Abstract:

Context:
As a result of social processes such as labour migration, forced migration and globalization, our society has become more diverse in terms of ethnicity and religion (Stevens et.al., 2006; Franken, 2016; OECD, 2016). This is clearly visible in the Flemish educational landscape where teachers are often confronted with conflicts that arise from alleged differences in the framework of reference -regarding norms and values (Kavadias et.al., 2007; Geldof, 2016). These differences can lead to controversial issues and polarization in schools when teachers lack the necessary dialogue skills and methods in order to facilitate the dialogue about controversial themes (Maréchal et.al., 2014; Van Alstein, 2018). Moreover, creating an inclusive educational environment, a sense of belonging and mutual dialogue will not be possible. A major initiative in this respect is the project of Democratic Dialogue. It was launched in 2015 within the Erasmus University College Brussels in order to facilitate a constructive dialogue regarding controversial topics in Flemish schools by the guidance of its multidisciplinary team.

Aims:
This abstract aims to study the methods of the project Democratic Dialogue in Flemish secondary schools, in particular the conflict and classroom management methods used by the dialogue coaches during their interventions in schools. This is also the research question.

Methods:
There's no scientific data available regarding the methods of project Democratic Dialogue. Therefore, we opted for an explorative case study (Bryman, 2012). Conducting interviews is an essential research approach in order to gain insight about the experiences and developments of individuals in education (Seidman, 2013). Two expert interviews were conducted per dialogue coach (N=8) regarding their methods and effectiveness of dialogue coaching. Thus, a total of 16 expert interviews were conducted to understand the methods, objectives and assumptions of effectiveness regarding their dialogue coaching.

Results:
We can determine five different methods from the interviews with the dialogue coaches (N=8): Nonviolent communication (N = 3) with communication techniques such as rational argumentation; observing and active listening; forwarding of (open) questions; paraphrase and summarize. Subsequently, intercultural communication (N = 2) with the objective of developing an intercultural awareness. The Socratic method (N=1) characterized by forming your own opinion (self-analysis); arguing; reflecting and meta-conversation. The use of role play based on the request for help or problem (N=1), in particular to trigger confrontation, feeling of empathy and reflection among the participants. And finally communicating about theological knowledge when dealing with specific religion-inspired conflicts (N=1).

Conclusion:
The project Democratic Dialogue aims to create a dialogical attitude by coaching teachers with conflict management methods such as nonviolent communication; intercultural communication; Socratic method; case-related role play and theological knowledge transfer. The long-term objective would be that teachers will be able to act preventively in conflict situations.

Keywords:

Controversial topics at school, conflict management methods, democratic dialogue.