DISKUS Vol. 5 (1999) http://www.uni-marburg.de/fb11/religionswissenschaft/journal/diskus POTENTIAL PIONEERS OF PLURALISM: THE CONTRIBUTION OF RELIGIOUS EDUCATION TO INTERCULTURAL EDUCATION IN MULTICULTURAL SOCIETIES Denise Cush Bath Spa University College, UK Email: d.cush@bathspa.ac.uk ==================================================== Abstract This paper discusses the concept of multiculturalism in the context of education, and argues that religious education has a potential for a major contribution to intercultural education hitherto often neglected. Indeed, if a 'positive pluralist' approach is taken, religious education can improve on current practice. In the process concepts such as religion, culture and ethnicity are examined and the relationship between religion and culture explored. ==================================================== This paper discusses the concept of multiculturalism in the specific context of education, and suggests that religious education has the potential to make a major contribution to intercultural education and indeed for making the world of the future a better place. The brevity of treatment here means that important debates can only be alluded to, in the hope of stimulating further discussion. 1. What is multiculturalism in education? Other articles in this volume discuss the concept of multiculturalism, so I will confine myself to issues relevant to education. Following Skeie (1995) I shall use 'plurality' as a descriptive term and 'pluralism' for an ideological prescription. It has become something of a cliche in educational circles to claim that we live in a 'multicultural society' and that education must recognise this, hence the various debates and huge international bibliography on 'multicultural' education. Although human societies have always contained internal plurality and had contacts with other societies, in the last half century movements of peoples, improved communications and increased travel have made us more aware of the diversity of lifestyles in our own countries and elsewhere on the planet. Paradoxically, those same forces of globalisation are producing a certain homogeneity of lifestyles across the planet (for those who can afford it). 'Multicultural education' can refer either generally to any attempt to respond to cultural diversity in education, or to particular approaches which can then be contrasted with other approaches such as 'anti-racist'. When we claim that society is 'multicultural' and that therefore education should be too, are we implying the existence of several discrete cultures existing side by side and potentially in conflict in our societies and classrooms? Do we take account of the inequalities of power between the dominant culture and minorities in any given location? What about the many classrooms outside the large urban areas which are still largely 'monocultural'? Multiculturalism in education is not one movement but an area of heated debate (see for example Modgil et al. 1986). If culture is defined as the learned aspect of being human (eg 'the symbolic and learned, non-biological aspects of human society including language, custom and convention' (Abercrombie 1994), then formal education in schools is one of the ways in which culture is transmitted. Of course, education itself is a highly contested term - is it initiation into culture or giving people the intellectual tools with which to critique culture? Is it 'initiation into the worthwhile' aspects of culture, and if so who decides what is worthwhile? Underlying different views on these issues are different philosophical and indeed religious positions on the nature of human existence and the nature of knowledge. A brief history of reactions on the part of education to a situation of perceived cultural plurality reveals various phases. I will here describe the situation in Great Britain, but similar patterns are found elsewhere ( in the USA, for example, we see an interim stage of 'ethnic revitalisation' - separate classes for minority groups to revive their 'own culture' - see Banks and Lynch (1986). The first response tended to be assimilationist, where the incomers were expected to learn the national language and customs as quickly as possible, then in the 1970s and 1980s the concept of 'multiculturalism' was developed whereby diversity of language, custom, culture, religion etc was to be positively appreciated. Though different authors define it in different ways, and distinguish various subcategories (Todd 1991, Mason 1995) the basic idea of 'multicultural education' was to challenge ethnocentrism in the curriculum and introduce an education which prepared people for living in a society characterised by a plurality of cultures. Thus music and art would include examples of African and Indian origin, literature draw on global examples, mathematics and science emphasise the contributions of non-Western peoples. This drew criticisms from both the political right, who generally argued that multiculturalism threatened the perceived national culture, indoctrinated relativism and distracted children from the 'basic essentials' of reading, writing and mathematics (for details of the 'right-wing' attack on multiculturalism and counterarguments see Jackson 1997 and Banks 1986) and also from the political left (see for example Mogdil S et al 1986) not the least a virulent critique from the proponents of antiracist education. Multicultural education was criticised as being trivial and superficial (Troyna's 'saris, samosas and steel bands'1986.24 quoted in Troyna 1990 and by most people talking about multicultural education in the UK ), of being tokenistic (a bolt on to an unchanged ethnocentric curriculum), for making the situation worse by stressing the differences between groups and stereotyping individuals and worst of all criticised for failing to address the real problem of deep-seated institutional or structural racism and the unequal power relationships between groups. Multicultural education, it was argued, should be replaced by anti-racist education, directly exposing the reality and causes of racism and seeking to expunge it. The fact that this critique often came from within a politically left or Marxist framework (eg 'multiculturalism in its present form is little more than a masking ideology with which an artful and ruthless capitalism protects itself' (Bagley 1986) meant that in turn antiracist education was heavily attacked by the political right (Troyna and Carrington 1990). Some tried to combine the strengths of both approaches, advocating a multicultural and antiracist approach (e.g. Leicester 1989). One criticism from the antiracist perspective was that 'multicultural education' tended to separate and reify cultures, stressing the differences between people and viewing a multicultural society as one where several discrete and competing cultures had to learn to live side by side in harmony. Thus Kwami (1996) argues that it is preferable to talk about 'intercultural education' which stresses that cultures are not discrete and fixed but constantly interacting, that there is no hierarchy of superior and inferior cultures and that cultures can learn from each other, creating new and exciting fusions and hybrids (in his case, of music). Intercultural education seems to be the preferred usage for European rather than British or American publications (eg Fennes and Hapgood 1997). In the 1990s in England and Wales, the debate on multicultural/intercultural education has been somewhat marginalised by the other priorities of educational reform: the national curriculum, literacy and numeracy, and the taking of power and resources from local government have all contributed to a decreasing emphasis on multi-/inter-culturalism in both schools and teacher education (see Ward 1998). My students often find this area of debate confusing because the terms are used so loosely. I am continually castigating my student teachers for referring to 'multicultural children' when they mean the presence in the class of children with black or brown skin. Any consideration of multiculturalism faces the questions of what we mean by 'culture' anyway, and how it relates to other concepts such as 'ethnicity', 'race', 'religion' and 'nationality'. This would be another paper in itself, but one of the best treatment of these questions I have come across recently is Jackson (1995, 1997 and elsewhere) who is himself a Professor of Religious Education, illustrating my thesis that religious education has a lot to offer here. The ideas which follow owe a lot to Robert Jackson. 2. There is no such thing as religion, culture, race, ethnicity, or nationality. The problem with discussing religion, education, culture, and other related terms like race and ethnicity is that these are all contested terms meaning somewhat different things to different people, and the relationship between them is not clear. It did not take postmodern philosophy to point out that our concepts are merely human constructs with no direct correspondence to 'reality', for over two millennia ago, the Buddhist deconstruction of the concept of 'self' demonstrated that such a concept is 'just a denomination, a designation, a conceptual term, a current appellation, a mere name'(Conze 1959 p. 147). No such entity 'exists' as self, religion, culture, race, ethnicity, or nationality. However, we still need to use these terms to communicate about the complex issues that have given rise to such terms. Leaving 'self' out of it for the moment (though I would argue that plurality can also be found in the self) I will take a brief look at each concept. 'Religion' could be defined, according to Abercrombie, Hill and Turner (1994) as 'any set of coherent answers to human existential dilemmas - birth, sickness or death - which make the world meaningful' and each particular set of answers given a label - Christianity, Buddhism, Islam etc. However it is clear to anyone working in the study of religions that this is far too neat. Religions themselves are internally diverse. It is too intellectual a definition, focusing on ideas rather than feelings and practices. The dividing lines between religions are not clear, particularly when considering Indian traditions (Geaves 1998) or postmodern manifestations of religion such as 'new age'. There are also 'sets of coherent answers' such as Marxism or Humanism which tend not to be included by the term 'religion'. Robert Jackson (1997), following Cantwell-Smith, has argued that the concept of religion as defined above is a product of post-enlightenment Western thinking which has been inappropriately imposed on non-Western traditions and that the reification of religions into static 'isms' is largely a product of the nineteenth century. What we call for convenience a religion is a fluid, developing, fuzzy edged stream of ideas and practices, influenced by and influencing other such streams and not easily distinguishable from 'culture'. 'Culture' Dictionary definitions of culture illustrate the overlap with the concept of religion : 'the total set of beliefs, customs, or way of life of particular groups' (Abercrombie 1994) could easily be a definition of religion. Tim Fitzgerald (1995) has argued that the term religion is unhelpful in the Japanese and Hindu contexts and that 'Religious Studies' should be replaced by 'Cultural Studies' defined as 'values and their institutionalisation'. However, apart from the fact that this title has already been claimed by an academic discipline which in Britain is mainly about the media and popular culture, there would still seem to be some use in distinguishing between religion and culture whilst recognising the difficulty of so doing and the fuzzy nature of the boundaries. Culture, like religion, can easily be reified. One criticism of the term 'multicultural' (Kwami 1996) is that it suggests a series of discrete entities side by side in a society, and that the individual either 'belongs' to a particular culture or uncomfortably straddles more than one. However, like 'religions', 'cultures' are fluid, internally diverse and contested, influenced by and influencing other cultural steams. It could be argued that an individual does not so much 'belong' to a culture, but engage with a number of cultural resources. Jackson's research with young Hindus in Britain reveals them not as negatively 'caught between two cultures' but as positively 'skilled cultural navigators' of plural cultural streams. A culture is best thought of not as an entity but as a language or grammar 'a language with which to construct a worldview' (Jackson 1997), ' a means of communication and representation repertoire' (Auernheimer 1990, quoted in Fennes and Hapgood 1997). The comparison of culture with language highlights the fact that language and culture are closely related, as the concern for 'mother-tongue' learning illustrates. The cultural repertoire is inherited from the society into which you are born ('the collective programming of the mind which distinguishes the members of one group or category of people from another' Hofstede 1991 quoted in Fennes and Hapgood 1997) but this society itself is not monolithic and the programming is constantly subject to change and development, and to criticism by the individual. The concept of 'counterculture' reveals that societies are not only diverse because cultures with alien origins are introduced into them, but also because there is always the possibility of individuals or sections of the community refusing to accept the majority programming. So, 'culture' like religion, is not to be thought of as a static entity. The relationship between 'religion' and 'culture' If we were dealing with two clearly defined entities, it would be easy to discuss the relationship between the two. Comparing two fluid and contested terms is not so easy. I stated above, against Tim Fitzgerald, that it is still useful to distinguish to some extent between religion and culture. When 'religions' migrate from one location to another, they change and develop. Theologians (and their non-theistic equivalents) find it useful to distinguish between 'religion' and 'culture' in these contexts (see for example various discussions about the relationship between Christianity and African cultures in Parratt (1987) or between Buddhism and Western cultures in Subhuti (1983). Culture becomes the more trivial and time-location-relative aspects of a way of life, and 'religion' the crucial and important 'eternal verities' of the tradition. (The sources I mention put it more positively than I have done, talking of the need to see all cultures as valuable). Thus what is 'merely cultural' from the old context can be dropped, and what is 'merely cultural' from the new context can be safely adopted. This is known as 'inculturation' or 'indigenisation'. You can therefore be a cultural relativist without being a religious relativist (Cush 1994). This is not just a Christian theological position, as is illustrated by the way Buddhism has adapted itself to different cultural contexts, happily co-existing with indigenous traditions. This can be seen in the Friends of the Western Buddhist Order, which has consciously sought to shed 'oriental' cultural trappings and develop a Buddhism which is culturally Western. However, it is not so simple , in that what counts as 'religion' and what as 'culture' is contested - what some people classify as religion, others classify as culture. Is the institition of male priests in Roman Catholic Christianity merely cultural and therefore changeable? Buddhism has accepted as 'cultural' practices such as worshipping gods (Sri Lanka) spirits (Burma) ancestors (China) which have been classified as 'religious' by most Christian missionaries. Members of African (traditional) religions are angry at their traditions being deemed 'merely cultural' and thus colonised by African Christians (Mndende 1997). The idea that 'religion' is important and 'culture' unimportant is denied by examples such as a Jain student I interviewed who was much more concerned to marry a fellow Gujarati than a fellow Jain (whether her priority here was 'culture' or 'ethnicity', it was not 'religion'). The distinction between religion and culture makes no sense in some contexts because what Westerners would classify as religion is more like culture (Tim Fitzgerald may have a point about 'Hinduism' and Japan here) or because all culture is deemed to come under the purview of 'religion' (an attitude found amongst some Muslims and Christians). Do many 'ordinary' followers of traditions stop to distinguish? (Probably only in situations of crisis and challenge eg the Sikh daughter who wants to cut her hair, which is why, in diaspora, communities may become more conscious of having a 'religion'). In spite of these difficulties, it would seem to be still useful to distinguish between the two terms, so long as we keep reminding ourselves of all the caveats; it does make sense to say that religions are themselves multicultural. This is seen particularly in the case of Buddhism and more recent forms of Christianity. 'Race', 'ethnicity' and 'nationality' 'Race' is a human construct, a social rather than biological or ontological reality, which nevertheless has profound human consequences. Writers on racism have talked of the 'new racism' where crude biological ideas of genetically superior/inferior races have been replaced by a more insidious racism of the incompatibility of 'cultures' (Troyna and Carrington 1990). 'Ethnicity' could be said to be the sense of belonging to a particular group, being accepted by a particular group as 'one of us' or being ascribed to a particular group by others. It is often connected with a shared language and 'culture'. Fennes and Hapgood (1997) suggest that the difference between a cultural and an ethnic group is that the former is less conscious of itself than the latter. No more than religion or culture is ethnicity fixed and bounded. As Jackson argues, it 'connotes some degree of identification with an ancestral tradition or sense of "shared peoplehood"...shared ancestry is still a feature of ethnicity, but the internal variety within an ethnic group is acknowledged, as well as the possibility of ethnic reconstruction' (1997:86). Jackson discusses also the relationships between 'culture', 'ethnicity' and that other construct 'nationality'. Not only do most states contain more than one 'nation', but the concept of 'nationality' is also fluid and situational, with regional diversity as well as cultural diversity. As Jackson concludes, 'the view that religions and cultures are monolithic and unchanging, and the belief that such monoliths can be taken as an indicator of national identity, need to be challenged' (1997:141) 3. The neglect of religious education (and religion) in multicultural/intercultural education Martin Baumann (1999) points out that religion has generally not been recognised as an important factor by those whose business it is to discuss multiculturalism. The same is true of religious education (and religion itself) within multicultural or intercultural education. In the texts on 'multicultural education' that I have looked at, religious education (and religion) is sometimes forgotten about, sometimes gets a token recognition (eg Lynch 1989:75), sometimes is misrepresented through ignorance (see Jackson 97:75 and Fennes and Hapgood 1997:26) and often is seen as part of the problem rather than the solution (eg Banks and Lynch 1986:184, Troyna 1990:103, Parekh 1986:21). There are several reasons for this. One is the 'knowledge explosion' which means that we all work in separate fields, increasingly ignorant of work elsewhere. Experts in 'multicultural education' tend to have arrived via different routes from those in Religious Education, e.g. starting as teachers of English as a second language. Because of the poverty of their own religious education in the past they may be ignorant of the world's religious traditions and 'religiously illiterate'. They may come from particular philosophical traditions (eg Marxist or liberal humanist) where religion is 'explained away' or viewed as a purely negative or private and unimportant influence. Of course Religious Education is another contested field, and it depends on the type of religious education whether it contributes to intercultural understanding or reinforces a sense of cultural superiority. It can be and has often been 'part of the problem'. Meanwhile, those working in religious education are hampered in their contribution to multicultural/intercultural education by the general state and status of the subject. In many countries there is no religious education in state schools (eg France, Russia, Ukraine), in others it is confessional in the sense of being linked to the construction of a monolithic religio-cultural national identity (eg Greece, Romania, Poland). In some countries (eg most of Germany, Austria, Finland) the multicultural nature of society is recognised by provision of separate confessional strands. Even in those countries where RE is non-confessional and pluralist, it suffers from lack of status and therefore neglect in terms of resources. All subjects tend to feel that their contribution is undervalued, but religious education would seem to suffer from what might be called 'subjectism'. It has suffered from some of the ills that dominant groups lay upon the non-dominant. It is left out (of the curriculum in France, Russia etc), stereotyped (presumed confessional when there are a variety of approaches), segregated (as in its odd position in the curriculum of England and Wales), it is included as marginal, exoticised and made the subject of 'humour'. In England and Wales, inspections have revealed objective evidence that RE is the least well served subject in terms of time, resources, inservice training and specialist teachers (see Gates 1993, Copley 1997), though there are signs that things are beginning to improve (OFSTED 1997). There is the same perception of low status in Norway (Skeie 1997) and Namibia (Kotz 1997). 4. The potential of Religious Education in multicultural/intercultural education In spite of this perceived neglect, the picture of religious education nationally in England and Wales and internationally is one of exciting developments and enthusiasm amongst religious education professionals (see Copley 1997, Andree et al 1997). Potentially, religious education could make a significant contribution to intercultural education. In countries such as Britain and Sweden, which have pioneered a non-confessional multifaith approach to RE since the late 60s and early 70s, it has been recognised by some as the main location for such multicultural education as existed. In Britain, Stephen Bigger (1995), referring to innovative work stemming from Lancaster University and published by the Schools Council in 1971 states that 'RE can take some credit for being among the earliest advocates of multicultural education', while Mal Leicester (1989) claims that 'for many educational institutions religious education has led the way in this multicultural development', referring to the groundbreaking 1975 Birmingham (UK) syllabus for religious education. Those developing the new religious education in Namibia see religious education and religious studies as 'crucial carriers of an alternative ethos for society' (Lombard 1997). A quick survey of syllabuses for schools available in England and Wales reveals not only an RE which takes seriously the plurality of faiths, and thus includes a sympathetic study of several religions, but also one concerned with attitude formation as well as knowledge, for example aiming to 'develop a positive attitude towards other people, respecting their right to hold beliefs different from their own, and towards living in a society of diverse religions' (SCAA 1994). It also expects pupils to reflect critically on their own beliefs and values 'in the light of their studies' thus acknowledging the possibility of learning from as well as about the diversity of religions and cultures. Many syllabuses also include the possibility of direct exploration of the topics of human rights and racism, such as the English and Welsh examination papers in Religious Education for pupils aged 16, and the 1998 Namibian syllabus for religious and moral education. No doubt this material is often taught poorly or naively, by those who do not have sufficient knowledge of religions and cultures, who fall into the traps of reifying religions and cultures, who see problems such as racism as a matter of pious exhortation rather than institutional structures. This is why the contribution of RE is still only potential rather than actual. But put money into research, training and resources for Religious Education and these problems could be solved. 5. 'Positive Pluralism' as an improvement on multicultural, intercultural or interfaith education. Of course, the contribution of religious education to intercultural and multicultural education depends on the type of religious education on offer. The approach taken by my colleagues and myself at Bath I have labelled 'positive pluralism' (Cush 1994). This is a non-confessional approach open to all whether 'religious' or not, but possible in a confessional context where there is an open and pluralist attitude. It is developed in opposition to 'negative pluralism' which tries to acknowledge the multicultural situation by attempting to leave religion out of education, and to those kinds of confessional education which either focus on the dominant religious tradition or divide children into discrete creedal groups. The 'positive pluralist' approach views the plurality of religions, worldviews and cultures as a positive opportunity rather than a problem. It is possible to learn from the views and practices of others without necessarily losing your own religious and cultural roots. It attempts to combine the best of recent developments in religious education in our English context. Thus, with the phenomenological approach pioneered by Ninian Smart, it advocates exploring religious traditions with an open mind, attempting as far as possible to put aside prejudice and to gain an empathetic understanding of the traditions studied. From the 'interpretive' approach of Robert Jackson it realises that it is impossible to do this with a completely innocent eye (we all have our traditions of belief and disbelief), and that religious and cultural traditions are internally diverse, fluid and with no clear boundaries, so we must beware of reification and stereotyping. With Michael Grimmitt (1987) it stresses the need to explore the students' own ideas and relate to their interests, concerns and experience. It explores the affective dimension as well as the cognitive , drawing on the 'experiential' approach of Hammond et al (1990), for knowledge alone does not bring with it positive attitudes to those who hold different beliefs and values, nor does it give sufficient space to reflect on our own. It does not shy away from questions of truth, difficult as these are, but following Andrew Wright (1993) encourages students to engage in asking philosophical questions and sometimes in challenging aspects of religious and cultural traditions as well as trying to understand them. It is, as Wolfram Weisse and Cok Bakker (in Andree et al 1997) suggest, 'dialogical' RE. This is not an interfaith dialogue as practised in the Juliana Van Stolberg school in the Netherlands (an experiment, often quoted in surveys of RE in Europe, where children have both confessional lessons in two faith groups of Christian and Muslim as well as coming together for interfaith discussion), but a dialogue between the diverse religious and non-religious traditions and the pupils, whether they can put a label on themselves or not. Thus it is an improvement on 'interreligious education' in that it does not presume that all students can identify with any named tradition of belief or disbelief. The approach of positive pluralism sees itself as an improvement on 'multicultural education' in that it avoids the trap of superficiality into which multicultural education can fall, because the study of religions reveals that there is diversity not just of customs of dress, food or art forms such as music and dance, but of fundamental beliefs and values such the nature and destiny of human beings, the nature of reality and the nature and sources of knowledge; exploring different ways of knowing as well as diverse content. It does include direct treatment of the topics of racism and human rights. It attempts to treat religions and cultures in their full diversity and fluid nature. Through looking at cross-religious themes it illustrates that there are many concerns which unite human beings as well as beliefs and values which divide them. Although approving of the term 'intercultural' in that this stresses the flexibility of cultures and the possibly of new and creative combinations, positive pluralism attempts to escape from the complete 'cultural and religious relativism' this may imply, which so worries those who do belong to particular religious and cultural traditions because they see them as both true and valuable. Following from our discussion of the distinction between religion and culture, it may be acceptable to view products like art and music and even things like marriage customs as culturally relative and of equal value. However, does our 'dialogical RE' have room for those who are strongly committed to a particular truth, or is it just indoctrination into liberalism, Christian or secular? The positive pluralist takes seriously the pluralism and incommensurability of truth claims, but rather than denying the concept of ultimate truth takes a position of 'epistemological humility'. Inspired by the Jain concept of 'non-onesidedness' (anekantavada) it feels that for all who are not omniscient, the truth is probably best reached by considering a number of different perspectives. However, this is not to say that all perspectives are equally near the truth. It is not universalist, seeing religions and cultures as teaching 'the same thing really' so it is careful not to impose the categories of one tradition upon another. On the other hand, it stresses similarities as well as differences between human groups, so that thematic treatments of topics across religions can be helpful, if undertaken with sensitivity. It takes seriously the diversity of views on the sources of knowledge, accepting the possibility of revelation, mystical experience and traditional authority as well as reason and empirical evidence. Thus non-liberal, non-relativist claims are included as possible perspectives. It is not completely relativist in the sense of teaching that cross-religious and cross-cultural understanding and evaluation are impossible because of cultural conditioning, and that there are no values by which particular lifestyles can be judged, but espouses what Mal Leicester calls 'limited relativism' - accepting that whereas some things are relative to time, location and culture, there is the possibility of overarching shared values such as social justice, human rights, concern for the future of the planet and fighting racism, which are however continuously negotiated and refined. Or perhaps it is 'true relativism' where things are not seen as entities in themselves, but as inter-related and constantly in need of judgements as to their relative truth or usefulness in any given situation. We do not all agree on fundamental issues such as the nature of the human being, the nature of reality and the natural world, whether there is more than the empirically observable, or how to conduct ourselves in human relationships. However a conversation, open to all whether we can give ourselves a particular label or not, would seem to be the best way forward. We are only now entering a global situation where such conversations are really possible - who knows what might develop if both the pluralism and diversity of religions and cultures and the quest for truth, justice and ecological sustainability are really taken seriously? ====================================== References and bibliography Abercrombie N, Hill S and Turner B (1994) The Penguin Dictionary of Sociology (3rd edition) London, Penguin Andree T, Bakker C and Schreiner P (eds) (1997) Crossing Boundaries:Contributions to Interreligious and Intercultural Education Muenster, Comenius Institute Arora R and Duncan CG (eds) (1986) Multicultural education: towards good practice London, RKP Bagley C (1986) 'Multiculturalism, class and ideology: a European-Canadian comparison' in Modgil S, Verma G, Mallick K and Mogdil C (eds) (1986) Multicultural Education: the Interminable Debate Lewes, Falmer Bailey J (1997) Cultural Development (Church of England National Society for Promoting Religious Education) Baumann M (1998) 'Multiculturalism and the Ambiguity of Recognizing of Religion' in this volume of DISKUS. Bigger S (1995) 'Challenging RE in a Multicultural World' in Journal of Beliefs and Values 16.2 Conze E (1959) Buddhist Scriptures London, Penguin Copley T (1997) Teaching Religion: fifty years of religious education in England and Wales Exeter, University of Exeter Cush D (1994) 'A Suggested Typology of Positions on Religious Diversity' in Journal of Beliefs and Values 15.2 Fennes H and Hapgood K (1997) Intercultural Learning in the Classroom:Crossing Borders Cassell/Council of Europe Fitzgerald T (1995) 'Religious Studies as Cultural Studies: a Philosophical and Anthropological Critique of the concept of Religion' in DISKUS 3.1 Gates B (1993) Time for religious education and teachers to match: a digest of underprovision Lancaster, RE Council Geaves R (1998) 'The Borders between Religions: a Challenge to the World Religions Approach to Religious Education' in British Journal of Religious Education 21.1 Grimmitt M (1987) Religious Education and Human Development London, McCrimmons. Hammond J et al (1990) New Methods in RE Teaching: an Experiential Approach (Harlow: Oliver and Boyd) Jackson R (1995) 'Religious Education's Representation of "Religions" and "Cultures"' in British Journal of Educational Studies 43.3 Jackson R (1997) Religious Education, an Interpretive Approach London, Hodder & Stoughton Kotz( M (1997) 'Looking at the Namibian syllabi' in T Andree, C Bakker and P Schreiner (eds) (1997) Crossing Boundaries:Contributions to Interreligious and Intercultural Education Muenster, Comenius Institute Kwami R (1996) 'Music Education in and for a multicultural society' in Plummeridge (ed) Music Education: Issues and Trends London, Institute of Education Leicester M (1989) Multicultural Education: from Theory to Practice Windsor,NFER/Nelson Lombard C (1997) 'Contextual and Theoretical considerations in the Namibian Curricular Process' in T Andree, C Bakker and P Schreiner (eds) (1997) Crossing Boundaries:Contributions to Interreligious and Intercultural Education Muenster, Comenius Institute Lynch J (1989) Multicultural education in a Global Society Lewes, Falmer Mndende N (1997) 'African Religion in the post-apartheid South Africa: developments in the inclusion of the religion in the education curriculum' in T Andree, C Bakker and P Schreiner (eds) (1997) Crossing Boundaries:Contributions to Interreligious and Intercultural Education Muenster, Comenius Institute Modgil S, Verma G, Mallick K and Mogdil C (eds) (1986) Multicultural Education: the Interminable Debate Lewes, Falmer OFSTED (1997) the Impact of New Agreed Syllabuses on the Teaching and Learning of Religious Education London HMSO Parratt J (ed) (1987) A Reader in African Christian Theology London SPCK SCAA (1994) Model Syllabuses for Religious Education London, SCAA Skeie G (1995) Plurality and Pluralism: a Challenge for Religious Education' in British Journal of Religious Education 17.2 Skeie G (1997) 'Some aspects of RE in Scandinavia and Norway: an outline of a cultural approach' in T Andree, C Bakker and P Schreiner (eds) (1997) Crossing Boundaries:Contributions to Interreligious and Intercultural Education Muenster, Comenius Institute Subhuti (1983) Buddhism for Today, a Portrait of a new Buddhist Movement Salisbury, Element Todd R (1991) Education in a Multicultural Society London, Cassell Tomlinson S (1990) Troyna B and Carrington B (1990) Education, Racism and Reform London, Routledge Ward S (1998) 'Intercultural Education and Teacher Education the UK: a case of reversible decline' in European Journal of Intercultural Studies 9.1 Weisse (1997) 'Dialogical religious education' in T Andree, C Bakker and P Schreiner (eds) (1997) Crossing Boundaries:Contributions to Interreligious and Intercultural Education Muenster, Comenius Institute Wright A (1993) Religious Education in the Secondary School: prospects for religious literacy (London, Fulton) END