Religious Education and the Public Sphere

Patricia Hannam

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• Print ISBN: 9780815354659
• eBook ISBN: 9781351132213
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

Religious Education and the Public Sphere reveals, through an analysis of theory and practice, that religious education is resting on historic and persistent assumptions about both religion and education. Drawing on work from Arendt and Weil, new ideas emerge regarding religious education's constituent elements: education and religion. It offers a new and timely proposal for religious education and argues for a broader understanding of religion, bringing a fresh contribution to current discussions regarding the relationship between religion and education in the public sphere.

Some practical considerations emerging from theory developing through the earlier parts of the book are presented in the final section, including the teacher's role and what should guide religious education curriculum. At a time when there is raised interest in the role of religion in the public sphere internationally, this book aims to contribute something new, both theoretically and practically, to discussions regarding the role of religion in education is and relevant to educational contexts worldwide.

This book will be vital reading for academics and researchers in the fields of religion and religious studies, education, philosophy of education and religious education, and will also be of great interest to teachers and policy makers working in the field of religious education in the public sphere.

Part I

An historical analysis of religious education in the public sphere

Chapter 1

The root of the problem

Introduction

In this chapter I discuss the background and history of religious education, giving first an overview, drawing from international and European literature, before offering an in-depth analysis of what has happened in maintained schools in England since the education acts of the late 19th century. I proceed from here to expose religious education’s pathway through the inter-war years in England, noting its tendency to be isolated from mainstream educational developments of the period. I seek to discover the things religious education has been said to aim to achieve and identify assumptions that have underpinned it; in addition I highlight consequences of understanding religious education in particular ways. In fairly well all cases religious education in a particular country has been influenced by relationships with established religions; in England up until the Second World War proposals for religious education in the main came from the Christian churches. I then present and critique first confessional approaches and later in some detail the phenomenological approach to religious education which together defined the 50 years immediately following the 1944 Education Act. The exploration in this chapter enables me to identify several assumptions underlying both theory as well as practical approaches to religious education, since the beginning. Furthermore I show how these assumptions have influenced recent research and policy documents, revealing longstanding implications for religious education.

Religious education internationally: an evolving story

Whether or not it will be possible to find any common features in religious education across nations will depend on many factors. Although systems of public education began at a similar time across Europe and in European- influenced nations (such as the United States and Australia), the history of religious education in relation to public education has charted varying routes. This is so much the case that it would probably be better to say that a number of different activities currently take place in schools across the world and are termed ‘religious education’. Bråten (2014) points out that many factors make a difference here, including the religious history of the nation. For example, if Christian, whether a nation is protestant/Roman Catholic or Orthodox or whether there has been influence from a communist past as in Eastern Europe (p. 19). Schreiner (2013) observes differences between the way the Council of Europe speaks about religion and education as compared to the European Union documents, with Council of Europe documents indicating a preference for a model of religious education in relation to ‘teaching about religions’ (p. 5). Davies (2017) suggests that in ‘Australia, religion is broadly understood in the traditional sense – by belonging or ascribing to the values of one of the large religious institutions’ and, given the complexity of immigration in Australia, that is a multi-religious understanding of religion. However, in Australia in addition to this there is a growing distrust of the religious authorities in some cases.

In the United States, the American Academy of Religions guidelines (Moore 2010) points out that although ‘religious studies is not a required subject in public K-12 schools, religion is embedded in curriculum standards across disciplines, and it is especially prominent in social studies and English at the state and national association levels’ and further that ‘(g)iven the rising interest in the study of religion due to national and global affairs, there are also a growing number of elective courses offered in schools’ (p. 1). The approach here is quite closely linked with that advanced in the Toledo Principles; however what is actually happening in individual schools will vary greatly. To be sure then, this great variation internationally in what religious education means presents a challenge for those of us seeking to make some general recommendations for education and the relationship between religion and education in what might be called ‘religious education’. However, in a world where most education systems are influenced by factors of globalisation the view advanced through the argument in this book will be that this is not only possible but also desirable.

Religious education in maintained schools in England 1870–1966: origins and intentions

Religious education in the public sphere in England took a new and significant turn as a consequence of 19th-century educational reforms. The Education Act of 1870, known as the ‘Forster Act’, ‘set out to fill the gaps in voluntary provision of schools’ (Matthews 1966, p. 7) which, until that time, had by and large been provided by religious agencies. Prior to the 1870 Act the largest provider of schools was The Church of England’s National Society established in 1811, which aimed to ensure a school in every parish; by 1851 there were 12,000 schools across England and Wales. Before this time although education in England had usually been associated with religion, by the late 18th century it was in general only available to the elite. Nineteenth-century educational reform must therefore be understood in the context of other social and economic reforms taking place in the Victorian industrialised period. This is because these reforms were influential on the thinking of various Victorian Christian educationalists, for example Thomas Arnold. Arnold’s assertion that ‘school was a factory in which men are made’ (Kinloch 1938, p. 129) articulated what was to become a prevailing and persistent association between character building, religion and educational achievement. The 1870 Act ensured the establishment of elementary education in England; attendance at school became both compulsory and free for all children, up to the age of 12, by the end of the 19th century.

Religious education in the maintained education sector in England came about as a consequence of accommodations that successive governments made with different ‘religious agencies’ (Cox 1983a, p. 3). This was in order to fulfil the intention to ensure elementary education for all; an intention with multiple motivations. The political accommodation with the various ‘religious agencies’ (Cox 1983a, p. 3) facilitated the use of existing buildings, for example belonging to the Christian denominations, to be used by the authorities in order to provide enough school places for all children. A special relationship was established at the very beginning between the ‘religious agencies’ in England and the government’s wider educational intentions. A dual system developed consisting of voluntary denominational schools, including Catholic and Jewish schools, and non-denominational board schools. The new schools were to be operated by school boards who ‘would levy a rate’ (Matthews 1966, p. 7) and provide for the building of new schools where there was need, especially in the rapidly expanding cities. Although the new ‘Board (that is non-denominational) Schools’ that followed the 1870 Act ‘generally included a religious element in their curriculum’ (Cox 1983a, p. 3), it is important to realise that at this point religious education was not compulsory in these schools. Concerns (see Matthews 1966, p. 7) that the churches might seek to proselytise in these schools ‘ensured the 1870 Act included the Cowper-Temple clause’ (Louden 2004 p. 13) which prohibited the use of distinctive religious formularies in non-denominational rate-supported schools. In turn influences on late 19th-century educational reforms included those involved within the Christian Socialist Movement, such as Charles Kingsley and Frederick Maurice, who felt there was compatibility with socialist ideas and Christianity. An intention therefore of including religion in schools, right at the very beginning, was commonly understood as enshrining in some way a social and reforming vision of what religion could do for society as well as in terms of the public sphere. There was general agreement regarding an anticipated positive influence of religion in education, upon the individual and beyond.

Nevertheless, in the period leading up to the First World War, bitter theological controversy raged between Christian denominations about the nature of religious education (see Cox 1983a, p. 3) or religious instruction (RI) as it was more commonly known at this time. At the same time there were other challenges to the power of the relationship that has been established between the government and the churches regarding education. This came for example from emerging secular movements such as the Moral Instruction League (see Freathy 2008, p. 297). At this time new forms of moral education also began to be developed, but these were in reality ‘rarely outside a Christian moral framework’ (Freathy 2008, p. 297). Strong theological disagreements existed between churchmen in many respects. Although there was agreement that Christianity had had a critical contribution to make to the moral fabric of public life, there was also awareness that other freethinking intellectuals from the new secular movements would have been happy, even at this time, for there to have been no religion at all taught in schools. As Matthews (1966 notes, there was concern that the new board schools might fail to teach religion at all and, because of this, compromises were struck. This can be exemplified by for example the London Board, where in addition to the conscience clause, content was prescribed in such a way to ensure that simply ‘the Bible shall be read and there shall be given such explanations and such instruction therefrom in the principles of morality and religion as are suited to the capacity of the children’ (p. 8).

To be sure religious education in maintained education, from the earliest Education Acts in the late 19th century up till 1944, was given a special position in the school curriculum because of the influence of the churches. Furthermore, and importantly, in order to satisfy the various factions, it was ‘artificially protected’ from agencies such as those involved in the new teacher training institutions who ‘could have done most to help it’ (Matthews 1966, p. 8). In addition to this, during the first quarter of the 20th century subsequent legislative opportunities added another layer of complexity. The various Education Acts designated a distinction between voluntary aided (VA) and voluntary controlled (VC) schools. In VA schools the partner body, in return for putting more funding into the running of the school buildings, would have more control over the religious education the children received, leading to eventually all Catholic and Jewish state-funded schools becoming VA schools and around half The Church of England schools adopting VA status. The first 60 years of compulsory elementary schooling in England made rapid progress in many respects; however religious education remained subject to a particular perception of the relationship between church and home and school and the intentions of government.

By 1944 a range of social factors and educational concerns had led to the political determination on the part of government to transform maintained education. The architects of the 1944 Education Act, building on several reports published in the preceding years, ensured religious education became compulsory in all schools receiving public funds. This Act also came at a point where there was recognition of the need for a broad education, broader than the elementary schools were able to provide, for all young people. Successive reports such as the several Hadow Reports (see for example 1931), Spens (1938) and Norwood (1943) reports, which included respected educationalists of the day, advocated a development and restructuring of state education in such a way that included providing secondary schools for all and extending the school leaving age to 15, the 1921 Education Act having already raised the leaving age to 14. These reports also gave an opportunity for rethinking the settlement between the churches and government and, particularly relevant here, for reviewing provision for religious education. Religious Education in the 1944 Act was broken down into religious instruction (RI) and collective worship – both compulsory.

However, despite making religious education compulsory, the act ‘never specifies what religion was to be taught’ (Cox 1983a, p. 5). Instead, having legislated for religious education, ‘parliament handed over the definition of it to the representatives of the Churches and the educational administrators’ (Cox 1983a, p. 5). The process for a Local Authority adopting an ‘agreed syllabus’ for religious education in board schools was established and the wording of the Act extended the provision which allowed a parent to withdraw their child from religious education in voluntary and board schools alike. It is worth noting at this point that by and large educationalists were not engaged with defining religious education, but more concerned with determining its continued presence in maintained schools. These various reports affirmed the presence of an assumed link between good character and religious instruction. This was even to the extent of asserting ‘that no boy or girl can be counted as properly educated unless he or she has been made aware of the fact of the existence of a religious interpretation of life’ (Spens Report 1938, p. 208 as quoted in the Norwood Report 1943, p. 85). Thus the link between religious education and the education of character can be seen as being in the heart of the political vision behind the inclusion of religious education in the 1944 Act.

Nevertheless, in terms of why the provision for religious education was strengthened in the 1944 Act, several additional factors also need to be taken into account. These include the development of an ecumenical movement which ensured that denominational rivalries had subsided considerably. This meant that there were instead reasons to work together to advance a shared vision for religious teaching in schools, and the foundations to make that possible in the terms of the 1944 Education Act were now in place. However the established Church remained the most influential partner. In addition to this there were also more practical reasons. The need to build schools fit for the purpose and able to meet the intention to provide secondary education for all meant that the stake the established Church had in existing buildings enabled it ‘to bargain for the presence of religious teaching in schools’ (Cox 1983a, p. 7). Far higher standards were prescribed in the 1944 Act for school buildings themselves: ‘the State offered to take over any ecclesiastical schools whose owners were prepared to relinquish them rather than face the expense of modernisation’ (Cox 1983a, p. 7). So it was then that for many reasons two elements were woven into the 1944 Education Act under the sub (shoulder) title of ‘religious education’. The first was religious observance, now understood as collective worship, and the second was religious instruction, in other words what was to go on in the classroom. The wording of the act did not specify what religion was to be taught, but it was assumed that Christianity was intended and probably protestant Christianity in particular (see Cox 1983a, p. 5).

The confessional approach to religious education and 1960s challenges

As well as laying down requirements for the existence of religious education in a unique way over any other school subject, the 1944 Act set out the vehicle for establishing religious education in the form of the ‘agreed syllabus’. The 1944 Act required every Local Authority to adopt an agreed syllabus by an ‘Agreed Syllabus Conference’ (ASC) which the Local Authority must convene comprising of four interest groups with equal status: Group A representing ‘other denominations than The Church of England’, Group B representing The Church of England, Group C representing the Local Authority elected representatives and Group D to include teacher representatives. These particular criteria made sure everything was in place for an approach to religious education that would ensure it was not like any other aspect of school life. Furthermore the 1944 Act made it clear that religious education was intended to contribute to the life of the whole school in a particular and distinct kind of way. However the politicians who had been involved in the construction of the 1944 Act, such as Rab Butler and Winston Churchill as well as social reformers such as Archbishop William Temple, having established religious education into the statute of the 1944 Education Act left determination over what should be taught to the Local Authorities and other ‘experts’ of the ASCs. The position of The Church of England and other Christian denominations therefore made sure that any Local Authority agreed syllabus developed between 1944 and the 1960s remained largely schemes of Christian study (Cox 1983a, p. 6)

Cooling defines this focus on Christian study and evangelistic intention as being a ‘confessional’ approach (Cooling 2000, p. 154) to religious education. Cox (see 1983a, pp. 30–31) gives examples from several agreed syllabuses of this time to demonstrate this point. The Cambridgeshire Syllabus of 1949 (Cambridge 1949) aimed to ‘lead children to an experience of God, His Church, and His Word, an experience based upon worship, fellowship and service’ and the Lincolnshire Syllabus of 1964 makes it clear that ‘(t)he syllabus is deliberately designed as an evangelistic influence … the aim is to lead pupils to a personal knowledge of Jesus Christ’. However, although in the 1966 The West Riding of Yorkshire Syllabus there are signs of an interest in educational matters emerging, assertions such as ‘(p)ersonal needs are religious needs which are only satisfied by the growing discovery that at the heart of the universe there is a God who cares’ nevertheless reveal a strong confessional approach to the curriculum. Cole notes that a ‘principle pioneered by the West Riding (was) to have given education precedence over theology’ (Cole 1976, p. 127). However although this syllabus was influenced by educational pioneers significant at the time and sought to take these matters seriously, it remained predominantly orientated to the view that children should better understand Christianity.

It is important to note that these confessional agreed syllabuses had been developed under the influence of the constituent members of the ASCs, revealing something of the influences at work in these ASCs. However, from the late 1950s onwards confessional approaches to religious education were challenged and came under scrutiny as the religious and social composition of England underwent rapid transformation. I group these challenges into three broad areas: firstly cognitive or psychological challenges, secondly philosophical and thirdly theological challenges.

Cognitive or psychological challenges can be seen for example in the work of Yeaxley for the Institute of Christian Education as well as from Harold Loukes (see Cox 1983a, p. 13). Although working separately, both Yeaxley and Loukes showed that children were remembering very little of what they had been taught and furthermore often misunderstood what they did remember. Loukes’ work also identified that teenagers were disenchanted with ‘a bible based religious education that assumed the truth of Christianity’ (Jackson 2004a, p. 24). In addition to this Goldman (1964, 1965) and Hyde (1965) drew for example on the developmental insights of Piaget. Piaget’s ideas had been inspiring wider curriculum reform in England during the 1960s, and Goldman raised questions for religious education about children’s cognitive capabilities at different ages. Discussions ensued regarding the appropriateness of certain religious material at particular ages. In terms of curriculum development, although not challenging the confessional approaches as directly as some other research of the period, it did influence the planning of schemes of work in some syllabuses. In particular Goldman’s influence led to agreed syllabus recommending for example that small children are taught more concrete aspects of religious teachings such as the New Testament parables, while leaving other elements such as the Gospel accounts of Jesus’ miracles until later. Goldman’s ideas, which had influence for more than a decade, were themselves subsequently contested (e.g. Slee 1986; Cooling 2000, p. 156) as Piaget’s work in education was more carefully reviewed.

A second group of criticisms came from the newly emerging area of philosophy of education. Paul Hirst (see for example 1965, p. 5) was amongst those who challenged assumptions made about the role of religion in individuals’ lives as well as in society and the public sphere in terms of moral formation. His view was that if religious education were to have any place in maintained education, it could only be to impart facts about religion that are demonstrable and agreed. Building on writings of the 19th and early 20th century from secularists and humanists (Cox 1983a, p. 21), these arguments had a stronger voice in the 1960s as the analytic movement within philosophy at large had an increasingly powerful influence in philosophy departments of English universities during this time. In addition to this, analytic philosophy was also informing the newl...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• Part I An historical analysis of religious education in the public sphere
• Part II Addressing assumptions
• Part III New possibilities for religious education?
• 6 What should religious education aim to achieve in the public sphere?
• 7 Practical considerations: what might this mean for the teacher?
• 8 Epilogue and some practical considerations: what might this mean for a religious education curriculum?
• Bibliography
• Index