A Simple Goal, In
Principle
The following discussion assumes
that
public education should include a fair, balanced treatment of religious worldviews.
Most educators, including myself, agree that extreme situations — such
as a teacher actively evangelizing for any worldview (theistic, atheistic, new
age,...) —
are not desirable. So let's assume our goal is a moderate balance,
and we're thinking about how to achieve this goal.
Asymmetry and Balance
asymmetry: In trying to achieve
balance, a major problem is the inherent asymmetry between expressions of
theistic and
nontheistic
views.
An event cannot be described theistically unless this is done explicitly, but
"not theism" is communicated implicitly yet strongly when the possibility
of theistic action is omitted from every description of every historical event.
balance: If a curriculum always
assumes — in science
education and
in
other areas — that "there
is
no
theistically
active
God," is
this neutral? Is an assumption that God has been absent from the history
of the universe neutral? Imagine a classroom that totally ignores
women, giving them no role in history (past, present, or future) and no possibility
of importance in life. Would this be a fair treatment? Now consider
a common situation, analogous in some ways, in which there is a total absence
of theistic concepts. Does the absence of a perspective produce a balanced
treatment of this perspective? Or will an absence of God in all discussions
of the world encourage students to live as if God is absent from
the
world?
A Challenging Goal, In
Practice
Due to asymmetry, trying to ignore religious
questions produces an implicit hidden curriculum that teaches more than just
subject-area content.
But deciding what to do instead is difficult because my optimistic statement
that
"our goal is a moderate balance" is a simple summary of a complex situation.
Definitions of desirable balance vary widely, and instruction that is satisfactory
for some will be unacceptable for others. In a pluralistic society there
will be vigorous debates about an important function of education, the selective
transmission of culture, when we are deciding which cultural concepts and values
to include, and how these should be taught. For example, if theistic ideas
are discussed, does this require that every other religious idea must also be
included, or should a teacher focus on the religions (theistic and/or nontheistic)
that
are
most
prevalent
in
a local community? And do theists really want theistic concepts to be explained
by a teacher who might distort these ideas due to a lack of knowledge and skill,
or by a skeptical nontheist who might try to persuade students against theistic
beliefs?
In addition, during discussions of educational
policies there is a tendency to mix religion and education with broader political
concerns, which contributes to unproductive "more heat than light" attitudes
and an uncomfortable climate of controversy for teachers. A confrontational
approach, with a
debating
mentality, is
especially common in some areas. In education
about origins, for example, the situation is often made more volatile
by polarized attitudes, with zero-sum battles fought by combatants who acknowledge
only two possibilities (young-earth creation and naturalistic evolution),
who ignore
all other positions. This unfortunate approach, encouraged by those
with extreme positions, tends to produce mutual hostility and disagreement
about
everything except that
"there is no middle ground so we have to fight it out."
* The paragraph above was written before I discovered the widespread efforts, beginning in the late 1980s, to improve the religion/nonreligion balance in public schools and to seek agreement in communities — among teachers, administrators, school boards, parents, and other citizens, across a wide range of religious and political beliefs — about what should be taught and how. These efforts are described throughout Worldviews and Religion in Public Education — especially in the resource-pages written by Charles Haynes. Although I could change the paragraph now, unfortunately the fears of teachers still seem to be "often justified" so I'll leave it as-it-was.
Appendix
Do good guys always win?
In one "character education" activity,
the lesson to be learned, the claim being made by the teacher, is that "The
game is rigged so the good guys always win. The moral of our game
is, if you're a good citizen, you always come out on top." {source}
Is this claim true — in the short
run, or even in the long run — if there is no God? Many students
will find this claim less credible, and the arguments
for it less persuasive, if teachers are not allowed to talk about the possibility
that God does exist and will judge our actions, if the school's foundational
assumption is that God does not exist, if the implicitly assumed worldview is
atheistic.
Questions about Charters and Vouchers
As background knowledge, this section
assumes that you've read the brief
description of charter
schools and
the brief introduction (in the first two paragraphs) for School
Choice: Charters and Vouchers in the homepage for Religion in Public Schools.
Imagine two charter schools — available
to be chosen by parents — that are
identical in every way except their worldview: one is
nonreligious and the other is religious. When they submit their charter
school application to the government, one request is granted but the other
is rejected. Is this fair?
Can a charter school adopt a religious
worldview (which usually is forbidden) instead of a non-religious worldview
(which usually is required)? Would a faith-based
charter school be legal and acceptable? For example, if an inner-city
black church wanted to start a charter school — with curriculum, instruction,
and
environment based on its religious perspectives — many parents would
choose this school for their children, but would it be allowed? If not,
with the result that (despite the desires of many members of the public) a
nonreligious
worldview
was mandated by the government, would this be unfair discrimination against
a religious worldview? Would it be "establishing a nonreligious
worldview" in
the government schools?
Is there an alternative to worldview monopoly
in public education? Looking
at the experience of another country, Charles Glenn describes a problem (re:
the free exercise of religion) and a possible solution: "[Many
Americans] came from countries where suspicion and bitterness between Catholics
and Protestants
had long been stoked, not by the existence of faith-based schools, but by efforts
to require all children to attend a single, state-controlled system. The
great Dutch immigration of the nineteenth century... was in part a reaction
of orthodox
Protestant parents to what was then a monopolistic system in the Netherlands
that had forced their children to attend schools that taught a version of Christianity
from which sin and salvation had been surgically removed. In the Netherlands,
75 years of struggle over the schools came to an end in 1920. The well-named "Pacification," to
which all Dutch political parties agreed, established the constitutional principle
of equal funding for the schools chosen by parents, whether public, or Protestant,
or Catholic. Today there are more than 20 forms of schooling in the Netherlands,
including Jewish, Muslim, Hindu and Humanist schools, all fully-funded by the
government, and none of the contemporary political parties is suggesting that
this successful arrangement be abandoned or that it has resulted in a splintered
and dysfunctional society."
I.O.U. — Eventually, maybe by the end of 2010, there will be links to pages with more information about faith-based schools in other countries.
This website for Whole-Person Education has TWO KINDS OF LINKS:
an ITALICIZED LINK keeps you inside a page, moving you to another part of it, and a NON-ITALICIZED LINK opens another page. Both keep everything inside this window, so your browser's BACK-button will always take you back to where you were. |
This page is the first in a three-part series: School Options — public, charter, private, home — has a Worldview Education for Christian Living (with love, ethics,...) |
This page is
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/education/views/balance.htm
Copyright © 2003 by Craig Rusbult, all rights reserved