Can content create community?

Can content create community? Exploring curriculum centered training for social learning and belonging in class. Project outline 4.5.2018 Frode Restad, Phd Fellow (6026700) Research Centre for Child and Youth Competence Development Innland Norway University of Applied Sciences

INTRODUCTION In this project, I will be investigating whether and how content oriented training in the subjects of Norwegian and Science, can enhance a sense of community among students in lower secondary school class. As an overall research question, I will be asking: How does curriculum centered training influence students’ social learning and sense of belonging in class? This question, generalizes content oriented training in the school subjects of Norwegian and Science, into a broader analytic concept of curriculum centered training, and emphasizes students’ social learning as a part of that curriculum. The question also employs sense of belonging as a model of individual students understanding of themselves as part of the class community. To answer the overall question, I will divide the project into three parts. First, by investigating theory and methodological perspectives on curriculum centered training, second by investigating curriculum content, and third, by empirical exploration of students and teachers understandings of their own practice in class. For each part of the project, I will be looking to answer a corresponding research question, as follows: 1. On what theoretical basis can we understand and explore curriculum centered training to influence students’ social learning and sense of belonging in class? 2. What are goals and strategies for enhancing social learning and students’ sense of belonging in the new national curriculum? 3. How do teachers and students’ intra-act social learning and sense of belonging in curriculum centered training? I will answer these questions in the form of course papers and peer reviewed articles as described in the following outline. The findings from the articles will be brought together for further discussion when answering the overall research question in the final dissertation. Inspiration for the project has been provided by recent works from Ingunn Marie Eriksen & Selma Therese Lyng (I. M. Eriksen, 2018; I. M. Eriksen, and S. T. Lyng, 2015, 2018), Helle Rabøl Hansen (Hansen, 2011b, 2014) and Helle Plauborg (Plauborg, 2011, 2016) who emphasize the need to “rethink didactics” as a part of integrative approach to enhance student social and academic learning and prevent bullying. The concept of community creating didactics (Hansen, 2011b, 2014; Plauborg, 2011) has been proposed to describe training for both social and academic learning, while at the same time strengthening students’ sense of community and belonging in class.

1

This project aims to elaborate these ideas theoretically, adding content - core and subject curriculum, to community, and build an analytical framework to explore students and teachers understanding and practice while developing new subject curriculum in Norwegian schools. My personal outset as researcher is based on the preconception that in an ever more fragmented and rapidly changing society, schools are becoming more important as collective arenas (Erstad, Amdam, Arnseth, & Silseth, 2014). I believe learning to live together as a community in school is important for the future wellbeing of individuals and society as whole (Qvortrup, 2011). Arguably, schools in recent years have come under increasing pressure to emphasize learning outcomes and employability, at the expense of the broader civic and social aims (Mølstad & Karseth, 2016). Building on research from the fields of classroom management, bullying prevention, and curriculum development, I hope to explore and ad empirical support to integrative teacher practices that facilitate both learning and belonging. With a background in educational anthropology, I believe a qualitative approach is well suited to explore the complexity of classroom interaction (Ambrosius Madsen, 2004; Hastrup, 2004), hopefully bringing new cross sectional insights to these wellestablished fields of research.

FIELD OF RESEARCH A number of scholarly fields take interest in students’ social learning and belonging. In the following, we will make a brief visit to some of them. Firstly building on existing research in classroom management (RED), including strategies for enhancing student-teacher relations and peer relations in class. Secondly exploring emerging works in bullying prevention (PURPLE), particularly on peer oriented strategies and moral disengagement. Thirdly, investigating research and processes of curriculum development (BLUE). The inline figure illustrates relevant points of overlap (GREY) between fields, and envisions community creating didactics (GREEN) as a potential hub – connecting all fields in an integrative approach to students’ social learning and belonging in class. Classroom management In 2008 Clearinghouse for Educational research (Nordenbo, 2008) published a systematic review of studies pertaining the relationship between manifest teacher skills and students' learning. Three main teacher competencies are highlighted. First, the teacher must possess the competence to be part of a social relationship with the individual student. Second, the teacher must be able to build a relation to the whole class (of students) and to lead them in teaching by being a visible leader who over time encourages students to formulate rules and follow them. Both of these skills are important for developing overall goals related to students' motivation and autonomy and plays a central role in promoting academic learning.

2

Finally, the teacher must also possess general didactic competence in relation to the content of the education in general and in the individual subjects. Ingunn Marie Eriksen & Selma Therese Lyng (I. M. Eriksen, and S. T. Lyng, 2015, 2018) document how the core elements of classroom management, have become well known, and have had a great impact on teachers practice in recent years. They also, point to a “missing link” in sociological insights into social factors and mechanisms that influence the student culture, arguing that within the field of classroom management the links between teacher practices, social structures and bullying in class are underexplored.(Allen, 2010) Similarly, Helle Plauborg argues for a reconciliation of classroom management and didactics, the separation of which has created an unfortunate divide between teachers’ core activity of teaching and the development of students’ social and academic learning. Rethinking classroom management entails understanding classroom management as intra-action between didactics, academic learning and sociality. It implies including didactics and how academic learning is performed, in the concept of classroom management.(Plauborg, 2016) Bullying prevention In recent years research on bullying prevention, particularly within the whole school approach, has become more attune to the complex social underpinnings of bullying in school. A growing number of scholars (Dupper, 2013; Kousholt & Fisker, 2015; Schott & Søndergaard, 2014; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2010; Thornberg, 2011) regarding bullying as a systemic, social and intrapersonal problem have emerged – calling for holistic interventions that involve the whole school context and its various sub-systems. One example is the Australian Donna Cross (Waters, Cross, & Runions, 2009). In her work she finds that adolescents feeling of connectedness to school impact on a variety of mental health issues, including bullying behavior. Her theoretical model of school social ecology emphasizes, among other functional factors, how ...student involvement in decision making, academic press, and student centered approaches to teaching and learning, have been found to enhance feelings of connectedness to school. She also finds, however, that existing studies have been unsuccessful in adequately describing the process by which connectedness is enhanced. Another example from Norway is Eriksen & Lyng (I. M. Eriksen, 2018; I. M. Eriksen, and S. T. Lyng, 2015, 2018; I. M. Eriksen & Lyng, 2018) who outline two main strategies of schools that have been successful in preventing bullying. They too point to shortcomings in these strategies, particularly when dealing with social marginalization and gendered abuse (I. M. Eriksen & Lyng, 2018). The main strategies of behavior regulation and relation work are not sufficient to deal with these challenges, and intervention strategies to create a sense of community between the students are not sufficiently developed. They direct attention towards the necessity of creating the class as a collective, with positive relations between the students. (I. M. Eriksen, and S. T. Lyng, 2015, 2018) Drawing on theories of social psychology and post structuralism, Danish researcher Søndergaard (Schott & Søndergaard, 2014) offers a reconceptualization of bullying as a social process. She understands bullying as a response to social exclusion anxiety that occurs when group members feel that their inclusion and belonging to a group is threatened. Such anxiety may turn into social panic, alleviated by targeting other(s) as an object of exclusion and contempt. Similarly Helle Rabøl Hansen (Hansen, 2011a) describes the process as driven by a longing for belonging whereby students in want of belonging, create informal groups of us and them. 3

These groups allow for exclusion of peers that are otherwise included in the formal class community, while reinforcing a sense of belonging within the informal group. Building on the works of Albert Bandura (Bandura, 2016), Swedish researcher Robert Thornberg (Thornberg, Wänström, & Pozzoli, 2017), investigates the connection between the relational climate of the class and bullying victimization. He finds that classes with poor relational climate and higher levels of moral disengagement have higher degrees of victimization. These findings suggest that a caring, supportive and friendly interaction pattern in school classes, in which teachers as well as students treat each other fairly and respectfully, works as a protective factor that lowers the degree of victimization among students. Curriculum development So far we have explored socially oriented strategies of bullying prevention, and teachers work with classroom management. The “missing link” that this project aims to explore is the formal content that mediates student and teacher practice in school. This content is described in the national core and subject curricula, and is currently under development. From the already revised core curriculum1, a number of points are relevant. Firstly, Norwegian schools are obligated to support students’ social learning and development in all subject work. Academic and social learning is interconnected and everyone must learn to cooperate, work together and to develop a capacity for shared determination and responsibility. Additionally all students have the right to a safe and positive school climate and an individual responsibility to contribute in developing a positive learning environment. The curriculum also underlines that when students are met with respect and appreciation through their training, it enhances their sense of belonging. Further, schools must adapt training for each individual student through variation of working methods, teaching aids and organization, and through their work with the learning environment, curricula and assessment. This must as far as possible be realized within the diversity of the student group and as part of the community. Christina Elde Mølstad (Mølstad, 2015) has shown that schools work with local curriculum in recent years been more oriented toward implementation, rather than development of curriculum. This coincides with the White Paper (Ludvigsenutvalget, 2015) emphasizing school owners responsibility for development of local curriculum, and making proper connections between the national and the local curriculum. The involvement of teachers is also emphasized stating that, teachers should acquire the new curricula, work with it, and view their teaching and assessment as one, as part of their planning for student learning. Mausethagen (Mausethagen & Mølstad, 2015) have also shown how this shift in curriculum control has challenged ideas of teacher autonomy, making the question of assessment criteria as part of the didactic core of teacher professionalism, a contentious one. In the coming years subject curriculum, and cross subject themes such as public health and life mastery, democracy and citizenship, and sustainable development will be developed and analyzed in the second part of the project2. During 2019-2020 schools will have time to study, and prepare for the new curriculum in their teaching.

1

Core curriculum: https://www.regjeringen.no/contentassets/37f2f7e1850046a0a3f676fd45851384/overordnet-del---verdier-ogprinsipper-for-grunnopplaringen.pdf 2 Curriculum reform process: https://www.udir.no/laring-og-trivsel/lareplanverket/forsok-og-pagaende-arbeid/nye-lareplaner---2020/

4

The development of new local curriculum makes for a particularly interesting context in which to study student and teachers’ understanding of social learning and belonging, as it brings to life both existing and new goals, strategies, and connections within the curricula, and potentially also emerging practice based on those understandings. Curriculum centered training as community creating didactics? How can we understand curriculum centered training in the context of social learning and belonging? A starting point for analysis may be the concept of community creating didactics as proposed by Helle Rabøl Hansen and Helle Plauborg (Hansen, 2011b, 2014; Plauborg, 2011). A key argument is that social and curricular aspects are mutually constituting. While school practitioners and discourses traditionally position activities related to community, bonds and wellbeing among students as something separate from – and partly in opposition to – learning activities, community creating didactics are characterized by an integrated approach to the curricular and the social. (Plauborg, 2011) Community creating didactics can be understood as a strategy for creating community and inclusion among students as part of the formal class structure. As such it acknowledges didactics and thereby schools’ very core activity of learning as the main source for developing community and positive relations between students (Hansen, 2011b) (Hansen 2011). The concept proposes a connection between social and academic learning. Plauborg emphasizes not only in terms of individual social and academic learning, but on learning the class collective’s way of being a collective (Plauborg, 2011). As such she is not merely concerned with the creation of better cohesion within the class, she also highlights the need to move beyond focusing on individual students inability to adapt to the community, and addressing the community's ability constitute itself by providing meaningful and ‘worthy’ forms of participation for all members. Plauborg also argues that the community does not seem to be strengthened by community creating activities alone. It is also strengthened by the teachers’ friendly and respectful relational practice towards the individual student, highlighting the interconnection between skills traditionally associated with classroom management, and those needed to build the class as a collective. This sentiment is echoed by Lars Qvortrup (Qvortrup, 2011) when he says a precondition for modern society is that children “learn to create communities” in the social micro universe of the class. In his understanding, students in class create and recreate the class as a common universe of meaning, continuously between chaos and order, not with the teacher as singular point of influence, but as a system of interactions that is sustained by its internal operations and by its participant’s observations. Setting the stage for new knowledge So far we have reviewed perspectives on social learning and belonging from the fields of classroom management, bullying prevention and curriculum development. We have also seen how the emerging concept of community created didactics relates to the aforementioned fields by addressing training and academic and social learning in an integrated whole. Although all perspectives bring relevant insights, it is also clear that the role of the curriculum is less emphasized in those fields. If we are to understand how subject oriented training is related to students’ social learning and belonging in class, further exploration is needed. In the following I will outline a research design to develop theoretical and empirical knowledge of these complex phenomena.

5

PROJECT OUTLINE This is a three year Phd-project under the Faculty for Education and Social Work at Innland Norway University, and the Research Centre for Child and Youth Competence Development (CYCD). As a Phd-fellow the conducting research will have access to a network of scholars at CYCD, including internal and external supervision. The research questions described above will be explored through coursework and articles as follows: 1. On what theoretical basis can we understanding and explore curriculum centered training to influence students’ social learning and sense of belonging in class? Course paper 1: Science theory: Separability of epistemology in critical realism. Investigating “semantic” differences in dialectic critical realism (Bhaskar, 2008) and agential realism (Barad, 2007). Phd-article 1: Curriculum centered training for social learning and belonging - what do we know? Exploring theory and methods of understanding. Potential journals: Educational research, Nordic studies in Education 2. What are goals and strategies for enhancing social learning and students’ sense of belonging in the new national curriculum? Course paper 2: Child theory: The moral agency of the school class. Exploring research on collective moral agency within the school class. (Bandura, 2016) Phd-article 2: A new (moral) curriculum for social learning and belonging? Analyzing goals and strategies for social learning and belonging in lower secondary Norwegian and Science curriculum. Potential journals: Journal of Moral Education, Journal of youth studies, Education Inquiry 3. How do teachers and students’ intra-act social learning and sense of belonging in curriculum centered training? Course paper 3: Science methodology: Interpreting narratives of intra-action. Exploring methodology for investigating narratives of identity and othering. (Ricoeur, 2016) Phd-article 3: Subject matters. Experiences of students and teachers’ intra-acting social learning and belonging in Norwegian and Science class. Potential journals: Educational research, Nordic journal of STEM, Nordic studies in Education In the final dissertation, I will discuss how curriculum centered training influences students’ social learning and sense of belonging in class. The discussion will build on insights from theory and methods review in article 1, content analysis and theory in article 2, and empirical data, theory and methodological analysis in article 3.

6

A timeline for the project can be illustrated as follows: 2018

Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug

Start Phd Project design, Participation NERA 2018 Course NVIVO, Project design, Supervision Course paper 1: Science Theory, Phd-project approved, Phd article 1 20% defence (Course paper 1 + outline article 1), Conference Critical realism

Sep Okt Nov Dec

Course paper 3: Science Methodology, Presentation SOM, Supervision 10%, Phd article 1 Phd article 1 submitted Phd article 2

2019 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Okt Nov Dec

Phd article 2 Optional course, Phd article 2 Course paper 2: Child theory, Phd article 2, Supervision 20% Phd article 2 submitted Preparation field research, optional courses Preparation 50% defence, Paper World Anti Bullying Forum 50% defence (Article 1&2, Outline field research) Preparation, field research, optional courses, Field research Field research Field research

2020 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Okt Nov Dec

Field research/analysis Field research/analysis Field research/analysis, Paper NERA 2020, Supervision 30% Transcription & analysis Transcription & analysis Phd article 3, preparation for 80% 80% defence (Phd article 3 + outline dissertation) Paper ECER 2020 Phd article 3 submitted Dissertation Dissertation, Supervision 40%

2021 Jan Feb

Dissertation Phd Dissertation submitted

7

FRAMEWORK & METHODOLOGY Analyzing complex processes of knowing and being in school, the project takes a theoretical vantage point from critical realism, and in particular the dialectic critical philosophy of Roy Bhaskar (Bhaskar, 2008). I start from the perspective of reality as dialectically constructed, and being as an interconnected, openended whole that is both intrinsically connected and relatively autonomous from its different parts. This understanding implies knowledge as something both part of a mutual and intertwined process of transformation, and as something separate from reality. The term intra-action will be used to describe the interplay of entities (agents) in the world, being simultaneously products, producers and process (Gunnarsson, 2015) This eclectic approach of ontological realism, and epistemological constructivism will be discussed as part of the projects coursework and first article (cf. project outline). Seeing as the project will be analyzing both text, primarily in relation to the local and national curriculum, as well as actions in the classroom, I will further be building on the hermeneutic phenomenology of Paul Ricoeur (Ricœur, 1992; Ricoeur, 2016) and in particular his vocabulary for understanding selfhood and narrativity. The concepts of first and second order narratives and narrative identity appear relevant in analyzing how individual and collective identities are constructed in classroom dialogue, and in applied texts and curricula. Collection of data will be done using an anthropological approach to educational research. (Ambrosius Madsen, 2004) Participant observation, as a central method, can provide insight into the lives of students and teachers in school on the premises of this life (Hastrup, 2004) and contribute to a deeper and more updated understanding of how social communities manifest and reproduce identities. Working with focus group interviews (Schweber, 2004) of both students and teachers can extrude collective understandings of life within the class. Finally, as a critical perspective on peer group intra-action, Albert Banduras (Bandura, 2016) concepts of moral agency and disengagement will be discussed in coursework on child theory, and in project article 2 analyzing the new national curriculum. Moral agency can be described as the power to refrain from behaving inhumanely, and the proactive behavior to behave humanely. As such it is rooted in socio-cognitive theory whereby mechanism of social control do not come into play, unless they are activated by safeguards built into social systems that uphold compassionate behavior and renounce cruelty. This has relevance for how schools perceive and develop students’ social learning, how students perceive and intra-act within their peer group, and for the development and enactment of local curriculum.

8

Limitations and informant selection A number of appraisals will be needed to ensure the sustainability of the project. First, it seems pertinent to limit the scope of research to lower secondary education, seeing as this is an important time in students’ development of identity, while at the same time having to cope with increasing demands and assessment of academic achievement. I propose to limit the scope of field research to 2 schools over a period of 3-6 months, allowing for multiple visits and time for sensitizing and reappraisal. It is also necessary to limit the number of curriculum subjects. Native language (Norwegian) training, being the biggest curriculum subject in lower secondary education, seems an appropriate choice giving ample time to develop relations with students and establishing a common understanding of class identity. For contrasting observations, the curriculum and training in Science may provide insights from a subject that on the surface may not be as highly associated with issues of social learning and belonging. Finally it will be crucial to identify schools and teachers who have prior experience and a motivation to work with academic and social learning as part of their didactic practice, and in particular teachers of Norwegian and Science who are affluent in using subject content, and a variety of teaching methods to realize curriculum goals. A starting point for selecting informants might be to survey schools who already have a positive school environment (I. M. Eriksen, and S. T. Lyng, 2015), and schools who have established structures for local curriculum development. Further consideration will be given to informant selection as part of coursework, and in dialogue with supervisors. Limiting the scope of the project also has implications for the validity of its findings. Impeded by a small number of informants and narrow timeframe for observation, the findings will not be generalizable to other contexts. The study also lacks quantitative data to validate and contrast its findings. Should the opportunity for a follow-up study arise, a mixed-methods design (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2010) could potentially alleviate some of these weaknesses. For now however, such designs seem beyond consideration for this study. Further methodological discussion and appraisals for anthropological fieldwork will be discussed as part of the projects coursework and final article (cf. project outline). Ethical considerations The project will be conducted in accordance with NNREC guidelines3, pending approval from NSD. Special consideration will be given to the collection of data from young participants on sensitive issues pertaining to identity and positioning within their peer group. Also teachers perceptions of students, views on local and national curriculum development, and the work of colleagues, may be of a sensitive nature. Having a third eye in the classroom may be an imposition to both students and teachers, and participation in interviews will certainly require extra effort from all. It is imperative that research yields not only scientific data, but also knowledge that is intelligible and relevant to participants and the wider practice community. Dissemination of insights from the study will be done through selected conferences and papers during the project, and more widely following completion of the dissertation.

3

Forskningsetiske retningslinjer: https://www.etikkom.no/globalassets/documents/publikasjoner-sompdf/60125_fek_retningslinjer_nesh_digital.pdf

9

REFERENCES Allen, K. P. (2010). Classroom Management, Bullying, and Teacher Practices. Professional Educator, 34(1), r. Ambrosius Madsen, U. (2004). Pædagogisk antropologi : refleksioner over feltbaseret viden. København: Reitzel. Bandura, A. (2016). Moral disengagement : how people do harm and live with themselves: Worth Publishers, Macmillan Learning. Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway : quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham: Duke University Press. Bhaskar, R. (2008). Dialectic : the pulse of freedom. London: Routledge. Dupper, D. R. (2013). School bullying: New perspectives on a growing problem: Oxford University Press. Eriksen, I. M. (2018). The power of the word: students’ and school staff’s use of the established bullying definition. Educational Research, 1-14. doi:10.1080/00131881.2018.1454263 Eriksen, I. M., and S. T. Lyng. (2015). Skolers Arbeid Med Elevenes Psykososiale Miljø: Gode Strategier, Blinde Flekker og Harde Nøtter. Retrieved from Oslo: http://www.hioa.no/content/download/108496/2529476/file/Skolers-arbeid-med-elevenespsykososiale-miljo-NOVA-R14-15.pdf Eriksen, I. M., and S. T. Lyng. (2018). Addressing social peer structures in bullying prevention: A sociological supplement to the whole school approach. Nordic Studies in Education (Submittet). Eriksen, I. M., & Lyng, S. T. (2018). Relational aggression among boys: blind spots and hidden dramas. Gender and Education, 30(3), 396-409. doi:10.1080/09540253.2016.1214691 Erstad, O., Amdam, S., Arnseth, H., & Silseth, K. (2014). Om fremtidens kompetansebehov. En systematisk gjennomgang av internasjonale og nasjonale initiativ. Ludvigsen-utvalget. Hentet juli, 20, 2016. Gunnarsson, L. (2015). Why we keep separating the ‘inseparable’: Dialecticizing intersectionality. European Journal of Women's Studies, 24(2), 114-127. doi:10.1177/1350506815577114 Hansen, H. R. (2011a). (Be)Longing. Forståelse af mobning som længsel efter at høre til. Psyke & Logos, 32, 480-495. Hansen, H. R. (2011b). Fælleskabende didaktik: et forslag til et begreb, der samtænker antimobbing, undervisning og fælleskab. Skolen i morgen, 10, 10-15. Hansen, H. R. (2014). Fælleskabende didaktikker. Pædagogisk Psykologisk Tidsskrift, 31, 63-72. Hastrup, K. (2004). Viden om verden : en grundbog i antropologisk analyse. København: Reitzel. Kousholt, K., & Fisker, T. B. (2015). Approaches to Reduce Bullying in Schools – A Critical Analysis from the Viewpoint of First‐ and Second‐Order Perspectives on Bullying. Children & Society, 29(6), 593-603. doi:10.1111/chso.12094 Ludvigsenutvalget. (2015). NOU 2015:8 Fremtidens skole. Fornyelse av fag og kompetanser. Departementenes sikkerhets- og serviceorganisasjon. Informasjonsforvaltning Retrieved from http://nettsteder.regjeringen.no/fremtidensskole/files/2015/06/NOU201520150008000DDDP DFS.pdf. Mausethagen, S., & Mølstad, C. E. (2015). Shifts in curriculum control: contesting ideas of teacher autonomy. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 2015(2), 28520. doi:10.3402/nstep.v1.28520 Mølstad, C. E. (2015). State-based curriculum-making: approaches to local curriculum work in Norway and Finland. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 47(4), 441-461. doi:10.1080/00220272.2015.1039067 Mølstad, C. E., & Karseth, B. (2016). National Curricula in Norway and Finland: The Role of Learning Outcomes. European Educational Research Journal, 15(3), 329-344. doi:10.1177/1474904116639311 Nordenbo, S. E. (2008). Lærerkompetanser og elevers læring i førskole og skole læring i førskole og skole : Et systematisk review utført for Kunnskapsdepartementet, Oslo. In. Plauborg, H. (2011). Klasseledelse og fællesskabende didaktikker: Om meningsfulde læringsmuligheder og værdig deltagelse i undervisningen. In T. Binderup (Ed.), Klasseledelse (Vol. nr 90, pp. 67-78). Århus: Tidsskriftet KvaN. 10

Plauborg, H. (2016). Klasseledelse gentænkt. København: Hans Reitzel. Qvortrup, L. (2011). Hvordan og hvorfor taler vi om klasseledelse. In T. Binderup (Ed.), Klasseledelse (Vol. nr 90, pp. 7-15). Århus: Tidsskriftet KvaN. Ricœur, P. (1992). Oneself as another. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Ricoeur, P. (2016). What is a Text? Explanation and Understanding. . In J. B. Thompson (Ed.), Hermeneutics and the human sciences : essays on language, action, and interpretation. New York: Cambridge University Press; Reprint edition. Schott, R. M., & Søndergaard, D. M. (2014). School bullying : new theories in context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Schweber, S. (2004). Making sense of the Holocaust : lessons from classroom practice. In. Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2010). SAGE handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (2nd ed. ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE. Thornberg, R. (2011). ‘She’s Weird!’— The Social Construction of Bullying in School: A Review of Qualitative Research. Children & Society, 25(4), 258-267. doi:doi:10.1111/j.10990860.2011.00374.x Thornberg, R., Wänström, L., & Pozzoli, T. (2017). Peer victimisation and its relation to class relational climate and class moral disengagement among school children. Educational Psychology, 37(5), 524-536. doi:10.1080/01443410.2016.1150423 Waters, S. K., Cross, D. S., & Runions, K. (2009). Social and Ecological Structures Supporting Adolescent Connectedness to School: A Theoretical Model. Journal of School Health, 79(11), 516-524. doi:doi:10.1111/j.1746-1561.2009.00443.x

11