To What Extent Does Religion in the Education System, Help or Hinder the Success of Children - Term Paper Example

The Cross in the Class? An Examination of the Benefits And Drawbacks of Faith Schools Before one can establish whether or not religion is a beneficial or a corrosive element in primary and secondary education, one must first define both what religion and education consist of. One can define “religion” as a set of beliefs and practices, or as a more holistic response to the events of one’s life. One can define “education” as the inculcation of information from the topics set by the National Curriculum, or as a more general preparation for the rigors of adult life. Because this paper addresses religion in general, as opposed to one particular faith, such as Anglicanism or Islam, religion will be viewed as the human response to the events of life. Based on what happens in life, one may choose to follow the Judeo-Christian God, or Allah, or Buddha, or to follow no particular deity at all. Education will be viewed in a more holistic sense as well – the role that schools play in taking Britain’s children and molding them into adults. It will become clear, after a review of relevant literature, that there is not one mixture of religion in education that works for every student. The multiplicity of educational choices has arisen from a multiplicity of personalities, collective life experiences, and individual responses. The Muslim educational experience in Great Britain is particularly demonstrative of this need for variety in educational choices. In the first half of 2005, the Imam Muhammad Zakariya School for Girls in Dundee received its second consecutive poor report on academics (Saeed, 2005). While Ibrahim Hewitt (2005) makes a strong case that the British government should establish and support schools run according to the Muslim philosophy of education, and that only a “complete Islamic education as delivered in a well-resourced Muslim school” will give Muslim students the “spiritual, moral, cultural, mental, and physical development of pupils” (Education Reform Act 1988) required by law, the results of the Zakariya school are troubling. However, Osama Saeed, of the Muslim Association of Britain, points to the results of Feversham College in Bradford, a Muslim school that finished at the top of the “Value Added” ranks in the same period that the Zakariya school finished so poorly (Saeed, 2005). He argues that a Muslim education will help to combat the “lack of values currently within the non-denominational sector” and that even non-Muslim parents would want their children to have the opportunity to attend Muslim schools to avoid the corrosive effects of this “selfish, consumer-driven world” (2005). Hewitt is similarly frustrated with an education system which, in his view, “largely regards religion as a nuisance best ignored” (2005). While there are some who would argue that such a parochial approach to education would intellectually shortchange students, Hewitt responds with the example of the Ennerdale and Kinniside Primary School, which is a parochial Church of England school, but which received a gold star from the educational inspectors (2005). Hewitt argues further that a parochial education more closely mirrors real life – at home, he says, children celebrate only one winter holiday – but at school, they often observe all three of the major celebrations. Hewitt also points out that the removal of religion from the classroom, is not a neutral position, but is just another choice (2005). For those who would argue that the removal of religion from the classroom would create a neutral environment, this is an important corrective – agnosticism or atheism is a religious choice. The Muslim and Anglican schools are not the only parochial environments that have produced successful students. A report in June 2005 showed that standards of academic achievement at Stage 4 in Catholic schools exceed national norms, and that Catholic schools are particularly effective at helping socially disadvantaged students who come in from the non-religious schools to improve their performance dramatically (Morris, 2005). There are secular educators who see a place for religion in the educational curriculum. Thinkers such as Cornelia Roux believe that, as society becomes more multicultural, there is a challenge for teachers to become more aware of their “new role as value practitioners” (2000). Research has shown that citizens of diversifying societies need to have an enhanced understanding of the cultural beliefs of their neighbors, and in particular their religious beliefs (Laehnemann, 1995; Weisse, 1996). These beliefs will be the underlying tenets for moral and ethical decisions, and people will be much more able to understand each other’s motivations, once they understand their spiritual priorities. And so religious education, according to this secular school of thought, needs to evolve along with the society in which it is taught. Rather than focusing on “issues of old scriptures, or to comfort them only in their daily need” (Roux, 2005), religious education needs to focus students on their place in a global society (Kueng, 1995). Students should emerge from religious education, according to Roux, more aware of their individual spirituality, values that are common to all of humanity, and of the beliefs of others outside their individual cultures (2005). Because one tends to adopt values based on one’s own cultural history (Du Toit, 1998) – in other words, one inherits values from one’s parents and immediate influences – most multicultural societies lack a universal value system. Societies that have a dominant value system generally favor the majority culture, rather than taking all viewpoints into consideration. This is one injustice that, according to Roux and others, religious education can ameliorate. But is this possible? Can students from diverse religious backgrounds enter one RE classroom and emerge with similar levels of enlightenment, given their markedly different thought systems? Phil Albans, the Deputy Head of the Little Heath Primary School in Coventry, and the Chairman of PCfRE, conducted a study using questioning techniques that measured student growth in moving from “learning about a religion…to…[learning] from it” (2002). He was motivated by a 1997 Ofsted survey that reported a general lack of “confidence in enabling pupils to learn from religion as well as to learn about religion” among many teachers in England”(Ofsted, 1997; Albans, 2002). Because research also showed that there was no guiding pedagogical theory for religious education when the public guidelines were written (Grimmitt, 1997), Albans felt free to design his own questioning system (2002). Albans’ objective was to measure how “effective questioning can elicit reflective responses from children” from a range of religious backgrounds (2002). He also wanted to show that these responses could be graded, and so he placed the responses on one of three levels: literal, emergent, and sophisticated (2002) – in other words, basic, somewhat thoughtful, and empathetically and spiritually aware. He carried out his experiment in two schools in Warwickshire – one serving a racially mixed area serving Christian, Hindu, Muslim and Sikh, and nonreligious families, and the other serving only students of white European ethnicity, and solely of Christian belief. The students identified their own religious affiliations, so that the students would feel on an equal footing with the other students in the class (2002). Based on the responses of the students over time, Albans felt that his questioning technique enriched the depth of student responses in both educational settings over time. This ability to approach the sophisticated level – in other words, to feel empathy, is an important part of the educational process, even if the individual’s particular doctrinal views do not change (Nesbitt, 1997). The questions were written according to guidelines in research so that they would “stimulate and ignite” (Watson, 1993) the students to express themselves at deep levels. In Albans’ opinion, religious education is vital to the development of character and empathy in students, and can flourish in parochial or more diversified settings. Naturally, when cultures converge, there will be some clashes. Of note are the recent ban on Muslim foulards (headwear) by school girls in France, and a recent controversy surround a Sikh student’s desire to wear a turban to class (Singh, 1999). Dress codes and other regulations written by members of one cultural background can at times be offensive to members of other cultures. Also, there are valid questions as to whether or not girls can receive the education they need in a parochial environment, particularly in cultural contexts where the rights of women are not viewed as being protected as well as they are in the majority culture. Liberal feminism is very cognizant of the ways in which schools at times fail to provide equal opportunities and foster gender roles that will be harmful to young women as they enter adulthood, and many thinkers along this vein will clash with the traditional gender roles associated with Christianity and Islam (Acker, 1987). Marxist thinkers concerned with gender issues will question how the parochial schools will perpetuate male/female divisions (Acker, 1987). These are concerns that the parochial schools will need to address, but every educational environment will need to consider how it either perpetuates or eliminates stereotypes – not just based on gender, but ethnicity and social background as well. The existing research at this time does not offer a clear answer as to whether religion will benefit education, but is clear that it can benefit education. Religious education can create empathy within children and lead to sophisticated thought patterns that might not otherwise occur within the curriculum. Because of this, it would not be wise to remove religion from the National Curriculum (Colson, 2004). Additionally, exposure to (but not inculcation in) religion might assist children in making their own spiritual choices (Dagovitz, 2004), leading them to a more fruitful adulthood. Since there is no clear argument either for removing religion for schools, or for making a parochial faith education compulsory (Burtonwood, 2002), the best answer for religious education in England is to continue to permit diversity in choices, and to instill in students an awareness of and an appreciation for the growing diversity of their society. Works Cited Acker, S. (1987). “Feminist theory and the study of gender and education”, International Review of Education, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 419-435. Albans, Phil. Effective questioning in primary religious education and the assessment of pupils’ learning from religion, [Online]. Available from http://www.farmington.ac.uk/documents/Master%20index.pdf, [5 December 2005] Burtonwood, N. (2002). “Political philosophy and the lessons for faith-based schools”, Educational Studies, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 239-252. Colson, Ian. (2004). “’Their churches are at home’: the communication and definition of values in four aided Church of England secondary schools”, British Journal of Religious Education, vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 73-84. Dagovitz, Alan. (2004). “When choice does not matter: Political liberalism, religion, and the faith school debate”, Journal of Philosophy of Education, vol. 38, no. 2, p. 165. (The) Daily Telegraph (1989). 22 February CE. (The) Daily Telegraph (1989). 27 February CE. Du Toit, C.W. & Kruger, J.S. (1998). Multireligious education in South Africa – Problems and prospects in a pluralistic society. Pretoria. Research Institute for Theology and Religion. University of South Africa. Education Reform Act 1988, Section 1(2)(a). Grimmitt, M. (1997). Current pedagogies in RE: What are they? Unpublished paper, WRERU Seminar, University of Warwick. Hewitt, Ibrahim. (2005). The case for Muslim schools, [Online]. Available from http://www.metrust.demon.co.uk/issues1211/issues72-78.pdf, [5 December 2005]. Kueng, T. (1995). “A global ethic and education”, British Journal of Religious Education, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 6-21. Laehnemann, J. (1995). “Protestant education and global changes”, British Journal of Religious Education, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 27-30. Morris, A. (2005). “Diversity, deprivation and the common good: pupil attainment in Catholic schools in England”, Oxford Review of Education, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 311-330. Nesbitt, E. (1997). Researching 8-13 year olds’ perceptions on their experience of religion. Unpublished paper presented at the British Association for the Study of Religions Conference on Spirituality and Harris Manchester College, Oxford, September 1997. Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted) (1997). The impact of new agreed syllabuses on the teaching and learning of religious education, The Stationery Office, London. Roux, C. (2000). The need for the transformation of religion in education: Towards an understanding of democratic values, [Online]. Available from http://www.kas.de/db_files/dokumente/7_dokument_dok_pdf_5098_2.pdf, [5 December 2005] Saeed, O. (2005). “Will the state protect Islamic teaching?” [Online]. Available from http://www.mabonline.info/scotland/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=27, [6 December 2005] Sarwar, G. (1994). British Muslims and Schools, CE. Singh, B. (1999). “Responses of liberal democratic societies to claims from ethnic minorities to community rights”, Educational Studies, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 187-204. Watson, B. (1993). The Effective Teaching of Religious Education, Longman, Harlow. Weisse, W. (ed.) (1996). Inter-religious and intercultural education: methodologies, conceptions and pilot projects in South Africa, Namibia, Great Britain, the Netherlands. Read More