Respondent 3 believes that, based on how a school and community is organised, a teacher will always be able to spot signs as there is often a great deal more going on. In addition, most teachers believe that as a teacher you have a ‘fingerspitzengefühl’ to notice signs. While respondent 2 agrees and believes teachers have a ‘social antenna’ to spot signs, he is also critical about his own statement as he asks himself out loud whether this is not a naïve thought. This feeling is shared by respondent 1 who adds that spotting signs mainly occurs at an individual level and you will never have the guarantee that you spot all signs. As he explains:
34
“The human psyche is complex and people are quite capable of hiding certain thoughts and feelings. This is also the case with students who are suicidal. It is therefore very important that, as a teacher, you always keep your eyes and ears open”. Respondent 8 elaborates: “Two girls from our school travelled to Syria to join the jihad but were stopped halfway in Turkey. I don’t think anyone at our school saw this coming. One of the girls did have closer supervision at school due to problems at home, but she never showed radicalisation signs. That the other girl wanted to travel to Syria was even more unexpected as she was always very open about her thoughts in discussions etc. But apparently, she kept her radical thoughts to herself.”
Certain views and ideas, and thus signs, can also come to the surface in discussions with students. But “Especially students with an outspoken viewpoint will join the debate, while the students with a more moderate view, often the majority, keep a low profile. Just like society.” (respondent 2) As mentioned before, students with a lower level of education often lack the nuance to address disagreements in a constructive way (respondent 1, 4 & 5). When the teachers were asked how they deal with such opinionated students, respondent 6 explained that he believes he does get through to his students as long as he stays close to home in his examples and ideas to stop his students from generalising. However, most teachers feel they do not get through to their students. Respondent 2 therefore prefers to focus on covering all the different sides and on discussing the facts of what happened to suppress wrong views, such as conspiracy theories. Most teachers experience similar feelings of powerlessness when dealing with such outspoken students and apply the same tactics. Especially when these outspoken views collide with the values of the school or Dutch society, they are more inclined to end the conversation to avoid an endless discussion:
“I let current events regarding this topic circulate in the class, but I am no longer dedicating major debates to these sort of themes. I think it is much more important to give the facts that define what happened. I do allow students to share their opinions on the subject, but I will not try to crystallise the different views in the classroom because I know it will just lead to disappointment.”(respondent 4)
35
The majority of the teachers think it is important to stay as objective as possible during a discussion, however respondent 8 states that: “I think if students know what I stand for, it only gives them clarity, so I will express a more left-wing opinion.”
Nevertheless, all teachers do understand the necessity to continue the dialogue with these students and to find out where these views come from because that is precisely where schools can add value (respondent 4 & 7).
“You can think these talks go in one ear and out the other, you can think that there is nothing you can do about it, or you can think that you can only settle things within the school but not outside the school, or that it is too big or complex to be fixed. However, I have always said in the event of bullying, we make agreements for inside and outside the school. So, you just have to talk about it, enter into dialogue and listen to find out why that person has such a strange view about gays, that they are not allowed to exist, or why Moroccans are another type of people than Moluccans or whatever.” (respondent 1)
Furthermore, several teachers indicate that their students are more often provoking than truly radicalising. Mainly due to their age, as they believe that their students in the age group 12-18 are too young to actually become radicalised. Nevertheless, respondent 4 & 9 believe their students are in an age group that is easily influenced, thus making them more receptive for radicalisation. Some teachers add that while it might not be the case right now, it might be applicable later when their students are older as some of them do have very outspoken views (respondent 1 & 4). But, as respondent 1 points out: “You still have no guarantee that that particular student with the big mouth actually will become radicalised when he gets older.” And, as respondent 4 adds, teachers must be careful not to generalise too soon as these students can also surprise you with different judgements. He mentions as an example the contrasting reactions his Muslim students had on two different terrorist attacks. While these students felt that the 2015 Charlie Hebdo shooting was legitimate as the victims in that shooting were guilty of insulting the prophet Muhammad in a cartoon, they were upset and hurt in response to the 2016 Brussels bombings, as they considered these victims as innocent.
When students make such provocative statements that are just unacceptable, or when teachers or mentors have the feeling that there is more to it than simply provoking, they all declare that they will discuss the matter with their supervisor or the care coordinator and pass the responsibility on to them. “I did not study to become a youth worker or a police officer. So when I notice something serious, I will pass the matter on to someone who did.”
36
(respondent 2) Then the supervisor or care co-ordinator decides whether is it necessary to take the matter further and to reach out to external parties. When the teachers were asked whether they feel bad about sharing information about their students with others, they all responded unanimously that this is not the case. “By not sharing information about one child for social- emotional reasons, it can mean damage to ten others.” (respondent 7) They consider the safety of the student, the school and the rest of society as their first priority and believe that it is in the interest of the student as well. Thus, they do feel responsible for spotting signs and to report these signs to third parties, but that is where their task ends (respondent 2 & 4). Nevertheless, one teacher points out that the communication within the school is often one- sided. “To me, it is not really clear what happens after a teacher reports a signal to third parties. Do they take the matter further or does the chain stop there?” (respondent 5) Respondent 7, a school director, describes the chain of reporting. The heart of the circle, the first line, consists of mentors. The layer around the heart, the second line, consists of specialists that are employed by the school, ranging from coaches for students with dyslexia or performance anxiety to anti-bullying and media coordinators. And when that is not sufficient, there is a third layer consisting of external parties such as the national public health institute and the child and family centre that can look into the matter.
One of the most important external parties are the students’ parents. On the one hand because these students are often under 18 and parents are still responsible for their children, on the other hand because all teachers believe that a student’s upbringing plays a major role in his or her viewpoints as they often base their standards and values on what they hear in their immediate surroundings. It is therefore important for teachers to engage in conversation with the parents and to involve them in school activities, for instance by letting them volunteer at a school’s open house (respondent 1). Yet, respondent 3 indicates another major third party that has a significant influence on youngsters: other people from their age, the ‘street culture’. Respondent 1 notices a trend when it comes to Muslim students. Over the years these students are more and more engaged in their religious identity and their beliefs. This makes them more receptive to peer pressure:
“Nowadays, it has become commonplace for Muslim girls to wear a headscarf once they start to menstruate, often during their first or second year of secondary school. But 10/15 years ago, students often did not wear headscarves until they were in their final year of secondary school. A student of mine returned to school after the summer holidays and suddenly wore a headscarf so I asked her about it. She explained to me that she was tired of defending herself
37
to other peers. ‘I do not want to be constantly corrected that I should cover my hair or that I am not a good Muslim because I do not wear a headscarf. So, now I just wear a headscarf and be done with it.’ When you discuss the matter with the parents they often state that their children are free to choose their own clothes and they do not deem it necessary for their daughters to wear a headscarf. You just notice an increase in peer pressure in the last couple of years.” (respondent 4)
According to a third of the teachers, (social) media adds fuel to the fire as it gives Muslim youngsters a platform to wind each other up e.g. in response to the unequal opportunities at the labour market. As a lot of Muslim students feel they are treated as second-class citizens (respondent 4). These tensions in society increase the workload of schools as well as society’s problems also emerge in the classrooms (respondent 1,2 & 4).
4.4 To what extent does the Dutch government’s support for secondary schools help