Religion in Education

[IMDWalrus]

Originally Posted by M. Krass

What is it about people defending their conviction and religious beliefs that makes them ignorant? I'm just curious.

Maybe I'm reading it differently, but the impression I got from that post was that the ignorance in question was the majority in the class either not listening to or not respecting her beliefs.

[KarenH]

Originally Posted by Raven_Writer

"In YOUR OPINION, is this right...".

Another story (happened to my friend):
In math class, she was taking a test, one with an extra credit question. When she got to the question, it said something about the famous satan/apple/adam/eve incident.

One last story (also happened to my friend):
In her computer class, she had to do this worksheet for her daily assignment. One part of the worksheet said "Who were the first couple on Earth?"

Please do keep in mind that I'm not asking what your religion is, I'm just asking if you think that brining religion into material in discussion is a justified thing to do.

As you say, Adam/Eve is a "famous...incident." There is a concept called "cultural literacy," which suggests that there is a body of cultural knowledge that "everyone" in a given culture knows. Adam & Eve, Noah & The Flood, Jesus' Sermon on the Mount ("And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise") are all widely known portions of the Bible. They are NOT obscure, but appear frequently in art, literature, folk art, drama, and music, throughout centuries of Western culture.

Culture literacy also includes many of the popular sayings, such as "God helps those who help themselves" and "A penny saved is a penny earned" from Poor Richard's Almanac, numerous quotes from Shakespeare, Mother Goose nursery rhymes, fairy tales, songs, legends (George Washington and the cherry tree), etc.

All of these kinds of things used to permeate our society, and forever influenced the English language, but the persistent efforts of various radical people to expunge them from public schools and from TV shows have caused many people to be completely ignorant of them, or at least of the origin of many traditional sayings. Or else the sayings are parodied to such an extent that many people only know the wrong version (Bumper sticker: "Do unto others, then split"). In place of the old wisdom, our modern culture has substituted a fragmented collection of movie trivia, sports stats, and other junk that has nothing to do with shaping a person into someone who can make valuable, lasting contributions to society.

As a reaction, other people have published works such as "The Dictionary of Cultural Literacy" (not sure of exact title), and the "Wee Sing" children's tapes. The problem here is, who can say for certain what should be included in a list of what "culturally literate" people know? It's hardly an exact science!

Now, a teacher has to assume that the students know SOMETHING about the culture. And it's a common technique for textbooks to throw in all kinds of references to other fields, because the textbook writers are trying to make the subject interesting to students with varying interests. A math textbook will have problems about sports, music, animals, cars, etc. An English textbook may have examples from literature and articles relating to history, science, and art.

Why, then, is there so much pressure from a few people to completely eliminate religion as a topic fit for inclusion in the public schools? Why not ban references to art because some people are ignorant about it, or hate it? Why not ban math, because some students are no good at it, and hate it, and feel like their teacher has elevated it to the level of a religion? (Math was Mark Leon's "mantra" at the Sacramento Regional, for those of you who weren't there to see our fabulous MC. )

On the lighter side, I have a story about the pitfalls of the "every schoolboy knows" assumption. This may shock some of you Detroit area people...

A couple years ago, one of my son's textbooks put a question which I felt was unfair. I think the subject was math. The question presumed the student knew what the Big Three automakers are. Now, with all the new models coming out of Detroit every year, how is anyone supposed to remember what the Big Three are? Ford is one, of course--every schoolboy knows that--but is Chevrolet a label of Plymouth, or its own company? Is Buick one of the Big Three? Must be, 'cause my granddad always drove a Buick. I know American Motors got eaten up by another company--was it Jeep?--and AM used to make Ramblers (I know, because my family used to own one--now there's a topic that should be banned from classrooms, the way my dad hated that car!). And where can you look up this information? I'm afraid I wasn't much help to my son in this case.

I was so annoyed by this question that I complained to the publisher.

[Al Skierkiewicz]

Eric,
I am encouraged that a student felt the need for a call to action. However, by attempting to stop the lesson, you may have missed the idea the teacher was trying to establish. This idea may have been flawed but you didn't give her a chance to establish the idea and then you would be in a better position to make up your own mind. In my experience, teachers (and people in general) feel a need to establish a line from a starting point to the point they are trying to make. It seems like Lit and religion teachers carried this to an extreme, in my mind. Unfortunately, Lit and religion are not sciences with proven facts and theorems so it is hard to establish right and wrong.
Although this has been a discussion of Christianity we must remember that the religion of Russia at the time this book was written was a hotly contested and individual struggle. Not only was the populace severely divided by class but each person struggled with the obvious inhumanity perpetrated by supposedly Christian people on the lower classes and non Christians. We also must remember that the Christianity of Russia is Orthodox and for centuries this sect was at odds with the Roman Catholic Church. This struggle resulted in millions of deaths over the centuries as people defended to the death, the right way to perform the Sign of the Cross. While Dostoevsky may have been talking of religion, you must remember that he was under scrutiny as was any writer of his time. While he struggled to do something he wanted to do, he walked a narrow line that might have got him jailed or worse. With that knowledge, the book may written with the ever present conflict of trying to say what he felt while trying staying alive.
As to your other examples, the facts are still a little too sketchy. I had a calc teacher who would give "are you here?" quizzes at his 8:00AM class. It didn't matter whether you knew what color George Washington's white horse was, as much as you were present to answer the question. The math teacher may have been trying to see who was aware of all of the questions and not trying to establish a religious link.
I feel I was lucky (blessed?!?) that my parents sent me to progressive parochial schools. One of my classes (in high school) was an investigation into the world's major religions. It is pretty interesting that they share many common ideas and stories. With a few twists and different characters, they have similar tales of Genesis, the great flood, etc. They also expound on the idea of love of neighbor. None of these beliefs preach anything about harsh treatment of the non-believers yet the major struggles and wars through the ages used religion as a basis for the initial attacks. Think of where the human race would be now had the religious leaders of those conflicts been more aware and tolerant of other religions and cultures.
FIRST is breaking down those cultural and religious boundaries. Can you imagine what will take place when Israeli and Muslim teams come together for a competition? A place where Gracious Professionalism is followed and there is a free exchange of ideas can only be good for the future of those students and mentors. I hope I can live to see a day when these fences fall.

[Adam Y.]

Do you think there are unbiased teachers when it comes to anything? By the very nature of individuality, each individual has an inherent and undeniable bias towards everything. Some people have large and obvious biases, others have theirs hidden, but everyone has them.

Heh.... I found this article about robotics which oddly says the differnces in American robotics research and Japense robotics research is caused by the differnce in religions.
Robotics

And where can you look up this information? I'm afraid I wasn't much help to my son in this case.

Pssss... Wikipedia. It has Big Two,three, four, five and six.

[KenWittlief]

something I have seen growing over the last several years, many people are talking about religious tolerance, when the rest of the conversation clearly shows what they really want is religious acceptance.

There are many commonalities between religions, on the most basic level everyone teaches we should be "good".

There are also many differences. There is a real trend lately for people to try to blend all the major religions together, and call this tolerance.

On the core level, you cannot accept the teachings of different relgions, because they are different. Tolerance means "I respect your decision to follow your personal beliefs". It does not mean I agree with your beliefs or accept them as valid. In other words, I respect your freedom to make a wrong choice (from my perspective).

To me, tolerance means both sides are allowed to state their beliefs, to explain what they believe and why, and the individuals are free to choose their own path. At some point you must respect the other persons choice, and treat them with respect and dignity.

That does not mean we must pretend the differences do not exist. It means we can peacefully co-exists, even if you think the other person has made an error in their thinking.

In the end we are all individually accountable for the decisions we have made. No one is going to be held responsible because someone else chose the wrong path.