Managing the Controversial Issue of Racism – Exploring the Agency of School Principals in the Swedish Education System

Year 2025, Volume: 10 Issue: 4, 1032 - 1069, 24.12.2025

Magnus Larsson , Ulf Leo , Pär Poromaa Isling , Anna Rantala , Björn Ahlström

https://doi.org/10.30828/real.1661977

Abstract

While there is abundant literature on how teachers can and should manage controversial issues (CI) in schools, far less attention has been paid to how school principals manage CI. We explore this topic by applying a socio-temporal understanding of agency to explore how school leaders understand their role in managing the specific controversial issue of racism. The study comprises interviews with principals in which they express how they understand and manage the controversial issue of racism. The findings show that the principals’ primary temporal direction of agency has consequences for how they manage racism. Principals primarily directed towards the present (practical-evaluative) or the future (projective) demonstrate more expanded agency, while principals primarily directed towards the past (iterative) display less expanded agency in managing the controversial issue of racism. One finding of the study is that principal deal with controversial issues seemingly to the same degree as teachers, however, they do so in different ways and under different circumstances. We therefore propose a conceptual shift from controversial issues to controversial spaces to better adhere to the specificities of principals’ encounter with controversy.

Keywords

agency , principals , racism , controversial issues , controversial spaces

References

• Åkerlund, M. (2023). The Sweden paradox: US far-right fantasies of a dystopian utopia, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 49(19), 4789-4808. DOI: 10.1080/1369183X.2023.2208293
• Alemanji, A. A. & Mafi, B. (2018). Antiracism education? A study of an antiracism workshop in Finland. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 62(2), 186–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2016.1212260
• Anders, P. & Shudak. (2016). Criteria for controversy: A theoretic approach. Thresholds in Education, 39(1), 20–30.
• Årman, H. (2021). Order and turbulence in a Swedish bathroom: Youths’ negotiations of the meaning of ‘queer’. Gender and Language, 15(4), 476–502. https://doi.org/10.1558/genl.18826
• Arneback, E., Bergh, A., & Tryggvason, Á. (2023). On teachers’ professionalism when colleagues express racism – challenges and choices. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 67(1), 169–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2021.1990123
• Balibar, É., & Wallerstein, I. M. (2011). Race, nation, class: Ambiguous identities. Verso.
• Biesta, G., Priestley, M., & Robinson, S. (2015). The role of beliefs in teacher agency. Teachers and Teaching, 21(6), 624–640.
• Brauckmann, S., Pashiardis, P., & Ärlestig, H. (2023). Bringing context and educational leadership together: Fostering the professional development of school principals. Professional Development in Education, 49(1), 4–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2020.1747105
• Brooks, J. S., & Watson, T. N. (2019). School leadership and racism: An ecological perspective. Urban Education, 54(5), 631–655. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085918783821
• Bunar, N., & Juvonen, P. (2021). ‘Not (yet) ready for the mainstream’ – newly arrived migrant students in a separate educational program. Journal of Education Policy, 37(6), 986–1008. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2021.1947527
• Council of Europe (2015). Teaching controversial issues. Council of Europe publishing: Strasbourg Cedex. https://edoc.coe.int/en/human-rights-democratic-citizenship-and-interculturalism/7738-teaching-controversial-issues.html
• Council of Europe (2017). Managing controversy—Developing a strategy for handling controversy and teaching controversial issues in schools. Council of Europe publishing: Strasbourg Cedex. https://book.coe.int/en/human-rights-democratic-citizenship-and-interculturalism/7247-managing-controversy-developing-a-strategy-for-handling-controversy-and-teaching-controversial-issues-in-schools.html
• Dimick, M. (2023). Race and reification. Historical Materialism, 31(3), 69–105. https://doi.org/10.1163/1569206x-bja10016
• Emirbayer, M., & Mische, A. (1998). What is agency? American Journal of Sociology, 103(4), 962–1023. https://doi.org/10.1086/231294
• Eteläpelto, A., Vähäsantanen, K., Hökkä, P., & Paloniemi, S. (2013). What is agency? Conceptualizing professional agency at work. Educational Research Review, 10, 45–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.05.001
• Fjellström, R. (2004). Skolområdets etik: En studie i skolans fostran. Studentlitteratur.
• Fluehr-Lobban, C. (2018). Race and Racism: An Introduction. Rowman & Littlefield.
• Fransson, G. and Grannäs, J. (2013). Dilemmatic spaces in educational contexts – towards a conceptual framework for dilemmas in teacher work. Teachers and Teaching, Vol. 19(1) s. 4–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2013.744195
• Fullan, M. (1993). Change forces: Probing the depths of educational reform. Falmer: London.
• Fullan, M. (1998). Change forces: The sequel. Falmer: London.
• Fullan, M. (2003). Change forces with a vengeance. Routledge Falmer: London.
• Hammer, A., & Lenz, C. (2022). Exploring teacher agency to address controversial issues in religious education – a forum theatre and action research approach. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 0(0), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2022.2130976
• Hanberger, A. (2018). Rethinking democratic evaluation for a polarised and mediatised society. Evaluation, 24(4), 382–399.
• Hand, M. (2008). What should we teach as controversial? A defense of the epistemic criterion. Educational Theory, 58(2), 213–228. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5446.2008.00285.x
• Hand, M., & Levinson, R. (2012). Discussing controversial issues in the classroom. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 44(6), 614–629. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00732.x
• Hardy, I., & Salo, P. (2022). The particularity of practice: Superintendents’ agency for school development. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 25(2), 211–237. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2019.1629696
• Hess, D. E. (2009). Controversy in the classroom: The democratic power of discussion. Routledge.
• Hsieh, H.-F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
• Journell, W. (2022) Classroom controversy in the midst of political polarization: The essential role of school administrators. NASSP Bulletin 106(2): 133-153. https://doi.org/10.1177/019263652211005
• Larsson, A., & Lindström, N. (2020). Controversial societal issues in education: Explorations of moral, critical and didactical implications. Acta Didactica Norden, 14(4), Article 4. https://doi.org/10.5617/adno.8380
• Laursen, R. (2020). Does the combination of professional leadership and learning management systems signal the end of democratic schooling? Research in Educational Administration & Leadership, 5(2), 342-374. DOI: 10.30828/real/2020.2.2
• Leithwood, K. (2021). A review of evidence about equitable school leadership. Education Sciences, 11(8), 377. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11080377
• Lindgren, N. (2020). The political dimension of consuming animal products in education: An analysis of upper-secondary student responses when school lunch turns green and vegan. Environmental Education Research, 26(5), 684–700. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2020.1752626
• Misco, T. (2013). The importance of context for teaching controversial issues in international settings. International Education, 42(1). https://trace.tennessee.edu/internationaleducation/vol42/iss1/5
• Odenbring, Y., & Johansson, T. (2019). “If they’re allowed to wear a veil, we should be allowed to wear caps”: Cultural diversity and everyday racism in a rural school in Sweden. Journal of Rural Studies, 72, 85–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2019.10.033
• Priestly, M., Biesta, G., & Robinson, S. (2017). Teacher Agency: An ecological approach. Bloomsbury Academic. Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., McNaughton Nicholls, C., & Ormston, R. (2014). Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers. SAGE.
• Sætra, E. (2019). Teaching controversial issues: A Pragmatic view of the criterion debate. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 53(2), 323–339. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9752.12361
• Sætra, E. (2021). Discussing controversial issues in the classroom: Elements of good practice. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 65(2), 345–357. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2019.1705897
• SFS (2010:800). Skollagen. [Swedish Education Act]. https://www.riksdagen.se/sv/dokument-och-lagar/dokument/svensk-forfattningssamling/skollag-2010800_sfs-2010-800/
• Stradling, R. (1984). The teaching of controversial issues: An evaluation [1]. Educational Review, 36(2), 121–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/0013191840360202
• Wenner, J. A., & Settlage, J. (2015). School leader enactments of the structure/agency dialectic via buffering. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(4), 503–515. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21212
• Zumpe, E. (2024). School improvement at the next level of work: the struggle for collective agency in a school facing adversity. Journal of Educational Change, 25, 485–529. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-023-09500-x