Recognising and responding to radicalisation at the ‘frontline’: Assessing the capability of school teachers to recognise and respond to radicalisation

Abstract

Governments across the west have put teachers at the forefront of efforts to tackle radicalisation of young people based on their proximity to potentially vulnerable students. This has proven controversial, as critics claim that this securitises teachers’ work and that they cannot be expected to accurately identify and respond to extremism. Despite investment in P/CVE teacher training, research to assess teachers’ competence to identify signs of radicalisation and to respond in an appropriate manner is scarce. This article presents findings from a survey experiment with 2,173 teachers in Great Britain and Denmark. It shows that British and Danish teachers largely recognise radicalisation cues and respond to student radicalisation in similar ways. However, our data shows that British teachers are more likely than Danish teachers to react formally (e.g. report to authorities), and that British teachers feel more confident in reacting to signs of radicalisation. The results enhance our understanding of the effects of radicalisation prevention in schools. Furthermore, they challenge arguments within the extant literature by suggesting that what leads to concerns of radicalisation is not entirely subjective or completely context dependent.

The meanings, risk factors and consequences of religious extremism: The perceptions of Islamic education teachers from Israel

“…The teachers reported on three patterns of risk factors (personal, religious and socio‐political) that might trigger students' religious extremism. They seem more confident, compared to previous studies, to evaluate signs of radicalisation and to respond to them as part of their safeguarding duty (Moffat & Gerard, 2019; Parker et al, 2021). These patterns, the author argues, may function separately or in combination.…”

“…Religious education teachers, because of their intimate relationships with students, are well placed to identify and prevent religious extremism in schools and the larger society (Parker et al, 2021). This study explores Islamic education teachers' perspectives on religious extremism among their Arab Muslim students in middle and high schools in Israel.…”

Safe Space, Dangerous Territory: Young People’s Views on Preventing Radicalization through Education—Perspectives for Pre-Service Teacher Education

“…From the students' perspective, the fears of being labelled as radicalised have limited the scope, depth, and possibilities of educational discussions on sensitive topics that students want to engage in class and prevented some of them from seeking psychological support from the school's well-being personnel in the fear of stigma [71][72][73][74][75]. Overall, the PVE-E policies approached from a monitoring perspective may heavily undermine the trust of the students and their families in the teachers and the education system as a place of support and help, and have a long-term toll on the well-being of the students [2,5,68,76]. The lack of trust and higher thresholds for seeking socio-emotional support may indeed hinder the general feeling of safety in educational institutions and increase the risk of radicalisation.…”

“…The challenges these developments pose for societies and their educational institutions are growing and becoming more complex [2][3][4][5]. As possible approaches for the prevention of violent attitudes, radicalisation, and extremism in education, authorities and scholars from various fields have suggested, for example, peace education [6], citizenship education [7], religious education [8], or fostering of national values [9].…”

Threshold of Adversity: Resilience and the Prevention of Extremism Through Education

“…However, numerous studies highlight teachers' puzzlement about these suggested duties or responsibilities regarding the prevention of radicalization (Parker, Lindekilde & Gøtzsche-Astrup, 2020;Mattsson & Johansson, 2020;Ragazzi, 2017;van San, Sieckelinck & de Winter, 2013). Many questions remain open especially regarding the objectives and pedagogical implementation of such responsibilities, which, together with the vague definitions of the key concepts, make tackling this mission challenging (Sjøen & Mattsson, 2020;Mattsson & Säljö, 2017;Ragazzi, 2017;Grossman et al, 2017;Christodoulou, 2020).…”