Pluralism and Constructivism in Turkish Religious Education: Evaluation of Recent Curriculum of Religious Culture and Ethical Knowledge Lesson

Transcription

1 Pluralism and Constructivism in Turkish Religious Education: Evaluation of Recent Curriculum of Religious Culture and Ethical Knowledge Lesson Recep KAYMAKCAN* Abstract It is argued that a traditional approach to religious education is not sufficient to meet the necessities of contemporary world. For this reason, pluralistic approaches to religious education receive a particular attention in the recent years. In line with the other school subjects, the curriculum of secondary religious education was changed in Turkey. It is stated that the new curriculum was prepared taking the constructivist learning theory into consideration. The new curriculum may be accepted as a response to the demand for change in religious education. In this article, the following three issues related to pluralism are examined in terms of the new religious education curriculum: (i) Religious education and constructivist approach, (ii) the teaching of Alawism and (iii) the teaching of non-islamic religions. An analysis of the curriculum indicates that some improvements have been made in line with pluralism. Key Words New secondary curriculum, teaching Alawism, teaching other religions, constructivism, religious education *Correspondence: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Recep KAYMAKCAN, Sakarya University Faculty of Divinity, Ozanlar Adapazar -Turkey. E- mail: recepk@sakarya.edu.tr Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice 7 (1) January E itim Dan flmanl ve Araflt rmalar letiflim Hizmetleri Tic. Ltd. fiti.

2 KAYMAKCAN / Pluralism and Constructivism in Turkish Religious Education: Evaluation of P Religious Education and Constructivist Learning Theory It is argued that consistent with the development in the pedagogy in the modern world the curriculum subjects in Turkish schools have been changed in line with constructivist learning theory in recent years. In this process, the new secondary curriculum for religious education together with other school subject claim that the curriculum has been developed taking constructivism into consideration, multiple intelligences, learner-centered learning, learner participation, and individual differences. The overview of the literature reveals that there is a lack of research pertaining how to implement the constructivist learning theory to religious education in schools. However, we can claim that pluralistic religious educational approaches such as interpretative and phenomenological are more supportive for constructivist learning than traditional denominational or confessional approaches to religious education. It is assumed that the following two points may lead to some problems when we are implementing constructivist learning in religious education. Firstly, the epistemological understanding of construction of knowledge in religion is mainly different from the assumption of subjective construction of constructivist learning theory. Secondly, the followers of a religion believe the existence of objective religious principles, faith, and so on beyond the interpretation of individual believer of the religion. This can cause in a contradiction with the constructivist principle of individual construction of knowledge. In the present article, it is suggested that the constructivist learning theory be used in the teaching of living dimension of religion (experience and practice by individual and society) rather than the doctrinal dimension in religious education. The examination of the new religious educational curriculum reveals that the curriculum exhibits some shortcomings pertaining to constructivist approach with providing emphasis on content-based tendency, the lack of importance for religious experience of students, and etc. Moreover, only touching upon religious diversity or trying to promote implicitly one type of Islamic understanding in Islam is a weak dimension of the curriculum from the constructivist point of view. With the present form, it can be argued that this curriculum is more similar to the behaviorist theory of learning rather than the constructivist theory of learning.

3 204 EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES: THEORY & PRACTICE It should also be noted that the implementation of constructivist approach to religious education, particularly in a society that has a high level of religiosity and less pluralistic from religious perspective is not without problems. For this reason, a particular attention should be given to the issue of relativism when we are presenting Islam. Grimmet (2000) provides the following pedagogical suggestions during the implementation of constructivist approach in religious education: The item of religious content is always brought into a dynamic relationship with critical thought which pupils undertake as situated or contextualized individuals. Any communication of information about the item of religious content on the part of teacher is always related to the constructions that pupils are using, applying. The sequence of learning is always from encouraging egocentric interpretations of experience within situated thought then alternative contextualized interpretations by interventions from pupils or teacher. Pluralism in Islam: Teaching Alawism Plurality has usually been ignored or at least tried to be taken under control in the traditional school culture because differences are seen obstacles rather than richness for education. The modern pluralism in religious education advocates to include plurality in a religious tradition. Plurality may be either the thoughts of different denominations in a religion or it may consist newly developing theological and sociological comments in a religion (Skeie 2002). After a brief reference to pluralism in religion education at schools, the presentation of Alawism will be evaluated in terms the new Religion Culture and Moral Knowledge (DKAB) curriculum of the secondary schools. We can divide the discussions into two groups on this matter: First of all, the arguments in favor of and against for teaching Alawism will be mentioned. The second is how to include Alawism in the curriculum. In this section, positive and negative arguments about including Alawism in religion education are as follows:

4 KAYMAKCAN / Pluralism and Constructivism in Turkish Religious Education: Evaluation of Negative arguments: (1) Uncertainty in the definition of Alawism: It is claimed that there is no consensus even inside the different Alawi groups about the definition of themselves. It is asked how Alawism take place in the religious education in schools. (2) The current RE curriculum is not denominational: It is argued that the present religious education curriculum does not promote denominational religious education. It is also stated that the information about Islam is provided from the Quranic perspective and common points in Islam rather than diversity in Islam. Therefore, there is no reason to teach the Alawi branch of Islam. (3) The possibility of a radical change in the structure of the RE: In this respect, it is said that if Alawism becomes a part of religious education in schools this may later lead to a separate Alawism lesson. Positive arguments: (1) Pluralistic trend in religious education: The pluralistic understanding in education promotes that religious education has to reflect the religious traditions in the society rather than ignoring the religious diversity at the state schools. At this point, the inclusion of Alawism in religious education will be a contribution for plurality inside Islam (2) Freedom of religion and conscience: It is argued that the compulsory religious education in state schools is not consistent with the international covenant s articles on Freedom of Religion or Belief. If we include Alawism in the curriculum, this lesson will be more appropriate with the covenant of freedom of religion. (3) Student-centered approach in education: New pedagogical understanding mainly focuses on the studentcentered approach. It is claimed that the ignorance of Alawi students and not including Alawism in the religion courses can be considered as a discrimination against Alawi students. At the same time, this may be recognized as the violation of student-centered pedagogy. Alawism in Turkish Religious Education We would like to present the issue how Alawism is presented in the new RE curriculum.

5 206 EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES: THEORY & PRACTICE a. The topic Alawism is included in the reading texts in the curriculum. There are nine reading texts in religious education in the entire secondary curriculum. b. In the 12th class, Alawism, Bektashi Order, Yesevism, Mevlevism, and Ahism take places in the learning area of Sufistic Comments in Islamic Thought. c. In the 11th class, the Caferi sect with the other four Sunni sects is firstly seen in the learning area of The Comments in the Islamic Thought. Also, in the same level, the topic Love for the Ehl-i Beyt in our culture is included in the learning area of The Model Muhammad (MEB 2005) It is seen that Alawism and Bektashi Order partly take place in the secondary religious education. When it is compared with the previous curriculum, even a limited inclusion of Alewism is a positive step but not sufficient in line with the presentation of internal pluralism in Islam. Two options may be suggested for giving a wider place to Alawism in religious education in Turkey. The first one, the Alawi perspective of the religion may be included in the course while teaching the topics that are directly about religion and moral. The second option is to include an additional learning area under the title of Alawism with the other seven learning areas for each class in the curriculum. Teaching for Other Religions We find important changes and improvements in relation to content and educational approaches in the new curriculum of religious education compared to previous curriculum. First, the old textbooks for RE used to give the classification the religions as divinely originated and non-divine, then subdivide divinely originated religions as distorted and undistorted religions. In this classification, for example, Christianity was considered as distorted divinely originated religion. From the beginning, this connotes prejudice against Christianity (Kaymakcan 1999). We can observe that there is a new type of classification of religions in the curriculum where religions are divided into four groups: 1. Abrahamic or divine religions (i.e., Islam, Christianity and Juda-

6 KAYMAKCAN / Pluralism and Constructivism in Turkish Religious Education: Evaluation of ism); 2. Chinese and Japanese religions; 3. Hinduic religions, and 4. traditional religions. It is not difficult to assume that major priority will be given to Christianity and Judaism and they will be treated more extensively (MEB 2005). With this approach, the new curriculum tries to lay stress on the points of agreement rather than conflicts on ethical values among religions. It seems that particular attention is given to ethical issues which are common among different religions rather than controversial theological issues (MEB 2005). Moreover, it should also be mentioned that the new curriculum includes more modern topics such as Environmental issues in religions and inter-religious relations in a globalized world. This new curriculum can be considered as a significant shift from the traditional religious understanding to more modern and pluralistic religious education in the presentation of other religions. It appears that this curriculum mainly uses learning about approach which aims to present religions objectively rather than learning from religion approach. It can be concluded that learning from religion approach is more compatible with the pedagogical needs of students. Conclusion First of all, the introduction of new curriculum for religious education in line with other school subjects can be considered as a positive step after 23 years. From the pedagogical point of view, the new curriculum advocates constructivist learning and student-centered approach. In spite of this intention, the examination of the curriculum suggests that it cannot be realized. We observe that behaviorist learning and content-centered approach are very influential even in the new religious education s curriculum. Secondly, it is seen that Alawism and Bektashi Order partly take place in the secondary religious education. Considering the nonexistence of Alawism in the previous curriculum, even the limited inclusion of Alewism is a positive development but not sufficient in line with the presentation of internal pluralism in Islam. This issue should be debated by the stakeholders of this matter in light with science.

7 208 EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES: THEORY & PRACTICE Thirdly, we can observed in the teaching of non-islamic religions is a significant shift from the traditional religious understanding to modern and pluralistic religious education in the new religious education curriculum. It appears that this curriculum mainly uses learning about approach which aims to present religions objectively rather than learning from religion approach.

8 KAYMAKCAN / Pluralism and Constructivism in Turkish Religious Education: Evaluation of Kaynakça Ayd n, M. (2005). Paradigman n yeni ad : Dinsel ço ulculuk. M. Ayd n (Ed.), Dinsel ço ulculuk ve mutlakl k iddialar içinde (s ), Ankara: Ankara Okulu. Ayhan, H. (1999). Türkiye de din de itimi, stanbul: Marmara Üniversitesi FAV Yay nlar. Brelsford, T. (2005). Lessons for religious education from cognitive science of religion. Religious Education, 100 (2), Estep, J.R. (2002). Spiritual formation as social: Toward a Vygotskyan developmental perspective. Religious Education, 97 (1), Fox, R. (2001). Constructivism examined. Oxford Review of Education, 27 (1), Genç, K. (2005, Haziran). Zorunlu din derslerinin kalkmas için verilen hukuksal mücadele. Pir Sultan Abdal Kültür ve Sanat Dergisi, 4 (42), Gömleksiz, M.N. (2005). Yeni ilkö retim program n n etkilili inin de erlendirilmesi. Kuram ve Uygulamada E itim Bilimleri, 5 (2), Grimmet, M. (2000). Pedagogies of religious education. Essex: McCrimmons. Hull, J. (2004). Ço ulcu demokratik toplumlarda din ö retimi üzerine genel de- erlendirmeler. Din Ö retiminde Yeni Yöntem Aray fllar Uluslararas Sempozyum Bildiri ve Tart flmalar içinde (s ). Ankara: MEB Yay nlar. Jackson, R. (2004). Rethinking religious education and plurality. New York: Routledge & Falmer. Jackson, R. (2006). European institutions and the contribution of studies of religious diversity to education for democratic citizenship. Paper presented at the International Seminar on Religious Education and Values. Driebergen, Holland. Johnson, J.R. (2003). Dewey and Vygotsky: A comparison of their view on social constructivism in education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The State University of New Jersey, New Jersey. Kara, M. (1999). Tasavvuf ve tarikatlar tarihi. stanbul: Dergah Yay nlar. Kaymakcan, R. (1996). Religious education in the multi-party period in Turkey. East/West Education, 17 (1-2), Kaymakcan, R. (1999). Christianity in Turkish religious education. Islam and Muslim Christian Relation, 10 (3), Kaymakcan, R. (2006a). Turkish adolescents: High islamic faith in secular state. In (Ed.) H. G. Ziebertz, & W. Kay (Ed.), Religion and youth in Europe. Münster, & London: Lit Verlag. Kaymakcan, R. (2006b). Yeni ortaö retim din kültürü ve ahlak bilgisi ö retim program inceleme ve de erlendirme raporu. Yay nlanmam fl rapor, Sabanc Üniversitesi E itim Reform Giriflimi, stanbul. Kaymakcan, R. (2007). Religious education culture in modern Turkey. M. de Souza, et al. (Eds.), International handbook of religious, spiritual and moral dimensions of education (pp ). Secauces: Springer. Kodelja, Z., & Bassler, T. (2004). Religion and schooling in open society, a framework for informed dialogue. Ljubljana: Open Society Institute.

9 210 EDUCATIONAL SCIENCES: THEORY & PRACTICE MEB. (1967). Lise ve bunlara muadil ö retim kurumlar ile lise derecesindeki din dersi program. Tebli ler Dergisi, 30 (1475). MEB. (1976). Lise din bilgisi program. Tebli ler Dergisi, 39 (1900). MEB. (1992). lkö retim ve ortaö retim din kültürü ve ahlak bilgisi dersi program. Tebli ler Dergisi, MEB. (2005). Orta ö retim din kültürü ve ahlak bilgisi dersi ö retim program. stanbul: Devlet Kitaplar Müdürlü ü. Race, A. (1983). Christians and religious pluralism. London: SCM Pres. Rivard, J. & Amodi, M. (2003). Education and religion: The paths of tolerance, teaching time allocated to religious education in official timetables, Prospects, 33 (2), Skeie, G. (2002). The concept of plurality and its meaning for religious education. British Journal of Religious Education, 25 (1), Terwel, J. (1999). Constructivism and its implication for curriculum theory and practice. Curriculum Studies, 31 (2), Tosun, C. (2005). Din kültürü ve ahlak bilgisi derslerinde Alevilik. Türk Yurdu, 25 (210), Y ld z, S. (2002). Türkiye de Alevilerin din e itiminden beklentileri. Yay nlanmam fl Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Sakarya Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. Ziebertz, H. (2003). Religious education in a plural western society. Hamburg & London: Lit Verlag.