Geir Skeie Norway: Religious education a question of legality or pedagogy? A very short history of religious education in Norway When general schooling was introduced in Norway in 1739 by the ruling Danish king this was more a question of principle than practice. Still, the first schools for ordinary people were introduced in the with teachers who moved between farms hosting the local school for some weeks before moving to the next place in a poor country at the periphery of Europe. This first school system was placed within the framework of a protestant state church, and the aim of public education was to prepare for confirmation through acquiring the skills of reading and writing. This system continued more or less during the first 150 years, uninterrupted by change of rulers when Norway was included in a union ruled by Sweden in 1814. One could say that all public schooling at this time was religious education. Towards the latter part of 19 th century a secularisation and pluralisation of school meant that religious education became more of a school subject if its own, even if it was still part of the nurture into Christian faith as interpreted by the Lutheran state church. At this time Norway was marked by strong political change, including struggle for national independence from Sweden, democratic and parliamentary system etc. In 1889 the first modern school laws came into being and finally, in 1905 the country became a nation state of its own without violent action. The school system continued a development towards a more common system in cities and countryside, and religious education stayed as a separate confessional subject with some control of the Church of Norway. Around 1850 the state had allowed for other religious organisations than the Church of Norway to organise them, and teachers could be exempted from teaching religious education. These religious minorities were visible, but very small compared with the Lutheran majority. In the middle of the 1930 s also pupils got the right to be exempted if they were not members of the state church. At this time the first political and curricular basis for the Norwegian school system was firmly based in a social democratic ideal of a common school for all. The main aim was to secure that all people living in a scarcely populated country and coming from different social groups, should get the chance of good schooling. In 1969, for the first time the parliament formally decided that religious education in school ( Knowledge of Christianity ) should be seen as a school subject of its own and not as part of Christian nurture or preparation for confirmation. Even if this did not lead to important consequences in terms of curriculum, it can be seen as the beginning of a new development. A few years later a parallel school subject (Life-stances) was introduced for those who were exempted from the main religious education. At this time also the modern textbooks were introduced with pictures, questions based in young peoples reality and a stronger appeal towards being relevant. The system with parallel (RE-) subjects meant that pupils who normally belonged to the same class, were separated in religious education, and some were exempted from both alternatives. In addition the cultural composition of Norwegian society had been changed from the early 1970 s onwards. Especially in the capital, Oslo, Muslims, Hindus and other religions were more visibly represented in the classrooms and the need for better knowledge about the plurality of religions was obvious.
Processes of secularisation, pluralisation and globalisation can be seen as the general background for the important change in Norwegian religious education that occurred in 1997. After a period of investigation and political debates the school subject of religious education was changed into a multifaith subject, for all pupils with knowledge about Christianity and other world religions, ethics and philosophy. To some extent this was a combination of the old Christianity-subject and the Life-stances subject, but as many political compromises, this was controversial. The Church of Norway was generally satisfied, while the religious minorities as well as the secular humanists were very critical. In spite of these controversies, the majority ruled and the subject was put into practice. Since 1997 there has been changes in school practice as well as teacher training based on the new subject, but also continuous debate. The present cultural and political context of RE In Norway the state church system is still in place, formally speaking, but there is a process of reconsideration in the political system. At the present time it is an open question, however, if the majority of the population wishes to change this when put to referendum. Seen from outside a state-church system may look somewhat pre-modern, but the modifications have been so many already that in practice little church power in political matters is left, and also the state has limited influence over inner-church decisions. Most important is probably the fact that still 85 % of the population are members of Church of Norway, and the 15 % are spread over a range of religious organisations with other Christian denominations as the largest group of around 3% (among these Catholics 1% and Pentecostals 1 %). The largest of the world religions are Muslims (1,8%) and a about the size of the association of Secular Humanists (1%) which especially strong in Norway. 1 Except from Catholicism, the Christian population of Norway is dominated by ethnic Norwegians, and those who belong to the indigenous Sami people. Non-Christian religions in Norway are mainly the result of immigration, and the dominant national backgrounds of immigrants with a longer history are Pakistan, Vietnam, Turkey and Sri Lanka, and the other Scandinavian countries. In more recent times also Iraq, Somalia, Bosnia, Iran and Germany are among the countries where refugees and immigrants come from. Very recently migrant workers from eastern parts of Europe are also a large group, but it is difficult to know how this in the longer run will impact on the permanent population and consequently on the school system. Being aware of the danger of stereotyping it may be of use for an international audience to be aware of some characteristics of the politico-cultural configuration of Norways majority population. Historically Norway is a new nation, still with a strong national identity drawing on traditions stretching back before the 500 years ruled by Denmark and Sweden towards the Viking age. Around 1000 years ago Norwegian armies and traders toured Europe and gradually were influenced by the Christian religion and culture. A gradual change from Norse to Christian religion took place. At the time of reformation the king of Denmark ruled and decided for a change of confession, merging royal rule and Christina faith. When finally this type of rule came to an end and democratic institutions were established, the critique of the state church system as well as religious education in schools mainly came from the labour movement which was especially radical in Norway from about 1910. In the coming decades 1 These figures are not exact, and they vary according to different ways of counting. Still they give some general impression. For more information see Statistics Norway: http://www.ssb.no/english/subjects/07/02/10/trosamf_en/
the two popular movenents; Labour and lay church organisations struggled over the cultural hegemony in Norway. When finally Labour came into political power at the end of 1930 s they had become reformists and they needed the cooperation with the Church. This partnership was significantly strengthened through the struggle against German occupation 1940-45 and during the post-war years Labour has been in power for many years. Also in this period there were conflicts between Church circles and Labour, also dealing with religious education, but they may be seen more as symbolic struggles than total confrontation. Both institutions and popular movements can be seen as potentially hegemonic cultures, one based on political ambitions, the other focusing more on personal values and participation in liferituals. Gradually these ambitions seem to have merged somewhat. The Church of Norway has become radicalised, at least on the leadership level in issues like ecology, consumerism, global justice, and Labour has abandoned much of its earlier critique of religion and church. Over the years most political parties in Norway have accepted the main thrust of socialdemocratic policies, like welfare, relatively egalitarian economy and politics of equality. This is part of the background for private schools being so few in Norway; only about 2,5% of children are not in the public school system, which is the lowest in Scandinavia. Even if Norway according to sociology of religion is a highly secularised country, the state church plays an important role in certain life-rituals, public events, and times of crisis both nationally and locally. In some parts of the country, lay church movements are still strong. This means that the recent religious pluralisation resulting from immigration as well as more general post-modern developments are countered by a silent majority of Norwegianness. It is extremely difficult for minorities to get real influence, and apart from the region of Oslo, national, ethnic and religious minorities tends to be marginalised from influence. This marginalisation is somewhat countered by the strong ideals coming from the Labour tradition and supported by Christian virtues to distribute wealth, goods, influence and education to all irrespective of background or social group. Some researchers have suggested that this is integrated into a regime of goodness, a cluster of good intentions, which at its worst can be interpreted as immune to critique. In the field of religious education it can should be mentioned that all officially recognised religious groups in Norway now receive government grants to provide for the fostering of children in their faith community according to membership. This also applies to the Norwegian Humanist Association. This interpretation of the cultural context of religious education seems to explain some of the developments since 1997. When the multifaith curriculum was introduced this was done in a way that did not challenge the Christian oriented majority. In this curriculum Christianity was transformed from mainly being a confession and personal belief, towards being portrayed as a broad cultural tradition uniting all Norwegian citizens. This was acceptable both to the Church of Norway and the more secularised membership of the church. It was much more problematic for minorities, both religious ones and the secular humanists. In order to secure good practice it was decided to do a research based evaluation of the RE-subject after the introduction in 1997. This evaluation resulted in curricular reforms a few years later, but this was not enough to satisfy the minorities. Since the curriculum content was not satisfying, also the lack of a general right of exemption became an important issue. The position of the political and cultural majority was that partial exemption as well as the clear intention to teach impartially was securing the rights of minorities. Interestingly enough it was the secular humanists who found an alternative route to reach minority influence. This group is mainly coming from the Norwegian majority population, while religious minorities are mainly of immigrant background and this possibly gives them
an increased possibility of influence. From 2001 a group of parents have taken issues related to religious education to court, supported by The Norwegian Humanist Association. They lost all cases in the Norwegian legal system, but continued to the UN Human Rights Committee (Geneva) and later to the European Human Rights Court (Strasburg). In both cases (2004 and 2006) they won and the government of Norway had to change present curriculum, law and regulations. These changes are mainly done in curriculum content be giving more room for non-christian religions and world views, in underlining the importance of objective, impartial and neutral teaching and information about exemption rules. But the limitations on exemption rights are still not changed, and one can wonder if this will lead to new court cases. Practice and research in religious education In spite of the debates, court cases and political conflicts over religious education it seems that most groups today agree that children should learn about religions and worlds views other than their own. Even many who opposed the initial multifaith subject in 1997 now defend it when there are suggestions to balance the content somewhat more towards non-christian religions and secular world-views. This would suggest that there is no way back to the former parallel subject solution based on a confessional model, but if full exemption is granted it is difficult to predict the effects of this on parents and children. If many use this right, it will probably undermine the justification of a multifaith subject. We do not know much about the views of today s parents, but several researchers doing field work, teachers and teacher trainers informally report that most parents, also of minority background, are quite satisfied. Much of this is probably due to the practice parents experience in their local school. There have probably been changes in the practice of religious education teaching since 1997 in several ways. On the one hand teachers today are aware of their role as being impartial, and the ideal of former time teachers in religious education; to be a Christian model, is left behind. On the other hand many teachers are trained when the former confessional Christianity subject was in place. Many therefore feel they lack competence in world religions even if a program of further education has been in place for several years. The changes in teacher training have partly to do with further training of older teachers and partly with substantial changes in initial teacher training. Religious education is a compulsory subject for all primary and secondary school teachers, and the academic background of teacher trainers is about to change from a dominance of theologians towards more people coming from religious studies and to some extent philosophy. This contributes to changes in the internal debates among teacher trainers and goes together with increased research and international orientation during the last 10-15 years. Before the 1990 s the epistemology of religious education as a research area in Norway was still dominated by Christian theological thinking, partly related to systematic theology and partly to practical theology. This perspective is still alive in conservative Christian institutions, and particularly applied in private Christian schools, but in general teacher training it is slowly disappearing. A new basis for discussing religious education is more based on general educational theory, pedagogical approaches, and a plurality of theories coming from research practice in theology and religious studies. Much research today is empirical and tries to understand better what is going on in the classroom. The many changes
in curriculum texts have directed much energy towards this, and there is perhaps a danger to overemphasise the effect of such changes on school practice. A short conclusion Pulling the threads together it may be justified to say that the most interesting, but also problematic development in Norwegian religious education today, is the consequences of recent legal decisions mainly based on human rights issues. The problem here is of course not human rights in themselves, but the possible practical effects on classroom teaching. As a result of recent court cases the government of Norway is focusing strongly on issues like neutrality and objectivity in religious education. Even if this is important to safeguard minorities, it simultaneously tends to influence teaching in a problematic way. Teachers may feel it difficult to do anything that might engage the students in debates or dialogue, voicing their views. The whole issue of personal development may be compromised by fear of violating neutrality and objectivity. In this way the subject may become very boring. Theoretically speaking, this may be seen as substituting pedagogy with legal perspectives in practical teaching, which can be problematic. Even if the teacher-student-content relationship is regulated by law it is still mainly based on ethical values performed in a interpersonal relationship. Learning is not only a question of relating to objective knowledge, it is also a process of education (Bildung) that includes change and personal development. If this is not taken into account religious education may become not only boring, but also insignificant. In that case we may be better off without such a school subject. References Skeie, Geir (2007): Religion and Education in Norway. Jackson, R., S. Miedema, et al., Eds. (2007). Religion and Education in Europe : Developments, Contexts and Debates. Religious Diversity and Education. Münster, Waxmann pp221-242. Leganger-Korgstad, Heid (2007): Kyuk, Elza et. al. (eds.) Religious Education in Europe. Situation and current trends in schools. Oslo: IKO Publishing House pp 141-148