand, often shared opinions and convictions with her students to support her belief that students should be able to be and express themselves; but also need to be aware of the effects their words and behaviour (might) have on others. One example was her (literal and physical) modelling of what she called ‘power’ relations, or the differences in body language between people who adopt either a ‘higher’ or a ‘lower status’ in relation to others.

For Michael, finally, sharing values, beliefs or personal experiences with students appeared to hardly play any role at all, and no specific Bildung focus appeared from our observations of his classes, in contrast to the other teachers. Michael did disclose preferences and values related to the work that had to be done in his Math classes: repeatedly requesting his students to work calmly, autonomously and encouraging them to always try to do things by themselves before asking for help. Moreover, his main focus appeared from his frequent requests to students to behave decently and respectfully, by addressing students’ bad language, attitudes or disruptive behaviour (‘language, missy’) and reversely, from how Michael was always addressing students calmly and respectfully himself.

Teachers’ methods to model Bildung formed a second major theme: the six teachers differed significantly in how they modelled, demonstrating different personal methods of putting the modelling components displaying, explaining, legitimizing and adopting into practice. Teachers differed greatly in whether and how they did so, varying between modelling mostly unconsciously or consciously; and between explicit or verbal to non-verbal modelling.

For instance, we saw earlier that Nichole shared stories about her own Bildung with students, including personal stories about self-reflection and self-discovery. In addition, she demonstrated self-reflection by discussing her own personal qualities, challenges and pitfalls as an introduction to an assignment in which her students had to do the same. In other words: Nichole consciously and explicitly displayed, explained and legitimized the importance of getting to know yourself through self-reflection to her students. In addition, she supported them in adopting this: reflecting on their own traits and qualities and discussing, as a group, how they recognized these in each other, as well as what role these (might) play in their current and future lives, studies and work.

Reversely, we indicated how Kathy focused on students forming their own opinions. While Kathy did not (or very rarely) share or model opinions or beliefs nor stories of how she developed her own opinions; she did display, explain and legitimize the importance of forming and expressing your own opinions with respect for others, and of developing arguments to support your opinions. In order to do so, Kathy had a specific method: she first offered students background information about a certain topic to let them explore several different perspectives and determine and share their own opinions; and then let students discuss their different opinions by dividing the classroom into different ‘sides’. In this process, she deliberately did not express or share her opinions or how she formed these. At the same time, however, Kathy was very expressive of her opinions and beliefs in her unconscious or spontaneous and non-verbal behaviour towards students, which played a key role in how she moderated students’ behaviour during assignments. On multiple occasions, she put a swift end to students making disrespectful or racist comments, interrupting others and expressing blunt, unsubstantiated opinions. She did so simply by making stern facial expressions or hand gestures and without offering further explanation, legitimation or negotiation.

For Josie, and Paula and Ann as co-teachers, the explaining, legitimizing and indications for adopting what they were modelling mostly relied on establishing a constant interchange with their students, in which they seemingly probed students to do the explaining, legitimizing and adopting themselves. They did so mainly by constantly asking questions, such as: ‘What is learning?’, ‘What do you need to reach your goals?’, ‘How can you tell how your behaviour and words affect others?’, on which they expected students to reflect and respond.

Despite the differences in what and how teachers modelled, they all appeared to prioritize an element of adopting in their modelling: all teachers appeared to focus on supporting students in translating their modelling to what they, themselves, valued and found important for their own lives.

How do teachers perceive their modelling of Bildung in the classroom?

In the interviews, we identified three main themes in teachers’ own perceptions of their modelling: (1) the aim(s) of modelling Bildung as helping students to develop their relationships to oneself, to others, and to society or the world as a whole; (2) modelling Bildung as teachers showing students their humanity: who they are as a person, and that they are (only) human or fallible, and (3) teachers’ subject areas as either enabling or restricting their Bildung modelling.

A first theme arose from how teachers described the Bildung aims they pursued through their modelling in terms of students developing three relationships: to themselves, to others and/or to the world. All teachers, for instance, indicated they pursued specific goals concerning how students form and relate to themselves, such as promoting the personal and identity development or self-reflection of students, helping them to identify and pursue their own interests, form their own opinions and determine their own paths in life, etc.

So that’s where my question started: how can I make students proud of themselves. And that starts with first getting to know yourself well—Nichole

Well the aim is for students to bild themselves, to develop, by learning and exploring, what all the possibilities in life are and learning more about them.—Paula

So, in one way or another, all teachers shared an interest in helping the young people in their classrooms to become and express themselves. Most teachers also connected their aims of students forming themselves to how they would like their students to learn to relate to others.

Awareness of oneself. (…) what am I actually radiating? And is that also my intention? And do I consider that important? And how do I actually want to come across to others? Because I think (…) you first need to know: how do I actually come across? What kind of person do I want to be? For that, you first need to know: what is inside me right now?—Josie

In a similar vein, the other teachers mentioned the importance of learning from and with others, learning to work together, becoming conscious of how you relate to and influence others, taking others’ perspectives and being respectful of other peoples’ feelings and opinions. For all teachers, this aspect of relating to others included exploring and discussing what the boundaries are to what you can say or do in relation to others, both in- and outside of the classroom.

Finally, all teachers expressed a concern for connecting students’ Bildung to how they learn to position themselves in and relate to the world, which they mostly understood as gaining knowledge of and forming your own opinions about historical or topical events, and becoming conscious of your own interests and position in society. For example, for five out of the six teachers, the Russian invasion and ensuing war in Ukraine starting in February 2022 came up as a prominent topic during the interviews, and more specifically: how teachers wanted to help students to relate to this event. For example, Paula recollected a cooking class in which she tried to raise students’ awareness of the necessity to exercise solidarity and responsibility by using baking flour economically, due to its scarcity following the outbreak of the war. Nichole and Kathy both indicated they shared their own feelings about the war with their students, so they would feel seen and acknowledged in their own feelings, fears and insecurities. Michael, finally, mentioned a conversation with a student who questioned the (humanitarian) need to host Ukrainian refugees in the Netherlands:

And then I do give my opinion: ‘listen, have you thought about it if it were the other way around? Suppose a war were to come here, and people were to say you’re not welcome because they also have needs there’. (…) then I do clearly give my opinion to make them think. (…) They still have a free choice, but it is good to show them another side, like ‘that is not how I had thought of it at all’.

Michael’s approach also illustrates how the participating teachers generally saw the three aspects of forming or becoming yourself, and relating to others and the world as interrelated: forming yourself, your opinions, own interests, etc. always has to do with how you relate to others, and how you position yourself in or relate to what is going on in the world.

A second central theme was teachers’ conviction that modelling as a teacher implies you always and inevitably (have to) show students that you are (only) human. All teachers indicated that, in their role as a teacher, they inevitably show students who they are as a person and that they did not mind sharing things about themselves and their lives. Quite the opposite: they mostly described this to be the very foundation or essence of their teaching and modelling, as illustrated by Kathy’s following statement:

I think as a teacher, you are definitely a very big role model. Yes not only (in) what you teach, but precisely (…) in what you do and who you are, that’s what they take away.—Kathy

Next to showing who they are, all teachers mentioned the importance of showing themselves as ‘only’ human to their students. Teachers were highly aware of not always being a perfect model, and of inevitably making mistakes. Rather than considering this a deficit, teachers believed this to be a crucial aspect of being a model for students’ Bildung:

I think that’s actually the most important thing, that you show’:I’m not perfect, I’m not the ultimate, good example’. Uhm yes I think I try to be an example in that I’m not always the good example or something like that—Josie

But you know as a teacher, you take on a certain role and you discuss that with your vulnerabilities and your strength and then children also see: you are also allowed to be vulnerable, and indeed you are allowed to make mistakes—Paula

A third central theme coming from the interviews, is how teachers felt that the extent to which they could foster students’ Bildung through modelling depended on their respective subject areas. Kathy, Josie, Paula, Ann and Nichole all indicated how they felt enabled in their modelling by their subjects (inquiry-based project learning, history, citizenship, drama, Dutch) because of the relative freedom their curricula allow them. Michael, on the other hand, felt that his subject (mathematics) limited his modelling of and for Bildung, because it leaves little room for interpretation and for open discussion with students. This made him focus more on having personal, one-on-one conversations with students outside of his classes. During these encounters, he indicated to adopt a role as a model of Bildung by sharing his own educational stories and experiences (for example the influence of being religious on his life choices), and adapting his modelling to connect to his students’ perspectives and experiences:

(…) how do I interact with children, how do children react, how do I respond to them and how is the dynamic. (…) What is a model for them and what does and doesn’t such a teacher need to possess, in their view? As a teacher, you can have a completely different picture than they have.—Michael

How do students experience their teachers’ modelling?

This brings us to students’ experiences of their teachers’ Bildung modelling. In the data from the focus groups with students, we identified two main themes: (1) the varying effects of teachers’ modelling on students; and (2) students’ perceptions of certain traits as crucial to teachers’ role as a Bildung model.

When asked about how they experienced what their teachers modelled as beliefs or their own experiences, students indicated varying effects. First, the majority of students did not consider their teachers to model anything significant, or indicated their modelling had no specific effect on them or their own lives (‘I don’t usually pay attention to that, like I think “oh this inspires me” or something’).

Other students, mostly those from Kathy’s and Paula and Ann’s groups, described what teachers shared about themselves and their own lives as a fun or interesting break to keep things ‘cozy’ in class, as they put it, or to hold their attention. Only a few students from Josies’ and Paula and Ann’s groups saw their teachers’ modelling as a way for them to show and express their own personalities, and for students to learn to take into account teachers’ sensitivities and boundaries. Finally, only the students from Nichole’s and Michaels’ classes described their teachers as offering them inspiration or wise life lessons from which to draw for shaping their own lives. Michaels’ students found his general demeanour inspiring: they described Michael as always being kind, positive and considerate towards pupils. One of the students described this as offering him the lesson to ‘always be happy, then you get happy things in return’. In Nichole’s case, students indicated they drew important life lessons for their own lives from her stories and experiences as a former vocational student, because it made them feel like Nicole related to them and their experiences on a personal level. As one student put it:

Because then she tells us about her life, and that does bind us together. And also just in terms of school, that she has experienced this (…) from the position we are in now.

Overall, our conversations with students taught us that they generally defined a ‘model’ as someone to imitate, or someone they would want to be or become like. Very few students thought of their teachers in line with this definition, and more generally, almost all students mainly emphasized their dreams and aims of being able and free to be(come) themselves, make their own choices, be their own boss, etc. during the focus groups.

Many students did, however, refer to their teachers as having (had) a profound influence on their lives when we asked them about encounters or experiences that inspired or changed them and their views. What stood out, was how they all referred to teachers as being an inspiration or having (had) a positive impact on their lives, because of specific traits they possess(ed) and express(ed) in their relations to them. Students mostly emphasized the crucial importance of teachers being kind, polite, respectful, helpful, supportive, positive, and believing in students’ capacities.

Be positive, and trust in everyone I think, believing in everyone.

Just that they are polite and nice and that they just help you when you really need it; and that you just trust them yourself, that’s about it.

What stood out to students, was the difference teachers can make in their lives by showing students they believe in them and encouraging them to believe in themselves. Generally, students felt that ‘model’ teachers have the ability to combine good teaching, understood as knowing their subject well and formulating clear goals, creating structure and giving good explanations; with being a source of inspiration and support and relating to students on a personal level. Several students described these elements as determining the difference between exceptional, inspiring teachers and most other teachers who, as students repeatedly put it, just ‘do their jobs’. Overall, students indicated that for them, this difference depends on teachers’ personalities, more than on the subjects they teach or how they do so.

I think it doesn’t necessarily have to do with the subject, I think it’s just purely what kind of teacher it is.

Overall, the (pre-)vocational students in our focus groups considered inspirational teachers, who truly show their human or kind and supportive side, and who are models for their own lives by doing so, to be a rare species. Of our group of six teachers, only Michael and Nichole were viewed in this regard by their students.

Conclusion

This study aimed to explore how teachers in (pre)vocational education can foster their students’ Bildung by adopting a modelling role. Concretely, we provided insights into how six teachers modelled and perceived being a model of and for Bildung, and how their students experienced this modelling.

All teachers modelled certain beliefs, values and convictions, indicating what they thought was important for their students Bildung, such as self-reflection, developing and substantiating their own opinions and interests. These were confirmed by the teachers in the interviews and were also generally recognized as important by their students. These elements by themselves were, however, insufficient for teachers to be considered a model by students. This rather depended on teachers also taking on a role as a model of Bildung towards students. Given the fact that all teachers agreed that showing who you are as a teacher is crucial to being a model, it is remarkable that only Nichole actually did so by sharing beliefs, values and her personal experiences or stories. Adding the perceived curriculum, only Michael indicated that he also explicitly and consciously relied on his own experiences and values in his modelling towards students. Moreover, Nichole and Michael indicated that they adapted their modelling to support their students’ experiences and needs. This was confirmed by their students, who were the only ones in our study who considered their teachers to be models, because they offered them an inspiring example or important life lessons and their students felt supported, believed in and seen by them.

Apart from this main thread, one additional similarity and two differences across teachers’ actual Bildung modelling, their perceptions, and their students’ experiences are worth mentioning. First, we found that both teachers and students believed that teachers’ modelling aiming to foster Bildung does or should offer students elements they can relate to, interpret and adopt for their own personal, social and professional lives. However, two differences can also be identified between teachers’ perceptions and students’ experiences. First, all teachers seemingly agreed that, as a teacher, you inevitably show your students things about your life and who you are as a person, and that his is crucial to modelling. Students, however, indicated that this, in itself, is insufficient to truly show students who you are, and to be considered a model or a source of inspiration. Rather, students appeared to look at teachers as models when they actively and consciously related to students on a personal level, supported them and adapted to their experiences and needs. Additionally, the (pre-)vocational teachers and students in our study differed in the roles they accorded to teachers’ personalities and their subject areas for modelling Bildung. Teachers accorded the greatest importance to their subject areas, which they considered to be either enabling or limiting their roles as a model. In contrast, while students also found it important that teachers know their subjects and ‘teach well’, they unanimously discussed teachers’ basic (pedagogical) attitudes and relationships to students as more essential to being a model than subject-related methods or content.

Limitations

As a small-scale study with a very specific sample of respondents, several limitations apply to our inquiry. First, the study and project only included a specific sample of teachers who had an explicit interest in incorporating Bildung modelling in their teaching practices. Our findings can and should therefore not be generalized to other secondary school teachers, nor students, either in (pre-)vocational or other tracks. However, by working with this specific sample of teachers, we were able to contribute a new perspective to the small body of existing empirical knowledge on Bildung.

Second, within our sample of teachers, general subject areas were overrepresented in comparison to more natural scientific or vocationally oriented subjects. We have therefore gained little insight into how teachers in other subjects and tracks would compare in how they (aim to) and experience Bildung modelling to the ones included here.

Finally, the use of multiple, qualitative research instruments enabled us to explore several curriculum forms and the perspectives of both teachers and students. For our explorational inquiry this set-up sufficed. However, a longer trajectory including a larger and more diverse group of both students and teachers would be recommended to acquire deeper insights into Bildung and teacher modelling both in- and outside of vocational education.

Discussion

The results of this empirical exploration of Bildung and teacher modelling in (pre)vocational education inspire a rethinking and expanding of existing notions of Bildung and of teacher modelling as a way to foster students’ Bildung.

First, this study’s focus on how Bildung was embedded in (pre)vocational teachers’ ideals and practices, as well as in students’ experiences, offers new and practical insights that previous empirical studies and theoretical explorations could not account for. For example, even within our small sample of teachers and students, we found significant diversity and tensions within and across different curriculum levels: most, but not all teachers could be observed to demonstrate a personal focus and interpretation of Bildung, and we learned from both teachers’ and students’ perspectives that promoting Bildung can also be situated in one-on-one encounters and conversations between teachers and students. Moreover, having a clear vision of Bildung as a teacher did not guarantee getting this across to students, as teachers’ actions were sometimes deemed incongruent with that vision, or unconvincing or uninspiring by students. These similarities and differences illustrate the importance of including students’ perspectives to discuss aims and processes of Bildung in education.

Second, new about this study was that it focused on how teachers can foster students’ Bildung by functioning as a model of and for Bildung. In the literature, Bildung is often situated within a traditional model portraying educational relations as a didactic triangle (Miyamoto, 2021; Willbergh, 2021) which encompasses relations between teachers, students and content (see Figure 1 below).

Figure 1. Didactic triangle.

Within this model, Bildung is represented as inseparable from content and inherently entwined with subject teaching (Tyson, 2016; Willbergh, 2015). This was confirmed by the teachers in our study, who attributed great influence to their respective subject areas on how they could foster Bildung. Students equally mentioned that ‘good’ teachers, in their view, should be experts in their subjects. However, the student focus groups also yielded a different and ‘refreshing’ perspective: students saw teachers only as a source of inspiration for their own lives if teachers were committed to a supportive relationship with students, based on trust and believing in students’ capacities. The students in our study therefore situated Bildung primarily within the pedagogical teacher-student side of the triangle. At face value, this confirms the suggestion made in other empirical Bildung studies that teachers’ qualities and interpersonal skills are more important than teachers’ commitment to their subject (Kim, 2013; Plew, 2014; Ulvik et al., 2021). However, circling back to the distinction between objective and subjective aspects of Bildung made in our theoretical framework, our findings show that, in practice, there is no stark distinction between the objective (addressing or transferring knowledge and values) and the subjective (self-inquiry and self-determination) aspects of Bildung. In fact, this distinction can obscure the ways in which pedagogical relations in the classroom, as specific social relations between teachers and students, are also part of the objective aspects of Bildung which foster the inquiry of students into what they themselves find important and worthwhile. In other words, our study showed that supporting and fostering (vocational) students’ Bildung covers all sides of the triangle.

Further, our study offers a new perspective on teacher modelling as a method to foster students’ Bildung. In the literature on moral education, modelling is often understood as an important and even foundational teaching method that teachers can use deliberately (Kristjánsson, 2007; Sanderse, 2013). Teachers ‘model’ if they display the kind of moral reasoning, emotions, or actions that they would like to promote in students. The views expressed by the students in our study can help shed new light on this understanding of teacher modelling. While the students in our focus groups did generally express a similar understanding of a (role) model as someone to imitate or copy; students did not apply this definition to their teachers: they did not consider their teachers to be models for their own lives, in the sense of wanting to become like them. They rather expected their teachers to support and inspire them to pave their own paths in life. Additionally, the two teachers who appeared most ‘effective’ in their modelling, consciously adapted their modelling to connect to their students’ lives and experiences.

While Bildung cannot be reduced to moral education or vice versa, our study does suggest that a Bildung perspective offers important elements to re-think teacher modelling in moral education as a fundamental pedagogical relationship of supporting and inspiring students to see and develop their own capacities and pave their own Bildung path; rather than as a didactic method or strategy initiated by teachers and their idea(l)s.

Educational implications

The insights provided by this study have the potential to benefit teachers, teacher education and educational policy, primarily within but also outside of vocational educational contexts.

First, our study illustrates how teachers can and do contribute to (pre-)vocational students’ Bildung by investing in a positive and supportive relation with their students and by sharing aspects of one’s own Bildung explicitly and consciously to inspire them. The DELA- model (Geursen et al., 2012) we used in the PLC’s and in our study’s methodology is a useful tool, not only for teacher educators, but also for teachers to (1) become more conscious of what and how they model beliefs and their own Bildung experiences (2) make their own interpretation and focus of Bildung explicit, and (3) reflect on how they aim to relate to students and inspire their personal development.

Secondly, given the crucial importance the students in our study accorded to their relationship with teachers, as well as their personalities and fundamental pedagogical attitudes, (vocational) teacher education could also profit from putting teachers’ relations to themselves and their students more explicitly on the agenda as a fundamental purpose of teacher education, rather than a ‘tool for effective learning’ (Ulvik et al., 2021, p. 10). One way to do so is to formally prepare future teachers to take on a mentoring role. Moreover, if students find the most support and inspiration in teachers who share insights into their own beliefs and life experiences, teacher education programs could support (future) teachers to become more conscious and confident of themselves as full persons (in development). Where suggestions for improving teacher education often focus on didactic strategies and further professionalization, we recommend making room for future teachers to become aware of their own visions and experiences of Bildung, and to develop their personal manner of modelling Bildung accordingly.

Finally, there is topical value, on a policy level, in the accounts of Bildung modelling offered here. We have encountered both vocational teachers and students who were concerned with and committed to the personal, social and societal thriving of these students as full, unique persons. This debunks the common, persistent idea that Bildung is too abstract, elitist or irrelevant for (youth in) vocational education. However small a spark, we therefore believe these teachers and students can inspire all those carrying educational responsibilities, including those in policymaking, to enact the belief that all students can and fundamentally deserve to grow into full, autonomous, self-directing persons through education.

Acknowledgments

The authors would to like to express their gratitude to their colleagues of the Education department for their fruitful comments and suggestions, and are particularly grateful to Marieke van Belle for all her efforts, assistance and input during the project, and to Isolde De Groot for sharing her expertise and advice. They also appreciate the feedback received on a first, initial draft of the results discussed in this paper, which was presented at the annual conference of the Association for Moral Education, Manchester, on July 22^nd 2022.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available on reasonable request from the corresponding author, [M.J.]. The data are not publicly available so as not to compromise the privacy of the participants.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Porticus Foundation under Grant number [GR-074772].