The experiences of Dutch high school teachers when discussing historic and present-day racism in class

(1)

|

The Experiences of Dutch high school

teachers when discussing historic and

present-day racism in class

MASTER THESIS

MASTER SOCIAL AND CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY

SPECIALIZATION: APPLIED ANTHROPOLOGY

UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM

Sientje Trip

Student number: 12774219

Supervisor: Dr. Yatun Sastramidjaja Second reader: Dr. Anne de Jong Word count: 25.952

(2)

1

Declaration:

I have read and understood the University of Amsterdam plagiarism policy

[http://student.uva.nl/mcsa/az/item/plagiarism-and-fraud.html]. I declare that this assignment is entirely my own work, all sources have been properly acknowledged, and that I have not previously submitted this work, or any version of it, for assessment in any other paper.

(3)

2

Abstract

This research explores the negotiability of systemic and structural racism in Dutch high school education, from the dominant discourse in the mandatory curricula to the approach of related topics in the classroom. Specifically in relation to the Dutch slavery history. I examine the experiences of high school teachers in two high schools, a city and a suburban high school, in The Netherlands. I focus on the views of the teachers on what makes certain topics sensitive to discuss in class, how they approach these topics and what this means for the course of these classes. This then established the central question in this research;

How do teachers in Dutch high schools view and approach sensitive national histories and their present-day consequences?

To do this I dive deeper into the concepts of white innocence and white privilege (Wekker 2016), the idea of a post-racial society (Valluvan 2016) connected to the concepts of mental heritage (Van Stipriaan 2015) and social reproduction (Appelrouth & Edles 2016), to then further understand the way in which change in attitudes and actions cultivate through the concepts of internal contradiction (Berliner 2016) and moral-breakdown (Zigon 2007). I conclude this research by shedding light on the experienced discomfort felt among many high school teachers while discussing these sensitive topics and the variations of this discomfort as a result of class composition with different outcomes in the execution of the classes. Ultimately I conclude with how this can be changed which is presented in advice reports made in cooperation with my partnering organization Critical Mass which can be seen in the appendix of this thesis.

Keywords: Education, Discomfort, White innocence, White privilege, Mental heritage,

(4)

3

Acknowledgments

I would first like to start by thanking my amazing supervisor dr. Yatun Sastramidjaja for her great guidance, support and feedback during my thesis process. Despite being on the other side of the world and being in the midst of a pandemic, putting us both in lock-down situations, she continued to guide and help me both academically as well as looking out for my mental health during this whole process. I greatly admire your knowledge and expertise which has taught me a lot during my fieldwork and writing process and feel honored to have had you as my supervisor.

Adding to this I would like to thank the two schools I did my research at for allowing me to come into their workspace and opening up about their experiences and feeling surrounding sensitive topics in their class as well as letting me observe some of their classes. Then my partnering organization Critical Mass, not only for allowing to do my research in partnership for you and working together on advice reports for the schools but also for the work they do. I truly believe that organizations like Critical Mass, even if it is in small steps, contribute to becoming a more mindful and reflective and ultimately create a more inclusive society.

Last but not least I would like to thank my friends and family for supporting me through this year long process. Listening to all my experiences and things I was learning along the way, checking in I was not overworking myself and of course my mother for helping me proofread my written work to make it the best possible version. A special thanks to Nikki, Katie and Isis for keeping me on track from a distance while writing in social isolation restrictions. Our daily zoom workroom meetings where we all worked on our thesis, held each other accountable to do the work we set out for ourselves that day, keep each other motivated and help each other out where possible have helped me out more than you may know. So, thank you for that.

(5)

4

1. Introduction

Growing up in the Netherlands I always learned we are a tolerant and diverse country. We have a rich history with connections all over the world and are open to all sorts of ideas, people and religions. Getting older, my eyes are opening more to other perspectives and thus other sides of this story. Yes, the Netherlands has a rich trading history with the VOC and WIC, had colonies all over the world and has, partly because of that history, a diverse population. That was however not all glam and gold. Throughout that history we, as a nation, also played a big part in the worldwide slave trade, slavery in general and the resulting structuralization and institutionalization of racism. This has resulted in the Dutch culture, in many ways, developing into a colonial culture with visible legacies to this day (Legene 2010:8 in Wekker 2016:123). This part of our history was only lightly brushed upon in my education at a small town primary school and later big city high school. This made me wonder, why is this history hardly spoken about in schools, was this how all schools manage these subjects and are we really as tolerant now as we make the rest of the world and ourselves believe?

That racism and discrimination are not just a phenomenon of the past and that we might not be as tolerant as we make to believe is demonstrated in a recent report published by Tendayi Achiume1 on issues of racism and discrimination in The Netherlands (Achiume, 2019). In this report Achiume refers to, among other things, the importance of education in tackling still present issues of racism and discrimination in the Netherlands.

“Education on the history and legacy of slavery and colonialism (…) is urgent in the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Especially for people who understand themselves as native Dutch, their ability to fully understand their relationship to ethnic and racial Dutch minorities and the ways in which race privileges some while subordinating others is contingent on greater engagement with this history.” (Achiume 2019: 5).

She also raises the issue of Black Pete [Zwarte Piet], where she describes the racist aspect of the character and the unequal police protection and punishment anti-Black Pete protesters have been subjected to. This issue of Black Pete is a very blatant controversy of current racism and the history of the character that comes to full debate every November and December in The Netherlands around the yearly Sinterklaas holiday. There is a growing polarization between

1_{Special rights rapporteur of the Human Rights department of the United Nations.}

https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Racism/SRRacism/Pages/IndexSRRacism.aspx (Accessed on 16-12-19)

(7)

6

those people opposing and those defending the use of Black Pete, in his current appearance, in this tradition. The opponents of Black Pete say he is a racial figure promoting and normalizing stereotyping on the basis of race as well as the idea of one white person [Sinterklaas] being superior to his solely black submissive helpers. Advocates of Black Pete say it is an old Dutch tradition which should therefore not be touched by foreigners and that the appearance of Black Pete is not racist as it is part of an innocent childrens’ holiday. A link can here be seen between the lack of knowledge about our history with racism and slavery and the lack of understanding why a black faced figure like Black Pete is experienced as being racist.

This discussion on Black Pete has been active for some time now through the Dutch movement ‘Kick Out Zwarte Piet’2. Dutch media attention to this, and the worldwide Black Lives Matter movement have increased since 25th of May 2020, when a Black American man named George Floyd was killed by police officers3. Following this, discussions in The Netherlands related to creating awareness on issues of racism, such as ethnic profiling by the police, on the job market, on the housing market, with the tax authorities and many other places, have expanded through protest and (social) media. Ongoing discussions like these show that there is still a long way to go regarding the fight against racism and discrimination in the Netherlands and that education can be a significant factor in this.

Numerous critical studies have been done on the lack of education in this field, the innocence of the white ruling class and the importance of more open discussion on racism and discrimination present and past. However, I believe not enough focus has yet been put on the experiences of teachers in this matter as they are often the ones to execute this necessary change in education. There are projects and curricula available to open this discussion within schools but for some reason this is not yet being implemented broadly. Within this research I will therefore focus on the teachers’ experiences and aim to fill the gap on what prevents teachers from opening or broadening the discussion on slavery history and present-day racism. I will focus on this education, or perhaps more the lack of it, from the perspective of the teachers. Why are subjects like the Dutch slavery history and its present-day consequences often only brushed upon in high schools?

Going in to the research I expected teachers to find it difficult to talk about this past and the contemporary consequences, or to see it as a non-issue for their students. Therefore I have looked at how teachers feel about these topics, how they discuss it in their classroom and what

2_{https://stopblackface.com/kozp/}

(8)

7

they need in order to be activated to go deeper into these subjects. I will do this by answering the following research question: How do teachers in Dutch high schools view and approach sensitive national histories, in particularly the history of slavery, and their present-day consequences? To answer this main research question, two high schools have been selected, one in a city and one in a suburban area, that will be studied for this research. This research is done in cooperation with Critical Mass as my point of reference which aims to increase social safety in schools by tackling social issues and taboos through interactive eye-opening projects.

Theoretical framework

In this research I look at dominant discourses in education, structural limitations experienced by teachers, agency and responsibility, (hidden) racism, the history of today’s social constructs and the possible anxieties or discomforts that come along with these topics. I focus on how high school teachers deal with matters of racism and discrimination in light of historical heritage, and how external organizations geared towards broadening social cohesion and inclusion can best translate their message towards schools.

The myth of Dutch tolerance and the post-racial society

This research was conducted in the Netherlands, a democracy with a history of wealth, trade and progressiveness, but also imperialism, colonialism, racism and inequality are an important aspect of its history. However, a rather common belief among its citizens is that they live in a tolerant and post-racial society. This entails the sentiment that contemporary liberal democracies, such as the Netherlands, have passed issues of race and racism and that any recurrence of racism or inequality are either merely unfortunate remnants of a fading past, or concern bad individuals within a good society (Valluvan 2016: 2241). Valluvan argues that precisely because of this post-racial sentiment, structural (racial) inequalities stay rather untouched, as there seems to be nothing ‘broken’ to ‘fix’. This sense of innocence can be seen for example in the Black Pete discussion referred to in the introduction. The innocence of being tolerant, an idea that many white citizens try to hold on to, is connected to a privilege not to have to worry about racism as it does not affect one's self personally, also known as ‘white innocence’ and ‘white privilege’ (Wekker 2016:18).The fact that the Netherlands is a relatively small country also contributes to this idea of innocence as being small is often linked to being innocent and good (Ibid: 30). This may be why, when talking about racism in education, teachers often look at bigger more prominent countries like the United States of America. This losing of innocence however does not only apply to a nation such as The

(9)

8

Netherlands as a whole, but also to the individuals within it. Even though losing this innocence by acknowledging previous and present-day racism does not automatically entail guilt, the unwitting feeling of losing this innocence often results in the covering up of structural racism and occasionally provokes racist violence (Ibid: 18). This again can be seen with Black Pete; as the voices against the current figure of Black Pete grow stronger and louder, so too do those claiming their innocence and that of their traditions. With this comes an increasing extent of racist exclusion, as well as verbal and non-verbal racial violence. Frequently black people in The Netherlands have been scolded as Black Pete through the years. However this has become more visible as the discussion has grown tenser in the media over the past decade, with many people defending their view that current day Black Pete has nothing to do with the Dutch history of slavery. This idea of tolerance or innocence allows people to disregard history and present-day racism, thus also to justify Black Pete (Hilhorst & Hermes 2015: 230).

Aspects that makes dealing with this past difficult are its legacies in the present-day society. This is shown by Van Stipriaan (2016: 92) who explains why the topic of the Dutch slavery history is such a sensitive subject and how the Dutch deal with this past. He explains it is one thing to have ancestors who were on the wrong side of history, it is however more difficult to discuss a past if one might still be part of the “bad guys” (Van Stipriaan 2016: 93). Also, most people identify with the ‘normal laborers’ from the past and not the ruling class responsible for occurrences like slavery. This can be linked to the present-day innocence still upheld, as stated by Wekker (2016), where the responsibility of racism is pushed to a higher class. Others claim not to identify with the past at all as their ancestors migrated to the Netherlands after the abolishment of slavery in 1863. However, to this Van Stipriaan (2016: 93) argues that once people identify with a nation they adopt its history, additional benefits and outcomes. Although the legacies of the Dutch history of colonialism and slavery are still seen in present-day societal and cultural relationships4, many Dutch citizens do not view this history as their shared history or heritage. Nonetheless, everyone living in the Netherlands now experiences legacies of this past, be it in the form of racism, privilege or national wealth.

As I will be comparing a city- and a suburban-high school, it is important to look at possible links between location, diversity, racism and discrimination. Although diversity is not solely present in urban areas, ideas of ‘others’ threatening the ordinary ‘us’ is often still based on media stories concerning ‘bad’ urban neighborhoods or anti-racial protests held in cities. In these media stories, as De Koning and Vollebergh (2019: 2) argue, ordinary iconic figures are

(10)

9

created as political techniques so that people have an, often fictitious, representative figure they can relate to within these national narratives. Well-known Dutch ordinary iconic figures are ‘Henk and Ingrid’. These refer to the ‘average’ white Dutch couple, who do not feel heard about their concerns. Besides giving people someone to relate to, these ordinary iconic figures also fixate them and others like them in a certain ‘box’. This fixation on putting people in boxes can be seen as a clear form of ‘othering’ which was first introduced into anthropology by Edward Said (1978). It refers to the idea of distancing one’s self from other groups, ‘the other’, who in your eyes have different characteristic to your own and with that highlighting one’s own group on the basis of certain characteristics one feels a connection to and views as correct. This way of thinking can also be seen in education through which one’s own nation or group is compared to ‘others’, when learning about one’s own history in relation to other nations. For example when learning about national explorers, global trade, religion and colonialism.

This othering and seeing oneself as living in a post-racial society connects to the historic and ongoing silence on the Dutch slavery history. In his article ‘Silence and the politics of compassion’, Balkenhol (2016) shows the development of the progress in Dutch politics concerning breaking the silence of the Dutch slave trade and slavery history. He uses the politics of compassion to describe “The political mobilization of a particular emotion in negotiations over the nation, citizenship and belonging” (Balkenhol 2016: 279). This can be tied to the previously mentioned ordinary iconic figures and concept of othering as this shows the emotions in the discourse surrounding a nation’s identity. Here the emotion regarding the hidden fear of losing one’s innocence and not being heard is often politically used. The previously noted idea of a tolerant and post-race society gives ground to these current racial discourses (De Koning & Vollebergh 2019: 7). For example, ‘Henk and Ingrid’ are addressed and told they are heard in their fear of losing Dutch national values, such as tolerance and hospitality, because of the growing number of non-white citizens. This seems to be an effective political strategy, considering the popularity of anti-immigrant parties such as the PVV, which is currently the second biggest party in our government5. Such parties aim their politics of compassion towards figures like ‘Henk and Ingrid’.

Following the idea of white innocence, people often claim to be anti-racist while seemingly not being aware of the racism they or the people around them practice in everyday life. This contradiction between ideas of innocence and actual actions can also be understood through the theory of ‘internal contradiction’, where people live with certain principles but

(11)

10

uphold opposing attitudes (Berliner et al., 2016:4). This internal contradiction is often an unconscious occurrence for one to be able to live a peaceful life, at peace with one’s own decisions and actions. Here, unconscious is not meant in the sense that one is not aware of one’s choices but rather that, to be at peace with our decisions, our minds choose not to focus on the contradiction between our actions and principles. This internal choice of not putting in the effort of assimilating ones principles to ones actions links back to the idea of white innocence; as a white person one has the privilege the acts and effects of racism can be ignored as they do not influence one’s own life (Wekker 2016). In this research I will be looking at the principles teachers say they live by and the action they show and describe. If there is a difference between these two, can it be considered an internal contradiction or be seen through the compartmentalization principle which “overcomes the idea of a split between two or more opposing forces that would fight within the individual and renders possible the coexistence of contradictions” (Berliner et al., 2016: 3). Internal contradictions tend to be sustained unless they are explicitly revealed as such, which may provoke an internal moral-breakdown (Zigon 2007). Zigon (2007: 133) describes this moral-breakdown as; “The need to consciously consider or reason about what one must do which arises in moments that shake one out of the everydayness of being moral”. This may become the starting point for the adoption of new ideas and attitudes and with that hopefully also actions (Ibid: 140). This moral-breakdown, or the moment of problematization, is when the ethical moment occurs where change in attitude and action can transpire (Ibid: 137). This is where critical education can play an important role, as will be explained below.

Dominant discourse in the mandatory narrative of educational curricula

While looking at (hidden) racism, it is important to state that racism is dynamic, a collection of beliefs and practices embedded in a particular social context that over time finds new ways of expression. It is the combination of othering and seeing this other as inferior, based on racial aspects, within both an ideological construction as well as legal, political and social discriminatory constructs (MacMaster & Black 2001:2). Here the hidden and dynamic aspect correlate with one another as racism constantly finds new political, social or linguistic forms fitting new times and social formations (Ibid.). This way of looking at racism can also be related to education, or the relative lack of it, of the Dutch national history surrounding sensitive pasts such as slavery. Exactly this relative lack of focus on Dutch slavery history or the focus on solely the Dutch prosperous side of colonialism can here be seen as a form of hidden racism

(12)

11

where the people within the colonies are reduced to inferior others within the construct of Dutch history books.

An important aspect within the conversation on sensitive pasts is to be aware of the relations of power and inequality in language, and within that the inequality in required narrative sources in education. It is the institution, which is frequently run by the dominant group, which establishes these narrative sources within their institution. Detailed attention to narratives and power relations are therefore essential to educate on these historical power relations (Blommaert & Bulcaen 2000: 458). Important here is the idea of social reproduction which consists of the reproduction of layered, hierarchical relations which divert or resist radical change by those who dominate the social space (Appelrouth & Edles 2016: 670). This can be seen in the way the dominant group, who occupy most places in national governments, either have in the past or still continue to resist radical change regarding breaking a silence and the idea of innocence of the nation in its own (slavery) history. This can also be understood through the concept of ‘mental heritage’ which refers to the worldview of a people that helps decide which material and immaterial heritage should stay or go within their society (Van Stipriaan 2015: 410). Here the post-racial worldview helps decide not only which material heritage is visible in society, such as street names or statues, but also which immaterial heritage is sustained, such as the continuation of a certain view on national history by the next generation through a mandatory curriculum as well as the cultural consequences of this history.

The mandatory narratives and curriculum in schools are imposed by our government based on the dominant discourse held by those in power. When it comes to education on history, emotions on the nation, citizenship and belonging are likely to play a part when these curricula are made or instructed on, as Balkenhol (2016) argues. This can be seen in the content of the national historical Canon [De Canon van Nederland] which states “what every citizen in any case ought to know about the history and culture of the Netherlands” (Balkenhol 2016: 280). Here the grand narrative, and thus the dominant discourse within the education system, that is being communicated through this Canon sustains the idea of (white) innocence, tolerance, post-racism, strength and resilience of the Dutch nation both throughout its history and presently as a result of this history.

The national historical Canon is relatively stable but not unchangeable or uncontested, as seen in the motion to change it by TendayiAchiume of the United Nations as mentioned earlier. Through negotiations, steps towards acknowledging more silenced aspects of our history have previously been made. In 1998 a petition was accepted which demanded slavery to be recognized as a part of Dutch history and also to show the ‘damaging side’ of it (Balkenhol

(13)

12

2016: 280-281). Both Dutch politicians, scholars and international organizations like the UNESCO Slave Route Project agree that this silence has been here so long because it does not match the national Dutch identity of being tolerant and progressive, yet that this part of the Dutch history should be taken out of the silence (Balkenhol 2016: 281-282). I will be exploring if the above mentioned influence of national emotions of tolerance and innocence might also affect individual schools and teachers in how they discuss sensitive national histories. Schools and teachers are relatively free to decide how these subjects within the curricula are dealt with.6 This gives them a certain agency on how a class is carried out. Agency is here used as the freedom of making decisions on action one takes that one can reflect on such as designing one’s own classes (Eriksen 2010: 52). Here I will look at the teacher’s views on the dominant discourse regarding sensitive histories from a macro top down level of politics and the mandatory narrative of the curriculum, and how this translates to the meso level of the schools and the micro bottom up level of the individual teachers or classes.

Critical education

According to scholars in critical education theory, who based their ideas on the work of Bourdieu (1990) on social reproduction in education, educational institutions can be seen as possible central agencies of oppression that serve to legitimize social class differences between the dominant and marginalized groups in society (Brownlee 2013: 196). Examples of this are the dominant discourse and mandatory curriculum, as described in the previous section, as these legitimize and maintain inequalities and ideas of innocence and inferiority. This is of relevance for this research as I build on this theoretical approach by observing the role of teachers and discourse on education in relation to historic and present-day discrimination and racism. Within critical education theory, the notion of ‘reproduction theory’ arose which discusses the possible political nature of education with its connection to social groups (Ibid: 196). This can be understood through the political power of dominant social groups, both with the transmission of curricular knowledge as the maintaining of social class differences within a classroom. This notion of reproduction is also discussed by Lazar (2010: 200-201) where she describes the importance of critical education, both within and outside the main curriculum, to evoke a sense of political agency in students. For school is an important place where young people learn their citizenship both through the reproduction of curricula and social interaction. When looking at this last aspect, classroom relationships and the embodiment of certain social

(14)

13

practices and interactions can influence the feeling of collective belonging of the students as citizens. Lazar (2010: 201) goes on to explain how this power of reproduction based on classroom relations and social reproduction in class can even be seen to be as strong as parades or demonstrations in the evoking of a feeling of collective belonging. As collective belonging and political agency can often be products of critical education outside of the main curricula, it is important to focus on classroom relations both inside the physical classroom and outside. An example of education outside of the main (mandatory) curriculum and the physical classroom are projects done by outside organizations. These are offered in all sorts of ways, at the schools, in museum or on the streets, where extracurricular education is offered in new and often creative and sensory ways.

An example of such an extracurricular education project was a collaboration between the Tropenmuseum in Amsterdam and Van Stipriaan to critically educate people on the Dutch slavery heritage (Van Stipriaan 2016: 100). Van Stipriaan mentions how sensitive this subject was as the people involved had numerous discussions what to include and what not to include in the exhibition, to make sure it would be attractive enough for people to come (Ibid: 101). This emphasizes the sensitivity of the slavery history and its present-day heritage which some still see as a non-issue, and the ongoing innocence where it is not yet fully accepted to show all sides of this history and its legacy in that negative colonial light. When teaching about the slavery history in The Netherlands, the American slavery history is often more prominent than the Dutch slavery history (Mok 2011). This emphasis on the American history of slavery can be seen as an indication of the above-mentioned idea of innocence related to being small. Here an exhibition such as the one by Van Stipriaan, can try to undermine this idea by breaking with ‘naïve thinking’. This naïve thinking sees history as static experiences of the past which make the present appear normalized (Freire 2005[1970]: 92).

Heritage education can be complicated as it can be difficult to grasp when students do not notice legacies or consequences of these heritages themselves. It is important to point out these legacies to both majority and minority groups as this promotes intergroup dialogue and mutual understanding (Van Boxtel, Grever and Klein 2016: 12). In contrast, exposure to one-sided collective narratives, for example only from the majority point of view, can harm intergroup relations (Van Stipriaan 2016: 242). The key for educating on these topics is the creation of sensory experiences which help students connect to the history and with that, to the effects these have on the present (Van Boxtel, Grever and Klein 2016: 21). Especially for students that are privileged not to have to think about racism or discrimination because of their

(15)

14

majority position, such a sensory experience is important to establish conscientization7_.

Conscientization refers to the development of critical awareness of the structures that cause one’s current circumstances (Van Willigen, 2002: 37). Thus, when applied in a school setting, the educators have to be aware of the structural position students are in which influences their current circumstances. In order to achieve conscientization the educators should not impose the ‘correct answers’ on students, but rather help them achieve this critical awareness through a process of critical thinking and conversation. This will teach them to understand that the society around them is not fixed but can transform or be seen as a different reality (Rugut & Osman 2013: 24). For this, intergroup dialogue and critical thinking is necessary, in particular critical thinking that sees social structures and reality not as a static entity but as a process that can be transformed (Freire, 2005[1970]: 92). These ideas of critical education and conscientization can be the ambition and tools with which high school teachers can strive to engage their students in the development of political agency and citizenship while covering sensitive national histories, both in their mandatory curricula and outside of it.

Research questions, setting and population

In order to better understand the relative neglect of sensitive national histories in Dutch education from the experiences and perspectives of high school educators I have composed the following main research question:

How do teachers in Dutch high schools view and approach sensitive national histories, in particularly history of slavery, and their present-day consequences?

To help me answer the main research question I have formulated the following four sub-questions which acted as guidelines throughout the fieldwork. The first sub-question was: How

do Dutch high schools engage with sensitive national histories, related to slavery and colonialism, and present-day consequences in their curricula? This first sub-question is designed to map and interpret current educational practices surrounding these subjects. As mentioned before, schools and teachers are relatively free to decide how these subjects within the curricula are dealt with.8 It was therefore important to take a look at the main and extra curricula used by the teachers in the schools of this case study, as well as the chosen material

7_{Original concept by Freire (2005)[1970]}

(16)

15

like educational posters or arts to find out what is being referenced in these pieces and how teachers experience and approach this.

Answers to this first sub-question were then used during interviews and discussions for the following second sub-questions: How do teachers in Dutch high schools experience the

dominant discourse surrounding sensitive national histories and possible discomforts provoked by it? This second sub-question focuses on the experiences of the teachers surrounding the

discourse of these sensitive national histories. Here I use information gathered from the first sub-question, participant observation and interviews to try to uncover the experiences of the teachers on these topics and the curricula they use or are offered to use. This question is further geared to understand to what extent teachers experience racism within their own school and find a possible link between these national histories and present-day consequences. These first two sub-questions will be dealt with in the first empirical part of this thesis, chapter two, ‘White innocence and the myth of distance’.

In the second empirical part of the thesis, chapter three; ‘Dominant discourse and the struggle of being a teacher’, the last sub-questions will be used as guidelines and ultimately answered. Therefore the third sub-question is: What are the structural limitations teachers

experience in their daily work, focused on topics of sensitive national histories and their present-day consequences, within or outside of the mandatory curricula? This third

sub-question builds on the knowledge gathered through the first two sub-sub-question by focusing on everyday struggles the teachers experience as limiting to the education they can give to their students. This is done by looking at the way teachers approach their daily work regarding the related topics, what possible limitations they experiences and how they deal with these limitations.

The fourth and final sub-question is: How do teachers experience, approach and deal

with their responsibilities as educators, both within the mandatory curricula and outside of it.

This sub-question looks further than the mandatory curricula as it not only looks at the agency teachers have in their focus within this mandatory curriculum, but also looks at the additional responsibility and agency teachers experience with the choice and action of extra-curricular activities through organizations such as Critical Mass.

Ultimately the answers to these questions are aimed to identify which resources teachers feel they need to be activated, to help start or broaden the discourse on sensitive national histories and their present-day consequences in their school. Here the goal is to understand how teachers experience these topics, to what extent they might be considered non-issues and how teachers themselves feel they can best be reached and activated to broaden these discussions.

(17)

16

Here the link with the partnering organization of this research is made which will be further explained in the next section.

Setting and population

This research is done in cooperation with Critical Mass9_{, an organization that offers projects}

tackling social safety in classrooms, regarding difficult subjects, through interactive projects. As my aim for partnership in this research is to help them reach more schools and therefore more students, I have looked at schools in different environments that could have different approaches or views on the subject of sensitive histories such as slavery and its present-day consequences. I had therefore chosen two high schools in very different environments; one in a major city of the Netherlands, and one in a suburban town. Both schools prepare their students for university or applied sciences [HAVO-VWO], but they differ in their location and consequently in population.

My reason for choosing these two schools in these different locations is motivated by the different responses to the Black Pete discussion seen in big cities on the one hand, and suburban towns on the other. The national discussion surrounding the appearance of Black Pete has led more and more municipalities to change the appearance of Black Pete, from the traditional fully blackface figure with racial stereotypical characteristics, to a more ‘modern’ version which looks as if he has black swipes on his face from the chimney instead of a fully covered blackened face and has lost (some) of the racial characteristics like red lips and gold hoop earrings. However, it seems it is mostly big cities that have adopted this new Black Pete (Borst 2019). The changing population in western cities and the consequential growing diversity often has an effect on discourse in history classes (Grever 2011: 1). An urban background or suburban one can influence how children react on history lessons and therefore change the discourse of those lessons (Ibid: 10). I therefore expect to see a difference between the experiences and approach to sensitive national histories by teachers in a big city or outside a big city. Connected to this is that schools were chosen with different classroom compositions when it comes to majority or minority groups.

The first school is located in a large prominent city, a very ethnically diverse city, and has a diverse range of ethnicities in its student population. I have purposefully chosen a school that has a diverse range of ethnicities present but still reflects the nation’s population by not having a majority of non-white students (so-called ‘black schools’). This as I expect teachers

(18)

17

in these so-called ‘black schools’ already go deeper into subjects of discrimination and racism compared to a mixed or majority white school where discomfort and negotiations of different opinions will more likely be present. The second school is located in a suburban town (located around 30 kilometers outside of the big city in which the other school is located) which is, as stated by one of the teachers during a preliminary interview, a mostly white and rich area which is also reflected in the student population.

For this research I will be focusing on teachers, heads of the specific departments and members of the management team of the school. These are the actors who have the responsibility and agency to translate the mandatory curricula and current political and social developments into classes which educate the future generation of the nation. Among the teachers I will mostly focus on those who teach history, social studies [maatschappijleer] and citizenship lessons [burgerschapsles] for both the sensitive national histories as the present-day consequences. Additionally, teachers who have mentor classes, teach geography or a language will also be taken into account as topics of racism and discrimination can also be discussed in these class curricula. The teachers at both schools were predominantly white, majority male (though more so at the suburban school) and majority under the age of 35. For most of these teachers, their current school is the first school they started working full-time.

Within the setting of this research it is important to have clear from what angles and on what scale issues will be looked at. Starting from the macro level, which is understood in this research as the dominant discourse in society on certain topics. This dominant discourse is maintained and strengthened through a top down view of mandatory curricula imposed by the Dutch government. From this mandatory curricula come schoolbooks and other materials based off of this dominant discourse which then connects to the meso level of the individual schools who make use of these books and educational materials. Finally, within these schools I focus on the micro level of the individual teachers and classes. This last one is seen from a bottom up view as teachers can make use of their own agency how they approach the mandatory curricula and the available educational materials based off of this.

Methodology and operationalization

Comparative case study

For the purpose of this research I have conducted a comparative case study (Walford 2011) two schools. Despite its limitations of context dependency and lack of generalization connected to this form of research, like Flyvbjerg (2006: 224) I consider a case study to be the most suitable

(19)

18

method to gain a deeper understanding of the lived experiences and everyday practices of the teachers at issue from their point of view. This research is context-dependent precisely because experiences of individuals are always context based. I feel it would not do justice to the sensitive nature of the research if I choose for context-independent methods.

From this research I do not aim to make grand generalizations but rather, where possible, so called ‘petite generalizations’ which focus on the single case or similar cases (Stake 1995: 20). A so-called petite generalization is referred to when generalizations are made off of one or a few cases and thus cannot be deemed (grand)generalizations, though not less interesting or important (Ibid: 7). As this is a research in the form of comparative case study, this will also be the case here. By focusing on only two schools I was able to spend more, personal and in-depth time with my participants at both sites, while still being able to make comparisons between the two. This comparative aspect part did however carry the risk of focusing too much on differences between the two schools instead of also being open to similarities. Thus to make sure I kept and open and objective point of view on the data that I found, I was forced to check and correct myself on this when in the field.

Participant observation

Throughout my fieldwork I practiced ‘deep hanging out (Walmsley 2018), where I hung out in teachers’ lounges and talked to the teachers and staff there to gain rapport and help me familiarize myself in the field (O’Reilly 2012: 92). I did this by observing the physical surroundings, dynamics between teachers, as well as verbal and non-verbal communication and reactions to conversations as cues to a certain positioning in the discourse. As I have done overt research (Ibid.: 88), I made myself and my research known before entering the field which gives participants the chance to think about my subjects of interest before having these informal conversations. Reflecting on this balance between overt and covert and giving away my goals and interest to the participants I found myself sometimes struggling with finding the right moment when to give away more of my focused interest without shaping or guiding the data being collected. In practice, this was often done only once I had a sense of what the participants view was on the topic. This helped me to know how to frame or introduce the more focused interest of the research in such a way that probes the respondent to talk about their experience regarding that topic without shaping the conversations.

Although my focus is on the teachers and not the students, where possible, I also observed classes where these topics are discussed to further deepen this research. The goal was to see how teachers act in class while discussing these topics and how both the teacher and

(20)

19

students react to the topic and one another. This gave me unique insights which could not have been obtained through other research methods, such as the influence of classroom composition on the tone and emphasis in a class as well as the experienced discomfort of the teacher as a reaction to this composition. Another example is the interaction between a teacher and someone from an outside organization discussing sensitive topics in class through their offered extracurricular project.

In-depth interviews

After the stage of solely participant observation in the first two weeks I started conducting one on one in-depth interviews with teachers at the two high schools. Although I was open to any teacher who would agree to talk to me about my topics, I aimed to have most of these interviews with teachers of history and social studies as these are classes in which topics of the Dutch slavery history or present-day racism and discrimination are generally discussed. During these interviews I reflect on the data collected from (participant) observations made at their school, and tried to acquire their views and perspectives on sensitive subjects, the topics of historic and present-day racism, the current curricula and discourse surrounding these topics.

Focus group discussions

Lastly, I aimed to have focus group discussions at the end of the fieldwork period with a number of teachers to observe their interaction, generate their views and experiences and show possible different behaviors and responses in the presence of colleagues (O’Reilly 2012: 134-135). Unfortunately, due to the outbreak of the Corona (Covid-19) crisis and the resulting closing of the schools, I was only able to conduct this method at one school which I will shortly go further in to later on in this thesis. Fortunately I was able to conduct this focus group discussion at the city school before it closed. Four teacher participated, two of which solely teach history, one solely social science and the forth teaches in both classes. I was slightly nervous before the discussion started as I had never lead one of these discussions before. However, I knew that those joining were open to talk about their experiences as most had spoken to me on these topics while in the company of colleagues. Though this led to an interesting and rich discussion where every participant was able to share their experiences, in a next discussion I would like to focus more on the dynamic between the participants as I noticed some showed to be more dominant in the discussion compared to others. During this focus group discussion I made use of sensory experiences to evoke a discussion among teachers and shed light on any different perspectives they might have. Examples of this were material from extracurricular sources, including quotes

(21)

20

from current public debates in the media, and a poster created by the Black Archives10_{, an}

organization that collects and shares unacknowledged books, academic work and other archives written by, and from the perspective of black people. Lastly, this method was used as an idea generator tool on how the teachers feel they would best be activated in teaching about sensitive national histories, as focus group discussions are a good way to pinpoint possible problems and help generate ideas for future improvements (Khan et al. 1991:145). This information then helped me to formulate practical advice for Critical Mass as can be seen in the Appendix.

Discourse analysis

Besides the methods described above, I conducted discourse analysis of the materials presented at the schools, both in the form of books as well as posters and other forms of decoration in the hallways and classrooms. This method mostly served to map out the field, understand what my participants work with, which could then be used to build on during in-depth interviews and the focus group discussion. I would like to view this as a form of content analysis, though not as thoroughly or systematically as the method is often used and described. Although mostly known as a quantitative method, content analysis can also be used qualitatively by putting focus on interpretation and meaning of text (O’Reilly 2012:163-164). This method was applied by studying the schools’ schoolbooks and the national curricula Canon on relevant topics and other study material given to me by the schools. Here I looked at how much material they have on the relevant topics and if links are made between slavery history and present-day racism.

While analyzing the data, both during and after the fieldwork, I use the concept of critical discourse analysis, which refers to the relations of power and inequality in language (Blommaert & Bulcaen 2000: 447). This will be of interest when I look at the curricula and discourse on these sensitive topics in the schools. Here I analyze if there might be inequality in required narrative sources in education. As stated before, it is often the institution of education, which again is frequently run by the dominant group, which establishes these narrative sources in their institution. This is something I look for during the analyzing of my data as detailed attention to narratives is of importance to educate on history and historical power relations (Ibid: 458).

10_{http://www.theblackarchives.nl/meergeschiedenis.html I obtained this poster from the black}

(22)

21

Ethical considerations and applied research

Regarding the issue of ethics during my fieldwork, I had different aspects to consider. First of all, it is important to point out that informed consent was achieved before gathering of data. Here, informed consent was used as an understanding between me as a researcher and my participants about me using information I gather from them in my research and disclosing as much as possible what my research entails (O’Reilly 2012: 65). For each individual and group interview I ask the participants for informed consent to being interviewed and for the interview to be recorded for the purpose of transcribing it later on. Both schools had asked me to send in a short text explaining who I am as well as when and why I would be coming to the school. This gave the teachers the chance to let me or their supervisors know if they would not be open to participate in the research. Luckily no teachers had come forward against participating; quite the opposite, many approached me and wanted to tell their story. An important aspect of this trust is the assurance that their story will be anonymized and that any recording will only be used by me for research purposes.

I was fortunate that a lot of teachers were interested and keen to speak to me for my research and thus were also never against the recording of the one-on-one interviews as most teachers seemed to be aware up front of this practice. I did however run into a few moments that were somewhat new to me, that is when a teacher asked to be interviewed in the same area his or her colleagues were present, such as a communal working space or the teachers’ lounge. I found this both interesting and sometimes complicated as I was not sure how aware the teachers were of their surroundings considering the perhaps sensitive topic of our discussion like their view on the school, their colleagues or on topics like Black Pete and how much this might affect their answers.

As Van Willigen (2002: 48, 55) writes, anthropologists have to be aware of the potential harm they can do to their participants through conducting and publishing their research. This is something I had in mind often when talking to my participants, even more so when colleagues were present during an interview. An aspect that I had and still have to consider is tension my research could create within the schools where I conduct my fieldwork. I discuss different personal opinions regarding sensitive subjects in their field of work. I have to be aware of possible strong conflicting opinions and the consequence of this for the individual teachers. This is another reason why anonymizing is so crucial and why participant observation proved to be so valuable to ‘test the water’ for the general atmosphere at the school on how possible conflicts could arise. Knowing this before having in-depth interviews and discussing sensitive

(23)

22

topics allowed me to ensure a safe space for my participants to share their views and stories with me. This worked out well as I knew who felt safe to talk about topics in a group and who seemed to prefer to talk in private.

I feel my positionality as young white female may have helped to not be seen as a threat and therefore made the teachers feel safe to talk to me on the topic of racism. Reflecting on this, I think it was indeed the case as most teachers did not seem to be cautious with voicing their opinion in my presence and occasionally, in the case of white teachers which the majority was, referred to a group as our shared group. Although for this research in particular, as I was doing this research by myself, seemed to have a positive effect on the data collection. The fact that this most likely helped me did make me even more aware of the white privilege I benefit from myself and is something I am still learning to approach and deal with in the right way.

As I am partnering with Critical Mass but am not commissioned or paid by them, I had a certain freedom concerning what I focused my research on and what happens to the data I collect. When this research, and the partnership with Critical Mass, was set-up the focus within the research had been discussed and favored in different ways between the two parties. Critical Mass had initially favored more focus on the views and experiences of the students whereas I wanted to focus more on the teachers. This was later agreed on, though I did say I would observe and focus on the students where possible too. The main reasoning behind this decision is the fact that I do not have a background in pedagogics as well as the fact that I believe not enough research has yet been done on the viewpoints of the teachers as they often feel unheard. Furthermore, it is the teachers who ultimately decide what and how topics are discussed within school and often it is also the teachers who have to make the effort to connecting with outside organizations for extracurricular activities, thus making the teachers the most interesting and valuable to understand for both Critical Mass and myself.

Besides producing new academic knowledge, the research findings will also be shared with the two schools and Critical Mass. This will be done in the form of reports in which I show my findings, give advice based off of these findings, which in the case of the reports for the schools is combined with the experience and knowledge from Critical Mass. These reports can be found in the appendix of this thesis.

Although I will share my findings with Critical Mass in the form of an advice report, a presentation and meetings, the data will not belong to them. I should therefore have no issues sharing my findings with fellow researchers to broaden anthropological knowledge and data and where possible contribute to the discussion of racism in education. Through sharing my findings with the teachers I hope to create reflexivity and self-awareness and a broader and

(24)

23

more understanding discussion amongst the teachers regarding the topics of historical and present-day racism. Allowing and understanding of others to have the same emotions as oneself, be it from a different perspective, can be a good starting point to a more open courtesy conversation. This is necessary to prevent increasing polarization when striving to break the silence surrounding exclusion, discrimination and racism (Hilhorst & Hermes 2015: 230).

The effects of the Corona crisis on this research

The fieldwork for this research was set to start sixth of January 2020 and officially end the thirteenth of March, though with a little wiggle room to conduct some last fieldwork after that date. In the Netherlands all schools, therefore also those studied for this research, closed the 16th_{of March. Although most data was gathered already there was still one interview and a}

focus group discussion planned for the week of the 16th of March. Unfortunately this had to be cancelled as I was not able to visit the school nor did the teachers have any time as they suddenly had to change all ways of teaching to online schooling. Although, of course, as a researcher this felt very disappointing to me, as I felt my data was out of balance between the two schools, I understand and accept that these were unforeseen and extraordinary circumstances. Adding to that, I have learned from my teachers and my supervisor that we, anthropological researchers, usually have too much rather than too little data so that missing two interviews should not stand in the way of writing a strong, relevant and meaningful thesis. So that is what I have tried my best to do.

(25)

24

2. White innocence and the myth of distance

It is a little before 9 a.m. when I arrive at the always busy Amsterdam Central Station and walk to my fairly quiet platform. Once the train arrives I get in and find myself a window seat so I can watch the train leave the busy city and see how we pass meadows, to suburban residential areas and pretty old train stations. After about 30 minutes, joined by only four others passengers, I get out at my stop. I can see the school from the platform, it is a fairly big school building for a suburban town, I think to myself, with nice big sport fields across from it. I walk into the teachers’ entrance where you enter right where the lounge and working areas are. As it is only my second week in the field I am still a bit nervous to talk to people so I decide to walk around the building a little. It is fairly quiet as most students are in class, with just the sounds of kids talking and teachers trying to get them quiet coming from some of the classrooms. Along the walls of most of the hallways there are a lot of posters and artworks made by students fitting to the classes given in that hallway. I then make my way back to the teachers’ area as one of the history teachers had said he has some free time to chat with me a bit today. We find an empty work room to sit in and talk about all sorts of topics that come up in his history classes and how some can be more challenging than others. When I ask him if the slavery history is one of the hard ones for him he laughs a bit before answering:

“No, have you looked around you at all here? Yes we have some Iraqi and because of

the Hoogovens [a well-known steel factory in the area] we have some Turks but not very many, almost no one from Surinam or anything like that. Most of the students do not feel that much of a connection to it [een ver-van-hun-bed-show]. They will say things like ‘yes sir we know it was bad you do not have to tell us that anymore’. Something they do talk a lot about though is Black Pete, they can get really angry about that. Then you really hear those Nazi parents talking through them because they just repeat what they hear at home of course.” (Colin, Suburb, History, 2020).

One of the social science teachers has joined us at the big table and laughs as a response to that saying: “I do have more allies than before” (Sebastiaan, Suburb, social sciences, 2020). I wonder what he means with that, does he mean more students are against Black Pete just like him or the other way around? When I ask him if the school takes up a position when it comes to this topic he laughs again, “No, but I would find it funny if they did.”

(26)

25

This dialogue was very interesting to me as it made me curious how teachers felt about the topics of the Dutch slavery history and present-day racism. Furthermore, it made me curious to what extent the teachers feel these topics are relevant for their students and perhaps if their teaching on these topics is affected by the way they view and approach them. This in itself can have an effect on the mental heritage of a country; that is, as discussed in the theoretical section of this thesis, the worldview of a people that helps decide which material and immaterial heritage should stay or go within their society (Van Stipriaan 2015: 410). In this chapter I will discuss how teachers in the two schools where I conducted my fieldwork experience and approach these topics.

What makes a topic sensitive?

When researching how teachers view and approach sensitive topics in their class it is of course important to first find out what they actually experience as sensitive and why this is the case. As most of the teachers in the two selected schools were somewhat aware of the topic of my research, they all agreed that the slavery history is one of the sensitive topics. Other topics mentioned by teachers in both schools were for example the Holocaust and the Dutch Black Pete character. In the city school the Israel-Palestine conflict, the Turkish-Greek war and the Armenian genocide were added to that. In the suburban school they also mentioned the refugee crisis. But what, according to the teachers, makes these topics sensitive or difficult to discuss in class? For different topics teachers mentioned different reasons for why they might be experienced as sensitive. With regard to political topics, as whether something can be considered a genocide or not, which side of a war or conflict to support or whether one agrees with certain political viewpoints, the fact that people can have different points of views can make it sensitive. Students might have different viewpoints because of what they are told at home. As a teacher they want to shed light on other viewpoints but not dismiss or reduce what students have heard from the people they look up to at home. An example came forward when a history teacher was discussing the Turkish-Greek war with her class when a student disagreed with her story based on what he had learned from his grandmother:

“At that moment I found it hard to say okay that is great what you are saying but that story also has other sides. I do not want to hurt him or drastically change his world view. And I also do not want to put his grandma in a bad daylight, it is his family. I find that difficult yes, it is sensitive.”(Anouk, city, history, 2020).

(27)

26

Teachers sometimes struggle with how far they feel they should go in to a discussion when one of their students does not agree with what is being said by them as a teachers or by others in class. An example of a topic that often creates disagreements between students in class can be the already mentioned character of Black Pete.

Through this, an interesting difference came to light between the two schools. Many teachers of the suburban school pointed out to be conscious that they as teacher have a certain influence over their students which they have to exercise responsibly. “You have to be careful

that the kids do not fixate themselves too much on you, you have to be aware of the exemplary role you have as teacher.” (Colin, suburb, history, 2020). This feeling of responsibility, and in

a sense a form of power, seemed to make them more careful with exercising this. They explained their role as teachers should be to solely teach their students to think for themselves and back up their own arguments but not to push their students in a certain direction or tell the students how they themselves as teachers feel about sensitive issues. This also came forward in an interview with a history teacher where we discussed his feelings on wanting students to think a certain way or not and how he as a teacher should act on that:

“The only thought we should have as school is that we want them to form an opinion

and teach them how to deal with that. Not to make our students look at it a certain way you know. Because what kind of society are you living in then? What kind of school are you then? Then you are indoctrinating children. No matter if it is for the good or the bad, if it is pro or anti. That is something you have to stay as far away from as possible in my opinion. But at the same time I will also say, if there has to be a Black Pete then personally I think it should be a soot wipe [roet veeg](Black smears on the face imitating soot wipes instead of fully blackface).” (Dorian, suburb, history, 2020).

On the other side the teachers in the city school, though also aware of their influence and feeling the responsibility to teach the students to think for themselves as a priority, more often felt free and sometimes even obligated to sway the students to a certain view point. With that they also shared their personal opinion more freely. As one Dutch teacher explained how debates often carried out in his class and how he involves his own views in this: “Yes, then I give them that

[his opinion], I am fairly direct in that. The students usually like that. That is also a way of trying to evoke a bit of a discussion (…) If I really feel a certain way about something I do try to pass that on to my students yes.” (Joris, city, Dutch, 2020). I believe this difference in

wanting to address certain topics more carefully or strongly and either leave out or emphasize one’s own views as a teacher are linked to the idea of white innocence and the feeling of

(28)

27

discomfort that can come when it is challenged. For example, when the controversial discussion of Black Pete came up, although most teachers in both schools say they feel the same way about the topic, namely that the characters appearance should be changed, the approach within the school and classrooms was often different. Teachers in both schools say their students are free to have their own opinion, as that is a right. However the city school teachers more often said they will share their views and say that, as city school, they do not support the outdated appearance. The suburban school on the other hand seemed more careful in being vocal on that matter. As the suburban school, and therefor also the individual classes, is majority or predominantly white, the white innocence has not been challenged (often) yet. I will go further into this agency and responsibility of teachers in the next chapter.

Returning to what makes certain topics sensitive, different reasons come up than those mentioned above that affect the experience of teachers when discussing them. Particularly in the case of the Holocaust and the Dutch slavery history. Both these events, and to some extent also some of the others, were based on racial and/or religious grounds, inferiority of a certain group in society of which this sense of inequality is still frequently experienced to this day. For that reason, teachers can often perceive these topics as more sensitive as this teacher explains: “Because there are still people alive that experienced it [The Holocaust] themselves. And also

the white and dark issue, which is so rooted in society, that is something very difficult.” (Anouk,

city, history, 2020). As shown in this quote, the teacher sees these topics as being part of contemporary society, rather than a closed chapter of the past. She sees it as a part of contemporary society that she disapproves of or at least is uncomfortable with and therefore as a sensitive topic to discuss in class. For some teachers, a further complicating matter in discussing these topics is the fact that most of them as teachers are part of the (ethnic) majority group and thus historically the oppressor side. As one history teacher said: “It is about

something that happened to a very specific population, look most people that teach are not necessarily Jewish or have a connection to slavery. So then how are you going to tell them as if you know how it was?” (Alexander, city, history, 2020). The teacher here shows how being

ethnically linked to the oppressors’ side of a historic event or system can bring up feelings of discomfort and uncertainty within the teacher.

The fact that these historical inequalities are still experienced by some people to this day would make it a very important and relevant topic to discuss in class. In both schools, teachers said this is indeed the case and continued to explain the assignments they set up for their students to discuss these topics. Assignments are set up in different grades in which the students can choose a certain topic to do some research on and write or make something about. In the

The experiences of Dutch high school teachers when discussing historic and present-day racism in class