Received: 24 April 2023

| Accepted: 13 December 2023

DOI: 10.1002/berj.3955

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Combatting conspiracies in the classroom:
Teacher strategies and perceived outcomes
Lee Jerome1| Ben Kisby2| Steve McKay2

1

Department of Education, Middlesex
University, London, UK

2

School of Social and Political Sciences,
University of Lincoln, Lincoln, UK
Correspondence
Lee Jerome, Department of Education,
Middlesex University, The Burroughs,
London NW4 4BT, UK.
Email: l.jerome@mdx.ac.uk
Funding information
Middlesex University

Abstract
This article draws on data from a specially commissioned representative survey, which elicited
responses from 7691 teachers in primary and secondary schools in England, to examine how teachers
perceive young people's engagement with a variety
of different conspiracy theories in school settingsand how they respond to them. Approximately 40%
of teachers report encountering students who supported conspiracy theories. In response, teachers
use a wide range of contradictory strategies, including opening up discussion, closing it down, challenging students in class and reporting individuals as
safeguarding concerns. The research evidence suggests that several of these strategies are likely to beineffective or even backfire to reinforce conspiracy
thinking. Unsurprisingly then, few teachers reportsuccessful responses. The article concludes that theevidence of possible negative impacts of unpreparedteachers confronting conspiracy theories at schoolmeans that teachers need to be better equipped
through training, support and further research.
KEYWORDS
citizenship education, conspiracy theories, controversial issues,teaching

I NTRO DUCTI O N
Recent years have witnessed a rise in concerns by policymakers, academics and others
about the prevalence of conspiracy theories, especially following the global spread of theThis is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution
and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
© 2024 The Authors. British Educational Research Journal published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Educational
Research Association.
Br Educ Res J. 2024;00:1–21.	﻿	

wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/berj

| 1

|   

JEROME et al.

Key insights
What are the main issues this article addresses?
This article considers the nature of contemporary conspiracy theories, the extent towhich teachers encounter them in schools and the kinds of responses they adopt
when students raise them.
What are the main insights that the article provides?
A large minority of teachers (40%) encounter students who support conspiracy theories but, although teachers report adopting a wide range of strategies in response,
very few consider them to have been successful.

COVID-­19 pandemic and the accompanying dissemination of conspiracy theories related
to COVID. There are, in fact, a wide range of different conspiracy theories in circulation incontemporary societies, and conspiracy theories have most likely been in existence for as
long as human communities. However, since social media took off in the late 1990s, suchtheories have been able to spread quickly, with false information easily amplified and propagated, both inadvertently and deliberately. Drawing on data from a specially commissioned
representative survey, which elicited responses from teachers in primary and secondary
schools in England (n = 7691), this article examines how teachers perceive young people's
engagement with a variety of different conspiracy theories in school settings and how they
respond to them.
The article is structured as follows. First, it situates the research within current literature on conspiracy theories, discussing concerns about the rapid spread of false
information and about young people's susceptibility to conspiracy theories, as well as educational responses to the presence of conspiracy theories in society and teachers' dilemmas when considering how best to deal with students raising such theories at school.
Second, the article summarises the research methodology. Third, it sets out the survey
results. It provides evidence that teachers contend with students discussing conspiracy
theories in different contexts at school and that a significant proportion of the teachers
sampled report encountering students who support conspiracy theories to some extent.
The article highlights the fact that different groups of teachers have different levels ofconfidence in their ability to deal with students mentioning conspiracy theories, and it
discusses the evidence that teachers respond in a wide range of different ways. Finally,
the article argues that it is problematic that such a variety of different approaches are
adopted by teachers, especially given their own lack of confidence that they are having
a positive influence on their students. It argues that the evidence of possible negative
impacts of unprepared teachers confronting conspiracy theories at school—unintentionally serving to reinforce student support for such theories—means that teachers need tobe better equipped to deal with conspiracy theories; this includes teachers being madeaware of research evidence and helped to develop effective strategies, such as planningsuitable lessons and managing and, when necessary, closing down inappropriate conversations, as part of their professional development.

14693518, 0, Downloaded from https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.3955 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [30/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

2

  

| 3

LITE R ATUR E R E V I E W
Conspiracy theories, infodemics and mis/disinformation
Whilst there is no universally accepted definition of a conspiracy theory, we take as ourstarting point that they generally include an explanation for an event or state of affairs that
holds that this situation has been caused by individuals or groups of conspirators, usually
very powerful and working in secret, and with nefarious intent (see Bale, 2007, pp. 47–51;
Barkun, 2013, p. 3; Keeley, 1999, p. 116). Conspiracy theories invariably offer significantly
fewer probable explanations for events than other non-­conspiracy-­based accounts and assume that when an event occurs, it must have been intended by someone; randomness
or coincidence or accident are dismissed (Bale, 2007, p. 53; see also Barkun, 2013, p. 3;
Swami et al., 2010, p. 751). A key feature of a conspiracy theory, as compared to a scientific theory, is that it relies on circular or tautological reasoning and cannot be falsified; thelack of evidence supporting a conspiracy theory and evidence that contradicts it are both
treated as somehow demonstrating that the conspiracy theory is true (Barkun, 2013, p. 7;
Keeley, 1999, pp. 120–121) and that the official narrative must involve some kind of cover-­up(Goertzel, 2010, pp. 494–495). Our starting point for this paper is therefore that conspiracy
theories tend to rely on overly elaborate explanations, ascribe deliberate and malign personal intentionality to outcomes rather than seeking systemic explanations, and are often
self-­sustaining and resistant to contrary evidence.
Conspiracy theories are not new and have a long history (see Greig, 2006), and frequently
scapegoat particular groups, such as Jewish people (Aaronovitch, 2010, ch. 1; van Prooijen& Douglas, 2017, pp. 324–326). Of course, conspiracies do sometimes occur, for example,
the involvement of the then US President, Richard Nixon, in the Watergate scandal—theconspiracy to break into the Democratic Party headquarters in 1972 and the subsequentattempt to hide this fact (Woodward & Bernstein, 2006), or tobacco companies conspiring
to conceal information about the harmful effects of their products for many years after theyknew about them, including funding public relations firms to try and muddy the waters andcast doubt on the scientific evidence (Brandt, 2007; Hilts, 1996). However, conspiracy theories have been linked with a wide variety of very serious negative consequences. For example, in the recent past, the hundreds of thousands of avoidable deaths from AIDS in South
Africa as a result of the South African government's groundless questioning of HIV scienceand the resulting delay of antiretroviral treatment (Nattrass, 2012, ch. 5); the false claimsof a link between MMR vaccines and autism in children by the discredited British former
physician Andrew Wakefield, which led to a fall in vaccination rates in several countries (seeDeer, 2020); and the fictitious QAnon ‘deep state’ conspiracy theories in the United States,
including the baseless claim that the 2020 US Presidential election was stolen from Donald
Trump, which played a part in the violent US Capitol Building attack on 6 January 2021 (seeRothschild, 2021).
Early work on conspiracy theories, such as that of the American historian Richard
Hofstadter (1966), viewed conspiratorial thinking as pathological (Butter & Knight, 2019, pp.
34–36; see also Radnitz & Underwood, 2017). For Hofstadter (1966), since the establishment of the republic, Americans have had a tendency to believe all sorts of unfounded andparanoid fantasies, reflecting a lack of trust of those in positions of power in society—and
this thinking, held particularly by those on the political fringes, especially (but not only) on
the political right, could be seen as a threat to liberal democracy. However, more recent work
has questioned the notion of pathology, finding evidence that significant numbers of citizens
hold conspiracy theories of one kind or another (Brotherton, 2015; Oliver & Wood, 2014).
Sunstein and Vermeule (2009) have described conspiracy theories as being underpinned
by a ‘crippled epistemology’ through which advocates adopt a belief without understanding

14693518, 0, Downloaded from https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.3955 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [30/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

COMBATTING CONSPIRACIES IN THE CLASSROOM|   

JEROME et al.

how genuine knowledge is constructed. Others have stressed the psychological functionof conspiracy theory in fuelling insider/outsider identity. For example, van Prooijen and van
Vugt (2018) have argued that belief in conspiracy theories has evolutionary origins; that it
was useful for early humans to share beliefs with other members of their community and tobe suspicious of groups they did not belong to, given the dangerous nature of the conditions
in which they lived. Moreover, where such theories were once limited to the margins of public
discourse, they have become increasingly prevalent since the late twentieth century, driven,in part, by technological change and the development of social media, leading to the ubiquityof easily accessible online information (Andrade, 2020, pp. 513–514).
This has coincided with the rise of concern over ‘infodemics’, a term first coined in 2003
by the political scientist and journalist David Rothkopf in a column in The Washington Poston the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) outbreak (Rothkopf, 2003; see also
WHO, 2020). It refers to the rapid and extensive proliferation of both accurate and inaccurate information about something. An infodemic occurs when there is a very large volume of
information available about an issue or problem, both offline and online, and where, throughthe spread of false information, whether unintentionally (misinformation) or intentionally(disinformation), citizens can become confused and distrustful of authorities, which may
then struggle to deliver effective responses. Misinformation and disinformation can infiltratemainstream news discourse and legitimise false narratives. Some writers have expressed
concerns about the pervasiveness of ‘fake news’, that is the propagation of false stories
that appear to be news, and about the implications of a ‘post-­truth’ environment, in whichappeals to emotion take precedence over factually and evidentially based assertions (d'Ancona, 2017; McIntyre, 2018). In February 2020, as the severity of the COVID-­19 pandemic
started to become clear, the Director-­General of the World Health Organisation (WHO),
Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, told the Munich Security Conference: ‘We're not just fighting an epidemic; we're fighting an infodemic. Fake news spreads faster and more easily than
this virus and is just as dangerous’ (Ghebreyesus, 2020).
UNESCO (2020, p. 3) has also referred to a ‘disinfodemic’ in which 30–40% of social
media posts are from unreliable sources, are misleading or include manipulated content.
This includes disinformation, with the promotion of false stories about the source and treatments of the virus, and misinformation (distorted interpretations of legitimate sources) put
forward by politicians and other public figures (Reilly, 2020). Rubin (2019) uses the epidemiological disease model to discuss mis/disinformation, arguing that we are witnessing avirulent pathogen (widespread false and misleading information online), susceptible hosts(individuals overwhelmed by information and lacking the skills to discern the accurate fromthe inaccurate) and a conducive environment (poorly regulated social media platforms). That
environment is truly transnational and, whilst governments may attempt to protect their populations from the virus by controlling borders, there is no such option for controlling the infodemic (Bridgman et al., 2021). But this is more than a metaphor, or a parallel process; thereis evidence that the infodemic and the pandemic are reciprocally linked.
In previous epidemics, such as Ebola, a complex web of misinformed beliefs arose aroundthe causes and treatments, and these were resistant to the provision of ‘fact-­checking’ services (MacPherson, 2018). In the early stages of the COVID-­19 pandemic, a significant minority of UK citizens believed that COVID-­19 ‘was planned by pharmaceutical corporations
and government agencies’ (10%), ‘seems to be connected to 5G mobile networks’ (5%) orwas ‘probably created in a lab’ (24%) (Allington & Dhavan, 2020). Such beliefs are also associated with being less likely to follow public health advice, and similar levels of false beliefs
are also reflected in international data (Kleis Nielsen et al., 2020).
These beliefs represent a shift from believing individual items of disinformation, to connecting with broader conspiracy theories about the pandemic underpinned by a wider narrative about secretive groups with evil intent. Here, conspiracy theory refers to ‘explanations

14693518, 0, Downloaded from https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.3955 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [30/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

4

  

| 5

for events that implicate secretive and powerful groups who cover up information to suit theirinterests’ and they tend to flourish in times of crisis, when people are ‘struggling to makesense of a chaotic world’ (Jolley et al., 2021, p. 500). However, as Jolley and his colleagues
point out, whilst the adoption of conspiracy theories may not actually fulfil people's need tomake sense of the world, they do have other predictable negative consequences, including
a loss of trust, the adoption of risky behaviour, a rejection of collective political action and antagonistic feelings to outgroups or those being scapegoated within the conspiracy theories(typically including a racist or antisemitic dimension; OSCE/ODIHR, n.d.). COVID-­19 disinformation has been positively correlated with a rise in hate speech (Uyheng & Carley, 2020) andthe UN Secretary General expressed his concern that ‘the pandemic continues to unleash
a tsunami of hate and xenophobia, scapegoating and scare-­mongering’ (Guterres, 2020),
leading Human Rights Watch (2020) to call for national action plans to counter the intolerance shown towards Chinese and Asian people in many western countries.

Young people and conspiracy thinking
Whilst much of the data relating to these issues is drawn from adults, there are several reasons to be particularly concerned about young people. They are less likely than adults tobe able to differentiate true from false stories (NLT, 2018; Wineburg et al., 2019), more likely
to use social media sources (Ofcom, 2020b) and use different social media platforms fromadults (Kemp, 2020). Research in the United Kingdom and Canada suggests that young
people returned (at least initially) to more traditional trusted news outlets for information on
COVID-­19 (Parsons Leigh et al., 2020). However, UK data suggest that young people havebeen more likely to develop news fatigue and avoid COVID-­19 news (Ofcom, 2020b), andhave been less likely to follow public health advice (Ofcom, 2020a). Although young people
are not the sole (or even primary) group distributing misinformation (Guess et al., 2019),
research shows that they often share content they later find out is unreliable (Robb, 2017).
In addition, whilst in theory young people may encounter a wide variety of views/news, inreality they often access news that is mediated through ‘opinion leaders’ in their friendshipand social media networks (Bergström & Jervelycke Belfrage, 2018).
In relation to conspiracy theories, there has been little work focused explicitly on young
people, but what has been carried out by Jolley et al. (2021) suggests that 14–18 years ofage may be a period of increased susceptibility. Hope not Hate reports that its research
has consistently found that younger people are more open to conspiracy theories thanother groups (Carter & Lowles, 2022, p. 38). For example, a recent report found that 34%
of 18–24-­year-­olds believe that Jewish people have an unhealthy control over the world'sbanking system, compared to 12% of those aged 75 and over (Carter & Lowles, 2022, p.
39). This concern is heightened for marginalised young people who (in their search for inclusion) may be more likely to seek out extremist groups that promote hatred and violence anddraw on conspiracy theories (Parker & Gill, 2021). In relation to the infodemic, De Koninck
et al.'s (2021) international research demonstrated that young people are more likely to report COVID-­19-­related conspiracy theories in all the countries they researched (including
the United Kingdom).

Educational responses
Whilst UNESCO points to a variety of organisations offering online content monitoring
and fact-­checking services (Posettie & Bontcheva, 2019a), it also notes that young people are a relatively under-­researched group in this regard (Posettie & Bontcheva, 2019b).

14693518, 0, Downloaded from https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.3955 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [30/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

COMBATTING CONSPIRACIES IN THE CLASSROOM|   

JEROME et al.

Wineburg et al. (2020) have observed that most young people do not employ any deliberate
fact-­checking strategies, and that some widely promoted generic checklists in education
may actually make young people more susceptible to disinformation. However, Wineburg
et al. (2019) also demonstrate that more focused programmes can produce measurable improvements in criticality. Cook et al. (2017) argue that, rather than using detailed prescriptive
checklists, most people tend to use a kind of mental rule of thumb, asking themselves: Have
I heard this before? Does it fit in with what I've already heard? What do others say about
it? Such shortcuts are of little use in a fast-­moving, ‘echo-­chamber’ online world, whereaffirmative answers may simply prove one has already disappeared rather deeply down arabbit hole. The answer, therefore, might be thought to lie in the relatively mainstream areaof critical (digital) media literacy work. By helping young people understand the processes
through which information is distorted and amplified, one might expect education to provide the critical skills to enable an individual to extricate themselves from mis/disinformation
and COVID-­related conspiracy theories (Polizzi, 2020). Cook et al.'s (2017) experiment withadults provides some supporting evidence for such an approach. They found that using examples of common disinformation techniques (e.g., the use of ‘fake experts’ or setting up a‘false balance’ between perspectives) helped participants to apply the same critical insights
to other, unrelated, case studies. For example, seeing how the tobacco industry manipulated
the public debate about smoking risks can encourage greater criticality over media debates
about climate change or COVID-­19.
Regardless of the potential of such general media literacy programmes, some teachers
have reported ‘panic moments’ when confronted by conspiracy theories in the classroom(Dyrendal & Jolley, 2020, p. 5). This indicates that conspiracy theories may feel moreurgent or risky, and that therefore a general media literacy intervention may not entirely
fit the bill. Berman and Stoddard (2021, p. 300) pick up Sunstein and Vermeule's (2009)
argument that conspiracy theories represent a form of ‘crippled epistemology’ (see also
Hardin, 2002) in order to develop educational responses that tackle what they see as a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of evidence and reasoning. Whilst this encourages a corrective pedagogic response, they also draw attention to the risks of ‘directional
motivated reasoning’ (Berman & Stoddard, 2021, p. 300), which means that presenting
an individual who supports a conspiracy theory with a critical argument about their beliefs may strengthen their identification with the belief (the ‘backfire effect’), whereby they
avoid and reject information that contradicts the conspiracy theory they hold (Berman &Stoddard, 2021, pp. 300–301), and they may seek further evidence from ubiquitous social
media to support their view (the ‘bolster effect’; see Mercier & Sperber, 2011). Berman
and Stoddard (2021) observed three distinct approaches in American classrooms relating
to false 9/11 conspiracies, such as the idea that the terrorist attack was really an ‘insidejob’ perpetrated or allowed to happen by the US government, or that the Twin Towers
were not brought down by the planes but by explosives planted in the buildings in advance (see Dunbar & Reagan, 2006 for a debunking of various 9/11 conspiracy theories).
First, some teachers asked students for evidence to support their conspiracy theory,or directly challenged it (with the obvious risks just outlined). Second, others explicitly
taught about how conspiracy theories work, in the hope that students might transfer
this understanding over to their own beliefs. A third approach was to use documentaryfilms, although this raises concerns of encouraging ‘empty sentimentality’ (Berman &Stoddard, 2021, p. 306).
Some advocate that teachers should adopt open discussions of conspiracy theories,
and Peters and Johannesen (2020) explore how they might be framed as controversial
issues. This draws on an established pedagogic tradition in which controversial political/
moral issues are taught in an open way, to encourage students to think about the issue
and the different perspectives adopted by people in relation to it, rather than to adopt a

14693518, 0, Downloaded from https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.3955 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [30/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

6

  

| 7

right/wrong answer (Pace, 2021). Clark (2018) has demonstrated that such approaches
can increase perspective taking, so that students consider the opinions and perceptionsof others. The obvious problem here is that by virtue of calling something a conspiracy
theory, we are implying that it is wrong, and Hayward et al. (2022) have observed thatmisapplying controversial issues pedagogy, when an issue is not a genuinely open one,can lead teachers to adopt covert strategies to coerce students to adopt a more acceptable stance. This echoes Pace's (2015) observations that students may respondto such discussion by ‘ventriloquising’ what the teacher wants to hear, rather than engaging in serious open dialogue. Peters and Johannesen (2020) acknowledge that conspiracy theories are not ‘controversial’ according to the epistemic criteria widely used
(Hand, 2008), because there is no rational basis for believing they are legitimate rationalviews. However, they argue for a more expansive definition of ‘controversial’ reflecting
the lived reality for young people in a political culture where arguments are raging aboutsuch beliefs—what good is it to claim QAnon is not controversial when its adherents arestorming the Capitol Building?
Hobbs (2017) urges teachers to consider the bigger picture and rather than questioning
the belief itself, consider why people might be attracted to it, what it tells you about thecontext in which it arose, what arguments are used to sustain it and what impacts it might
have on different people. In Peters and Johannesen's (2020) application of these ideas
in the history classroom, they taught students about conspiracy theories in general thendeconstructed some examples. They found that some young people who had performed acompetent critical analysis of a conspiracy theory in class, nevertheless developed some
sympathy for the theory as a result of this engagement. This approach is further complicatedby evidence that teachers often find it very difficult to sustain open, critical discussions about
conflictual issues (Bickmore & Parker, 2014) and that when teachers do attempt to do so,they sometimes leave students feeling unacknowledged and further marginalised (Parker &Bickmore, 2020).
Vitriol and Marsh (2021) have demonstrated that merely informing people about COVID-­19
conspiracy theories can make them more likely to give them credence and reduce their confidence in their prior scientific knowledge. In response to such concerns, several authors in
the field have returned to older work by McGuire on ‘pre-­bunking’ as a specific technique tocounteract conspiracy theories (Dyrendal & Jolley, 2020; Jolley et al., 2021; van der Linden
et al., 2017). In this approach, the teacher introduces the conspiracy theory with a warning that it is false information. Once the view is framed as ‘wrong’ and the teacher follows
up the theory with a detailed explanation of why it is wrong and how it is constructed, theidea is that students are quite likely to accept it as an example of an inaccurate belief. This
comes close to presenting an educational inoculation, but it is presented in the literature asa theoretical possibility, rather than evaluated in contemporary educational settings. Petersand Johannesen's (2020) work comes close to testing this idea but, by their own admission,
seems to have backfired to some extent.

Teachers' dilemmas
The range of approaches considered so far leaves teachers in a difficult situation. Should
they engage in discussion of conspiracy theories as they arise? Are teachers obliged topoint out the flawed logic or lack of evidence to try to ‘defeat’ them? Or will their efforts
backfire, potentially reinforcing mistaken beliefs and further propagating them with others in
the class? If they do open them up to critical discussion, as with other controversial issues,
do they inadvertently imply they are acceptable, even though they are examples of ‘crippled
epistemology’? Or should they adopt the opposite approach and pre-­emptively teach these

14693518, 0, Downloaded from https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.3955 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [30/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

COMBATTING CONSPIRACIES IN THE CLASSROOM|   

JEROME et al.

ideas as wrong, regardless of such views being promoted by parents, media, celebrities
and even presidents? Should they simply rely on generic (and potentially outdated) critical
media literacy programmes to inoculate young people against mis/disinformation, and if so,
what should they do in the meantime, when serious or harmful examples of misconceptions arise? And, if conspiracy theories fuel racist scapegoating and undermine democratic
politics and social cohesion, should they teach about them in the broader political context inwhich these problems arise?
Our discussion of the literature underlines the urgency of the problem and demonstrates
the lack of consensus about the best way ahead. In this troubling context, teachers andyoung people are encountering these dangerous ideas, and engaging with them in several
ways (or not at all), which may be variously effective or counterproductive. The literaturethat directly addresses teaching about conspiracy theories in the context of the pandemic
tends to either offer teachers general advice about teaching (which often fails to reflect
the complex and nuanced considerations we have highlighted) (e.g., AFS & SSV, 2020;
Council of Europe, n.d.; Lewandowsky & Cook, 2020) or focuses on small-­scale teachinginterventions (e.g., Peters & Johannesen, 2020). Hayward and Gronland's (2021) advice
for teachers provides an interesting exception in advising teachers to close down conversations, primarily to avoid the unintentional side-­effects of backfire and bolstering beliefs.
This has been endorsed in UNESCO's (2022) advice, but it still remains unexplored inempirical research. This paper presents an important step to gaining a clearer picture of
how teachers perceive and respond to young people mentioning conspiracy theories inschools, and it sets out lessons that can be drawn for schools and teachers in helping
young people navigate political and media environments in which false and dangerous
ideas have a significant presence.

M ETHO DO LOGY
To investigate the issue of how teachers perceive and respond to young people mentioning
conspiracy theories in schools, this research uses quantitative data from a specially commissioned Teacher Tapp survey. Teacher Tapp is a daily survey app for teachers, started
in 2017, that provides a representative sample of over 7000 primary and secondary school
teachers in both state and private schools across England (https://​teach​ertapp.​co.​uk/​). The
survey ran on 22 and 24 August 2022, with the questions administered in two phases. In
phase 1, 7691 teachers were asked three questions about their experience of conspiracy
theories being mentioned in school. In phase 2, we focused on the experiences of the subgroup (3149),i filtered from the questions asked on the first day, who said they had experienced them, and six questions were addressed to this group (see Appendix A for the full setof questions).
The profile of the respondents was supplied by Teacher Tapp and stayed fairly consistent between phases 1 and 2, with the exception of age phase as primary teachers wereless likely to have experienced conspiracy theories being mentioned (see Table 1; note thatthe percentages do not always add up to 100% due to rounding and because a very small
number of respondents, generally <1%, had not provided information for all questions). A
distinctive feature of the Teacher Tapp data is that the data are ‘weighted’ to ensure that theresults fit the national profile of teachers (based on the School Workforce Census for stateschools, supplemented with information from the Independent School Census for private
schools). Hence, our descriptive results are weighted to be representative of the underlying
populations of interest. Teacher Tapp's weighting ensures that the results are representativeof the workforce, but it is not a random sample and is therefore susceptible to recruitment

14693518, 0, Downloaded from https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.3955 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [30/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

8TA B L E 1| 9Profile of respondents.
Phase 1

Phase 2

20s

16%

17%

30s

36%

37%

40s

32%

31%

50+

16%

14%

Female

73%

73%

Male

26%

27%

30%

19%

Age

GenderPhase
Primary
Secondary

67%

77%

Special/Alternative Provisiona

3%

3%

Private7%

7%

State-­funded

92%

93%

Class teacher

36%

35%

Middle leader

40%

44%

Senior leader

19%

17%

Headteacher

6%

3%

Q1 Affluent

20%

19%

Q2

18%

18%

Q3

16%

17%

Q4 Deprived

16%

16%

7691

3149

School type

Seniority

Free School Meals quartileb

N teachersab

Because this was such a small group, we excluded them from our reporting to focus on mainstream teachers.
For this question there was no data for around 30% of the sample.

bias. However, Teacher Tapp does run some tests to check whether particularly enthusiastic
respondents might skew the results, for example, by running comparisons between early
adopters, those who are particularly engaged with research, or heavy users of social media
and the rest of their respondents to check if there are significant differences (https://​teach​
ertapp.​co.​uk/​how-­​it-­​works/​​).
The dataset was supplied by Teacher Tapp as two spreadsheets covering the main questions and demographics, structured with one row per response. In this case that represented
almost 78,000 rows of data for the main questions and a further 10,000 rows of data relating
to demographics. The analytical task began by converting this specialised database structure into one row of data per teacher, with separate columns for each question response.
The resulting data were analysed using bivariate analysis routines in IBM SPSS 28. The
converted data structure facilitated the kinds of analysis below, where questions may becross-­tabulated both against each other and by relevant demographic data, and for subsetsof the overall data (secondary school teachers).

14693518, 0, Downloaded from https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.3955 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [30/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License  

COMBATTING CONSPIRACIES IN THE CLASSROOM|   

JEROME et al.

FI ND I NGSThe spread of conspiracy theories
Teachers were asked about which general conspiracy theories had been mentioned by students over the past two years, and which COVID-­specific conspiracies had been mentioned
since the start of the pandemic. When interpreting these figures, it is important to rememberthat teachers were asked if they had encountered students who mentioned these conspiracies, not who espoused them, so we cannot assume that conspiracy thinking is widespread,rather that students are discussing them. That said, research published in 2020 found thatapproximately a third of young people (in late adolescence) believed that it was at least‘probably’ true that the world was ruled by a secret elite, and one in five were sceptical about
global warming, so it is also reasonable to assume that the fact that these ideas are circulating reflects the reality that many young people are attracted to them (Carter, 2020, p. 54).
In our data, when we asked teachers in phase 2 to reflect on the success of their teachinginterventions, only 6% said it was irrelevant because no-­one supported conspiracy theories,
which suggests that approximately 40% of the entire sample of teachers had encounteredstudents who supported conspiracy theories to some degree.ii
In relation to general conspiracy theories (Figure 1), the data clearly show that teachers are more likely to experience students mentioning conspiracy theories in secondary
schools than primaries.iii Whilst two-­thirds of primary teachers said their students had nevermentioned conspiracy theories, this was true for only a third of secondary teachers. This
reflects the research evidence, which suggests that adolescence and early adulthood are
the ages most associated with attraction to conspiracy theories (Carter & Lowles, 2022;
Jolley et al., 2021). Many young people are intrigued by them, and may start exploring them,or even trying them out to see what the appeal is. However, we should also remember that
secondary teachers generally teach more individual students than primary teachers, whocommonly spend most of their time with one class. In line with previous research into young
people and conspiracy thinking, by far the most commonly selected category was ‘Illuminati/
New World Order (secret elite)’, which had been heard by 41% of secondary teachers and

FIGURE 1
responding.

Which conspiracy theories have students mentioned over the past two years? 7672 teachers

14693518, 0, Downloaded from https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.3955 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [30/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

10

  

| 11

18% of primary teachers. The next most frequently mentioned related to climate change
denial and faked moon landings.
In relation to COVID, most of the common conspiracies were also being discussed inschools, especially secondary schools (Figure 2). Our data show that 43% of secondary
teachers reported having heard students mention the idea that COVID was created in alab, and 35% heard students mention that the vaccines amounted to a mass experiment,
whilst 29% also heard students discussing the idea that the vaccine rollout was a ruse to
inject micro-­chips into people, and that COVID did not exist. Anti-­vaccine sentiment wasreported more in the most deprived schools (measured by Free School Meals), with 22% ofteachers in the most deprived schools hearing about the microchipping theory compared to
17% in the most affluent schools, and 30% in state secondaries compared to 19% in private
secondaries.
In phase 2, teachers were asked about how frequently these kind of conspiracy theories
were mentioned by students and Table 2 shows that, by and large, these are not common,with the majority of teachers indicating that they only arise occasionally. Secondary teachers are more likely to report that they arise ‘quite frequently’, with the highest rates being
reported by English and Humanities teachers (18% report they hear conspiracies mentioned
very frequently in these subjects; for this analysis we used Teacher Tapp's definition of
Humanities, including History, Geography and RE), compared to only 8% of Maths teachers.
These issues were mentioned in lessons, in tutor time and outside of planned events,
such as during breaktime. The data show that 70% of secondary teachers said they heard
these issues being discussed in their classrooms, but only 38% of primary teachers agreed.
By contrast, 56% of primary teachers reported that such issues arose in breaktimes, whilst
44% of secondary teachers agreed.

Teachers' responses to conspiracy theories
In addition to asking about which conspiracy theories are mentioned and how frequently thisoccurs, we asked teachers what they thought the best educational response might be. In thefirst phase, we asked all participants the hypothetical question: In general, what do you thinkteachers should do when students mention conspiracy theories? Figure 3 demonstrates
a variety of responses. Here, the difference between primary and secondary phases was
relatively small, although secondary teachers were more likely to suggest referring students

F I G U R E 2 Which COVID conspiracies have students mentioned since the start of the pandemic? 7635
teachers responding.

14693518, 0, Downloaded from https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.3955 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [30/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

COMBATTING CONSPIRACIES IN THE CLASSROOM

|   

TA B L E 2
2 years?

JEROME et al.

How frequently have you encountered students talking about conspiracy theories over the past

Once

All

Primary

Secondary

13%

19%

7%

Occasionally

72%

68%

75%

Quite frequently

10%

5%

14%

Very frequently

2%

2%

2%

Not relevant/cannot answer

4%

6%

2%

Note: 3149 teachers responding.

FIGURE 3
responding.

What should teachers do when students mention conspiracy theories? 7594 teachers

as a safeguarding risk but, even in primary schools, almost a quarter of teachers suggested
this course of action. By far the most common response was a general strategy to teachmedia literacy, presumably in the hope that it would provide students with some resilience
to conspiracy theories circulating online and through social media. Next, teachers erredon the side of opening up the conversation, either by opening up the issue for whole-­classdiscussion or by asking the student to explain their belief (42% suggested these strategies).
This tendency to open things up to discussion meant that few teachers thought it would beappropriate to close down the conversation (7% of primary and 17% of secondary teachers). Relatively few teachers suggested that they would try to prove the conspiracy wrong,
although secondary teachers were twice as likely to do this (14%) as primary teachers (7%),
and men were more likely than women to suggest this (18% vs 8%). Also, relatively few suggested that teachers should go away to plan lessons that respond to specific conspiracy
theories brought up by students.
The general sense from these responses is that teachers have a perhaps optimistic belief
that media literacy can act as a preventative strategy and, when issues do arise, they are
more inclined to open up a space for discussion than they are to deliberately close it down.

14693518, 0, Downloaded from https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.3955 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [30/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

12

  

| 13

In the subsequent questions in phase 2, we focused more explicitly on the experiences ofteachers who had heard conspiracy theories in their schools.
Figure 4 shows the responses from those who had experienced conspiracy theories intheir schools. Interestingly, the types of response relating to opening up the discussion areeven higher among those who have actually dealt with conspiracy theories, whereby 52%
said they had asked students to explain their beliefs, compared to 42% who supported thisas a general proposition. The option to open it up to class discussion was slightly higher at
45% than the general response of 42%. Explicit planned teaching about conspiracy theories was still rather low, even when students were raising the issue, and fewer than 10%
said they had taught about conspiracy theories in general or specifically about the theories
being raised by students. The proportion of teachers saying that they had tried to prove theconspiracy theory wrong was significantly higher than in the first phase suggesting that,in the moment, teachers may be getting drawn into this teaching response. Whereas 14%
of secondary teachers suggested that this would be a good idea in general, 30% of those
confronted by the issue reported that they had tried this. This was also the option with thebiggest gender difference, with 33% of male respondents reporting that they had tried thisapproach, compared to 21% of female respondents.
We explored whether these responses were correlated with school and teacher variables,
this time using the raw data rather than the weighted results. Although the overall figures
were low, women were more likely than men to plan specific lessons about conspiracies
being mentioned by students (p = 0.049). Younger teachers were more likely to close down
the conversation (p < 0.001), suggesting that this may be through lack of confidence thanjudgement. And when it came to the reality of referring students as a potential safeguarding
risk, this was more likely to be adopted as a course of action among younger teachers, thosewith less teaching experience, women, teachers in state schools and those in deprived
schools (29% in Q4 vs 17% in Q1, p < 0.019).
We also asked teachers about their levels of confidence in their ability to deal with theseissues, and what types of concerns they may experience. Figure 5 demonstrates that mostteachers fall in the middle of our scale in terms of confidence, with relatively few feeling very
confident, or completely lacking confidence. The only difference between phases is thatF I G U R E 4 What have you personally done in response to hearing students mention conspiracy theories?
3097 teachers responding.

14693518, 0, Downloaded from https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.3955 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [30/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

COMBATTING CONSPIRACIES IN THE CLASSROOM|   

JEROME et al.

F I G U R E 5 How confident have you generally felt to respond when students mentioned conspiracy
theories? 3129 teachers responding.

19% of secondary teachers report feeling very confident, whilst only 9% of primary teachers
agree. This is possibly related to two other factors: 26% of men reported feeling very confident compared to only 10% of women (and women are more likely to teach in primary), andonly 2% of Early Years/Key Stage 1 practitioners said they were very confident, compared
to 10% of Key Stage 2 teachers.
In order to explore this issue of confidence further, we calculated the mean number ofconspiracy theories mentioned by each secondary teacher to explore whether this would beconnected to the level of confidence. Table 3 suggests that there is a small but significant
relationship between teacher confidence and the number of general conspiracy theories
arising, with a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.099 (p < 0.001). Confidence levels werealso slightly higher for older teachers than younger ones, and senior leaders than classteachers. However, there were no differences between schools based on levels of deprivation or private/state school status.
Figure 6 reports the data about the kinds of concerns that worry teachers when they areweighing up their options. There are a variety of concerns ranging from capacity, strategy
and fear. In relation to capacity, many teachers reported a lack of knowledge (47%). In relation to strategy, many were concerned that opening up the issue may help to spread theideas (46%) and reinforce them for the individual who raised the issue (38%). And in relation
TA B L E 3

Mean number of conspiracies* encountered by secondary teachers and levels of confidence.

Not at all confident

Number of general conspiracies
mentioned

Number of COVID
conspiracies mentioned

1.34

2.89

Somewhat confident

1.8

2.7

Fairly confident

1.86

2.68

Very confident

2.15

2.77

Total

1.86

2.71

*The survey included eight named options for each category.

14693518, 0, Downloaded from https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.3955 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [30/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

14

FIGURE 6
responding.

  

| 15

When deciding how to respond, have you felt worried about any of the following? 3119 teachers

to fear, 44% were concerned about parents' response, although there was a marked difference between phases, with 55% of primary teachers expressing this concern, compared to
34% of secondary teachers.
Finally, we asked teachers how successful they felt their responses had been. Figure 7
shows the main results and clearly indicates that teachers are far from confident that they
have strategies that work. Very few (only 2%) said that they had a negative impact, but
13% said they had no affect and 35% said they had achieved mixed results, suggestingthat in these instances at least some students had been unaffected or adversely affected.
Only 17% felt that they had achieved positive results, and more simply did not know. We
compared teachers' judgements of success against the types of response they used, whichstrongly suggests that there is no consensus about what might work best, and teachers are
expecting similar results, despite using very different approaches.

FIGURE 7

What impact do you think you have had? 7672 teachers responding. 3082 teachers responding.

14693518, 0, Downloaded from https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.3955 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [30/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

COMBATTING CONSPIRACIES IN THE CLASSROOM|   

JEROME et al.

D I SCUSS I O N A ND CO NCLUS I O N
Our discussion of the literature indicated no clear consensus about what teachers should
do, and no clear evidence about what might work for the best. The data set out in this article
support the idea that there is no consensus between teachers about what to do, and no clear
criteria for choosing between what are in effect incompatible strategies (e.g., opening up
or closing down conversations). The teachers in this survey had equally high levels of self-­
belief in all the strategies, which reflects the contradictory nature of the guidance available tothem. This also means that students who mention conspiracy theories are experiencing very
different responses. The literature indicates that different responses are likely to lead to different outcomes, which suggests that in some classes there may be unanticipated negativeside-­effects. This appears to be borne out by the teachers' own evaluations of their teaching,which demonstrates that they do not feel confident they are having a positive impact.
Against this backdrop of a broad range of approaches being adopted by teachers, it issignificant that they are more likely to argue with conspiracies when confronted with them,than they expect to do when thinking about conspiracy theories in general terms. This needs
to be understood in the context of the evidence for unintended side-­effects in reinforcing
beliefs. An unprepared teacher, constructing an off-­the-­cuff argument, is unlikely to improve
the situation because of the closed mindset that often accompanies conspiracy theories,
reflecting the tautological nature of such beliefs. This is associated with the backfire andbolstering effects for those who already believe a conspiracy theory, and also risks further
disseminating the ideas to others by giving them some form of legitimacy in the classroom(Berman & Stoddard, 2021).
The relatively high numbers of teachers who say they are referring students to others
because of disclosures about conspiracy theories suggests that educational strategies may
be being displaced (or complemented) by ‘safeguarding’ or ‘securitised’ responses. Thisechoes the evidence in relation to the Prevent Duty, where teachers are required to reportconcerns about students being drawn into extremist thinking to designated safeguarding
leads in school, and potentially to Channel Panels (Busher & Jerome, 2020). The referrals
data show that, whilst most referrals to Channel are related to Islamism or far-­right concerns,
the number of ‘unspecified’ or ‘mixed’ referrals is growing year on year (Home Office, 2023).
In thinking about the distinction between educational versus safeguarding approaches, ourdata show that fewer teachers actually plan lessons to explicitly tackle conspiracy theories inany way, which suggests that they are more likely to respond in the moment or refer students
on to others as a potential security concern. This also suggests that proactive strategies like‘pre-­bunking’ are unlikely to be widespread.
As this article has discussed, the proliferation of fake news, particularly online, is asignificant problem. Social media companies have been criticised for failing to deal adequately with false information online, with the algorithms used to tailor stories to users'
particular interests having the effect of creating echo chambers, reinforcing users' pre-­existing viewpoints in a closed system, insulated from information and perspectives that
may challenge their beliefs. However, there is no simple technological fix to the spread ofconspiracy theories online. Education has an important role to play in helping young people develop their political literacy, media literacy and critical thinking skills, with students
learning how to distinguish fact from fiction and understanding the importance of pausing
to reflect before sharing a story online (Jerome & Moorse, 2023). Moreover, teachers
need adequate training themselves in political and media literacy. Schools could consider
running special events on the topics of misinformation, disinformation and fake news.
They could work with others with expertise in this area who could contribute to classes
aimed at promoting political and media literacy, such as university staff and journalists.
However, as Hayward et al. (2022) argue, teachers ought to give serious consideration

14693518, 0, Downloaded from https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.3955 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [30/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

16

  

| 17

to the management of discussions relating to conspiracy theories, including planning appropriate lessons. They should also consider the idea that it is sometimes necessary toclose down classroom conversations when they involve such theories—what they referto as ‘quietening’. There are various grounds for doing this, such as the prevention ofharm to others, avoiding discussions that distract from learning goals and forestallingthe ‘backfire effect’ highlighted earlier, whereby an individual's perspective can actually
be strengthened rather than weakened when presented with information that contradicts
it. Whilst the burden of explicit teaching might be expected to fall on those teachers inwhose lessons such issues occur most frequently (e.g., English and Humanities), ourdata suggest that all teachers should be prepared to deal with such issues.
To conclude, we argue that there is a powerful case for teachers to be involved in combatting conspiracy theories, but that they are currently poorly placed to make an effective
contribution and therefore there is a need for further research and professional development. In relation to the case for teachers' role, we are aware that, in England, government guidance reminds teachers of their legal duty to be impartial in discussing politicalissues, but it also reiterates that this does not mean teachers have to give equal weight
to opposing views, rather that they should expose all views to equal critical analysis, andhold all opinions to the same level of rational argumentation. This suggests that teachers
cannot avoid being embroiled in these issues, especially when conspiracy theories are
so ubiquitous. More importantly, there are powerful educational reasons for requiring
teachers to take action when confronted with conspiracy theories. Many of these conspiracy theories are racist or fuel hatred towards ‘out groups’, and so teachers need to havestrategies to intervene when they encounter them in school, in order to promote equality
and social justice and ensure the school functions as an inclusive environment. And thefact that conspiracy theories are underpinned by a form of ‘crippled epistemology’ alsosuggests that teachers should be concerned with challenging them and developing better
approaches to building knowledge. Finally, from the perspective of education for democratic citizenship, it is also important to note that conspiracy theories seem to be at odds
with genuine political thinking, as systemic or institutional factors are often flattened into
inter-­personal malign intentions, meaning adherents give accounts of political phenomena that are essentially de-­politicised.
Our data clearly demonstrate that teachers are not sufficiently well equipped with effective strategies. One response is to call for further research, by which we mean both qualitative and quantitative research with teachers and young people. We need to understandmore about how conspiracy theories circulate in schools and how young people engage
with them. We also need to better understand what teachers do, why and with what impact.
It is highly likely that different strategies will have different impacts on different students,
and this initial glimpse into educational practice tells us nothing about this. But the issue issufficiently urgent that we also think there is important professional development work to bedone to ensure that teachers are at least better informed about the small evidence base that
does exist, and are therefore helped to make decisions about the risks involved in teachingin this area.
F U N D I N G I N F O R M AT I O NThis research was funded by Middlesex University.
C O N F L I C T O F I N T E R E S T S TAT E M E N T
The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
D ATA AVA I L A B I L I T Y S TAT E M E N T
Research data are not shared.

14693518, 0, Downloaded from https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.3955 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [30/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

COMBATTING CONSPIRACIES IN THE CLASSROOM|   

JEROME et al.

E T H I C S S TAT E M E N T
The research was approved by the Research Ethics Education Sub-­Committee at Middlesex
University.
ORCID
Lee Jerome https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0278-6986
Ben Kisby https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9725-9737
Steve McKay https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5080-8417
ENDNOTESi

ii
iii

In terms of statistical reliability, a 95% confidence interval for an estimate of one-­half would be ±1.1% for a sample
size of 7690 and ±1.8% for 3148.
94% of the 3149 teachers who continued to phase 2, expressed as a percentage of the whole sample.

The figures reported here have generally been weighted to reflect the national teaching and school population,according to Teacher Tapp's reporting protocols. Where further analysis has been conducted on the raw figures,
we indicate this in the text.

REFERENCES

Aaronovitch, D. (2010). Voodoo histories: How conspiracy theory has shaped modern history. Vintage.
Allington, D., & Dhavan, N. (2020). The relationship between conspiracy beliefs and compliance with public healthguidance with regard to COVID-­19. Centre for Countering Digital Hate.
Andrade, G. (2020). Medical conspiracy theories: Cognitive science and implications for ethics. Medicine, HealthCare, and Philosophy, 23(3), 505–518. 10.​1007%​2Fs11​019-­​020-­​09951​- ­​6
AFS & SSV. (2020). Conspiracy theories in the classroom: How to deal with these issues as a teacher. Anne Frank
Stichting and the School & Veiligheid Foundation.
Bale, J. M. (2007). Political paranoia v. political realism: On distinguishing between bogus conspiracy theories
and genuine conspiratorial politics. Patterns of Prejudice, 41(1), 45–60. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​0 0313​22060​
1118751
Barkun, M. (2013). A culture of conspiracy: Apocalyptic visions in contemporary America. University of California
Press.
Bergström, A., & Jervelycke Belfrage, M. (2018). News in social media: Incidental consumption and the role ofopinion leaders. Digital Journalism, 6(5), 583–598. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​21670​811.​2018.​1423625
Berman, D. S., & Stoddard, J. D. (2021). “It's a growing and serious problem”: Teaching 9/11 to combat misinformation and conspiracy theories. The Social Studies, 112(6), 298–309. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​0 0377​996.​
2021.​1929054
Bickmore, K., & Parker, C. (2014). Constructive conflict talk in classrooms: Divergent approaches to addressing
divergent perspectives. Theory & Research in Social Education, 42(3), 291–335. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​
00933​104.​2014.​9 01199
Brandt, A. M. (2007). The cigarette century: The rise, fall, and deadly persistence of the product that definedAmerica. Basic Books.
Bridgman, A., Merkley, E., Zhilin, O., Loewen, P. J., Owen, T., & Ruths, D. (2021). Infodemic pathways: Evaluating
the role that traditional and social media play in cross-­national information transfer. Frontiers in Political
Science, 3, 1–11. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3389/​fpos.​2021.​6 48646
Brotherton, R. (2015). Suspicious minds: Why we believe conspiracy theories. Bloomsbury.
Busher, J., & Jerome, L. (Eds.). (2020). The Prevent Duty in education: Impact, enactment and implications.
Palgrave Macmillan.
Butter, M., & Knight, P. (2019). The history of conspiracy theory research: A review and commentary. In J. E.
Uscinski (Ed.), Conspiracy theories and the people who believe them (pp. 33–46). Oxford University Press.
Carter, R. (2020). Young people in the time of Covid-­19: A fear and hope study of 16–24 year olds. Hope not Hate.
Carter, R., & Lowles, N. (2022). Fear and hope 2022: A realignment of identity politics. Hope not Hate.
Clark, C. H. (2018). The impact of student political identity over the course of an online controversial issue discussion. Democracy and Education, 26(2), 1 https://​democ​racye​ducat​ionjo​urnal.​org/​home/​vol26/​​iss2/​1
Cook, J., Lewandowsky, S., & Ecker, U. K. H. (2017). Neutralizing misinformation through inoculation: Exposing
misleading argumentation techniques reduces their influence. PLoS One, 12(5), e0175799. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1371/​journ​al.​pone.​0175799
Council of Europe. (n.d.). RFCDC – learning activities based on the COVID-­19 pandemic. https://​cutt.​ly/​1mzZBvY
d'Ancona, M. (2017). Post-­truth: The new war on truth and how to fight back. Ebury Press.

14693518, 0, Downloaded from https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.3955 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [30/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

18

  

| 19

De Koninck, D., Frissen, T., Matthijs, K., d'Haenens, L., Lits, G., Champagne-­Poirier, O., et al. (2021). Beliefs inconspiracy theories and misinformation about COVID-­19: Comparative perspectives on the role of anxiety,depression and exposure to and trust in information sources. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 646394. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3389/​fpsyg.​2021.​6 46394
Deer, B. (2020). The doctor who fooled the world: Andrew Wakefield's war on vaccines. Scribe Publications.
Dunbar, D., & Reagan, B. (Eds.). (2006). Debunking 9/11 myths: Why conspiracy theories can't stand up to thefacts. Hearst Books.
Dyrendal, A., & Jolley, D. (2020). Conspiracy theories in the classroom: Problems and potential solutions. Religion,
11(10), 494. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​rel11​100494
Ghebreyesus, T. (2020). Munich Security Conference speech, 15 February. www.​who.​int/​direc​tor-­​gener​al/​speec​
hes/​detail/​munic​h-­​secur​ity- ­​confe​rence​
Goertzel, T. (2010). Conspiracy theories in science. EMBO Reports, 11(7), 493–499. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1038/​
embor.​2010.​8 4
Greig, C. (2006). Conspiracy: History's greatest plots, collusions and cover-­ups. Arcturus.
Guess, A., Nagler, J., & Tucker, J. (2019). Less than you think: Prevalence and predictors of fake news dissemination on Facebook. Science Advances, 5(1), eaau4586. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1126/​sciadv.​aau4586
Guterres, A. (2020). Secretary General denounces ‘tsunami’ of xenophobia unleashed amid COVID-­19, calling for all-­out effort against hate speech, United Nations, 8 May. https://​press.​un.​org/​en/​2020/​sgsm2​
0076.​doc.​htm
Hand, M. (2008). What should we teach as controversial? A defence of the epistemic criterion. Educational
Theory, 58(2), 213–228. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/j.​1741- ­​5 446.​2008.​0 0285.​x
Hardin, R. (2002). The crippled epistemology of extremism. In A. Breton, G. Galeotti, P. Salmon, & R. Wintrobe(Eds.), Political extremism and rationality (pp. 3–22). Cambridge University Press.
Hayward, J., & Gronland, G. (2021). Conspiracy theories in the classroom: Guidance for teachers. Association
for Citizenship Teaching.
Hayward, J., Jerome, L., Pace, J., & Parker, C. (2022). Closing down classroom conversations: Why conspiracy
theories and the age of misinformation necessitates the interruption of classroom dialogue. Paper presented
at College & University Faculty Assembly of the National Council for the Social Studies Annual Conference,
Philadelphia, 30 November–3 December.
Hilts, P. J. (1996). Smokescreen: The truth behind the tobacco industry cover-­up. Addison-­Wesley.
Hobbs, R. (2017). Teach the conspiracies. Knowledge Quest, 46(1), 16–24. https://​eric.​ed.​gov/?​id=​EJ115​3347
Hofstadter. (1966) [1965]). The paranoid style in American politics, and other essays. Cape.
Home Office. (2023). Individuals referred to and supported through the Prevent Programme April 2021 to March
2022. www.​gov.​uk/​gover​nment/​​stati​stics/​​indiv​idual​s-­​refer​red-­​to-­​and-­​suppo​r ted-­​throu​gh-­​the-­​preve​nt-­​progr​
amme-­​april​-­​2021-­​to-­​march​-­​2022/​indiv​idual​s -­​refer​red-­​to-­​and-­​suppo​r ted-­​throu​gh-­​the-­​preve​nt-­​progr​amme-­​april​-­​2021-­​to-­​march​-­​2022
Human Rights Watch. (2020, May 12). Covid-­19 fueling anti-­Asian racism and xenophobia worldwide. www.​hrw.​
org/​news/​2020/​05/​12/​covid​-­​19-­​fueli​ng-­​anti-­​asian​-­​racis​m -­​and-­​xenop​hobia​-­​world​wide
Jerome, L., & Moorse, L. (2023). Citizenship education: Building for the future. In H. Tam (Ed.), Who's afraid ofpolitical education: The challenge to teach civic competence and democratic participation (pp. 163–179).
Policy Press.
Jolley, D., Douglas, K. M., Skipper, Y., Thomas, E., & Cookson, D. (2021). Measuring adolescents' beliefs in conspiracy theories: Development and validation of the Adolescent Conspiracy Beliefs Questionnaire (ACBQ).
British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 39(3), 499–520. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​bjdp.​12368​
Keeley, B. L. (1999). Of conspiracy theories. The Journal of Philosophy, 96(3), 109–126. https://​doi.​org/​10.​2307/​
2564659
Kemp, S. (2020). Digital around the world in April 2020. https://​weare​social.​com/​uk/​blog/​2020/​0 4/​digit​al-­​aroun​d-­​the-­​world​-­​in-­​april​-­​2020/​
Kleis Nielsen, R., Fletcher, R., Newman, N., Scott Brennen, J., & Howard, P. N. (2020). Navigating the ‘infodemic’: How people in six countries access and rate news and information about coronavirus. Reuters
Institute.
Lewandowsky, S., & Cook, J. (2020). The conspiracy theory handbook. http://​sks.​to/​consp​iracy​
MacPherson, Y. (2018). The truth about health misinformation: It's not just about fact checking. www.​bbc.​co.​uk/​
blogs/​​media​actio​ninsi​ght/​entri​es/​d86fc​dde- ­​5 420- ­​4973-­​99bf- ­​59136​a3bc222
McIntyre, L. (2018). Post-­truth. MIT Press.
Mercier, H., & Sperber, D. (2011). Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory. Behaviouraland Brain Sciences, 34(2), 57–74. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1017/​s0140​525x1​0 000968
NLT. (2018). Fake news and critical literacy: The final report of the commission on fake news and the teaching of
critical literacy in schools. National Literacy Trust.
Nattrass, N. (2012). The AIDS conspiracy: Science fights back. Columbia University Press.

14693518, 0, Downloaded from https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.3955 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [30/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

COMBATTING CONSPIRACIES IN THE CLASSROOM|   

JEROME et al.

Ofcom. (2020a). Covid-­19 news and information: 12–15 year old children's news consumption and attitudes.
Ofcom. www.​ofcom.​org.​uk/​data/​assets/​pdf_​f ile/​0 027/​195345/​covid​-­​19-­​news-­​consu​mptio​n- ­​child​ren-­​12-­​15-­​report.​pdf
Ofcom. (2020b). Covid-­19 news and information: Consumption and attitudes. Ofcom. www.​ofcom.​org.​uk/​resea​rch-­​and- ­​data/​t v-­​radio ​-­​and- ­​on- ­​demand/​news-­​media/​​coron​aviru​s-­​news-­​consu​mptio​n-­​attit​udes-­​behav​iour
Oliver, J. E., & Wood, T. (2014). Medical conspiracy theories and health behaviors in the United States. JAMA
Internal Medicine, 174(5), 817–818. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1001/​jamai​ntern​med.​2014.​190
OSCE/ODIHR. (n.d.). Challenging conspiracy theories: Teaching Aid 4. www.​osce.​org/​f iles/​f/​docum​ents/e/​d/​
441101.​pdf
Pace, J. L. (2015). The charged classroom: Predicaments and possibilities for democratic teaching. Routledge.
Pace, J. L. (2021). Hard questions: Learning to teach controversial issues. Rowman & Littlefield.
Parker, C., & Bickmore, K. (2020). Classroom peace circles: Teachers' professional learning and implementationof restorative dialogue. Teaching and Teacher Education, 95, 103129. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​tate.​2020.​
103129Parker, C., & Gill, R. (2021). Religious literacy and restorative justice with youth: The role of community service
professionals in mediating social inclusion. Religion & Education, 48(2), 141–154. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​
15507​394.​2021.​1903789
Parsons Leigh, J., Fiest, K., Brundin-­Mather, R., Plotnikoff, K., Soo, A., Sypes, E.E., et al. (2020). A nationalcross-­sectional survey of public perceptions of the COVID-­19 pandemic: Self-­reported beliefs, knowledge,
and behaviors. PLoS One, 15(10), e0241259. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1371/​journ​al.​pone.​0241259
Peters, R. A., & Johannesen, H. J. (2020). What is actually true? Approaches to teaching conspiracy theories andalternative narratives in history lessons. Acta Didactica Norden, 14(4), 1–26. https://​doi.​org/​10.​5617/​adno.​
8377
Polizzi, G. (2020). Fake news, COVID-­19 and digital literacy: Do what the experts do. https://​blogs.​lse.​ac.​uk/​
media​lse/​2020/​0 6/​17/​fake-­​news- ­​covid​-­​19-­​and- ­​digit​al-­​liter​acy- ­​do-­​what-­​the- ­​exper ​ts- ­​do/​
Posettie, J., & Bontcheva, K. (2019a). Disinfodemic: Deciphering COVID-­
19 disinformation. Policy Brief 1.
UNESCO.
Posettie, J., & Bontcheva, K. (2019b). Disinfodemic: Deciphering COVID-­
19 disinformation. Policy Brief 2.
UNESCO.
Radnitz, S., & Underwood, P. (2017). Is belief in conspiracy theories pathological? A survey experiment on the
cognitive roots of extreme suspicion. British Journal of Political Science, 47(1), 113–129. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1017/​S0007​12341​4000556
Reilly, P. (2020). Faced with an ‘infodemic’ of fake news about Covid-­19, most people are checking their facts – but
we mustn't be complacent. www.​democ​ratic​audit.​com/​2020/​0 4/​20/​faced​-­​with-­​an-­​infod​emic- ­​of-­​fake-­​news-­​
about​-­​covid​-­​19-­​most-­​peopl​e -­​are-­​check​ing-­​their​-­​facts​-­​but-­​we-­​mustn​t-­​be-­​compl​acent/​​
Robb, M. B. (2017). News and America's kids: How young people perceive and are impacted by the news.
Common Sense.
Rothkopf, D. (2003). When the buzz bites back, The Washington Post. www.​washi​ngton​post.​com/​archi​ve/​opini​
ons/​2003/​05/​11/​when-­​the-­​buzz-­​bites​-­​back/​bc8cd​8 4f-­​cab6- ­​4648-­​bf58- ­​02772​61af6​cd/​
Rothschild, M. (2021). The storm is upon us: How QAnon became a movement, cult, and conspiracy theory of
everything. Monoray.
Rubin, V. L. (2019). Disinformation and misinformation triangle: A conceptual model for “fake news” epidemic,
causal factors and interventions. Journal of Documentation, 75(5), 1013–1034. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1108/​
JD-­​12-­​2018- ­​0209
Sunstein, C. R., & Vermeule, A. (2009). Conspiracy theories: Causes and cures. The Journal of Political
Philosophy, 17(2), 202–227. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/j.​1467- ­​9760.​2008.​0 0325.​x
Swami, V., Chamorro-­Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2010). Unanswered questions: A preliminary investigation of
personality and individual difference predictors of 9/11 conspiracist beliefs. Applied Cognitive Psychology,
24(6), 749–761. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​acp.​1583
UNESCO. (2020). Journalism, press freedom and COVID-­19. UNESCO. https://​unesd​oc.​unesco.​org/​ark:/​48223/​​
pf000​0373573
UNESCO. (2022). Addressing conspiracy theories: What teachers need to know. UNESCO. https://​unesd​oc.​unesco.​org/​ark:/​48223/​​pf000​0381958
Uyheng, J., & Carley, K. M. (2020). Bots and online hate during the COVID-­19 pandemic: Case studies in the
United States and The Philippines. Journal of Computational Social Science, 3, 445–468. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1007/​s 4200​1-­​020-­​0 0087​-­​4
Van der Linden, S., Leiserowitz, A., Rosenthal, S., & Maibach, E. (2017). Inoculating the public against misinformation about climate change. Global Challenges, 1(2), 1600008. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​gch2.​20160​0 008
Van Prooijen, J.-­W., & Douglas, K. M. (2017). Conspiracy theories as part of history: The role of societal crisis
situations. Memory Studies, 10(3), 323–333. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​17506​98017​701615

14693518, 0, Downloaded from https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.3955 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [30/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

20

  

| 21

Van Prooijen, J.-­W., & van Vugt, M. (2018). Conspiracy theories: Evolved functions and psychological mechanisms. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(6), 770–788. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1177/​17456​91618​774270
Vitriol, J. A., & Marsh, J. K. (2021). A pandemic of misbelief: How beliefs promote or undermine COVID-­19 mitigation. Frontiers in Political Science, 3, 648082. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3389/​fpos.​2021.​6 48082
WHO. (2020). Infodemic. www.​who.​int/​healt​h-­​topics/​infod​emic# ​tab=​tab_​1
Wineburg, S., Breakstone, J., Smith, M., McGrew, S., & Ortega, T. (2019). Civic online reasoning: Curriculum
evaluation. Stanford University. https://​stacks.​stanf​ord.​edu/​f ile/​druid:​xr124​mv4805/​COR%​20Cur​ricul​um%​
20Eva​luati​on.​pdf
Wineburg, S., Breakstone, J., Ziv, N., & Smith, M. (2020). Educating for misunderstanding: How approaches toteaching digital literacy make students susceptible to scammers, rogues, bad actors, and hate mongers.
Stanford University. https://​stacks.​stanf​ord.​edu/​f ile/​druid:​mf412​bt5333/​Educa​ting_​for_ ​Misun​derst​anding.​pdf
Woodward, B., & Bernstein, C. (2006) [1974]). All the president's men: The most devastating political detective
story of the 20th century. Simon & Schuster.

How to cite this article: Jerome, L., Kisby, B. & McKay, S. (2024). Combatting
conspiracies in the classroom: Teacher strategies and perceived outcomes. British
Educational Research Journal, 00, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3955

A PPE N D I X : Q U EST I O N S AS K E D I N T E ACH E R TA PP 2 2 / 2 4 AUG UST
2 02 2 A
Phase 1: Q1–Q3 were asked on 22 August 2022
1. Which of these general conspiracy theories have your students mentioned over the
past two school years? (examples include moon landings faked, 9/11 was an insidejob).
2. Which of these COVID-­related conspiracy theories have your students mentioned since
the COVID pandemic started? (examples include link to 5G networks, created in a lab).
3. In general, what do you think teachers should do when students mention conspiracy
theories?
Phase 2: The following questions were only asked to teachers who said the students had
mentioned at least one conspiracy theory in the past two years, and were posed on 24
August 2022
4. How frequently have you encountered students talking about conspiracy theories
over the past two years?
5. Where have you heard students mention conspiracy theories?
6. How confident have you generally felt to respond when students mentioned conspiracy theories?
7. When deciding how to respond to students mentioning conspiracy theories, haveyou felt worried about any of the following? (examples include concerns about own
knowledge, colleagues’ reaction, attitudes of parents etc).
8. What have you personally done in response to hearing students mention conspiracy
theories?
9. If you have had one or more students who expressed support for conspiracy theories, what impact do you think you have had on them?

14693518, 0, Downloaded from https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/berj.3955 by Test, Wiley Online Library on [30/01/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License

COMBATTING CONSPIRACIES IN THE CLASSROOM