The Value of Continued Study – Amy Thacker

Teaching is a profession where continued development and regular reflection on progress is integral to what it means to be a teacher. However, managing growing workload commitments and responding to what seem to be ceaseless government initiatives, the time to stop and reflect on what got you here and why you teach may be diminishing. It was in part this sense that the one thing I didn’t have enough of was time and feeling, as many teachers do stretched and overworked, that for many years put me off further study. Despite having loved academic study, I was also dissuaded by the cost attached to university courses and had some concerns that having been so many years out of it, I may even struggle to write an essay! Putting reservations to one side, I knew I was keen to do something that would refresh my outlook on Religious Education and give me the chance to think critically about the subject I love. Having done my PGCE in RE at Warwick University I was familiar with their distance learning Masters in Religions and Education and looking at the flexibility of the programme and the time I would have available to study I concluded that I would be able to manage work commitments alongside studying. Around about the same time, a colleague sent me a link to the 3 for RE scheme which offers financial support (60% of fees or £1000) on the condition that your employee also pay at least 10% and that you are prepared to share any work of interest with Culham St Gabriels. My school were very supportive so I applied and am now in my second year of study.

It would be disingenuous to suggest that getting back into studying at university level has been without challenge. The Distance Learning Programme in particular has required a great deal of self-motivation and organisation especially at those busy times of the year when exams are approaching. Now in my second year though, it is clear to me that the benefits have outweighed any such challenges though. In practical terms I have been given new ideas for content and activities. More than this though the study and the numerous questions raised have had an impact on the way I think and speak about religion and education. Does religion even exist? Is it an imposition from outsiders[i]? What is RE for? Should we as educators be given only time for critical study of religion or is it appropriate to allow opportunities for spiritual development? One of the things I’ve found most valuable has been sharing with my students, in particular Sixth Form, what I am studying and getting their feedback to some of the questions above. The conversations that we have had as a result, which would not have come about were it not for my MA, have offered insight into my own practice which after nine years of teaching, has certainly been refreshing. It has also been valuable for them to see me as a learner too and I was able to share with them feedback from my own work, both good and not so good!

Engagement with students has been at the forefront of my experience of the course so far and this was particularly so with the module last term on Interfaith Dialogue. Dialogue and sharing ideas is a feature of any classroom, particularly the Religious Education classroom. The value of this is fairly obvious, students can learn from one another’s views and experiences and faced with difference are giving the opportunity to negotiate and be more confident about their own position. In the RE classroom of course the main focus may be around matters of faith and religious practice but of course it is not likely to be limited to this. The value of dialogue is not solely in what students can learn from one another but also in development of thinking skills including listening and questioning. However the potential for dialogue to achieve all this is dependent on how it is organised and managed by the facilitator. Dialogue is not just about talking, understanding does not just come about through discussion. When it comes to interfaith dialogue, perhaps more so than other form of dialogue, this needs to be clearly acknowledged with regular reflection and agreed upon guidelines. Should dialogue be about highlighting differences or focusing on similarities? Can dialogue strengthen relationships or could it actually accentuate divisions?

To help explore these questions practically I set up an interfaith group, made up of students from different year groups and importantly different religious backgrounds (including those from none). This was made possible as I teach at a highly diverse school in Birmingham but in a different context, email contact and other forums can be facilitated to make links with other communities.[ii] Early on in our first meeting we agreed guidelines for discussion, guidelines being of great importance if dialogue is to be inclusive and student centred. Those set out by The Inter Faith Network for the UK suggested that effective dialogue should involve self-reflection and awareness that dialogue is as much about listening as it is talking[iii]. It may be difficult to communicate this clearly to younger students and that is why it is important to agree together the aims and guidelines for dialogue. The facilitator must take a prominent role in ensuring these guidelines are adhered to. Through the meetings of the group I also came to understand that one of the roles of the facilitator is to at times limit criticism so that dialogue can develop into understanding, not debate. Whilst dialogue would be limited if students were not able to disagree and question, at time there needs to be acceptance that some practices and even beliefs cannot be rationalised – it does not follow that they are any less meaningful to someone’s way of life.

It is difficult here to explain here fully the positive impact that the MA as a whole has had on my teaching but simply I wonder why I waited so long before applying! In relation to the group, I believe it has been a success in building relationships and though is very difficult to measure, this is in part reflected in the continued attendance of students who give up their lunchtime with no obligation. In terms of meaningfully breaking down barriers and reducing prejudice the impact may have been limited bearing in mind that the members of the group self-selected and tended to already be interested in different views and open to sharing their own. Nevertheless, the popularity of the group has grown and student voice has shown that at the very least, students have valued the opportunity to discuss openly without pressure of academic achievement. In terms of my own teaching though where dialogue is a feature of virtually every lesson, the group and the reflection on the effectiveness of interfaith dialogue has had an impact on my organisation of discussions. I have provided students with guidelines for discussion and in some lessons this has been modelled by volunteers before dialogue takes place. I no longer hold the assumption that just because students are talking about the topic, effective dialogue is taking place. The opportunity to reflect on theory and put it into practice in this way is one that I have valued and would recommend strongly to other colleagues as a reminder of why we teach this fantastic subject.

[i] For some interesting responses to this question see Edward Said (1985) Orientalism, Penguin, London and Wilfred Cantwell Smith (1978) The Meaning and End of Religion, Harper and Row, New York

[ii] For evaluation on the effectiveness of the use of technology in dialogue see Julia Ipgrave (2009) ‘The Language of Friendship and Identity: children’s communication choices in an interfaith exchange’ in British Journal of Religious Education 31:3 pp213-226

[iii] See The Inter Faith Network for the UK (1993) Building Good Relations with People of Different Faiths and Beliefs http://www.interfaith.org.uk/