Grappling with the Good: Talking about Religion and Morality in Public Schools

TEACHER CAPACITY FOR ETHICAL DIALOGUE

TEACHER CAPACITY FOR ETHICAL DIALOGUE Teachers need to develop both a conceptual understanding of the principles embedded in Ethical Dialogue as well as pedagogical skill in guiding students through a process of imaginative engagement and civic deliberation . In addition, teachers need to appreciate the importance of pedagogical even-handedness and church-state separation. (Perhaps this is obvious , but teachers also need to be informed citizens themselves—reading newspapers, seeking out varied perspectives, and considering where they stand on issues being discussed in the public square.) As with any form of pedagogical content knowledge, the biggest challenge is not mastering content alone or mastering facilitation skills alone, but learning how to best facilitate dialogue involving that content.2 Let me be clear that by conceptual understanding, I do not mean to imply that teachers need extensive, detailed training in philosophical ethics or religious studies. Part of the expectation here is that teachers will be familiar with general principles—legal and theoretical—surrounding Ethical Dialogue. Their level of understanding of the foundational principles of Ethical Dialogue will need to be more substantial than that of their students, but the emphasis here is on educational concepts rather than philosophical terminology. Just as with students, technical terms such as reciprocity and burdens of judgment need not be part of teachers’ vocabulary (again, we might consider a parallel example: I have observed many student teachers who make it a point to capture their students’ interest at the beginning of class, without ever having heard the term “anticipatory set”). Teachers will need to develop a clear sense of how Ethical Dialogue contributes to broader educational ends, however, and particularly why student reflection and thoughtfulness are vital dispositions to be cultivated . In addition, one strand of specific terminology with which teachers should be familiar is the set of distinctions between the private, civic, and political realms. I have argued for the importance of cultivating shared reasons in the political realm, but this tripartite distinction matters just as much in another, more inclusive sense. This book sets itself apart from much standard liberal political theory in emphasizing the ample civic space outside of the political realm, where efforts toward imaginative engagement cultivate the morally vital groundwork for necessary political deliberation. The more that teachers can help their students appreciate 129 Preparing Teachers for Ethical Dialogue these distinctions, the more students will feel that their private ethical frameworks are acknowledged and considered in the civic realm. This perception , I believe, will contribute to a greater appreciation among students -as-citizens that civic and political deliberation are vital endeavors in promoting mutual respect and social justice. Many teachers will also need a clearer understanding of key boundaries regarding pedagogical neutrality and, in particular, separation of church and state issues. On the latter point, I have already acknowledged that public school teachers are understandably wary of violating churchstate boundaries. Certainly this concern is an important one. Historian of education David Tyack tells the story of a workshop he once led for public school social studies teachers exploring how the study of religion could be thoughtfully included in their curricula. At the end of their week together, one enthusiastic participant approached him and exclaimed, “Professor Tyack, I just want to thank you for helping me to figure out how I can go back and lead all my students to Jesus!” Needless to say, this was neither Tyack’s intention nor his message, but it seems the teacher had filtered the workshop’s objectives through a particularly evangelistic framework.3 Nel Noddings likely had this type of phenomenon in mind when she made the clearly valid point that “it can be very hard for teachers with strong religious commitments to maintain religious neutrality.” But this claim overlooks a broader consideration. The challenge of neutrality certainly applies to atheists as well, many of whom have strong feelings about religion. And while many scholars point to the tendency of Protestants to overemphasize the importance of belief and doctrine in studying religion, the broader Western analytical tradition also places a premium on identifying underlying principles and the importance of written texts. The potential for biases can be found in many forms. What is important to recognize here, however, is that civic virtue cannot be realized by ignoring religion any more than it can by adopting the perspective of Tyack’s workshop student.4 What seems clear is the need for greater confidence on the part of teachers regarding legal policy for exploration of religious issues. The...