RadicalizationTeaching terror: what role for schools in countering violent extremism?
A new report by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute calls for the inclusion of counter-radicalization messages in the school curriculum and for the teaching of the situation in the Middle East and Australia’s involvement. Those who propose that schools should help law-enforcement identify students who might be susceptible to radicalization should realize that any approach that attempts to identify people for law enforcement and other forms of intervention risks over-reporting on radicalization. It also fails to understand that young people may superficially engage with some of the symbols of violent extremist organizations without fully comprehending the implications of such actions or without ever actually agreeing with those ideologies that promote and justify violent extremism. Perhaps even more concerning is that certain behaviors considered indicative of radicalization could potentially “misdiagnose” other issues such as drug abuse, family violence or mental illness. Assessing whether or not an individual is radicalized to the point where they pose a risk of violent extremism is far beyond the core business of education.
A new report by the Australian Strategic Policy Institute calls for the inclusion of counter-radicalization messages in the school curriculum and for the teaching of the situation in the Middle East and Australia’s involvement.
This recommendation is much more useful than the one which sees teachers and school personnel being trained in how to “spot a jihadi,” as the government recently proposed.
However, broader teaching on peace, pluralism and tolerance in all aspects of school would be more beneficial than curriculum additions on specific world conflicts and religions.
Teachers can’t be expected to recognize extremism
Any approach that attempts to identify people for law enforcement and other forms of intervention risks over-reporting on radicalization. It also fails to understand that young people may superficially engage with some of the symbols of violent extremist organizations without fully comprehending the implications of such actions or without ever actually agreeing with those ideologies that promote and justify violent extremism.
Perhaps even more concerning is that certain behaviors considered indicative of radicalization could potentially “misdiagnose” other issues such as drug abuse, family violence or mental illness.
Assessing whether or not an individual is radicalized to the point where they pose a risk of violent extremism is far beyond the core business of education.
Education does play a role
There is no denying that education plays an important role in the socialization of young people and their moral development. Consequently, education features strongly in counter-radicalization programs in several countries – such as the United Kingdom, The Netherlands, Austria and Belgium. For the most part, these education interventions focus on teaching subjects that promote tolerance, understanding and citizenship.
The compulsory school curriculum in Australia includes civic values. Suggestions have also been made that the curriculum should include teaching young people about different religions – including Islam.
While these may be valuable in their own right, proposing curriculum changes that focus on a particular context such as the Middle East, or on a single issue such as democratic participation, or on the teaching of religion, is problematic. For a start, the argument that all schools should teach young people the core principles of Islam misses the point.
A study of vulnerability and resilience to al-Qaeda violent extremism and other types of violent activity (animal rights activism; cults; gangs; right wing extremism and youth crime) found tolerance of other religious and ethnic groups is a factor in resilience to violent extremism.
