When and how do pedagogues (Danish: pædagoger, may also be referred to as social educators) use their knowledge and skills in pedagogy when working with ethnic minority children in school and school-based leisure time facilities? The objective of the study to be presented is to obtain knowledge on how pedagogy, understood in the continental tradition of allgemeine Pädagogik and Bildung (Kant, 1899; Benner, 2012), may qualify working with ethnic minority children and thus enhance ethnic minority children’s possibilities for participation.

In a Danish context, studies have shown that teachers and pedagogues often underestimate ethnic minority children’s abilities to cooperate with peers, self regulate, and demonstrate empathy. Thus professionals in school seemingly tend to undervalue the social and linguistic competencies of ethnic minority children while focusing more on deficiencies (Bundgaard & Gulløv, 2008; Gitz-Johansen, 2003, 2006) and teachers’ internal assessments of boys, pupils with low educated parents and pupils with migrant background are systematically lower compared to these groups’ external exam scores (Rangvid, 2015). Furthermore, a Danish survey shows that pedagogues in Danish day care institutions estimate ethnic minority children to be less empathetic than majority children (Ministeriet for Børn, Undervisning og Ligestilling, 2016). However, it seems not thoroughly investigated how professionals in education can become better at, and more aware of, using their basic, pedagogic knowledge and skills when encountering ethnic minority children. This is especially relevant in a social justice perspective because of ethnic inequality in education (Christensen, Egelund, Fredslund & Pilegaard Jensen, 2014) and social inequality in education (Andrade & Thomsen, 2016), which the Danish school reform from 2014 aims at reducing. Among other things, the reform implies a prolonged school day in which pedagogues play a larger role and leisure-oriented activities are integrated into the school days.

The study aims at exploring how pedagogues work with ethnic minority children aged 6-10 during school days and at school-based leisure time facilities, with a special focus on whether and how their practice may be seen in a perspective of the tradition of Pädagogik and Bildung implying the pedagogical paradox of how to develop individual autonomy through force and external regulation, which requires use of pedagogues’ judgment as well as acceptance that practice and its results are not fully foreseeable and controllable.

The study builds on the assumption that while on the one hand ethnic minority children, qua structurally underprivileged, would benefit from Bildung oriented practice, on the other hand they seem to be likely to experience less of this kind of practice than ethnic majority, middle class children. This could mean that pedagogues tend to focus more on external regulation and less on cultivating the children’s own individual autonomy. In other words, the study aims at researching how Bildung oriented practice may be used in intercultural educational settings to enhance possibilities for participation for minority children in a social justice perspective.

In analysing the empirical data, the Bildung and pedagogy perspective is supplemented with theoretical insights from intercultural and multicultural education such as Parekh (2000) and Banks & Banks (2004). While such perspectives never gained much attention in Denmark (Kampmann, 2011) Bildung perspectives have been more predominant, though however recently, as in many European countries, evidence based concepts focusing on learning outcomes have become prevailing (Biesta, 2010). Hence, the project will analyse and discuss the empirical findings in light of current theoretical discussions of school effectiveness, multicultural education, and Bildung, as well as comparing these perspectives and exploring how they potentially influence practice. 

The project builds mainly on ethnographically inspired fieldwork conducted over a year. Data is collected in two different elementary schools in Danish middle sized cities, where pupils are of both majority Danish origin, with long term residence migrant background, and with newly arrived refugee background. Separate leisure time facilities are connected to each school. Observations of pedagogues are carried out both during school hours and in the school-based leisure time facilities, where the children spend the afternoons. At each school, four pedagogues are observed during two periods of five to six weeks. Observations are carried out by a research team consisting of three researchers and three 3rd year students from the BA in Social Education, functioning as research assistants. Observations are followed up with interviews with the pedagogues.

The project is expected to generate new knowledge on whether and why pedagogues exercise their pedagogical knowledge and skills in their everyday work with ethnic minority children in school and in school-based leisure time facilities, and thus generate knowledge on how pedagogy may strengthen children’s opportunities for participation both in their current peer groups, in the learning environments in school, and in society and democracy in a broader sense in the future. The aim is thus not to develop new concepts, methods or techniques, but rather to obtain practice directed research, which by collecting, analysing and disseminating practice examples may contribute to discuss understandings of pedagogy that will be relevant and applicable in the everyday practice of pedagogues. The project’s research contribution aims at showing how pedagogues’ pedagogic and Bildung oriented practices may be especially beneficial for children, who otherwise often experience barriers for participation in different communities, such as ethnic minority children. Furthermore it will be discussed whether and how a Bildung oriented perspective may be combined with intercultural or multicultural education perspectives.

Andrade, S. B. & Thomsen J.-P. (2016). Uddannelsesmobilitet i Danmark. København: SFI, Det Nationale Forskningscenter for Velfærd. Banks, J. A. & Banks, C. A. M. (2004). Multicultural Education: Issues and Perspectives (5. ed.). Hoboken, N.J.: Wiley. Benner, D. (2012). Allgemeine Pädagogik. Eine systematisch-problemgeschichtliche Einführung in die Grundstruktur pädagogischen Denkens und Handelns, 7. korrigierte Aufl. Weinheim; Basel: Beltz Juventa. Biesta, G. J. (2010). Why ‘What Works’ Still Won’t Work: From Evidence-Based Education to Value-Based Education. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 29(5), 491-503. Bundgaard, H. & Gulløv, E. (2008). Forskel og fællesskab. Minoritetsbørn i daginstitution. København: Hans Reitzels Forlag. Christensen, V. T., Egelund, N., Fredslund, E. K., & Pilegaard Jensen, T. (2014). PISA Etnisk 2012: PISA 2012 med fokus på unge med indvandrerbaggrund. København: KORA, Det Nationale Institut for Kommuners og Regioners Analyse og Forskning, 978-87-7488. Gitz-Johansen, T. (2003). Skal vi reparere børnenes "fejl" eller kvalificere deres forskelle? – kompensatorisk eller multikulturel pædagogik. I: C. Horst (red.), Interkulturel pædagogik. Flere sprog – problem eller ressource? Vejle: Kroghs Forlag, 199-216. Gitz-Johansen, T. (2006). Den multikulturelle skole – integration og sortering. Frederiksberg: Roskilde Universitetsforlag/Samfundslitteratur. Kampmann, J. (2016). Multikulturel og interkulturel pædagogik i skolen? In Kristensen, H. J. F., & Fibæk Laursen, P. (Eds.). Pædagogikhåndbogen: otte tilgange til pædagogik. København: Hans Reitzel. Kant, I. (1961 [1899]). Über Pädagogik. Bochum: Verlag F. Kamp. Ministeriet for Børn, Undervisning og Ligestilling (2016). Børns tidlige udvikling og læring – målgrupperapport (af Rambøll Management Consulting, Aarhus Universitet, UC Nordjylland og Danmarks Evalueringsinstitut). Parekh, B. (2006). Rethinking Multiculturalism: Cultural Diversity and Political Theory (2. edition ed.). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Rangvid, B. S. (2015). Systematic differences across evaluation schemes and educational choice. Economics of Education Review(48), 41–55.