Religiozni simboli v javnih šolah kot poučne kontroverze v religijskem izobraževanju
Povzetek
Tematska številka revije CEPS izpostavlja dve temi, ki se običajno obravnavata ločeno – pouk o religijah in uporaba religijskih simbolov v javni šoli. Obe zaznamuje izziv apliciranja liberalnodemokratičnih načel sekularizma in pluralizma v šolskem okolju, skozi obe se tudi lomijo politike glede religije v razmerah globalizacije, modernizacije in migracij. Takšne razmere predstavim kot priložnost za poučevanje in argumentiram, da ilustrira potencial specifičnega, na religiologiji utemeljenega predmeta o religijah, za osmišljanje trenutnih razprav v Evropi, vključno z razpravami o pouku o religijah. To pa zahteva ohranjanje duha svobodnega, nepristranskega primerjalnega raziskovanja, ki lahko trči ob politične poskuse instrumentalizacije predmeta kot sredstva integracije učencev iz manjšinskih skupnosti v sistem vrednot.
Prenosi
Literatura
Alberts, W. (2008). Didactics of the study of religions. Numen, 55(2-3), 300–334.
Alberts, W. (2010). The academic study of religions and integrative religious education in Europe. British Journal of Religious Education, 32(3), 275–290. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/01416200.2010.498621
Andreassen, B.-O., & Lewis, J. R. (Eds.). (2014). Textbook gods: Genre, text, and teaching religious studies. Sheffield, UK & Bristol, CT: Equinox.
Appiah, A. (2018). The lies that bind: Rethinking identity, creed, country, color, class, culture (1st ed.). New York, NY: Liveright Publishing Corporation.
Bellah, R. N. (1967). Civil religion in America. Daedalus, 96(1), 1–21.
Berger, P. L. (1999). The desecularization of the world: A global overview. In Berger (Ed.), The desecularization of the world: Resurgent religion and world politics (pp. 1–18). Washington, D.C: Ethics and Public Policy Center & William B. Eerdmans.
Beyer, P. (1994). Religion and globalization. London, UK & Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Bowen, J. R. (2007). Why the French don’t like headscarves: Islam, the state, and public space. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Carter, J. (Ed.). (2004). Special issue: Comparison in the history of religions. Method and Theory in the Study of Religion, 16(1), 3–101.
Casanova, J. (1994). Public religions in the modern world. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Chaves, M. (2010). Rain dances in the dry season: Overcoming the religious congruence fallacy (SSSR presidential address). Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 49(1), 1–14. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5906.2009.01489.x
Committee of Ministers. (2008). Recommendation CM/Rec(2008)12 of the Committee of Ministers to Member states on the dimension of religions and non-religious convictions within intercultural education. Council of Europe.
Davie, G. (1994). Religion in Britain since 1945: Believing without belonging. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers.
ECtHR (European Court of Human Rights). (2001). Dahlab v. Switzerland: decision on admissibility (Application No. 42393/98). Strasbourg: European Court of Human Rights.
ECtHR. (2007). Folgerø and others v. Norway: Grand Chamber judgment (Application No. 15472/02). Strasbourg: European Court of Human Rights.
ECtHR. (2008). Dogru v. France: Judgment (Application No. 27058/05). Strasbourg: European Court of Human Rights.
ECtHR. (2011). Lautsi and others v. Italy: Grand Chamber judgment (Application No. 30814/06). Strasbourg: European Court of Human Rights.
Faas, D., Hajisoteriou, C., & Angelides, P. (2014). Intercultural education in Europe: Policies, practices and trends. British Educational Research Journal, 40(2), 300–318. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3080
Farrell, F. (2016). ‘Why all of a sudden do we need to teach fundamental British values?’ A critical investigation of religious education student teacher positioning within a policy discourse of discipline and control. Journal of Education for Teaching, 42(3), 280–297. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2016.1184460
Fernández, C., & Jensen, K. K. (2017). The civic integrationist turn in Danish and Swedish school politics. Comparative Migration Studies, 5(1). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1186/s40878-017-0049-z
Gedicks, F. M., & Annicchino, P. (2013). Cross, crucifix, culture: An approach to the constitutional meaning of confessional symbols (Working Paper No. RSCAS 2013/88). European University Institute.
Hallpike, C. R. (1979[1969]). Social hair. In W. A. Lessa & E. Z. Vogt (Eds.), Reader in comparative religion: An anthropological approach (4th ed., pp. 99–105). New York, NY: Harper Collins Publishers.
Hvithamar, A., Warburg, M., & Jacobsen, B. A. (Eds.). (2009). Holy nations and global identities: Civil religion, nationalism, and globalisation. Leiden & Boston, MA: Brill.
Jackson, R. (Ed.). (2014). Signposts: Policy and practice for teaching about religions and non-religious world views in intercultural education. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
Jaffee, M. S. (1999). Fessing up in theory: On professing and confessing in the Religious Studies classroom. In R. T. McCutcheon (Ed.), The insider/outsider problem in the study of religion: A reader (pp. 274–286). London, UK & New York, NY: Cassell.
Jensen, T. (2008). RS based RE in public schools: A must for a secular state. Numen, 55(2), 123–150. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1163/156852708X283023
Jensen, T. (2010). Integrative religious education in Europe: A study-of-religions approach. Religion, 40(1), 63–65. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.religion.2009.04.001
Kuburić, Z., & Moe, C. (Eds.). (2006). Religion and pluralism in education: Comparative approaches in the Western Balkans. Novi Sad: CEIR.
Marzouki, N., McDonnell, D., & Roy, O. (Eds.). (2016). Saving the people: How populists hijack religion. London, UK: Hurst & Company.
McCutcheon, R. T. (Ed.). (1999). The insider/outsider problem in the study of religion: A reader. London, UK & New York, NY: Cassell.
Mir-Hosseini, Z. (2007). The politics and hermeneutics of hijab in Iran: From confinement to choice. Muslim World Journal of Human Rights, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.2202/1554-4419.1114
Muesse, M. W. (1999). Religious studies and “Heaven’s Gateâ€: Making the strange familiar and the familiar strange. In R. T. McCutcheon (Ed.), The insider/outsider problem in the study of religion: A reader (pp. 390–394). London, UK & New York, NY: Cassell.
Nowak, M., & Vospernik, T. (2004). Permissible restrictions on the freedom of religion or belief. In T. Lindholm, W. C. Durham Jr., & B. G. Tahzib-Lie (Eds.), Facilitating freedom of religion or belief: A deskbook (pp. 147–172). Leiden: Brill.
Ortner, S. B. (1979[1973]). On key symbols. In W. A. Lessa & E. Z. Vogt (Eds.), Reader in comparative religion: An anthropological approach (4th ed., pp. 92–98). New York, NY: Harper Collins Publishers.
OSCE/ODIHR (Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights). (2007). Toledo guiding principles on teaching about religions and beliefs in public schools: Prepared by the ODIHR advisory council of experts on freedom of religion or belief. Warsaw: ODIHR.
PACE (Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe). (2005). Recommendation 1720 (2005). Education and religion. Retrieved from http://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-en.asp?fileid=17373
Patton, K. C., & Ray, B. C. (Eds.). (2000). A magic still dwells: Comparative religion in the post-modern age. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Pettersen, E. (1995). Identitet og dialog: kristendomskunnskap, livssynskunnskap og religionsundervisning [Identity and dialogue: Knowledge about Christianity, knowledge about worldviews and religious education]. Oslo: Statens Forvaltningstjeneste.
REDCo. (2009). Religion in education: Contributions to dialogue: Policy recommendations of the REDCo research project. Retrieved from https://patternsofgoverningreligion.weebly.com/uploads/2/7/0/3/27037565/redco_policy_recommendations_eng.pdf
Richardson, R. (2015). British values and British identity: Muddles, mixtures, and ways ahead. London Review of Education, 13(2), 37–48. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.18546/LRE.13.2.04
Rousseau, J.-J. (1999). Discourse on political economy and the social contract. Oxford, UK & New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Said, E. W. (1995[1978]). Orientalism: Western conceptions of the Orient (Reprinted with a new afterword). London, UK: Penguin Books.
Scharffs, B. G. (2012). The role of judges in determining the meaning of religious symbols. In J. Temperman (Ed.), The Lautsi papers: Multidisciplinary reflections on religious symbols in the public school classroom (pp. 35–58). Leiden & Boston, MA: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Smith, J. Z. (1982). In comparison a magic dwells. In J. Z. Smith (Ed.), Imagining religion: From Babylon to Jonestown (pp. 19–35). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Smith, J. Z. (2004). Relating religion: Essays in the study of religion. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Sullivan, W. F. (2005). The impossibility of religious freedom. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Thomassen, E. (2006). Religious education in a pluralistic society: Experiences from Norway. In M. Pye, E. Franke, A. T. Wasim, & A. Ma’sud (Eds.), Religious harmony: Problems, practice, and education (pp. 257–266). Berlin & New York, NY: Walter de Gruyter.
Turner, V. (1967). The forest of symbols: Aspects of Ndembu ritual. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Univ. Press.
von der Lippe, M., & Undheim, S. (Eds.). (2017). Religion i skolen [Religion in school]. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors are confirming that they are the authors of the submitted article, which will be published online in the Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal (for short: CEPS Journal) by University of Ljubljana Press (University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Education, Kardeljeva ploščad 16, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia). The Author’s/Authors’ name(s) will be evident in the article in the journal. All decisions regarding layout and distribution of the work are in the hands of the publisher.
- The Authors guarantee that the work is their own original creation and does not infringe any statutory or common-law copyright or any proprietary right of any third party. In case of claims by third parties, authors commit themselves to defend the interests of the publisher, and shall cover any potential costs.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
