Review of Interventions to Counter Polarization in Educational Settings: An Analysis of "What Works"?

• In Event: Intervening to Tackle Polarization in and Through Education: What Paradigms, What Merits?

Abstract

Purpose of the study

Building upon earlier review work (Beelmann & Heinemann, 2014; Lub, 2013), this study systematizes and analyzes recent research asking ‘What effective interventions counter polarization in educational settings?’. Its goal is to guide practitioners working with ideologically or culturally diverse student populations, and provide them with practical suggestions for achieving more inclusive, socially-cohesive and democratic classrooms.

Theoretical framework

Schools seem increasingly characterized by a lack of social cohesion, stronger expressions of prejudice and the inability to deal with ‘difference’ (Gindi & Erlich, 2018) often referred to as increasing ”polarization”. Polarization here refers to the process that drives groups apart based on the delineations established by an increasing sense of “us” versus “them”, mostly driven by underlying social conflicts, such as socio-economic inequalities, status and power differences, or access to certain privileges. It often goes together with stereotyping, prejudice, discrimination and delegitimating (Kuper, 1977; Jensen, 2011; Celik, Bilali & Iqbal, 2017). In our review, we analyse the different conceptual paradigms that underlie interventions addressing polarization.

Methodology

A systematic literature search was conducted in two electronic databases: Google Scholar (phase I, resulting in 43 studies) and Web of Science (phase II, resulting in 42 studies). Using a combination of multiple relevant key words like a) “polarization” OR “intergroup attitudes”, etc. and b) “classroom” OR “education” a search was done to include empirical studies from January 2014 onwards. Initial hits have been filtered on a number of criteria to include only original peer-reviewed research papers on interventions in an educative setting that aimed to reduce polarization between students.

Data and preliminary findings

The studies were categorized into five intervention areas (conflict mediation, positive social interaction, recategorizing identities, intercultural communication and teaching just societal models). In the analyses we pay attention to the context, nature and severity of the group conflict so that intervention approaches could be linked to the particularity of the conflict or tension. Findings indicate, for instance, that in contexts of violent confrontation and high-polarization (e.g. Northern Ireland, Israel and Cyprus), educational interventions simulating indirect interactions between the students (i.e. online, imaginary) are preferable in terms of effectivity to bringing opposing groups together. On the other hand, in lower-conflict contexts (e.g. Finland), interventions involving real-life cooperative tasks (i.e. perspective-taking dialogues, drama, sports), spread in time (i.e. over the duration of a school year) lead to more significant positive results.

Point of view and conclusions

Effectivity was systematically reported as contextual, conditional and dependent on professional skills of teachers, while studies also differed in their notion of ”effect” depending on their epistemological-political stance. Despite this, our preliminary conclusion is that the effectivity of the different intervention areas is related to the level and nature of confrontation.

Significance of the study

This study has the potential to guide the design of effective interventions in polarized educational contexts. Its focus on transferability to other contexts and populations, attention to understanding effects within the historical, social, geographical, interethnic, socio-economic setting enhances its potential value across national and local contexts.

Authors

• Mariette Haan De, Utrecht University

• Semiha Sözeri, Utrecht University