Chapter 2 Reviewing the Literature
2.9 Religious Pluralism and Policy Development in Education in Europe
While the current research study is focused on denominational education, developments in Europe relating to the role of religion in education in public schools has implications for how RE is taught more broadly. In the European context, a seismic shift in the understanding of the role of religion in education ensued after the catastrophic events of 9/11. A revaluation of how education could address matters of religious plurality resulted in a drive for the religious dimension of intercultural education to become much more prominent. However, there is still much debate regarding the relationship between religion and education in public schools and this remains contested throughout European Member states. The following section reviews key policy documents that track the progress made by bodies such as the CoE and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) in addressing how education can support religious pluralism.
50
The CoE is an international organisation founded in 1949, prior to other institutions such as the European parliament and the European Commission, and currently comprises 47 Member states. Following the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the CoE prioritised an evaluation of the role religion plays in public life and how the promotion of the religious dimension of intercultural education and RE could assist in protecting freedom of and freedom for religion in religiously plural societies. The new challenge of intercultural education: religious diversity and dialogue in Europe (2002-2005) became the first project of the council and focused on religion’s relationship with culture. The project found that, “regardless of the truth or falsity of religious claims, religion is a part of life and culture and therefore should be understood by all citizens as part of their education” (Jackson, 2012, p.170). Two reference books were published by the council following this project; The religious dimension of intercultural education (2005) and Religious diversity and intercultural education (2007). Recommendations were published for governments, policymakers and educators in 2008. The recommendations state:
i. Intercultural dialogue is a pre-condition for the development of tolerance in Europe;
ii. There should be respect for the rights of individuals to hold particular religious beliefs;
iii. Teaching about religious and non-religious convictions is consistent with the aims of education for a democratic citizenship;
iv. Promoting dialogue between people from different cultural, religious and nonreligious convictions is important in schooling;
v. Respecting the dignity of everyone and promoting mutual trust and understanding is important for education in the twenty-first century. (CoE, 2008)
The council’s recommendations underscore the importance of the learning about religions and learning from religions as a prerequisite for a democratic, diverse yet unified Europe. Subsequent publications illustrate the possible applications of the 2008 recommendations for those involved in educational policy and practice. Significant among these was Signposts: policy and practice for teaching about religions and non-religious worldviews in intercultural education (Jackson, 2014). This document is for policymakers, schools and educators to specifically address the issues that may arise from religious pluralism in schools and colleges. It advocates interpretive and dialogical didactical approaches and advises on the integration of non-religious worldviews into the study of RE (2014, p.47).
Signposts’(2014) direction relating to the integration of non-religious convictions and religions within intercultural education is particularly apposite to the current research, which includes the views of
51
students with non-religious worldviews. While the 2008 recommendations identifies both non- religious convictions and religions as “cultural facts” that are “complex phenomena”, with neither being “monolithic” (CoE, 2008), Signposts (CoE, 2014) aims to aid the inclusion of non-religious convictions in intercultural education. Detailing the problematic issues of nomenclature concerning the study of religious and non-religious beliefs, Signposts also raises issues concerning the skills and attitudes needed by teachers to promote dialogue throughout this educational endeavour.
The most recent publication by the CoE is Competences for democratic culture (2016), which describes a conceptual model of the competences needed by citizens for “living together as equals in culturally diverse democratic societies” (2016, p.9). Twenty competencies that enable individuals to participate effectively in a culture of democracy are listed under the categories: Values, Attitudes, Skills and Knowledge and Critical Understanding. The document is aimed at policymakers and educational practitioners and can be used to aid pedagogical design, assessment and curriculum development.
2.9.2 The OSCE and the Toledo Guiding Principles
In parallel with the work of the CoE, OSCE developed the Toledo guiding principles on teaching about religions and beliefs in public schools (2007). These guiding principles, developed by a team of international lawyers, social scientists and educators from a cross-section of religious and philosophical backgrounds (Jackson, 2013), promote the study of religion in schools as a way to foster greater levels of security and stability in European societies. The objective of the Toledo guiding principles is:
to contribute to an improved understanding of the world’s increasing religious diversity and the growing presence of religion in the public sphere. Their rationale is based on two core principles: first, that there is positive value in teaching that emphasizes respect for everyone’s right to freedom of religion and belief, and second, that teaching about religions and beliefs can reduce harmful misunderstandings and stereotypes. (OSCE, 2007)
These Toledo guiding principles argue that the teaching about religion and beliefs has human rights implications and therefore must be acknowledged and adopted by stakeholders in public education. They offer criteria and recommendations for those involved in developing policies on religion and education. The Toledo guiding principles uphold the distinction between practical and theoretical RE, asserting that “students are not pressed to accept, conform, or convert to any belief” (OSCE, 2007, p.20).
Critics of the development of policies concerning “religious education” or “teaching about religions and beliefs” by an organisation like the OSCE make the criticism that they “politicise” RE (Gearon, 2013, 2014). Gearon identifies this instrumentalisation of RE as a manipulation of its objectives in
52
order to effectively address issues of security, which reduces the intrinsic value of the subject. Jackson, countering such criticism, concedes that there are issues about the nature or aims of RE that relate to the social, political and security concerns (Jackson, 2016). However, legitimate concerns persist regarding the possibility of the purpose of RE becoming manipulated by political agendas seeking harmonious integration of religious diversity, and the fear that its purpose will become fixated on objectives that are conducive to social cohesion, while ignoring the complexity and conflictual aspects of the study (Wright, 2000; Thompson 2010; Gearon, 2013, 2014). It is important to note the fundamental conflict between epistemology in RE as a faith pursuit and RE as a knowledge pursuit. It is interesting, but not surprising, to note that while 55 of the 56 states in the OSCE, including Ireland, accepted the Toledo guiding principles, the Holy See did not. In a circular letter to Bishops in 2009, the Holy See refers to the tension between the aims of RE in public and denominational education:
The nature and role of religious education in schools has become the object of debate. In some cases, it is now the object of new civil regulations, which tend to replace religious education with teaching about the religious phenomenon in a multi-denominational sense, or about religious ethics and culture – even in a way that contrasts with the choices and educational aims that parents and the Church intend for the formation of young people. (CCE, 2009, p.1)
The circular letter goes on to recommend that the Church recall the founding principles of a Catholic education as rooted in its mission of the developing of the Catholic faith and the formation of the person as a whole (CCE, 2009). Accordingly, it asserts the existence of faith to be the primary premise for RE as follows:
Religious nature is the foundation and guarantee of the presence of religious education in the scholastic public sphere. (CCE, 2009, para. III, 18)
While RE may contribute effectively to social cohesion, it should not be bound by arguments for expediency. RE in the context of the Catholic school seeks to nurture the faith of its Catholic students first and foremost, with an inter-religious objective as secondary. The Catholic Church also identifies the marginalisation of practical RE within public schools as compromising the right of parents and students to religious freedom. However, it recognises that within Catholic schools, “the religious freedom of non-Catholic pupils must be respected” (2009, para. III, 16). Knowledge of other faiths is not understood as outside the remit of Catholic schools: indeed, the teaching about different religions is promoted in church documents Nostra aetate, being an example example. However, there is an assumption that a focus on the teaching about the religious phenomenon in a multi-denominational sense will reduce the complexity of religions to a list of descriptors and denigrate the practical approach with its concern of teaching a person how to be religious (2009). The Catholic Church’s rejection of the Toledo guiding principles (OSCE, 2007) seems to be based on pedagogical grounds
53
rather than ideological grounds. However, it is important to note that the Toledo guiding principles are not intended for denominational or faith schools, but rather for public or state-run schools.
2.9.3 The European Commission’s REDCo Report
In 2009, the European Commission funded a large-scale research project entitled, Religion in education: a contribution to dialogue or a factor of conflict in transforming societies of European countries? (REDCo) project. The aim of the project was to explore if RE in Europe was a factor contributing positively or indeed negatively to religious dialogue. The research project assessed “the potential and limitation of religion in educational fields” of the participating countries (England, Estonia, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, the Russian Federation, and Spain). This significant study included the voice of European students ranging from 14-16 years old (Arweck, 2017).
Findings from the research conclude that, overall, participants were positive in their appraisal of RE and agreed it should be taught in schools. However, the majority of students felt that school is not the place for religious practice (Knauth and Kors 2011). Allowing for the contextual difference across and within participating countries, Jackson (2012, p. 7-8) summarises the findings as follows:
Students wish for peaceful coexistence across differences, and believe this to be possible;
•
For students, peaceful coexistence depends on knowledge about each other’s religions and worldviews and sharing common interests as well as doing things together;•
Students who learn about religious diversity in school are more willing to haveconversations about religions/beliefs with students of other backgrounds than those who do not;
•
Students wish to avoid conflict: some of the religiously committed students feel vulnerable;•
Students want learning to take place in a safe classroom environment where there are agreed procedures for expression and discussion;•
Most students would like the state-funded school to be a place for learning about different religions/worldviews, rather than for instruction into a particular religion/worldview.The REDCo report and other policy developments from Europe clearly emphasise the importance of RE in public schooling. It is, however, interesting to note that the importance of this subject is understood primarily in terms of RE’s inter-religious objective, and it can be deduced that to learn
54
about other religions will increase social cohesion. The findings of this report are of particular interest to the current research, which documents the student voice in its exploration of RE at senior cycle in a Catholic post-primary school. Discussion of the relevance of the REDCo report’s findings and their consonance with the current research’s findings is presented in Chapter 4.