Irene McCormack Catholic College UNIT 3AREL
TYPE:
Investigation
OUTCOMES: Outcome 1: Investigating the interplay between religion and life
Outcome 2: Search for meaning and purpose
Outcome 3: Religion in society
CONTENT: Religious inquiry and processes
Investigative processes and research skills; Interpreting, analysing and
synthesising information; Forms of communication that present findings and
conclusions
The nature of religion
Religious practices and structures
The influence of religion
The place of religion in society; Religion in historical and cultural contexts;
Contemporary issues for religion
LEARNING CONTEXT:
 Religious leadership in a changing world
 Important moments in religious history
 Religious perspectives on contemporary issues
TASK 3: Religion and interfaith dialogue (40%) 25 marks
How does interfaith dialogue create points of connection and challenge in a globalised world?
From the perspective of one religion, explore three historical examples of interfaith dialogue and
evaluate their relevance to religion in the modern world of globalisation.
How long will you need?
You will have 3 weeks to plan, research and structure your investigation to this question. You
are required to present your investigation informatively to your classroom peers in the third week
using PowerPoint.
What you need to do:
Using a range of sources, identify and describe three examples of interfaith dialogue. Focus on
the religious organisational structures that underpin the interfaith dialogue as a cross-institutional
process. Evaluate their relevance of the interfaith dialogue within the context of its occurrence.
Record the progress and results of your inquiry/research in your process journal. Use the
following questions to guide your inquiry:
 What is interfaith dialogue?
 What are some perspectives on the relevance of interfaith dialogue?
 What are some examples of interfaith dialogue?

Vatican II perspective

Ecumenical dialogue

Catholic and Orthodox dialogue

Jewish–Christian relations

Islamic scholars open letter to Christian leaders

Catholic/Islamic dialogue.
What needs to be submitted for assessment?
□
Your process diary
□
Your PowerPoint presentation
Due date
Nature of
answer
Hypothesis
Research
methodology
Criteria—the process diary
Mark
 hypothesis/guiding question is clearly structured.
1
 hypothesis/guiding question is well-stated/formulated.
1
 hypothesis/guiding question is relevant to issue/aspect/area.
1
 research methodology is planned/definitive/clear on the process
of gathering data.
1
 research methodology is clearly recorded/explicated.
1
 selects appropriate primary sources.
1
 analyses the primary sources for bias and/or values and/or
purpose.
1
 selects some appropriate secondary sources.
1
 uses organisational skills to order primary and secondary
sources.
1
 evaluates/explains the relevance of the secondary sources.
1
Total
Nature of
answer
 Interfaith
dialogue
Explanation:
 clarity
 structure
 expression
 use of
examples.
Criteria—the PowerPoint
Mark
 the structural/organisational features of a particular religion,
including beliefs and practices, are used appropriately and
where necessary to illustrate the relevance of interfaith dialogue
 the impact of interfaith dialogue upon how people respond to
religion is examined in detail.
 examination of the elements of religion is detailed and examples
from a religion focus on the question
 the relevant context vis-à-vis the globalised world is accurately
treated.
 answer focuses on describing interfaith dialogue with little or no
real focus on the impact this has on peoples response to religion
 examples are provided.
 key elements of interfaith dialogue are not defined or used
 some errors in detail are made.
 sweeping statements are made but not supported by examples
 overly simplistic response that relies on generalised information.










10
articulates in depth ideas, beliefs, details etc.
explores associated ideas and issues as part of the presentation.
accurate, to the point, economical in choice of words etc.
explanation shows structure and clarity of thinking focused on
task.
a few examples are clear and detailed
relevant features or details are structured/explained clearly.
relies on generalisations and sweeping statements
assumes understanding or does not distinguish adequately
between ideas.
may dwell too much on one aspect
examples may be overly stereotypical and/or one dimensional.
Total
9–10
7–8
5–6
3–4
1–2
5
4
3
2
1
15