Theoretical presentation of the topic

Schools are often seen as environment where extremism prevention can be conducted. They involve students, as well as educators, parents, local governments and have connections with social workers, psychologists, and, if needed, the police. Prevention in the context of school includes wide range of topics, e.g. all three levels of prevention, theoretical frameworks in terms of definitions, and various interventions. This e-module focuses on ways how teachers can do interventions that support prevention of extremism. However, before going to the toolbox of tasks and methods, there is a need to get on the same page in terms of theoretical frameworks. The theoretical presentation of the topic focuses on three key themes: definition of extremism and resilience, processes, and the role of school in preventing extremism through education.

 

Although there is no single agreed-upon definition of extremism, it has two primary features – rigid adherence of a system of ideas and-or tendency to rely on (physical, verbal) violence. There are a number of ways how ‘extremism’ is defined in the literature. As we discuss it in the context of preventing extremism through education, this e-module relies on the work of Lynn Davies who is the key researcher of the topic. Lynn Davies (2016) has said that there is no one internationally agreed definition of extremism, and that it takes many different shapes – religious, far right, neo-Nazi, far left, animal rights and even climate change activists. Also that, extremism in current usage and understanding therefore is not just doing something to extremes, such as extreme sport. It is the denial of other realities. Terrorism is the extreme end of an extreme position, using fear and violence to achieve political ends.“ (Davies 2008:612) What we can see from her work is that extremism has two main drivers: absolutism (single truths, simple dualisms, black and white certainties, either enemy or friend) and the search for perfection, utopia or purity.” (Davies 2009:190). These two drivers should be kept in mind when working with students in prevention (violent) extremism through education. Furthermore, it is seen that the extremist position comes from an absolute conviction of the ‘one truth’. This leads to dualism, good and evil, enemy or friend. Absolutism and bipolar perspectives have two consequences: that if one accepts one aspect of the single truth, one has to accept the rest; and that others must be convinced of this truth, by whatever means. The educational implications are to promote alternatives, give many-sided views, and ensure comfort with ambiguity and flexibility in thinking.“ (Davies 2008:620)

One aim of educational interventions is to increase the resilience of students to extreme content. Resiliense is seen as a key in prevention of (violent) extremism in education (Bonnell et al 2020; Davies 2009, 2016; Koirikivi et al. 2021). To elaborate more on it, it is necessary to define ‘resilience’. In this e-module, sees the term as follows: „means resilience to violence as a means to an end, resilience to revenge and retribution and resilience to people who seem plausible but do not have your interests at heart. This means defiance to being drawn into cruel gangs/groups: and resistance to the amplification of existing fears, prejudices, family feuds and tribal histories.” (Davies 2021:105) According to studies, resilience helps to avoid and weaken extremist mindset (Benjamin et al. 2021) and any type of violence as a solution to conflict or problem (Malkki 2020:16). Resilience towards extremism is seen as one of the key component of preventing extremism. Due to named reason, increasing one among students has a major role in preventing extremism through education.

The second part of theoretical overview includes processes that lead individuals to extremism: radicalisation and engagement. Without a clear understanding on the mentioned process, it is difficult or almost impossible to prevent extremism through education. It is known that “… there is no one route into radicalisation, so single target that we can isolate and provide an antidote.” (Davies 2016);

Most definitions describe radicalisation as a process that starts from somewhere and leads to extremism. For instance, Braddock states that radicalisation is a “process by which an individual adopts an extremist ideology” (Braddock, 2014); and the Radicalisation Awareness Network (RAN, 2019) states in its policy brief on preventing the risk of radicalisation of asylum seekers that radicalisation processes involve social interactions with peers and/or direct contact with extremist milieus. In this e-module, ‘radicalisation’ is seen as a psychological process where a moral change takes place. (Bouhana, 2019, p.11) and an individual engages with and acquires radical religious or political views. ‘Engagement’ is understood as a readiness to become actively involved in an extremist group, which might take various forms. (Chalmers, 2017) Therefore, radicalisation involves changes in the worldview while engagement being involved in an extremist movement. Importantly, one can be both at the same time and be on but not the other. The authors of this e-module see that it is possible and needed to formulate list of ways how to detect extremism and individuals who are vulnerable and ‘at risk’ of extremism. Neverthless, teachers need to assess every individual case, context, idea and individuals involved on their own. (Maiberg and Kilp, 2022) Therefore, in detecting possible signs of extremism, every student must be taken individually, considering the context surrounding them, their needs and changes in their behaviour.

 

Finally, it is necessary to discuss the role of school in preventing extremism through education. Schools are one of the primary settings for fostering skills to support students in understanding the causes, motivations and outcomes of extremism (Vallinkoski et al. 2021). Radicalisation Awareness Network (2015) sees that among many duties, schools have the objective to provide a safe and respectful learning environment for their students. The following sections discuss what is the exact role of a school and teachers in connection to extremism.

Literature highlights mainly three objectives of schools in regards extremism. First, the number of young people who can be involved simultaneously. No matter the approach, school-based interventions affect several students simultaneously. Through educational interventions, it is possible to reach to wide audience of students. Reaching many youths – including those who might be at risk of radicalisation or recruitment – can be done through education. (Wallner 2020) Second, school is a cooperation network between children, parents, and local government. In case a concerning sign is noticed, educational organisations have a wide network of counterparts who can be informed in a fast manner. And vice versa. Distressing information can easily move from local government, parents or other counterparts involved to educators in order to support the students from the extremist milieu.

Last and most important, according to Mattsson and Johansson, young people’s situation at school, and pupils’ relationships with their teachers have a clear impact on the processes that lead to their radicalisation. (Mattsson & Johansson 2018; Mattsson & Johansson 2019). Therefore, it is highly likely that teachers and/or fellow students have noticed the changes that have been taking place with the student radicalising and/or engaging with extremism. Taking this into account, it is infallible that education organisations are keeping an eye on the changes that take place in the students lives as well as work towards preventing and tackling extremism. Furthermore, in doing so, teachers are leading the named processes.

Schools’ objective to prevent extremism is seen by a number of researchers. For instance, Ezekiel (2002) highlights that schools could have a role in breaking down isolation from the surrounding community that students might feel to have. Farinelli (2019) adds that the role of a teacher is to involve students in prevention initiatives, increase their media literacy, and to provide a respectful learning environment. The latter should be structured to express their views, grievances, and desires in a safe setting and with confidence. Mayssoun Sukarieh and Stuart Tannock see that the educational treatment of radicalisation and extremism should also address their structural root causes, promote education for social change and avoid “stigmatisation of radicalism and radicalisation in society”, because the unwanted outcome will otherwise be that some students will become fearful of speaking out and being labelled as radical. (Sukarieh & Tannock 2016: 34)

The literature and practitioners have highlighted the need to conduct prevention of extremism through education. Wallner (2020) has analysed education initiatives that aim to prevent and counter violent extremism. She sees that majority of the education initiatives in P/CVE are split into five sub-thematic intervention areas that are discussed below.
 

Interventions addressing the knowledge

The interventions addressing the knowledge of students about values of citizenship, human rights and historical narratives are often delivered in the form of curriculum-based programmes aimed at encouraging these attributes in learners. Many curriculum-based interventions are delivered by NGOs and other actors rather than national education systems. (Wallner, 2020, p. 9). For instance, in Kyrgyzstan, teaching on the ‘History of Religions’ was first piloted by the Ministry of Education and the State Commission for Religious Affairs. (Jailobaeva et al., 2020) The results show that students who studies history of religions, had higher levels of resilience on violence-related beliefs and behaviours compared to the students who did not study the subject (Wallner, 2020, p. 9).
 

Interventions focused on the way students think

The second type of interventions focused on the way students think, and on building their critical thinking skills and capacity for integrative complexity. According to Wallner (2020), such interventions are aimed at building pupils’ resilience to violent extremism by encouraging the development of critical thinking skills address the way in which young people process and interrogate information with which they are confronted. Often this objective is aimed to gain by enhancing critical thinking skills of students. For instance, how to detect fake news or manipulative narratives used by recruiters used via online mediums.

Interventions addressing the way students engage with each other

The third type of interventions involve techniques and principles how students engage with each other. This is done through intergroup contact, peer mediation and other techniques. Wallner (2020) sees that if students learn to understand and empathise with students different from them, the so-called the ‘other’, then young people will be less susceptible to extremist narratives which demean and vilify outgroups. Furthermore, Davies claims that interventions building on this premise aim to forge relationships between young people identifying with different groups by facilitating interactions in day-to-day school life or in intervention settings in specific projects or activities. (White, 2021, p75)

The interventions that use such an approach often bring students with diverse background and identity together to provide space to get to know each other and break prejudice. Expedition Friend and Foe, an intervention in the Netherlands, does a similar thing. The study around it shows that students’ perspectives on bullying, exclusion, discrimination, conflict esclataion and social pressure decreased after participating at the programme. (RAN 2018)X Nevertheless, the long-term impact is unknown.

Interventions focused on educators

The fourth type of interventions focus on educators and on building their capacity to recognise signs of radicalisation in their students, as well as providing them with the skills to facilitate lessons relevant to P/CVE. Without necessary background knowledge, teachers might not address extremism-related topics even, if they see the need. In order to increase the knowledge, teachers are often provided training opportunities so that they can facilitate lessons with P/CVE content and recognise the signs of radicalisation and recruitment in their students (Wallner, 2020).

Cross-cutting interventions

The last type, cross-cutting interventions, aim to achieve P/CVE objectives through several approaches at the same time. The named interventions have various goals, for instance to increase the knowledge of students and critical thinking.

For detailed discussion on the types of interventions used in education as well as examples of each type, please read Wallner’s report: https://static.rusi.org/pcve_education_final_web_version.pdf