311 Conclusion and Discussion 10 which I did not find in the TAR research projects I studied, could be a new contribution to enrich the TAR methodology. What seemed more difficult when it came to applying the TAR methodology was the positioning of the insider and outsider groups. In its most common elaboration, TAR means that a faith-based institution is visited by external TAR researchers. The researchers form the outsider group, while the participants from the institution form the insider group, which owns the practice. In this study, however, such a clear distinction could not be made. Indeed, it was the insider team that owned the practice of Christian teacher training, whereas the outsider team owned the practice of Christian primary education for a highly diverse child population—experiences that were lacking in the teacher training. This dynamic made it difficult to decide when it was time for separate meetings of the insider and outsider groups. In practice, this was mainly (albeit not exclusively) done when specific ideas for DCU’s curriculum were considered. The same dynamic also led to the subsequent choice of insider leadership during the study. This could have rendered the position of the main researcher too strong, although this was avoided through the specific knowledge and character of the members of the outsider group, some of whom had many years of experience in primary education and leadership as well as a strong affinity with the central topic of preparing Christian traineee teachers to deal with higher levels of diversity and complexity. What I fully realise is that the whole of this study, as presented in this dissertation, may come across as having such a broad scope as to be somewhat superficial in the sense that the identified core components for Christian citizenship formation still leave significant space for further interpretation and application. However, I contend that this was inevitable, given the holistic nature of the study. This study should be appreciated for what it is—namely, a broad analysis of a broad, interdisciplinary topic with consequences for one’s whole educational approach in relation to the changing sociocultural reality. It leads to a practice-theory that is neither closed nor ready. A number of core components have been presented. The claim is that they fit together holistically, which is not the same as presenting a completely new paradigm in education. New sociocultural developments indicate the need for a new approach—and this study presents both its need and its general outline, meaning the characteristics that it requires. In so doing, it discloses the broader movement towards WCD for Christian education with a concrete proposal of certain core components for citizenship formation as part of Christian teacher training. The fact that this leaves many questions unanswered leads to this dissertation’s final section.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw