Hanna de Jong-Markus

Chapter 1 26 2013; Weisse, 2009). Moreover, the literature evidences the ideal of the teacher as an agent of change, including social change: someone who brings about positive changes in people’s lives, at both the individual and the societal level (Bourn, 2015; Fullan, 1993; Pantić & Florian, 2015; Van der Heijden, 2017). These two levels are—as described earlier—also explicitly recognisable in citizenship education. In the case of the teacher as agent of social change, the connotation is that the teacher plays a contributory role in social justice (Bourn, 2015; Pantić & Florian, 2015). The focus on the teacher as change agent has increased because of the rapid changes in our society and the high demands this places on teachers and other professionals (Leu, 2005; Van der Heijden et al., 2015; Vereniging Hogescholen, 2019). Important personal characteristics of teachers as change agents are mastery (giving guidance and being accessible, positive, committed, trustful and self-assured), collaboration (being collegial), entrepreneurship (being innovative and feeling responsible) and lifelong learning (being eager to learn and being reflective) (Van der Heijden et al., 2015; Van der Heijden, 2017). Pantić and Florian (2015) synthesise that knowledge and understanding, the capacity to engage with educational change, and the capacity to reflect on one’s own beliefs and values are central teaching competencies when change agency is at stake. Within teacher education programmes it is also spoken about educating teachers as reflective practitioners (Leu, 2005; cf. Schön, 1973). Characteristics that are important for change agency, namely innovation and reflection, can be recognised in that idea. For example, for preservice professional training (undergraduate) it is stated that training to be reflective practitioners means paying attention to reflective skills, curiosity about knowledge and the ability to systematically acquire and apply knowledge (Leijnse et al., 2006; cf. Enthoven & Oostdam, 2014; Leu, 2005; Vereniging Hogescholen, 2019). Teachers are expected to make intentional choices and decisions at work (Van der Heijden et al., 2018). The relative autonomy they have in doing so is peculiar to teaching as a professional endeavour (Kelchtermans, 2012; Kole, 2011; cf. Pantić & Florian, 2015). Moreover, teaching is a moral profession (Fullan, 1993; Hansen, 2011 in Bourn, 2015; Kelchtermans, 2012; Kole, 2011; Lukacs, 2015). Fullan (1993) states that the combination of moral purpose and change agency is necessary for good teachers. Right when it comes to citizenship education, nowadays the role of teachers themselves is emphasised and said to deserve more attention (Inspectie van het Onderwijs, 2016; Van Waveren, 2020). De Muynck (2009) shows that, as pedagogy is by definition normative, one can never fully rely on practice when it comes to action, but will also always use concepts that have a guiding load, often coming from philosophical sources (e.g., Aristotle or the Bible). In the citizenship task normative questions are clearly recognisable, for example, when it