Danish experiences of ‘togetherness’ and its implications for multicultural education

It was Finland that received global adulation from education policy circles during the first decade of the 2000s. After the first Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) results were released in 2001, the Finnish education system’s (surprisingly) excellent performance triggered an international scale of ‘educational pilgrimage’ to learn about ‘educational know-how’ (cf. Sahlberg, 2009, p. 341). Turning to the second decade of the 2000s, the global envy directed towards Finland has since faded as Finnish schools have been continuously slipping in their PISA results. Amid this eventuation, Denmark, another Scandinavian country, has increasingly been receiving the spotlight, initially by journalists (e.g. Kingsley, 2013; Oh, 2014). While there would be multiple reasons for this attention shift, probably the most likely reason is the fact that Denmark has consistently ranked first place in the World Happiness Report commissioned by the United Nations, the Organisation for Economic and Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) Better Life Index, and the European Social Survey (ESS) in recent years.

Worldwide, researchers and policymakers have started wondering what makes the Danes so happy. Researchers often provide explanatory factors such as Denmark’s ‘universal and free health care, free university education and relatively generous unemployment benefits’ as major factors to substantially reducing unhappiness (Wiking, 2016, p. 274). It seems clear that Denmark’s position as the world’s happiest country can be, in large part, attributed to Denmark’s welfare state characteristics. At the same time, however, such caring, welfare features of the system do not, on the surface at least, set Denmark apart from other Scandinavian countries since these factors are also found in Denmark’s neighbour countries.

In this special issue, we aim to navigate another (potential) explanatory factor, namely, ‘togetherness,’ which manifests in a unique and salient way in Denmark. Four articles in this special issue provide clues about how togetherness is inextricably intertwined with Danish people’s sense of belonging. Furthermore, the four articles explore what Danish experiences of ‘togetherness’ can offer for multicultural education, and have commonly sought to examine ‘togetherness’ as a social construct and practice for enhancing individual autonomy alongside a commitment to developing a sense of community.

While the four articles stand on such commonalities, they address different aspects of togetherness as well. Specifically, Tanggaard’s article proposes a new, updated paradigm of creativity with a focus on togetherness. She points out the fact that creativity is often dependent upon support from others. Exploring such a social conception of creativity and its implications on education, Tanggaard argues that the ability to work together in a team or group is crucial for creativity; as it often facilitates the much sought-after goal of achieving novel and innovative outcomes. In this regard, Tangaard proposes a ‘we-paradigm’ that values ‘a broad and inclusive multicultural idea of creative education’ as an essential component for cultivating humanity in a global age.

Lieberkind’s article titled ‘Democracy and togetherness: Between students’ educational and political status’ explores the link between democracy and togetherness within the Danish primary and secondary school context. Lieberkind’s main argument is that ‘the Danish educational system is based on, and promotes, a strong, “educationalized” version of democratic togetherness.’ To support her argument, Lieberkind provides a descriptive statistical analysis of Denmark’s results in the 2009 International Civic and Citizenship Education Study and the 2015 National Student Wellbeing Survey. Based on her empirical analysis, Lieberkind concludes that ‘the educationalization of society is changing the conventional forms of politics and, consequently, young people’s attitudes towards society and their sense of togetherness as motivation for intellectual freedom, equality, and democracy.’

Jantzen’s article delves into two distinctive but interrelated perspectives on togetherness. He reviews how togetherness can be seen in relation to students´ participation and thereby, how togetherness can serve to create meaningful and inclusive processes in schools. In doing so, Jantzen highlights that togetherness is not only a means for promoting student participation, but also an aim for the school curriculum more largely. He further emphasizes that by being together with others, we can develop our culture, identity and society, which leads him to a conclusion that ‘future school research should focus on identifying the ability to nurture and view togetherness as a parameter of quality – especially from a multicultural perspective.’

In the last article of the special issue, Mason contextualizes togetherness in relation to Denmark’s homogeneity, providing a brief historical account of the Danish social system and political history. At the same time, he critically notes some multicultural challenges in current understandings and practices of togetherness in relation to the growing trend of immigration, and how it may influence existing school and societal configurations in Denmark. With this in mind, Mason discusses how schools and communities can cultivate a constructive sense of belonging and how education can play a role in broadening togetherness for greater inclusivity.

We believe that the four articles included in this special issue provide a meaningful snapshot of the ‘togetherness’ that is embedded in the social rituals and awareness of the Danish people. Collectively, the articles show how a ‘we over me’ atmosphere (Wiking, 2016) is a critical feature of the ‘togetherness’ that permeates everyday life for the Danes. In this regard, togetherness functions as kind of (informal) social support network which, in turn, seems to contribute to the high levels of happiness observed in Denmark (cf. Wiking, 2016). Of course, in saying this we are also acutely aware that Denmark has its own significant challenges and issues, including huge private debt levels, one of the highest rates of death from cancer, and the increasing social tension and anxiety in response to the influx of immigrants, to name a few (cf. Booth, 2015). Therefore, the underlying purpose of this special issue is not to simply romanticize the Danish experiences of togetherness, but to critically examine what the Danes’ experiences of ‘togetherness’ may be able to offer to the field of multicultural education. For example, some of the articles in this special issue attempt to problematize togetherness, and in doing so, unveil certain challenges and difficulties of tapping into the potential of ‘togetherness’ for multicultural education and society.

We hope that the special issue provides an academic and thought-provoking platform for researchers and practitioners to further explore and interrogate ‘togetherness’ as a lens and motivation for researching and facilitating multiculturalism in Denmark and beyond.

Acknowledgement

This special issue was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea [NRF-2017S1A3A2065967]. The lead editor of the special issue appreciates Jakob Clausager Jensen at Efterskoleforeningen (Efterskole Association in Copenhagen, Denmark) for his support for the special issue project.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.