Young People's Attitudes to Religious Diversity

Elisabeth Arweck

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• Print ISBN:
  9781138385337
• eBook ISBN:
  9781134790463
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Religion

Investigating the hitherto unexplored topic of how young people understand and relate to religious diversity in the social context in which they are growing up, this book makes a significant contribution to the existing body of literature on religious diversity and multiculturalism. It closes a gap in knowledge about young people's attitudes to religious diversity, and reports data gathered across the whole of the UK as well as comparative chapters on Canada, USA and continental Europe. Reporting findings from both qualitative and quantitative research which reveal, for example, the importance of the particular social and geographical context within which young people are embedded, the volume addresses young people's attitudes towards the range of 'world religions' as well as non-religious stances and offers an interdisciplinary approach through the different analytical perspectives of the contributors.

Part One
Setting the context

1
The Young People’s Attitudes to Religious Diversity project in the context of Warwick Religions and Education Research Unit (WRERU) research

Robert Jackson and Ursula McKenna

WRERU’s studies of religious diversity and education

Warwick Religions and Education Research Unit (WRERU) has undertaken externally funded empirical research on various aspects of religions and education since its foundation in 1994. From 1994 to 2013, WRERU was based in the Institute of Education at the University of Warwick. Since October 2013, WRERU has been part of the University of Warwick’s newly formed interdisciplinary Centre for Education Studies.

The Young People’s Attitudes to Religious Diversity project continued a tradition of WRERU studies concerned with religious diversity in the UK. Most of these studies have been variously concerned with the experience of children and young people from a range of religious and cultural backgrounds. They have built on earlier ethnographic studies, such as Warwick’s Religious Education and Community Project, involving children in Britain from Christian, Jewish, Muslim and Sikh backgrounds, and the first UK project on religion and education to be funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) (Jackson and Nesbitt 1992; Nesbitt and Jackson 1992, 1995; Woodward and Jackson 1993), together with studies of children from a Hindu background funded from various sources, including the Leverhulme Trust (e.g. Jackson and Nesbitt 1993).

These early ethnographic studies were inspired by listening to the personal stories of children in schools and homes, and through meeting, spending much time with and interviewing their parents and members of their wider communities. Reflection on academic issues related to the study of religions ‘on the ground’ and methodological issues concerned with understanding, portraying and responding at a personal level to another’s religious life, together with issues related to the ‘transmission’ of religious culture, inspired the interpretive approach to religious education. This drew eclectically on methods and ideas from a range of sources and disciplines, including ethnography, social psychology, literary theory, religious studies and hermeneutical theory. Its key concepts of representation, interpretation and reflexivity provided a research framework which was also used pedagogically, as a basis for teaching and learning in other contexts: the learner’s challenges of comprehension mirrored those of the researcher (Jackson 1997, 2012c). This period also included experiments in producing texts for use in schools drawing on research material collected during ethnographic studies (e.g. Barratt 1994a, 1994b, 1994c, 1994d, 1994e; Barratt and Price 1996; Jackson and Nesbitt 1990; Mercier 1996; Robson 1995; Wayne et al. 1996).

WRERU’s subsequent wide-ranging qualitative research extended to school-based as well as family- and community-based studies. These included a longitudinal study of young people from a Hindu background (e.g. Nesbitt 1991; Nesbitt and Jackson 1992), research on the life histories of teachers and students of religious education (e.g. Sikes and Everington 2001), studies of pupil-to-pupil dialogue in the classroom (e.g. Ipgrave 2001, 2013; McKenna, Ipgrave and Jackson 2008) and religious education for children with special educational needs (e.g. McKenna 2002). The Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) funded research on the religious identity formation of young people in mixed-faith families (e.g. Arweck 2013; Arweck and Nesbitt 2010, 2012) and on the influence of Hindu-related ‘religious movements’ on classroom practice in various contexts (e.g. Arweck, Nesbitt and Jackson 2005, 2008). This period also saw further development of theory and pedagogy in religious education (e.g. Jackson 2004).¹

In 2006, WRERU had the opportunity to broaden its research perspective in two ways: to work collaboratively with teams of researchers from across Europe interested in themes connected with diversity, and to extend its repertoire of research techniques, for example introducing a mixed-method approach to research (e.g. Jackson 2012a). Thus WRERU participated in a large European project, the REDCo (Religion, Education, Dialogue, Conflict) project, involving researchers from eight European countries (see later in this chapter).

Expansion of WRERU and the UK government DCSF project

In 2007, considerable expertise in quantitative research was added to WRERU’s team, when Prof. Leslie Francis and other colleagues (Dr Mandy Robbins, Dr Emyr Williams, Dr Tania ap Siôn and Prof. David Lankshear) joined. As well as bringing huge knowledge and experience of quantitative methodologies, Prof. Francis’s deep experience in psychology (especially individual differences psychology) and practical and empirical theology complemented existing WRERU competence in fields such as ethnography, sociology, interfaith dialogue, religious studies and religious education, making large-scale collaborative mixed-methods research feasible.

The first major opportunity to use the new research team came in 2008, when WRERU won a competitive bid from the UK Government’s then Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) to investigate ‘materials used in schools to teach world religions’. The project employed 29 staff, including WRERU researchers and associate fellows, experts in academic studies of religions, information and communications technology (ICT) and primary and secondary religious education as well as consultants from faith communities. The research included three strands: in strand 1, a sample of published materials (identified in strands 2 and 3) was reviewed by a panel of experts consisting of members of faith groups, academic experts and professional religious education (RE) experts. Strand 2 was a quantitative survey of materials used in schools, in which subject leaders were asked to identify materials which were used by teachers in the preparation of lessons, by both teachers and pupils during lessons, and by pupils during their own independent researches. Strand 3 consisted of qualitative case studies conducted in 10 primary and 10 secondary schools, selected from maintained and independent schools of all types. Case study research included: documentary analysis (e.g. the RE syllabus used by the school); visual ethnography (e.g. observation of visual images in the school relating to religion, religious diversity and community cohesion); lesson observations (e.g. to see how materials were used); semi-structured interviews with key staff and pupils; and focus group interviews with pupils. Throughout the project, there was consultation between the research groups involved in the three strands, the schools involved in the case studies and the experts from the different faith communities. Project publications included the main report to the DCSF (Jackson et al. 2010). However, the key significance of the project for WRERU was its leap forward in terms of capacity to design and conduct large-scale mixed-methods research in religious education.

The REDCo project

WRERU’s participation in the European Commission Framework 6 REDCo project produced a body of research on young people in eight European nations, including WRERU’s studies in England. These consisted of qualitative (e.g. Ipgrave and McKenna 2008) and quantitative (e.g. McKenna, Neill and Jackson 2009) studies of the views of 14- to 16-year-olds as well as qualitative studies of classroom interaction (e.g. O’Grady 2009). One of WRERU’s distinctive contributions to REDCo was an experiment in using key principles from the interpretive approach (Jackson 1997) in a series of school-based action research studies conducted through the ongoing work of a collaborative community of practice, including teachers, teacher trainers and a religious education adviser (Ipgrave, Jackson and O’Grady 2009). The key concepts of the interpretive approach were used not as a formal theoretical framework but as a theoretical stimulus and the basis for a checklist for researchers working in the field (Jackson 2011, 2012b).²

The REDCo project set out to explore whether religious education in Europe was a factor contributing positively to religious dialogue or, on the contrary, a potential source of conflict. The main aim was to establish and compare the potentials and limitations of religion in the educational fields of the selected European countries and regions (England, Estonia, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, the Russian Federation and Spain). Another aim was to identify approaches and policies that might make religion in education a factor which promotes dialogue. Qualitative, quantitative and classroom interaction studies were carried out in the eight nations and various complementary studies were conducted.

The REDCo project was innovative in that, while it was a cross-European project, data analysis was enabled at both the national and European levels. Its data can be viewed nationally or as part of the wider dataset from the eight European countries, providing collections of examples of religion in education in a variety of northern, southern, western and eastern European countries (e.g. Knauth et al. 2008; ter Avest et al. 2009; Valk et al. 2009). Moreover, because qualitative and quantitative studies across participating nations used the same research methods, comparisons, such as between the English and the Dutch data (Bertram-Troost and O’Grady 2008), could be made between countries of diverse historical and socio-cultural backgrounds, including different histories of religion and state. Reports of a cross-section of the REDCo studies can be found in Jackson (2012a), while detailed findings of different project strands are presented in particular collections (e.g. qualitative studies in Knauth et al. 2008, quantitative findings in Valk et al. 2009 and classroom interaction studies in ter Avest et al. 2009).

Despite contextual differences between and within the participant countries, the main findings of the REDCo project included the following (based on information at http://www.redco.uni-hamburg.de/cosmea/core/corebase/mediabase/awr/redco/research_findings/REDCo_policy_rec_eng.pdf):

• The majority of pupils appreciated the religious heterogeneity in their societies, although a range of prejudices was expressed.
• The most important source of information about religions and worldviews was generally the family, followed by the school.
• The school population included a sizeable group of pupils for whom religion was important in their lives, a sizeable group for whom religion was not important and a sizeable group who held a variety of occasionally fluctuating positions between these two poles.
• Irrespective of their religious positions, a majority of pupils were interested in learning about religions in school.
• Pupils were well aware of and experienced religious diversity mostly in, but also outside, school.
• Pupils were generally open towards peers of different religious backgrounds. At the same time they tended to socialize with peers from the same background as themselves, even when they lived in areas characterized by religious diversity.
• Pupils often expressed a tolerant attitude at an abstract rather than practical level. The tolerance expressed in classroom discussion was not always replicated in their daily life-worlds.
• Those who learnt about religious diversity in school were more willing to enter into conversations about religions and worldviews with pupils from other backgrounds, compared to those who did not have this opportunity for learning.
• Pupils desired peaceful coexistence across religious differences and believed that this was possible.
• Pupils believed that the main preconditions for peaceful coexistence between people of different religions were knowledge about each other’s religions and worldviews, shared interests and joint activities.
• In most countries pupils supported the right of adherents to a moderate expression of religious faith in school. For example, they did not oppose in school the wearing of unobtrusive religious symbols or did not object to voluntary acts of worship for pupils who were adherents of a particular religion.
• Pupils for whom religion was important in their lives were more likely to respect the religious backgrounds of others and valued the role of religion in the world.
• Most pupils wanted to see school dedicated more to teaching about different religions than to guiding them towards a particular religious belief or worldview; however, pupils tended to favour the model of education about religion with which they were most familiar.
• Pupils wanted learning about religions to take place in a safe classroom environment governed by agreed procedures for expression and discussion.
• Pupils generally wished to avoid conflict on religious issues and some of the religiously committed pupils felt especially vulnerable.
• Dialogue was a favoured strategy for teachers to cope with diversity in the classroom, but pupils were more ambivalent about its value since, in practice, not all pupils were comfortable with the way diversity was managed in schools.

Many of these findings are reinforced by the Young People’s Attitudes to Religious Diversity project, but this project is able to provide more nuanced findings because it is based on bigger samples (see later).

Critical feedback on the REDCo project

Some criticisms have been advanced against REDCo, some of which could equally have been directed at the Young People’s Attitudes to Religious Diversity project (see later). Two criticisms, in particular, have been made by Liam Gearon (2013).

The first criticism is the assertion that research using theory and method grounded in the social sciences and psychology is inherently secularist and therefore exhibits an anti-religious bias. The basis of this criticism is the association of such disciplines with the European Enlightenment and its legacy, especially the association of disciplines with ‘founding’ intellectuals whose work, in effect, attempted to explain religion away. Sociology is associated by Gearon with Durkheim, while psychology is linked to its Freudian ancestry. Thus, Francis’s work is placed in a vague and cover-all ‘psychological-experiential paradigm’, along with that of others who make a strong use of psychology, regardless of the type of psychology they employ or the nature of its use in their research or pedagogy (Gearon 2013, 115–122). Jackson’s work (coupled with that of WRERU colleagues Nesbitt and Arweck) is seen to occupy its own distinctive ‘socio-cultural paradigm’. Regarding Jackson’s interpretive approach, Gearon claims that

the origins of this approach lie in the founding sociological work of Emile Durkheim and especially The Elementary Forms of the Religious Life … From Durkheim’s analysis of what were then regarded as religion’s primitive origins, it was surmised that religion itself originated in society’s self deification.

(ibid., 127)

But...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• List of figures
• List of tables
• Acknowledgements
• PART ONE Setting the context
• PART TWO Qualitative perspectives
• PART THREE Quantitative perspectives
• PART FOUR International engagement
• List of contributors
• Index