There is growing recognition in the Netherlands of the need for a more equitable and inclusive educational system (Hosseini et al., 2021). In spite of these developments, however, equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) are not addressed directly in the legal qualification criteria for secondary school teaching (Rijksoverheid, 2005), and often have no formal position in teacher education curricula. Also missing in this context, is a shared language among educators regarding the goals of and approaches to inclusion (Hosseini et al., 2021). In international contexts such as the USA, the more critical, political and activistic concept of social justice-oriented teacher education (Cochran-Smith, 2004; Gorski & Dalton, 2020) has developed following decades of awareness-raising and research (Leeman & Reid, 2006). In the Netherlands, this movement is still unknown to many educators, and may be considered “radical” (Hosseini, et al. 2021: 18).

Research has shown that having teachers with whom they can identify contributes to learners’ chances of school success (Figlio, 2017) and that a diverse teacher population can enhance the learning of all students (Wells et al., 2016). Teaching staff in schools in the Netherlands – as in many countries – do not reflect the diversity of the communities they serve (Grootscholte & Jettinghoff, 2010). Thus, the teaching profession does not have enough opportunity to benefit from a broad range of experiences and backgrounds among teaching staff (Bijlsma & Keyser, 2021), which can serve to perpetuate systems of inequity and social injustice. As emphasized in Banks’ (2004) model of multicultural education, inclusive and equitable education takes place within a diverse and inclusive environment that has empowering and equitable social structures. Among factors identified as contributing to the lack of diversity among teachers in the Netherlands are low recruitment rates and high levels of attrition among culturally diverse teachers and student teachers (Grootscholte & Jettinghoff, 2010). In order to promote inclusive teaching and provide diverse teachers with access to the profession, therefore, it is necessary for ITE to be inclusive itself. This is in line with the ‘teach as you preach’ principle within many teacher education programmes, and also with conceptualisations of social justice-oriented teacher education that emphasise multilayered goals affecting student teachers’ practice as well as the environment in which they learn (Cochran-Smith, 2004).

Research has shown that EDI in teacher education is best addressed as an integral aspect of teaching and learning to teach, rather than in electives or standalone courses (Civitillo et al., 2018). Thus, not only a handful of specialists, but the whole team of teacher educators should ideally be involved. Teacher education for inclusion is likely to be heavily influenced by teacher educators’ beliefs, and the goals they ascribe it (Hosseini et al., 2021). The question is therefore, in a setting where widespread attention for EDI is a relatively recent development, what are the starting points of teacher educators and their students with regard to inclusive education? And how can we build upon their beliefs and experiences in order to design and implement an inclusive teacher education curriculum?

The study presented in this ignite talk is situated in the context of a university-based initial teacher education (ITE) master degree programme in the Netherlands. Carried out during a process of curriculum revision, the study aimed to explore the beliefs and experiences of students and teacher educators regarding EDI and its role in (teacher) education. Through examining the ‘starting point’, the aim was to inform and inspire the further development of the programme in ways that involve meaningful change while maintaining space for colleagues’ beliefs and perceptions of their role.

The project took the form of a small-scale, exploratory study carried out by a team of nine teacher educators in the role of participant-researchers. The team had been issued the assignment to develop the topic of diversity and inclusion as part of a larger curriculum revision in the ITE master programme. The team, guided by two team-members who were also researchers, collaborated to formulate the research questions, plan and carry out the data collection, and conduct preliminary analysis of the data. The research questions identified by the research team were: 1. Which beliefs on EDI in teacher education are expressed by teacher educators and student teachers? 2. What are experiences of teacher educators and student teachers regarding EDI in teacher education? The research team developed an interview protocol, based on the heuristic goal system laddering method (Janssen et al. 2013). In total, the team conducted 21 interviews with each other (n=9), their colleagues (n=5) and their students (n=7). Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed (with informed consent), and a summary of each interview was produced by the interviewer. The summaries produced by the interviewers fueled a discussion among the research team, during which broad initial analysis of the data was conducted. The team discussion was audio-recorded and later analysed along with the interview data. Following initial data analysis, a third research question was added, which will be the focus of this ignite talk: 3. How can the beliefs and experiences of student teachers and teacher educators be classified under the categories of equality, equity and social justice? For the in-depth analysis, a core team of teacher educator/researchers conducted thematic content analysis of the interview transcripts and team discussion. The analysis for RQ3 focused on the characterisation of the teacher educators’ and students teachers’ beliefs according to the three perspectives on equal opportunities presented by Hosseini et al. (2021): ‘equality’ (equal opportunities are created when everyone receives the same treatment); ‘equity’ (equal opportunities are created by compensating for the fact that different groups have different starting points); and ‘social justice’ (equal opportunities are created by reflecting critically on the societal structures that create inequality, and teaching learners to do the same).

Findings suggest that Hosseini et al.’s (2021) framework can be useful in highlighting and making sense of interviewees’ beliefs and experiences of inclusion. Examples were also found of areas in which the lines between the perspectives appeared to be blurred. Some views leaned towards a social justice perspective, for example arguing for awareness-raising regarding discriminatory language and firm positioning of EDI across the curriculum, based on the potential impact on the future of the profession. Elsewhere, emphasis was on valuing diversity, and responding to individual needs. While reflecting the equity principle of unequal treatment for equal opportunities (Hosseini et al., 2021), there was little attention here for the compensation of societal inequities. A dilemma raised pertained to concerns about censorship and academic freedom. This echoes an equality perspective, emphasizing providing equal space for all opinions, without reflecting on the influence of power or positionality on which voices are most likely to fill that space. The underlying argument, however, was that differences of opinion should be engaged with critically, as promoted in a social justice approach. Interviewees recognized this “paradox of intolerance” (Popper, 1945) and did not all feel confident about how to approach it or where to draw the line in order to maintain a safe and inclusive learning environment. The findings and methodology of this study have implications for locally and can serve as inspiration for international contexts where social justice is not yet part of the common educational vocabulary. The participatory methodology sparked motivation among the whole teacher education team to and place EDI firmly on the agenda for professional development and curriculum renewal. A move towards social justice will require attention for the roles of privilege, power and positionality. This will likely involve a lengthy and at times uncomfortable process, but may not be out of reach.

Banks, J. A. (2004) Multicultural education: Historical development, dimensions, and practice. In J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks (Eds.). Handbook of research on multicultural education (2nd ed., pp. 3-29). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Bijlsma, H. & Keyser, M. (eds) (2021) Erken de ongelijkheid. De kracht van diversiteit in onderwijsteams [Recognise inequality. The power of diversity in teaching teams]. Huizen: Pica. Civitillo, S., Juang, L. & Schachner, M. (2018). Challenging beliefs about cultural diversity in education: A synthesis and critical review of trainings with pre-service teachers. Educational Research Review. 24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2018.01.003. Cochran-Smith, M. (2004) Walking the Road: Race, Diversity, and Social Justice in Teacher Education. Teachers College Press. Figlio, D. (2017) The importance of a diverse teaching force. Brookings. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-importance-of-a-diverse-teaching-force/. Gorski, P. & Dalton, K. (2020) Striving for Critical Reflection in Multicultural and Social Justice Teacher Education: Introducing a Typology of Reflection Approaches. Journal of Teacher Education, 71(3), 357–368. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487119883545. Grootscholte, M. & Jettinghoff, K. (2010) Diversiteitsmonitor: Cijfers en feiten over diversiteit in het po, vo, mbo en op lerarenopleidingen. Een stand van zaken [Diversity monitor: Figures and facts on diversity in primary, secondary, further and teacher education]. Den Haag: Sectorbestuur Onderwijsarbeidsmarkt (SBO). Retrieved from https://vmbogroen.nl/_data/_archive/kieskleuringroen.nl/Onderzoek/Diversiteitsmonitor_SBO%201%20.pdf Hosseini, N., Leijgraaf, M., Gaikhorst, L. & Volman, M. (2021) Kansengelijkheid in het onderwijs: een social justice perspectief voor de lerarenopleiding [Equal opportunities in education: a social justice perspective for teacher education]. Tijdschrift voor Lerarenopleiders 42(4) Tijdschrift voor Lerarenopleiders 42(4), pp15-25. https://hdl.handle.net/11245.1/ef3aa0ea-ce66-433d-92ac-6dd7d7c573e9. Janssen, F.J.J.M., Westbroek, H.B., Doyle, W., & Van Driel, J.H. (2013). How to make innovations practical. Teachers College Record, 115(7), 1-43. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811311500703. Yvonne Leeman & Carol Reid (2006) Multi/intercultural education in Australia and the Netherlands, Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 36:1, 57-72. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057920500382325. Popper, Karl (2012) [1945]. The Open Society and Its Enemies. Routledge. p. 581. Rijksoverheid (2005) Besluit bekwaamheidseisen onderwijspersoneel [Qualification requirements for teachers]. Retrieved from https://wetten.overheid.nl/BWBR0018692/2018-08-01 Wells, A. S., Fox, L., & Cordova-Cobo, D. (2016). How racially diverse schools and classrooms can benefit all students. Education Digest, 82(1), 17–24. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/openview/fb50b0955e27bccd50ca20d87073704b/1.pdf?cbl=25066&pq-origsite=gscholar.