Religious Studies, Religious Education and Pedagogical Reduction

The academic discipline of Religious Studies (RS) is complex both in terms of subject matter and methods. That complexity is central to the discipline which expends considerable energy probing the nature of the discipline itself: what is meant by ‘religion’?; what does it mean to ‘understand’ a religion? (Fitzgerald 2000; McCutcheon 2018). University students studying RS are typically encouraged to consider the complexity of the subject matter and to take very seriously the disclaimer that can be found in almost every textbook of RS: that the organisation of the discipline into X number of world religions is somewhat artificial, even arbitrary, and reflects a certain (Western hegemonic) framing of the subject matter. In other words, students must not assume that the textbook account is adequate and that therefore they must read beyond these framings of their discipline. These disciplinary reflections come to a head in the increasingly widespread deconstruction of the world religions paradigm (WRP) (Cotter and Robertson 2016). Thus, books that present the WRP in uncontested terms ought to receive short shrift within advanced studies of religion. 

But what about schools? Where Religious Education (RE) is taught in schools, it typically adopts something akin to the WRP to organise its curricula. Some such organisation is necessary perhaps, though good teachers know how, when, and why to complicate or subvert the textbook accounts presented through the WRP lens. However, in the first phases of schooling, it seems inevitable that children will be presented with simplified versions of religious cultures, practices and traditions, even where teachers strive to avoid the most reductive and essentialising clichés. Later stages of schooling rarely avoid such representations entirely (Jackson 1995) and so students are likely to leave school with a rather simplistic account of the nature of religion and religions. Why does this matter?

The enduring influence of religion in what might be called a postsecular context makes religious literacy crucial (Dinham and Francis 2015; Lewin 2016). But we cannot expect religious literacy without some kind of mediation between the complexity of the subject matter and methods in advanced studies, and more simplified views of the subject at less ‘advanced’ levels. While some educationalists may question this linear account of educational advancement, it is undoubtedly a feature of the educational landscape as students move from RE in school to RS in University. Even if we accept that this linear structure is part of the contemporary practices of teaching RS and RE, the question remains whether this linearity is part of the subject logic itself, and is therefore pedagogically unavoidable.

This project aims to address these relations between RE and RS by bringing together key scholars of RS who interrogate the WRP with theorists of Education and RE whose interests include questions of pedagogical representation. A series of meetings will take place in which these scholars will consider the nature and scope of what is called pedagogical representation and reduction of which a little more must be said.

Alongside the latest research in RS, insights from educational research will inform these conversations, especially the notion of pedagogical reduction (Lewin 2019) and exemplarity (Wagenshein 2015; Korsgaard 2020). Pedagogical reduction can be defined as the ways complex and wide-ranging phenomena are represented in simplified forms for educational purposes. Tröhler makes a distinction between research knowledge and pedagogical knowledge, the chief characteristic of the latter being that it is “combined, arranged and structured for the purpose of effective teaching” (Tröhler 2008, 79). The presentation of pedagogical knowledge, often in textbook form, follows certain principles: the knowledge is stable, not provisional or contested; exceptions and contradictions are avoided; elements are presented in discrete parts or units; the presentation itself is often attractive or entertaining in some way. In summary, pedagogical reduction involves “[s]election, condensation, composition, didactical structuring and streamlining for classroom instruction” (Tröhler 2008, 79).

With these and other pedagogical principles on the table, the project will explore the extent to which they do, can and should be applied to RE and RS. The principles of pedagogical reduction offer educators some basis for the selections and simplifications made beyond the persistent refrain that we need more curriculum time, or that we need to show our students the complexity of the subject matter and its methods (Jackson 1995). 

But pedagogical representation and reduction in RE/RS cannot ignore the impact of a range of social issues such as colonialism (Avalos 2017), gender identity (Bergdahl 2018), and racism (Reyes 2019). Acknowledging the challenges that these issues present, the project will address the following questions: 

  • What does pedagogical reduction mean for RE and RS?

  • What criteria should inform the selections and simplifications of subject matter in RE? What goals for RE lie behind these criteria? 

  • To what extent can RE and RS be viewed as human and social sciences which adopt the methodologies of these disciplines? What would it mean to examine religion scientifically in RE? (Jensen 2019)

  • In what ways can or should children suspend their (ir)religious identity when entering the classroom? (Masschelein and Simons 2013)

  

References

  • Avalos, N. (2017) “Re-Enchanting the Land of Enchantment: Religious Regeneration in a Native/Chicanx Community.” Special Issue, ChicanX and Native American Indigeneities, edited by Gerardo Aldana, Salvador Guerena and Felicia Lopez. rEvista: A Multimedia, Multi-genre e-Journal for Social Justice.  5: 2.

  • Bergdahl, L., (2018) Language matters: gendering Religious Education teaching, British Journal of Religious Education, 40:3, 317-326, DOI: 10.1080/01416200.2017.1324759 

  • Cotter, C., & Robertson, D. G. (2016) (eds.). After World Religions: Reconstructing Religious Studies. London and New York: Routledge.

  • Dinham A & Francis M (eds.) (2015) Religious Literacy in Policy and Practice. Bristol: Policy Press.

  • Fitzgerald, T. (2000) The Ideology of Religious Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Friesen, N (2017) The Textbook and the Lecture: Education in the Age of New Media. John Hopkins Press.

  • Jackson, R., (1995) Religious education's representation of ‘religions’ and ‘cultures’ British Journal of Educational Studies, 43:3, 272-289. 

  • Jensen, T. (2019) ‘Jensen’s Scientific Approach’ to Religion Education. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 9:4.

  • Korsgaard, M.T. (2020), Exemplarity and education: Retuning educational research. Br Educ Res J. doi:10.1002/berj.3636

  • Lewin, D. (2016) Educational Philosophy for a Post-secular Age. London: Routledge.

  • Lewin, D. (2019) Toward a Theory of Pedagogical Reduction: Selection, Simplification and Generalisation in an Age of Critical Education, Educational Theory, 68: 495-512. doi:10.1111/edth.12326

  • Lewin, D. (2020) Between horror and boredom: fairy tales and moral education, Ethics and Education, DOI: 10.1080/17449642.2020.1731107

  • Lewin, D. (Forthcoming) ‘Religion, Reductionism and Pedagogical Reduction’ in Biesta and Hannam (eds.) Religion and Education: The forgotten dimensions of religious education, Brill.

  • Masschelein, J. & Simons M., (2013) In Defence of School: A Public Issue, trans. Jack McMartin. Leuven, Belgium: E-ducation, Culture & Society.

  • McCutcheon, R. (1997) Manufacturing Religion: The Discourse on Sui Generis Religion and the Politics of Nostalgia. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • McCutcheon, R. (2018) Fabricating Religion: Fanfare for the Common e.g. Berlin: De Gruyter.

  • Reyes, P. (2019) Religious Education: Race, Dreams, and the Guild, Religious Education, 114:3, 388-397, DOI: 10.1080/00344087.2019.1610928

  • Tröhler, D. (2008) ‘The Knowledge of Science and the Knowledge of the Classroom: Using the Heidelberg Catechism (1563) to Examine Overlooked Connections,’ in Emidio Campi, Simone De Angelis, Anja-Silvia Goeing, and Anthony Grafton (eds.) Scholarly Knowledge: Textbooks in Early Modern Europe, Geneva, Switzerland: Librarie Droz. 

  • Wagenschein, M. (2015) ‘Teaching to Understand: On the Concept of the Exemplary in Teaching’ in Ian Westbury, Stefan Hopmann and Kurt Riquarts (eds.) Teaching as a Reflective Practice: The German Didaktic Tradition, London: Routledge