Staying attuned, keeping the flow – possibilities and obstacles in teachers’ tactful acting

ABSTRACT

The standardised and instrumental view of teaching overshadows the unintentional spontaneous, unpredictable aspects of teaching captured by the notion of pedagogical tact. Pedagogical tact is grounded in teacher-pupil relations involving trust and care. This article illustrates how pedagogical tact can be used as an analytical tool in empirical educational research. The overall aim was to explore how tactful acting manifests itself in teachers’ pedagogical decision-making, and what can facilitate or impede teachers’ tactful acting. The author provides examples from two cases. The first case shows how the teacher balances freedom and constraint in making decisions about grading. The second case demonstrates how a beginning teacher handles a situation involving a student with special needs. The findings show that the conditions for tactful acting are determined by various aspects of the educational practice, such as the teacher’s freedom to make pedagogical decisions and the teacher’s obligations towards the students, principal, and parents.

KEYWORDS:

• Pedagogical judgement
• tactful acting in grading
• pedagogical obligations
• tactful decisions
• pedagogical tact

Introduction

Teaching is highlighted as one of the most difficult and complex professions because teaching is about human interaction aiming for human improvement with outcomes that are far from certain (Labaree 2000). Teachers of today face many challenges in finding the balance between various professional responsibilities and duties. Over the past few decades, teaching practice has been governed by an emphasis on effectiveness and measurement, combined with a standardised and instrumental view on teaching. When suggesting educational improvements, policymakers promote the idea of ‘effective pedagogy’ (Biesta 2020, 30). In this standardised view on teaching, less attention has been paid to the understanding of professional actions as interaction between human beings who ‘never appear just as objects of intervention but always also as subjects in their own right’ (Biesta 2017, 323). The focus on teaching as relating to measurement and standards had shifted the teaching practice from building on teachers’ relational encounters with students to teachers being managers who ‘produce measurable outcomes that are high currency at the competitive school market’ (Foran and Levinsson 2020, 2). Standardisation and accountability discourses that highly influence schools today overshadow the existential perspective on education (Korsgaard 2019; Rumianowska 2020) as well as the unintentional, spontaneous, unpredictable aspects of teaching captured by the notion of pedagogical tact (Friesen and Osguthorpe 2018; Ljungblad and Rinne 2020; Rinne 2020; van Manen 2015). Pedagogical tact is defined by Friesen (2022) as ‘educators’ attunement to the children or young people in their care’ (1). Friesen outlines this definition as one of the key themes in pedagogy. The second theme is the pedagogical relation, which refers to ‘the educator’s professional and personal relationship with a young person, for the sake of that person’ (1). Pedagogical tact encompasses both professional judgement and thoughtfulness, involving a teacher’s sensitive instant acting, focusing on what is pedagogically right for the child in a particular situation in a complex pedagogical environment (van Manen 1991, 2015). There is no tact without thoughtfulness, and ‘without tact, thoughtfulness is at best a merely internal state’ (van Manen 1991, 127). Accordingly, professional judgement and tactful acting require thoughtful ethical considerations, because teaching is about human interaction and there is always an inherent moral dimension to it (Rumianowska 2020).

But what then is tactful acting? How does tact show itself when teachers make decisions in such a complex and unpredictable practice as teaching? What facilitates or impedes teachers’ tactful pedagogical decisions? In this article, I will address these questions by employing pedagogical tact as an analytical tool in empirical educational research (Rinne 2014; Rinne et al. 2023). The analysis focuses on two cases. The first case uses video-recorded teacher-student grade conferences at a Swedish upper-secondary school and illustrates how a teacher makes pedagogical decisions when she informs her student about the final grade. The second case is based on an interview with a beginning teacher. It illustrates the pedagogical dilemmas the teacher experiences when feeling torn between various pedagogical obligations involving a student with special needs.

Conceptual framework

Existentialism in the context of education and pedagogical tact

This study focuses on human interaction in education. Education is therefore understood from an existential perspective in line with Heidegger’s (1992) description of Dasein, which is the distinguishing feature of the existence of human life. Rumianowska (2020, 262) defines existentialism in the context of education as ‘a theory of human development, a philosophy of being, philosophy of existence or life.’ She suggests with reference to (Kierkegaard and Lowrie [1843] 1959); 1983) that the key task of education is to ‘awaken one’s inner power to be a person, to be the self which is connected with the spiritual, moral and ethical development of a human being’ (Rumianowska 2020, 263). To fully exist means to make existential choices that do not follow given patterns of conformity but are rather made through one’s beliefs and values. Being truthful to oneself refers thus to authenticity:

Authenticity might best be viewed as an ability to develop a personal truthfulness with oneself, being true to one’s beliefs and values and taking responsibility for one’s own decisions.

(Rumianowska 2020, 262)

For the teacher, authenticity means staying truthful to oneself and providing the best opportunities for the student to find their own voice. This is not done in an instrumental way, providing students with skills and knowledge, but in a way that encourages them to develop their uniqueness. Furthermore, there are no guarantees that the teacher’s actions will convey the intended meaning for the students (Kelchtermans 2005).

This view on education is closely related to pedagogical tact, which focuses on inter-human aspects of teaching. The word tact has its origin in the Latin verb tangere, to touch. Its metaphorical meaning concerns the capacity to ‘touch’ a person ‘by word, by look, by gesture’ (Fišer 1972, 467). Further, it can mean to strengthen, to encourage, to express concern and trust, but also to make demands, to show disapproval, to judge, but always to be ready to help. Scholars have addressed tact from various perspectives. Herbart elaborated the concept of pedagogical tact at the beginning of 19th century as ‘an answer to the problem of the relation of educational theory and practice’ (Kenklies 2012, 269). In bringing theory and practice together, Herbart discerns three possible ways or ‘modes’ to relate to theory that correspond to the teacher’s pedagogical development. It starts with ignoring the theory and relying on one’s own practice and develops into the mode of translating theory immediately into practice. The right pedagogical action interconnects theory and practice (Friesen 2022). Thus, theory does not tell us what to do or not to do. In Herbart’s view, theory as the teacher’s scientific knowledge cultivates ‘the attunement or disposition that is needed for tactful action’ (Friesen 2022, 27). Tactful acting is thus more a question of feeling than thinking. It is not oriented towards knowing, but rather to being and caring. Tact is about a special way of being in the world. It is not about general principles, but rather about the ability to see the particularity of others and the ability to balance closeness and distance (Korsgaard 2021). Thus, pedagogical tact is the essence of practical wisdom, phronesis embodied and based on experience, reflection, and the ability to ‘see’ the student, grounded in the teacher-student relationship (Korsgaard 2021; Lunenberg and Korthagen 2009; van Manen 2015).

Van Manen (2015) emphasises the emotional impact of tact by highlighting bodily coexistence: ‘To teach is to touch and to be touched’ (103). Tact touches the person in the ‘expression of a thoughtfulness that involves the total being of the person, an active sensitivity toward the subjectivity of the other, for what is unique and special about the person’ (van Manen 1991, 146). Similarly, Muth (in Friesen 2022) points out that ‘the one who is tactful restrains themselves for the sake of the other’ and that this may be ‘an omission rather an overt act, something that is not possible without sensitivity’ (Muth in Friesen 2022, 92). Muth refers to tact as the ‘unplannable;’ there is always unpredictability in teaching, a gap between what the teacher plans and what actually happens in the classroom. In this regard, van Manen (2015) captures efficiently the teacher’s sense of tact in the subtitle of his book: ‘Knowing what to do when you don’t know what to do,’ defining tact as the teacher’s ability to make the pedagogically right decision in a specific situation. Zirfas (in Friesen 2022) accentuates that tactful acting is not instrumental or planned: it can never include ‘all the factors and criteria that are significant for practice’ (190). Educators must rely on their own pedagogical judgement because there are no socio-ethical or pedagogical models, ‘neither as a principal nor a criterion, neither as an ideal or regulative idea’ (190) for how to deal with the individuality of the other in a situation. Tact manifests itself in acting ‘in a situation in which there is no prescription for action, which Zirfas recognises as a pedagogical aporia.

Rothuizen (2022) states that doing the right thing at the right time is practising good pedagogy. By going back to the continental tradition of human science pedagogy (Geisteswissenschaftliche Pädagogik), which offers a counterweight to the Anglo-Saxon tradition dominated by a normative and instrumental view on education, Rothuizen illustrates, in a context of early childhood education, two pedagogical values that teachers need to balance: children’s participation and emancipation. Children are agents of their own lives and are the ones who decide whether to participate in a community or to be emancipated from it. The core of pedagogy is then twofold for the child: evolving personal freedom and taking part in a community. Teachers cannot therefore act in an instrumental way. They need rather to make instant choices in every single moment by bringing moral orientations into play, which Rothuizen defines as pedagogical tact. However, a teacher’s pedagogical beliefs about the right action can conflict with her/his actual acting, driven by duties and obligations in a normative practice governed by policies and values. This can put the teacher in a moral dilemma. For instance, is it always right to follow the policy documents and fail a student, while being aware of the disastrous consequences for the student, such as a complete loss of motivation and feelings of worthlessness? How should a teacher act in a situation where her beliefs about the right action clash with the principal’s? Making pedagogically tactful decisions presupposes a teacher’s emancipation and ability to rely on her/his own judgements of the right action. Zirfas (in Friesen 2022) defines independence as a pedagogical aporia, with independence being ‘both a prerequisite and a goal of pedagogy’ (191). In making pedagogical decisions, educators must proceed from fundamental undecidability. On the one hand, a pedagogical decision is to be made in relation to the singularity and uniqueness of the other; on the other hand, it implies the necessity of the pedagogical rule. Zirfas states that the pedagogical rule has to be overlooked in relation to singularity because only undecidability can do justice to the uniqueness of the other. Thus, a teacher’s following of laws and norms fails the singularity of the other. The pedagogical decision must be made ‘in a situation that represents the impossibility of such a just decision’ (191). Pedagogical professionalism is thus, according to Zirfas, ‘the subjective ability and willingness to tactfully balance pedagogical paradoxes’ (192). From an existential point of view, a pedagogical decision is about authenticity and truthfulness to oneself (Rumianowska 2020) or as Palmer (2017) puts it, about teachers’ capacity for connectedness with their hearts, not methods, where hearts means: ‘the place where intellect and emotion and spirit will converge in the human self’ (11).

Case 1: staying attuned – example from a grading conference in upper-secondary school

The context

The case presented and analysed here is a part of the empirical material collected for a phenomenological hermeneutical study about a teacher’s and student’s understanding of grading as it shows itself in face-to-face grading conferences between a teacher and a student at an upper-secondary school in Sweden (Rinne 2014). According to the policy documents, teachers are obliged to explain how the grade given corresponds to the student’s academic performance according to the curriculum, which is commonly done in grading conferences. The criterion-referenced grading system is employed in Sweden, which means that the curriculum provides rubric templates with standard descriptors for each grade. The imprecise standard descriptors are open to interpretation and provide opportunities for the teacher to decide the appropriate methods for teaching as well as for the assessment of student performance. Thus, the teacher is responsible for constructing the tests and deciding where to draw the boundaries for the grades, which gives the teacher a lot of autonomy. To control the equity in grading, there are national tests constructed by the Swedish National Agency for Education in some subjects. Overall, the grading system in Sweden is built upon a trust that teachers are professionals and as such possess sufficient knowledge to grade fairly.

Attunement to individuality

This case involves a teacher (here called Marianne) and a student (here called Johanna). Marianne has about 20 years of teaching experience in history and social science. The length of each course she teaches is usually one year. The grading conference is a face-to-face interaction where Marianne shortly summarises the outcome of each of student’s performances throughout the course on a sheet of paper that she hands out to the student at the end of the conference. The following excerpt is a shortened version of the video-recorded grading conference between Marianne and Johanna. It illustrates how Marianne gives her reasons for a decision about the highest grade when she talks to Johanna:

• – I cannot really prove it … but it seems that you have been the one who sees that things get done [when working in peer groups] … you seem to know what’s going on, Marianne says.

• – Oh yes, I like … I need to know, Johanna replies.

• – Well, you’ve been close to the highest grade all the way. Marianne smiles and looks Johanna in the eyes when she reveals the final grade by unfolding the bottom of the sheet of paper that she has in front of her. - So … I’d rather give the benefit of the doubt.

• – Thank you! Johanna is amazed. She has a big smile on her face.

• – But it hasn’t been easy! While she is talking, Marianne is pointing at the sheet of paper where the results for the individual performances are documented. If somebody were to see this … I don’t think you are going to appeal against this grade …

• – No, Johanna interjects.

• – But if someone…did, it [the individual results] doesn’t really look like the highest grade … but you have to count in this, and this … . This one carries a lot of weight.

• – This one, Johanna points at one of the assignment scores. I didn’t even know how to get it right. I kept trying and doing it wrong … and in the end, I decided, I’ll just do this and it will have to do.

• – Mm, I hope you have the energy to continue. You’ve been tired lately? Marianne asks.

• – Yes, tired of school.

• – Yes … But if you get this [grade], would that encourage you to keep going?

• – Johanna nods. Well, I didn’t expect to get the highest grade in any courses this year. It feels like no matter how hard I work, I never get over the bar to the highest grade …

• – Well, you’ll get the highest grade from me in any case … The overall grade is the one that counts… This can maybe be an encouragement for you in the third year too. You have the capacity, but not always the energy.

• – Yes, I’ll have summer vacation now and it’ll be fine next year. (Rinne 2014, 167–171, translated by the author from Swedish to English)

When I present this case in lectures for student teachers, I often get a response that Marianne is not acting professionally. They argue that a teacher cannot base the grading on a feeling or encouragement. Nothing other than academic achievement should matter. Such a reaction might be influenced by the increased focus on standardisation and measurement that has become more predominant in the teaching profession in the last few decades. Such a development might give the impression that grading is an uncomplicated and simple process of aggregating test scores to produce a final grade. However, grading is a complex endeavour involving various aspects for teachers to consider. We must keep in mind that the standard descriptors in a criterion-referenced grading system are interpretable. Assessment is therefore always determined by teachers’ understanding of the descriptors, which allows multiple combinations to be reduced to a grade in the final appraisal. We do not know how Marianne has interpreted the descriptors, but we can see that she evaluates some results as being more critical for the final grade. Doubtlessly, various aspects have influenced Marianne’s grading, but she does not highlight them explicitly, other than stating that Johanna has been ‘close to the highest grade all the way’ which can be interpreted as a borderline performance. Thus, Marianne must decide between two grades and chooses the highest, which makes Johanna very happy. However, Marianne declares openly that ‘it hasn’t been easy’ and the documentation of Johanna’s individual results for the course do not correspond to the highest grade. Marianne shows that she has made her own decisions in the final appraisal and that it might not look right to an objective observer. When Marianne points out a result that she highlights as critical, Johanna reveals that she was not certain whether she had succeeded. Her honesty indicates that there is a trust between them. Marianne does not comment on Johanna’s statement. Instead, she turns the focus to Johanna’s wellbeing by asserting that she has been tired lately, which Johanna acknowledges. Marianne justifies giving the highest grade by focusing on the inter-human aspect of grading, involving encouragement for future studies and concern about Johanna’s wellbeing. Johanna’s statement about not getting the highest grade irrespective of how much she struggles indicates resignation. By saying ‘you have the capacity, but not always the energy,’ Marianne shows a deeper insight in Johanna’s capability for learning, which she encourages by giving her the highest grade.

Marianne’s acting reflects pedagogical tact, as she interconnects theory and practice (Kenklies 2012) by relying on her own professional judgement of what is pedagogically best for Johanna. Marianne does not focus on policy documents or grading criteria but is rather attuned to subjectivity and the value that the highest grade has for Johanna. Marianne’s acting can be understood as twofold. On the one hand, focusing on the individuality and uniqueness of the other, Marianne’s decision is fair and right, because it encourages Johanna. In making the appropriate decision in relation to individuality, Marianne has made professional choices in weighing the standard descriptors in the final appraisal. This is in line with the Swedish curriculum, which gives the teachers freedom for pedagogical action, to decide which teaching methods are appropriate to help the students to reach the competence goals for the subject. On the other hand, teachers’ freedom is constrained by the increased focus on standardisation, accountability and measurement that governs the teaching practice. Marianne makes good use of her freedom while tolerating the constraint of it. Freedom in a pedagogical context does not mean that teachers can do as they wish. It is rather about opportunities to make choices based on experience and knowledge that facilitates understanding what the best action in a certain situation is, that is, pedagogical tact. To quote Zirfas (in Friesen 2022), Marianne has made a pedagogical decision ‘in a situation that represents the impossibility of such a just decision’ (191). We must also keep in mind that freedom entails responsibility. Marianne’s actions in grading conferences follow the professional framing – she does not act arbitrarily. If the student has not performed on a level that justifies the highest grade, Marianne does not give it. Nevertheless, the inter-human aspect of grading is always included in Marianne’s grading conferences, as the following quote illustrates:

• – I had so many worries with you, Astrid. You’re one of the students that I would so much like to give the highest grade to, but I just cannot do that.

• – I understand, says Astrid.

• – Do you? (…) I am so sorry, but I just cannot justify the highest grade even if I want to do it so much. (Rinne 2014, 184).

Like in the conference with Johanna, Marianne is open about the difficulties and challenges that she encounters in grading. This quote illustrates the moral dilemma Marianne experienced, being torn between what she wants to do as a human being, and what she is obliged to do as a teacher. By apologising, Marianne reveals an emotional aspect of grading. She shows her benevolence in the desire to give Astrid the highest grade, focusing on grading as an existential act rather than a cognitive one. Even though Marianne shows herself as vulnerable by being open about the difficulties she experiences in grading, she still maintains her authority by giving Astrid a grade that is in accordance with her performance. In doing so, Marianne stays true to herself as a professional by taking responsibility for her decision, even though she fears that it will disappoint Astrid.

In summary, grading can put the teacher in a difficult position from the point of view of human improvement. Grades are connected to the student’s self-esteem and self-image, and if they do not coincide with the student’s view, grades can leave deep wounds. Marianne’s awareness of the importance of the grades for her students shows that she understands the student’s perspective. Grading has thus a broader significance than an appraisal of a performance. A grade can never reflect the complexity of knowledge; it is a rather blunt tool, used for measurement of something that cannot be measured. This might be the reason for the shift of focus to the inter-human aspects in the grading conferences. The aim of meeting the student face-to-face becomes, from this perspective, to bring about harmony on an inter-human level by focusing on not hurting the students’ feelings or lowering their self-esteem, rather than on their subject knowledge.

Case 2: struggling to keep the flow

The context

The case presented and analysed in the following section builds on the second part of a longitudinal interview study about beginning teachers’ development of professional identity in Sweden (Rinne et al. 2023). Sarah is a beginning teacher of Grades 0–3 who is in her twenties. On entering the profession, she experienced various pedagogical challenges that she was not prepared for. One of the challenges concerned the pedagogical diversity in the class she was teaching. There were students with special needs who, according to the school legislation, had a right to an aide or assistant teacher. One student in particular was in urgent need of assistance. However, due to lack of resources, the school could not provide any additional support. In the following, I will first illustrate the pedagogical decisions Sarah faced in this situation. Second, I will discuss how tact showed itself in Sarah’s acting.

Being torn between pedagogical obligations

Sarah was particularly concerned about one of the students with special needs. She turned to the principal and asked for additional support on several occasions:

This child had great difficulties being in the classroom at all. And here I come, an inexperienced teacher, no assistant teachers whatsoever in my class, even though there were other children who needed support as well. I tried to get help for a year and a half, and finally this 18-year-old guy, who recently finished upper-secondary school, was employed as a teaching assistant. He spent most of the time on his mobile phone. I made lesson plans for him, but this poor guy was supposed to teach one of the students who mostly refused to do anything at all. It did not work. The principal said then, well you teach the student. I was thinking, was this 18-year-old guy supposed to teach the rest of the class then? If you do not have any relationship with the students, then there will just be chaos. Well, you have to obey the principal, so I stepped out of the classroom and taught the student. It was chaos for two days in the class, and I was constantly thinking: ‘Where should I be? Where am I needed most?’

To act pedagogically in attempting to resolve the situation, Sarah needs to consider not only the students in her class, but also the young assistant, the student with special needs, and the decisions the principal makes. As an inexperienced teacher, she felt obliged to do as the principal said, even though she was astonished that the student who required authorised professional help was entrusted to this 18-year-old assistant without adequate qualifications. Teaching is unusual among the professions, in that it allows uncertified practitioners to be involved in practice, although it is one of most complex and demanding professions. Labaree (2000) defines the teaching profession as ‘an enormously difficult job that looks easy’ (228). One of the challenges according to Labaree concerns teacher-student relations because teachers need to motivate students who are in school under duress. As Sarah indicates, it is imperative to establish relationships and emotional links to students, which requires advanced pedagogical knowledge. Letting a young and inexperienced assistant teach the class increased Sarah’s workload because of the chaos created in class rather than relieving her of some of her work. Being in a position that did not allow Sarah to fully decide how to act restricted her pedagogical actions and placed her in a moral dilemma about her pedagogical responsibility. Sarah knew that the class wouldn’t work in her absence, and it worried her when her fear was confirmed. Van Manen (2015) accentuates, with reference to Levinas and Rötzer (1995), that pedagogical worry is necessary to keep the teacher ‘in touch with the presence of the other’ (73). It is interconnected with care. Sarah’s worry reflects her awareness of the damage the principal’s decision could cause to the class. Nevertheless, for a short period of time, she justifies her actions as being out of loyalty to the principal, even though she is not satisfied with how the situation proceeds. Consequently, Sarah ends up in an ethical dilemma about what is the right pedagogical action for taking pedagogical responsibility. Since the problem remained unsolved, Sarah turned to the principal again:

Finally, the principle suggested that I should make it cosy for the student and build a hut where he could feel safe. I was confused. Is it my job to build huts? I have lessons to plan but I am supposed to go to IKEA and purchase blankets and so on. I realised eventually that the principle did not know what to do with this child either. We needed support from an expert but there was none. In the end, I just did what I felt was best. I stayed with the class and the assistant was with one of the students in another room.

Sarah was surprised by the principal’s suggestion to solve the problem by building a hut for the student with special needs. She did not approve of such a radical solution. Realising that the principal could not solve the problem because the school lacked resources to employ an authorised teacher’s aide, Sarah was prompted to act in line with her own pedagogical judgement by taking responsibility for her own decision to stay with the class. Even though Sarah was a beginning teacher, she had the strength and courage not to follow the principal’s decisions. Nevertheless, Sarah was not yet experienced enough to ‘know what to do’ (van Manen 2015). She made her own decisions based on her concern about the students’ wellbeing and it worried her that she was not able to help all her students. The student with special needs required professional help that the school was not able to provide:

I think it is a teacher’s duty to adjust to each student’s needs and to be concerned about the students’ wellbeing. But when I’ve done so much, and it still does not help. This child had severe problems. He needed help from a psychologist, but the parents refused to admit it. I could see that this child did not feel good and it was my duty to report it. This makes the teacher-parent relationship difficult.

How does tact then show itself in Sarah’s acting? Finding herself in a complex pedagogical situation, Sarah was obliged to rely on the principal’s decisions which initially constrained her freedom to act (Rothuizen 2022). However, when Sarah did not recognise the principal’s suggestion to build a hut for the student as a pedagogical solution, she followed her own judgement and conviction about the best pedagogical way of acting, which was to stay in the classroom. In relation to tact, van Manen (1991) makes an association with the context of music, pointing out that Takt is the German for beat and that this ‘rhythmic beat or pulse … is the heart of music’ (131). In a similar way, Thornhill and Badley (2020) also associate tact with flow. The constant interruptions caused by the effort to find the right solutions make it difficult for Sarah to keep the rhythm or flow in teaching. It seems that, in the end, the way of keeping the flow was to exclude the student with special needs, because Sarah was not capable of helping him on her own. Furthermore, she was not receiving support either from the principal or the parents. Her worry about the chaotic situation in the classroom, and her concern about the students’ wellbeing reflect tact. Seeing that the child did not feel good prompted Sarah to report the parents. In doing so, she hoped that the child could receive the professional help that was required. Even though this affected the relationship with the parents negatively, Sarah was convinced that it was the right action to help the child. Thus, tact showed itself in the independent decisions Sarah finally made. Even though her actions were occasionally restricted, she followed her convictions about the right pedagogical decision to create the best conditions for herself and her students. To conclude, this example illustrates that the conditions in pedagogical practice do not always facilitate tactful acting but rather put the teacher in the position of trying find the best possible solution in the situation.

Prerequisites for tactful acting

Van Manen (1991) accentuates that ‘pedagogy is context sensitive’ (47). Therefore, studying what is good and not good in a pedagogical situation can never be ‘objective’ in a scientific sense (43). There is no objective method or instruction for how to act. Teachers’ actions must therefore be understood throughout in relation to the specific context. The cases analysed here illustrate two contexts that determine the conditions for tactful acting. In the first case, Marianne relies on her pedagogical judgement when she makes decisions about grading. Tact shows itself in the existential choices that Marianne makes. She remains true to her pedagogical beliefs, that is, the desire to support her students, which reflects authenticity (Rumianowska 2020). She uses grading to encourage students’ learning when it can be justified by the policy documents. Being solely responsible for grading, Marianne has a freedom to use her professional judgement to decide the right grade for each student. The educational context provides Marianne with opportunities for tactful acting. It facilitates a balance between the existential, inter-human aspects of the profession, by adjusting to each student, and following the professional duties that are governed by the policy documents. Thus, Marianne has the freedom to make the right decision, based on the pedagogical relation that is fundamental for making such decisions (Rothuizen 2022).

In the second case, the conditions for tactful acting are dominated by several aspects that Sarah needs to deal with. Like Marianne, Sarah is dedicated to her pedagogical beliefs and she is concerned about her students’ wellbeing, which reflects pedagogical tact. However, she refers to the student with special needs as ‘this child,’ which does not align with tact. Nevertheless, she wants to support the student, but she cannot help him adequately because she is needed by the other students in the class. Referring to the student as ‘this child’ does not necessarily mean that Sarah considers the student as different from the others. She pays attention to his needs and struggles to find the best solution for him, but she is constrained by organisational issues. Furthermore, she needs to consider various perspectives. Her own understanding of the situation is determined by a pedagogical understanding, while the suggestions from the principal are organisational rather than pedagogical. Moreover, the parents were reluctant to involve a psychologist, even though Sarah saw the need to do so. The question is then how the solution of excluding the student with special needs might affect him. The principal’s suggestion about building a hut indicates that the child could be hidden in a cosy place to avoid causing any trouble. In such a view, the exclusion of the child is strengthened by approaching him as a kind of ‘alien,’ a term that has been proposed by the German educator Wilfried Lippitz (in Friesen 2022, 155). ‘alien’ cannot be defined by binary oppositions, such as day and night. It is rather a relational concept that appears in contrast to something ‘that is not seen as alien’ (156). ‘Alienness’ is thus something that does not fit into available structures and is therefore excluded, while the existing order is maintained by inclusion of that which constitutes itself. According to Lippitz education is a practice which arises and is maintained in systems of order: ‘The system operates in a realm of the general that is beyond the individuality of the child’ (166). Approaching the child with special needs as a ‘problem’ that needs to be hidden (or somehow removed) hinders him in developing as a human in his own right (Korsgaard 2019; Rothuizen 2022; Rumianowska 2020). Such treatment can mark the child as being different and impedes him in finding his own voice. Children can be permanently harmed by such procedures. In his book, van Manen (2015) provides numerous examples of pedagogical moments experienced in childhood that left people with deep wounds. We must remember that students are vulnerable and that all pedagogical solutions affect them. In this respect, not only teachers, but all adults who are in one way or another involved in children’s upbringing, bear a heavy responsibility.

Sarah’s pedagogical acting is characterised by a state of constant struggle; she lacks the resources to meet the pedagogical needs of her students. Sarah is torn between obligations towards the students, the principal, and the parents. She intends to act in the best interests of each student in the class by following her pedagogical convictions and her desire to provide professional support tailored to the specific needs of each individual. However, the conditions in schools, such as teacher shortages and lack of resources, do not always provide the best opportunities for tactful acting, placing teachers in moral dilemmas about their pedagogical responsibilities. In the worst-case scenario, this causes teacher burnout leading to more teachers leaving the profession, which has repercussions both for the individual teachers and the profession as a whole, and can also cause severe damage to students. For this reason, it is vital to gain a deeper understanding of the processes involved in teachers’ decision-making and the conditions that influence these processes, particularly with regard to how this affects opportunities for tactful acting.

Ethics approvals

The second case included in this article is a part of a project that has been approved by the Swedish Ethics Review Authority (Dnr 2022–00476–01).

Acknowledgments

I thank the teachers and the students who participated in the studies referred to in this article and Catherine MacHale Gunnarsson for offering suggestions regarding the language.

Disclosure statement

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