Ainscow et al. (2023, p. 6) highlight “that inclusion and equity in education are studied, encouraged and evaluated with an intersectional view”. To transform teacher education for social justice, Pugach et al. (2021, p. 237) emphasize the need to strengthen intersectional perspectives (Crenshaw, 1989) across subjects, disciplines and faculties. This is closely linked to the question raised by Klieve et al. (2023, p. 98) of “how we can reimagine education as an interdisciplinary space for collaboration” and an intersectionally and internationally oriented one.
This symposium is based on a collaboration in teacher education focusing on diversity, equity and inclusion by scholars and teacher educators in the fields of literacy, social studies education, English didactics and inclusive education from Midwestern US and Germany. While there is a long tradition of educational research and discussions across these contexts (Jornitz & Wilmer, 2021), new challenges for collaboration on diversity, equity and inclusion arise within the ongoing „backlash against this idea(l)” (Powell, 2023, p. xxii). The global rise of ‚far-right‘ political actors, while by no means a monolithic group, is associated with challenges as schooling and higher education form “arenas for new culture wars” and “strategic arenas for far-right actors to disseminate their values, beliefs and ideas“ (On Education, 2024).
In this context, questions on “activist attitudes, or even merely the orientation of research towards the instigation of practice transformation” and “political positioning of researchers” (CfP) arise within in our research and teaching collaboration. In this respect, we refer to global and local perspectives, since e.g., „retreating behind the safe walls of the ivory tower of science“ (CfP), as stated with regard to the IFO conference, raises questions on underlying ideas on safety and academia when confronted with constant disruptions concerning diversity, education and inclusion (DEI) and higher education in the current US context.
After a brief introduction (5min), there are three presentations (each presentation: 12min + 3min clarifying questions): while the first two presentations focus on the US and German context, the third presentation discusses experiences within our joint online course in teacher education and leads to a joint discussion (30min).
By thus, we aim for ‚glocal’ perspectives to critically reflect on engaging “in dialogue about complex social issues that are intertwined between the local and the global“ (Niemczyk, 2019, p. 4). In doing so, we negotiate our understanding of the intersecting positions and responsibilities of scholars and activists, while highlighting how scholar-activist engagement remains pivotal and "in need of resistance" (Bashiri, 2024, p. 73) in the context of social justice and inclusive education, as it continues to be re-defined, de-legitimized and instrumentalized through distinct political rhetoric and action.

1 Stops and Starts: Dysfluency in the Work on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in the US

Although dedicated to using our research to support social justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion (DEI) in our contexts, it has become more difficult, particularly in the last year. Faced with local, state, and national mandates that scholarship remains neutral, that federal funding related in any way to DEI initiatives or special populations be revoked, and with the need to change the language we use in our research and teaching to avoid scrutiny, we find ourselves grappling with dysfluency in our work.
To address and work on educational issues collaboratively, Petrie et al. (2020, p. 174) generally argue in favor of creating “communicative spaces across research settings”. This includes mutual discussions and negotiations that “strive for (...) intersubjective agreement about words and ideas in the language they use” (ibid). The need to change our language poses specific challenges to this endeavor, which also affects our agency in terms of how we can position ourselves and voice perspectives within our work in social studies education and literacy education.
For example, a central question affecting our work is: To what extent does the need to employ an ‘alternative language’ lead to tensions regarding the risk of self-censorship and the powerful potential of “using resistance as a reactionary measure against existing forces” (Bashiri, 2024, p. 73)?

2 Teacher Education for Inclusion in Times of Backlash in Germany

Boger and Simon’s (2024, p. 34) points to paradoxes when discrimination and power critical perspectives, often strongly entangled with activist contexts, become mandatory. They emphasize underlying tensions between transformation and reproduction as knowledge projects like courses on ‘heterogeneity’ are not static, but dynamic and contested (ibid).
This is particularly relevant when inclusive education appears „under threat“ (ÖFEB, 2025). The increasing attention paid to intersectional perspectives in discourses on inclusive education (Haas & Penkwitt, 2023) emphasizes the need to create spaces for power-critical reflection within (initial) teacher education (Ivanova-Chesse et al., 2022). However, developing such spaces is challenged, e.g., in the context of an increased focus on the (alleged) need for ‘neutrality’ of (future) teachers fueled by ‘far-right’ narratives (Koschmieder & Koschschmieder, 2019).
This presentation focuses on tensions or “issues” (Clarke et al., 2018) within discourses on teacher education for inclusion in German-speaking contexts. Understanding reflection as a collective social practice will serve as the starting point for a joint reflection on promoting teacher education for inclusion in times of ongoing “backlash against this idea(l)” (Powell, 2023, p. xxii).

3 Stepping Aside to Keep Going: Reflections Based on a Transcultural Online Seminar

Bourdieu (1998, p. 57) claims for social scientists “to devote some of their time and energy, in their activist mode”, e.g., “by helping non-professionals to equip themselves with specific weapons of resistance”. In teacher education, this is also relevant for (future) professionals, especially in light of the global rise of the ‚far-right‘: “at a time of conservative backlash against teaching for social justice, we need to speak back to these forces and show the power of the classroom to help us to imagine alternative futures” (Hytten, 2014, p. 392).
At the same time, navigating tensions in teacher education, like promoting power-critical reflection within its existing structures (Florian & Camedda, 2020, p.5), which (re)produce differences (Ivanova-Chesse et al., 2022), becomes even more challenging when ‘far-right’ narratives promote selective school structures, tracking and ‘merit’ (On Education, 2024).
This presentation focuses on our collaborative online seminar on transcultural perspectives on inclusion and diversity. It aims to provide 'glocal’ perspectives on current social, cultural, and political discourses and developments to support US and German students’ critical thinking and reflective practice, and to create space for mutual dialogue in initial teacher education in the US and Germany. Compromises were made by (re)shaping the syllabus to ‚fly under the radar‘. Following a critical literacy perspective (Vasquez et al., 2019), we discuss and (re)envision ‘what, how and why to teach’ in the current situation.

Anderes

Ainscow, M., Biewer, G. & Moser, V. (2023). Preface. In S. Seitz et al. (Hrsg.), International perspectives on inclusive education. (S. 5–10).
Bashiri, F. (2024). Conceptualizing Scholar-Activism Through Scholar-Activist Accounts. In P. Mattsson et al. (Eds.), Making Universities Matter. (pp. 61-97).
Boger, M.-A. & Simon, N. (2022). Kritik im Pflichtmodul Heterogenität. In O. Ivanova-Chessex, et al. (Hrsg.), Lehrerinnenbildung. (Re-) Visionen für die Migrationsgesellschaft (S. 20–35).
Bourdieu, P. (1998). Acts of resistance. Against the new myths of our time. Polity Press.
Hytten, K. (2014). “Teaching as and for Activism: Challenges and Possibilities.” Philosophy of Education, 70, 385-394.
Ivanova-Chesse, O., Shure, S. & Steinbach, A. (2022). [...]Einleitende Überlegungen. In Dies. (Hrsg.), Lehrerinnenbildung. (Re-) Visionen für die Migrationsgesellschaft (S. 7–17).
Koschmieder, C. & Koschmieder, J. (2019). Wider das Märchen von der Neutralität. Wie Schule mit der AfD umgehen sollte. In J. Schedler et al. (Hrsg.), Rechtsextremismus in Schule, Unterricht und Lehrkräftebildung (S. 99–109).
Niemczyk, E. K. (2019). Glocal Education in Practice. BCES Conference Books, 17, 1-6.
On Education (2024). Far-right actors and education: The global circulation of their ideas, agendas, and policies. On Education. Journal for Research and Debate, 7(20).
Petrie, K., Kemmis, S., & Edwards-Groves, C. (2020). Critical Praxis for Critical Times. In K. Mahon et al. (Eds.), Pedagogy, education, and praxis in critical times (pp. 163–178).
Powell, J. J. W. (2023). Forword. In B. Amrhein & S. Naraian (Eds.), Reading inclusion divergently. (pp. xxi–xxiii).
Pugach, M. C., Matewos, A. M. & Gomez-Najarro, J. (2021). Disability and the Meaning of Social Justice in Teacher Education Research. Journal of Teacher Education, 72(2), 237–250.
Vasquez, V. M., Janks, H., & Comber, B. (2019). Critical literacy as a way of being and doing. Language Arts, 96(5), 3