|
Report Says Religion Course Promotes Religious Freedom
By Charles C. Haynes |
|
|
Most Americans like
the idea of "teaching about religion" in public schools - at least until
educators start to take it seriously.
Then the questions start: Will teachers be fair and objective? How will
my faith be taught? What will be the impact on students?
During the decades-long debate over the role of religion in the public
school curriculum, answers to questions like these have been largely
anecdotal, based on good stories spotlighting successful teachers or bad
stories featuring conflicts over teacher bias or poor textbooks.
Now, at long last, we have some answers based on empirical data, rather
than politics or emotion. On May 8, the First Amendment Center released
"Learning About World Religions in Public Schools" (at
firstamendmentcenter.org), the first study of the effects on students of
in-depth treatment of religion in a public school.
The authors of the study, researchers Emile Lester and Patrick Roberts,
focus on a world-religions course required - that's right, required - of
all 9th-grade students in Modesto, Calif., city schools. Begun in 2000,
Modesto's course is part of the district's effort to create a "safe
school" environment by helping students understand religious diversity -
and respect religious liberty. Two weeks are devoted to discussion of
America's tradition of religious freedom for people of all faiths and
none. The remaining seven weeks focus on six of the world's major
faiths.
As far as I know, this is a unique experiment in American public
schools. Most schools include some discussion of religion in history or
literature classes (sometimes substantive, often superficial) and a few
offer elective courses in world religions or the Bible. But a required
world-religions course is highly unusual, if not unprecedented. That's
what makes it an important case study for considering the potential
impact of expanding the study of religion in all public schools.
The researchers surveyed 400 students, once before they took the course
and twice afterwards. In addition, they conducted personal interviews
with students, teachers, administrators, school board members and
religious and community leaders.
The findings are mostly good news for the First Amendment and good news
for education. After the course, students were more likely to support
religious liberty for all religious groups. Students were more willing
to extend political and First Amendment rights to everyone, including
their "least-liked" group. On a more personal level, the study shows the
course increased the likelihood that a student would defend a fellow
student whose religious beliefs were insulted.
Excitement about these results, however, should be tempered by
recognition of how much education still needs to take place, even in
Modesto. For example, while student support for permitting a
"least-liked" group to hold a public rally rose from 25% to 35%, that's
still appallingly low in a society committed to free speech and assembly
for all.
Beyond questions about First Amendment rights, the survey tested what
students learned about the religions covered in class. Average scores on
these questions went from 37% correct before the course to 66% after;
these gains persisted several months after the course ended.
One of the more intriguing findings concerns student attitudes about
similarities among religions. Before the course, 45% of students agreed
with the statement that "all religions share the same basic moral
values." After the course, that number rose to 63%.
But seeing a common morality didn't lead students to think all religions
are the same. On the contrary, students who began the course with a
strong commitment to their own religion finished the course still
believing in the truth of their tradition as compared to others. This
result may allay the fears of some parents, especially religious
conservatives, that teaching students about other religions might
undermine faith in their own.
The report is careful not to overstate the success of the Modesto course
- or the barriers to replicating it elsewhere. Preparing teachers to
teach about a variety of religions (especially since teacher-education
programs largely ignore religion) isn't easy. Students and community
members generally said teachers presented the material without bias. But
teachers were instructed to focus on "the facts," with little attention
to controversial issues or differences among religions. Although this
caution is understandable given the emotion surrounding religion in
school, it could lead to what the report calls an overly "warm and
fuzzy" approach that discourages critical thinking.
Despite challenges and limitations, Modesto's world-religions
requirement breaks new ground - without starting a fight. According to
the report, the course enjoys broad support from religious leaders,
parents, students and educators. This contradicts the widely held view
that any attempt by public schools to tackle religion in the curriculum
will end in conflict.
Whether other districts pick up Modesto's experiment remains to be seen.
But thanks to Professors Lester and Roberts, we now have evidence that
learning about religions can promote respect for religious liberty and
create understanding across differences. In a nation divided by
religion, in a world torn by sectarian violence, maybe it's finally time
to take religion seriously in the public school curriculum. 5-11-06
|
» go to Atheists of Silicon Valley home page «