Dialogue Among Young Citizens in a Pluralistic RE Classroom

1. Dialogue Among Young Citizens in a Pluralistic RE Classroom The Norwegian Discussion

2. Dialogue in REIn a national school system based on the principle of ‘one school for all’ • What is the particular role of RE in dialogue among pupils with different religious background, worldviews and beliefs? • What type of ideal picture or concept of the dialogue is found in different positions in the Norwegian discussion about RE?

3. Voluntary religious committed verbal dialogue among adults Open experimental (diapractice) ”unfinished” ongoing process verbally restricted among children in a given setting Ideal picture of the dialogue

4. ’One school for all’ • Comprehensive school for 98.3 % of all children • local school (mirrors the local culture) • all children integrated • streaming not allowed • permanent differentiation or segregation not allowed • equal opportunities • no formal assessment before age 13

5. RE as a test question • Up to 1997: division of children due to religious background. • 94,7 % Christian knowledge • 4,4 % Worldviews (Life Stances) • 0,9 % no RE in schools • From 1997: KRL common subject (with partly exemption only)

6. RE – as part of life in schoolDiapractice and dialogue • National school system build to serve citizenship as a main aim • School life is dominated by diapractice - (co-operation): living together with difference (Lissi Rasmussen) • Religious education cannot be limited to RE as a school subject

7. Diapractice... • School and classroom as given social structures • demanding differences in practice independent of objective degree of plurality • diapractice where the verbal dialogue is a minor part: children play, sing, make music, dance, make food, eat, have physical education and sports, have drama and role play, take part in student council, do creative arts …

8. Necessary dialogue • emerges from the necessity of living together in a society (Oddbjørn Leirvik) • the verbal dialogue that goes along with diapractice • making common celebrations and ethical practice possible, understandable and transparent

9. Dialogue in RE as a subject • The Official Norwegian Report: the principles in KRL is titled: Identity and dialogue • as mutual interdependent entities that form a continuum, with an emphasis on identity development in the first years of education and on the dialogue in the later years • theory about the dialogue in RE is a combination of the one from the theological, monoreligious academic tradition and the one from the academic, multireligious study of religions

10. Dialogue in the official reader • Practical dialogue skill • structured dialogue • a dialogue that occurs where the teacher sets the rules and decides the perspective to present the view of others • dialogue in the role as pupil • comparison - a prerequisite for the dialogue

11. Dialogue so far: • Diapractice – co-operation • Necessary dialogue – • everyday conversation to get to understand one another • informal personal exchange of ideas • Structured dialogue – • empathic work with other religions and beliefs • representing other views • comparison • face to face communication • Spiritual dialogue – the personal encounter that makes change

12. Concepts of dialogue in the debate: • Oddbjørn Leirvik: ”Interreligious dialogue in a Norwegian context” • frustrated about the lack of dialogical intentions in the syllabus • main focus is on development of identity in primary education, and that the dialogue is postponed until the lower secondary stage • system-oriented approach, few system-ascending theme-oriented approaches • lack of interest for “between religions” • Exception: dialogue about ethics

13. Leirvik’s ideal picture? • dialogue between committed adult representatives • voluntary, verbal dialogue • dialogue of religions - between systems (political and academic interest) • frustration: Theology and Religious Studies as separate academic traditions • the necessary dialogue seems not important, asks for the spiritual dialogue in schools

14. Tove Nicolaisen: • “the invisible (backstage) dialogue + narration theory” • Dialogue in the general part =>dialogue as a working method • bigger room for ethical dialogue, parents: not less dangerous • necessary dialogue, structured, philosophical and some times spontaneous spiritual • philosophical dialogue has its limits: “the best argument” • teachers task to turn the dialogue into an informed dialogue

15. Nicolaisen: • dialogical room within the narratives: all children are both insiders and outsiders because all narratives have three dimensions: • the anthropological common • the religious • the specific religious • system-ascension part of teacher training and classroom practice • Not interreligious dialogue, but KRL-dialogue

16. Nicolaisen’s ideal picture? • dialogue between children: informal spontaneous • open-ended process in a given setting • system-ascending on an individual level • not interreligious dialogue -room the secular child • something specific: KRL-dialogue

17. Aspects of the dialogue concept: •  Action side • Diapractice - co-operation • Necessary dialogue • everyday conversation to get to understand one another • informal personal exchange of ideas • Dialogue as a working method in KRL • Structured dialogue – (in the role as pupil) • empathic work with other religions and beliefs • representing other views • comparison • face to face communication • Philosophical dialogue • Spiritual dialogue – the personal encounter that makes change •  Verbal side

18. The function of dialogue in the classroom is not primarily to serve as dialogue between institutions nor between religions. System-ascending co-operation between academic traditions is a task for universities and colleges. • The dialogue in the classroom has as its main task to operate on an interpersonal level, to serve the purpose of building identity and empower for citizenship in a pluralistic global world.