Hanna de Jong-Markus

Beyond Right-or-Wrong Thinking 7 127 Table 2 Composition of the teacher educators focus groups Focus group 3 Focus group 4 Number of teacher educators 2 female, 1 male 2 female, 2 male Disciplines of teacher educators Dutch, history, religious education arts, Dutch, geography, religious education 7.4 Instruments Interview guides were prepared for the focus groups with open-ended questions about religious diversity in OPPSs and about the contributions of the OPPSs teacher education for equipping (trainee) teachers on religious diversity (see Appendix [XI]). With the alumni, the questions addressed what was significant for them regarding their own development, and what topics could be reinforced in teacher education. The teacher educators discussed what students should learn in teacher education, and what should require more attention. For the alumni, elaborating on a real-life case was included as a catalyst for the conversation. This case was chosen because it could be related to both internal and external religious diversity. For the teacher educators, we made distinctions between the knowledge, attitudes, and skills that should be developed because this is central to DCU as an expression of a holistic view of people and education (phrased as: ‘head, heart, and hands’) (De Muynck, 2018). Moreover, in the teacher educators’ focus groups, we worked with a visualization of the estimated entry levels and the desired exit levels of the trainee teachers. The interview guides were tested in a pilot with five people, after which one case was chosen instead of several real-life cases, as was initially planned. 7.5 Data Collection and Data Analysis The focus groups involved a moderator and an assistant. Each focus group was held at the participants’ workplaces. The ones with alumni lasted 75 and 90 minutes, the ones with teacher educators both lasted over 100 minutes. The focus groups were audiorecorded and the assistant created a report on the spot. Afterwards, the assistant further developed the report based on the audio recordings, and the researcher checked it. Then, in close consultation, they distinguished the various meaningful units in the data and coded them thematically (cf. Braun and Clarke, 2006; Elliott and Timulak, 2005). Coding was done in Dutch (cf. Van Nes et al., 2010). The codes were then jointly categorized (cf. Elliott and Timulak, 2005), after which the results were described. To stay close to the