Today I sent an email where I raised this discussion and these questions on the ITForum Listserve. I will try to summarize the best comments I receive from them as they come, but I am also interested in anyone else’s thoughts and feelings.
___
I realize that this email ventures into the realm of one of the two forbidden topics in polite conversations – but if it makes any difference, at least I’ll try here not to mention the “p” word ( i.e. politics). 🙂
</end – my weak attempt at being funny to try and defuse a potentially sensitive topic>
In studying cross-cultural issues over the last several years, I have been fascinated by the impact culture has in how people define themselves, their relationship with others, and their perspective of the world. Please correct me if I am wrong, but it seems like at the heart of education, we are interested in these same issues? Or can someone define the purpose of education in a way that is completely unrelated to these issues ( e.g. identity, relationships, world-view, etc)?
Although we rarely talk about it in academic settings, it seems that one of the most pervasive influences in how people in various cultures and sub-cultures develop identity and purpose is their faith and religion (including, of course, even the belief in no God).
I have recently witnessed several disturbing scenes in which religion became the point of stereotyping, skepticism, and conflict (something not uncommon in the history of the world) – which leads me to the questions that I have for all of you:
- Is it possible to discuss the role of faith in education (or religion in general) in a safe way in which people don’t feel threatened? (If so, how?)
- Is it possible to discuss these issues in a way that people can set aside (at least for a moment) any personal agenda or need to convince/persuade/defend – but rather to simply seek for increased mutual understanding and respect?
- From what you have seen/experienced, how can arrangements be structures so that people of very different belief systems can understand/respect each other, peacefully co-exist, and even collaborate with each other on joint projects intended to make the world a better place?
I realize that this is a deep and sensitive topic, and I realize that in even asking the questions I am making certain assumptions (which, by the way, you are also free to challenge if you wish).
I have some initial ideas of my own in answer to these questions, but I am very interested in any comments that you all might have. Please don’t feel like you need to be an expert in the topic to respond, initially you can just share your personal strategy, thoughts, reactions, etc.
Even you don’t have any answers to the questions, I am almost equally interested in your general reaction to being presented with questions like these.
__
If you could edit yourself to, say, a 30% ratio, you would discover (a) your entire exploration of “religion” was really over
“politics,” since it is the political polarity that you tried to address, (b) “religion” is an aggregation of concepts – at least in that dialog – between “faith,” “tradition,” “ethics,” and “belief,” making any reasoned discussion mush, and (c) some of those concepts are valuable to educational technology, but most are pure sentimentality that obscures much more self-interested political gain in local constituencies, which is where, primarily, educational decisions are subject to public debate and decisions. Think through the problems BEFORE you write them.
Joe, thanks for your post. I appreciate you taking time to think through how to clarify some aspects of the issue I questioned. I think I understand what you are saying, and find your feedback somewhat helpful. I think I am more curious, however, with the way that the discussion of this topic at all seems to have irritated or frustrated you (e.g. “Think through the problem BEFORE you write them.”) – and I wonder where that comes from? My way of understanding things and thinking through issues is to write them down and discuss them with others. If you expect people (students, spouse, children, friends, colleagues) to “think through” each problem they are considering until they come up with the same way to look at them and state them as you would – man, doesn’t that just exhaust you? I doubt you are often like that, as that not only seems like a very poor approach to intercultural communication, but to any kind of productive communication at all. But that is somewhat beside the point.
Although I disagree with your point (a) (depending on what you mean by “politics”) and part of your point (c) – I agree quite a lot with your point (b). Even after I sent that last summary email to the listserve, I recognized how people were talking about many different things in the aggregated concepts tied under the term of “religion”, and often talking past each other – thus making reasoned discussion very difficult, much less any real consensus. I think there somehow needs to be more clarity in these topics of discussion in addition to as much transparency as possible in the motivations behind the different comments. But I’m not as skeptical as you are (at least not yet) in thinking that, as you stated earlier, the “only” reason people could ever possibly want to discuss such issues is political and self-centered. Unless by “political” and “self-interested” agenda you also include the agenda of wanting to learn how to have a life and a world with an increase of peaceful understanding of, respect for, acceptance for, and collaboration between people with different ways of believing and of being?
(I say this out of sincere curiosity:) From what little interaction I have with you, I wonder if the reason that idea of peaceful co-existence and collaboration is so frustrating to you is because you can “only” see things as being one way (a very skeptical untrusting way), and that it irritates you when people do not see things the same way as you? (which, if that is that case, I think is sadly not unique to you)
Well, in just two days there was 23 responses to my email on the IT Forum. Here is the summary email I put together to try and tie up the discussion some:
___
Dear IT Forum Colleagues,
First, thank you for everyone who took the time to share their thoughts/reactions with me and the forum. I think each comment offered was most likely representative of a larger group of people with similar sentiments.
My three original questions were these:
* Is it possible to discuss the role of faith in education (or religion in general) in a safe way in which people don’t feel threatened? (If so, how?)
* Is it possible to discuss these issues in a way that people can set aside (at least for a moment) any personal agenda or need to convince/persuade/defend – but rather to simply seek for increased mutual understanding and respect?
* From what you have seen/experienced, how can arrangements be structures so that people of very different belief systems can understand/respect each other, peacefully co-exist, and even collaborate with each other on joint projects intended to make the world a better place?
There is clearly a variety of reactions and responses to these questions. Here is my initial summary of your (collective) comments, as well as my own thoughts and takeaways.
_____
First, the issue is not a matter of “should faith/religion play a role in education (and instructional technology)” – it obviously does play a role already (by that, I mean it has an influence) simply because humans are involved, and because humans carry with them beliefs about themselves, others, and the world (which come from a lot of sources including things like: media, culture, family, socio-economic status, friends, education, and their faith of adherence – whether it be Buddhist, Hindu, Islamic, Christian, Baha’i, agnostic, atheistic, and so on).
The issue is much more a matter of how do we understand and approach the influence these things have, particularly from our perspective in the discipline of instructional technology (who might also be considered somewhat human – if looked at from the right angle and under the right lighting ;-). And my particular questions were geared towards how I might understand and contribute to more peace and collaboration of people who come from different belief systems.
The main question people have debated here in the forum then is not “does faith/religion have an influence in what we do”, but rather seems to be (1) “Should we talk about it?” and (2) “If we do talk about it, how do we do it?”
1. “Should we talk about it?”
Representative comments included:
“No, we shouldn’t because…”
* It shouldn’t be talked about in this forum – this is not the right place (Howard).
* The particular questions asked are perhaps not the best ones. (Bev) “That’s the problem with this discussion as I see it. The broadness of the questions prevent each of them from being answered in ways that avoid trivialization.” (Howard) “Your first questions are, I think, more difficult unless you are happy with pretending that religious beliefs can be relativistic – but, in that pretence you also make any conversation less authentic.” (Mark)
* It shouldn’t be talked about in education at all – the best approach is not to talk about religion publicly. Bringing religious differences into schools, and then trying to resolve them would be more ugly than helpful. “True religion” is out there, unpublicized and private, and those who want it, will find it. Why bring the differences into the school in the first place? (Alfredo).
* From a couple people, the reaction was even immediate skepticism over why the issue would be brought up – seeing the “only” possible motivation for so doing as to “sell” an underlying “political” agenda. (Joe, Caroline) (As a weak attempt at a comical aside: just for the record – I tried to keep the “p” word out of the discussion). (As a serious aside, see * below)
* -?- “Unsubscribe” from the ITForum (Julie, Suzanne) – sorry about those ones Bev, I’m assuming those are because of our discussion.
“Yes, we should because…”
* It is perhaps particularly relevant in our times and circumstances with increased and intensified contact between and interactions with multiple cultures and belief systems. (Jan, Brooke)
* I think it’s a great topic, and relevant to IT too. I’ve argued before (here) about how we might need to move beyond making people smarter, and start making them wiser. (Clark)
* In open, honest, and respectful discussion we’d probably find that we have more in common with each other than we would perhaps otherwise think, with a better understanding of each other’s motivations and rationale. This helps diffuse common misunderstandings, prejudices, and other feelings of alienation that tend to spur on the defensiveness, intolerance, and agenda. (Matt, Brooke)
* Striving for enhanced understanding among diverse cultures seems to me a most essential goal of the educational enterprise. Technology can play instrumental roles in this regard. (Jan)
* Most likely it will come up whether we like it or not, and about apparently unrelated issues. (Claude)
* ‘Religious’ differences often hide the moral common ground that most of us wish to ardently maintain. Working at understanding is prerequisite to uncovering the common ground that is worth reinforcing (Mike)
* The fact that religion is considered divisive by many might be even more reason to learn about it and understand it. The presence of institutionalized religion is part of the reality of our world. If that part of reality cannot be discussed, how can one expect that people come prepared to interact with it constructively? It is a challenge as an instructional designer to know how to deal with it, but it is an interesting challenge. It would be a sad conclusion for the worth of our discipline if we must recognize that it’s a challenge we are unable to meet. (Jan)
2. “If we do talk about it, how do we do it?”
Representative comments included:
* “As to the how, I think we should view religion and religious institutions from the perspectives of history and that of humanity’s cultural heritage.” (Jan)
* On the surface I think it’s both possible and appropriate to have discussions about the role of faith in education, but you would need to have clear boundaries to what is included in that sort of discourse. “Faith, yes – but faith in WHAT?” is where the sparks start to fly. (Mark)
* I would argue for bringing dialogue about religion from a multicultural perspective. There are multiple major religions and a multitude of minor variants, often spread across large proportions of the world’s population. It is important to understand that diversity and appreciate it, for believers and non-believers alike. (Jan)
* It would be unhealthy to use this as an opportunity to oppose religion to science, as is sometimes done in some cultures (not only in the US). It would be useful, though, to integrate both science and religion and their various expressions in a philosophical framework. (Jan)
* It is more appropriate to address the issues of concern through using different terminology (e.g. ethics), in order to stand a better chance at the conversation that unites people rather than dividing them. (Alfredo)
* The word “religion” is too loaded of a word. Can our discussions be approached differently? Could we easily have discussion of an ontological, metaphysical, or spiritual nature rather than a religious one? (TammĂ©)
* The word “tolerance” is not so helpful – terms like respect are preferred. (Brooke, TammĂ©)
* To discuss religion and faith in education forces issues of metaphysics and theology to the fore that might tempt educators to be overly simplistic (or overly dismissive) of matters that actually deserve careful debate, deliberation and conversation. This will probably take more time than you have in a formal setting, and would also require a very carefully thought out objective or series of objectives (the more objective your objectives the better!). To link this back into IT Forum: I think carefully constructed asynchronous debate would be an excellent mechanism for this sort of dialogue, particularly with a skilled facilitator with no metaphysical axe to grind! It would take a great deal of humility to be one! (Mark)
* Conflicts are ubiquitous and that’s OK! With training it is more likely to ensure that conflicts are resolved constructively rather than destructively. Cooperative learning groups’ mediation, and problem solving skills at an early age, can afford people the ability to solve conflicts constructively. (George)
* The service-learning approach is helpful (Clark) – and perhaps these kinds of initiatives get at the heart of what Alfredo was suggesting too when he said “The way to bring people together is to get them to do things together, in a way that the emphasis is naturally on their common basic humanity and not on what separates them.” (Alfredo)
* Come at it with an understanding of people’s core needs (emotional). Thinking across cultures, taking the stuff that separates us away – what do people want? Respect, love, to be seen and heard. It is my belief that when we communicate we need to convey that – we need to do our best to let others know that they are respected simply because they *are*, that we are doing best to understand their point view – or if we don’t understand it – we honor that this is their perspective and then share disagreement (if we have it) from a place of respectful disagreement. (Brooke)
* Rather focusing on religion or politics as the topic, let’s ask alternative questions, such as:
o Can the promise of education through technology be used as a carrot to lead religious liberals and religious conservatives to sit at the same table? (Howard)
o What kind of skills the ID needs to develop or have and how to acquire them, to “facilitate” the handling of cultural or other potentially divisive issues that could influence design and development as well as implementation of a learning environment? How would you go about expanding your knowledge of a culture or situation? (Bev)
Overall, I think the discussion was encouraging and productive, each person adding something interesting to the discussion. In particular I loved George’s story (wishing that IT was helping facilitate more of that), and think Brooke’s comments represent, from a personal standpoint, a lot of wisdom.
Final thoughts:
* Conflicts exist.
* Those arising from stereotypes and miscommunication seem unhelpful and unnecessary.
* As George’s story and many of the comments illustrate – these unnecessary conflicts can be reduced and resolved constructively instead of destructively.
* I would like to see more research and publications in IT regarding the use of what we do to help bridge cultural, religious, or other potentially divisive issues. (As a side note, I’d also like to use those strategies and technologies myself, to better understand my own cultural biases and assumptions.)
* I’m not just interested in conflict management; I am particularly interested in how to utilize communications at the cross-section of different world-perspectives to spur many kinds of innovations, etc.
If anyone wants to discuss potential ideas for research, tech development, and publications along these lines – send me an email and let’s chat off-forum. I have some ideas to start with, but know they would be much better with the collaboration of many interested people. Or perhaps there are existing efforts you could simply point me to, which I could add my contribution to.
All the best,
Clint
* (In response to Joe) Having been the one to bring the topic up, I can say that if it is an agenda on one level to want more personal understanding of the topic from an academic forum that I respect, and on a higher level to want more peaceful co-existence and collaboration of people with different belief systems, then I suppose I did have an agenda. I get quite exhausted and even disgusted by the increasing polarization in the U.S. and the world (of whatever nature – religious or otherwise), and I see my choices to either (a) become hardened, cynical, or apathetic or (b) seek ways to build more harmony – to decrease skepticism, selfishness, ethnocentrism, destructive labeling, ill-placed mistrust (first in myself and second through my profession) – and at the same time try to increase understanding, respect, productive dialogue, constructive collaboration and innovation. I’m not very good at it yet, but I am trying to consciously choose the second option.
So, if I could somehow (a) live it better myself and (b) “sell” you on those things too, I suppose that wouldn’t be too bad of a thing.
(As a side note to my side note: I do agree that questioning underlying philosophies and motivations behind comments is helpful – and I believe technologies can be utilized & further developed to assist in facilitating this kind of meta-communication for those who willingly and honestly participate.)
Clint,
Do not be discouraged…You raise challenging and critical questions which, eventually, will have to be answered.
RMG
Well done!
I wonder if you are a fan of Chris Lowney?
Certainly in Joburg, the religious schools are the ‘schools of choice’.
Best regards,
TonyF
Thanks Ritamarie and Tony.
I had not heard of Chris Lowney before, actually. I just went to his website and it looks like his books are interesting – discussing the innovations (including introducing paper the western world, our Hindu-Arabic number system, advanced irrigation, cotton and citrus, architectural advances, and medical discoveries) that came from the first period ever in mainland Europe (in Spain actually) when Muslims, Christians, and Jews co-existed successfully and worked side-by-side.
For those not on the forum, the moderator released this message 12 hours ago: “Members, I tried to gently steer the conversation away to dealing with facilitation and other issues when I checked the list the other night and it did not work. The number of members, including long standing ones that are unsubscribing and the messages I have received tells me that this cannot continue. I am not up to handling issues this week since I am recovering from surgery, so I ask you to please discontinue this topic before we lose more valuable members.”
So I suppose the answer to my first question: “Is it possible to discuss the role of faith in education (or religion in general) in a safe way in which people don’t feel threatened?” – is “no” (at least for some in that particular group of people at this particular time).
I think from this experience I have learned more about people (which, by some accounts, also even includes academics 🙂 ). I wonder if there is simply too much insecurity, tension, fear, skepticism, cynicism, etc. for some people to even discuss the possibility of understanding/respecting multiple perspectives?
On the other hand, I have received a number of emails and comments where many people have expressed their feeling that the discussion was a breath of fresh air, and that these are essential issues (even in IT) that we not only need to address, but can address openly and with optimism.
What a interesting world we live in, huh? Confusing and perplexing sometimes, but always interesting.
Hi Clint,
It seems people at the IT Forum are voting with their feet …and thinking with their *ss.
Myself, I found the topic interesting, and happy to discuss it with you once I am back at Joensuu!
I enjoyed reading this page. Yes – a very hot topic. As indicated by the responses, because some have such strong negative reaction to this kind of topic it is too hard to discuss in most settings. I think people have to feel secure in their beliefs, but also open to understanding before they can handle such a thing. I’m glad you are willing to show your desire to understand. That is what allows other people to trust you, and makes it safe to discuss such issues with you.