Broadbent, Lynne & Brown, Alan (2002). Issues in Religious Education

	Broadbent, Lynne & Brown, Alan (2002). Issues in Religious Education. In S. Capel, J. Davison, J. Arthur & J. Moss (Eds.), Issues in Subject Teaching Series. N. Y: Routledge Falmer. Pp. vi + 235 $27.95     ISBN 0-415-26253-4 Reviewed by Alan G. Phillips, Jr. Indiana State University July 20, 2003 Lynne Broadbent and Alan Brown have put together a well-written collection of essays on the current condition of Religious Education (hereafter referred to as RE) in the United Kingdom. Issues in Religious Education covers a broad range of topics and controversies that have emerged from key British initiatives like the Education Act of 1996 and its predecessor the Education Reform Act of 1988. The editors of this volume have conveniently organized the essays under three headings dealing with the impact of RE on the school curriculum, classroom practices, and other subject matter. In addition, they have included key questions at the end of each essay, providing scope for further work and thought for those interested in religion and education. Briefly, I would like to highlight some key elements of this collection and then, I would like to conclude with a brief suggestion for further direction in this important field. In the opening essay of Part I, Alan Brown provides readers with an enlightening tour of the many interests and policies that informed key decisions about RE from the years 1988-2001. Tracing the evolution of RE from the Education Act's emphasis on "Religious Instruction and Collective Worship" in 1944 up to the SCAA's recent "model syllabuses" with their stipulated attainment targets, "learning about (AT1) and learning from (AT2) religion," Brown (2002) manages to give readers a vivid sense of how conflicting religious, political and educational constituencies grappled with how they could preserve the expressive aspects of religion and still retain a curriculum that provides a broad academic underpinning for life in a diverse world. The following essay by Lynne Broadbent also examines many of the important facets related to the National Curriculum and enforcement of RE standards in British schools after the 1988 Education Reform Act. In addition to an overview of this material, Broadbent sketches a plausible rationale for RE, covering a broad range of thinkers and considerations that have informed the process of balancing the two attainment goals. Once again, the issue of how the subject is to be approached looms large. What is the golden mean between the extremes of strictly content-based instruction and broadening one's understanding of other religious experiences? Broadbent (2002) highlights this problem by observing that "the QCA [Qualifications and Curriculum Authority] monitoring and OFSTED [Office for Standards in Education] inspection reports indicate that teachers lack confidence in promoting 'learning from religion', finding the first attainment target, 'learning about religions' more factually based and less ambiguous" (Broadbent & Brown, p. 25). The author concludes her examination of RE in the National Curriculum with a positive assessment of its future place in a rich learning environment that includes "historical, sociological, philosophical and spiritual elements" (Broadbent & Brown, 2002, p. 26). The next essay by John Bailey on the role of RE in Voluntary Aided and Voluntary Controlled schools helps to fill in the bigger picture painted by those essays that focus primarily on the National Curriculum. Bailey provides the reader with a brief tour of the 1996 document produced by the 1996 Bishops conference of England and Wales, Religious Education, Curriculum Directory for Catholic Schools. Bailey's overview includes an examination of the Catholic program for the primary level and ends with a look at the Catholic program for secondary schools entitled Icons. In spite of a consistent emphasis on the goals of "evangelisation, catechesis and Religious Education" (Broadbent & Brown, 2002, p. 28), the author recognizes some change in how other faiths are being approached in teacher certification modules endorsed by the Catholic church. The bulk of his essay focuses on Church of England aided schools and the great variety that exists in various dioceses throughout England and Wales. Various syllabi are examined, and the author draws attention to some interesting questions about the potential tensions at work between faith-based schools and growing multicultural concerns (Broadbent & Brown, 2002, pp. 42-43). A constellation of issues in the RE curriculum are addressed in the essays that follow the three just mentioned. Trevor Cooling examines different metanarratives that inform the study and teaching of religion and expresses skepticism of liberal approaches that downplay underlying commitments to the diverse stories that shape an individual's understanding of personal faith. John Keast tackles the difficult task of explaining what can and cannot be assessed at the various Key Stages of RE, and Jan Thompson addresses the nuances of OFSTED inspection as they relate to the religious aspects of teaching and learning. Finally, Peter Schreiner (2002) looks at how different models of RE in Europe attempt to "promote education into religion, education about religion or education from religion" (Broadbent & Brown, p. 86). In the process, he examines key problems that arise when dealing with the "Europeanisation" of RE, such as "the problem of terminology, the problem of language and cultural barriers and the differences in the existing education systems" (Broadbent & Brown, 2002, pp. 96-97). In Part II, the essays cover a number of themes of particular interest to RE teachers working in the classroom. Brian Gates (2002) considers the development of individual empathy through a focus on what he calls world religions versus narrow ”tribal cults” that are not global in scope (Broadbent & Brown, p. 105). Later, he also looks at the importance of encountering the ”why” questions of morality through an ongoing encounter with diverse religious traditions. Eleanor Nesbitt follows his piece with her excellent account of how ethnographic method may be utilized to better understand the complexity and richness of religious experience. As someone grounded in this social scientific approach, I really appreciated the way she drew on ethnographic insights to caution against oversimplifying the richness of ”world religions” and RE in general. Here, the author provides a much needed corrective to stagnant treatments of both religious and cultural differences in educational literature. Nesbitt (2002) warns: The endlessly diverse patterns of innovation, compromise and conservativeness, within a single lifespan as well as generation from generation within a family, make statements that 'Hindus believe this' or 'Muslims do this', let alone 'all Sikhs believe or do…' palpably untrue. (Broadbent & Brown, p. 116) A focus on diversity and RE carries over into the Dinah Hanlon piece about various approaches to the study of gender and critical thinking. In this piece, the author struggles with an inclusive strategy and one that seeks to overcome patriarchal religious stories. She concludes by appealing to "a dialogical approach" in an effort to address the tensions between male and female religious views (Broadbent & Brown, 2002, p. 135). Her piece is followed by one written by the editors of the book. Broadbent and Brown raise several important questions about students with special educational needs in the context of RE requirements. They (2002) remind readers that "the Education Acts 1993 and 1996 require staff in special schools to provide RE for all their pupils wherever practical" (Broadbent & Brown, p. 138). Then, the authors proceed to suggest how themes like community, mystery, change, celebration and the difference between right and wrong can fit into the QCA guidelines, Religious Education: Planning, Teaching and Assessing the Curriculum for Pupils with Learning Difficulties. They also offer an appeal for changing RE syllabuses to accommodate the interests of those with special educational needs. After their contribution, Arthur Giles rounds out the section with an informative essay on post-16 studies and RE. In his work, helpful recommendations are made about alternative assessment strategies and viable assignments at this level, along with suggestions about the future direction of RE at this developmental phase. The last section of the book brings together some essays that seek to trace connections between RE and other aspects of the curriculum. Broadbent's piece begins by examining links between religious education and areas such as language development, mathematics, technology, citizenship, spirituality, social and cultural development. Next, Peter Vardy's essay follows hers with an examination of ”the possible tension between ethical and moral debate and Religious Education” (Broadbent & Brown, 2002, p. 178). Of particular interest to philosophers of education is his examination of how realist and anti-realist approaches to RE have different implications for how religions are studied and explained. His discussion of the ”Five Strands” approach to RE serves as a curricular solution to the past tensions between ethics and religious studies (Broadbent & Brown, 2002, pp. 185-187). The next two pieces deal with the relationship between the affective dimension and the RE curriculum. John Hammond addresses the problem of reaching the second attainment level (AT2), learning from religions, especially in secondary schools. He explains, ”The objectifying mode appropriate to the scientific study of religion (and necessary for the achievement of A1) may actually inhibit a receptive encounter with the faiths (as required by AT2)” (Broadbent & Brown, 2002, p. 192). Drawing on analogies from ritual and theatre studies, he offers recommendations for how mini-rituals and role plays can be used in the classroom to strengthen an empathetic knowledge of the diverse spiritual traditions of the world. Geoff Marshall-Taylor's essay continues this focus on the affective life of students by exploring how Collective Worship can function in tandem with RE. After examining the stated aim of this practice in the document entitled Circular 1/94, the author gives practical advice for five school days of activity built around a significant religious theme or symbol, such as ”water” (Broadbent & Brown, 2002, pp. 207-208). Then he concludes by exploring both the possibilities and difficulties involved in Collective Worship since the Education Reform Act. In the last piece, one originally published in another collection, John Bowker (2002) draws attention to the serious world issues affected by religion, and he points out that ”all religions have voices of inclusion as well as exclusion” (Broadbent & Brown, p. 215). He concludes with an appeal for government to take the study of religion seriously. Throughout many of the essays of this collection, one theme resurfaces time and again. Briefly, I will express it in a question: To what extent did a phenomenological approach to world religions undercut or bypass the need for emphasizing spirituality in the RE curriculum? Put another way, have British teachers focused on methods for attaining AT1 at the expense of AT2 in the National Curriculum? Frequently, reference is made by the authors to the late Ninian Smart's phenomenological method for the study of religion. In "Issues in the Teaching of Religious Education," Keast (2002) explains how schools began to interpret Smart's approach as one that emphasized "neutrality and objectivity" (Broadbent & Brown, p. 60). For some, this left RE too open-ended and value free. However, Keast suspects that these educators misunderstood aspects of Smart's scholarship. Some might be inclined to agree with him on this matter, as there are passages in Smart's work that struggle with the balance between devotion and rigor, description and prescription in the context of religious studies. After all, in his book The Phenomenon of Religion, Smart (1973) does point out that "phenomenology needs to be evocative as well as descriptive (and it is possible to be misleading in both modes)" (p. 34). Over time, various debates about how to learn from religion have centered on key themes like "spirituality" and moral development, as educators struggle with finding some middle ground between the extremes of neutrality and subjective experience in the school curriculum. Yet, one may wonder if this is a complete repudiation of the phenomenological method in RE, or merely a valid criticism leveled at one branch of this approach, namely Smart's? After all, in his foreword to Van Der Leeuw's classic work, Religion in Essence and Manifestation (1933/1986), Smart is critical of the Christian theological underpinning that informed this Dutch scholar's phenomenological approach. He points out the following: It is as if phenomenology in delineating the existential categories of humankind's religiosity poses questions which ultimately only some form of ultimate theology can answer: for him this was, of course, Christian theology. So although he drew a boundary between phenomenology and Christian theology he was content that the science of religion should be pursued within the ambience of a theological faculty or divinity school. (Smart, 1986, p. xv) Thus, even in the phenomenological approaches to RE, there is anything but consensus and unanimity. A diversity of phenomenological perspectives emerge, whether one looks at the ideas of Ninian Smart, Edmund Husserl or Mircea Eliade, to name a few. Just as there are ”religions” in the study of religion, there are phenomenologies in the phenomenological approach. Plurality affects theory as well as the common sense understandings that govern everyday social life. Perhaps this is one aspect of pluralism that has been overlooked by those approaching this complicated, yet rich domain of human inquiry. It seems as if a well-rounded account of RE must address various theoretical strategies for explaining what is different in order to understand the religious life. In addition to learning about and learning from religion, there is also a need to learn more about the many lenses through which we filter content and spirituality. The essays that address social development and cultural values touch on this, but how much more could be done in a National Curriculum along these lines? How might a plurality of theoretical approaches enter into the Key Stages? Broadbent and Brown have certainly done a fine job of laying out many of the key issues and significant questions that educators must address in order to deal with the complexities of religious education. As with other topics of perennial human concern, there is always more work to be done. They have given religious educators a fine foundation on which to build. References Broadbent, L., & Brown, A. (Eds.). (2002). Issues in religious education. In S. Capel, J. Davison, J. Arthur & J. Moss (Series Eds.), Issues in subject teaching series. N. Y: Routledge Falmer. Smart, N. (1973). The phenomenon of religion. N. Y: Herder and Herder. Smart, N. (1986). Foreword. In G. Van Der Leeuw, Religion in essence and manifestation (pp. ix-xix). N. J: Princeton University Press. Van Der Leeuw, G. (1986). Religion in essence and manifestation (J. E. Turner & H. H. Penner, Trans.). Princeton, N. J: Princeton University Press. (Original work published in 1933) About the Reviewer Alan G. Phillips, Jr. is Assistant Professor of Educational Leadership, Administration and Foundations at Indiana State University. His primary interests are in the area of social theory and philosophy of education. He is the author of "John Dewey and His Religious Critics," published in Religion and Education, vol. 29, no. 2 (Spring 2002) and "Response to Charles Colson and Pat Robertson" in the same issue.