Addressing Religious Plurality: A Teacher Perspective on Minority Religion and Secular Ethics Education in Finland

Author(s):

Harriet Zilliacus(presenting / submitting)

Conference:

ECER 2013

Network:

07. Social Justice and Intercultural Education

Format:

Paper

Session Information

07 SES 11 A, Identities in the Margin

Paper Session

Time:

2013-09-12

17:15-18:45

Room:

D-302

Chair:

Hanna Ragnarsdóttir

Contribution

The purpose of this study is to investigate Finnish minority religion and secular ethics teachers’ views on plurality among their pupils. The Finnish education system recognizes religious plurality in its organization by offering education in pupils’ own religion or in secular ethics. Finnish basic education offers 12 religion- specific minority religion curricula and a secular ethics curriculum parallel to the majority Lutheran curriculum. This differentiating system attempts to develop the cultural and religious backgrounds of the pupils and promote equality with respect to religion and different worldviews (Kallioniemi& Ubani, 2012). The system supports religious freedom, particularly regarding the positive right of the child to education in religion or belief in accordance with the wishes of his parents (Sakaranaho 2006). However, the modern, plural identities (Skeie, 2006) of minority pupils' raise questions regarding how instruction in pre-defined groups succeeds in supporting pupils’ diverse identities. This study investigates through an intercultural theoretical framework minority teachers’ different approaches to classroom plurality. The study pursues the research question how minority religions and secular ethics teachers in the Finnish comprehensive school (age levels 7-13) view the task of supporting and including plurality within their classrooms.

Method

The methodological stance of this study lies in constructivism. To answer the research question a semi-structured interview study was undertaken in 2011. The informants consisted of 31 minority religion and secular ethics teachers of comprehensive school grades 1–6 in the Helsinki metropolitan area. The informants represented all forms of minority education offered in the metropolitan area, and approximately 40 % of all the minority religion teachers in the school year 2010–11. The interviews were on average 45 minute long and included teachers’ views on classroom dynamics, the role of the pupil, the role of the teacher, and the aims of education. The data was analysed through thematic data-analysis (Hatch 2002) and inductively searched for themes emerging in the data.

Expected Outcomes

The findings of this study show how instruction puts high demands on teachers due to religious and cultural diversity as well as age differences in the classroom. Teachers generally made an effort to take diversity into account by considering the different backgrounds of pupils in instruction and engaging pupils in class. However, teachers experienced the culturally diverse classrooms as highly challenging. Also, in religious instruction teachers frequently took a traditional rather than a modern perspective on plurality by assuming pupils’ religious belonging. Pupils were consequently not always seen by teachers as actively shaping and changing their religious identities, but rather as being fixed by an assumed affiliation. Confessional elements such as religious family background and religious practice outside school were also commonly seen as vital. Consequently, teachers had at times difficulties in supporting pupils with plural or little religious affiliation. The findings show a need to strengthen the non-confessional character of Finnish religious education as well as increased teacher-training, particularly focused on intercultural education and multi-age classrooms. For the viability of the Finnish system, it appears essential that education and teacher-training is developed so that both modern and traditional plurality among pupils has an equal position in education.

References

Council of Europe. 2008. White paper on intercultural dialogue: Living together as equals in dignity. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing. Cush, D. 2007. Should religious education be part of the state school curriculum? British Journal of Religious Education, 29, no 3:217-27. Gay, G. 2010. Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research and practice. 2nd Ed. New York: Teachers College Press. Hatch, A. 2002. Doing qualitative research in educational settings. Albany: State University of New York Press. Jackson, R. 2004. Rethinking religious education and plurality: Issues in diversity and pedagogy. London: Routledge Falmer. Kallioniemi, A. and Ubani, M. 2012. Religious education in the Finnish school system. In The miracle of education: The principles and practice of teaching and learning in Finnish schools, ed. Niemi. H., Toom, A. & Kallioniemi, A.,177-87. Rotterdam: Sense. Sakaranaho, T. 2006. Religious freedom, multiculturalism, Islam: Cross-reading Finland and Ireland. Leiden: Brill. Skeie, G. 2006. Plurality and pluralism in education. In International handbook of the religious, moral and spiritual dimensions in education, ed. Souza, M. & al.,307-19. Dordrecht: Springer.

Author Information

Harriet Zilliacus (presenting / submitting)

University of Helsinki

Department of Behavioural Sciences

Helsinki

Search the ECER Programme

Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
Search for authors and in the respective field.
For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.