Dialogue Among Young
Citizens in a Pluralistic RE
Classroom
The Norwegian Discussion
Dialogue in RE
In a national school system based on the
principle of ‘one school for all’


What is the particular role of RE in
dialogue among pupils with
different religious background,
worldviews and beliefs?
What type of ideal picture or
concept of the dialogue is found in
different positions in the Norwegian
discussion about RE?
Ideal picture of the
dialogue




Voluntary
religious
committed
verbal dialogue
among adults






Open
experimental
(diapractice)
”unfinished”
ongoing process
verbally restricted
among children
in a given setting
’One school for all’







Comprehensive school for 98.3 %
of all children
local school (mirrors the local
culture)
all children integrated
streaming not allowed
permanent differentiation or
segregation not allowed
equal opportunities
no formal assessment before age
13
RE as a test question

Up to 1997: division of children due
to religious background.
 94,7
% Christian knowledge
 4,4 % Worldviews (Life Stances)
 0,9 % no RE in schools

From 1997: KRL common subject
(with partly exemption only)
RE – as part of life in
school
Diapractice and dialogue



National school system build to
serve citizenship as a main aim
School life is dominated by
diapractice - (co-operation): living
together with difference (Lissi
Rasmussen)
Religious education cannot be
limited to RE as a school subject
Diapractice...


School and classroom as given
social structures
demanding differences in practice
independent of objective degree of
plurality

diapractice where the verbal
dialogue is a minor part: children
play, sing, make music, dance, make
food, eat, have physical education and
sports, have drama and role play, take
part in student council, do creative arts
…
Necessary dialogue



emerges from the necessity of
living together in a society
(Oddbjørn Leirvik)
the verbal dialogue that goes along
with diapractice
making common celebrations and
ethical practice possible,
understandable and transparent
Dialogue in RE as a
subject


The Official Norwegian Report: the
principles in KRL is titled: Identity
and dialogue
as mutual interdependent entities that form a
continuum, with an emphasis on identity
development in the first years of education and
on the dialogue in the later years

theory about the dialogue in RE is a combination
of the one from the theological, monoreligious
academic tradition and the one from the
academic, multireligious study of religions
Dialogue in the official
reader


Practical dialogue skill
structured dialogue
a
dialogue that occurs where the
teacher sets the rules and decides the
perspective to present the view of
others
 dialogue in the role as pupil

comparison - a prerequisite for the
dialogue
Dialogue so far:
Diapractice – co-operation
 Necessary dialogue –




everyday conversation to get to
understand one another
informal personal exchange of ideas
Structured dialogue –
empathic work with other religions and
beliefs
 representing other views
 comparison
 face to face communication


Spiritual dialogue – the personal
encounter that makes change
Concepts of dialogue in the
debate:






Oddbjørn Leirvik: ”Interreligious dialogue
in a Norwegian context”
frustrated about the lack of dialogical
intentions in the syllabus
main focus is on development of identity
in primary education, and that the
dialogue is postponed until the lower
secondary stage
system-oriented approach, few systemascending theme-oriented approaches
lack of interest for “between religions”
Exception: dialogue about ethics
Leirvik’s ideal picture?





dialogue between committed adult
representatives
voluntary, verbal dialogue
dialogue of religions - between
systems (political and academic
interest)
frustration: Theology and Religious
Studies as separate academic
traditions
the necessary dialogue seems not
important, asks for the spiritual
dialogue in schools







Tove Nicolaisen:
“the invisible (backstage) dialogue
+ narration theory”
Dialogue in the general part
=>dialogue as a working method
bigger room for ethical dialogue,
parents: not less dangerous
necessary dialogue, structured,
philosophical and some times
spontaneous spiritual
philosophical dialogue has its
limits: “the best argument”
teachers task to turn the dialogue
into an informed dialogue
Nicolaisen:

dialogical room within the
narratives: all children are both
insiders and outsiders because all
narratives have three dimensions:





the anthropological common
the religious
the specific religious
system-ascension part of teacher
training and classroom practice
Not interreligious dialogue, but
KRL-dialogue
Nicolaisen’s ideal picture?





dialogue between children:
informal spontaneous
open-ended process in a given
setting
system-ascending on an individual
level
not interreligious dialogue -room
the secular child
something specific: KRL-dialogue
Aspects of the dialogue concept:



 Action side
Diapractice - co-operation
Necessary dialogue
 everyday conversation to get to understand one another
 informal personal exchange of ideas


Dialogue as a working method in KRL
Structured dialogue – (in the role as pupil)







empathic work with other religions and beliefs
representing other views
comparison
face to face communication
Philosophical dialogue
Spiritual dialogue – the personal encounter that
makes change
 Verbal side


The function of dialogue in the
classroom is not primarily to serve as
dialogue between institutions nor
between religions. System-ascending
co-operation
between
academic
traditions is a task for universities and
colleges.
The dialogue in the classroom has as
its main task to operate on an
interpersonal level, to serve the
purpose of building identity and
empower for citizenship in a pluralistic
global world.