Picture child's feet next to pens, pencils and paper

Open Access research that is helping to improve educational outcomes for children

Strathprints makes available scholarly Open Access content by researchers in the School of Education, including those researching educational and social practices in curricular subjects. Research in this area seeks to understand the complex influences that increase curricula capacity and engagement by studying how curriculum practices relate to cultural, intellectual and social practices in and out of schools and nurseries.

Research at the School of Education also spans a number of other areas, including inclusive pedagogy, philosophy of education, health and wellbeing within health-related aspects of education (e.g. physical education and sport pedagogy, autism and technology, counselling education, and pedagogies for mental and emotional health), languages education, and other areas.

Explore Open Access education research. Or explore all of Strathclyde's Open Access research...

Who's afraid of secularisation? Reframing the debate between Gearon and Jackson

Lewin, David (2017) Who's afraid of secularisation? Reframing the debate between Gearon and Jackson. British Journal of Educational Studies, 65 (4). pp. 445-461. ISSN 0007-1005

[img]
Preview
Text (Lewin-BJES2017-Who-is-afraid-of-secularisation)
Lewin_BJES2017_Who_is_afraid_of_secularisation.pdf
Accepted Author Manuscript

Download (361kB) | Preview

Abstract

This paper examines the debate between Liam Gearon and Robert Jackson concerning the politicisation of religious education. The debate concerns the extent to which secularisation frames religious education by inculcating politically motivated commitments to tolerance, respect, and human rights. Gearon is critical of a supposed ‘counter-secularisation’ narrative that, he argues, underpins a major international research project into the contribution of religious education known as REDCo (Religion in Education. A Contribution to Dialogue or a Factor of Conflict in Transforming Societies of European Countries), suggesting that the politicising assumptions behind the project extend rather than counter secularisation. Although Jackson’s rejoinder to Gearon is robust and largely accurate, I suggest that it misses the basic challenge that religious education serves political ends. I argue that both Gearon and Jackson are enframed at a more fundamental level by a particular notion of religious identity. The problem of pluralism is not, as Gearon supposes, a consequence of the secular framing of religion in terms of tolerance and respect, but predicated on a propositional view of religion that places competing truth claims in opposition. Nothing less than a transformed view of religion itself is the presupposition and the aim of religious education.