In recent years, racism in Norway has received increasing attention, with a number of studies and reports demonstrating how it manifests in various forms across different areas of society. Personal narratives and lived experiences of racism in public debate have emphasized that racism is a topical, contested and challenging issue in Norwegian public discourse (e.g., Døving, 2022). This is reflected in educational contexts where racism is understood as both sensitive, emotional and controversial (Sibeko & Eriksen, 2022). This entails a recognition of how racism as a topic tends to invoke strong emotions and polarized opinions (Faye, 2024, p.  2). Disagreement on how to define and identify expressions of racism as a phenomenon in present day Norway, constitutes a major reason for why the topic is challenging to discuss (Sibeko & Eriksen, 2022, p. 34). For instance, some studies suggest that many students view racism as an exceptional phenomenon associated with historical events such as apartheid or the Holocaust, or as a trait of morally and socially deviant individuals (see Hagen, 2021; Røthing, 2017). This suggests that students lack the conceptual tools and analytical frameworks to critically assess and reflect on racism as a contemporary and structural phenomenon.

Research on antiracist work in schools have advocated teaching practices that highlight structural perspectives on racism (c.f. Arneback & Jämte, 2022; Eriksen, 2021). Consequently, different pedagogical approaches, such as safe space, pedagogies of discomfort and brave space, have been suggested, with the purpose of sensitizing students to racism as a structural phenomenon, while simultaneously considering the sensitive nature of the topic (Flensner & von der Lippe, 2019). While the former emphasizes the need to create pedagogical spaces that protect the emotional safety of participants, the latter two concepts accentuate how experiences with discomfort and engagements in challenging conversations may act to produce important spaces for learning (Arao & Clemens, 2013). Inspired by these approaches, this paper explores how an inductive case-based teaching approach (see Lycke, 2016; Prince & Felder, 2007) can equip students with the analytical tools necessary to comprehend the various manifestations of racism within historical and contemporary contexts.

In this paper we present preliminary findings from a study of teaching sessions where four groups of students in higher education are presented with and discuss cases illustrating racism, othering and/or exclusion. The empirical material consists of transcripts, field notes and student evaluations from these teaching sessions. The paper explores which understandings of racism the students apply when discussing the cases, how they draw on each other’s understanding and how they deal with disagreements in the conversational process.

In our data collection, and in continued work with the empirical material, we view discomfort as a potential pedagogical resource in anti-racist education, while remaining attentive to who might experience it and not. A key concern has been, and is, to avoid portraying students with experiences with racism as illustrative examples or implicitly expect them to share personal experiences. Therefore, we have and continuously seek to establish conditions resembling what Arao & Clemens (2013) refer to as 'brave spaces' rather than 'safe spaces': spaces in which discomfort and disagreement are anticipated, but with clear boundaries regarding harm, personal exposure, and who may end up bearing the costs of others' learning.

We have adopted an inductive, case-based teaching approach, in which students discussed real-life cases and problem scenarios, after which they received subject-specific instruction (Prince & Felder, 2007, p. 14). First, students were provided with a set of historical and contemporary cases that can be interpreted as expressions of racism. The cases we used, were designed and selected to represent ambiguous forms of racism (Andersson,2022), in which the motives of those involved are unclear or contested. Working in groups of four to six for approximately 45 minutes, students discussed whether the cases constituted racism, whether they were uncertain, or whether they did not regard them as racism. This was followed by a whole-class discussion in which groups presented their interpretations and reflections. Second, Bjerke held a 45-minute lecture on theoretical perspectives on racism, followed by a second plenary discussion in which students reflected on how, and if, their interpretations of the cases had changed. Johannessen observed and took field notes during the lecture and plenary discussions. Our empirical material consists of observation notes from five teaching sessions (three in social studies within teacher education and two in intercultural studies), audio recordings of twelve group discussions, and students’ written notes. The material was analyzed using thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006), focusing on recurring patterns in the students’ discussions of and reasoning about the cases. All participants were anonymized, and informed consent was obtained. We have taken particular care in the handling of sensitive data, in accordance with national research ethics guidelines (cf. NESH, 2023), and the project has received a positive assessment from the Norwegian Agency for Shared Services in Education and Research (SIKT). Throughout the study, we have engaged in careful ethical reflection, particularly regarding our positionalities and power as instructors, and the sensitivity of the topic. In both lesson design and data collection, we have paid special attention to the interplay between power, discomfort and research ethics. The teaching was conducted by white, majority-positioned instructors in both relatively homogeneous groups of primarily white, majority-positioned students and more heterogeneous groups in terms of skin color, religious and cultural background. Consequently, some students may have personal experience with racism, while others may not. This means that both the teaching and the research took place in contexts where participants were positioned differently in relation to power and where discomfort and privilege was not evenly distributed (Røthing et al., 2024, p. 34).

While the analyses are ongoing, our preliminary findings point to several recurring tendencies in how the students understand and discuss the cases in relation to racism. We find that students during group discussion explore different perspectives, applying different frames of interpretation. However, most of the interpretations tend to apply an individualized lens (i.e. Midtbøen & Rogstad, 2010; Røthing, 2017, p. 114). For instance, discussions center on personal characteristics such as age, background, experiences, and particularly the assumed intentions of the individuals involved in the cases. Although relevant contextual factors are occasionally acknowledged, structural conditions and power relations are rarely foregrounded analytically. As a result, racism is often framed as an individual and psychological phenomenon rather than a relational and structural one. During group discussions the students appeared to be open-minded both towards sharing their interpretations, and towards the interpretations presented by other group members. Some also drew attention to and asked questions about the experiences of and points of view of other group members. This suggests that the case-based approach appears to create a space where students can collaboratively explore the topic and test different lenses of interpretation, without discernible sanctions. Still, racism is primarily framed as an individual and psychological phenomenon rather than a relational and structural one. This in turn may indicate that students lack conceptual tools to address structural forms of racism, or that they are wary of labelling themselves or others as being racist or committing racist actions.

Andersen, H. P., Fiskum, A. & Rosenlund, M. R. (2018). Hva menes med utforskende, undrende og aktiviserende undervisning? In H. P. Andersen, A. Fiskum & D. Gulaker (eds.), Den engasjerte eleven: Undrende, utforskende og aktiviserende undervisning i skolen (p.17-30). Cappelen Damm. https://doi.org/10.23865/noasp.35 Andersson, M. (2022). Rasisme: En innføring. Fagbokforlaget. Arao, B., & Clemens, K. (2013). From Safe Spaces to Brave Spaces: A New Way to Frame Dialogue around Diversity and Social Justice. In L. M. Landreman (ed.), The Art of Effective Facilitation: Reflections from Social Justice Educators (p.135–150). Sterling. Arneback, E., & Jämte, J. (2022). How to counteract racism in education – A typology of teachers’ anti-racist actions. Race Ethnicity and Education, 25(2), 192–211. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2021.1890566 Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa Døving, C. A. (ed.). (2022). Rasisme : fenomenet, forskningen, erfaringene. Universitetsforlaget. Eriksen, K. G. (2021). Mot utvidede forståelser av rasialisering og rasisme i skolen. Nordisk tidsskrift for pedagogikk og kritikk, 7. https://doi.org/10.23865/ntpk.v7.2445 Faye, R. (2025). Room for discomfort when teaching about racism. Front. Educ. 10:1520607.doi: 10.3389/feduc.2025.1520607 Flensner, K. K., & von der Lippe, M. (2019). Being safe from what and safe for whom? A critical discussion of the conceptual metaphor of ‘safe space’. Intercultural Education, 30(3), 275–288. https://doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2019.1540102 Hagen, F. S. (2021). Norske elevers konseptualisering av rasismebegrepet. Nordisk tidsskrift for pedagogikk & kritikk, 7, 147-162. https://doi.org/10.23865/ntpk.v7.2269 Lycke, K. H. (2015). Problembasert læring, caseundervisning og prosjektarbeid. I H. I. Strømsø, K. H. Lycke, & P. Lauvås (Red.), Når læring er det viktigste - undervisning i høyere utdanning (ss. 171-188). Cappelen Damm Akademisk Midtbøen, A. H. & Rogstad, J. (2010). Den utdannede, den etterlatte og den drepte: Mot en ny forståelse av rasisme og diskriminering. Sosiologisk tidsskrift, 18(1), 31-52. https://doi.org/10.18261/ISSN1504-2928-2010-01-03 NESH. (2023). Forskningsetiske retningslinjer for samfunnsvitenskap og humaniora. De nasjonale forskningsetiske komiteene. https://www.forskningsetikk.no/retningslinjer/hum-sam/forskningsetiske-retningslinjer-for-samfunnsvitenskap-og-humaniora/ Prince, M., & Felder, R. (2007). The many faces of inductive teaching and learning. Journal of College Science Teachning, 36, ss. 14-20. https://www.jstor.org/stable/i40116287 Røthing, Å. (2017). Mangfoldskompetanse: Perspektiver på undervisning i yrkesfag. Cappelen Damm akademisk. Røthing, Å., Johannessen, E. M. V. & Myrebøe, T. (2024). Meningsmangfold i klasserommet: Perspektiver, begreper og ressurser for lærere. Cappelen Damm akademisk. Sibeko, G. & Eriksen, K. G. (2021). Innganger til antirasistisk undervisning. In B. Goldschmidt-Gjerløw, K. G. Eriksen & M. K. Jore (eds.), Kontroversielle, emosjonelle og sensitive tema i skolen (s. 33–51). Universitetsforlaget.