The status of religious education

The perception of and actual outcomes of religious education. Religious education in Estonia is clearly non-confessional according to its aims and contents. Still, it cannot be classified as integrative but rather as separative, as discussed in section 2.2.3. There is still a lingering idea that knowledge about religions is not fully worthwhile and that the subject is basically only relevant to people from religious backgrounds, as the aim of religion in education is still generally considered to be to bring people to religion. The subject is often regarded in public discussions as if it were confessional. Also the subject’s

‘optional’ status indicates that religious education is also regarded as confes-sional in the legislation. Education about religions and beliefs is not valued generally in society, otherwise this would be a study which all children would do. However, my study has shown that the subject in practice is non-confessional not only according to its syllabus but also to its actual outcomes.

There is no evidence to support the view that the subject propagates religion;

there is, however, evidence that it contributes to peaceful co-existence and to the well-being of people living in the Estonian society.

The appropriateness of the model for the Estonian context. The non-confessional approach is proper in the highly secular Estonian context with most students being non-religious in any terms. The school is a place where all students must be respected, secular as well religious. Even students with a religious background favoured the non-confessional model of religious education. However, its potential benefits are unlikely to be realized within the separative framework of a voluntary subject. Existing prejudices, together with regarding religion as a strictly private matter, are contributing to a situation where religious students and students who are interested in religion feel segregation and exclusion. Thus, a positive potential for the subject remains unrealized and can even cause further segregation.

This suggests two directions for future developments: to include a religious dimension into other subjects and/or to allow schools to teach inclusive religious education. The first direction rests on a fact that there are few schools and teachers teach religious education. It is difficult to imagine that they can bring about a major change, especially in the short term. There is a challenge to support young people in developing their sophistication on the issues of a faith

or worldview to live by, as well as helping to create readiness for dialogue on these controversial matters for all schools and teachers.

The second direction means that a school should be allowed to teach religious education as a mandatory subject for all students if the subject is consistent with the national syllabus for religious education. The right to opt-out should be indeed available in cases where the teaching is perceived as not being neutral by some students or parents, but on the same grounds as it should be available for other subjects that include some sort of teaching about religions and beliefs²¹.

The European context. Estonia, being a member of the European Union and of the Council of Europe, and belonging culturally-historically to Europe, must take into account not only its inner developments but to be also outward looking. As discussed in section 1.1.1, in recent years at the European level it has been recognized more that religion is not simply a matter for the private sphere. Key documents now recognize that education about religions within public education is necessary in order to have a population that is not ignorant of religious diversity. These points are clearly emphasized in The Toledo Guiding Principles on Teaching about Religions and Beliefs in Public Schools (OSCE, 2007) and in different documents of the Council of Europe (2004;

2005; 2007; 2008). The Toledo Guiding Principles are published by the Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights of the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe, which includes 56 participant states. The Council of Europe, Europe’s leading human rights institution, with a strong educational input, has 47 member states. Estonia is a member of both European institutions.

Council of Europe documents point out that education systems need to recognize that religion is at least a part of human culture and that the variety of religious communities present in society contributes to its plurality. If that is the case, then in plural society people have to understand religion and to create cohesion among its citizens: this is one of the messages of the Council of Europe’s White Paper on Intercultural Education (2008) and in other key documents referenced above. There is a growing consensus among European educators that it is not worthwhile to ignore the role of religions in societies neither at school.

“6. Education is essential for combating ignorance, stereotypes and misunder-standing of religions. Governments should also do more to guarantee freedom of conscience and of religious expression, to foster education on religions, to encourage dialogue with and between religions and to promote the cultural and social expression of religions.” (Council of Europe, 2005)

Even in France, with its very strong and clear approach of laïcité, the high relevance of religion in public sphere and the need for the inclusion of religion

21 In some European systems, there is a parental right of withdrawal, even from non-confessional religious education. The pros and cons of a withdrawal clause are dis-cussed in the Toledo Guiding Principles (OSCE, 2007, 68-73).

in education has been of high relevance since the 1980s (Beraud et al, 2008, 52).

The biggest shift in including religion in education has been since Régis Debray’s report and requirement to include studies about religion in initial teacher training and also in-service training to overcome ‘laïcité of ignorance’ into ‘laïcité of understanding (Debray, 2002, 43, as cited in Williame, 2007, 93).

The Toledo Guiding Principles give broad suggestions for religious edu-cation and ideas which could be adapted to fit national contexts. This document complements the Council of Europe’s ‘cultural argument’ stressing that knowledge about religions and beliefs is an important part of education in the context of commitment to religious freedom and human rights. It draws on the freedom of religion and the framework of human rights. If there is a religious freedom in a society, then it follows that society will be plural. The only way for a plural society to function peacefully, is through encouraging tolerance of difference and to educating its citizens for tolerance (OSCE, 2007, 76–77). Both the Council of Europe’s ‘cultural’ argument and the OSCE’s ‘human rights’

arguments are very relevant in the Estonian situation. I believe that it is time for Estonia to take these arguments and recommendations seriously and revise its current approaches education about religion. This needs to be done in such a way that the distinctiveness of the Estonian context is recognized. I hope that the data from my research provide the necessary detail about the particular nuances of the Estonian situation for such a discussion to take place in a productive way.

REDCo findings which challenge policies for religious education in Estonia. There were several findings which challenged models and policies concerning education on religious issues in the Estonian educational system.

My empirical findings show that some changes should be made in order to improve students’ tolerance towards ways of life different from their own. The role of the school in giving a balanced picture is of great importance for guaranteeing freedom of religion or belief and activating mutual respect. The policy where religious education is taught only in primary classes or not at all can be seen to contribute to some hostile attitudes students held towards religion and representatives of different religions. Pushing religion only into private sphere creates a situation where students are not educated about a phenomenon which is making a very significant impact globally and in Europe and may inadvertently marginalise students with a religious background. Leaving out any consideration of religion within education is not a neutral act: prejudices towards religious people are supported by avoidance of religious topics – if students do not have the possibility to talk and to know about each others’

convictions, there is no challenge to their own presuppositions.

In most Estonian schools there is no religious education. According to my study, there is a need for inclusive religious education. I am not suggesting that all the schools necessarily must include religious education as a separate subject. However, the students should be given possibilities to have some knowledge about world religions, have chances to discuss religion in the contemporary world and know about their fellows’ views in a more systematic

way than is possible under present arrangements. The studies of religions, if handled as set out above, can precipitate more tolerant and open views.

An alternative for dealing with religious education as a distinctive subject is to make efforts to improve the studies of religion in other subjects. In this case major changes should be made in teacher education, and in the contents and text books of other subjects which would need to cover issues about religion and tolerance. If all that students need to know about religions, together with the relevant competencies, could be acquired in such subjects as History, Literature and Civic education, then the teaching of these respective subjects should be revised and improved to include broader and more explicit knowledge about different religions and their impact on the lives of individuals and societies.

Such a change should also give space for reflecting upon ones’ own beliefs and attitudes. The challenge of this approach would be to include sufficient know-ledge and understanding of religions in the teacher training courses of those who would have responsibility for teaching about religions.