Re-imagining Senior Secondary Religious Education: Evaluating the Religion, Meaning, and Life Curriculum (SpringerBriefs in Education) 9811991790, 9789811991790

Citation preview

SpringerBriefs in Education William Sultmann · Janeen Lamb · Peter Ivers · Mark Craig

Re-imagining Senior Secondary Religious Education Evaluating the Religion, Meaning, and Life Curriculum

SpringerBriefs in Education

We are delighted to announce SpringerBriefs in Education, an innovative product type that combines elements of both journals and books. Briefs present concise summaries of cutting-edge research and practical applications in education. Featuring compact volumes of 50 to 125 pages, the SpringerBriefs in Education allow authors to present their ideas and readers to absorb them with a minimal time investment. Briefs are published as part of Springer’s eBook Collection. In addition, Briefs are available for individual print and electronic purchase. SpringerBriefs in Education cover a broad range of educational fields such as: Science Education, Higher Education, Educational Psychology, Assessment & Evaluation, Language Education, Mathematics Education, Educational Technology, Medical Education and Educational Policy. SpringerBriefs typically offer an outlet for: . An introduction to a (sub)field in education summarizing and giving an overview of theories, issues, core concepts and/or key literature in a particular field . A timely report of state-of-the art analytical techniques and instruments in the field of educational research . A presentation of core educational concepts . An overview of a testing and evaluation method . A snapshot of a hot or emerging topic or policy change . An in-depth case study . A literature review . A report/review study of a survey . An elaborated thesis Both solicited and unsolicited manuscripts are considered for publication in the SpringerBriefs in Education series. Potential authors are warmly invited to complete and submit the Briefs Author Proposal form. All projects will be submitted to editorial review by editorial advisors. SpringerBriefs are characterized by expedited production schedules with the aim for publication 8 to 12 weeks after acceptance and fast, global electronic dissemination through our online platform SpringerLink. The standard concise author contracts guarantee that: . an individual ISBN is assigned to each manuscript . each manuscript is copyrighted in the name of the author . the author retains the right to post the pre-publication version on his/her website or that of his/her institution

William Sultmann · Janeen Lamb · Peter Ivers · Mark Craig

Re-imagining Senior Secondary Religious Education Evaluating the Religion, Meaning, and Life Curriculum

William Sultmann La Salle Academy Australian Catholic University Brisbane, QLD, Australia

Janeen Lamb La Salle Academy Australian Catholic University Brisbane, QLD, Australia

Peter Ivers Faculty of Theology and Philosophy Australian Catholic University Brisbane, QLD, Australia

Mark Craig Brisbane Catholic Education Brisbane, QLD, Australia

ISSN 2211-1921 ISSN 2211-193X (electronic) SpringerBriefs in Education ISBN 978-981-19-9179-0 ISBN 978-981-19-9180-6 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9180-6 © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 Published by Australian Catholic University Ethics approval number: 2019-377H This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721, Singapore

Contents

1 Research Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 Research Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 Gathering Community Perceptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3 Findings and Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3.1 Research Question: Overall Levels of Satisfaction with RML . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3.2 Research Sub-question 1: What Influenced the Selection of RML? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3.3 Research Sub-question 2: What Topics Held Most Significance? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3.4 Research Sub-question 3: What Pedagogical Approaches Were Most Influential? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3.5 Research Sub-question 4: What Outcomes Were of Most Significance from the Experience of RML . . . . . . . . 1.4 The Educational Experience of RML . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.5 Research to Practice Emphases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.6 Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1 1 3 3

2 Research Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1 Identity and Religious Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.1 The National Perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.2 Religious Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.3 Historical Approaches to Religious Education . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 Religious Education in the Archdiocese of Brisbane . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.1 A Reconceptualist Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.2 P-12 Religious Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.3 Re-Imagining Religious Education in the Secondary School . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.4 Religion, Meaning and Life: Curriculum Overview . . . . . . . 2.3 Research Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

9 9 10 13 16 19 19 20

3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 6

21 23 29

v

vi

Contents

2.3.1 2.3.2 2.3.3 2.3.4 2.3.5 References

Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Researching Religious Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Research Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Research Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Research Question . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .....................................................

29 30 32 32 32 32

3 Commonality of Trends in Religious Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1 Context for Religious Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 Definitional Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.3 The Catholic School and Religious Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.4 International Perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.5 Sub-questions from the Review of Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

35 35 35 36 38 41 41

4 Gathering Community Perceptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1 Research Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2 Participants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3 Data Collection and Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3.1 Instruments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4 Data Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4.1 Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.4.2 Semi-structured Interviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

45 45 45 47 47 48 48 49 49

5 Reporting Community Perceptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.1 Results and Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2 Students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2.1 Choice and Themes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2.2 Topics and Themes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2.3 Pedagogies and Themes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2.4 Outcomes and Themes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2.5 Overall Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.2.6 Core Influences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3 Teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3.1 Choice and Themes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3.2 Topics and Themes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3.3 Pedagogy and Themes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3.4 Outcomes and Themes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.3.5 Overall Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4 Parents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4.1 Choice and Themes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4.2 Overall Responses on Topics, Pedagogy and Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.4.3 Outcomes and Themes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.5 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

51 51 51 51 53 55 58 61 63 65 65 66 68 69 72 74 74 74 75 77 77

Contents

vii

6 What Matters Most: Interpretation of the Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.1 Participant Perceptions: First Order Interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2 Researcher Perceptions: Second Order Interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.1 Research Sub-question 1: What Influenced the Selection of RML? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.2 Research Sub-question 2: What Topics Held Most Significance? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.3 Research Sub-question 3: What Pedagogical Approaches Were Most Influential? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.2.4 Research Sub-question 4: What Outcomes Were of Most Significance from the Experience of RML . . . . . . . . 6.3 Integrating Literature with Community Perceptions: Third Order Interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3.1 Emerging Directions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.3.2 New Understandings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.4 Modelling and Advancing Theoretical Propositions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.4.1 Modelling the Integration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.4.2 Advancing Theoretical Propositions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

79 79 81

7 Practice Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1 Practice Emphases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1.1 Participant Agency and Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1.2 Curriculum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1.3 Pedagogy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1.4 Formation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1.5 Catholic School Identity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.1.6 Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.2 Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.3 Further Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.4 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

95 95 95 95 96 96 96 96 97 97 97

Appendix A: Student Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

99

83 83 84 84 85 85 87 88 89 92 93

Appendix B: Teacher Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103 Appendix C: Parent Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 Appendix D: Semi-structured Focus Group Interview Process for Students and Teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 Appendix E: RML Teaching and Learning Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 Appendix F: Content of Units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117 Appendix G: Toledo Guiding Principles on Teaching about Religions and Beliefs in Public Schools . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 Reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123

About the Authors

William Sultmann AM, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor at Australian Catholic University and Deputy Dean of La Salle Academy. He is a teacher, psychologist, practical theologian, and leader with senior executive and governance roles in education, health, and welfare across Government and Catholic sectors. He has chaired and participated in multiple state and national bodies and consulted nationally and internationally. He has published comprehensively through books, monographs, and journals and holds research doctorates in Educational Psychology and Practical Theology. Current responsibilities include university teaching, applied research and professional writing, and community engagement in not-for-profit governance boards. In 2019, Bill was honoured in the Queen’s Birthday Honours as a Member of the Order of Australia. Janeen Lamb, Ph.D. is an Associate Professor at Australian Catholic University with expertise in Educational Leadership, Curriculum and Pedagogy, Statistical Applications, and Research Methods. Professional experience and expertise have been evidenced in positions as Director, Higher Degree Research in Education, and in instructional leadership in teaching doctoral courses. Her work on leadership and the development of leaders within faith-based cultures has been across several national projects as well as provincial research in support of specific Arch/Dioceses. In all cases, the significance of leadership and its integration within the changing landscape in which the faith-based school operates has identified the significance of mission and curriculum within educational practice. Peter Ivers, EdD is a Senior Lecturer and National Coordinator for Postgraduate Studies in the Faculty of Theology and Philosophy at Australian Catholic University. He has extensive experience in a variety of leadership roles in different educational settings. His doctoral work investigated the emergence of educational discourses on Religious Education in the Archdiocese of Brisbane between 1984 and 2005, and this has been extended to include recent research projects for the Archdiocese. Peter teaches postgraduate units in Religious Education in areas of History and theories of RE; RE Curriculum; Catholic Social Teaching; and Partnerships in RE. ix

x

About the Authors

Mark Craig has been a secondary school teacher of religion for over 20 years and is currently employed as an Education Officer with Brisbane Catholic Education. Before that, Mark was in full-time ministry with the Archdiocese of Brisbane. He is currently completing a Ph.D. in Philosophy at the University of Divinity, Melbourne, and has a Master of Education (Research), as well as a Bachelor of Theology. Mark is a sessional lecturer with BBI TAITE and has published several books on religion and spirituality as well as articles on Religious Education pedagogy and curriculum in Religious Education Journals.

List of Figures

Fig. 2.1 Fig. 2.2 Fig. 2.3 Fig. 2.4 Fig. 4.1 Fig. 4.2 Fig. 4.3 Fig. 5.1 Fig. 5.2 Fig. 5.3 Fig. 5.4 Fig. 5.5 Fig. 5.6 Fig. 5.7 Fig. 5.8 Fig. 5.9 Fig. 5.10 Fig. 5.11 Fig. 5.12 Fig. 5.13 Fig. 5.14

An overview of Religious Education in Australia 1960–2022 . . . . An overview of parameters shaping the RML curriculum . . . . . . . A summary of RML content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An overview of Religious Education in Australia 1960–2022 . . . . Overview of research design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Breakdown of participant engagement across data collection periods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Breakdown of data analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Graphic representation of influences on student choice . . . . . . . . . Graphic representation of importance of RML content by topic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Graphic representation of student perceptions of pedagogical approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Graphic representation of student perceptions of outcomes . . . . . . Graphic representation of student perceptions of RML by research themes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Graphic representation of the influences on teachers to teach RML . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Graphic representation of teacher perceptions of the RML units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Graphic representation of teacher pedagogy in RML effectiveness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Graphic representation of teacher role in RML effectiveness . . . . Graphic representation of assessment on RML effectiveness . . . . Graphic representation of internal personnel contribution to RML . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Graphic representation of external personnel contribution to RML . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Graphic representation of teacher outcomes from teaching RML . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Graphic representation of teachers’ evaluation of RML . . . . . . . . .

17 24 26 31 46 46 47 52 54 57 60 60 66 67 67 69 69 70 71 71 73 xi

xii

Fig. 5.15 Fig. 5.16 Fig. 5.17 Fig. 6.1

List of Figures

Graphic representation parent perceptions on choice influences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Graphic representation of parent perceptions of difference of RML . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Graphic representation of parent perceptions of RML outcomes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The educational experience of RML . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

75 76 76 90

List of Tables

Table 5.1 Table 5.2 Table 5.3 Table 5.4 Table 5.5 Table 5.6 Table 5.7 Table 5.8 Table 5.9 Table 5.10 Table 5.11 Table 5.12 Table 5.13 Table 5.14 Table 5.15 Table 5.16 Table 5.17 Table 6.1 Table 6.2

Influences on student choice of RML (N = 276) . . . . . . . . . . . . . Importance of RML content by topic (N = 276) . . . . . . . . . . . . . Comparison student responses for themes within the construct of topics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Student perceptions of pedagogical approach (N = 276) . . . . . . Comparison student responses for themes within the construct of pedagogies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Student perceptions of RML outcomes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Comparison student responses for Themes within the construct of Outcomes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Student perceptions of RML by overall themes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Influences on teachers to teach RML . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Teacher perceptions of the relevance of each of the four units of RML for students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Teacher perceptions of pedagogical practices in RML . . . . . . . . Teacher ratings of professional discussion with internal and external personnel on RML . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Teachers outcomes from teaching RML . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Teachers’ evaluation of RML . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Parent perceptions of influences on choice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Parent perceptions of difference in RML . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Parent perceptions of RML outcomes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . All participant groups overall satisfaction rating with RML . . . . Comparison of participant groups across research sub-questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

52 54 56 57 59 59 62 62 65 66 68 70 71 73 74 75 76 80 80

xiii

Chapter 1

Research Overview

Abstract This chapter is an overview of the research on an innovative pilot Religious Education curriculum at the senior secondary school level. It responds to the call for Religious Education to address religious plurality within the profile of the contemporary Catholic school and the explicit request from the community for curriculum to be more inclusive, respectful of difference and engage student agency and experiential reflection and participation. The development of the literature context in which RML is situated is pursued fully in Chap. 3. The research focused on the level of satisfaction by students, teachers and parents with the re-imagined curriculum, Religion Meaning and Life (RML). Research sub-questions included: what influenced subject choice; and what was most significant with respect to topics, pedagogies and outcomes. Findings permitted the modelling of key curriculum elements across topics, pedagogies and outcomes that serve to enhance the curriculum at scale and provide lenses for the wider educational community into curriculum construction in senior secondary Religious Education. Keywords Australia · Catholic · School · Research · Religious Education · Senior secondary

1.1 Research Context Catholic education in Australia is reflective of international context and responses. It is informed by the national goals for education (Education Council, 2019), guided by national statements on Religious Education (NCEC, 2018) and within each Catholic authority, complies with local Church expectations and engagement with community priorities. Notwithstanding the attraction of nostalgia with practices of the past (Goldburg, 2020), the development of Religion, Meaning and Life (RML) adopted a Reconceptualist Approach in advancing Religious Education at the senior secondary level. Drawing from policy parameters for Catholic schooling in the Archdiocese, it is characterised as an innovative curriculum designed to be relevant, authentic and academically sophisticated to meet the expectation of Church mission in support of student development and community expectations. RML emerges from a confluence of influences and is a practical response to student priorities, curriculum renewal, © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 W. Sultmann et al., Re-imagining Senior Secondary Religious Education, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9180-6_1

1

2

1 Research Overview

and system authority resoluteness to be relevant, inclusive and respectful of student needs. The approach is not unique to Australia for it examines a breadth of school and community perceptions and inquires particularly about Choice, Topics, Pedagogies and Outcomes integral to advancing Religious Education as central to the mission of the Catholic school. It is no surprise to educators in Catholic schools that Religious Education has a significant place in the curriculum. What continues to be a challenge is the accommodation of Religious Education theory and practice within quality curriculum programs in light of inclusive practices, curriculum preferencing in response to student priorities, student agency, and diversity in religious affiliations and faith practices. These imperatives increase in their level of significance for students in their final years of schooling where maturation, search for meaning, and competency to operate independently and relationally are acknowledged. Curriculum practices typically mirror these imperatives as community expectations are integrated with new understandings of mission practice relationships. This concept of continuity and discontinuity is no more evidenced than in the field of Religious Education where new pathways are being explored as the reality and significance of Religious Education in the Catholic school remains a priority for the Church in Australia. The senior secondary innovative Religious Education curriculum, Religion Meaning and Life (RML) (Brisbane Catholic Education, 2019) responds to the uniqueness of senior secondary education and reflects changing parent and student profiles and interests while being faithful to the essence of the Catholic Tradition in Religious Education (Rymarz & Starkey, 2021). In this context, the development and piloting of RML has engaged the community, school and system authorities. As a curriculum initiative it commenced as a fledgling trial project and after an initial review was introduced as a pilot initiative supported by commissioned research. This research adds to the limited quantitative evaluations of new initiatives in Religious Education in Australia, where the need for breadth and depth of research is recognised (Rymarz & Starkey, 2021). This commissioned research by the Archdiocese of Brisbane, under the leadership of the former Executive Director, Ms Pam Betts, explored levels of satisfaction with the pilot program and examined influences on course selection; and topics, pedagogies and outcomes of significance. The research promoted participation and collaboration across schools and system authorities and entailed detailed preparation of a curriculum and associated professional learning of participant teachers. The research was longitudinal in nature and gave significance to evidence-based data gathering. RML invites students to encounter and engage with “the inexhaustible mystery of human existence, as glimpsed primarily through the lens of the Catholic Christian Tradition, as well as other religious traditions” (Brisbane Catholic Education, 2019, 2020, p. 1). This research presents the process of independent inquiry that supported the discernment and subsequent endorsement of RML by the Archbishop of Brisbane in July 2021 as an integral option within the suite of Religious Education (RE) programs in the senior secondary years of schooling.

1.3 Findings and Discussion

3

Mindful of the diversity of expectations of the Catholic school, the curriculum initiative of RML was developed, implemented and supported. Commissioned research undertaken by the La Salle Academy of the Australian Catholic University, reviewed this senior secondary curriculum across three years. The principal research question was: What was the overall level of satisfaction with RML by students, teachers, and parents? And the specific sub-questions included: 1. 2. 3. 4.

What influenced curriculum selection? What topics held most significance? What pedagogical approaches were of most significance? What outcomes were of most significance?

1.2 Gathering Community Perceptions RML commenced in 2019 across two schools: a co-educational systemic school and a single sex Religious Institute school. Following the success of the trial program, the course moved into a pilot phase in 2020 where the program was implemented in a further eleven schools. During 2021, the number of pilot schools grew to 17. Two studies across the period 2020–2021 involved the collection of quantitative data which was subsequently interrogated through qualitative focus group interviews with students and teachers (Study 3). Overall, across the three studies, data collection was drawn from three groups of respondents: students (n = 318); teachers (n = 38); and parents (n = 65). This report records the collective findings from the quantitative survey-based research (Studies 1 and 2) and the results of the qualitative research pursued through focus group interviews.

1.3 Findings and Discussion 1.3.1 Research Question: Overall Levels of Satisfaction with RML Overall, students, teachers and parents were positive in their satisfaction with RML across each of the two quantitative studies.

1.3.2 Research Sub-question 1: What Influenced the Selection of RML? 1. Students pointed to the influence of Subject Information coupled with General Interest as the main influences on their choice of a Religious Education option.

4

1 Research Overview

2. Teacher engagement in RML was influenced by the unique curriculum ‘purpose’ of RML and a personal commitment to ‘spirituality’. 3. Parent support for the selection of RML related to the prioritising of accredited curriculum as a basis for tertiary entrance.

1.3.3 Research Sub-question 2: What Topics Held Most Significance? 1. Students rated ‘Ethics’; ‘Catholic Social Teaching’; ‘Other World Religions’; and Jesus as most important. Collectively, these priorities reflected student interest in seeking meaning about existential questions. A Regression analysis confirmed a core set of topics as predictive of levels of satisfaction. 2. No developmental differences for themes across years 11 and 12 were found within the construct of Topics. 3. Teachers affirmed all Religious Education units of study with the highest rating being for ‘The spiritual and sacred dimension to life’ and ‘Implications of belief’. In addition, teachers indicated that RML supported their understanding and engagement with ‘pastoral care’, ‘appreciation of mission’, and the ‘religious dimension’ of the school.

1.3.4 Research Sub-question 3: What Pedagogical Approaches Were Most Influential? 1. All students emphasised the priority of ‘dialogue’; ‘media and technology’; ‘problem solving’; and ‘peer to peer learning’ as significant influences on their learning. They also gave importance to RML pedagogy which incorporated socially interactive processes which emphasised experiential learning; student and teacher agency; small group learning; relationships; and the integration of Religious Education with service learning. A Regression analysis confirmed a core set of topics as predictive of levels of satisfaction. 2. No developmental differences for themes across years 11 and 12 were found within the construct of Pedagogies. 3. Teachers observed RML as a curriculum initiative that required pedagogical competencies and content familiarisation in relevant and prescribed areas of the curriculum. Support for implementation included the provision of valuable and appropriate resources, and support for the development of competencies from internal and external pesonnel.

1.4 The Educational Experience of RML

5

1.3.5 Research Sub-question 4: What Outcomes Were of Most Significance from the Experience of RML 1. ‘Listening to others’; ‘dialoguing with others’; ‘making connections’; and ‘contributing to community’ were of most significance for students. A Regression analysis confirmed a core set of outcomes as predictive of levels of satisfaction. 2. No developmental differences for themes across years 11 and 12 were found within the construct of Outcomes. 3. ‘Pastoral care’, ‘appreciation of mission’ and the ‘religious dimension of the school’ were significant for teachers. 4. Parents perceived the impact of RML was on the reinforcement of ‘values’.

1.4 The Educational Experience of RML The overall level of satisfaction with RML was consistent and positive. Moreover, as to what influenced Choice and constituted Topics, Pedagogies and Outcomes of significance, the research confirmed RML as an authentic re-imagined Religious Education curriculum for senior secondary students. It was an example of a Reconceptualist Approach through demonstrating adaptability to context while being faithful to mission. As an innovative curriculum it was characterised by four theoretical propositions: formative, relational, educational and interdependent. RML as a formative educational experience: RML mirrors the Catholic school as a place that is founded on a vison of the human person which recognises the dignity of all as made in the image and likeness of God, and the invitation to seek the holistic development of the person within a context of advancing a flourishing humanity. RML as a relational experience: RML involves an appreciation of the individual’s prior learning and associated learning expectations. This primary understanding is coupled with an understanding of the learner in the social context of the classroom, the expectations of the school, and the partnership with parents within the life of the community. RML as a quality educational curriculum: RML incorporates established educational practices which entail relevant and meaningful curriculum of topics, pedagogy and outcomes. These are the essential elements which have been validated as necessary, comprehensive and integral to its effective implementation. RML as an interdependent initiative: RML development and successful implementation was based on multiple and interdependent influences. First, the program engaged personnel within and beyond the school; second, it was aligned with the policy of the school to provide a Religious Education curriculum integral to its mission; third, it was mindful of choice and flexibility in the selection of a Religious Education option; and fourth, it was an initiative that was integrated within the overall life and culture of the school. These theoretical propositions are advance by way of a theoretical model, The educational experience of RML (Chap. 6).

6

1 Research Overview

1.5 Research to Practice Emphases The model for conceptualising RML draws from quantitative and qualitative research across the delivery of the pilot program for two years. The research and the model that accompanies it provides a base for its delivery and continuing effectiveness in its implementation at scale. A Regression analysis confirmed a core set of Topics (Ethics, Other World Religions, Catholic Social Teaching, and Jesus), core set of pedagogical variables (Dialogue, Media and Technology, Peer to Peer Learning, and Solving Problems) and a core set of outcome variables (Listening to others, Dialoguing with others, Making connections and Contributing to community) as predictive of satisfaction levels, and semi partial correlations confirmed the distinctive influence of each of the variables. That is, satisfaction levels could be increased with appropriate curriculum adjustments to Core Topics, Core Pedagogies and Core Outcomes leading to enhanced overall levels of satisfaction with RML. In light of this, implications exist for attention to practices arising from the research (Chap. 7).

1.6 Limitations The study focused on a particular approach to senior school Religious Education in a Catholic school system. In this context, it was conducted in accord with various assumptions. These included the geographical, cultural, social and ecclesial obligations of the Archdiocese within which the research was conducted, expectations as to curriculum quality, the professional learning and competency of teachers, and the invitational nature of the program within school and system ethical provisions. The review of RML was undertaken during the COVID-19 pandemic resulting in no face-to-face interactions with students. In addition, findings from the combination of studies were influenced by initial, and in some cases, small sample sizes. As well, commentary on RML initiatives was contextualised by a progressive and comparatively early stage of implementation. Notwithstanding these limitations, digital face-to-face engagements with students and teachers, together with RML staff and specialist consultants were significant to gathering and analysing the factors of preparation, support (internal and external), curriculum delivery, and outcomes.

References Brisbane Catholic Education. (2019). Religion meaning and life pilot course handbook, version 2. Brisbane Catholic Education. Brisbane Catholic Education. (2020). Religious education curriculum P-12. Retrieved from http:// www.rec.bne.catholic.edu.au/Pages/Religious-Education.aspx.

References

7

Education Council. (2019). Alice springs (Mparntwe) education declaration. Commonwealth Department of Education. Goldburg, P. (2020). Nostalgia and the future of Religious Education in Catholic schools. In Presentation at, the 2nd International Conference on Catholic Religious Education in Schools. Catholic Leadership Centre. National Catholic Education Commission (NCEC). (2018). Religious Education in Australian Catholic Schools: Framing paper. NCEC. Rymarz, R., & Starkey, J. (2021). Only she can teach it! Investigating exemplary RE teachers. Journal of Religious Education, 69, 209–218. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40839-021-00136-8.

Chapter 2

Research Context

Abstract The context for Religious Education is developed through reference to international and national literature. In addition, the history of an innovative Religious Education curriculum in an Australian Catholic school system is presented. This discussion leads to the identification of the research problem, purpose and questions underpinning a Reconceptualist Approach to advancing Religious Education at the senior secondary level. Keywords Australia · Catholic School · Research · Religious Education · Senior Secondary

2.1 Identity and Religious Education The changing profile of students in Catholic schools together with the change in constructs that influence Religious Education provision are argued by Rossiter (2010a, 2010b) as a basis for re-thinking Religious Education. The argument is made that the landscape for Religious Education is impacted by changes in religious practice (e.g., religiosity of students); social changes (e.g., pluralism); institutional change (e.g., de-institutionalisation, the decline in the power of social institutions such as religions); and psychological constructs (e.g., wellbeing) all of which combine to invite new interpretations and emphases in the provision of Religious Education. The challenge of Religious Education becomes one of the educational integration of theological and religious understandings in ways that equip students with capabilities, (knowledge, skills, behaviours and dispositions) for addressing the spiritual and moral issues within life and living. Clarity of purpose, content and pedagogy form the basis of the change out of which constructs of religion, meaning and life can be integrated. Rossiter makes the argument that a new framework for understanding Religious Education is imperative, ‘a big-picture’ approach that takes account of the Tradition while being responsive to social and educational imperatives.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 W. Sultmann et al., Re-imagining Senior Secondary Religious Education, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9180-6_2

9

10

2 Research Context

2.1.1 The National Perspective Education in Australia is based on a ‘democratic, equitable and just society’ (Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs [MCEETYA], 2008, p. 4). Principles of equity and excellence drive the educational agenda centred on students becoming ‘confident and creative individuals, successful lifelong learners, and active and informed members of the community’ (Education Council, 2019, p. 6). Within this overall framework, The Education Goals for Young Australians (Mparntwe) are enunciated as residing in deep knowledge across a range of curriculum areas; promoting the intellectual, physical, social, emotional, moral, spiritual and aesthetic development of students; and students needing to deal with information abundance and navigate questions of trust and authenticity. In essence the national goals seek to empower students to both learn and apply their learning. Religious Education in support of the overall goals of Catholic Education are identified in the Declaration on Christian Education Paul VI, (1965, n. 8) in which the goals of schools being: . places of encounter and deepening relationship with God in Christ. . places where the pursuit of wisdom and truth is encouraged by a supportive academic culture; and, . where schools integrate faith, culture, and life into harmony for the students they meet. The context for this mission within Australia is articulated by the National Catholic Education Commission as one of change: Australian contemporary culture continues to grow and become more diverse, pluralistic and secular. Increasingly, Australian and other western societies experience an erosion of tradition and authority in religion and society and a diminished ability for one generation to pass on traditions to the next…. For some, this is an exciting evolution, adding to the richness of Australian culture, and for others, a challenge, and a sense of loss is experienced as what was once known and understood has been transformed. p. 12

This context becomes very apparent in the educational experience for secondary student. The senior years of schooling are a critical transition point for young people – emotionally, socially and educationally. These years should provide all students with… high quality advice, support and experiences to make informed choices about their future and smooth the initial transition to further education, training or meaningful employment (Education Council, 2019, 9).

The Honourable Jason Clare, Australian Federal Minister for Education and Youth (2022), speaks of contemporary priorities for school renewal and empowering a teacher workforce for educational processes that gives students ‘keys to the kingdom’ or life changing opportunities for themselves and the betterment of society. He underlines the significance of teachers within a new context and the significance of preparing them for the classroom of today.

2.1 Identity and Religious Education

11

It is within this context of national goals for learners, and in view of the distinctive vision and mission of the Catholic school, that the Congregation for Catholic Education (CCE) has long advanced that Catholic schools facilitate these outcomes centred on the person and message of Christ and its application within the contemporary world. Christ is the foundation of the whole enterprise in a Catholic school. His revelation gives new meaning to life and helps to direct thought, action and will according to the Gospel, making the beatitudes the norm of life. (CCE, 1977, para. 34)

More recently, Cardinal Tom Collins (2013), a member of the Congregation for Catholic Education, underlines in his YouTube presentation, the importance of the Christological foundations for Catholic education as educating the whole person. He summarises the challenge as “who we are and what we are committed to”. The response comes as quality of our teaching for a better society informed by a meaning and purpose in life. He summaries Catholic Education as an element of formation in which students acquire wisdom and schools go beyond being factories of knowledge. This is education as formation informed by the Gospel in the light of Christ. It is an appreciation of sharing “the true, the beautiful and the gool as the expression of who God is”. He summaries the challenge as to empowering students “to know, love and serve God”. In short, the intention and delivery of Catholic Education constitutes “a place to stand” and in drawing from the words of Ronald Knox, Collins reiterates, “give me a place to stand and I can change the world”. The sentiments of Collins were reinforced within the Australian context by the Chairperson of the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference Committee, Archbishop Fisher (2022). Within a creative and innovative presentation at the National Conference for Catholic Education, Archbishop Fisher engaged with the image of cooking to reinforce, in practical terms, the nature and somewhat extraordinary mystery and enterprise of Catholic Education. The setting involved a cooking demonstration and the construction of a welcomed and prized dish, that of the souffle. In commenting on the gastronomical success Archbishop Fisher described Catholic education as contributing to the education of the whole person, flavouring the effort within the Catholic Tradition and making it available to all. Moreover, he gave emphasis to the gift as being especially for those who are most needy in our community. In his terms, the recipe for success in Catholic education, lies in education the whole person informed by the message and person of Jesus and offering this to all who would embrace its intentions (Sultmann, 2018). This perspective, coupled with the noticeable joy and hope that accompanied the conversation is summed up in the following: The cooking showcase not only demonstrated how our Catholic schools were setting up young people to follow their passions; it also provided the perfect metaphor to explain how a faith-based education has helped more than half of all Australians “rise” from poverty over the past two centuries. “The genius of Catholic education from its earliest days in the colonies was its egalitarianism. It was there for everyone. Especially to raise up the poorest kids,” Archbishop Fisher said. Like creating a good souffle, a well-rounded Catholic education shows that with time, care and patience, success can be achieved. (CathNews, 9/9/22)

12

2 Research Context

Within the context of the national Catholic education gathering of parents, leaders, teachers and academics, the Archbishop of Melbourne the Most Reverend Peter Comensoli (2022) identified the practice of Catholic education as an encounter with Christ. Engagement with the Catholic school as a learning community invites all to encounter Christ through all that is good, beautiful and true. The Archbishop succinctly summarised the person and message of Jesus and their implications for Catholic education as constituting the essence for practice: “His teachings are our playbook”. In this light Catholic education is a formative process; where education is a call to engage the Spirit of Christ from within and into the richness of the curriculum, particularly that of Religious Education, the religious life of the school, its processes and structures. This comprehensive culture engages all within the “apostolic team” as disciples, who as a community, commit to and engage in a shared vocation. Interestingly, the noticeable pastoral engagement in the post Eucharistic gathering was marked by a relationship where mission was shared, people were valued and connections obvious. It was a wholistic and connected experience. In the Catholic school’s educational project there is no separation between time for learning and time for formation, between acquiring notions and growing in wisdom. The various school subjects do not present only knowledge to be attained, but also values to be acquired and truths to be discovered. All of which demands an atmosphere characterized by the search for truth, in which competent, convinced and coherent educators, teachers of learning and of life, may be a reflection, albeit imperfect but still vivid, of the one Teacher. (CCE, 2022, n. 23)

The identity for Catholic education follows the foundations of the Gospel, the Traditions of the Church and their ongoing engagement with the community the Catholic school serves. Catholic education therefore experiences the movement of the Spirit and exhibits outcomes of this revelation (Gittins, 2022). Gittins goes on to advance the Church as a missional community and operating in a context where outcomes are not known where the process of dialogue provides for the discernment of outcomes. Notwithstanding this outward looking perspective to the school as an ecclesial community, the Dicastery of Catholic Culture and Education (formerly the Congregation for Catholic Education) articulates the principles that present as universal and commit to a platform for continuity as experience interacts with Tradition. Such a process of revelation is inspired by and grounded in the essence of the Tradition which for Craven (2022) underlines the question, “What has Rome got to do with it?” Caution therefore is offered as to the concept of reductionism whereby Catholic schools operate within the oversight and wisdom of the Magisterium and while flexible in their identity are unapologetic as to their Gospel and ecclesial traditions which find expression within the entirety of the curriculum and the witness within community life (CCE, 2022, n. 45–47). This is the process of engagement of the richness of the Tradition and the expectations of the wider community.

2.1 Identity and Religious Education

13

2.1.2 Religious Education The new reality of ‘who is present’ in Catholic schools and the nature of their learning needs and priorities evidence changes in staff and student profiles. The context is argued as one of diversity and inclusion and as such Catholic schools welcome: . those who are Catholic or other Christian learners for whom their faith formation is shared with their families and parishes. . those who are Catholic or from other Christian traditions for whom the Catholic school is their only regular connection with a Christian community. For these students, the Catholic school community may be a place of primary proclamation and for others, new evangelisation. . those from other religious traditions whereby the experience of a Catholic school community may deepen their own faith. . those learners with no religious affiliation for whom the Catholic school community can be a place of first proclamation (NCEC, 2022, p. 12). In this light the goals of student faith formation and religious education interact whereby Catholic schools are committed to the faith formation of all students which: . speaks to the desire for God at the heart of our humanity. . and respects the child and young person as a person in whom the Holy Spirit is already present and as a person with an existing spirituality and agency. . embraces the richness of the Catholic Tradition in respectful dialogue with people’s lives, culture and creation. . invites and leads students to a deepening encounter and relationship with God through Jesus Christ and in the Spirit while respecting the religious identity of students from other faiths. . inspires and empowers students to be witnesses to the Gospel individually and in community to live virtuous and ethical lives59 serving the Reign of God (NCEC, 2022, p.17). . express ‘faith in action’ by involvement in charity, social justice and integral ecology. . engage in new, deeper and renewed participation in Catholic Eucharistic communities or, for those with other religious affiliation, meaningful participation in other faith communities. The Congregation for Catholic Education (2009) has emphasised that the mission of the Catholic school is rooted in the formation of young people and that Religious Education plays a central role in achieving the church’s mission. Religious Education in Catholic schools is not an optional extra but an integral part of the school curriculum because ‘without religious education, pupils would be deprived of an essential element of their formation and personal development, which helps them attain a vital harmony between faith and culture’ (Congregation for Catholic Education, 2009, para. 10). The importance of Religious Education for Catholic schools is reinforced in the National Catholic Education Commission (NCEC) Framing Paper: Religious Education in Australian Catholic Schools (NCEC, 2018); a statement to

14

2 Research Context

complement Diocesan Religious Education curriculum (Costelloe, 2018) with the fundamental and challenging goals of developing: … students’ knowledge and understandings of Christianity in the light of Jesus and the Gospel, and its unfolding story and diversity within contemporary and global society. It expands spiritual awareness and religious identity, fostering their capacity and skills discerning, interpreting, thinking critically, seeking truth and making meaning. It challenges and inspires their service to others and engagement in the Church and the world (NCEC, 2018, p. 7).

Notwithstanding the significance of Religious Education in Australia; the provision is argued to engage three fragile premises: Religious Education builds on the catechetical experience of the home and parish; teachers are well-formed and committed to the faith; and, Religious Education can be offered transmissively in classrooms of diversity (Hall, 2019). The challenge for educators lies in finding ways to contribute effectively to Religious Education of young people in the detraditionalized, pluralised and expressivist cultural context that now depicts many Catholic schools across Australia (ABS, 2016). In short, this challenge involves responding to the signs of the times; revealing how Catholicism is relevant to the contemporary world; critical dialogue between faith and culture; questing for social justice; Christian humanism and humanistic psychology; addressing the real personal and spiritual needs of people; Christian praxis; raising critical consciousness; critical interpretation and evaluation of culture (Hall & Sultmann, 2020). The challenge is further complicated as teachers are manufacturing their own meaning; not necessarily following institutional teaching or authority policies (Kyle-Robinson, 2021). This is the reality of pedagogical practice and emerging creativity that unfolds and shapes the delivery of Religious Education. These movements converge to counter a widespread educational emergency. The latter mainly stems from the breakdown of the “educational compact” among institutions, families and individuals. These tensions also reflect a crisis in the relationship and communication between generations, and a social fragmentation made even more evident by the primacy of indifference. In this context of epochal change, Pope Francis proposes a global compact on education capable of responding to the current “transformation that is not only cultural but also anthropological, creating a new semantics while indiscriminately discarding traditional paradigms”. (CCE, 2022, n. 33)

The importance of dialogue within Religious Education is central (CCE, 2013, 2017, 2022). It is a process of learning together with the goal of meaning making as distinct from engaging certainty. It involves the process of progressive learning, being open to another and being open with the other. Truth “unfolds in the middle space of encounter where boundaries offer time for engagement” (Hyde, 2022). The argument is made: In turn, dialogue, the fruit of knowledge, must be cultivated for people to co-exist and build up a civilization of love. It is not a matter of playing down the truth, but of realizing the aim of education which “has a particular role to play in building a more united and peaceful world. It can help to affirm that integral humanism, open to life’s ethical and religious dimension, which appreciates the importance of understanding and showing esteem for other cultures and the spiritual values present in them.” Within intercultural education, this dialogue aims

2.1 Identity and Religious Education

15

“to eliminate tensions and conflicts, and potential confrontations by a better understanding among the various religious cultures of any given region. It may contribute to purifying cultures from any dehumanizing elements, and thus be an agent of transformation. It can also help to uphold certain traditional cultural values which are under threat from modernity and the levelling down which indiscriminate internationalization may bring with it.” “Dialogue is very important for our own maturity, because in confronting another person, confronting other cultures, and also confronting other religions in the right way, we grow; we develop and mature”. (CCE, 2013, n. 20)

A commitment to dialogue is not to reduce a commitment to the Catholic Christian tradition but rather an approach that involves applying the Tradition in support of conversations that seek the truth and have expression in witness and in relevance for student learning and development. At the same time, it opens the Tradition to new revelations arising from exchanges that place the individual at the centre and the significance of the Spirit to enliven the wisdom of the discussion. It is a process integral to Catholic school Religious Education and wider pastoral practices. …communities that draw their inspiration from the values of the Catholic faith (families, schools, groups, youth organizations, etc.) must give voice and reality to an education truly based around the human person, in line with Christian humanist culture and tradition. There must be new commitment to the individual seen as “person in communion” and a new sense of his or her belonging to society. Otherwise, a looked-for society of free and equal individuals undoubtedly hides the risk of limitless, uncontrolled conflict and ambiguity. (CCE, 2013, n. 46)

Within an assessment of the contemporary delivery of Religious Education in Australia, Rossiter (2022) concluded that “in some quarters of Catholic schooling, there have long been views that overestimated the role of classroom Religious Education in changing young peoples’ beliefs and religious behaviour” (p. 2). He contends that the more realistic approach is to resource young people’s spirituality, morality and Religious Education and so offer them a basis for understanding and empowering their lives irrespective of their religious disposition. Rossiter’s conclusions align with Rymarz et al. (2021) in applying spirituality to the conditions of life and in the process attempting to make a difference by drawing meaning from the Gospel and applying it to contemporary times. In his Foreword, Rymarz identifies three key features of the new era that is opening before us. First, he notes the trend towards individualisation and the weakening of communal bonds especially in relation to participation in religious activities. Second, he highlights the impact of individualisation on religious affiliation; and third, the separation that now exists in the minds of many people between spirituality and formal religious traditions. Each of these features impacts on the classroom teaching of religion in significant ways. In addressing the challenges of a new era, the authors are clear about the necessity of maintaining the “three S’s,” namely that the teaching of Religious Education continues to be serious, systematic, and scholarly. Rymarz et al. (2021) observe that: an educational approach is still the best suited, as its focus on knowledge can address the needs of a diversity of learners, but a changing focus is needed to develop educational approaches that take into account the emerging social realities, but in a way that allows for student growth and collective human flourishing.

16

2 Research Context

2.1.3 Historical Approaches to Religious Education The significance of Religious Education lies in its support to the learner in his or her generation of meaning, purpose and values (Rossiter, 2021). As such it is argued to constitute both an academic discipline and a field of research that is challenged to operate in relation to its Tradition while being outwardly looking in terms of the profile and needs of the learning community within which it is offered (Rossiter, 2021). This position is expressed more fully in a systematic review of the development and emphases in Religious Education in Australia for the period 1960–2022 (Rossiter, 2022). While clarifying the “relationships between Religious Education and young people’s personal development” (p. 22), Rossiter offers an informed understanding of the trajectory of Religious Education considering personal development from a religious perspective. This entails “the enhancement of people’s beliefs, personal faith, values, attitudes and behaviour including religious behaviour” (p. 2.). In brief, Rossiter proposes that Religious Education can possess a narrative of personal influence and “proposes a need to recalibrate the expectations of Religious Education with a more appropriate and realistic account of its role as a school subject that can resource the spirituality and development of young people through the knowledge and skills it can impart” (p. 22). Among a range of ‘best practice’ strategies (p. 20), Rossiter draws attention to matters such as the importance of context, the challenge of perceptions about Religious Education, the significance of teacher beliefs and skills, and the relevance of pedagogy and content specifically in the senior years of schooling. These conclusions are not offered as independent of ‘lessons’ from the past and interpretations within the literature (Crawford & Rossiter, 2006; Rossiter, 1999). Rather, they draw from a rich and engaging history in Religious Education that has been responsive to needs and influences while faithful to the Church Tradition. Rossiter’s goal of generating a “functional narrative of personal influence” (p. 3) for Religious Education presents as imperative when consideration is given to inclusive practices and religious diversity within the classroom; and the necessity of professional practice to engage quality and consistency. In Rossiter’s terms this approach to Religious Education in the context of personal development serves to: Help religion teachers clarify what they are trying to accomplish in both the short and long terms. It helps give perspective, purpose and direction to their teaching. It helps shape reasonable and realistic expectation of what can be achieved in the classroom, and of what is respected as the private inner workings of young people’s minds that are not open to scrutiny. It can affect their choice of content and methods, as well as the questions they ask of students in class, and the sorts of responses they would like to get. It can help them evaluate various theories of Religious Education as well as discern where expectations and practice may be inappropriate and/or unrealistic. It can help them value their own teaching and their profession as religious educators (p. 3).

The exploration of the history of Religious Education in Australia for six decades is developed by Rossiter (2022) by drawing attention to dominant themes and their relevance to personal development. These themes are described as ‘successive approaches’ (p. 5) that are not necessarily discrete and different but rather a statement

2.1 Identity and Religious Education

17

about the ‘contributing influences’ (p. 5) that have informed teachers perspectives and efforts at a particular time, and in some instances, possess a continuing influence. The Rossiter analysis is summarised in Fig. 2.1 in which a breakdown of approaches across sixty years is displayed. Themes

Rationale

Implications & Resources

Era of the Catechism (up to 1965)

Knowledge of Catholic teachings influences young people’s thinking, values and religious behaviour. Sharing personal views could directly affect personal/spiritual development, especially where content was related to young people’s life experience.

Approach harmonised with the socialising religious influence of the school and parish (Baltimore Catechism; My Way to God; Catholic Catechism) Christian spirituality championed by religious congregations gave impetus to life-centred and experiential learning (Come Alive, New Catholic Catechism for Years 11-12; The Renewal of the Education of Faith; Community Development Studies) Developmental stages in faith advanced by James Fowler (1981) catalysed a movement from personal spiritual development to personal faith development. The influence of Herman Lombaerts and Didier Pollefeyt (2004) gave attention to personal/spiritual/social issues for analysis and critical hermeneutical attention The influence of Thomas Groome on Shared Christian Praxis (1991). Sharing Our Story

Life-centred experiential approach (mid 1960’s to 1970’s)

Faith Development and Faith Formation (1976 onwards) Hermeneutic Communicative Model (mid 1970s onwards) Faith developed by sharing of personal faith (1980s onwards) A critical, composite, interfaith model – typology and praxis (1989 onwards) State-based Religion Studies (from 1991 onwards) RE as an academic subject in the curriculum ((1980’s & 1990’s onwards) The Hermeneutic Communicative Model, associated with Catholic identity in schools (2005 onwards) Key Catholic ecclesiastical terms used for describing Religious Education (late 1970s)

The expression and sharing of personal faith in discussions catalysed further development of faith A hermeneutic (interpretive) emphasis for developing ‘competency’ for ‘authentic personal dialogue’, Personal faith story was related to the Christian story leading to a vision including action for social justice. Knowledge and literacy related to religions derived from a study of religious phenomena across religious traditions Knowledge and literacy related to religions derived mainly from descriptive, phenomenological study. A renewed emphasis on academic capabilities such as knowledge, understanding and cognitive skills that could inform personal development A dialectical dialogue with a strong hermeneutic emphasis enhancing ‘competency’ for ‘authentic personal dialogue’ for self-discovery and discovery of others. Faith development, faith formation, evangelisation and ‘new’ evangelisation, Catholic identity, Catholic mission, witnessing

The influence of Terry Lovat (2009) and the process of promoting faith and personal development as ‘enfaithing’ as a composite model giving an inter-faith perspective to student learning Senior secondary and non-denominational curriculum justified on educational grounds (Study of Religion; Religion and Society; Religion and Life; Religion and Philosophy) Religious Education subjected to rigour of regulated curriculum expectations (Faithful to God and faithful to People; Sharing our story; Know Worship and Love) The influence of Pollefeyt (2009) and the process of religious ‘recontextualising’ through re-articulating one’s religious disposition through critical dialogue with challenges in contemporary culture. The terms implied changing people’s personal faith and their religiosity. The argument is made that the multiple terms created unnecessary ambiguity about the purpose and nature of Religious Education.

Fig. 2.1 An overview of Religious Education in Australia 1960–2022

18

2 Research Context

The Rossiter narration of the approaches to Religious Education across the period 1960–2022 is accompanied by commentary on the shifts and emphases influenced by social, Church, theological, and psychological understandings. The progressive emphases identify continuity and discontinuity in practices and the overlap of some approaches in terms of what is considered significant to the delivery of relevant, inclusive and engaging curriculum. While differences of views exist, and priorities and emphases vary across ecclesial and educational jurisdiction, what emerges from the analysis are dominant principles of significance that underpin Religious Education in Australia into the future. These include: . The central place of Religious Education within the mission, life and culture of the Catholic school. . The consistent link within Religious Education between knowledge/understanding and personal/spiritual development as integral to curriculum generally, and within successive curriculum expressions of Religious Education, in particular. . The movement from a catechetical emphasis (catechism era) to a life-centred, experiential, and inclusive approach supportive of the learning needs and priorities of a diverse religious and social population of students. . The influence of the Social Sciences which inform understandings of personal, group and organisational learning all of which impact curriculum development and pedagogy in Religious Education. . The delivery of Religious Education based on teacher competencies appropriate to the complex nature of the subject and its associated pedagogical skills. . Religious Education presented as an interdisciplinary curriculum domain with related scholarship in Scripture, Theology, Ecclesiology, Spirituality, World Religions. . The outcomes of Religious Education involve learning about religion and the place of religion in supporting student spirituality, morality and ethical behaviours. The position of Rossiter (2022, p. 20) draws from an analysis of the historical approaches to Religious Education. It leads him to conclude a ‘best practice’ orientation for Religious Education into the future be characterised by: 1. Religious Education and its relationship to personal/spiritual development is through knowledge, understanding and critical thinking skills 2. Religious Education enhances student’s views of life and of their world with the agency for authentic personal practice residing with the individual 3. Religious educators identify the knowledge and skills that support student construction in their development of spirituality in challenging times and within a complex culture 4. Acceptance of the relationship of personal development with Religious Education as subject to multiple influences. 5. Spiritual and moral content and methods of Religious Education for young people provide knowledge and understanding of their own religious tradition and that of other traditions.

2.2 Religious Education in the Archdiocese of Brisbane

19

6. Religious Education provides skills in the identification, interpretation and evaluation of contemporary spiritual/moral/social issues. 7. The attention to knowledge and critical thinking skills does not need to compromise experiential, student centred and research pedagogies. 8. Discussion and dialogue in the classroom contribute to the above purposes with the desired model being informed debate.

2.2 Religious Education in the Archdiocese of Brisbane The changing focus of educational approaches is evident in more recent curriculum documents issued by dioceses such as Catholic Education Melbourne (2018) and Brisbane Catholic Education (2020).

2.2.1 A Reconceptualist Approach The classroom learning and teaching of religion in the Archdiocese of Brisbane, since 2008, has been characterised by a Reconceptualist Approach. The word ‘reconceptualist’, coined by Kieran Scott (1984), simply means changing the way concepts are used for interpreting or explaining something. The Reconceptualist Approach within the Archdiocese has been associated with an educational framework rather than a catechetical or ‘shared Christian praxis’ framework. This educational orientation is one that positions Religious Education to be a robust academic subject in the school curriculum, alongside other academic subjects, with the personal/spiritual dimension accommodated within it. Rossiter (2018), a strong proponent of an educational approach, states: Classroom religious education is about educating young people spiritually, ethically and religiously. It is not primarily a religious experience, but it is essentially teaching young people about religion, and about spiritual and moral issues, from a Catholic viewpoint. (p. 1)

Similarly, Scott (1984) has argued in the past that “a reconceptualized religious education takes education as its overarching frame of reference. It self-consciously works out of an educational rather than ministerial framework”. He says that “it is the way we go about understanding our own religious tradition, convictions and our God over against the religious identity of ‘the other,’ the stranger” (p. 333). Building on this further, Gabriel Moran distinguishes between the classroom learning of religion and the practice of religion (Moran, 1981, p. 37). Moran (1981) and Harris and Moran (1992) are in agreement that “an education that deserves to be characterised as religious would have to include two quite distinct things: (1) an understanding of religion, starting but not ending with one’s own religion; and (2) access to the free and intelligent practice of a particular form of religious life” (Moran, 1981, p. 21).

20

2 Research Context

2.2.2 P-12 Religious Education The content of the Religion Curriculum P-12 (Brisbane Catholic Education, 2020) is organised into four interrelated strands: Sacred texts, Beliefs, Church and Christian life. Each strand has its own distinctive body of knowledge. It is anticipated that planning for the classroom learning and teaching of Religion would balance and integrate all four strands within and across different units of work. The senior secondary religion curriculum builds on the prior learning in Prep to Year 10. It allows opportunities for students to consolidate and expand on what they have learned in previous years. Hence, the four interrelated strands of Sacred Texts, Beliefs, Church and Christian Life also underpin the senior secondary curriculum and assists in identifying core content that is required to be taught and that students should learn. In senior secondary, students in Catholic schools in the Archdiocese of Brisbane can choose from a suite of religion offerings. These include Study of Religion (SOR), Religion and Ethics (R&E), Compass and Compass Plus (C&C+) and Religion, Meaning and Life (RML). While SOR, R&E and C&C+ are state accredited courses that may contribute toward a tertiary entrance score, RML is a non-accredited religious education course that does not contribute to a tertiary entrance score. The Religious Education Curriculum P-12 (2013, 2020) used in the Archdiocese of Brisbane embraces the two dimensions of religious education identified by Moran (1981). It identifies what it calls “the distinct and complementary nature” of teaching people religion and teaching people to be religious in a particular way. It draws on Moran and uses the two dimensions identified by him as the basic framework for Religious Education (RE) in the Archdiocese of Brisbane: The Vision for Religious Education is realised through the intersection of both dimensions. Hence, the Religious Education classroom is identified as being the primary domain where students are taught ‘about’ religion while the religious life of the school is viewed as the primary domain where students are taught the practice of a particular form of religious life. As a result, religion in the classroom is primarily understood to be an academic pursuit, not necessarily an arena for explicit and planned faith formation, which is fully consistent with a Reconceptualist Approach, as defined above. The P-12 Religious Education curriculum in the Archdiocese of Brisbane provides an academic foundation to an understanding of the Catholic Christian Tradition in addition to other religious traditions. However, one of the challenges that has presented itself, particularly in the senior secondary space, is that the place of faith formational objectives is not always clear. Rossiter (2018) defines direct and explicit faith formation as “an activity that intentionally sets out to change the personal beliefs and commitments of individuals”. Rather than setting out to intentionally “change the beliefs and commitments of individuals,” (p. 90) indirect and implicit faith formation is an invitation, through dialogue, to consider the beliefs and commitments of other individuals, alongside of one’s own. It invites students to be open to the contribution that these beliefs and commitments might make to an articulation of what is true. This is the goal of faith formation, or what might be better called personal meaning-making. Rossiter (2018, p. 96) argues that “there is a need to re-orient

2.2 Religious Education in the Archdiocese of Brisbane

21

Catholic school Religious Education more in the direction of trying to enhance the basic human spirituality of young people, whether or not they engage with Catholicism”. Consequently, if educators are to be successful in engaging young people in the Religious Education classroom, then, Religious Education classes become both places of robust academic learning and places of robust personal meaning-making.

2.2.3 Re-Imagining Religious Education in the Secondary School The nature of Religious Education in the contemporary Catholic school continues to respond to trends of pluralisation and detraditionalisation. The educational situation is one which invites approaches which are faithful to the tradition, responsive to community expectation and sensitive to student needs and priorities (Rossiter, 2015, 2018). The initiative of RML is one example of creative ways forward in Religious Education called for in the literature (e.g., Hall & Sultmann, 2020) which incorporate dynamic approaches that seek the integration of societal, ecclesial and educational influences on RE. The processes typically reflect a movement away from a neoliberal understanding of schooling as primarily a process of instruction (Middleton, 2021) to an understanding of education as a process which shapes and molds an individual to participate fully and flexibly in the world of today. The task entails ‘creating spaces for learning’ in contrast to ‘doing to’ or ‘instructing about’ (see Middleton, 2021). This is particularized in the Catholic school where the teaching of Religious Education is challenged to be responsive to the Tradition and respectful of the unique profiles of its students. As far back as 1990, there was recognition that changes were occurring in relation to senior secondary schooling in Queensland. The Viviani Report (1990) identified the need for multiple pathways for students given that 70% of students were completing Year 12 and looking to complete some form of post-secondary education. Although the report focussed primarily on tertiary entrance procedures, it had an impact on curriculum delivery in the senior school with an increasing variety of subjects being offered to students in Queensland. For Religious Education (RE), two pathways were available to students. The first pathway was designed for students who intended going to university for post-secondary education. For these students, Study of Religion (Craig, 2009, 2010) became the preferred option. The second pathway was designed for students who intended going to TAFE or joining the workforce in the post-secondary Years. Religion and Ethics was developed to meet the needs of these students. However, during the next twenty years, mixed and blended pathways emerged to deal with the increasingly diverse world opening to young people in the early 21st century. During this time, a third course of study emerged that aligned with developments in Vocational Education and Training. Certificate III/IV in Christian Ministry was added to the Religious Education offerings for senior secondary students. The three courses came to form a suite of studies in Religious Education.

22

2 Research Context

Each of these courses were accredited with the relevant Queensland educational authorities (for example, the Queensland Curriculum and Assessment Authority) and, as such, contributed to a student’s Queensland Certificate of Education. The history of Religious Education curriculum change across three decades (1990–2020) included the widening of options in Religious Education and the introduction of the Australian Tertiary Admission Rank (ATAR) system in Queensland for determining entrance to higher education. In response to parent and student interests, flexible pathways for studying Religious Education were endorsed in accord with two conditions. First, the affirmation that the Archdiocesan Religious Education Curriculum P-12 (Brisbane Catholic Education, 2013) was the authoritative source for curriculum development; and second; under certain circumstances and as required, endorsement was given to the development of flexible delivery options of accredited courses in that would contribute to a student’s Certificate of Education. This was commensurate with the 2018 NCEC Religious Education in Australian Catholic Schools Framing Paper document in which it was argued that accredited and non-accredited Religious Education programs can be used to teach Religious Education—“The curriculum in the senior years offers various pathways for students, including state-accredited courses that enable deeper understanding of Christianity and empathetic study of other religions” (p. 19). Against this background of student choice and community diversity, approval was given to explore an alternative Archdiocesan non-accredited senior secondary Religious Education course which would not contribute to a student’s Queensland Certificate of Education. However, it would continue to educate and form students “who are challenged to live the gospel of Jesus Christ and who are literate in the Catholic and broader Christian tradition so that they might participate critically and authentically in faith contexts and wider society” (Brisbane Catholic Education, 2013, p.10). During late 2018 and all of 2019, a writing group was established to develop the new course which was titled Religion, Meaning and Life. The writing group comprised Education Officers from Brisbane Catholic Education, APREs and teachers from Brisbane Catholic Education schools, APREs and teachers from Religious Institute schools and included, in an advisory capacity, a member of the La Salle Academy from Australian Catholic University. The development of RML curriculum carried with it an appreciation that young people are confronted by complexities, dilemmas and conflicting interpretations of life’s meaning and purpose. The assumption was that students require, more than ever, critical thinking skills to navigate an uncertain and pluralistic world. The overall goal of RML was for students to experience “an opportunity to access quality theological material in multiple learning modes and engage in a variety of religious experiences and service-learning opportunities” (Brisbane Catholic Education, 2019, p. 1). Further, the “opportunity for a personal response to key religious ideas through dialogue and an evaluation of a range of secular perspectives will be offered” (Brisbane Catholic Education, 2019, p. 1). Learning in Religion, Meaning and Life builds on P-10 Religious Education Curriculum (Brisbane Catholic Education, 2013). Within Religion, Meaning and Life, students in Year 11-12 complete four units of work (two per year), 50 hours per unit. Each unit consists of two

2.2 Religious Education in the Archdiocese of Brisbane

23

topics, 25 hours per topic. There are three modes of delivery – for each topic within respective units, students complete a minimum equivalent of 10 hours of face-to-face learning, 10 hours of self-directed learning and 5 hours of Service Learning, Experiential Learning and Ritual and Reflective Practice. This fulfills the Archdiocesan requirement that students complete, a minimum of 2.5 hours a week or 92-100 hours per year of religious education. (Brisbane Catholic Education, 2013, p. 13)

Integral to the content of the course structure were the guiding principles that directed the generation of content, guided the nature of pedagogy and identified outcomes of significance. Content was established across four units: 1 The Spiritual and Sacred dimension to Life; 2 Holy Words, Sacred Stories; 3 The Implications of Belief; 4 Church: Learning from the past, living in the present, creating the future. Pedagogical methods centred on face-to-face Learning; self-directed learning and a combination of service learning, experiential learning, ritual and reflective practice (see Course Handbook, 2021). In summary terms, the teaching and learning process entailed specific objectives; inclusion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives, entailed World Religions and secular perspectives; and embraced a Reconceptualist Approach as a model for RE. Avoidance of presumptive language; teaching about the tradition; the application of powerful pedagogies; and the role of the teacher as specialist, moderator and witness were emphasised. Appendix E provides a detailed summary of the course characteristics and an overview of unit content is given in Appendix F. Summarising the overall pilot process, Archbishop Coleridge points to the parameters for concentration and continuing renewal. This project is the beginning of a new era in the way we conceptualise and teach Religious Education. To enter new territory will require imagination, courage and, above all, faith. It will mean letting go of old baggage as we set out, like Abraham, on a new journey led by God. My prayers are with all of you as we set out on the great adventure of opening the infinite treasures of Jesus Christ to the young people whom we are called to serve. (Coleridge, 2020)

2.2.4 Religion, Meaning and Life: Curriculum Overview The Framing Paper-Religious Education in Australian Catholic Schools identifies the provision of various pathways for students in the senior years as one feature of high-quality religious education. Religion, Meaning and Life is a non-accredited option that students in Senior School may choose, from among the suite of available courses, to fulfil the requirements of the Brisbane Archdiocese for quality religious education until the end of Year 12. Religion Meaning and Life is founded upon the educational dimensions of objectives, content, pedagogy and outcomes. The process assumes that students enter the program having been assessed to meet the requirements and having the necessary prerequisites (Fig. 2.2).

24

2 Research Context

Requirements & Prerequisites

Objectives

Content

Pedagogy

Outcomes Fig. 2.2 An overview of parameters shaping the RML curriculum

2.2.4.1

Requirements and Prerequisites

Requirements Student entry into this course will be through the school’s usual SETP Processes. As a result, students will need to be able to explain why this course best suits their needs. If students undertake this course, it is expected that they: . Will be able to manage their time and consistently complete course requirements in terms of mandated hours and tasks which will be stored in an online folio. . Will be able to meet agreed check-in deadlines set for the completion of aspects of the course, including Learnings for Life Portfolio. . Will be open to engaging in the Service-Learning, Experiential Learning and Ritual and Reflective Practice offered at school and in the wider community which form part of the course. . Will complete all course requirements in relation to mandated hours: – completing the equivalent of 10 h (minimum) of face-face learning per topic – completing the equivalent of 10 h (minimum) of self-directed learning per topic – completing the equivalent of 5 h (minimum) in Service-Learning, Experiential Learning and Ritual and Reflective Practice per topic. Prerequisites When considering Religion, Meaning and Life as an option for studying religion in the senior secondary years, it is important that the following pre-requisites be considered: (a) Familiarity with concepts from Year 10 Religion. (b) Self-motivated and able to negotiate and design an individualised path of study from the choices offered within the course. (c) Ability to manage time effectively and complete course requirements in terms of mandated hours and tasks. (d) Capacity for independent, self-directed learning.

2.2 Religious Education in the Archdiocese of Brisbane

2.2.4.2

25

Objectives

Engagement with Religion, Meaning and Life may develop students’ twenty first century skills of critical thinking, creative thinking, communication, collaboration and teamwork, personal and social skills and information and communication technologies skills (ICT). Students may develop an ability to engage in an open narrative and dialogue with other religious traditions as well as their own. This course meets the Archdiocesan requirements for quality Religious Education in Senior Secondary Years, is rigorous but differs in modes of delivery and content presentation. The course monitors student progress and achievement by way of ongoing evidence of learning opportunities in which students demonstrate their learning in a variety of modes. By the conclusion of the course of study, students will be able to: 1. Identify that religions, religious traditions and other belief systems are both diverse and internally pluralistic. 2. Demonstrate a post-critical understanding of religious ideas, narratives and practices within respective religious traditions and the recontextualising of meaning within a contemporary context. 3. Understand that horizons of meaning shift, historically speaking, requiring that the deeper questions about life’s meaning and purpose be asked in accordance with the prevailing horizon of meaning. 4. Reflect on and evaluate diverse hermeneutical viewpoints enabling a critical and productive encounter of belief system and context. 5. Develop skills that contribute to dialogue with alternative religious and secular narratives and discourses in accordance with the hermeneutical-communicative model. 6. Apply learnings through focused engagement in the religious life of the school via Service-Learning, Experiential Learning and Ritual and Reflective Practice. 7. Develop and demonstrate effective time-management and self-monitoring skills. 8. Produce artefacts that typify and reflect a range of deep learnings across the course content. 2.2.4.3

Content

Learning in Religion, Meaning and Life builds on P-10 Religious Education Curriculum . Within Religion, Meaning and Life, students in Year 11–12 complete four units of work (two per year), 50 h per unit. Each unit consists of two topics, 25 h per topic. There are three modes of delivery—for each topic within respective units, students complete a minimum equivalent of 10 h of face to face learning, 10 h of selfdirected learning and 5 h of Service-Learning, Experiential Learning and Ritual and Reflective Practice. This fulfils the Archdiocesan requirement that students complete a minimum of 2.5 h a week or 92–100 h per year of religious education. Figure 2.3 outlines the structure of this course of study.

26

2 Research Context

Unit 1

Unit 2

The Spiritual and Holy Words, Sacred Sacred Stories dimension to Life

1. How does the Sacred and Spiritual make meaning for us? 2. How do we make meaning of the Incarnation today?

1. How can ancient words create meaning in contemporary contexts? 2. How about edited sacred texts with the best of every religious tradition?

Unit 3 The Implications of Belief

1. Religion and the fun bits of life go together like …? 2. Religion in the public square: Where and how does the conversation confront and challenge?

Unit 4 Church: Learning from the past, living in the present, creating the future 1. How might religious communities contribute to personal religious faith? 2. Being spiritual and not religious – How can this be? OR Identity and Meaning: How do people construct personal identity and community in a consumerist culture?

Fig. 2.3 A summary of RML content

2.2.4.4

Pedagogy

The hermeneutical-communicative model is “confessionally bound” and “based on a preferential option for the Roman Catholic narrative”. However, this narrative is not closed and needs to be open to expansion, deepening and change. The hermeneuticalcommunicative model identifies that the essence of a human being consists in the ability to transcend his or her own reality through dialogue and come to a new understanding as a result. This is particularly important within contemporary culture due to the multicultural and pluralistic forces which shape it. Within the dialogical process, being open to the belief systems of others is called the “hermeneutical space”. “One of the tasks of Religious Education is to allow children and young people to discover this hermeneutical space within themselves and others”. The hermeneutical space allows for diverse and divergent horizons of meaning to connect and intersect and this leads to a recontextualising of the Catholic tradition, as well as other religious and secular ideas for students.

2.2 Religious Education in the Archdiocese of Brisbane

27

A pivotal feature of Religion, Meaning and Life is the importance given to dialogue as a primary mode for encountering the other. The other is identified as that which is situated beyond the horizon of personal experience and a personal world view. Within the classroom, students are invited to be open to an encounter with the other in the theological material explored, the relationships within the classroom and in the opportunities for Service-Learning, Experiential Learning and Ritual and Reflective Practice provided. It is anticipated that the intersection of distinct human experiences and world views will facilitate the development of a recontextualised understanding of meaning and purpose informed by the Catholic Tradition. . Face to Face: (FTF)—minimum 10 h per topic . Self-Directed Learning (SDL)—minimum 10 h per topic . Service-Learning, Experiential Learning and Ritual and Reflective Practice— minimum 5 h per topic. Characteristics of the Course . Ongoing and monitored Evidence of Learning . Specific focus on dialogue and Post-Critical Belief . Intentional inclusion of Service-Learning, Experiential Learning and Ritual and Reflective Practice within mandated hours . Student-centred curriculum . Co-creation of Course: While there is core curriculum to be covered, there is opportunity for negotiating curriculum . Promotes self-motivation and self-monitoring—a real life skill. Avoidance of Presumptive Language In a Reconceptualist approach, teachers of Religion, Meaning and Life avoid using presumptive language and do not start with assumptions about students’ faith development based upon religious affiliation. It is preferable that teachers use language that is invitational and educational to engage students in the religion classroom. Students who can readily identify themselves as Catholics are affirmed by this approach. Further, when using non-presumptive language, teachers provide students with the freedom to respond in ways that do not assume a programmed response. Teaching ‘about’ the Tradition In teaching about the Catholic Christian tradition, teachers of Religion, Meaning and Life give witness to the value they place on their personal beliefs as much by the authenticity of the teaching processes they employ, as by who they are as people in search of meaning and purpose. Teachers of Religion, Meaning and Life are challenged to build critical distance between themselves and the content they are teaching; to make available space for authentic dialogue; to allow students the freedom to investigate, to inquire and to use their religious imagination. Subsequently, teachers and students may return to their respective religious traditions with enhanced understanding.

28

2 Research Context

The flexible, online, self-directed nature of the course requires the teacher to be a specialist in content as well as being an enabler of the flexible design and delivery of the course. It requires the teacher, more explicitly, to assume the role of “witness, specialist and moderator (WSM) during the learning process”. Powerful Pedagogies A Reconceptualist approach requires powerful pedagogies that engage students with the rich resources of the tradition. In Religion, Meaning and Life the religion teacher acknowledges the reality of students’ lives, identifies learners’ levels of thinking and builds on the attributes each student brings to the religion classroom. Teachers are challenged to incorporate powerful questioning pedagogy, within the context of a community of thinking, that stimulates and supports genuine, active and authentic student engagement. Consequently, an inquiry method is at the heart of any learning experience within Religion, Meaning and Life. In order to facilitate the use of powerful pedagogies, four ‘Learning Spaces,’ based on the model developed by David Thornburg, are integrated into the learning experiences for each topic within respective units. These four spaces are: . Campfire: Didactic presentation by teacher—home to the lecture. . Watering Hole: Social Learning among peers—home to dialogue. . Cave: Reflective Learning—home to cognitive construction of understanding of individual learner. . Life: The meaningful application of things learned as a demonstration of knowledge and skills acquired. A pivotal feature of Religion, Meaning and Life is the importance given to dialogue as a primary mode for encountering the other. The other is identified as that which is situated beyond the horizon of personal experience and a personal world view. Within the classroom, students are invited to be open to an encounter with the other in the theological material explored, the relationships within the classroom and in the opportunities for Service-Learning, Experiential Learning and Ritual and Reflective Practice provided. It is anticipated that the intersection of distinct human experiences and world views will facilitate the development of a recontextualised understanding of meaning and purpose informed by the Catholic Tradition. Hermeneutical intersections (tensions and conflicting interpretations) can be exploited using the following pedagogical structure: . Teacher as specialist: Revealing—recognising and expressing hermeneutical intersections—that different interpretations of ideas and texts are possible. . Teacher as moderator: Mobilising—establishing a classroom context of openended discussion in which it is understood that ideas and texts can be interpreted in many ways. . Teacher as moderator: Communicating—entering into conversation about ideas and texts, going in-depth and making room for difference.

2.3 Research Overview

29

. Teacher as specialist and moderator: Consolidating—capturing the moment from communication to insight as a result of multiple interpretations. Presenting results of communication process. . Teacher as witness: Integrating—students are invited towards maximal integration of lesson content/discussion in their own lives. As Pope Francis has stated, dialogue is not merely about “posing the problems but also in searching together for ways to resolve them”. The implementation of RML commenced in 2019 across two schools: a coeducational systemic school and a single sex Religious Institute school. Following the success of the trial program, the course moved into a pilot phase in 2020 where the program was implemented in a further eleven schools. During 2021, the number of pilot schools grew to 17. At the time of the movement into the formal pilot implementation, independent research was commissioned by Brisbane Catholic Education and the La Salle Academy within Australian Catholic University proceeded to collaborate with the Archdiocese on the research design and implementation across two further years.

2.3 Research Overview The commissioned research drew from initial review of discussion of trial RML in two schools of the Archdiocese. As a consequence, the research problem was identified, and the research purpose and sub-questions generated.

2.3.1 Terminology Thomas Groome (1980) in the acclaimed text Christian Religious Education introduces the discussion of Religious Education by nominating three assumptions about Education, and in the following chapter, underlines the significance of terminology in “coming to terms”. Education is argued as continuing and pervasive, as “old as human consciousness” (p. 5); the phenomenon entailing “the present process being realized” (p. 6); and the concept of “not yetness” as the “point to which the leading is done” (p. 6). In this light, Religious Education draws from the past, engages the present and anticipates the future. The examination and discussion of Religious Education theory and practice are encouraged to consider “coming to terms” (p.20) in order that there exists a reference point, a basis for discussion. However, Groome’s caution is clear: “there is nothing like a universally agreed upon definition of the enterprise. Actually, for such a complex activity, there could never be anything like one precise and exhaustive description. There are, of course, a myriad of definitions available, some well-known and others less” (p. 20).

30

2 Research Context

Within the discussion of Religion, Meaning and Life curriculum the following understandings have been applied (see Fig. 2.4) as a basis for consistency of discussion within the work and as a starting point for offering boundaries to what are multiple concepts and understandings. For the purposes of this work the terms Education, Catholic Education, Curriculum, Religious Education, Christian Religious Education, Catechesis, Educational Constructs within Religious Education (Religious Educational Constructs), and Themes are identified in support of the discussion. The discussion as to the significance of terms and understandings is concluded by Groome (1980) with two caveats. First, that “problems can be solved if we find the right words” (p. 28) and the suggestion that “we resist the temptation to insist that everyone else use his or her own language under penalty from the community” (p. 26). In short, Groome advances that terminology should not get in the way of dialogue over what is a common concern and yet it is nonetheless significant as a basis for discussion though presentation of a consistent platform from which dialogue can flow.

2.3.2 Researching Religious Education Religious Education research is argued to be an academic discipline and field of research that is interdisciplinary (Rossiter, 2021, p. 4). Its focus is said to incorporate “what it means to educate people spiritually, morally and religiously” (p. 4). Rossiter makes the point that the discipline of Religious Education has been fluid and flexible in ways it has adapted to new contexts and hence definitions of its expression have changed “over time in different contexts” (p. 4). Moreover, variations relate to variations in teachings by different religious traditions; age ranges of students; national educational philosophies and priorities; religious profiles of participants; curriculum emphases and accreditation practices; and, practicing and non-practicing profiles of students. The conclusion of Moran (1989) summarises the diversity and the challenge in that the delivery of Religious Education is “inter-institutional, inter-generational, inter-religious, and international). The nature of research on Religious Education is argued as an interdisciplinary process entailing an analysis that recognises three integrated dimensions (Rossiter, 2021, p. 5). First, is the appreciation that Religious Education recognises the formative influences and sources of meaning for the student; the influence of culture which includes religion, theology, scripture, media and social groups, and the family and educational and experiential processes. The second domain of the research rests in the spirituality of children, young people and adults and the contemporary search for personal meaning and identity, for religious faith and moral life; personal development and religious practice. The third domain lies in the practice and implications in spiritual, moral and religious education, and church ministry. In this latter domain, the influence of curriculum theory, curriculum development and evaluation, student learning, pedagogy, teacher professional development are identified.

2.3 Research Overview

31

Term Education

Understanding

Catholic Education

…a place of integral education of the human person through a clear educational project of which Christ is the foundation; its ecclesial and cultural identity, its mission of education as a work of love; its service to society (Congregation for Catholic Education, 1988, n. 4). (The Catholic school) … fulfils a service of public usefulness and, although clearly and decidedly configured in the perspective of the Catholic faith, is not reserved to Catholics only, but is open to all those who appreciate and share its qualified educational project (Congregation for Catholic Education, 1998, para. 16). “To run a set course … An object and an action … what eventuates through the teaching student engagement, meaningful connections with student’s lives and relationship building that are inherent parts of the learning process” (Churchill, Godinho, Johnson ...& Vick, 2016, p.189). “A deliberate attending to the transcendent dimension of life by which a conscious relationship to an ultimate ground of being is being promoted and enabled to come to expression” (Groome, 1980, p.22) “A political activity with pilgrims in time that deliberately and intentionally attends with them to the activity of God in our present, to the Story of the Christian faith community, and to the vision of God’s Kingdom, the seeds of which are already present” (Groome, 1980, p.25). “The activity of re-echoing or retelling the story of Christian faith that has been handed down (Groome, 1980, p.27). “Catechesis is an essential part of the broader process of renewal that the Church is called to bring about in order to be faithful to the command of Jesus Christ to proclaim always and everywhere his Gospel” [Mt. 28:19] (Pontifical Council for the promotion of the new evangelisation (2020, n. 1). Overall dimensions of educational practice (Goals, Topics, Pedagogies, Outcomes) that serve to categorise multiple themes of understandings and approaches within the Religious Education curriculum. Main Ideas and concepts within Religious Education curriculum constructs.

The Catholic School

Curriculum

Religious Education Christian Religious Education Catechesis

Religious Education Constructs Themes

The nature of education lies precisely in being able to lay the foundations for peaceful dialogue and allow the encounter between differences with the primary objective of building a better world. It is, first and foremost, an educational process where the search for a peaceful and enriching coexistence is rooted in the broader concept of the human being - in his or her psychological, cultural and spiritual aspects - free from any form of egocentrism and ethnocentrism, but rather in accordance with a notion of integral and transcendent development both of the person and of society (CCE, 2017, para. 15).

Fig. 2.4 An overview of Religious Education in Australia 1960–2022

32

2 Research Context

2.3.3 Research Problem The introduction of RML arose from practical and theoretical considerations within some senior secondary colleges within the Archdiocese of Brisbane. The independent research that was commissioned to explore this trial, sought to address the reception of the initiative by students, teachers and parents.

2.3.4 Research Purpose The research purpose was to explore the perceptions of students, teachers and parents of the Religion Meaning and Life (RML) curriculum initiative in the pilot schools of the Archdiocese of Brisbane.

2.3.5 Research Question What was the overall level of satisfaction with RML by students, teachers and parents? The term ’satisfaction’ denotes that for the key stakeholders of students, parents and teachers, the RML course satisfies the following requirements: . it is academically rigorous . it presents content relevant to the life experience of students . it employs pedagogies that engage students in meaningful learning.

References Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2016). Census population and housing, 1996, 1991, 2016. Retrieved from https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/Lookup/by%20Subject/2071.0~201 6~Main%20Features~Snapshot%20of%20Australia,%202016~2. Brisbane Catholic Education. (2013). Religious education curriculum P-12. Retrieved form https:// cspqld.schoolzineplus.com/religious-education-curriculum-p-12. Brisbane Catholic Education. (2019). Religion meaning and life pilot course handbook, version 2. Brisbane Catholic Education. Brisbane Catholic Education. (2020). Religious education curriculum P-12. Retrieved form http:// www.rec.bne.catholic.edu.au/Pages/Religious-Education.aspx. Catholic Education Melbourne. (2018). Religious education curriculum framework documentation (Draft). Melbourne: Archdiocese of Melbourne. Clare, J. (2022). Keynote presentation. National Catholic Education Conference: The future is listening. Melbourne 4–7 September – Live and Virtual. Coleridge, M. (2020). The shape of religious education: Letter from the archbishop of Brisbane Retrieved form http://www.rec.bne.catholic.edu.au/The%20Shape%20of%20Religious% 20Education/Pages/Letter-from-the-Archbishop-of-Brisbane.aspx.

References

33

Collins, T. (2013). Educating the whole person: Our hope for Catholic education. Lectures in Catholic experience. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlyJUCVWV3s. Comensoli, P. A. (2022). Homily: Liturgy of the eucharist. N National Catholic Education Conference: The future is listening. Live and Virtual. Congregation for Catholic Education. (1977). The Catholic School. St Paul Publications. Congregation for Catholic Education (CCE). (2009). Circular letter to the presidents of Biships’ conferences on Religious Education in shcools. Retrieved from https://www.vatican.va/ roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20090505_circ-ins egn-relig_en.html Congregation for Catholic Education. (2013). Educating to intercultural dialogue in Catholic schools: Living in harmony for a civilization of love. Retrieved from https://www.vatican.va/ roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20131028_dialogointerculturale_en.html. Congregation for Catholic Education. (2022). The identity of the Catholic school for a culture of dialogue. Retrieved from https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/docume nts/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20220125_istruzione-identita-scuola-cattolica_en.html. Costelloe, T. (2018). Foreword. In Framing paper religious Education in Australian Catholic Schools. NCEC. Craig, M. (2009). Study of Religion and its relevance in the post-modern age. Journal of Catholic School Studies, 81(1), 41–52. Craig, M. (2010). From phenomenology to multiliteracy: Exploring more effective models for teaching Study of Religion in post-modern context. Journal of Catholic School Studies, 82(2), 59–72. Craven, G. (2022). What does Rome have to do with it? In National Catholic Education Conference: The Future is Listening. Live and Virtual. Crawford, M., & Rossiter, G. (2006). Reasons for living: Education and young people’s search for meaning, identity and spirituality. Australian Council for Educational Research. Congregation for Catholic Education. (2017). Educating to fraternal humanism: Building a civilization of love 50 years after Populorum Progressio. Retrieved from https://www.vatican.va/ roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20170416_educareumanesimo-solidale_en.html#:~:text=Education%20to%20fraternal%20humanism%20deve lops%20cooperation%20networks%20in,among%20students%20as%20regards%20learning% 20methods%20and%20. Education Council. (2019). Alice springs (Mparntwe) education declaration. Commonwealth Department of Education. Fisher, A. (2022). Recipe for success. In National Catholic Education Conference: The Future is Listening. Live and Virtual. Gittins, A. (2022). The future is listening the future is here to stay. In National Catholic Education Conference: The Future is Listening. Live and Virtual. Groome, T. H. (1980). Christian religious education: Sharing our story and vision. Harper and Row. Hall, D. (2019). Dean’s reflection. In La Salle academy newsletter. ACU. Hall, D., & Sultmann, W. F. (2020). Ways forward in Religious Education: Reflections of an Australian colloquium. eJournal of Catholic Education in Australasia, 4(1), 1–23. Harris, M., & Moran G. (1992). Catechetical language and religious education. [In English]. Theology Today, 49(1), 21. Hyde, B. (2022). Claiming the Angles and the Saints for the truth: A focus on phenomenology. Invitational Colloquium: Global Researchers Advancing Catholic Education (GRACE). Kyle-Robinson, J. (2021). Teachers in Catholic secondary schools and the new evangelisation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Australian Catholic University. Middleton, M. (2021). For the love of teaching: A plea for trust and engagement. Busybird.

34

2 Research Context

Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA). (2008). Melbourne declaration on educational goals for young Australians. Retrieved from http:// www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_resources/National_Declaration_on_the_Educational_Goals_ for_Young_Australians.pdf. Moran, G. (1981). Interplay: A theory of religion and education. St Mary’s PR. Moran, G. (1989). Religious education as a second language. Religious Education Press. National Catholic Education Commission (NCEC). (2018). Religious Education in Australian Catholic Schools: Framing Paper. NCEC. National Catholic Education Commission. (2022). A Framework for student faith formation in Catholic Schools. National Catholic Education Commission. Paul VI. (1965). Declaration on Christian Education. Gravissimum Educationis. Retrieved from https://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_1 9651028_gravissimum-educationis_en.html. Rossiter, G. (1999). Historical perspective on the development of Catholic Religious Education in Australia: Some implications for the future. Journal of Religious Education, 47(1), 5–18. Rossiter, G. (2010a). A case for a big-picture re-orientation of K-12 Australian Catholic Religious Education in the light of contemporary spirituality. Journal of Religious Education, 58(3), 25–36. Rossiter, G. (2010b). Religious education and the changing landscape of spirituality: Through the lens of change in cultural meanings. Journal of Religious Education, 58(2), 25–36. Rossiter, G. (2015). A case for a big picture re-orientation of K-12 Australian Catholic School Religious Education in the light of contemporary spirituality. The person and the challenges. The Journal of Theology, Education, Canon Law and Social Studies (inspired by Pope John Paul II), 5(2), 5–32. Rossiter, G. (2018). Life to the full—The changing landscape of contemporary spirituality: Implications for Catholic School Religious Education. Agora. Rossiter, G. (2021). Religious education as an academic discipline, and consequently as a recognised, functional field of research. In The Australian Network Meeting of Global Researchers Advancing Catholic Education (GRACE). Retrieved from February 16, 2021, https://asmre.org/ grace.html. Rossiter, G. (2022). Clarifying links between the religion curriculum and young peoples personal development. Retrieved from https://asmre.org/ReligiousEducationAndPersonalDevelopmentRossiter.pdf. Rymarz, R., Engebretson, K., & Hyde, B. (2021). Teaching Religious Education in Catholic Schools: Embracing a new era. Garratt Publishing. Scott, K. (1984). Three traditions of religious education. Religious Education, 79(3), 323–339. https://doi.org/10.1080/0034408400790302. Sultmann, W. F. (2018). Cornerstone: Encountering the spirit of Christ in the Catholic School. Coventry Press.

Chapter 3

Commonality of Trends in Religious Education

Abstract The context for Religious Education is developed through reference to international and national literature. In addition, the history of an innovative Religious Education curriculum in an Australian Catholic school system is presented. This discussion leads to the identification of the research problem, purpose and questions underpinning a Reconceptualist Approach to advancing Religious Education at the senior secondary level. Keywords Australia · Catholic · Religious Education · School · Curriculum · Reconceptualist · Senior secondary

3.1 Context for Religious Education The context for Religious Education within the Catholic school mirrored trends internationally and nationally. Notwithstanding these influences, Religious Education as central to the Catholic school and as integral to the mission to the local or universal Church develops an identity in accordance with its traditions interacting with community needs and priorities.

3.2 Definitional Perspectives A Reconceptualist Approach, as understood within Brisbane Catholic Education, is an educational approach to the teaching of Religious Education with the following three characteristics: it is non-presumptive, employs powerful pedagogies and teaches about the Catholic Tradition (BCE, 2020). While it has explicit educational objectives, commensurate with other academic subjects, it does not have explicit faith formational objectives. However, the personal/spiritual dimension is accommodated within it. A key element of the Reconceptualist Approach as enacted by Brisbane Catholic Education is the recontextualization of specific textual elements reflective of contemporary, pluralised and detraditionalised culture (outsider discourse); By juxtaposing © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 W. Sultmann et al., Re-imagining Senior Secondary Religious Education, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9180-6_3

35

36

3 Commonality of Trends in Religious Education

these elements, a space of dialogue is created between them. This approach provides Catholics with the opportunity to deepen and reflectively clarify their own faith in dialogue with others (Boeve, 2006). Post-Critical Belief , as understood within Brisbane Catholic Education, denotes an affirmation of faith propositions as symbolic. It is characterised by belief in a God who is transcendent, deferring to a religious interpretation of reality wherein the transcendent is represented symbolically. God is the radical ‘other’ to whom we relate through a symbolical representation, through the interpretation of a sign that refers to the transcendent rather than to a literal and immediate presence. People relate to the transcendent reality through the mediums of ritual and story, tradition and organisational structures. These render the transcendent reality present indirectly to the faith community (Pollefeyt & Bouwens, 2010).

3.3 The Catholic School and Religious Education The confidence in, and the competency of, Catholic schools is affirmed in the area of religious education in the Identity of the Catholic School for a Culture of Dialogue: Instruction, (CCE, 2022). The Catholic school is founded on a model and a vision for people living and learning in community. Jesus is the perennial model and his view of life, marked by right relationships of justice, peace, liberation and compassion, provides the basis for what it is to be authentically human. Through professional practices and witness, educators in Catholic schools not only give expression to these fundamentals, but also see them as outcomes for their students. “The Catholic school is committed thus to the development of the whole person, since in Christ, the perfect human, all human values find their fulfilment and unity” (CCE, 1977, para. 32). In this way, the mission of the Catholic school is the facilitation of holistic development (personally and collectively) centred in Christ. The significance of mission within Catholic schools is described by the Congregation for Catholic Education (CCE) as: “the young people we are educating today will become the leaders of the 2050s” (CCE, 2014, n. III). To this end, the Congregation asks: What will religion’s contribution be to educating younger generations to peace, development, fraternity in the universal human community? How are we going to educate them to faith and in faith? How will we establish the preliminary conditions to accept this gift, to educate them to gratitude, to a sense of awe, to asking themselves questions, to develop a sense of justice and consistency? How will we educate them to prayer? (n. III)

The purpose of Religious Education (RE), within this context, is the facilitation of meaning through understanding the place of religion in this quest and the application of being religious in the process (see Moran, 1981). The challenge is imminent: “if Religious Education does not deal directly with contemporary life in a systematic and challenging way, then the perception of students that it is nominal and irrelevant will increase ever further” (Rossiter, 2018, p. xi).

3.3 The Catholic School and Religious Education

37

A key determinant of Religious Education curriculum provision is that of context. Education grows out of unique histories, priorities, political circumstances and legislative frameworks coupled with the changing profiles and expectations of the community. The reminder is provided: “One cannot talk about Religious Education in the abstract but only about particular forms of RE, and these forms differ greatly from country to country’ (Barnes, 2014, p. 4). Within the Australian context the presence of the Catholic religion is argued to have declined, and significantly the 2021 census identifies 38.9% of respondents indicating no religion. Interestingly, the number of those identifying as having no religion approximates the combined presence of the overall Christian community within Australia. Within the changing face of Australia’s religious community, the National Centre for Pastoral Research depicts this changed and changing profile. The 2021 Census revealed that the Australian community shows much diversity in its religious make up. Christianity continued to be the most common of the religious groups, by far, comprising 43.9% of the population, a decrease from 52.1% in the 2016 Census. Australians identifying with non-Christian religions grew from 8.2% of the population in 2016 to ten percent in 2021. The percentage of Australians not identifying with any religious group continued to grow, and in 2021 made up 38.9% of the population, up from 30.1% in 2016. Although the religion question is the only optional question in the Census, it was completed by 93% of all Australians … Religion in Australia, 2016 & 2021 (number of people identifying with each group, percentage of population) One in five Australians identify as Catholic According to the 2021 Census, Catholics comprised around twenty per cent of the Australian population, a slight decrease from the previous Census in 2016, when Catholics made up 22.6% of all Australians … The decline continued in 2021, when there were around 215,000 fewer people identifying as Catholic than five years prior in 2016 … While the percentage of Catholics in the community remained relatively steady in the 50 years between 1961 and 2011, the declines in 2016 and in 2021 mean that the proportion of Catholics in the Australia population is now similar to the first few decades of the twentieth century (2022, p. 2). The consideration of education and more particularly, RE, varying across and within contexts, suggests that young people are spiritual more so than religious. The changing profile for the place of religion within culture and in particular the relationship of religion to the younger generation is developed in a report published by the Australian National University (ANU, 2018). The research found that 52% of 13–18 year age group identified as having no formal religious affiliation. Notwithstanding, the report established that 74% of Australia’s teens generally have a positive attitude towards religion and, while not necessarily affiliated with a specific religion, nevertheless remain open to some form of spirituality. With respect to aspects of religion the report recorded 24% of Gen Z teens have no belief in God or a higher being, 37% believe in God while another 30% believe in a higher being or life force instead of God. Additionally, another 9% identify as not sure regarding the existence of God or a higher life force. This means that 67% of Australian teens demonstrate a belief in some form of transcendent reality beyond themselves, while a further

38

3 Commonality of Trends in Religious Education

9%, while identifying as unsure, are not closed off from considering it as a possibility. Hence, a significant number of teens either maintain or are open to a belief in a spiritual or supernatural dimension to life. Given that this demographic is the one that predominantly presents itself in Catholic secondary Religious Education classrooms across the country, this set of statistics is significant and has implications for curriculum and curriculum delivery. More recent confirmation of these trends is given in the McCrindle Research (2021), which found that while Australia as a nation is seeing a decline in cultural Christianity, it remains spiritual. This is owing, in part, to Australia’s increasing cultural diversity and to migration which has brought other faiths into society. Not surprisingly, within the context of education in Australia the Catholic sector educates approximately 0.7 million students or 18% of the overall student population (ISA, 2021, p. 6).

3.4 International Perspectives The history and trajectory for Religious Education in Catholic schools internationally possess uniqueness and yet exhibit a commonality of challenges. Not surprisingly, these challenges arise from global influences which incorporate education practices that are increasingly inclusive, pluralistic and secular. While not exhaustive, these trends and influences are evidenced in Religious Education curriculum in Western and European settings. It is useful to review this international context in which Religion, Meaning and Life operates. From this perspective, it is helpful to note the ongoing importance of the Toledo Guiding Principles on teaching about Religion and Beliefs in Public Schools (Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe [OSCE] Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, 2007, Appendix G). These guiding principles were prepared to promote greater understanding of the world’s increasing religious diversity. Notwithstanding, the significance of these principles, Vacca (2019), points out that there are differences between the Toledo guiding principles and some of the positions taken by the Holy See in relation to the teaching of religion even in the public sphere. However, several of the 10 principles are still applicable to the teaching of religion in a Catholic school. For example, it is stated that “Teaching about religions and beliefs must be provided in ways that are fair, accurate and based on sound scholarship” (OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions & Human Rights, 2007, p. 20) is entirely consistent with the Catholic Church’s position in relation to the dialogical teaching of religion. Similarly, long before Toledo (2007), the document tradition of the Catholic Church consistently affirmed the importance of professional learning for teachers (CCE, 2022, para 14). This is in keeping with Toledo Principle 6 where it is stated that “those who teach about religions and beliefs should be adequately educated to do so” (p. 20). Against the background of a detraditionalized, secularised and pluralist society, the seventh Toledo principle is particularly relevant: “Preparation of curricula, textbooks and educational materials for teaching about religions and beliefs should take into account religious and non-religious views in a way that is inclusive, fair, and respectful” (OSCE Office

3.4 International Perspectives

39

for Democratic Institutions & Human Rights, 2007, p. 20). It is essential that this principle be respected and enacted if an authentic, dialogical classroom space is to be created. Building on the Toledo guiding principles, it is also important to note the significance of the Rainier Economic Development Council (REDCo) Project that was funded by the European Union between 2006 and 2009 (Weisse, 2011). The REDCo project investigated the contribution that the study of religion can make to improving understanding of the role of religion in the public square. Scholars from eight European countries participated in the project which focused on 14–16 years old students. As Weisse (2011) notes, one of the key findings of the REDCo project was that “the school has a central role to play in promoting learning about and from religions” (p. 118). This finding highlights the importance of creating a genuine curriculum and an associated pedagogical/dialogical space in the classroom. One of the difficulties with the current research is that the context for international settings varies so widely and as such it is difficult to interpret against Australian data. For example, the Netherlands has a similar religious profile to Australia. van Dijk-Groeneboer (2019) notes that the percentage of the population who state adherence to Christianity (40%) and no religion (49%) is higher than the global statistics (33% for Christianity and 12% for no religion) while the percentage of the population stating adherence to other world religions is actually lower than global trends (p. 655). At the same time, van Dijk-Groeneboer (2019) observes that “Most of the 655 secondary schools in the Netherlands are denominational schools, either Roman Catholic (153) or Protestant (133), with 184 public schools, and 185 other non-public schools (Statistics Netherlands, 2016)” (p. 655). This religious identity, however, is contested in many denominational schools with neither students nor teachers expressing strong adherence to traditional forms of Christianity. Numerically, the situation with secondary schools, therefore, is almost the reverse of the Australian experience where approximately 80% of children and young people are educated in public or other religious schools and only 20% are educated in Catholic schools. The same issue of a crisis of religious identity, though, has also been reported in the findings of the Enhancing Catholic School Identity Project (ECSIP). This is registered by a major Catholic school system authority (Brisbane Catholic Education, 2020b) who note, “Catholic education operates within an increasingly de-traditionalised and pluralised Australian cultural context” (p. 4). The same is true when making comparisons between Australia Germany. In Germany, confessional Religious Education is mandated by the Federal Constitution and is designated as a subject in the school curriculum that is taught collaboratively by religious denominations. This is made more complex as Germany has recently been confronted by an increase of the politicisation of religious identities brought about by Islam as a ‘public religion’. German public officials are trying to manage this growing diversity by allowing students who do not which to take part in the mandated Christian or Islamic confessional religious education courses to take alternative ethics courses often called ‘Values and Norm’ or ‘Practical Philosophy’. These are more inclusive and provide an interfaith approach to religious education (Barb, 2019).

40

3 Commonality of Trends in Religious Education

In the United States public schools, the teaching of Religious Education is not mandated. Rather, the teaching of history and geography must include the topics of major world religions and their cultural, social and political influences. These courses have a focus on increasing religious literacy, civic responsibilities, and to instil intercultural understanding (National Council for the Social Studies, 2017). Unfortunately, these courses have been criticised as being largely the presentation of religious facts and taught by teachers who lack sufficient training (Barb, 2019). The Religious Education experience within the UK context is also challenged. The vulnerability in provision is evidenced in concerns that present as being to the extent of Religious Education potentially collapsing due to issues of sustainability and marginalisation (Barnes, 2020). The future is said to rest with two contrasting ways forward. The first is to “attempt to revise the original paradigm… seek its preservation in some form”; and the second; “to admit the problems are insurmountable and be open to the possibility that there may be a new disciplinary model” (Barnes, 2020. p. 3). Barnes goes on to add: “there is no Archimedean point to view the world of religious education” (p. 6), with either direction needing to be underscored by evidence based and consultative practices. Notwithstanding the selection of directions within diverse contexts, the significance of Religious Education is universal and profound: “to make a positive contribution to the creation of a tolerant, cohesive society where people are respectful of each other and responsible socially” (Barnes, 2014, p. 8). Put more practically; “The far goal of Religious Education … comparing worlds of difference and hoping to create a common world filled with such worlds of difference” (Roebben, 2019, p. 51). Conclusions as to what constitutes an integrated, responsive and meaningful Religious Education curriculum reflect the integration of what is educationally sound, socially supported and contextualised by the history and traditions of schools as authentic learning communities. Variation in emphases can be observed across educational and national spectrums. This variability incorporates the range of classroom teaching to experiential approaches; disciplinary content to student existential concerns; faith-based meaning systems to overall worldviews; and moral foci to ethical considerations (Lovat, 2019). However, what tends to be emphasised at a practical level emerges from four fundamental principles: student learning; engagement of parents; collaborative partnerships, and responsiveness to diversity, plurality and curriculum development (Braten, 2021). This challenge involves balancing longheld religious and educational practices within a changed and changing culture. The transition is argued to begin with a view of Religious Education as a process as distinct from a product; the teacher as an accompanier who reflects theologically with young people as they dialogue on matters of importance; and, identifying pedagogical practices which support the process of gaining meaning and promote thinking about the transcendent (Roebben, 2021). Any shift in direction is therefore not necessarily away from the confessional, the ecclesial or existential, but rather engages an approach that moves to best practice in Religious Education as incorporating these fundamental emphases within parameters of inclusion and dialogue exemplified in the dialogue school (Pollefeyt, 2013, 2018).

References

41

Curriculum themes of a generative outlines curriculum themes of a generative nature which support this transition are outlined by Roebben (2021) as incorporating: correlation—helping students understand their tradition in faith learning; inclusion—an appreciation of plurality and the nature of difference among learners; interpretation—reflection on experience through applying a common grammar for understanding; character education—incorporating moral education in supporting an ethical perspective on social issues; narration—the application of story to inspire reflection and action; performance—religious experiences and learning from religious socialisation; and, spirituality—being consistent and broad in the application of religious learning. The opportunity for Religious Education to engage and be informed, through encounter and dialogue, provides opportunity, and yet demands sensitivity as Religious Education in classrooms is characterised by diversity and carry the implication of Religious Education being in the public sphere (Alexander, 2021). In this regard Religious Education in transition is most ably supported by the integration of key change practices. The elaboration of what becomes critical in transition, specifically in those contexts where secular education policy places particular demands on the Catholic school, is argued by Skeie (2021) through responses which incorporate: establishing policy laws (policy); identifying human constants (anthropology); academic rigour; validity and reliability of approaches; contextual stability (consistency in educational practice); and normative choices (values and hopes of the community). In this context, the role of Religious Education becomes integral to the mission of the Catholic school within communities of a pluralistic form. The role of Catholic education being: A place of integral education of the human person through a clear educational project of which Christ is the foundation; its ecclesial and cultural identity, its mission of education as a work of love; its service to society. (CCE, 1997, para.4)

3.5 Sub-questions from the Review of Research 1. 2. 3. 4.

What influenced students’, teachers’, and parents’ selection of RML? What topics hold most significance for students in RML? What pedagogical approaches were most impactful in RML learning? What outcomes were of most significance from RML?

References Alexander, H. (2021). Religious Education in the public sphere. John Hull Memorial Lecture. In Digital Conference on International Seminar on Religious Education and Values. Australian National University. (2018). Young Australians’ perspectives on religions and nonreligious worldviews. Study finds Australian teens welcome religious diversity, but with caution | School of Sociology (anu.edu.au).

42

3 Commonality of Trends in Religious Education

Barb, A. (2019). The new politics of religious Education in the United States and Germany. German Law Journal, 20, 1035–1046. https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2019.73. Barnes, L. P. (2014). Education, religion and diversity. Routledge. Barnes, L. P. (2020). Crisis, controversy and the future of religious education. Routledge. Boeve, L. (2006). The identity of a Catholic University in post-Christian European societies: Four models. Louvain Studies, 31(2006), 238–258. Braten, O. (2021). MOVe with RE-searchers across the curriculum and national boarders to achieve deep learning: Experimenting with teaching methodology developed in Exeter, UK, in a local “university school” in Trondheim, Norway. In Digital Conference on International Seminar on Religious Education and Values. Gothenburg, Sweden. Brisbane Catholic Education. (2020). Religious education curriculum P-12. Retrieved from http:// www.rec.bne.catholic.edu.au/Pages/Religious-Education.aspx. Congregation for Catholic Education. (1977). The Catholic school. St Paul Publications. Congregation for Catholic Education. (1997). The Catholic school on the threshold of the third millennium. Retrieved from http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/ documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_27041998_school2000_en.html. Congregation for Catholic Education. (2014). Educating today and tomorrow: A renewing passion. Retrieved from https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/docume nts/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20140407_educare-oggi-e-domani_en.html. Congregation for Catholic Education. (2022). The identity of the Catholic school for a culture of dialogue. Retrieved from https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/docume nts/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20220125_istruzione-identita-scuola-cattolica_en.html. Independent Schools Australia. (2021). School enrolment trends and projections: ISA research report. Independent Schools Australia. Lovat, T. (2019). Theological underpinnings of Australian Catholic RE: A public theology proposal In M. T. Buchanan & A-M Gellel (Eds.), Global perspectives on Catholic Religious Education in schools. Vol 2. Learning and leading in pluralist world (p. 63–74). Springer Nature. McCrindle, M. (2021). The impact of faith on Australian society. (Olive Tree Media). Retrieved from https://www.olivetreemedia.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/The-impact-of-faith-onAustralian-society_McCrindle.pdf. Moran, G. (1981). Interplay: A theory of religion and education. St Mary’s PR. National Council for the Social Studies. (2017). Religious studies companion document for the C3 framework. In C3 Framework for social studies state standards (pp. 92–97). https://www.social studies.org/sites/default/files/2017/Jun/c3-framework-for-social-studies-rev0617.pdf. OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights. (2007). Toledo guiding principles on teaching about religions and beliefs in public schools. OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights. Pollefeyt, D. (2013). The lustre of life. Hermeneutic-communicative concept of religious education. Narthex, 13(1), 62–68. Pollefeyt, D. (2018). Hermeneutical-communicative religious education. In ECSIP Queensland intensive course: Part II supplementary literature (pp. 1–4). Catholic University of Leuven: Faculty of Theology and Religious Studies. Pollefeyt, D., & Bouwens, J. (2010). Framing the identity of Catholic Schools: Empirical methodology for quantitative research on the Catholic identity of an Education Institute. International Studies in Catholic Education, 2, 194. Roebben, B. (2019). New wine in fresh wineskins: Rethinking the theologicity of Catholic Religious Education. In M. T. Buchanan & A.-M. Gellel (Eds.), Global perspectives on Catholic Religious Education in schools. Learning and leading in pluralist world (Vol. 2, pp. 51–62). Springer Nature. Roebben, B. (2021). Religious educational leadership in times of upheaval. How to build sustainably on insights from the past? Digital Conference on International Seminar on Religious Education and Values.

References

43

Rossiter, G. (2018). Life to the full—The changing landscape of contemporary spirituality: Implications for Catholic School Religious Education. Agora. Skeie, G. (2021). Who cares about RE: Recent curriculum development in Norwegian RE in the context of change in educational policy and the role of religion in society. Digital Conference on International Seminar on Religious Education and Values. ISREV. Vacca, M. (2019). Education and religious freedom in the Toledo guiding principles: Comparative analysis between the Holy see and the United States. Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law, 36(2), 111–132. van Dijk-Groeneboer, M. C. H. (2019). Religious education in the secularized Netherlands. In M. Buchanan & A.-M. Gellel (Eds). Global perspectives on Catholic religious education in schools. Volume II, Learning and leading in a pluralist world (pp. 655–663). Springer Singapore. https:// doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6127-2. Weisse, W. (2011). Reflections on the REDCo project. British Journal of Religious Education, 33(2), 111–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/01416200.2011.543589.

Chapter 4

Gathering Community Perceptions

Abstract In this chapter reports on the method applied to the study of a senior secondary Religious Education curriculum initiative within an Archdiocesan school system in Australia. Participants included 276 students, 21 teachers, and 72 parents in the nominated pilot schools. Data collection techniques included online survey and semi-structured focus group interviews. Data analysis of quantitative data was both descriptive and inferential, and qualitative data was analysed using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA). The combined pool of data was examined in accord with Neuman’s (2007) three orders of interpretaiton. Keywords Australia · Catholic · School · Religious Education · Survey · Semi-structured interviews

4.1 Research Overview The research examines the satisfaction of students, teachers and parents with the pilot RML curriculum. Two studies addressed overall levels of satisfaction; and associated sub-questions, influences on RML choice, importance of content, impact of pedagogy, and the significance of outcomes. The first study was in two parts across two years and involved a quantitative online digital process. The second study was qualitative and examined student and teacher responses to the overall research question and sub-questions through interviews. The figure that follows (Fig. 4.1) summarises the process of data collection and analysis across two stages; exploration and inspection and introduces the process of three orders of interpretation (Neuman, 2007) developed in Sect. 4.4.2.

4.2 Participants Data were collected from senior secondary RML students, their teachers and parents (N = 418). Seventeen school communities participated in the study, nine from Brisbane Catholic Education (BCE) and eight from Religious Institutes or Ministerial © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 W. Sultmann et al., Re-imagining Senior Secondary Religious Education, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9180-6_4

45

46

4 Gathering Community Perceptions

Stages of the study Data Collection

Data Analysis

Exploration Study 2 x Student survey

First order interpretation

1

2 x Teacher survey

Participant group responses

2 x Parent survey

Quantitative data

4 x Student focus

Second order interpretation

group interviews

Participant group responses

4 x Teacher focus

Qualitative data

group interviews

Third order interpretation

Inspection Study 2

Theoretical propositions model development Fig. 4.1 Overview of research design

PJP Authorities. The pilot stages of the research incorporated a progressive increase within participant groups of students, teachers and parents/caregivers. The numbers in each participant group, for each study, are displayed in Fig. 4.2. Year 2020

2021

2021

Instrument and method Study 1: Survey 1 3 x Online quantitative surveys

Schools

Participants

11

Students (n=126) Teachers (n=11) Parents (n=33) Students (n= 150) Teachers (n=10) Parents (n=39)

Total participants

Students (n=276)

Study 1: Survey 2 3 x Online quantitative surveys

17

Study 2: Focus group interview 4 x Student semi -structured online focus group interviews

4

Students (n=32)

Parents (n=72) Students (n=32)

Study 2: Focus group interview Teacher semi-structured face-toface focus group interview.

4

Teachers (n=17)

Teachers (n=17)

Fig. 4.2 Breakdown of participant engagement across data collection periods

Teachers (n=21)

4.3 Data Collection and Process

47

4.3 Data Collection and Process Ethics approval was secured from the relevant system authorities and Australian Catholic University. Letters outlining the project and its expectations for each participant group (students, teachers and parents), were sent to the principals of participating schools. Participants received information and consent letters as approved by ACU. The process of data collection involved the anonymous completion of surveys (Studies 1 and 2) and participation by students and teachers in semi-structured focus group interviews (Study 3) (Fig. 4.3).

4.3.1 Instruments Survey Thematic areas of inquiry were developed into three online surveys (students, teachers and parents) on the basis of the research question and sub-questions and used in Surveys 1 and 2 across 2020 and 2021. The online surveys were made available through the Qualtrics platform using an anonymous digital link for each group Stages

Data Collection

Data Analysis

Exploration

2 x Student survey

First order interpretation

Study 1

2 x Teacher survey

of the study

Inspection

4 x Student focus

1. Calculation of Means to assess levels of satisfaction. 2. ANOVA to assess differences among the levels of satisfaction within each theme. 3. T-tests to assess difference between year levels. 4. Regression analyses to assess the significance of the contribution of themes to levels of satisfactions and predictability of satisfaction. First order interpretation

Study 2

group interviews

IPA

4 x Teacher focus

Second order interpretation

group interviews

Researchers’ interpretation of combined data

2 x Parent survey

Third order interpretation Theoretical propositions and model development Fig. 4.3 Breakdown of data analysis

48

4 Gathering Community Perceptions

of participants. Within each of these three surveys (Appendices) A (Students), B (Teachers) and C (Parents), the questions focused on influences on course selection; and topics, pedagogies and outcomes of significance. In addition, a measure of overall level of satisfaction with RML was asked. Survey questions were framed from three sources: Framing Paper: Religious Education in Australian Catholic schools (NCEC, 2018); the RML Pilot 2020 Course Handbook Version 2 (BCE, 2019); case study examples from recent research (Sultmann et al., 2020, 2021a, 2021b). Participants were asked to rate their responses using a Likert scale from 1 to 5: where 1 is the lowest score; and 5 is the highest score; or to answer Yes or No to the questions posed. Semi-structured focus group interview process Semi-structured focus group interviews were conducted to permit a deeper appreciation of survey data and hence utilised the same themes of choice, topic, pedagogy and outcomes. All pilot schools were invited to participate in the interview process with four schools accepting the invitation (n = 32) for student online participation. Teacher face to face semi-structured focus group interviews were conducted with teachers (n = 17) from a cross section of participating schools at a professional development day (see Appendix D for an overview of the process).

4.4 Data Analysis 4.4.1 Survey The Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) (IBM Corp, 2021) was used to assist analyses of the combined data collected from completed surveys over 2020 and 2021. These included the generation of descriptive statistics presented in tabular form with percentage response distribution and means. Beyond these descriptive statistics, inferential analyses were conducted to assess differences in satisfaction levels across students, teachers, and parents; and differences within response themes where multiple items were rated differentially. In these instances, T-tests, ANOVAs and Multiple Regression analyses were used to examine data and identify statistical significance. Mean scores of participant responses to survey questions on a range of themes identified within Topics, Pedagogy and Outcomes were not examined by inferential comparative statistical processes. This decision centred on the responses reflecting student responses to a spectrum of themes generated from National Curriculum Guidelines (NCEC, 2018) along with themes from related research (Sultmann et al., 2020, 2021a, 2021b, 2022) together with themes within the Religion Meaning and Life curriculum (BCE, 2019, 2020). Such an array of themes, while representative of a full range of Topic themes, was more comprehensive than the scope of themes used to generate the RML curriculum.

References

49

4.4.2 Semi-structured Interviews Interviews were recorded, transcribed and aligned to the overall research question (level of satisfaction) and the four sub-questions: choice; topic; pedagogy; and outcomes. All qualitative data were subjected to an Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) (Smith et al., 1999). IPA attempts to ‘unravel the meaning contained in narrative accounts through a process of interpretative engagement with the text of transcripts’ (p. 218) by focussing on the four sub-questions of the study. Three stages are involved in the process: (a) Data observations (identifying and exploring themes, summaries, questions, use of words, metaphors, etc.); (b) Generating thematic titles (nominating themes which capture the essence of what the text displays); and (c), Connecting themes (considering their relationship and recording a superordinate integrating principle). The data collection process of quantitative data (2020, 2021) followed by qualitative data (2021) was supported by a three-step iterative process of data analysis termed as first, second and third order interpretation (Neuman, 2007, p. 160). The first-order interpretation is made from the perspective of the participants being studied (Students; Teachers; and Parents). The second-order interpretation is made from the perspective of the researchers and involves eliciting the underlying coherence or sense of meaning in the data. Third-order interpretation involves the researcher assigning general theoretical significance to the data.

References Brisbane Catholic Education. (2019). Religion meaning and life pilot course handbook, version 2. Brisbane Catholic Education. Brisbane Catholic Education. (2020). Religious education curriculum P-12. Retrieved from http:// www.rec.bne.catholic.edu.au/Pages/Religious-Education.aspx. IBM Corp. (2021). IBM SPSS statistics for windows, version 28.0. IBM Corp. National Catholic Education Commission (NCEC). (2018). Religious Education in Australian Catholic Schools: Framing Paper. NCEC. Neuman, W. L. (2007). Basics of social research: Qualitative and quantitative approaches (2nd ed.). Pearson Education. Smith, J. A., Jarman, M., & Osborn, M. (1999). Doing interpretative phenomenological analysis. In M. Murray & K. Chamberlain (Eds.), Qualitative health psychology: Theories and methods (pp. 218–240). Sage. Sultmann, W. F., Lamb, J., Hall, D., & Borg, G. (2020). Student perceptions of a trial Religious Education curriculum: Establishing baseline data. Journal of Beliefs and Values, 42(2), 247–257. https://doi.org/10.1080/13617672.2020.1818923. Sultmann, W. F., Lamb, J., Hall, D., & Borg, G. (2021a). Into the deep: Teacher reflections of the development and implementation of a trial Religious Education curriculum. Religious Education, 116(5), 531–544. https://doi.org/10.1080/00344087.2021.1954341.

50

4 Gathering Community Perceptions

Sultmann, W. F., Lamb, J., Hall, D., & Borg, G. (2021b). Into the deep: A quantitative analysis of teacher ratings of the development and implementation of a trial religious education curriculum. British Journal of Religious Education, 44(1), 26–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/01416200.2021. 195115. Sultmann, W. F., Lamb, J., Hall, D., & Borg, G. (2022). Teacher and student evaluations of a trial RE curriculum: Implications for scale. British Journal of Religious Education. https://doi.org/10. 1080/01416200.2022.2042191.

Chapter 5

Reporting Community Perceptions

Abstract The results from the study of an innovative senior secondary Religious Education curriculum are reported in this chapter. Overall, students, teachers and parents affirmed the Religion, Meaning and Life curriculum and identified topics, pedagogies and outcomes of significance. Keywords Australia · Catholic · Religious Education · Students · Teachers · Parents · Perceptions

5.1 Results and Discussion This chapter reports on the total responses from each of the three groups (students, teachers and parents) who responded to surveys 1 and 2. These data are complemented by the qualitative data gathered by focus group interviews with students and teachers.

5.2 Students Two hundred and seventy-six students responded to two surveys that focused on the overall research question on level of satisfaction with RML and the sub-questions on the influences on choice, importance of topic, impact of pedagogy, and the significance of outcomes. In addition, 32 students provided commentary in relation to survey responses.

5.2.1 Choice and Themes The policy of the system authority was that all students continue to engage with a Religious Education curriculum in the senior secondary years. The exploration of Choice for the RML in Surveys 1 and 2 highlighted Subject Information (mean 3.2) coupled with General Interest (mean 3.0) as the main influences on their choice of © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 W. Sultmann et al., Re-imagining Senior Secondary Religious Education, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9180-6_5

51

52

5 Reporting Community Perceptions

a Religious Education option. Predictable influences on Choice, specifically that of the influence from parents, peer group and prior academic performance, presented as comparatively low and somewhat counter intuitive. Surprisingly, exploring a new curriculum, albeit new and therefore somewhat unknown to students, provided a level of interest which manifested itself in its selection (see Table 5.1 and Fig. 5.1). To further explore the quantitative data of combined surveys 1 and 2 commentary was invited from a representative group of RML students. The following student comments added particular details relevant to the question, Why did you choose RML? Table 5.1 Influences on student choice of RML (N = 276) Influences

% Response proportions

Mean

1

2

3

4

5

Teacher

35.9

17.0

18.8

15.9

12.3

2.5

Subject information

15.6

14.9

23.9

26.4

19.2

3.2

Parent preference

41.3

18.5

18.1

13.8

8.3

2.3

Peers

37.3

20.7

17.8

16.3

8.0

2.4

Grade results

35.1

15.6

19.2

15.2

14.9

2.6

General interest

25.4

12.7

19.2

21.0

21.7

3.0

Faith commitment

43.8

21.0

16.7

10.5

8.0

2.2

50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Teacher

Subject information

Parent preference 1

Peers

2

3

Grade results 4

5

Fig. 5.1 Graphic representation of influences on student choice

General interest

Faith commitment

5.2 Students

53

RML allowed me to take on PE as an additional subject. And Religion was never one of my weakest subjects. Like, I could have taken it on and probably managed it. … Taking on RML has just allowed me to free up more time for something that I’m more interested in. But I can still participate in religion and enjoy the bits of religion, like the discussions and applying it to the real world, which is the bits that I enjoyed from junior religion. So, I guess it’s taking the best bits of religion and allowing me to still do the things that I enjoy. So that’s why I chose RML.

The practical aspects of time and flexibility in the teaching process were attractive and supported choice making. And the reason I chose RML, was that I could take on two maths and three sciences, and I did that so that it would help me with my future career pathway …. Obviously because I want to do medicine, I took on Biology because I feel like Biology will help me in the medicine pathway… I feel like RML will allow me to manage my time more appropriately here at school.

In addition, student choice was influenced by the information made available, the opportunity to dialogue with teachers and their preparedness to complete an application for entry. It (RML) was there for the students who it was tailored for. And if you were one of those students, you would know, …(about)… the application process. It was definitely structured, but it was more relaxed than other application processes I’ve gone through before. I had to submit an application, of course, but it was more focused on who the student is. What their characteristics are what they find valuable in religion what they found valuable and other subjects and ultimately, what they want to end up doing with the rest of their lives.

Integral to student choice was their own agency and the non-directive role of parents/caregivers. It wasn’t something suggested by my parents. It was just something I came across. And I was like, that sounds interesting and something I could take on, but it wasn’t encouraged or discouraged by my parents. It was just like discussions, whether this is the best choice. And if you increase my workload or decrease or if this would let me do something that I wanted to do. But there wasn’t any, like pressure to do it or not to do. It was just more discussions of would this be a good option?

5.2.2 Topics and Themes Students reported that the study of Ethics (mean 3.6) and Other World Religions (mean 3.4) were the most important topics studied. Also, related to these topics, was Catholic Social Teaching (mean 3.1) and the study of Jesus (mean 3.0) (see Table 5.2 and Fig. 5.2). Topics listed as Scripture, Christian Traditions, Prayer, Sacraments, Teachings and Christian Life were rated at or slightly below the mid-point of the 5-point Likert scale. Evident in Fig. 3.2 is the noticeable emphasis in high to very high rating on Ethics and Other World Religions. Overall, the mid-range score for each of the topics, as represented by the colour ‘grey’ is comparatively consistent and reasonable. This outcome underlines the focus of the topic and evidences flexibility

54

5 Reporting Community Perceptions

in its delivery and relevance to daily living. Overall influences on the mean scores through very low ratings (1) is demonstrated across the topics and indicative of improvement potential for some students. Student commentary provided a more detailed explanation of the importance accorded to the topic areas of Ethics and Other World Religions. These topics were viewed as integral in processes of dialogue and application of religion to meaning and life. The movement from learning about a topic to its application was significant for students. To me, I feel it’s the morality side of things not so much the text and reading too deep into the text, but more looking at... you know the example that Jesus set and the modern take on that. Table 5.2 Importance of RML content by topic (N = 276) Topics

% Response proportions

Mean

1

2

3

4

5

God as trinity

21.7

15.9

29.3

21.0

12.0

2.9

Scripture

26.1

20.7

27.5

15.2

10.5

2.6

Jesus

23.6

11.6

23.9

21.0

19.9

3.0

Catholic social teaching

19.2

10.1

29.3

21.7

19.6

3.1

Christian traditions

21.4

15.2

32.2

21.0

10.1

2.8

Other world religions

15.9

8.3

23.6

25.0

27.2

3.4

Church

26.4

21.4

32.2

12.7

7.2

2.5

Prayer

27.5

17.0

29.0

16.7

9.8

2.6

Sacraments

29.0

21.7

28.6

13.4

7.2

2.5

Doctrines (Church teachings)

30.4

18.8

31.5

14.1

5.1

2.4

Christian life

25.4

19.9

29.0

16.7

9.1

2.6

Ethics

12.3

8.3

21.0

23.2

35.1

3.6

40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 God as Trinity

Scripture

Jesus

Catholic Christian Other Social Traditions World Teaching Religions 1

2

Church

3

4

Prayer

Sacraments

5

Fig. 5.2 Graphic representation of importance of RML content by topic

Church Teachings

Christian life

Ethics

5.2 Students

55

And I sort of look at religion in the philosophical sense … And so how it affects people … Where we look at the history and … what it does for people.

Students did not perceive RML as a formal curriculum of study. Like I wouldn’t describe it as another subject to study, but more just a chance to participate and engage in religion in a different way. Which is how, if I was selling it to someone, I would sell it in that way, like you get the chance to study a subject that you’re interested in and help you moving forward after school. And you also don’t lose the ability to study religion, which a lot of us here enjoyed.

Experiential learning was important. You definitely do get involved in religion, and but in this amount and in an engaging way. It’s definitely more helpful to be able to talk about religion. In this sense, we’re not being hindered by assignments or exams surrounding religion as an [traditional Religious Education subject], ‘so you really get to learn’, I guess. Yeah, more important moral questions … And it’s definitely more educational, in that sense.

The above qualitative responses pertain to the overall cohort of students. To compare responses to themes within Topics, students were assigned to two groups: year 11 and year 12. Presentation of means scores for Year 11 and 12 students are displayed in Table 5.3. Response data across students in years 11 and 12 to the themes within the curriculum construct of Topics revealed no significant differences using independent samples t-Tests.

5.2.3 Pedagogies and Themes Students reported that the most impactful pedagogical approaches were those that incorporated Dialogue (mean 3.8), Media and Technology (mean 3.5), and Peer to Peer Learning (mean 3.3), particularly in relation to Solving Problems (mean 3.4) and the Application of Religious Education (mean 3.0) (see Table 5.4 and Fig. 5.3). The lowest ratings were given to Praying (mean 2.2) and Textbooks (mean 2.1). This pattern of responses is underlined in Fig. 4.5 in which the highest responses (5) were attributed to the application of Religious Education supported by the process of dialogue. Focus group interviews provided further data on the impact of pedagogy. Commentary confirmed pedagogical practices of scheduling and timetabling; respectful inclusion; student agency; dialogue; teacher as witness, and assessment relevance. Timetabling and scheduling RML happens every two weeks, and in the afternoons, we basically take a few hours to discuss … And we begin with a few focus questions to start up the conversation. And those can range from what are your personal beliefs to what do you think about this specific topic or even morality questions? And we go from there.

56

5 Reporting Community Perceptions

Table 5.3 Comparison student responses for themes within the construct of topics Topics

Year

% Response proportions

Mean

1

2

3

4

5

Year 11

22.2

19.3

25.9

22.2

10.4

Year 12

21.3

12.8

32.6

19.9

13.5

2.9

Scripture

Year 11

28.9

21.5

30.4

11.9

7.4

2.5

Year 12

23.4

19.9

24.8

18.4

13.5

2.8

Jesus

Year 11

25.9

11.9

25.2

19.3

17.8

2.9

Year 12

21.3

11.3

22.7

22.7

22.0

3.1

Year 11

17.8

13.3

31.9

17.8

19.3

3.1

Year 12

20.6

7.1

27.0

25.5

19.9

3.2

Christian traditions

Year 11

20.7

18.5

31.1

22.2

7.4

2.8

Year 12

22.0

12.1

33.3

19.9

12.8

2.9

Other world religions

Year 11

11.9

11.1

17.0

25.9

34.1

3.6

Year 12

19.9

5.7

29.8

24.1

20.6

3.2

Year 11

28.1

23.0

30.4

12.6

5.9

2.5

Year 12

24.8

19.9

34.0

12.8

8.5

2.6

Prayer

Year 11

27.4

16.3

33.3

14.8

8.1

2.6

Year 12

27.7

17.7

24.8

18.4

11.3

2.7

Sacraments

Year 11

28.9

22.2

29.6

11.9

7.4

2.5

Year 12

29.1

21.3

27.7

14.9

7.1

2.5

Year 11

32.6

14.8

31.9

17.0

3.7

2.4

Year 12

28.4

22.7

31.2

11.3

6.4

2.4

Christian life

Year 11

27.4

22.2

28.1

12.6

9.6

2.5

Year 12

23.4

17.7

29.8

20.6

8.5

2.7

Ethics

Year 11

11.1

10.4

19.3

19.3

40.0

3.7

Year 12

13.5

6.4

22.7

27.0

30.5

3.5

God as trinity

Catholic social teaching

Church

Doctrines (Church teachings)

2.8

and I don’t mind doing stuff after school. I’ve always enjoyed being able to extend myself and busy myself outside of school hours. If I just go home every afternoon, and sit like a drone at my desk and do all my work and then go to bed and wake up and do it all again, I think life gets pretty boring... Sometimes you’ve had a big day and you just want to go home. But it always turns itself around. Really quickly when you actually get into it.

Respectful inclusion Even though we’re a Catholic school, we have a large population of students who wouldn’t attend Mass… By and large, a lot of the students here are not affiliated or atheist, but they just haven’t made up their minds yet. And I don’t think that’s unreasonable to expect. So, there’s not really much opportunity in an (ATAR accredited) religion class to talk about religion.

5.2 Students

57

Table 5.4 Student perceptions of pedagogical approach (N = 276) % Response proportions

Criteria

1

2

Mean

3

4

5

Dialogue

8.7

8.7

16.7

29.3

36.6

3.8

Textbook

37.3

27.2

22.1

10.5

2.9

2.1

Applying scripture

27.9

22.5

28.6

15.6

5.4

2.5

8.0

9.8

28.3

31.2

22.8

3.5

Peer to peer learning

15.2

9.8

27.9

27.9

19.2

3.3

Projects

21.0

17.0

28.6

19.9

13.4

2.9

Applying RE

19.2

18.1

25.0

21.0

16.7

3.0

Praying

41.7

23.2

18.5

10.1

6.5

2.2

Solving problems

15.2

9.8

24.3

25.7

25.0

3.4

Media and technology

45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Dialogue

Textbook

Applying scripture

Media Peer and Technology learning 1

2

3

4

Projects

Applying RE

Praying

Solving problems

5

Fig. 5.3 Graphic representation of student perceptions of pedagogical approach

And So, in normal religion classes, it’s very structured, and there’s really no room to talk about what you think or your interpretations. It’s mostly just analysing Scripture or, you know, that kind of thing. But in RML, it’s way more open, as they said before. But it’s much more welcoming, especially if you don’t already like talking in front of people. If you chime in with your beliefs, it’s very welcome, and it can branch into completely different conversations, which are really beneficial. And I think that’s the best part of RML.

Student agency I think RML definitely works better for certain personality types. But I feel most people in this group are comfortable. And even if you’re not, I’d like to think that it generates an

58

5 Reporting Community Perceptions atmosphere that, uh, said somebody who wouldn’t normally share a lot about themselves, especially about their religious views, makes them more comfortable to share those so that dialogue generally tends to open up rather quickly. The first session was really very quiet for a while, and then the comfort started to ease back … you find yourself being able to flow quite naturally… that openness really does help.

And I feel like what you said before about the relationship between us. It’s pretty good. But it’s even better when you have something like [teacher’s name] who’s willing to share his story. And that sort of encourages us to sort of get our perspective, like he’s told us a lot about growing up with religion and how that impacted his life and how his understanding of religion has grown and changed and pick the people around him. And that’s, I guess, something you wouldn’t get on the Internet.

Teacher as witness [Teacher] was offering his perspective on how religion has been important in his life and we’re all sort of talking about it from different perspectives. So, I guess you get to you sort of lose the focus on here’s what you’re trying to analyse or tell us about the perspective of Jesus, but more about, like, how religion has an impact in your life, which I guess is where it comes from Religion, Meaning and Life. It’s different for everyone, and that’s probably one of the best things we’ve explored. We also looked at, um, how religious practises like how that has an influence on our life, I guess, like whether we’re devout Catholics and we go to church every Sunday, or whether it’s just something we passively engage in at school and how that differs between each of us and [teacher] included. So, I guess that’s the best thing is discussing that getting to hear from different people about that just before

To compare responses to themes within Pedagogies, students were assigned to two groups: year 11 and year 12. Presentation of means scores for Year 11 and 12 students are displayed in Table 5.5. Response data across students in years 11 and 12 to the themes within the curriculum construct of Topics revealed no significant differences using independent samples t-Tests.

5.2.4 Outcomes and Themes Students reinforced RML outcomes of most significance as: advancing interpersonal skills of Listening to others (mean 3.5, Objectives 4), Dialoguing with others (mean 3.4, Objectives 3 and 5), and Making connections (mean 3.4, Objective 1) and in reflective abilities of Understanding myself (mean 3.1, Objective 2 and 7) and Contributing to community (mean 3.3, Objective 6) (see Table 5.6). Significantly, the application of Catholic teachings (mean 2.8) and Praying (mean 2.2) were not registered as outcomes of significance (see Table 5.6), although verbal commentary in focus groups identified prayer as a more subtle experience. The one objective that is not identified in the outcomes reported above relates to the production of artifacts ‘that typify and reflect a range of deep learnings across the course content’ (Brisbane Catholic Education, 2019, p. 4). With respect to this objective the evidence of learning was identified for each unit and topic with students contributing to their “learnings

5.2 Students

59

Table 5.5 Comparison student responses for themes within the construct of pedagogies Criteria

Year

% Response proportions

Mean

1

2

3

4

5

Year 11

7.4

11.1

16.3

30.4

34.8

Year 12

9.9

6.4

17.0

28.4

38.3

3.8

Textbook

Year 11

31.1

32.6

22.2

11.1

3.0

2.2

Year 12

43.3

22.0

22.0

9.9

2.8

2.1

Applying scripture

Year 11

28.9

25.2

22.2

19.3

4.4

2.5

Year 12

27.0

19.9

34.8

12.1

6.4

2.5

Year 11

5.2

10.4

29.6

33.3

21.5

3.6

Year 12

10.6

9.2

27.0

29.1

24.1

3.5

Peer to peer learning

Year 11

12.6

11.9

25.9

31.1

18.5

3.3

Year 12

17.7

7.8

29.8

24.8

19.9

3.2

Projects

Year 11

17.0

16.3

30.4

20.0

16.3

3.0

Year 12

24.8

17.7

27.0

19.9

10.6

2.7

Year 11

19.3

19.3

22.2

21.5

17.8

3.0

Year 12

19.1

17.0

27.7

20.6

15.6

3.0

Praying

Year 11

44.4

24.4

16.3

8.1

6.7

2.1

Year 12

39.0

22.0

20.6

12.1

6.4

2.2

Solving problems

Year 11

14.1

9.6

23.7

25.2

27.4

3.4

Year 12

16.3

9.9

24.8

26.2

22.7

3.3

Dialogue

Media and technology

Applying RE

3.7

for life portfolio” (p.13). The assessment of portfolio contributions is reported as “meeting expectation” or “not meeting expectations” for each of the three components of RML (Face to Face Learning, Self-directed Learning and Service-Learning, Experiential Learning and Ritual and Reflective Practice” (p. 13). Table 5.6 Student perceptions of RML outcomes Outcomes

% Response proportion 1

Mean

2

3

4

5

Listening to others

8.7

10.9

23.6

30.8

26.1

3.5

Dialoguing with others

8.7

12.7

25.7

30.8

22.1

3.4

Critiquing information

13.4

14.1

32.2

23.6

16.7

3.2

Making connections

10.1

13.8

27.2

28.6

20.3

3.4

Understanding myself

17.4

12.3

28.6

22.8

18.8

3.1

Contributing to community

13.0

13.4

24.6

26.8

22.1

3.3

Applying Catholic teachings

21.7

20.7

24.3

19.6

13.8

2.8

Praying

40.9

21.4

21.7

9.4

6.5

2.2

60

5 Reporting Community Perceptions

The pattern of results from quantitative data is displayed in Fig. 5.4 which identifies significant confirmation of curriculum and outcomes nominated as aligned with goals and pedagogy. Notably, outcomes such as Listening to others, Dialogue and Community contributions possess relevance within other curriculum domains (Fig. 5.5). Developing the importance of interpersonal skills from self-reflection and community contribution, students commented on the place of religion on personal meaning and its application within a safe a learning environment.

45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Praying

Applying Catholic Teachings

Making Contributing Understanding myself connections to community 1

2

3

4.0

Critiquing information

Dialoguing with others

5.0

Fig. 5.4 Graphic representation of student perceptions of outcomes

35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Content

Pedagogy 1

Outcomes 2

3

4

Overall

5

Fig. 5.5 Graphic representation of student perceptions of RML by research themes

Listening to others

5.2 Students

61

Personal meaning It (studying RML) gave me the ability to choose another subject. But I also feel like I gained. It gave me an insight to what religion means on, a deeper sort of level, because I got to find out what other people see in that conversation sort of atmosphere.

Application But what I’ve always liked about RML is it focuses more on the meaning ... So, while of course, some of our activities may lead us into an environment that could resemble being in the chapel… Now the volunteering opportunities that we have with Catholic Mission and that kind of sphere of things, you could say that involves prayer. But in a regular session, I wouldn’t describe it as being prayerful at any stage.

Safe learning environment One of the biggest outcomes of this, obviously, is the fact that we get to do our subjects (ATAR, university entrance) ... we do stay after school [to do RML]. But it’s a good atmosphere around here just to spend time with my friends and just to talk generally. So, it’s had a good impact on my mental health. Just sitting here in a good environment. And what else have I gained from this course? Well, obviously I’ve strengthened my understanding on Christianity and other religions, which we all talk about here, and [teacher’s] perspectives on certain topics and just everyone’s opinions and everyone’s beliefs. They all combine and merge together, so it allows me to have a deeper understanding of all the topics we talked about.

And Like with school, you can get pretty busy and you know, you don’t really take the time to sit back, or pray or reflect. And I think having RML and just that time, the fact that it’s after school … creates an environment where you feel really relaxed and you’re listening to other people and you’re telling stories and you’re learning. But you’re not learning in the normal way that you would in the school hours. I think that’s one of the biggest things that I’ve gained is that you get to see religion from a different perspective. Religion is not necessarily going to church on a Sunday morning.

To compare responses to themes within Outcomes, students were assigned to two groups: year 11 and year 12. Presentation of means scores for Year 11 and 12 students are displayed in Table 5.7. Response data across students in years 11 and 12 to the themes within the curriculum construct of Outcomes revealed no significant differences using independent samples t-Tests (Table 5.8).

5.2.5 Overall Trends Findings indicated that students’ choice of RML was based on RML being one of several curriculum options within the Catholic school. The influence on RML selection reflected a commitment to pursuing tertiary entrance and the flexible structuring and timetabling of RML as advancing this goal. Other factors beyond these influences were the availability of subject information and general interest. Students’ perceptions of RML, overall, were above the midpoint with a mean of 3.2. Dimensions of RML, as indexed by the research themes of Topic, Pedagogy and

62

5 Reporting Community Perceptions

Table 5.7 Comparison student responses for Themes within the construct of Outcomes % Response proportion

Outcomes Year Listening to others

1

Mean

2

3

4

5

Year 11

8.1

14.8

20.0

39.3

17.8

Year 12

9.2

7.1

27.0

22.7

34.0

3.7

Dialoguing with others

Year 11

8.9

15.6

23.7

32.6

19.3

3.4

Year 12

8.5

9.9

27.7

29.1

24.8

3.5

Critiquing information

Year 11

11.9

19.3

29.6

23.7

15.6

3.1

Year 12

14.9

9.2

34.8

23.4

17.7

3.2

Year 11

9.6

14.1

25.2

32.6

18.5

3.4

Year 12

10.6

13.5

29.1

24.8

22.0

3.3

Understanding myself

Year 11

19.3

15.6

25.9

22.2

17.0

3.0

Year 12

15.6

9.2

31.2

23.4

20.6

3.2

Contributing to community

Year 11

11.1

15.6

22.2

26.7

24.4

3.4

Year 12

14.9

11.3

27.0

27.0

19.9

3.3

Year 11

22.2

23.0

21.5

20.0

13.3

2.8

Year 12

21.3

18.4

27.0

19.1

14.2

2.9

Year 11

45.2

20.7

18.5

11.1

4.4

2.1

Year 12

36.9

22.0

24.8

7.8

8.5

2.3

Making connections

Applying Catholic teachings Praying

3.4

Table 5.8 Student perceptions of RML by overall themes Themes

% Response proportions 1

Topics overall

2

15.6

9.8

Mean

3

4

5

31.5

28.3

14.9

3.2

Pedagogies overall

9.8

12.0

23.2

27.2

27.9

3.5

Outcomes overall

13.4

14.5

29.3

25.0

17.8

3.2

RML overall

13.0

15.2

26.4

26.8

18.5

3.2

Outcomes, are consistent and positive. Aggregated responses for Surveys 1 and 2 indicated that all elements of RML achieved a moderate level of satisfaction (mean 3.2). However, pedagogy (mean 3.5) was more highly valued than topics (mean 3.2) and outcomes (mean 3.2). The data displayed in Table 4.5 and Fig. 4.5 indicates students’ overall evaluation of their experience was positive. Expectations of a normal distribution of responses can be observed in student responses to Topics and Outcomes. However, a positive orientation to RML pedagogy was pronounced (see Fig. 4.5). Closer inspection of the data indicates that only 45.3% of students were overall either highly satisfied (5) or satisfied (4) with the programme. It seems that students were more satisfied with the pedagogical processes (55.1%) rather than with topics

5.2 Students

63

studied (43.2%). This requires further investigation and is explored in the following Sect. 5.2.6. The same results are obtained in the questions related to the Pedagogy theme as for the questions related to Topics. In the latter section students seem to value more content that is more communal and practical rather than purely cognitive or doctrinal in nature. This is not surprising as RML focuses on an experiential approach which engages dialogue about experience informed by Catholic teaching together with insights from other world religions. Students appreciated the opportunity to dialogue and engage in peer-to-peer learning. They seem to appreciate the possibility of having ‘space’ to express themselves and clarify their thoughts.

5.2.6 Core Influences A further analysis of student responses on the effectiveness of RML, specifically in terms of the curriculum elements of Topics, Pedagogies and Outcomes, was pursued through a series of Multiple Regression analyses to confidently determine which elements in each of the themes matter most and how these elements and themes influence each other and contribute to overall levels of satisfaction and provide a basis for predictability in establishing a re-imagined Religious Education curriculum in a different context. The process entailed the following steps. First: Identification of core Topic; Pedagogies and Outcome variables This process included the selection of four variables in each of the lists of variables (Topics and Pedagogies) that achieved the highest mean rating by students. For example, for Topics (see Table 5.2) the four highest rated topics included Ethics, Other World Religions, Catholic Social Teaching, and Jesus. For the group of pedagogical variables, Dialogue, Media and Technology, Peer to Peer Learning and Solving Problems rated as highest (see Table 5.3). For the highest rated outcomes, Listening to others, Dialoguing with others, making connections and contributing to community (see Table 5.4). Second: Confirmation of Scale Reliability This process involved the assessment of the selected variables, Core Topics, Core Pedagogies and Core Outcomes as conforming to assumptions for inclusion within respective scales (Topics, Pedagogies and Outcomes) through establishment of their reliability as per a Cronbach Alpha. Third: Regression Analyses Within each of the groups of the selected variables (Core Topics, Core Pedagogies and Core Outcomes) Regression analyses were performed to identify the level of relationship (as measured by the extent of shared variance), and the significance of each variable (as indexed by overall Inferential values and probabilities), that each

64

5 Reporting Community Perceptions

group possessed with levels of satisfaction for overall Topics, overall Pedagogies or overall Outcomes. Fourth: Multiple Regression Analyses Utilising the procedure of Gleeson et al. (2020) the three sets of Scale variables (Core Topics, Core Pedagogies and Core Outcomes) were submitted to a Regression analysis on the overall level of satisfaction by Students. As with the analyses in step 3, overall levels of relationship and significance were explored. The combination of four Core Topics (Ethics, Other World Religions, Catholic Social Teaching, and Jesus, and four Core Pedagogical variables (Dialogue, Media and Technology, Peer to Peer Learning and Solving Problems) conformed to appropriate Scale characteristics. Cronbach Alpha Reliability measures for Core Topics was (0.83), Core Pedagogies (0.76) and for Core Outcomes (0.87). Linear Regression for the variables selected for inclusion in the scale of Core Topics, in relationship to overall satisfaction with Topics, indicated a significant relationship F (4, 275) = 25.2, p < 0.0001, with R2 value of 27% for shared variance. Linear Regression for the variables selected for inclusion in the scale of Core Pedagogies, in relationship to overall satisfaction with Pedagogies, indicated a significant relationship F (4, 275) 18.6, p < 0.0001, with R2 value of 22% for shared variance. Linear Regression for the variables selected for inclusion in the scale of Core Outcomes, in relationship to overall satisfaction with Outcomes, indicated a significant relationship F (4, 275) = 44.9, p < 0.0001 with R2 value of 40% for shared variance. The identification of Core Topics, Core Pedagogies and Core Outcomes confirmed their individual and significant relationship with overall Topics, Pedagogies and Outcomes respectively. Multiple Regression was used to assess the ability of three control measures (Core Topics, Core Pedagogies and Core Outcomes) to predict levels of overall satisfaction with RML. The total variance explained by the model was 42%, F (3, 275) = 64.49, p < 0.0001. Core Topics and Core Outcomes made the strongest contribution to the overall level of satisfaction with RML with the largest beta coefficient of 0.35 and 0.42 respectively reaching statistical significance (p < 0.0001). The beta value for Core Pedagogies was lower at 0.06, indicating that it made less of a unique contribution to the model and did not reach significance. Further, the semi partial correlation coefficients indicates that Core Topics and Core Outcomes each uniquely explain 29% of the variance in student overall satisfaction with RML, and for Core Pedagogies it was 6%. The Regression analysis of a subset of variables defined as Core Topics, Core pedagogies and Core Outcomes explained the considerable variance of student responses to the overall satisfaction with RML. The pilot components that were selected as integral to RML did in fact contribute to high levels of satisfaction. In addition, the individual contribution of Core Topics and Core Outcomes provided a unique contribution to this overall level of satisfaction. Student responses in light of these findings identified the personal impact of RML and underlined its successful delivery. In short, the topics were valued, and the

5.3 Teachers

65

outcomes which structured the educative experience were registered as important and relevant thereby leading to high levels of overall satisfaction.

5.3 Teachers The quantitative and qualitative data reported in this chapter focuses on teacher (n = 21) perceptions of RML across 2020 and 2021 and as indexed by responses to the themes of Choice, Topics, Pedagogy and Outcomes.

5.3.1 Choice and Themes Teachers’ motivation for teaching RML was identified primarily in terms of the Purpose of the RML curriculum (mean 4.5) and Personal spirituality (mean 4.4) (see Table 5.9 and Fig. 5.6). Additional influences on teacher engagement with RML included its Practice emphasis (mean 3.6), Resourcing support (mean 3.6) and Professional agency (mean 3.3) accorded to the teacher. Noticeably, least importance was given to motivation arising from Promotional prospects (mean 1.8). Clearly the level of intentionality for teachers to be involved with RML identified perspectives beyond their area of curriculum specialisation. Teacher commentary within focus group interview as to their motivation to teach RML confirmed the significance given to the nature and purpose of RML. This aligned with their personal spirituality and commitment to school mission. Interestingly, during this same discussion, teachers relayed the positive effects of RML for students “an opportunity to engage in a course that responded to their learning Table 5.9 Influences on teachers to teach RML Motivations

% Response proportions 1

Personal spirituality Purpose of RML Colleagues Resourcing support

4.8

Mean

2

3

4

5

0.0

14.3

14.3

66.7

4.4

4.8

0.0

9.5

14.3

71.4

4.5

28.6

0.0

33.3

19.0

19.0

3.0

9.5

9.5

28.6

19.0

33.3

3.6

Student group

33.3

4.8

9.5

23.8

28.6

3.1

Workload

42.9

4.8

19.0

23.8

9.5

2.5

Practice emphasis

14.3

4.8

23.8

23.8

33.3

3.6

Professional agency

19.0

4.8

23.8

28.6

23.8

3.3

Directed to teach

47.6

4.8

9.5

14.3

23.8

2.6

Promotional prospects

61.9

4.8

28.6

4.8

0.0

1.8

66

5 Reporting Community Perceptions

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Personal spirituality

Purpose of RML

Colleagues Resourcing support

Student group

1

2

Workload

3

4

Practice Professional Directed Promotional prospects emphasis agency to teach

5

Fig. 5.6 Graphic representation of the influences on teachers to teach RML

needs” and also opportunities to concentrate on tertiary entrance subjects through “flexibility” in timetabling. In addition, teachers commented that students exhibited favourable responses to the experience of RML due to perceived “levels of relevance” associated with limited assessment and a focus on “overall wellbeing”. Teachers also indicated that the experience of RML resulted in ‘more students wanting to do RML and, as such, it was not just a matter of ATAR (university entrance)”.

5.3.2 Topics and Themes Teachers underscored the importance of all topics for students and the relevance of ‘The implications of belief’ (mean 4.4), and the practical relationship of belief with life, incorporated within the unit, The Spiritual and Sacred dimension to life (mean 4.3) (see Table 5.10 and Fig. 5.7). The distribution of responses was negatively skewed, indicative of the majority of teachers responding favourably to the importance of RML topics. The positive teacher comments on topics also highlighted the challenges associated with their development and delivery. For instance, such was the relevance of some units that pressure existed to cover all the nominated areas of interest: “such good content but had to move on for balance”. In addition, “balance of face to face with formal or personal inquiry” together with establishing experiential learning Table 5.10 Teacher perceptions of the relevance of each of the four units of RML for students Units of study

% Response proportions 4

5

The spiritual and sacred dimension to life

4.8

0.0

9.5

33.3

52.4

4.3

Holy words, sacred stories

4.8

4.8

33.3

23.8

33.3

3.8

1

2

3

Mean

The implications of belief

0.0

0.0

17.6

23.5

58.8

4.4

Church: learning from the past, living in the present, creating the future

0.0

11.8

23.5

29.4

35.3

3.9

5.3 Teachers

67

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Spiritual & Sacred

Holy Words, Sacred Implications of belief Past, present, future Stories 1

2

3

4

5

Fig. 5.7 Graphic representation of teacher perceptions of the RML units 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Camp fire

Watering hole 1

2

Cave 3

4

Life

5

Fig. 5.8 Graphic representation of teacher pedagogy in RML effectiveness

opportunities added to preparation and involved some review of general understandings. This was particularly evident for “un-churched students,” who necessarily required more time given to foundations in areas of scripture and Church teaching. Clearly, topics do not stand as independent of student difference, pedagogy and outcomes. Examples of this particular focus were evident in the following: The opportunity for students to actively engage with content that was relevant to them. They valued the service-learning aspect of the course, as it allowed them to apply their developing spirituality into action.

And Units allow for critical engagement and a reflection on real world implications.

68

5 Reporting Community Perceptions

5.3.3 Pedagogy and Themes Teacher reflections on the range of RML pedagogical methods were consistent and positive with social learning (mean 4.0) along with direct instruction (mean 4.0) having most impact (Fig. 5.8). Role expression by teachers as Witness, Specialist and Moderator were emphasised (Table 5.11 and Fig. 5.9). Assessment considered most valuable was engaging in and reporting on subject participation that included service learning (mean 4.1) and use of portfolio (mean 4.1) (Table 5.11 and Fig. 5.10). Teachers identified that pedagogical practice in RML was enhanced by the combination of support from an internal support person and an external consultant working across participant schools (See Table 5.12 and Fig. 5.11). Internally, teachers rated most highly the Assistant Principal (Identity RE) (consistent with HODs in some schools) (mean 4.0) and externally, the Education Officer Religious Education (mean 4.1) (Table 5.12 and Fig. 5.12). Reflections by teachers as to the effectiveness of pedagogy emphasised: “Dialogical teaching”; “Campfire and project work”; “Story-telling” (connecting with previous knowledge); “consideration of active faith in their daily lives as part of a Catholic school community”; and “teacher personal histories on how practices have changed over time”. Across a range of positive responses, teachers captured their experience of RML as: “great to sit and talk about things in a different way”; “course offers an alternative to an industrial western learning model”; “learning is a joy with no end point because it is learning for learning”; “how great was RML; all religion should be taught like this, engaging, interesting, safe place to learn and apply”; and, Table 5.11 Teacher perceptions of pedagogical practices in RML Pedagogy

% Response proportions 1

2

3

Mean 4

5

Method Camp fire (direct instruction)

4.8

0.0

19.0

42.9

33.3

4.0

Watering hole (social learning)

0.0

0.0

33.3

33.3

33.3

4.0

Cave (personal reflection)

0.0

0.0

28.6

52.4

19.0

3.9

Life (integration through witness)

4.8

9.5

19.0

42.9

23.8

3.7

4.8

0.0

14.3

33.3

47.6

4.2

Role expression Witness Specialist

0.0

0.0

14.3

42.9

42.9

4.3

Moderator

0.0

0.0

9.5

52.4

38.1

4.3

Assessment Subject participation

0.0

4.8

14.3

42.9

38.1

4.1

Portfolio

4.8

0.0

23.8

23.8

47.6

4.1

Project-based

19.0

9.5

47.6

9.5

14.3

2.9

Group work

9.5

4.8

33.3

9.5

42.9

3.7

5.3 Teachers

69

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Witness

Specialist 1

2

3

4

Moderator 5

Fig. 5.9 Graphic representation of teacher role in RML effectiveness

50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Subject participation

Portfolio 1

Project-based 2

3

4

Group work

5

Fig. 5.10 Graphic representation of assessment on RML effectiveness

“opportunity for deep conversations”. The consistency of teacher comments together with affirmations provided by students underline the importance of pedagogy in the delivery of RML.

5.3.4 Outcomes and Themes The expectations established for RML, its learning objectives (Brisbane Catholic Education, 2019), were consistent across the implementation of RML. Three

70

5 Reporting Community Perceptions

Table 5.12 Teacher ratings of professional discussion with internal and external personnel on RML Personnel

% Response proportions

Mean

1

2

3

4

5

Peers

19.0

4.8

28.6

23.8

23.8

3.3

Curriculum specialist

14.3

9.5

19.0

23.8

33.3

3.5

A/Principal (Identity/RE)

14.3

4.8

4.8

14.3

61.9

4.0

Leadership team

19.0

19.0

28.6

19.0

14.3

2.9

Priest/chaplain/campus minister

52.4

14.3

4.8

23.8

4.8

2.1

Dialogue internal

Dialogue external Education officer RE

9.5

19.0

57.1

4.1

RML network

14.3

9.5

0

4.8

19.0

23.8

42.9

3.8

Specialist consultants

28.6

14.3

19.0

23.8

14.3

2.8

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Peers

Curriculum specialist

A/Principal (Identity/RE) 1

2

3

4

Leadership team Priest/Chaplain

5

Fig. 5.11 Graphic representation of internal personnel contribution to RML

outcomes were identified as most significant and included impact on a deeper Appreciation of school mission (mean 3.9), the Religious dimension of the school, (mean 3.9) and Pastoral care (mean 3.9) (see Table 5.13 and Fig. 5.13). Teacher perceptions on student outcomes based on focus group data included an array of positive reflections: . A deeper understanding of their own individual faith and spirituality. . Opportunities to develop their own spirituality in a non-dogmatic way, opportunities for service and to contribute to justice work, flexible ways of engaging with faith. . Freedom to discuss relevant issues outside the pressure of assessment.

5.3 Teachers

71

60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Education Officer RE

RML Network 1.0

2

3

Specialist Consultants

4

5

Fig. 5.12 Graphic representation of external personnel contribution to RML Table 5.13 Teachers outcomes from teaching RML % Response proportions

Outcomes

1 Personal faith

2

14.3

4.8

Mean

3

4

5

23.8

28.6

28.6

3.5

Appreciation of mission

4.8

4.8

19.0

38.1

33.3

3.9

Appreciation of the religious dimension

0.0

9.5

23.8

38.1

28.6

3.9

Pastoral care

4.8

4.8

23.8

28.6

38.1

3.9

Staff relationships

28.6

9.5

19.0

14.3

28.6

3.0

Pedagogy

14.3

14.3

19.0

23.8

28.6

3.4

Integrated curriculum

14.3

19.0

19.0

23.8

23.8

3.2

40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Personal faith

Appreciation Appreciation of of the mission religious dimension 1

Pastoral care

2

3

4

Staff relationships

Pedagogy

5

Fig. 5.13 Graphic representation of teacher outcomes from teaching RML

Integrated curriculum

72

5 Reporting Community Perceptions

. Students have been very enthusiastic about RML, for which we established an accountability process. . An opportunity to explore stories, meaning and life and the relevance of faith for themselves. . A positive attitude towards Religious Education and a more mature/considered response to topics/issues. Along with affirming outcomes for students, teachers consistently valued RML in terms of personal and professional outcomes. A summary of interview extracts included the following: . It has been rewarding to see students grow and develop in their own spirituality and appreciation of the role of religion in Catholic schools. . I have found the flexibility meaningful in being able to tailor the work to individual student priorities and needs. . the joy of learning for its own sake. . It is a great opportunity to share personal spiritual perspectives with student. . Reading joyful student reflections on experiences. . The opportunity to engage in dialogue with students. . Providing a positive space for engagement; and advancing my understanding of teacher as witness, specialist and moderator; the ah-ha moments.

5.3.5 Overall Trends For teachers, choice to participate was influenced by the purpose of RML (mean 4.5) and their own personal spirituality (mean 4.4). In stark contrast to these influences, promotional prospects (mean 1.8) and workload implications for teaching a new subject (mean 2.5) did not influence their choice to teach RML (see Table 5.9). For those themes where an overall rating was possible, Teachers’ perceptions of RML were well above the midpoint with a mean of 3.4. Dimensions of RML, as indexed by the research themes, were consistent and positive (see Table 5.14 and Fig. 5.14). Worthy of note is that pedagogy (mean 4.0) was more highly valued than topics (mean 3.7) and assessment (mean 3.1). Teachers also reported positive responses for RML support internally (mean 3.5) and externally (mean 3.9). General comments by teachers during focus group discussions focused on professional support, resource provision and their agency in being able to respond to local learning needs. and strategies for improving RML in light of an already positive experience. Examples included: . I think training could focus more on the flexibility and providing teachers with the understanding and confidence to know they can select aspects and focuses that suit the context rather than needing to tick every box in terms of content and resources. . I love the BCE learning bites and I think it would be wonderful to have RML with some more age-appropriate resources. Most certainly the resources provided were

5.3 Teachers

73

Table 5.14 Teachers’ evaluation of RML Criteria

% Response proportions 1

2

Mean

3

4

5

RML topics

4.8

19.0

9.5

33.3

33.3

3.7

RML pedagogy

0.0

9.5

14.3

47.6

28.6

4.0

RML assessment

14.3

23.8

19.0

19.0

23.8

3.1 3.5

Internal support

4.8

19.0

19.0

33.3

23.8

External support

0.0

14.3

14.3

38.1

33.3

3.9

Overall level

9.5

14.3

19.0

38.1

19.0

3.4

50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 RML topic RML pedagogy

RML assessment 1

2

Internal support 3

4

External support

Overall level

5

Fig. 5.14 Graphic representation of teachers’ evaluation of RML

useful however at times they needed to be more school appropriate. The students are aged between 16 and 18 with a range of abilities and the resources do not always reflect the scope required for the students. . Teachers need to be open and flexible in developing a curriculum that will build on your expertise and engage student interest A final set of questions proposed to teachers related to Are there any other comments that will help in relation to improving the RML experience for students in the future? Responses reinforced the unique elements of the course in terms of its flexibility and interconnectedness with the cultural and religious dimension of the school: . I would like to stress that RML *not* being accredited or assessed is, in my view, a critical part of the course’s success and reflective of the very nature of the course. One could not change this without effectively killing the course as it was intended to be.

74

5 Reporting Community Perceptions

. Greater flexibility to take more time on topics which really interest students. More chance to make the RML bespoke for the particular school environment. . I hope that the course explores and allows students to explore content themselves further rather than directed strictly in terms of 5 h service learning and 5 h of self-directed learning. I would like to see this assessed over the two years where students reflect on each religious experience that is provided in the school. For example, school retreats, masses and engagement and service provided in school should be part of the portfolio of work over the two years. Please do not make this an assessable course.

5.4 Parents 5.4.1 Choice and Themes Parents confirmed that prioritising ATAR subjects (mean 3.9) through curriculum flexible delivery (mean 3.9) were the primary motivations for choosing RML (see Table 5.15 and Fig. 5.15).

5.4.2 Overall Responses on Topics, Pedagogy and Assessment Most parents (over 90%) indicated an awareness that RML was different from the experience of Religious Education that their children had experienced in their preparatory years to Year 10. This uniqueness of RML was evident in parent perceptions of assessment (mean 3.8); topics (mean 3.5); and pedagogy (mean 3.4) (see Table 5.16 and Fig. 5.16). Coupled with this uniqueness, parents expressed consistent and positive overall responses to RML. Table 5.15 Parent perceptions of influences on choice Criteria

% Response proportions 4

5

ATAR priority

16.2

4.4

8.8

11.8

58.8

3.9

Integration of religion

32.4

13.2

23.5

19.1

11.8

2.6

8.8

4.4

16.2

25.0

45.6

3.9

1

Flexible delivery

2

3

Mean

5.4 Parents

75

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 ATAR priority

Integration of religion 1

2

3

4

Flexible delivery

5

Fig. 5.15 Graphic representation parent perceptions on choice influences

Table 5.16 Parent perceptions of difference in RML Criteria

No diff

% Response proportions 1

2

3

Mean 4

5

Difference of topics

7.4

7.4

10.3

27.9

20.6

13.2

3.5

Difference in pedagogy

8.8

5.9

8.8

27.9

20.6

13.2

3.4

Difference in assessment

7.4

1.5

7.4

23.5

25.0

20.6

3.8

*

Not all parents answered each of these questions

5.4.3 Outcomes and Themes Parent observations of RML outcomes reflected two primary effects. First, there was a high rating of RML on values (mean 3.6) and a noticeable commitment to service (mean 3.4). Overall, parents rated all the outcomes well above the midpoint of 2.5 (See Table 5.17 and Fig. 5.17).

76

5 Reporting Community Perceptions

30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Difference in teaching

Difference of topics

No Difference

1

3

2

Difference in assessment 4

5

Fig. 5.16 Graphic representation of parent perceptions of difference of RML Table 5.17 Parent perceptions of RML outcomes % Response proportions

Outcomes

1

2

Mean

3

4

5

Spirituality

23.9

6.0

34.3

19.4

16.4

3.0

Faith understanding

19.4

7.5

31.3

29.9

11.9

3.1

Faith practice

28.4

7.5

32.8

20.9

10.4

2.8

Faith with life

22.4

9.0

25.4

26.9

16.4

3.1

Service learning

14.9

9.0

25.4

26.9

23.9

3.4

Values

11.9

4.5

22.4

35.8

25.4

3.6

Religion interest

23.9

13.4

28.4

25.4

9.0

2.8

Study habits

22.4

6.0

29.9

19.4

22.4

3.1

40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Spirituality

Faith understanding

Faith practice

Faith with life 1

2

Service learning

3

4

Values

5

Fig. 5.17 Graphic representation of parent perceptions of RML outcomes

Religion interest

Study habits

References

77

5.5 Summary The response to the pilot RML senior secondary school curriculum initiative underlined its significance to Religious Education in the senior secondary school and the wider school community. At the same time, outcomes were registered by students, teachers and parents that were affirming of the program and its overall influence on students and teachers. What is significant in these findings is the extent of common themes across respondent groups and the interpretation of data for application of RML at scale and theoretical considerations that may apply to Religious Education programs of a similar nature and focus.

References Brisbane Catholic Education. (2019). Religion meaning and life pilot course handbook, version 2. Brisbane Catholic Education. Gleeson, J., O’Gorman, J., & O’Neill, M. (2020). The identity of Catholic schools as seen by teachers in Catholic schools in Queensland. In J. Gleeson & Goldburg, P. (Eds.), Faith-based Identity and Curriculum in Catholic Schools (pp. 133–161). Routledge.

Chapter 6

What Matters Most: Interpretation of the Data

Abstract In this chapter the findings of a longitudinal study of an innovative senior secondary Religious Education curriculum, Religion, Meaning and Life are interpreted at three levels. First order interpretation captures the participant’s perspective; second order interpretation entails the researchers’ perspective; and third order interprets findings such that a theory is generated resulting in the advancement of theoretical propositions. Keywords Australia · Catholic · Religious Education · Senior secondary · Interpretation · Innovative curriculum

6.1 Participant Perceptions: First Order Interpretation The overall level of satisfaction for all participants: students, teachers and parents, was positive with a mean of 3.5. Evident in Table 6.1 is that parents held the highest level of satisfaction with a mean of 3.8, which was significantly different to student and teacher satisfaction levels. Parent satisfaction centred on RML as an innovative Religious Education program as it offered flexibility in delivery, and relevance for students in their final years of schooling. RML originated from these priorities and extended them into an educationally viable option acceptable to the school community and the governing authority. The optimism of the teachers for the overall program (mean 3.4), although less than parents, is not surprising as it was somewhat taken for granted as a relevant and workable curriculum offering. Teacher inclusion in the program was based on their self-selection and personal commitment to the content and process advertised in the program outline. What is important to note is the satisfaction of teachers in the overall experience and their preparedness to critique constructively, Topics, Pedagogies and Outcomes in view of their engagement. The influence of RML on students also indicated a sound level of acceptance while pointing to differential appreciation of Topics and Pedagogies. The content of the program that gained most acceptance involved the practical application of religion within complex experiences and the value of the meaning system based on ethical approaches was registered. Pedagogies that supported the experience underscored © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 W. Sultmann et al., Re-imagining Senior Secondary Religious Education, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9180-6_6

79

80

6 What Matters Most: Interpretation of the Data

Table 6.1 All participant groups overall satisfaction rating with RML Participants

% Response proportions

Mean

1

2

3

4

5

Students

13.0

15.2

26.4

26.8

18.5

3.2

Teachers

9.5

14.3

19.0

38.1

19.0

3.4

Parents

4.5

7.5

22.4

34.3

31.3

3.8

priorities of experiential learning and dialogical approaches in communicating and evaluating beliefs, values and actions. A one-way between-groups analysis of variance was conducted to explore the different perceptions held by students, teachers and parents. There was a statistically significant difference in scores between students and their parents: F (2, 361) = 5.9, p = 0.003. Post-hoc comparisons using the Tukey HSD test indicated that the mean score for students (M = 3.2, SD = 1.3) was significantly different from parents (M = 3.8, SD = 1.1). Teacher perceptions (M = 3.4, SD = 1.2) were not significantly different from either students or parents. A breakdown of satisfaction levels with RML curriculum constructs can be observed in the response to the sub-questions for each group and across Choice, Topics, Pedagogies and Outcomes. Statistical comparisons among each participant group were not undertaken due to the uniqueness of themes for each construct relevant to each participant group. Notwithstanding, qualitative summary information for each group on the selected themes can be explored. These data are reported for each group across the sub-questions (see Table 6.2). An extrapolation of the summary comments in Table 6.2 permits some overall interpretation of participant perspectives. . For students, RML was relevant, relational, inclusive, dialogical and experiential. Moreover, Pedagogical approaches received higher levels of satisfaction than did Topics studied and Outcomes of study. . For teachers, RML provided engagement, extension and challenge in their integration of the curriculum within the mission and identity of the Catholic school. Table 6.2 Comparison of participant groups across research sub-questions Group

Choice

Topic

Pedagogy

Outcome

Students

Subject information and student interest

Mean: 3.2

Mean: 3.5

Mean: 3.2

Teachers

Committed to curriculum purpose and aligned with spirituality

Mean: 4.0

Mean: 3.7

Learning beyond the Religious Education lesson

Parents

University entrance priority

Uniqueness recognised

Uniqueness recognised

Values enhancement

6.2 Researcher Perceptions: Second Order Interpretation

81

. For parents, RML was recognised and valued as unique and responsive to student priorities and needs. . For all participants, RML was confirmed as an important Religious Education option within the life and mission of the Catholic school.

6.2 Researcher Perceptions: Second Order Interpretation The meaningful expression of Religious Education in this new context and at the senior secondary level of schooling has been the focus of the pilot curriculum initiative, RML. The contemporary profile of the Catholic school mirrors social, economic, cultural and religious diversity. At the same time, the mission and identity of the Catholic school draws from its traditional ecclesial base as it interprets and responds to community expectations within local community profiles (CCE, 2022). While Religious Education in the Archdiocese of Brisbane generally operates from a Reconceptualist Approach, this approach has been extended further to explicitly include curriculum content, flexible curriculum delivery, dialogical pedagogies and opportunities for service/experiential learning as part of the experience of Religious Education. The approach is one characterised by non-presumptive language, powerful pedagogies and learning about the Catholic Tradition (Craig, 2022). The development and implementation of the pilot program, Religion, Meaning and Life was premised on the integration of two foundational principles: a respect for choice in Religious Education curriculum; and the needs and priorities for students such as those with a tertiary entrance goal and special learning needs. All respondent groups valued this unique focus and contributed to understandings of its effectiveness across reasons for Choice, Topics of most significance, Pedagogies that made a difference and Outcomes that were most valued. The literature, which provided a basis for reconceptualising Religious Education, pointed to practices of continuity and discontinuity, matters of curriculum development, creative delivery options, establishing relationships of significance and utilising experiential learning. Relational and dialogical practices, which reflected on experiential learning and followed such experiences, were critical. Within this group reflection the anecdotal comments from teachers supported a view that an appreciation of the Christian message and the insights from other World Religions provided a basis for students’ reflections. These were associated with ethical considerations as a means for exploring existential questions in their lives and from the experiences they encountered. The capacity of teachers to facilitate such conversations presented as fundamental as they were called to be the Specialist, Moderator and Witness within a complex curriculum (Brisbane Catholic Education, 2019, 2020). A second foundational consideration within the experience of Religion, Meaning and Life was that it was an educational experience as distinct from a catechetical faith formation experience. The concept of faith formation is argued to possess a degree of ambiguity about it, originating from seminaries and religious houses as places of formation for the priestly and religious life, respectively. Due to its earlier

82

6 What Matters Most: Interpretation of the Data

ecclesial focus, the use of the term ‘faith formation’ in religious education can be confusing. Rossiter concludes that it inclines people towards a view of Religious Education that moves from a largely exclusively ecclesial perspective to one more based within the discipline of education (Rossiter, 2018). Religious Education in this light is challenged to find a delicate but necessary balance between ecclesial and education emphases if it wishes to preserve its strong educational focus and intention in keeping with the Reconceptualist Approach. Such a position accords with the challenge of Religious Education with Scott (1984) arguing that approach involves “the way we go about understanding our religious tradition over against the religious identity of the other, the stranger (p. 334).” Personal meaning-making, as experienced and foregrounded in the dialogical aspects of RML, sees religious education as primarily educational. It puts the learner at the centre of meaning construction. In the context of RML, personal meaningmaking entails the degree of influence that a knowledge and understanding of the faith tradition of the school, as well as other non-Christian religions, has on a students’ worldview. The effect that it may or may not have on a students’ worldview is purely at the discretion of the learner and not an explicit goal of the curriculum. ‘Personal meaning-making’ happens most effectively then, when students are invited into dialogue and are able to ask and discuss what Scott calls “the pressing religious questions of our time” (Scott, 1984, p. 336). The challenge is evident in the movement from an exclusive, to an inclusive and now as an engagement with a pluralist community (Craig, 2022). While it is hoped that students will have their faith enhanced within the Religious Education classroom, a truly Reconceptualist Approach to Religious Education can only make this an aspirational goal and never a direct or planned goal. To make a student’s spiritual development a planned goal of Religious Education is to ‘muddy the waters’ between an ecclesial agenda and an educational agenda. Rossiter says it well: Religious educators can try to make the classroom study of religion as meaningful and as personally relevant to students as possible. But this cannot make the Church itself more meaningful and relevant to Catholics. Only the church can do this. The question of the relevance of the Catholic Church is one that is important for Catholics. But the agenda for addressing that question has little or nothing to do with Catholic school Religious Education. (Rossiter, 2018, p. 5)

RML was developed and implemented as an innovative Religious Education experience at the senior secondary level of schooling. The curriculum content, pedagogy and outcomes were reconceptualised to address community priorities within established Religious Education parameters. The research interpretation of the pilot program is that RML is a creative curriculum initiative and exists as a lighthouse program for senior secondary education. It reflects the Local Church and national imperatives, draws from established programs, and has benefitted from collaborative insights into its own practice of delivery. In this regard, the following implications are offered in support of this ongoing implementation at scale specifically in relation to the research sub-questions on Choice, Topics, Pedagogies and Outcomes. These

6.2 Researcher Perceptions: Second Order Interpretation

83

implications serve to summarise the research questions from the perspective of the researchers’ second order interpretation.

6.2.1 Research Sub-question 1: What Influenced the Selection of RML? . Students pointed to the influence of Subject Information (mean 3.2) and General Interest (mean 3.0) for the selection of RML. Beyond the quantitative data, feedback from focus groups suggested that students viewed their participation in RML as a practical means for supporting the ethos of the school. . Teacher engagement in RML was influenced by its’ unique curriculum ‘purpose’ (mean 4.5) and a personal commitment to ‘spirituality’ (mean 4.4). Teacher engagement also affirmed the value RML teachers placed on their function as witnesses and their priority of formation in roles of specialist and moderator. . Parent support for the selection of RML related to the prioritising of complementary curriculum as a basis for tertiary entrance (mean 3.9). Clearly, motivation for parents’ choice of RML reflected ongoing learning priorities along with the relevance of the program for daily living. . The opportunity for choice within senior secondary Religious Education provided for a range of different priorities for each participant group to be met.

6.2.2 Research Sub-question 2: What Topics Held Most Significance? . Students rated ‘Ethics’ (mean 3.6), ‘Catholic Social Teaching’ (mean 3.1), and ‘Other World Religions’ (mean 3.4), as most important. Collectively, these priorities reflected student interest in seeking meaning about existential questions. . Teachers affirmed all Religious Education units of study with the highest rating being for ‘The spiritual and sacred dimension to life’ (mean 4.3) and ‘Implications of belief’ (mean 4.4). In addition, teachers indicated that RML supported their understanding and engagement with ‘Pastoral care’, ‘Appreciation of mission’, and the ‘Religious dimension’ of the school. Teacher responses affirmed the importance of exchange between personal beliefs, school mission and classroom practice. . The relevance of topics can be viewed both specifically and holistically. The appropriateness of each unit was confirmed and its relevance to associated units was also reinforced. Importantly, consideration needs to be given to the level of prior learning as a basis for successful engagement with the concepts and language of the curriculum.

84

6 What Matters Most: Interpretation of the Data

6.2.3 Research Sub-question 3: What Pedagogical Approaches Were Most Influential? . All students emphasised the priority of ‘Dialogue’ (mean 3.8) and ‘Media and technology’ (mean 3.5). They also gave importance to RML pedagogy which incorporated socially interactive processes which emphasised experiential learning; student and teacher agency; small group learning; relationships; and the integration of Religious Education with service learning. From this perspective, findings highlighted the contribution that RML made to developing 21st century skills such as critical and creative thinking, collaboration and teamwork, as well as personal and social skills. The incorporation of ICT skills throughout the units of work also supported the acquisition of 21st century skills. . Experiential learning involved students engaging in and dialoguing about their experiences within the wider community. Students were challenged to evaluate and/or modify their world view. Experiential learning initiatives within Religion, Meaning and Life are intentionally linked to Ritual and Reflective Practice and the Religious Education curriculum (Brisbane Catholic Education, 2013, 2019). This could take the form of a classroom activity, religious experience or other school-based activity, whereby, students are afforded opportunity to experience something that challenges their cultural assumptions, values, attitudes and beliefs and then critically reflect on this experience. . Teachers observed RML as a curriculum initiative that required pedagogical competencies and content familiarisation in relevant and prescribed areas of the curriculum. Support for implementation included the provision of valuable and appropriate resources, and the development of teacher competencies from internal and external administration and consultants. . The breadth of the curriculum and the preparation of the teachers identified the significance of teachers being specialist in understanding of content and pedagogical processes; moderator of curriculum in light of student needs; and, providing witness to students in the application of experiential learning.

6.2.4 Research Sub-question 4: What Outcomes Were of Most Significance from the Experience of RML . The importance of relationships within Religious Education between the student and teacher, student and student, were emphasised. This is reflected in pedagogies that invited, ‘Listening to others’ (mean 3.5); ‘Dialoguing with others’ (mean 3.4); and, ‘Making connections’ (mean 3.4) . The significance of relationships and their integral place within the mission and identity of the Catholic school was evident in teacher responses. For teachers, ‘Pastoral care’ (mean 3.9), ‘Appreciation of mission’ (mean 3.9) and the ‘Religious dimension of the school’ (mean 3.9) were significant. Moreover, while RML

6.3 Integrating Literature with Community Perceptions: Third Order …

85

addressed intended Religious Education outcomes, it also contributed to generic learning competencies applicable within other curricula. . Parents viewed outcomes of RML as essentially character building. For parents, the impact of RML was identified as contributing to their child’s ‘values’ (mean 3.6).

6.3 Integrating Literature with Community Perceptions: Third Order Interpretation 6.3.1 Emerging Directions Integral to the Catholic school is the development of the whole person informed by the person and message of Christ (CCE, 1977). This is the context in which Religious Education is established and remains as the anthropological basis in educating young people today (CCE, 1988, 2014). It includes the challenge of providing Religious Education in educationally systematic and relevant ways in support of student engagement (Rossiter, 2018), and educating in ways that support student for understanding as to the place of religion in society and the practice of being religious (Brisbane Catholic Education, 2019, 2020). This is summarised in the National Catholic Education Commission Framing Paper (2018): Religious Education in Australian Catholic schools develops students’ knowledge and understandings of Christianity in the light of Jesus and the Gospel, and its unfolding story and diversity within contemporary Australian and global society. It expands students’ spiritual awareness and religious identity, fostering their capacities and skills of discerning, interpreting, thinking critically, seeking truth and meaning making. It challenges and inspires their service to others and engagement in the Church and the world. (p. 7)

The development, delivery and review of RML is contextualised within an Australian Archdiocese and reflects the unique social, cultural and political differences that contribute to multiple expressions of Religious Education across the world (Barnes, 2020) and within Australia (Bishops of Australia, 2021). In this context, RML emerges as a response to universal changes in the profile of Catholic schools and the necessity of finding new ways to address local challenges. In this light, RML reflects an approach to Religious Education which is reconceptualist in nature as it seeks to advance student learning in ways that are responsive to their spiritual orientation (MCrindle, 2021) while being mindful of Church traditions in Catholic Education. Not to do so is to risk the marginalisation of Religious Education (Barnes, 2020) both within the life and culture of the Church and the expectations of parents and the wider community for the distinctive mission of Catholic Education. The challenge of Religious Education as engaging the Tradition within a diversity of religious traditions and for some students no religious tradition, does not imply a process of reductionism or minimisation of what is central to the identity of the Catholic school (Coupar, 2022). Rather, Rossiter (2018) suggests that “the creative

86

6 What Matters Most: Interpretation of the Data

tension between ecclesiastical and broader student personal development purposes” needs to be restored and maintained (p. 4). He further adds that it needs to be “reflected in the discourse for Catholic religious education which should not be dominated by ecclesiastical terms” (p. 4). This “creative tension” remains an ongoing challenge for the Religious Education classroom and is one that is not definitively resolved by a Reconceptualist Approach to RE (p. 4). However, a Reconceptualist Approach does make a clearer distinction between an educational and an ecclesial agenda when compared with more catechetical approaches to Religious Education. The position taken by Barnes (2020) to incorporate evidence-based and collaborative processes in the pursuit of advancing Religious Education was an early consideration in the development and review of RML. The invitation to an external Catholic agency to accompany the delivery of the pilot program offered an independent perspective on overall effectiveness from an educational delivery perspective. Moreover, the construction and application of research instruments provided a legacy for continuing review in view of changing circumstances and unique emphases at the local level. The development of resources to support the program aligned with the predictions of Bakker (2021) that Religious Education is often developed within an unknown future impacted by influences not easily predicted. The implication for frequent and regular review addressed this context. The development of RML through establishing educational principles in its formulation underscored what Braten (2021) advocated as being essential to Religious Education effectiveness. That is, the need to establish fundamental educational and organisational principles regarding student learning, parent engagement, and collaborative partnerships were integral to the pilot initiative. This process mirrored other national initiatives in Religious Education (Sultmann et al., 2020, 2021a, 2021b, 2022) which underscored curriculum relevance through community consultation; confirmation of teaching and learning principles to align with overall school curriculum parameters; and the systematic review of effectiveness through valid and reliable instruments and processes. Importantly, the identification of overall directions provided a basis for policy development as a form of organisational consolidation for on-going support and reinforced international emphases within a policy framework. Central to this is the narration of the fundamental anthropology underlying the approach, the necessity of academic rigour, and the value of valid and reliable means for evaluating effectiveness (Skeie, 2021). The practical delivery of RML reflected the imperatives for reconceptualising Religious Education identified internationally (Roebben, 2021) and nationally (Hall & Sultmann, 2020). Roebben’s argument for Religious Education being advanced by viewing the learning experiences as a formative process centred on encounter; the role of the teacher as one who accompanies; the centrality of dialogue in the overall process; and the necessity of incorporating informed and quality curriculum elements. The richness of traditional orientations of a confessional, ecclesial and existential dimensions of Religious Education were embraced within key parameters of inclusion and dialogue (see Polleyfeyt, 2013, 2018). Moreover, the significance of relationships and their alignment with mission as indicative of authenticity reinforced the findings of Sultmann and Brown (2019).

6.3 Integrating Literature with Community Perceptions: Third Order …

87

Within the Australian context, the national colloquium on Religious Education (Hall & Sultmann, 2020) pointed to the critical aspects of curriculum relevance; the significance of pedagogy, the necessity of formation, engagement with community, and formulation of applied and shared research practices for on-going renewal. RML mirrored these priorities through practitioners and academics coming together for a common purpose and advocating Ways Forward in Religious Education. The interdependent themes of curriculum, pedagogy, engagement, and research provided a basis for future planning for some participants, while for others, existing directions were affirmed. Moreover, the subsequent and practical themes identified by Roebben (2021) as embracing ways forward internationally underlined the same priorities of inclusion, interpretation, character education, story narration, performance awareness and the development of spirituality as core to the experience. RML incorporated these attributes and extended them in terms of particular emphases within the national educational agenda. The construction of the RML curriculum recognised that senior secondary schooling engages complexities and challenges in maturation and learning, and the experience of Religious Education supports an appreciation of the place of religion in this search and the capacity to operate religiously. The goal of advancing a Christian worldview and understanding other religions in addressing existential questions was realized as was living the Gospel through community learning experiences. Moreover, access to quality theological material and reflections supported dialogue. The role of the teacher as Specialist, Moderator and Witness became powerfully apparent as were goals of avoiding presumptive language and applying powerful pedagogies. Notwithstanding the effectiveness of the pilot, new understandings emerged from the experience and were revealed in the independent and evaluative practices that accompanied the pilot program.

6.3.2 New Understandings The overall aim of RML was the provision of an innovative Religious Education program in response to parent and student wishes for increased flexibility. While the rationale within the course handbook gave effect to this aim, the commentary by teachers after being engaged with the curriculum, articulated the aim as entailing leading students out into the world by providing a creative space for their learning. The accompanying research into levels of satisfaction within this overall conclusion confirmed outcomes of value and permitted a detailed examination of Choice to study RML, and program elements within the educational constructs of Topics, Pedagogies and Outcomes. New understandings arising from an examination of Choice identified student interest and the availability of subject information as significant. Surprisingly, intuitive and predictable influences from the peer group and parents did not feature. Significantly, teacher participation was characterised by the nature of the curriculum

88

6 What Matters Most: Interpretation of the Data

and their own spirituality being advanced. Parental support for the selection of RML was associated with the flexibility it offered to support tertiary entrance preparation. RML Topics of significance underlined the importance of Ethics and Catholic Social Teaching, together with knowledge of other World Religions in discussions about existential questions. Teachers expressed satisfaction in topics which allowed for the application of a spiritual dimension and reinforced the dialogical process as contributing to their appreciation of mission. Of interest from the teaching and learning perspective was the significance of prior learning to support students, together with the formation and experience of teachers in content awareness and processes of dialogue. The process of dialogue together with access to media and technology were foundational to the learning experience of students. Research suggests that dialogical pedagogies, when employed generally in the classroom (not just in RE), see increased student engagement and improved higher order thinking skills (Kuhn & Crowell, 2011; Wegerif, 2001). Experiential learning and reflection reinforced critical skills and the national goals of schooling within and beyond the RML experience. For senior secondary students the activation of personal agency and flexible learning opportunities provided an experience of individualised and flexible approaches to learning into the future, particularly for those students anticipating a tertiary career. Outcomes for students mirrored the processes of learning with characteristics of listening, dialoguing and collaborative learning being established. For teachers, reflective discussions on topics provided a deeper appreciation of school purpose and the integration of learning within the wider religious dimension and culture of the Catholic school. For parents, the practical application of values was observed beyond the classroom. These new understandings of the longitudinal study provided an opportunity for theoretical modelling. Within each of the valued practices, there were elements that were ‘stand alone in their significance’. Moreover, when considered collectively, the valued practices offered a level of dynamism which precipitated intended and unforeseen positive outcomes. In the words of one respondent, “RML was like no other subject.” The pilot program served to identify its unique contribution to Religious Education in the senior secondary Catholic school and permitted identification of insights relevant to other innovative initiatives being considered or in the process of development.

6.4 Modelling and Advancing Theoretical Propositions The Catholic school as a learning organisation can be characterised by five disciplines that converge in ways that support innovation and build long-standing change and transformation. The dimensions of systems thinking, personal mastery, mental models, building shared vision and team learning constitute the means for development which build a sense of the whole and advance people as active participants in shaping a preferred social reality.

6.4 Modelling and Advancing Theoretical Propositions

89

Learning organisations are places where people continually expand their capacity to create the results, they truly desire, where new and expansive patterns of thinking are nurtured, where collective aspiration is set free, and where people are continually learning to see the whole together. Moreover, the power of an approach to transformation that is centred in a unifying and integrating paradigm holds considerable advantages (Senge, 1990, p. 3). Mental models are the “deeply ingrained assumptions, generalisations, or even pictures and images that influence how we understand the world and how we take action” (Senge, 1990, p. 8). These models can be reinforced through visual representations or a diagram which depicts the relationships among the parts and provides for an immediate and accessible interpretation of the whole. The generation of visual representations in Religious Education is argued to support not only research findings in articulated frameworks but in ways that permit replication of the research in support of emerging frameworks that position the efficacy of the research but are not limited by it. Overall, the goal is to promote frameworks that both underpin research in Religious Education and support the integration with other pieces of research which add clarity to the wider research domain. “The clear explication of the theoretical framework which underpins research in Religious Education is what holds the pieces of the jigsaw together” (Cullen, 2022, p. 196).

6.4.1 Modelling the Integration RML is an example of reconceptualising Religious Education at the senior secondary level. It is responsive to varying expectations of the community while being faithful to the mission and purpose of the school. The key components arising from the research which support its unique characteristics are displayed in Fig. 6.1. They emerge from research findings which underscore the significance of Religious Education as meaning making in a world that is increasingly recognised as connected and supported within a common humanity (Lane, 2015). The innovative curriculum, Religion, Meaning and Life (RML), is centred on an anthropology which purports individuals as made in the image and likeness of God, and that within a common humanity, this foundational belief reflects the dignity of all people and their underlying relationship (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1994). In addition, RML can be characterised as organic in that it is founded on established quality practices; dynamic in terms of its sensitivity to developmental differences and local circumstances; and ecological in that within the life and the culture of the school community there exists an interdependence and prioritisation of what is important among all elements of the curriculum. The development of the pilot program and its projected implementation at scale align with the essentials of senior secondary school Religious Education. It is responsive to curriculum expectations that comprise essential elements being: pedagogical content knowledge and pedagogical learner knowledge; the relationship between teacher and student as being authentic; the relevance of the topics studied as

90

6 What Matters Most: Interpretation of the Data

Alignment

Choice

Topics

Integration

School

A formative educational experience

Community

Family

Engagement

Classroom

Pedagogy

Outcomes Empowerment Fig. 6.1 The educational experience of RML

supporting “real life for contemporary issues rather than institutional maintenance”; and, relationships that engage colleagues, parents and the wider community (Ang, 2012, p. 19), If these four essentials can be achieved in the Religious Education classroom, students will be engaged in their learning, which in turn will lead to higher quality intellectual work, and a more enjoyable and productive educational experience for both the teacher and student. Teaching is a profession where success usually comes in very small increments. But the rewards for such hard won success is that it resonates in the students’ lives long after a lesson or year is concluded. (p.21)

The overall findings on the development, delivery and outcomes of RML reinforce its’ significance to the mission of the Catholic school, its’ relevance and effectiveness for senior secondary students, its’ influence on school culture, and its’ contribution to the professional formation of teachers. The conclusion is that RML is meaningful to students, engaging and informative for teachers and welcomed by parents. The model (Fig. 6.1) for conceptualising the effectiveness of the pilot RML brings together multiple social relationships, educational parameters, and systemic supports within and beyond the RML school experience. Inspection of the model provides for the following conclusions. RML as a formative educational experience: Christian anthropology draws from a Gospel imagination as to humankind made in the image and likeness of God, and the invitation to experience this common foundation in love and truth. The first

6.4 Modelling and Advancing Theoretical Propositions

91

educational conclusion, and centrally represented in Fig. 6.1, is that RML mirrors the Catholic school as a place that is founded on a vison of the human person which recognises the dignity of all and the invitation to seek the wholistic development of each person. The experience is to engage the whole person within a respectful relationship with self and others in ways that support fullness in life in support of the person within a flourishing learning community. Education in this light, and Religious Education in particular, is formational in nature as it is premised on learners and teachers being drawn into a worldview. For some this may be unashamedly Christian within the Catholic Tradition, but for others it may be equally inclusive and respectful of other World Religions, while for some it will be a basis for ethical considerations in addressing existential questions. RML as a relational experience: A second perspective and educational conclusion as to RML is that it involves an appreciation of the individual’s prior learning and associated learning expectations. This primary understanding is coupled with an appreciation of the learner in the social context of the classroom, the unique and significant role of the teacher in the carriage of roles as expert, moderator and witness, and expectations of the school within the life of the community. This dynamic and interactive set of social factors is shown within the inner circle of Fig. 6.1. RML as a quality curriculum: A third educational perspective of RML is that it incorporates established educational practices and is centred on quality curriculum constructs of Topics, Pedagogies and Outcomes. These educational practices constitute the backbone of the RML curriculum. They are the essential elements which have been validated as necessary, comprehensive and integral to its effective implementation. They are represented in Fig. 6.1 within the four quadrants of the figure. RML as an interdependent initiative: A fourth perspective of RML is that its development and implementation is based on a variety of influences. First, the program engages personnel within and beyond the school; second, it is aligned with the policy of the school to provide a Religious Education curriculum aligned with mission; third, it is mindful of choice and flexibility in the selection of it as a Religious Education option; and fourth, it is an initiative that is integrated within the overall life and culture of the school. These system influences include: alignment with school mission through consistent policy and practice; engagement of multiple personnel within and beyond the immediate learning community; empowerment of students and teachers as co-learners while respecting individual agency and experience; and, integration of the personal dimension within the self along with the life and culture of the school. Collectively, these wider and significant elements fundamental to curriculum programming and delivery of RML. They are identified as the outer elements of the model (see Fig. 6.1). RML as an example of recontextualisation: The fifth and final perspective of RML is that it is an exemplar of recontextualization. It is representative of what is significant to the community and integral to the Catholic Christian tradition of the school. RML is responsive to varying expectations summed up as student agency, pedagogical flexibility, and school community connections. The dotted line in Fig. 6.1 identifies

92

6 What Matters Most: Interpretation of the Data

this wholeness and changing levels of encounters that are suggestive of the influences of the ongoing flexible characteristics within the program. Overall, the experience of RML has a differential impact on each person, is responsive to uniqueness in locations, aspects of teaching and learning emphases, and student priorities. The overall research conclusions confirm RML as a plausible, authentic response to Religious Education provision. Its’ outcomes are supported within the research literature and underline the pre-eminence in dialogue (Luby, 2019) and the realisation that differences in religious traditions and spiritualities are welcomed, as distinct from, being perceived as a challenge to be addressed (CCE, 2022; Polleyfeyt, 2013; 2018; Pollefeyt & Richards, 2019; Sjoborg, 2015).

6.4.2 Advancing Theoretical Propositions Religion, Meaning and Life exemplifies a Reconceptualist Approach to the development, delivery and review of Religious Education at the senior secondary level within the Catholic school. The longitudinal research on RML permit the advancement of a series of theoretical propositions which were associated with satisfaction levels of students, teachers and parents. These theoretical propositions include the following: Theoretical proposition: Formative Senior secondary Religious Education in a Catholic school is formative in nature in so far as the process of formation entails shaping and guiding perspectives from experience and exposure to a breadth of religious interpretation. This reflects a Christian understanding of the human person in terms of the holistic development of the individual within the overall evolution of human flourishing within community. Themes: Gospel values of love and truth; Inclusive practices; respectful engagement; holistic learning Theoretical proposition: Social Senior secondary Religious Education in a Catholic school is relational and draws from understandings of the unique development of the learner within a social context of the classroom, family, school and community. Themes: Collaborative processes; student agency; experiential learning; trusting relationships Theoretical proposition: Educational Senior secondary Religious Education in a Catholic school is founded on quality educational experiences in the nomination of Topics, Pedagogies and Outcomes integral to the mission and culture of the school. Themes: Relevant curriculum; ethical applications; dialogical processes; existential questions; rich pedagogy

References

93

Theoretical proposition: Interdependent systems Senior secondary Religious Education in a Catholic school is an interdependent experience characterised by systems of alignment, engagement, empowerment and integration within a common and shared mission. Themes: Alignment with mission; engagement of multiple personnel; empowerment of students and teachers; integration with the individual, life and culture of the school The nominated theoretical propositions are supportive of the effectiveness of recontextualised Religious Education in the senior secondary school. They provide a theoretical base for the practical implementation of RML at scale while also offering lenses into evaluation and development of similar initiatives.

References Ang, K. (2012). Engaging the secondary school student. Journal of Religious Education, 60(1), 15–22. Bakker, C. (2021). Facing the unknown future: Religion and education on the move. In Digital Conference on International Seminar on Religious Education and Values. ISREV. Barnes, L. P. (2020). Crisis, controversy and the future of religious education. Routledge. Bishops of Australia. (2021). 200 years young. https://www.ncec.catholic.edu.au/images/Pastoral_ Letter_200_Years_Young_18022021.pdf. Braten, O. (2021). MOVe with RE-searchers across the curriculum and national boarders to achieve deep learning: Experimenting with teaching methodology developed in Exeter, UK, in a local “university school” in Trondheim, Norway. In Digital Conference on International Seminar on Religious Education and Values. ISREV. Brisbane Catholic Education. (2013). Religious education curriculum P-12. Retrieved from https:// cspqld.schoolzineplus.com/religious-education-curriculum-p-12. Brisbane Catholic Education. (2019). Religion meaning and life pilot course handbook, version 2. Brisbane Catholic Education. Brisbane Catholic Education. (2020). Religious education curriculum P-12. Retrieved from http:// www.rec.bne.catholic.edu.au/Pages/Religious-Education.aspx. Catechism of the Catholic Church. (1994). St Pauls Publications. Congregation for Catholic Education. (1977). The Catholic school. St Paul Publications. Congregation for Catholic Education. (1988). The religious dimension of education in a Catholic school: Guidelines for reflection and renewal. St Paul Publications. Congregation for Catholic Education. (2014). Educating today and tomorrow: A renewing passion. https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc_con_cca theduc_doc_20140407_educare-oggi-e-domani_en.html. Congregation for Catholic Education. (2022). The identity of the Catholic school for a culture of dialogue. Retrieved from https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/docume nts/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20220125_istruzione-identita-scuola-cattolica_en.html. Coupar, B. (2022). Catholic identity: Shaping learning, service and action in the Catholic school. In National Catholic Education Conference: The Future is Listening. Live and Virtual. Craig, M. (2022). A reconceptualist approach to Religious Education and place of formation. In RE Academic Conference. Baulkham Hills. Cullen, S. (2022). Pieces of a jigsaw: Developing a theoretical framework for research in religious education. Journal of Religious Education, 70(2), 191–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40839-02200168-8.

94

6 What Matters Most: Interpretation of the Data

Hall, D., & Sultmann, W. F. (2020). Ways forward in religious education: Reflections of an Australian colloquium. eJournal of Catholic Education in Australasia, 4(1), 1–23. Kuhn, D., & Crowell, A. (2011). Dialogic argumentation as a vehicle for developing young adolescents’ thinking. Psychological Science, 22(4), 545–552. Lane, D. A. (2015). Catholic education in the light of Vatican II and laudato si. Veritas. Luby, A. (2019). Dialogic skills in RE: Recontextualising the dialogue school. Journal of Religious Education, 67(2), 127–142. McCrindle, M. (2021). The impact of faith on australian society. (Olive Tree Media). https:// www.olivetreemedia.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/The-impact-of-faith-on-Australiansociety_McCrindle.pdf. National Catholic Education Commission (NCEC). (2018). Religious Education in Australian Catholic Schools: Framing Paper. NCEC. Pollefeyt, D., & Richards, M. (2019). The living art of religious education: A paradigm of hermeneutics and dialogue for Re at faith schools today. British Journal of Religious Education, 42(3), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/01416200.2019.1593106. Pollefeyt, D. (2013). The lustre of life. Hermeneutic-communicative concept of religious education. Narthex, 13(1), 62–68. Pollefeyt, D. (2018). Hermeneutical-communicative religious education. In ECSIP Queensland intensive course: Part II supplementary literature (pp. 1–4). Catholic University of Leuven: Faculty of Theology and Religious Studies. Roebben, B. (2021). Religious educational leadership in times of upheaval. How to build sustainably on insights from the past? In Digital Conference on International Seminar on Religious Education and Values. Rossiter, G. (2018). Life to the full—The changing landscape of contemporary spirituality: Implications for Catholic School Religious Education. Agora. Scott, K. (1984). Three traditions of religious education. Religious Education, 79(3), 323–339. https://doi.org/10.1080/0034408400790302. Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organisation (Kindle ed.). Century Business: Random House. Sjoborg, A. (2015). One needs to be free: Making sense of young people’s talk about religion in multicultural Sweden. Journal of Religious Education, 63(2–31), 117–128. Skeie, G. (2021). Who cares about RE: Recent curriculum development in Norwegian RE in the context of change in educational policy and the role of religion in society. In Digital Conference on International Seminar on Religious Education and Values. ISREV. Sultmann, W. F., & Brown, R. (2019). Mission and teacher identity: A case for relationships. Journal of Religious Education, 67(2), 153–163. Sultmann, W. F., Lamb, J., Hall, D., & Borg, G. (2020). Student perceptions of a trial religious education curriculum: Establishing baseline data. Journal of Beliefs and Values, 42(2), 247–257. https://doi.org/10.1080/13617672.2020.1818923. Sultmann, W. F., Lamb, J., Hall, D., & Borg, G. (2021a). Into the deep: Teacher reflections of the development and implementation of a trial religious education curriculum. Religious Education, 116(5), 531–544. https://doi.org/10.1080/00344087.2021.1954341. Sultmann, W. F., Lamb, J., Hall, D., & Borg, G. (2021b). Into the deep: A quantitative analysis of teacher ratings of the development and implementation of a trial religious education curriculum. British Journal of Religious Education, 44(1), 26–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/01416200.2021. 195115. Sultmann, W. F., Lamb, J., Hall, D., & Borg, G. (2022). Teacher and student evaluations of a trial RE curriculum: Implications for scale. British Journal of Religious Education. https://doi.org/10. 1080/01416200.2022.2042191. Wegerif, R. (2001). Applying a dialogical model of reason in the classroom. In R. Joiner, D. Faulkner, D. Miell, & K. Littleton (Eds.), Rethinking collaborative learning, Free Association Press.

Chapter 7

Practice Implications

Abstract In this chapter records the research to practice emphases that emerged from the Religion, Meaning and Life (RML) pilot program. These implications are summarised as: participant agency and support; curriculum; pedagogy; formation; Catholic school identity; and evaluation. In combination the implications provide a platform for continuous improvement and the practical application of RML at scale. Keywords Australia · Catholic · Religious Education · Senior secondary · Curriculum · Practice · School

7.1 Practice Emphases Subject to school provision and student choice, the following research to practice emphases are recommended for consideration.

7.1.1 Participant Agency and Support RML is unique in its expectations of students and teachers. Expectations include: . Discernment processes that identify the learning styles (level of independence in learning) and needs of students. . Teachers’ capabilities: knowledge, skills, behaviours, and dispositions in relation to the religious meaning systems of senior secondary students. . Systemic and school support of curriculum, pedagogy, formation, and evaluative understandings and practices.

7.1.2 Curriculum . The integration of a Catholic Christian faith-based meaning system in the engagement with existential questions. © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 W. Sultmann et al., Re-imagining Senior Secondary Religious Education, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9180-6_7

95

96

7 Practice Implications

. . . .

Knowledge of Other World Religions as a basis for inclusive dialogue. Ethical applications centred on the life and message of Jesus. Experiential learning and discussion as integral to unit content. Advancing student interpersonal skills (listening to others, dialoguing, making connections, understanding self, and contributing to community) as foundational to curriculum outcomes. . Curriculum and program preparation aligned with school mission, the religious dimension, and the culture of the learning community.

7.1.3 Pedagogy . Integrating the model and message of Jesus together with Catholic Social Teaching within all learning modules. . Developing student dialogical skills across all RML learning modules. . Aligning unit content with experiential learning. . Engaging service learning as an example of Christian witness and a basis for advancing personal and social skills.

7.1.4 Formation . Supporting teacher awareness and applications as to the place and nature of prayer within all learning modules. . Professional learning in content, and the development and application of dialogue skills. . Valuing the relationship of teaching with personal spiritual development.

7.1.5 Catholic School Identity . That RML be understood and affirmed for its unique and integral contribution to school mission and identity. . The process of dialogue be recognised as a means for building Catholic school identity.

7.1.6 Evaluation . Evidence-based data gathering be reviewed and continued as a means for curriculum renewal and accountability. . Research on the ongoing roll out of RML be pursued.

7.4 Conclusion

97

7.2 Limitations The study focused on a particular approach to senior school Religious Education in a Catholic school system. In this context, it was conducted in accord with various assumptions. These included the geographical, cultural, social and ecclesial obligations of the Archdiocese within which the research was conducted, expectations as to curriculum quality, the professional learning and competency of teachers, and the invitational nature of the program within school and system ethical provisions. The review of RML was undertaken during the COVID-19 pandemic resulting in no face-to-face interactions with students. In addition, findings from the combination of studies were influenced by initial, and in some cases, small sample sizes. As well, commentary on RML initiatives was contextualised by a progressive and comparatively early stage of reflection without the advantage of longer-term experiences and their implications. Notwithstanding these limitations, digital face-to-face engagements with students and teachers, together with RML staff and specialist consultants were significant to a fuller appreciation of the factors of preparation, support (internal and external), curriculum delivery and outcomes.

7.3 Further Research The review of RML was conducted progressively across two years. Further research would be informed by regular annual reviews on a stratified sample of schoolbased programs. In addition, survey instrumentation would be improved through increasing precision in avoiding items of potential overlap. As well, focus groups with parents would serve to inform the implications of the program on overall student outcomes in the short and longer term and across the many dimensions of student social engagement.

7.4 Conclusion A key objective of RML was to promote Religious Education as relevant and to use and apply religious traditions in living and exploring the contemporary world. The review assessed what was effective in senior secondary Religious Education as a basis for senior secondary students transitioning into tertiary education and or community engagement beyond the school. Overall, the examination of RML identifies this curriculum as serving the holistic development of the student, advancing teacher qualities and relationships within the culture of the Catholic school and reassuring parents that the curriculum is inclusive, respectful and supportive within and beyond the classroom. RML provides a formative educational experience that supports the transformation of students, teachers and parents to varying degrees

98

7 Practice Implications

and in individualistic ways. Considering this research, RML can be characterised as dynamic, interactive, and differentially influential due to the variation in needs, motivations, preparation, expectations and engagement of participants. Understandings emerging from the pilot research establish a model on which to consider the complexity and significance of the curriculum and the propositions that arise and inform future provision in Religious Education.

Appendix A

Student Survey

Rate on a scale of 1–5 the influence of each of the following on your choice of RML 1 (low influence) (1)

2 (2)

3 (3)

4 (4)

5 (high influence) (5)

Teacher (1)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Subject information (2)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Parent preference (3)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Peers (4)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Grade 10 results (5)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

General interest (6)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Faith commitment (7)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Rate on a scale of 1–5 the importance of each of the following topics in RML

God as trinity (1)

1 (low importance) (1)

2 (2)

3 (3)

4 (4)

5 (high importance) (5)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Scripture (2)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Jesus (3)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Catholic social teaching (4)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Christian Religions ◯ (5)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Other world religions (6) Church (7)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Prayer (8)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Sacraments (9)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯ (continued)

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 W. Sultmann et al., Re-imagining Senior Secondary Religious Education, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9180-6

99

100

Appendix A: Student Survey

(continued) 1 (low importance) (1)

2 (2)

3 (3)

4 (4)

5 (high importance) (5)

Doctrines (church teachings (10)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Christian life (11)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Ethics (12)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Rate on a scale of 1–5 the importance of each of the following ways to learn RML 1 (low importance) (1)

2 (2)

3 (3)

4 (4)

5 (high importance) (5)

Dialogue (1)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Textbook (2)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Applying scripture (3)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Media and technology (4)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Peer to peer learning (5)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Projects (6)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Applying RE (7)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Praying (8)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Solving problem (9)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Rate on a scale of 1–5 outcomes from your study of RML 1(low outcome) (1)

2 (2)

3 (3)

4 (4)

5 (high outcome) (5)

Listening to others (1)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Dialoguing with others (2)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Critiquing information (3)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Making connections ◯ (4)

◯

◯

◯

◯

Understanding myself (5)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Contributing to community (6)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Applying Catholic teachings (7)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Praying (8)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Appendix A: Student Survey

101

Rate on a scale of 1–5 your evaluation of your RE experience 1 (low level of satisfaction) (1)

2 (2)

3 (3)

4 (4)

5 (high level of satisfaction) (5)

Topics (1)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Teaching (2)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Outcomes (3)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Overall satisfaction (4)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Appendix B

Teacher Survey

Rate on a scale of 1–5 each of the following influences on your participation to teach RML 2 (2)

3 (3)

4 (4)

5 (high influence) (5)

Personal spirituality (1) ◯

1 (low influence) (1)

◯

◯

◯

◯

Purpose of RML (2)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Colleagues (3)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Resourcing support (4)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Student group (5)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Workload (6)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Practice emphasis (7)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Professional agency (8) ◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Directed to teach (9)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Promotional prospects (10)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Rate on a scale of 1–5 the relevance of each of the four units of RML for students. 1 (low relevance) 2 (2) 3 (3) 4 (4) 5 (high relevance) Don’t know (6) (1) (5) The spiritual and ◯ sacred dimension to life (1)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Holy words, ◯ sacred stories (2)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

The implications ◯ of belief (3)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯ (continued)

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 W. Sultmann et al., Re-imagining Senior Secondary Religious Education, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9180-6

103

104

Appendix B: Teacher Survey

(continued) 1 (low relevance) 2 (2) 3 (3) 4 (4) 5 (high relevance) Don’t know (6) (5) (1) Church: learning ◯ from the past, living in the present, creating the future (4)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Rate on a scale of 1–5 your use of each of the following learning experiences in RML 2 (2)

3 (3)

4 (4)

5 (high use) (5)

Don’t know (6)

Camp fire—direct ◯ instruction (1)

1 (low use) (1)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Watering hole—social learning (2)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Cave—personal reflection (3)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Life—integration through witness (4)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Rate on a scale of 1–5 each of the following teacher functions in RML 1 (low function) (1)

2 (2)

3 (3)

4 (4)

5 (high function) (5)

Witness (1)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Specialist (2)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Moderator (3)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Rate on a scale of 1–5 your use of each of the following assessment practices in RML

Subject participation (1)

1 (low use) (1)

2 (2)

3 (3)

4 (4)

5 (high use) (5)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Portfolio (2)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Project-based (3)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Group work (4)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Appendix B: Teacher Survey

105

Rate on a scale of 1–5 your level of professional discussion with internal personnel on RML 1 (low level) (1)

2 (2)

3 (3)

4 (4)

5 (high level) (5)

Peers (1)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Curriculum specialist (2)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Assistant principal (Identity/RE) (3)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Leadership team (4)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Priest/chaplain/campus minister (5)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Rate on a scale of 1–5 your level of professional discussion with external personnel 1 (low level) (1)

2 (2)

3 (3)

4 (4)

5 (high level) (5)

Education officer RE (1)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

RML Network (2)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Specialist consultants (3)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Rate on a scale of 1–5 the extent to which the teaching of RML has influenced your: 1 (low extent) (1)

2 (2)

3 (3)

4 (4)

5 (high extent) (5)

Personal faith (1)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Appreciation of mission (2)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Appreciation of religious dimension (3)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Pastoral care (4)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Staff relationships (5)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Pedagogy (6)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Integrated curriculum (7)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Rate on a sale of 1–5 your level of satisfaction with

RML topics (1)

1 (low level) (1)

2 (2)

3 (3)

4 (4)

5 (high level) (5)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

RML pedagogy (2)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

RML assessment (3)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Internal support (4)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯ (continued)

106

Appendix B: Teacher Survey

(continued) Communal influence (5)

1 (low level) (1)

2 (2)

3 (3)

4 (4)

5 (high level) (5)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

External support (6)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Overall level (7)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Appendix C

Parent Survey

Rate on a scale of 1–5 rate your child’s reason for selecting RML 1 (low priority) (1)

2 (2)

3 (3)

4 (4)

5 (high priority) (5)

Prioritising ATAR (1) ◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Integration of religion ◯ (2)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Flexible delivery of subject (3)

Rate on a scale of 1–5 your observations of RML None (1)

1 (low level) (2)

2 (3)

3 (4)

4 (5)

5 (high level) (6)

Difference in topics (1)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Differences in teaching (2)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Difference in assessment (3)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Rate on a scale of 1–5 the impact that the study of RML has had on your child’s 1 (Low impact) (1)

2 (2)

3 (3)

4 (4)

5 (high impact) (5)

Spirituality (1)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Faith understanding (2)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Faith practice (3)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Faith with life (4)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯ (continued)

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 W. Sultmann et al., Re-imagining Senior Secondary Religious Education, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9180-6

107

108

Appendix C: Parent Survey

(continued) Service learning (5)

1 (Low impact) (1)

2 (2)

3 (3)

4 (4)

5 (high impact) (5)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Values (6)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Religion interest (7)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Study habits (8)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Rate on a scale of 1–5 your overall level of satisfaction with RML

Satisfaction with RML (1)

1 (low level) (1)

2 (2)

3 (3)

4 (4)

5 (high level) (5)

◯

◯

◯

◯

◯

Appendix D

Semi-structured Focus Group Interview Process for Students and Teachers

The following protocol applied to all interviews: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Introductions and Welcome. Appreciation to teachers and students for completion of the RML survey. Purpose of conversation: to better understand survey responses. Time allocation: approximately 30–40 min. Sessions were recorded to ensure that comments could be transcribed. Students and teachers remained anonymous during interviews. 6. Use of a PowerPoint presentation introduced each of five questions. a. b. c. d. e.

What influenced your choice of RML?; What topics hold most significance for you?; What teaching approaches were most impactful in RML learning?; What outcomes were of most significance from the experience of RML; Any other comments that will help in offering the course to others?

7. Students and teachers were invited to speak openly and freely. 8. Encouragement was given to students and teachers to share equitably in the interview process. 9. Appreciation and closure.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 W. Sultmann et al., Re-imagining Senior Secondary Religious Education, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9180-6

109

Appendix E

RML Teaching and Learning Principles

Objectives By the conclusion of the course of study, students will be able to: • Identify that religions, religious traditions and other belief systems are both diverse and internally pluralistic. • Demonstrate a post-critical understanding of religious ideas, narratives and practices within respective religious traditions and the recontextualising of meaning within a contemporary context. • Understand that horizons of meaning shift, historically speaking, requiring that the deeper questions about life’s meaning and purpose be asked in accordance with the prevailing horizon of meaning. • Reflect on and evaluate diverse hermeneutical viewpoints enabling a critical and productive encounter of belief system and context. • Develop skills that contribute to dialogue with alternative religious and secular narratives and discourses in accordance with the hermeneutical-communicative model. • Apply learnings through focused engagement in the religious life of the school via Service-Learning, Experiential Learning and Ritual and Reflective Practice. • Develop and demonstrate effective time-management and self-monitoring skills. • Produce artefacts that typify and reflect a range of deep learnings across the course content. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives Within all topics across all four units of study, Aboriginal perspectives and Torres Strait Islander perspectives have been embedded in the subject matter. World Religions and Secular perspectives Within all topics across all four units of study, World Religion perspectives and secular perspectives have been embedded in the subject matter. © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 W. Sultmann et al., Re-imagining Senior Secondary Religious Education, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9180-6

111

112

Appendix E: RML Teaching and Learning Principles

Reconceptualist Approach Since 2008, the classroom learning and teaching of religion in the Archdiocese of Brisbane has been characterised by a Reconceptualist Approach. In short, it operates from an educational framework rather than from a catechetical or ‘shared Christian praxis’ framework. The most prominent proponent of the Reconceptualist Approach has been Gabriel Moran upon whose work the Brisbane Catholic Education Model for Religious Education is based. In a Reconceptualist Approach, the classroom religion program becomes a primary arena for dealing with the critical religious issues and concerns of life. There are three key considerations for teachers using this approach: The Avoidance of Presumptive Language, Teaching ‘about’ the Tradition and Powerful Pedagogies (BCE, 2013, p. 22). Avoidance of Presumptive Language In a Reconceptualist Approach, teachers of Religion, Meaning and Life avoid using presumptive language and do not start with assumptions about students’ faith development based upon religious affiliation. It is preferable that teachers use language that is invitational and educational to engage students in the religion classroom. Students who can readily identify themselves as Catholics are affirmed by this approach. Further, when using non-presumptive language, teachers provide students with the freedom to respond in ways that do not assume a programmed response (BCE, 2013, p. 22). Teaching ‘about’ the Tradition In teaching about the Catholic Christian tradition, teachers of Religion, Meaning and Life give witness to the value they place on their personal beliefs as much by the authenticity of the teaching processes they employ, as by who they are as people in search of meaning and purpose (BCE, 2013, p.23). Teachers of Religion, Meaning and Life are challenged to build critical distance between themselves and the content they are teaching; to make available space for authentic dialogue; to allow students the freedom to investigate, to inquire and to use their religious imagination. Subsequently, teachers and students may return to their respective religious traditions with enhanced understanding. The flexible, online, self-directed nature of the course requires the teacher to be a specialist in content as well as being an enabler of the flexible design and delivery of the course. It requires the teacher to more explicitly assume the role of “witness, specialist and moderator (WSM) during the learning process”. Powerful Pedagogies A Reconceptualist Approach requires powerful pedagogies that engage students with the rich resources of the tradition. In Religion, Meaning and Life the religion teacher acknowledges the reality of students’ lives, identifies learners’ levels of thinking and builds on the attributes each student brings to the religion classroom. Teachers are challenged to incorporate powerful questioning pedagogy, within the context of a

Appendix E: RML Teaching and Learning Principles

113

community of thinking, that stimulates and supports genuine, active and authentic student engagement. Consequently, an inquiry method is at the heart of any learning experience within Religion, Meaning and Life (BCE, 2013, p. 23). In order to facilitate the use of powerful pedagogies, four ‘Learning Spaces,’ based on the model developed by David Thornburg, are integrated into the learning experiences for each topic within respective units. These four spaces are: • Campfire: Didactic presentation by teacher—home to the lecture. • Watering Hole: Social Learning among peers—home to dialogue. • Cave: Reflective Learning—home to cognitive construction of understanding of individual learner. • Life: The meaningful application of things learned as a demonstration of knowledge and skills acquired. Teacher as Witness, Moderator and Specialist In alignment with the Reconceptualist Approach and the importance of authentic dialogue, it is important that the classroom narrative be kept open and hermeneutic intersections actively explored as a means to interrupt any closed narratives in the learning process. Consequently, the teacher is pivotal in the learning process as witness, moderator and specialist (BCE, 2013, p. 13): • As witness, the teacher presents the Catholic Tradition as a living faith and an attractive option, with a humble and supportive attitude that is open to additional sources of wisdom outside of the Catholic Tradition. The teacher offers their constructed, particular and Christian synthesis of faith understood as a work-inprogress. • As moderator, the teacher brings into dialogue students’ issues, experiences and thinking both within the Catholic Tradition and beyond. This requires sensitivity as it requires the teacher to join young people in their searching and questioning. In line with the hermeneutical-communicative model, the teacher, while grounded in his/her own tradition, remains open to other traditions and secular viewpoints as avenues of wisdom • As specialist, the teacher offers opportunity to develop deep knowledge of matters concerning Christianity, Catholicism, and other religious, philosophical and secular perspectives. The teacher draws artfully upon resources from the Catholic faith and culture to inform and invigorate the work of students at the hermeneutic intersections (BCE, 2013, p. 13). Student as Co-Inquirer and Dialogue Partner An assumption of Religion, Meaning and Life is that students, along with the teacher, are co-inquirers and dialogue partners in the learning process. Together, student and teacher search, question and source the most suitable response to life’s problems and issues. However, as students may be in different developmental stages when responding to these questions, a faith perspective cannot be assumed. The school or college, therefore, is not a ‘community of faith’ in the same sense as a voluntary

114

Appendix E: RML Teaching and Learning Principles

religious community (E.g., parish, religious order). While the student can expect Catholic liturgy and religious education, for instance, it cannot be presumed that a student attends church or subscribes to a Catholic Christian worldview. It is because students are in different places intellectually, emotionally and spiritually that a key aim of this course is to appropriately resource them for making sense of life. This is achieved “by giving them educational access to their religious heritage” as well as to the rich treasures present in other religious and secular traditions. Moreover, equipping students with the skills of “critical evaluation,” in order to discern how contemporary culture can shape and influence identity development, is crucial. Consequently, Religion, Meaning and Life is underpinned by an understanding of the student as co-learner and dialogue partner. Dialogue and the Hermeneutical-Communicative Model The hermeneutical-communicative model is “confessionally bound” and “based on a preferential option for the Roman Catholic narrative”. However, this narrative is not closed and needs to be open to expansion, deepening and change. The hermeneuticalcommunicative model identifies that the essence of a human being consists in the ability to transcend his or her own reality through dialogue and come to a new understanding as a result. This is particularly important within contemporary culture due to the multicultural and pluralistic forces which shape it. Within the dialogical process, being open to the belief systems of others is called the “hermeneutical space”. “One of the tasks of Religious Education is to allow children and young people to discover this hermeneutical space within themselves and others”. The hermeneutical space allows for diverse and divergent horizons of meaning to connect and intersect and this leads to a recontextualising of the Catholic tradition, as well as other religious and secular ideas for students. A pivotal feature of Religion, Meaning and Life is the importance given to dialogue as a primary mode for encountering the other. The other is identified as that which is situated beyond the horizon of personal experience and a personal world view. Within the classroom, students are invited to be open to an encounter with the other in the theological material explored, the relationships within the classroom and in the opportunities for Service-Learning, Experiential Learning and Ritual and Reflective Practice provided. It is anticipated that the intersection of distinct human experiences and world views will facilitate the development of a recontextualised understanding of meaning and purpose informed by the Catholic Tradition. Hermeneutical intersections (tensions and conflicting interpretations) can be exploited using the following pedagogical structure: • Revealing—recognising and expressing hermeneutical intersections—that different interpretations of ideas and texts are possible. Teacher as specialist • Mobilising—establishing a classroom context of open-ended discussion in which it is understood that ideas and texts can be interpreted in many ways.

Appendix E: RML Teaching and Learning Principles

115

Teacher as moderator • Communicating—entering into conversation about ideas and texts, going in-depth and making room for difference. Teacher as moderator • Consolidating—capturing the moment from communication to insight as a result of multiple interpretations. Presenting results of communication process. Teacher as specialist and moderator • Integrating—students are invited towards maximal integration of lesson content/discussion in their own lives. As Pope Francis stated, dialogue is not merely about “posing the problems but also in searching together for ways to resolve them”. Teacher as witness

Appendix F

Content of Units

2.0 Unit 1: The Spiritual and Sacred dimension to Life 2.1 Unit description This unit explores questions about how societies (particularly Western ones) articulate and engage with divine or sacred forces or beings in contemporary contexts. Many young people around the world are declaring themselves atheists or “none’s”— having no religion. The question is whether they are rejecting the idea of Sacred Beings or Numinous Forces, or rather finding current understandings and beliefs about the Sacred to be inadequate for a scientific, rationalist mindset. At the same time, there is a growing movement, in both Christian and other World Religions, of fundamentalist, literalist adherents who are quite militant in proclaiming their faith. The unit is currently divided into two topics: How does the Sacred and Spiritual make meaning for us? and How do we make meaning of the Incarnation today? Each topic is expressed as a fertile question, which allows participants to reflect on the nature of the Sacred and explore modern interpretations, understandings, and speculation about the existence of a personal God or gods. In addition, it facilitates a discussion of the impact of a changed understanding of the cosmos and our place within it, and the new metaphors for understanding the Divine. Moreover, it incorporates prayer, life beyond this one, and traditional doctrines about God, and Jesus for Christians. 2.1.1 Unit Requirements The learning of the unit consists of two topics that provide students with knowledge and skills associated with the unit. The unit topics are: • Topic 1: How does the Sacred and Spiritual make meaning for us? • Topic 2: How do we make meaning of the Incarnation today?

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 W. Sultmann et al., Re-imagining Senior Secondary Religious Education, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9180-6

117

118

Appendix F: Content of Units

3.0 Unit 2: Holy Words, Sacred Stories 3.1 Unit description This unit explores the relevance of ancient Sacred Texts for the lives of young people in post-modern context. While many young people today are claiming to have no affiliation with formal religion, they nevertheless demonstrate a deep interest in spirituality and a passion for social justice. There is particular interest in secular writers and spiritual teachers, such as Eckhart Tolle, Deepak Chopra and Neale Donald Walsh, that suggests a genuine hunger for quality spiritual teaching, coupled with an interest in certain sacred texts. For example, the Tao Te Ching by Lao Tzu, The Prophet by Kahil Gibran and A Course in Miracles by Helen Schucman are enjoying a resurgence today. The unit is currently divided into two topics. Each topic aims to highlight the importance and centrality of the biblical texts within the Catholic Christian Tradition, while also investigating and being open to the wealth of spiritual treasure within the sacred texts of other religious and non-religious traditions. Each topic is guided by a fertile question which allow the participants to begin again in encountering the Holy Words and Sacred Stories important to the Catholic Christian Tradition. Furthermore, students are challenged to recontextualise these in a form that gives fresh meaning and relevance for a contemporary audience. Opportunity to bring the worlds of Religion and Science into dialogue are provided when analysing creation and miracle stories within the Bible as well as the idea of revelation. Moreover, a candid look at the person of Jesus enables students to confront questions around his existence and historical identity and compare and contrast this with the image of Jesus presented in the Gospels. The critical eye is cast over many sacred texts whereby students are asked to confront and authentically respond to the ambiguities and questions contained within them. 3.1.1 Unit Requirements The learning of the unit consists of two topics that provide students with knowledge and skills associated with the unit. The unit topics are: • Topic 1: How can ancient words create meaning in contemporary contexts? • Topic 2: How about edited sacred texts with the very best of every religious tradition? 4.0 Unit 3 The Implications of Belief 4.1 Unit description This Unit explores the diversity of responses to particular moral and ethical issues in our world and aims to equip students to discern what may or may not constitute an ethical response to either a personal moral issue or social ethical issue. Informed by the rich moral theological heritage of the Catholic Christian Tradition, students

Appendix F: Content of Units

119

are encouraged to enter into dialogue with moral and ethical standpoints of other religious traditions, as well as secular viewpoints, and evaluate diverse and sometimes divergent responses to key moral and ethical issues of the 21st century. The Unit is currently divided into two topics. Topic 1 focusses primarily on an individual response to ethical issues, Topic 2 focusses on a collective or social response. Each topic aims to highlight the importance and centrality of a life of personal integrity and social responsibility within the Catholic Christian Tradition. Additionally, it encourages an openness to the wealth of moral and ethical teachings within other religious and non-religious traditions. Each topic is guided by a fertile question which allow the participants to focus on key sources and ethical teachings significant within the Catholic Christian Tradition as well as other religious traditions. Furthermore, students are challenged to examine and reflect on ethical frameworks within their own as well as other non/religious traditions and evaluate the extent to which they adequately navigate the seas of moral ambiguity and ethical pluralism. Opportunity to develop deep understanding of key moral and ethical issues in our world and evaluate a variety of responses to them is provided. Furthermore, the ability to situate ethics not only as something deeply personal but also as something profoundly social affords students the opportunity to question institutional responses to key moral and ethical issues and develop a rich appreciation of Social Justice teachings within the Catholic Christian Tradition. 4.1.1 Unit Requirements The learning of the unit consists of two topics that provide students with knowledge and skills associated with the unit. The unit topics are: • Topic 1: Religion and the fun bits of life go together like …? • Topic 2: Religion in the public square-Where and how does the conversation confront and challenge?

Appendix G

Toledo Guiding Principles on Teaching about Religions and Beliefs in Public Schools

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

Teaching about religions and beliefs must be provided in ways that are fair, accurate and based on sound scholarship. Students should learn about religions and beliefs in an environment respectful of human rights, fundamental freedoms and civic values. Those who teach about religions and beliefs should have a commitment to religious freedom that contributes to a school environment and practices that foster protection of the rights of others in a spirit of mutual respect and understanding among members of the school community. Teaching about religions and beliefs is a major responsibility of schools, but the manner in which this teaching takes place should not undermine or ignore the role of families and religious or belief organizations in transmitting values to successive generations. Efforts should be made to establish advisory bodies at different levels that take an inclusive approach to involving different stakeholders in the preparation and implementation of curriculum and in the training of teachers. Where a compulsory programme involving teaching about religions and beliefs is not sufficiently objective, efforts should be made to revise it to make it more balanced and impartial, but where this is not possible, or cannot be accomplished immediately, recognizing opt-out rights may be a satisfactory solution for parents and pupils, provided that the opt-out arrangements are structured in a sensitive and non-discriminatory way. Those who teach about religions and beliefs should be adequately educated to do so. Such teachers need to have the knowledge, attitude and skills to teach about religions and beliefs in a fair and balanced way. Teachers need not only subject-matter competence but pedagogical skills so that they can interact with students and help students interact with each other in sensitive and respectful ways. Preparation of curricula, textbooks and educational materials for teaching about religions and beliefs should take into account religious and non-religious views

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 W. Sultmann et al., Re-imagining Senior Secondary Religious Education, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9180-6

121

122

Appendix G: Toledo Guiding Principles on Teaching about Religions and Beliefs …

in a way that is inclusive, fair, and respectful. Care should be taken to avoid inaccurate or prejudicial material, particularly when this reinforces negative stereotypes. 8. Curricula should be developed in accordance with recognized professional standards in order to ensure a balanced approach to study about religions and beliefs. Development and implementation of curricula should also include open and fair procedures that give all interested parties appropriate opportunities to offer comments and advice. 9. Quality curricula in the area of teaching about religions and beliefs can only contribute effectively to the educational aims of the Toledo Guiding Principles if teachers are professionally trained to use the curricula and receive ongoing training to further develop their knowledge and competences regarding this subject matter. Any basic teacher preparation should be framed and developed according to democratic and human rights principles and include insight into cultural and religious diversity in society. 10. Curricula focusing on teaching about religions and beliefs should give attention to key historical and contemporary developments pertaining to religion and belief and reflect global and local issues. They should be sensitive to different local manifestations of religious and secular plurality found in schools and the communities they serve. Such sensitivities will help address the concerns of students, parents and other stakeholders in education.

Reference

Brisbane Catholic Education. (2013). Religious education curriculum P-12. https://cspqld.school zineplus.com/religious-education-curriculum-p-12.

Uncited References Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2021). Census. Retrieved from https://www.abs.gov.au/census/ guide-census-data. Australian Catholic Social Justice Council (ACSJC). (2019). Social teaching. https://socialjustice. catholic.org.au/about-us. Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies. (2018). Indigenous Australians: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Retrieved from https://aiatsis.gov.au/explore/art icles/indigenous-australians-aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-people. Barnes, P. (2001). Ideology, the phenomenological approach, and hermeneutics: A response to Professor Lovat. Religious Education, 96(4), 572. Buchanan, & Gellel, A.-M. (Eds.). (2019). Global perspectives on Catholic religious education in schools. Volume II, Learning and leading in a pluralist world. Springer Singapore. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-981-13-6127-2. Casanova, J. (1994). Public religions in the modern world. University of Chicago Press. Catholic Education Melbourne. (2018). Religious education curriculum framework documentation (Draft). Archdiocese of Melbourne. CathNews. (2022). Why Catholic Education is like a good souffle. CathNews. Churchill, R., Godhino, S., Keddie, A., Letts, W., Lowe, K., Mackay, J., McGill, M., Moss, J., Nagel, M., Shay, K., Ferguson, P., Nicholson, P., & Vick, M. (2016). Teaching: Making a difference (3 ed.). Wiley. Clare, J. (2022). Keynote presentation. In National Catholic Education Conference: The Future is Listening. Live and Virtual. Congregation for Catholic Education. (1982). Lay Catholics in schools: Witnesses to faith. St Paul Publications. Congregation for Catholic Education. (2007). Educating together in Catholic schools: A shared mission between consecrated persons and the lay faithful. St Paul Publications.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2023 W. Sultmann et al., Re-imagining Senior Secondary Religious Education, SpringerBriefs in Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9180-6

123

124

Reference

Francis. (2013). The joy of the Gospel: Evangelii Gaudium [EG]. Veritas Publications. Francis. (2017). Pope Francis’ speech to the plenary session of the Congregation for Catholic Education of Seminaries and Institutes of Study. https://www.educationglobalcompact.orgen/thevillage-of-education/-dialogue--755/. Ivers, P. (2022). Review of Rymarz, R., Engebretson, K., & Hyde, B. (2021). Teaching religious education in Catholic Schools: Embracing a new era. Journal of Religious Education, 70, 127– 129. https://doi-org.ezproxy2.acu.edu.au/https://doi.org/10.1007/s40839-022-00163-z. Lovat, T. (2001). In defence of phenomenology. Religious Education, 96(4), 564–572. Lovat, T. (2005). The agony and the ecstasy of phenomenology as method: The contribution to Australian Religious Education. Journal of Religious Education, 53(2), 46–51. National Centre for pastoral Research. (2022). Census 2021—First results. Pastoral Research Online, (57), 2–3. https://ncpr.catholic.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Pastoral-ResearchOnline-Edition57-Jun22R.pdf. Pallant, J. (2016). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS (6th ed.). Allen and Unwin. Pontifical Council for the promotion of the new evangelisation. (2020). Directory for catechesis. Libreria Editrice Vaticana. Queensland Curriculum and Assessment Authority (QCAA). (2019). Study of Religion v1.2. QCAA. Robinson, T. J., Fischer, L., Wiley, D., & Hilton, J. (2014). The impact of open textbooks on secondary science learning outcomes. Educational Researcher, 43(7), 341–351. https://doi.org/ 10.3102/0013189X14550275. Sharkey, P. (2010). Regarding the Leuven Catholic identity project: A stimulus paper (Confidential Draft 1.00): A consideration of the Leuven—CECV enhancing catholic identity project from the perspective of Catholic Education in South Australia. Catholic Education South Australia. Stern, J., & Buchanan, M. T. (2020). RE leader connectedness: A theology of the lived reality of Catholic education. Journal of Beliefs & Values. https://doi.org/10.1080/13617672.2020.185 0610. Thornburg, D. (2014). From the campfire to the holodeck: Creating engaging and powerful 21st century learning environments. Jossey-Bass. Viviani, N., & Queensland. Department of Education. (1990). The review of tertiary entrance in Queensland 1990: Report submitted to the Minister for Education. Queensland Department of Education.