This document gives an overview of the good practices tested. The text has been drafted within the framework of the European project Talking about taboos.The project has been funded with support from the European Commission. The document reflects the view only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

1. This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.
This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained
therein.
GOOD PRACTICES
Project:
Talking about taboos: Website to help adult trainers address racism, xenophobia and other prejudices in their
classrooms
GRUNDTVIG Learning Partnerships. LLP 2007-2013 - N. 2013-1-FR1-GRU06-49587
Organization Ezzev Foundation
Theme Identity versusethnicity
#
Name/Field theme
of the good practice
Source (f.i.
literature)
Method and short description
Owner, place and time of
the implementation
Actual impact
1 Think and talk (Tat) Douglas Stone &
Sheila Heen –
Thanks for the
feedback. 2014.
Stone & Heeninterpret – in line with
A.Giddens (see below) and others – an
identity as a narration by ourselves on
ourselves. This narration makes use of
identity labelslike smartin “I am
smart” or dumb in “I am dumb”. The
less broad these identity labels are
defined, the more we have to defend
ourselves against the outside world and
the less we are open to feedback and
EF, FCP.
The Tat good practice was
implemented twice in Rugby,
UK on the May 15th
conference
(ar. 40 present). The
implementation was executed
together with partner FCP.
EF was co-organizer of TAT
The three sentences did not
lead to much discussion or
denial in the Dutch and the
Polish meetings. The
sentences were more or
less sheepishly repeated.
Occasionally a giggle could
be heard that was caused
by shame as the
participants admitted.

2. This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.
This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained
therein.
learning.
Stone & Heen describe a method to
widen our identitylabel. Basically, it
consists of accepting three sentences:
- Sometimes I make mistakes
- Sometimes my motivation is egoistic
- I am part of the problem
The first sentence makes sure that we
understand thatwe are not infallible.
Thus, we cannot claim to be right every
time, or even this time.
The second sentence implies that we
are not morally superior. We cut
corners. This might be the case now
too.
The third sentence ensures we cannot
blame a “them” versus an innocent
“us”. There is no “we” and “they”. We
have to solve problems together.
The three sentences should open us up
to the words and nonverbal
communication of others.
workshopsin Poland – see the
Polish good practices – where
Tat was implemented.
EF delegated an instructor to
Polish conferences – see the
Polish good practices – where
Tat was implemented.
Training and discussing the
good practice with EF’s
primary target groups: KIT
(leading intercultural adult
trainers inNL); Lightworks
(independent adult training);
school to train teachers and
staff in parent contacts (UniC);
marketers (to reach the
general audience) – offline and
online at the closed Facebook
group: Addressing Zwarte Piet:
https://www.facebook.com/gr
oups/1395826584003663.
EF implemented the good
practice at the following
During the Rugby meeting
two individuals did not
agree with one or more
sentences. Interestingly
enough, theywere project
teachers rather than local
participants. The two who
objected against the
sentences defined their
identitiesin terms more
explicitin terms of ethnicity
than the other participants.
Maybe there is a
correlation here.
When translated to the
Dutch project subject, it
was found in analyses of
the questionnaire (see
below) that the vast
majority distinguishes
betweenlabels of acts
(“racist” versus
“oversensitive”) and labels
of identity (“racist” versus

3. This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.
This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained
therein.
The good practice here is to have
instructors say the sentences out aloud,
one-by-one, have the participants
repeat them and ask after every
sentence who disagrees.
The aim of the good practice is to open
the field for a dialogue on(perceived)
social exclusion without any of the
participants getting defensive at once.
The repeating of the sentences and the
discussion is followed up by an analysis
by the instructor. This analysis is based
upon the discussion, in particular how
hard it isfor some participants to say
one or more of the sentences and to
agree with them or not.
The harder it is to say a certain
sentence or the less a participant
agrees with a sentence, the more likely
the sentence indicates a strategy of the
participant to not have tolisten to
feedback (infallibility, moral superiority
or no responsibility).
meetings and conferences:
- With teachers and parents:
Utrecht, Unic, 21.05.2014 (ar.
25 present; organized by EF),
18:30 – 21:00;
- With teachers (to train them
communicate with students
and parents; organized by EF):
Utrecht, UniC, 24.2.2014, 8:30
– 16:30 (6 present); Utrecht,
UniC, 9.3.2015, 8:30 – 16:30 (5
present); Zutphen, Vrijeschool,
12.5.2015 (1 present;
organized by EF), 13:00 –
13:45; Utrecht, UniC,
26.5.2015 (1 present;
organized by EF), 13:30 –
15:00;
- With the general audience at
the Social Media Week,
Rotterdam, nhow (ar. 60
present), 23.9.2014, 14:00 –
14:30;
- With the general audience at
a TAT-project conference,
organized by EF in Amsterdam,
“foreign”): a person
thinking or doing something
“racist” does not equal
being a “racist” according
to them. Just as a person
expressing themselves or
acting “oversensitive” to an
element of Dutch culture
automatically is “non-
Dutch”.
Some individuals on the
other hand do define
themselves strongly with
ethnic identity labels, and
perceive the world through
ethnic “we”-“they” glasses.
They dointerpret someone
having a “racist” opinion or
acting “racist” as a “racist”
and see someone opposing
a Dutch tradition as “a
foreigner who does not
belong here”.
Whereas in the Netherlands
(and Poland) this definition

4. This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.
This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained
therein.
The instructor should then ask
participants who findit hard to say a
certain sentence or who disagree with a
sentence to whatidentity label this
applies most. They specifically ask
whether this applies to ethnic identity
labels. Thisway ethnic exclusiveness
can be measured.
de Waag, 4.12.2014, 20:00 –
22:00 (38 present);
is an individual choice, in
the UK it is part of official
policy – see A.Hart.
The “we” – “they” division
in a strongethnic identity
opposes the third Tat
sentence. If it is combined
with a denial of the second
Tat sentence it can be
expected that an open
discussion is impossible.
The Tat sentences thus can
be used toestablish
whether there is common
ground at all to start a
dialogue about(perceived)
social exclusion.
2 Who are you until
now?
Anthony Giddens –
Modernity and Self-
Identity. 1991.
Zygmunt Bauman.
Identity. 2004.
Zygmunt Bauman.
Liquid life. 2005.
The good practice is simple. An
instructor asks a participant face to face
the question: Who are you until now.
The question is asked by aninstructor
who gives full attention (see C2C).
When the questionis answered the
instructor moves to the next participant
EF, FCP.
The good practice was
implemented twice in Rugby,
UK on the May 15th
conference
(ar. 40 present). The
implementation was executed
Adults in the Netherlands
and in Poland always in
great majorityfollowed the
mold of the first
participant. In Rotterdam
and Rugby adults didn’t.
In the adult groups where

5. This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.
This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained
therein.
Zygmunt Bauman.
Liquid times. 2007.
Erving Goffman. The
presentation of Self
in everydaylife.
1959.
Erving Goffman.
Frame analysis.
1975.
Adrian Hart. That’s
racism. 2014.
Dynamiczna
Tozsamosc project.
2012.
Dynamic Identity.
2012-2015.
and asks the same question.
Full attention means that no references
to the previous Q&A are made. Nor any
other references. The instructor
implements intense listening, patience,
good will, honesty and respect.
The theory behind this question is that,
according to A.Giddens, we all have a
default narration about ourselves
available. This narration should be
internally consistent and should
exclude other narrations about one’s
self.
As we found in the project Dynamiczna
Tozsamosc andlater on in the project
Dynamic Identity participants do not
have a default narration prepared to
answer our question: Who are you until
now? Rather, participants seem to
construct a narration semi-
spontaneously on the spot, weighing
what is being askedfrom them and
how earlier participants framed their
together with partner FCP.
EF was co-organizer of TAT
workshopsin Poland – see the
Polish good practices – where
the good practice was
implemented.
EF delegated an instructor to
Polish conferences – see the
Polish good practices – where
the good practice was
implemented.
Training and discussing the
good practice with EF’s
primary target groups: KIT
(leading intercultural adult
trainers inNL); Lightworks
(independent adult training);
school to train teachers and
staff in parent contacts (UniC);
marketers (to reach the
general audience) – offline and
online at the closed Facebook
group: Addressing Zwarte Piet:
the first participant’s mold
was followed the
participants knew each
other more or less before
the good practice was
implemented. In the
Rotterdam and Rugby they
didn’t.
The outcomes suggest the
good practice is a usable
measurement to measure
the strength of group
pressure in a group of
participants.
Ethnic identity labels were
mentioned by a minority of
adults. As could have been
predicted – see f.i. A.Hart -
ethnicity was more often
mentioned by British
citizens than in the
Netherlands or in Poland.
The reason for this
probably being that in the
UK ethnicity is highly

6. This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.
This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained
therein.
answer. This isin line with the theories
of Z.Bauman who states that in our
times we do not try to build one,
definite narration out of the puzzle
pieces that make up whowe are, but
that we all the time reconfigure the
puzzle pieces and fit them to the
circumstances.
The aim of this good practice is to show
that our identity narrations are
constructs and thus are open to
change. Our ethnic identities are
constructs too.
After all participants have answered the
same question individually, the
instructor shows patterns in the
answering. Mostly it will be the case
that the first person takes the longest
to answer. Applying Goffman’s insights
this would be because there is no
apparentframe readyfor this
participant to build upon. There is no
ready-made mould to model the
answer after.
https://www.facebook.com/gr
oups/1395826584003663.
EF implemented the good
practice – small version - at
the following meetings and
conferences:
- With teachers and parents:
Utrecht, Unic, 26.2.2014,
18:00 – 20:00 (ar. 25 present;
organized by EF), 18:30 –
21:00;
- With teachers (to train them
communicate with students
and parents; organized by EF):
Utrecht, UniC, 24.2.2014, 8:30
– 16:30 (6 present); Utrecht,
UniC, 9.3.2015, 8:30 – 16:30 (5
present); Zutphen, Vrijeschool,
12.5.2015 (1 present;
organized by EF), 13:00 –
13:45; Utrecht, UniC,
26.5.2015 (1 present;
organized by EF), 13:30 –
15:00;
- With the general audience at
political while in the
Netherlands and Poland
ethnicity isleft to civil
society.
This means that the good
practice could probably be
considered to be a reliable
instrument to establish the
importance of ethnicity
labelsfor the participants.
Self-reporting by the
participants after the
implementation of the
good practice indicated that
many considered this
simple instrument to be
very useful and very
interesting.

7. This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.
This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained
therein.
The second andfollowing participants
typically answer quicker. For them a
mold does exist – the one created by
the first participant.
If the participants have mostly or
exclusively used the frame that was
created by the first participant, it can
be concluded that the participants are
highly open to peer pressure.
A second element of analysisis self-
reporting by the participants. Why did
they select some identity
characteristics (for instance: age,
hobbies or roles they fulfill inlife) and
not others (for instance:ethnicity,
current mood or occupation). By
discussing why certain elements were
selected and others weren’t the
importance of ethnic identity labels for
the participants present can be
established.
the Social Media Week,
Rotterdam, nhow (ar. 60
present), 23.9.2014, 14:00 –
14:30;
- With the general audience at
a TAT-project conference,
organized by EF in Amsterdam,
de Waag, 4.12.2014, 20:00 –
22:00 (38 present);
3 C2C (citizen to
citizen)/ full attention
Emmanuel Levinas.
Totalite et Infini.
1961.
From a group of participants pairs are
formed. Each pair consists of two
participants. The pairs will engage in a
EF, FCP.
The C2C good practice was
During the meetings with
Dutch partners open
dialogues took place both

8. This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.
This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained
therein.
Joshua Greene.
Moral tribes. 2013.
Leonard Mlodinow.
Sublimal. 2012.
Timothy Wilson.
Strangers to
ourselves. 2002.
Dynamiczna
Tozsamosc project.
2013.
90 seconds dialogue. The subject of the
dialogue is to be decided by the
instructors.
Next, the entire group is askedwhether
90 seconds is a short or a long time.
Then, the group is asked to stay silent
and do nothing during 90 seconds to
experience 90 seconds intensively.
The framework of the dialogue is then
explained. One participant will ask the
other participant about the established
theme. This is not an interview. The
goal is to establishwhat the two
participants have in common and what
they do not have in commonwithin 90
seconds. Ten seconds before the end of
the 90 seconds the asking participant
receives a sign by the instructors thatit
is time to wrap up.
The instruments that are to be used in
the dialogue are: intense listening,
patience, goodwill, honesty, respect.
The two participants draw straws – to
decide who will ask and whowill
answer.
The participants are seated on chairs,
implemented twice in Rugby,
UK on the May 15th
conference
(ar. 40 present). The
implementation was executed
together with partner FCP.
EF was co-organizer of TAT
workshopsin Poland – see the
Polish good practices – where
C2C was implemented.
EF delegated an instructor to
Polish conferences – see the
Polish good practices – where
C2C was implemented.
Training and discussing the
good practice with EF’s
primary target groups: KIT
(leading intercultural adult
trainers inNL); Lightworks
(independent adult training);
school to train teachers and
staff in parent contacts (UniC);
marketers (to reach the
on the Dutch project
subject an on (perceived)
social exclusion – even
though often there was
little agreement about the
fundamentals of the
subjects.
The most thrillingexample
of full attention was
performed at the
Amsterdam conference.
Two (professional) friends –
one of which an EF TAT
trainer -had asked the
moderator – a EF TAT
trainer - to be as sharp in
the planned debate on
stage as he possibly could.
They were afraid that they
otherwise would agree
amongsteach other too
much to engage in a
discussion that would be
engaging for the audience.
What followed was a very

9. This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.
This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained
therein.
facingeach other. The other
participants watch them from the side.
The good practice is based on E.Levinas
assumption that when we open up to
another person all external definitions
disappear and a transcendent
communication remains.
According to T.Wilson and L.Mlodinow
our unconsciousness is the gathering
place of prejudices. Wilson goes so far
as to call the unconsciousness a second
personality. According to J.Greene
racism is a prejudice that has come late
in the evolution of men. In the good
practice it is tested how easy or hard it
is to overcome prejudices during a
dialogue with a stranger in a Levinasian
setting.
To measure this ideally a therapist
instructor is present who analyzes the
verbal but also the nonverbal
communication of the two participants
forming a dialogue pair for 90 seconds.
general audience) – offline and
online at the closed Facebook
group: Addressing Zwarte Piet:
https://www.facebook.com/gr
oups/1395826584003663.
EF implemented the good
practice (light version) at the
following meetings and
conferences:
- With teachers and parents:
Utrecht, Unic, 18.11.2013 (35
present), 18:00 – 20:00;
26.2.2014, 18:00 – 20:00 (16
present); 21.05.2014, 18:30 –
21:00 (ar. 25 present);
- With teachers (to train them
communicate with students
and parents): Utrecht, UniC,
24.2.2014, 8:30 – 16:30 (6
present); Utrecht, UniC,
9.3.2015, 8:30 – 16:30 (5
present); Zutphen, Vrijeschool,
12.5.2015, 13:00 – 13:45 (1
present); Utrecht, UniC,
26.5.2015, 13:30 – 15:00 (1
sharp debate that was
supported by the good
practice of full attention.
Neither the panelists nor
the moderator held back.
But because of the intense
listening, respect, good will,
patience and honesty the
dialogue was no longer an
exchange of opinions but
rather became a common
search for probable
answers. Although the
audience was invited
several times to join no one
reacted. Later on many
declared that they did not
want to interfere in the
electrifying process on
stage.
This, probably,is the
maximum of whatfull
attention can achieve:
overcoming opinions and
creating the beddingfor a
common quest.

10. This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.
This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained
therein.
In line with Mlodinow f.i. it is assumed
that the vast majority of human
meaningis constituted by nonverbal
communication. The more the
participants assume an open posture,
engage ineye contact and bow towards
each other the more open they are
assumed to be. For verbal
communication the criteria are: asking
open questions rather than closed
questions, asking neutral questions
rather than leading questions, waiting
for the other participant to finish their
sentences, answering personally rather
than generally, speaking in a thoughtful
tone of voice, referring to the words of
the other participant – all these are
signs of assumed openness.
An additional way of assessing the
effectiveness of the good practice is by
asking participants to self-report.
An alternative, smaller version of this
good practice is giving one’s partner in
communication full attention: intense
present);
- With the general audience at
the Social Media Week,
Rotterdam, nhow, 23.9.2014,
14:00 – 14:30 (ar. 60 present);
- With the general audience at
a TAT-project conference,
organized by EF in Amsterdam,
de Waag, 4.12.2014, 20:00 –
22:00 (38 present);
The worst performance of
the good practice was
during the meeting in
Rotterdam. The chosen
meeting topic, new
technology and (perceived)
social exclusion, was so
overwhelming for the
audience that no real
dialogue occurred.

11. This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.
This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained
therein.
listening, patience, good will, honesty,
respect and no references to others.
The aim of the good practice is to show
how to start a dialogue on (perceived)
social exclusion.
4 Online intervention Roy Voogd/ Slow
Dialogue.
Dick Swaab. We are
our brains. 2014.
The good practice is to implement the
full attention good practice – see above
– online.
The practice is to be implemented
during online discussions onethnic-
sensitive themes.
EF.
The good practice was
implemented online in the
period 22.8.2014 – 4.12.2014.
A dedicated Facebook page,
Slow Dialogue, was dedicated
to this good practice:
https://www.facebook.com/p
ages/Slow-
Dialogue/1461032810850493.
The good practice
implementation failed
gloriously. Inserting
reflective comments in
heated discussions and
requesting restraint and
reflection at extremist
Facebook groups on the EF
project topic of Zwarte Piet
did not lead to the effect
that was aimedfor but
rather triggered (very)
negative reactions, ranging
from accusations of being
presumptuous and arrogant
to accusations of conscious
trolling.
D.Swaab sheds some light
on this outcome: “If you’re

12. This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.
This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained
therein.
open to everyone and trust
everyone ... others will
perceive your behavior as
abnormal and shut you
out.”
Probably this is more true
online even because we
cannot establish nonverbal
communication online. The
typical nonverbal
reassurances that come
with empathy are blatantly
absent online so that
extremely empathetic
behavior is seen as even
more abnormal.
5 Online publication Zygmunt Bauman.
Identity. 2004.
Zygmunt Bauman.
Liquid life. 2005.
Zygmunt Bauman.
Liquid times. 2007.
Phil Rosenzweig. Left
brain, right stuff.
2014.
Tim Wise. White like
The good practice is to trigger
reflections and discussions by means of
online publications – be it by means of
essays, articles, questionnaires and
results analyses or videos – on
ethnically sensitive themes.
Indications of success are:
- Amount of views
- Amount of reactions
EF.
A videowas published on
12.11.2014 featuring the Tat
sentences – YouTube:
https://youtu.be/64FQ-
_XtHsw. The video asked
viewers to create their own
video while being silent as a
protest against the tone of the
The video published fell
flat. It attracted only 100
views and no reactions.
Offline people from EF’s
network reacted favorably
to the video but the impact
was zero.
The questionnaire on the
other hand attracted a lot

13. This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.
This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained
therein.
me. 2008. - Type of reactions(leastinteresting:
likes; mostinteresting: long reflections)
Zwarte Pieten discussionin the
Netherlands.
An online questionnaire- was
published on 30.4.2014 –
SurveyMonkey:
https://nl.surveymonkey.com/
r/6NM8Z69
The results plus analyses were
published on Slideshare:
9.6.2014:
http://www.slideshare.net/on
nohansen/the-black-pete-
discussion-survey-results-june-
2014 and 1.7.2014:
http://www.slideshare.net/on
nohansen/the-black-pete-
discussion-survey-results-def-
36521585;
The questionnaire addressed
the Zwarte Pieten discussion
and tried to find a correlation
between action labels (I judge
their opinions/ actions to be
...) and identitylabels (I judge
people who have these
of online interest. Being
propagated by individuals
from the EF network the
questionnaire caused
vehement discussions at
the profile pages of these
individuals. 472 individuals
filled out the questionnaire.
Preliminary results and
analyses and definite
results and analyseswere
published on Slideshare.
They were read 105 times
(preliminary) and 503 times
(definite).
The essays published on
Slideshare were read over
300 timeseach (381, 386,
342 times),liked once and
downloaded 2 times. In
comparison: the essay
published on the portal
Frankwatching(nearly
200,000 subscribers) was

14. This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.
This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained
therein.
opinions, undertake these
actions to be ...).
Essays were published on the
largest online Dutchlanguage
platform on Internet trends -
Frankwatching, at the occasion
of commemorating the dead
of WW II in the Netherlands:
4.5.2015:
http://www.frankwatching.co
m/archive/2015/05/04/hoe-
reageer-op-online-racisme/ on
the subject of how to react to
online racism;
and on Slideshare: 3.7.2014:
http://www.slideshare.net/on
nohansen/ppt-essay-
36579237; 6.7.2014:
http://www.slideshare.net/on
nohansen/persbericht-waar-
ligt-de-oplosing-in-de-zwarte-
pietendiscussie (press release);
12.11.2014:
http://www.slideshare.net/on
nohansen/ik-ben-klaar-met-
read 630 times and shared
174 times(36 times on
Facebook, 47 times on
Twitter, 86 times on
LinkedIn and 5 times on
Google+).
The essays on Slideshare
overperformed while the
essay on Frankwatching
underperformed. Possibly
this has to do with the
subjects of the essays: the
Slideshare essays covered
the EF project topic
(discussion on Zwarte Piet)
while the Frankwatching
essay covered the topic of
how to react to online
racism.
The video, questionnaire
and Slideshare essays did
not attract online reactions.
The Frankwatching essay
did attract one direct
reaction and tens of

15. This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.
This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained
therein.
de-zwarte-pieten-discussie - all
about interpretationframes
for the Zwarte Pieten
discussion, applying identity
literature to the discussion;
positive reactions in tweets.
The positive reactionswere
all framed in terms of
“nice”, “useful” and did not
include long reflections.