Educational rationality and religious education in Polish public schools

IF 0.8 3区 哲学 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Bogusław Milerski, M. Karwowski
{"title":"Educational rationality and religious education in Polish public schools","authors":"Bogusław Milerski, M. Karwowski","doi":"10.1080/13617672.2021.2018214","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In Poland, a country with a very high level of religiosity, religious education at school is confessional but not compulsory: it is an optional subject chosen by the student. In this article, we explore attitudes regarding participation in religion classes and explanations of the purpose of religious education as provided by adolescent students. We refer to the findings of our research on the rationality of school education and apply them to research on religious education. Rationality is defined as the logic of justifying the purpose of school education and four rationalities: praxeological, emancipatory, hermeneutic, and negational are distinguished. In a large and representative sample of secondary school students (N = 2,810), we examined the relationship between types of rationality and students’ attitudes and opinions towards religious education in school. We observed that high school students perceived religious education as highly conservative and declared the strongest support for more dialogical and liberal religious education. Moreover, students’ hermeneutical rationality was the primary factor associated with their lack of satisfaction with the current religious education and postulates to change it into a more dialogical one.","PeriodicalId":45928,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Beliefs & Values-Studies in Religion & Education","volume":"47 1","pages":"81 - 98"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Beliefs & Values-Studies in Religion & Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13617672.2021.2018214","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

ABSTRACT In Poland, a country with a very high level of religiosity, religious education at school is confessional but not compulsory: it is an optional subject chosen by the student. In this article, we explore attitudes regarding participation in religion classes and explanations of the purpose of religious education as provided by adolescent students. We refer to the findings of our research on the rationality of school education and apply them to research on religious education. Rationality is defined as the logic of justifying the purpose of school education and four rationalities: praxeological, emancipatory, hermeneutic, and negational are distinguished. In a large and representative sample of secondary school students (N = 2,810), we examined the relationship between types of rationality and students’ attitudes and opinions towards religious education in school. We observed that high school students perceived religious education as highly conservative and declared the strongest support for more dialogical and liberal religious education. Moreover, students’ hermeneutical rationality was the primary factor associated with their lack of satisfaction with the current religious education and postulates to change it into a more dialogical one.
波兰公立学校的教育理性与宗教教育
在波兰这个宗教信仰程度很高的国家,学校的宗教教育是忏悔性的,但不是强制性的:它是学生选择的选修科目。在这篇文章中,我们探讨了青少年学生对参加宗教课程的态度以及对宗教教育目的的解释。我们将学校教育合理性的研究成果应用到宗教教育的研究中。将理性定义为证明学校教育目的的逻辑,并区分了四种理性:行动理性、解放理性、诠释理性和否定理性。在一个具有代表性的中学生(N = 2,810)的大样本中,我们研究了理性类型与学生对学校宗教教育的态度和意见之间的关系。我们观察到,高中生认为宗教教育是高度保守的,并宣称最强烈地支持更多的对话和自由的宗教教育。此外,学生的解释性理性是导致他们对当前宗教教育缺乏满意的主要因素,并要求将其转变为更具对话性的宗教教育。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
31
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信