Bias in track recommendations is an important mechanism, which causes education inequity in a tracked educational system (streaming). If teacher biases in track recommendations change over time, inequity in society and in the education system may also change. We investigated changes in track recommendation bias over time for gender, immigration status and socioeconomic status (SES), based on a longitudinal empirical study of nine cohorts of Dutch students in their final year (grade 6) of primary education in the period 1995–2014. An overview of educational and societal trends was provided, alongside the empirical analysis, to explain the findings in variation over time in track recommendation bias. Results indicate that the level of track recommendations provided to the students gradually increased over time. For a similar performance, a higher track recommendation was awarded in 2014 compared to 1995. This development coincided with an increase in parental education level, the valuing of education and the introduction of lower‐status pre‐vocational education tracks. Track recommendation bias favouring students with a migrant background and female students decreased, which coincided with growing cultural intolerance and attention to the ‘boy problem’. Bias in track recommendations related to SES appeared stable, with only small deviations from year to year. The results of this study indicate that track recommendation bias and teacher considerations are dependent on time and context.

This article focuses on how Dutch newspapers represented the debate in the Netherlands in the 1970s on comprehensive education and thus influenced the Dutch Middle School experiment. Wiborg's identification of key factors of success in Scandinavia was used as a point of reference. The article shows that these key factors did not exist in the Netherlands because of the polarisation of liberals and social democrats. Furthermore, the article shows how newspapers played different roles, varying from disseminators of new ideas to sparking debate and from communicators of political views to a barometer, consequently influencing the political strategies chosen.

Within the polarised political culture of the 1970s, in which political differences were emphasised instead of being played down, Dutch right-wing politicians frequently accused left-wing politicians and educators of indoctrination in educational settings. In this period of economic stagnation and an ongoing Cold War, peace educationwhich was vulnerable to accusations of indoctrinationbecame an optional part of the secondary school curriculum. This article addresses the aims and strategies of the Working Group for Peace Education in implementing the peace education curriculum and relates it to politics, place and pedagogy. The study centres on the content, intentions, and methods of the Working Group's curriculum, especially with regard to topics relating to the Vietnam War and nuclear weapons. The results suggest that the members of the Working Group for Peace Education aspired to educate young people to become citizens who would be actively engaged in global problems. Sensitivity to possible accusations of indoctrination led the Working Group to present these ideals with caution.

No abstract

Dutch comprehensive education eventually failed on a political level, despite support from many politicians, labour unions and branches in the educational practice. In the early 1970s denominational political parties strove for a Middle School to provide equal opportunities of all children by postponing school choice. From 1973 onwards, however, the Middle School was given a socialist appeal, which led to strong critique from both the right-wing Liberal Party and teachers in higher secondary education united in The Dutch Association of Teachers. By resisting, the right-wing Liberals struck a chord with the denominational parties over their fear of indoctrination and the threatening of the constitutional freedom of education. The many proponents, including those from the field of education, tried to influence the political debate by publishing their ideas on the Middle School, but their efforts were to no avail. The outcome, therefore, was that in 1993 there were to be no Middle Schools, only the realisation of a common curriculum for the first phase of secondary education.