Teaching and Learning > DISCOURSE

Tandem Learning and Interfaith Dialogue

Author: Jon Gilbert and Christian Kaestner

Journal Title: Discourse

ISSN: 2040-3674

ISSN-L: 1741-4164

Volume: 9

Number: 1

Start page: 55

End page: 76

Return to vol. 9 no. 1 index page

Context

In November 2006, the University of Sheffield launched the Sheffield Graduate Award, first as a pilot for final year students and as of October 2007 for all students, undergraduate and postgraduate. The purpose of the Award is 'to recognize and reward the variety and experience of students' extra curricula activities and to enable students to monitor, build and reflect upon their personal development' (Lamb 2007, 2). The award thus seeks to bring an extra dimension to the qualifications of students by encouraging activities that take place outside their actual degree courses, which can provide valuable skills and experience and enrich personal development.1

The award covers six broad areas, which are as follows: Enterprise, Student Jobs and Work Experience, Volunteering, Cultural and Social Awareness, Extending International Horizons, and Activities Supporting the Institution. The Interfaith Tandem Learning Project, IDENTITY, was conceived of as part of the Cultural and Social Awareness area. It is funded by the Subject Centre for Philosophical and Religious Studies of the Higher Education Academy and executed through the Multifaith Chaplaincy Service at the University of Sheffield.

The project began late in 2007 and set out six key objectives (Lamb 2007, 2-3): (1) to research current trends in Tandem Learning, and current good practice in interfaith dialogue, with a view to reviewing potential options for development; (2) to develop appropriate learning resources in the light of the review (including appropriate guidelines for interfaith engagement); (3) to develop an appropriate method of assessment as part of the Sheffield Graduate Award, as well as an appropriate form of feedback for the purposes of the project; (4) to carry out a trial of the learning resources; (5) to review feedback from the trial and (6) to disseminate the learning resources to the wider Philosophy and Religious Studies community, as well as HE Chaplaincy.

A project board was established in October 2007 consisting of Christian, Jewish and Muslim chaplaincy advisors/chaplains, the President of the Students Union, and the Head of the Biblical Studies department to act as a consultant. In December 2007 two postgraduate research assistants were contracted to work on the project.

What follows is a report of the research and development of the interfaith tandem learning project at the University of Sheffield. We first discuss tandem learning and interfaith dialogue in general terms, followed by an exegesis of our appropriation of the two. We then comment on the theoretical underpinnings of the project we have been developing and its curriculum. The paper then relays the findings of a trial of the course curriculum and a consultation with staff from the University of Sheffield Modern Languages Teaching Centre. In the final section we present a revised up-to-date version of the programme curriculum.

Language Learning in Tandem

Language learning in tandem as a pedagogical approach within Universities has been developing over the last fifteen years or so, the stimulus for which was 'the awareness that the internet had demolished the barriers constituted by geographical distance and was making possible forms of partnership-based learning hitherto only feasible when one set of learners was able—or obliged—to travel to the homeland of the other.' (Lewis 2003, 13) Since its conception, tandem language learning has gained substantial popularity and is now practiced within several universities in Britain and around the world.

Brammerts suggests that learning a language is in tandem when 'two people with different mother tongues work together in order to learn from each other.' (Brammerts 2003, 28) In doing so he claims 'both set out: to improve their communicative ability in their partner's mother tongue; to get to know their partner better and learn about his or her cultural background, and to benefit from their partner's knowledge and experience, e.g. in the areas of work, education and leisure.' (Ibid., 28-29)

Tandem learning activities, therefore, comprise dialogue between native speakers of different languages either in person, via email, over the internet, on the phone and so on. As a result, partners develop 'their linguistic skills not only by making both languages the medium of their communication (learning from models supplied by their partner, practising what has been learnt, etc.), but also the topic of their communication (in the form of corrections, explanations of linguistic features, etc.).' [emphasis original] (Ibid., 29)

In creating an environment whereby partners learn, support and seek guidance and help from one another, tandem learning functions according to two basic principles, namely reciprocity and autonomy. Partners in a tandem partnership act on the one hand as teacher, offering guidance on their own language and culture, and on the other as pupil, seeking to improve their foreign-language linguistic ability through communication with their native-speaking partner. This 'mutual interdependence between two partners demands equal commitment in such a way that both benefit as much as possible from their working together,' (Ibid., 29); hence the reciprocity inherent in tandem learning. Meanwhile, autonomy exists as '[E]ach of the two partners is responsible for their own learning. Each decides what they want to learn how and when, and what sort of help is required from their partner.' [emphasis original] (Ibid., 29)

Project Development

In the initial stages of our project development, we looked at different forms of interfaith dialogue current in the UK. Our research showed that dialogue activities are concentrated around three main modes:

  1. people of different faiths taking action for common causes, like world peace or the environment2
  2. forms which are more theological or explicitly religious in orientation3
  3. and most recently, activities funded by the UK government,4 which have enabled many communal and regional interfaith bodies to carry out interfaith dialogue projects that centre on capacity building for communities with a view to promote social cohesion.5

There are many local interfaith initiatives that leave little trace in writing and are thus not easily researchable. However, much of the interfaith dialogue activity that we were able to research is not directly about religion, but about people of faith working together, or those which address communities or representatives of communities rather than individuals as religious believers.

The potential of tandem learning, we felt, lies in its potential to facilitate a personal interfaith dialogue that addresses the individual, as a member of a religious community, but not as a representative of that community. A careful appropriation of the tandem learning principles to the situation of interfaith dialogue could provide a semi-structured framework that would guide participants to engage in conversation about religious topics, and at the same time leave them enough space to bring their own interests and their own personal faith as a lived dayto- day experience to the table. The appropriation of tandem learning to interfaith activity is thus centred around the two basic principles of tandem language learning: autonomy and reciprocity. Meanwhile we draw explicitly on the element of cultural insight through personal contact which is inherent in tandem exchanges.

Autonomy in interfaith tandem learning

Autonomy is an essential element of tandem language learning. It ensures that tandem exchanges are authentic and relevant to each partner. It also allows each learner to manage their own learning goals and outcomes, ensuring that they benefit from the experience as much as possible.

Autonomy is also an essential aspect of an interfaith tandem experience. Providing tandem partners with freedom to discuss their beliefs and practices openly allows for authentic and meaningful conversation. This genuineness and relevance makes for a deep, personal and challenging interfaith experience. It promotes a real appreciation of the other's faith, whilst allowing partners to express themselves and their own experiences in a way which is truly significant.

Autonomous learning in interfaith dialogue, which encourages each learner to establish and assess their own learning goals and outcomes, moreover, guarantees that they discuss topics of interest and importance to them, again making the experience more consequential.

Reciprocity in interfaith tandem learning

Reciprocity in tandem language learning is the principle that each partner benefits from the experience equally. In tandem language learning, this is realised by each partner being given equal time to talk in their own language and the language of their partner, and to attend to their individual learning goals.

This principle is of course also essential in interfaith dialogue. Partners sharing their knowledge and experiences equally promotes tolerance, respect and empathy and ensures each achieves their learning goals.

In interfaith dialogue, the idea of reciprocity also has two more significant dimensions. First, by encouraging each learner to discuss their faith, not only do they acquire knowledge of their partner's religion but they are also forced to express their own faith in terms which their partner can understand. In other words, the tandem process promotes the formulation of religious identity through introspection and the negotiation of faith through conversation with the religiousother. Secondly, facilitating reciprocity and the equal share of 'talktime' decreases the likelihood of unhelpful dominance by one partner, counteracting the chance of proselytising or verbal bullying.

Cultural insight and living experience in interfaith tandem learning

One of the major benefits of face-to-face or virtual interactions with speakers of a foreign language as part of a tandem language learning scheme is the opportunity this provides for learners to not only acquire knowledge of a language, such as vocabulary and grammar, but an appreciation of how that language is used in real-life by a native speaker. This is often enhanced in tandem learning programmes by encouraging partners to discuss aspects of each other's culture, background and so on.6

In a similar vain, the potential for tandem learning in interfaith dialogue is for each partner to learn about each other's religion, not as a set of abstract propositions, as in a textbook, but as a lived experience. Partners are able to acquire knowledge of each other's religion, such as tenets, beliefs and practices, and they are able to understand how these are put into practice and expressed by a real-life adherent. We envisage that the chance to meet and converse with someone of another faith face-to-face in private will add to the appeal for potential participants to take part in the programme.

Following this appropriation of tandem learning to interfaith dialogue, we conceive that, in theory, a tandem interfaith programme will follow a three-fold framework, promoting a) the acquisition of knowledge, while offering b) the opportunity for authentic understanding and c) personal self-reflection. We believe that it is this move from knowledge to understanding to self-reflection, which sets interfaith tandem learning apart from other forms of interfaith activity described above:

Knowledge

Participants will gain a knowledge of the practices, beliefs and tenets of their partner's religion as a result of dialogue. This is on the level of interfaith activities which seek to provide participants with knowledge in the hope that this will encourage respect and tolerance.

Understanding

Participants will gain an appreciation and understanding of the religious- other through the authentic interaction with their tandem partner's faith as a real-life lived authentic experience. At this stage, knowledge becomes operational; can be applied to predict, forsee and gauge the consequences of circumstances and actions. This is on the level of interfaith activities which encourage social cohesion and conflict resolution.

Self-reflection

Participants will engage in a process of self-reflection and identity construction through the formulation of their faith for the purpose of conversation, and through negotiating their identity through communication with the religious-other. It is the potential for this process of selfreflection which distinguishes tandem learning from many interfaith activities which lack the personal and challenging nature of a tandem experience. It is because of the potential for tandem learning to challenge the individual's understanding of their own religious identity, that the tandem interfaith programme at the Multifaith Chaplaincy Service of the University of Sheffield is entitled 'Identity'.

The Original Curriculum

After several months of initial groundwork and preliminary research, the authors of this paper set out to develop a curriculum for a programme of interfaith tandem learning which could be employed by the Multifaith Chaplaincy Service at the University of Sheffield.

The curriculum was set out over five sessions with each session encouraging tandem pairings to discuss increasingly abstract and difficult topics, moving from the more general to the more personal, for which task sheets and some learning resources were to be provided. Moreover each session was to consist of three parts: a group meeting, a tandem task and journal questions. The curriculum was designed in this way so as to, as far as possible, promote the progression for participants from knowledge, to understanding, to a negotiation of identity, as described above.

The group meetings would serve to bring the group together and thus keep everybody 'on track'. However, more significantly, they would provide students with knowledge which would then, in the tandem tasks, go on to apply to a specific topic. Group meetings could make knowledge available through group discussions, presentations, lectures, reading texts, watching videos and so on.

After the group meetings, students meet with their tandem partner at their leisure within a set time frame and in a place they choose to do a tandem task. In the tandem meetings students are to find out how issues introduced in the group meetings play out in their tandem partner's religious life. Along the way they are free to explore any of the specificities of the general topic and beyond and they may take the discussion in whatever direction they are interested in. The intention is that participants will experience, as far as possible, the reallife manifestation of religion in the other. This encourages an authentic and meaningful understanding of another's religion in a way that engaging with a textbook or abstract propositions could not provide.

As a guideline for the tandem discussion, students are provided with a task sheet. These include suggestions of aims, objectives, questions to consider and a task which would act as a trigger for discussion between partners. These task sheets are designed to serve as guidelines only and students are encouraged to pursue their own interests in conjunction with their tandem partner, and as such may choose to follow the task sheets completely, or indeed not at all.

After the tandem task has been completed, the journal questions are answered. This will take place individually by each student. The first question of each session is designed such that it leads the students to reflect on what they have learned from the tandem discussion with their partner. This is to ensure that participants do the tandem tasks, while encouraging them to situate themselves in relation to their tandem experience. The second question does not relate directly to the tandem task and is meant to encourage further self-reflection.

Just as the structure of each session promotes the move from knowledge, to understanding, to self-reflection, so too does the progression from session to session, by encouraging tandem partners to discuss increasingly difficult and personal topics. The idea is that as partners become more and more comfortable sharing their thoughts and beliefs with each other as time goes on, they will be able to discuss ever more testing subjects, which would lead individuals to reflect upon, challenge, understand and express their faith more explicitly.

Apart from session 1 and session 5, which are reserved for an introductory exercise and a concluding exercise, respectively, the other three sessions provide participants with three topics from which they, in collaboration with their tandem partners, are required to address one. The topics for each session are deemed to present an equal challenge to participants. Learning resources and task sheets are to be provided for all topics. This freedom of choice granted to the students ensures that the autonomy aspect of tandem learning is preserved. Tandem partners are able to deal with topics which are of interest to them, thus allowing for a more meaningful and authentic experience.

The Trial

In April 2008, following the construction of an initial programme curriculum, the authors of this paper ran a trial of the methodology of tandem learning in interfaith dialogue.7 We have added italics here to stress that while the trial sought to gauge student response to the programme curriculum as a whole, its primary purpose was to test whether or not tandem learning worked as a pedagogical tool in student interfaith dialogue.

Consequently the trial consisted of an introductory session to introduce the programme to potential trialists, followed by the exercise designed to take place as the tandem task in session 1 of the curriculum and finally focus group sessions and questionnaires to attain feedback.

The introductory session involved a short presentation about tandem learning and the interfaith programme. Attendants were told that their participation in the trial was part of its research and development process and all were asked to sign a declaration of participation. Following a brief exercise designed to facilitate introductions between participants, they were asked to partner-up according to the religions they were interested in learning about. They were then told to carry out the tandem task in the subsequent two weeks, after which they would be invited to give feedback on their experience.

Participants were also asked to give feedback after the introductory session. 74% of respondents either strongly agreed or agreed that they were enthused by the concept of tandem learning, with one respondent suggesting 'I think tandem learning will be interesting, as it will allow us to explore interfaith issues at a personal level, whereas such discussions I have been involved in in the past have been far more formal and group-structured.' This feedback reflected our theory that participants would be excited by the idea of tandem learning in interfaith dialogue as it provides them with the opportunity to discuss faith in a unique way, particularly as a lived experience rather than a set of abstract propositions.

After two weeks, participants were asked to attend focus group sessions at the University of Sheffield Multifaith Chaplaincy Service. As mentioned above, the aim of the focus groups was mainly to find out from the students whether or not the methodology of tandem learning in interfaith dialogue worked. Our expectation was that tandem learning in interfaith dialogue would function to:

The feedback we received from questionnaires and focus groups resoundingly vindicated our theoretical underpinnings for appropriating tandem learning to interfaith dialogue.

As highlighted above, our primary concern was that tandem learning should provide students with the opportunity to gain knowledge (by learning from their partners about the tenets and practices of their religion), understanding (by experiencing what being an adherent of that religion is like through personal contact and conversation) and initiate a process of self-reflection (by reflecting upon their faith in relation to their tandem experience). The consensus among our respondents indeed suggested that tandem learning not only allowed them to gain a basic knowledge of their partner's religion, it allowed them to understand how their partner saw the world and practiced their religion. Significantly, feedback also showed that participants began to think about their own religion and beliefs as a result of their conversation with the religious-other.

When asked if they had gained a better understanding of a) their partner's religious doctrines and teachings and b) their partner's faith as a lived experience, 50% responded positively to a) while 75% responded positively to b). Respondents suggested that they already knew most of the information their partner's provided about their religion's doctrines and tenets, though they claimed with more time and other topics to discuss they would learn a lot more. Trialists did advocate strongly, however, that one of the significant benefits of tandem learning was that they gained an understanding of their partner's religion as a lived experience. One participant suggested:

It does feel like I learned more from a couple of hours with a Buddhist than I would have learned from two RE lessons at school on Buddhism. It's a lot less dry, there is a lot more reality to it when you are sat opposite someone, to whom this is their life and it is them we are talking about. It's not just some hypothetical person of that faith.

Although time restricted our ability to extend the trial to more than one session or to have the participants answer journal questions, the process of self-reflection, which we highlighted as one of the unique consequences of tandem learning, was nevertheless raised in the feedback:

The fact that you are articulating your faith into words you are forced to have something to put in there. There was an element while I was talking of putting words to stuff that I perhaps wouldn't normally put words to, because someone has asked about it and you have to explain it.

Another major advantage with tandem learning, as became apparent from the feedback, was its novelty, informality and enjoyability in comparison to other forms of interfaith dialogue. 100% of respondents said they had enjoyed the experience. Meanwhile one trialist said:

To be honest when I first heard about it I was sceptical...and [thought] it's never going to work like these things never do. But I really enjoyed it. I thought it was completely different to any interfaith thing I have experienced before, it was good.

Others suggested:

I can ask the kind of questions I wouldn't be able to ask a priest or someone, because I would expect them to give me a textbook answer, but because it was a person and their experience of it, it was interesting to see how they actually put it into practice rather than what I'm almost expecting to hear, and I don't think I would have got that other than by talking to someone about it, because you wouldn't get that from talking to a priest I don't think.
It is informal, and you can generally have a conversation, and you can get genuine answers.You don't feel like you have to say the right thing.

Finally, the response to the trial showed that the autonomy of tandem learning, namely allowing partners to explore aspects of their religions as they wish, was of real benefit to a genuine and authentic interfaith experience. 50% suggested they were able to discuss things of interest, while 50% were indifferent, though the general consensus amongst the latter was that more tandem sessions would be necessary to achieve more meaningful discussion. Nevertheless, 75% reported they were successful in achieving their learning goals. Significantly, the freedom to discuss on their own terms allowed participants to learn, share and teach, and begin to generate authentic and meaningful relationships. One respondent suggested:

It potentially builds you a friend in another faith, which is one of the most important things you can get out of it, that it can actually create links between faith communities so they don't become little isolated things. Even if someone knew about all the other faiths, but they didn't actually talk to each other then it doesn't mean a lot.

Issues Raised

While the trial tested the effectiveness of the tandem learning methodology in interfaith dialogue, Lesley Walker and Jane Woodin from the Modern Languages Teaching Centre (MLTC) at the University of Sheffield were invited to assess our curriculum and suggest improvements to our programme. The MLTC has played a significant role in developing tandem language learning and as such we were extremely grateful for their input. Their involvement highlighted two major issues, namely a lack of autonomy in our programme vis-à-vis the problem of expertise in religion. In this section, we will relay their criticisms and suggestions, and in the next section we will describe how we have revised our curriculum in response.

It was always the intention that our tandem learning programme would have no explicit aims, such as promoting social cohesion or tolerance to others, but rather that by encouraging a move from knowledge to understanding to self-reflection, these ends may be achieved in turn. However, by designing the curriculum in such a way so as to facilitate this move as far as possible, the staff from the MLTC pointed out that we were restricting the extent to which learners were able to define and fulfil their own learning goals. In this regard they also expressed concerns about the group meetings, which we had envisioned to provide knowledge that participants might need for discussing the subject, thus ensuring some degree of objective quality of the discussion. The MLTC staff felt that by making these provisions we were again neglecting the autonomy in tandem learning, and not allowing our learners to achieve the learning outcomes they would hope for from their tandem experience.

In tandem language learning, partners are required to jointly define and deal with their own learning goals. As such, for instance, if an English speaking partner wished to improve their ability to use the past tense in French, then the French-speaking partner would spend time helping him/her to do so. This is the principle of autonomy which, as was cited above, is one of the necessary features of tandem learning.

Following on from this issue of autonomy, questions arose concerning the place of 'expertise' within the interfaith programme. Unlike in tandem language learning, where each native-speaker is naturally an expert in their own language, in tandem interfaith dialogue being an adherent of a particular religion does not necessarily guarantee one's expertise in regard to one's religion in the same way. Believers may indeed have significant gaps in their religious knowledge. Furthermore, religion and religious belief is inevitably to some degree subjective with individuals interpreting and committing to religious doctrine and tenets differently.

So, if we take the same example given above, the Frenchspeaking partner will be able to expertly instruct and assess their partner's use of the past tense. However, correspondingly, if a Jewish student wished to learn more about the role of Mary in the Catholic faith, the opinion of their Catholic partner may be an interpretation which differs significantly to other Catholics, or they may not possess knowledge about Mary at all.

This problem raises questions such as what kind of knowledge, if any, partners are to expect to gain from each other? What is the value of tandem learning when neither partner is an expert? Couldn't some ideas be misleading? Of course, in tandem language learning, these issues, to a large extent, do not exist.

The issues of expertise lead on to a further concern, raised not only by staff from the MLTC but also by members of the project board, regarding the content and the practicality of the group sessions. Project board members suggested that apart from the problematic workload this would involve for students, providing 'knowledge' on various aspects of religion would be extremely difficult. Questions were posed regarding who would be qualified to provide this knowledge, how this knowledge would be relayed and what should be classed as 'knowledge' rather than personal interpretation.

Revised Curriculum

Having collected feedback and suggestions, the authors of this paper revised the original curriculum in order to respond to three main, and interrelated, difficulties, namely a lack of autonomy, the issue of expertise and problems with the group sessions.

In order to correct the perceived lack of autonomy three adjustments to the original curriculum were made. Firstly an initial introductory group session entitled 'setting objectives' was added at the start of the course to ensure participants, along with their tandem partner, are free to decide upon their own learning goals and objectives. This is more in-line with tandem language learning programmes, such as those at Sheffield MLTC, and ensures that the autonomy principle inherent in tandem learning is maintained.

Following on from this, rather than prescribe which tandem topics learners could cover each session, as was part of the original curriculum, the revised version invites participants to select five topics from an extensive list of options which they are requested to explore at their own discretion within a given time frame. They are advised that tandem partners should decide which topics they cover together, so as to fulfil their learning objectives. Task sheets and resources are provided for each topic. Participants are also free to cover topics not included in the list.

Finally, the journal aspect of the programme is expanded to include not only questions which are aimed to facilitate the process of self-reflection, but also questions designed to act as self-assessment to ensure that participants are fulfilling their learning goals. This allows them to keep track of what they have learnt and what they wish to cover in future tandem sessions. It also acts as a significant element of course assessment which is one of the requirements for it to be included in the Sheffield Graduate Award Scheme.

As suggested above, the issue of expertise in interfaith tandem learning, led to some discussion among those working on the project. The project board, along with the authors of this paper, have wrestled with this issue throughout the development of the tandem interfaith programme. We concluded, however, that the term 'expert' must have a different meaning in interfaith tandem learning than it does in tandem language learning.

The benefit of expertise in language learning is that it ensures both partners improve their linguistic aptitude, which is the major goal of the programme. However, in interfaith tandem learning, while the acquisition of knowledge about another's religion is important, the benefits of authentic, face-to-face communication with the religiousother, and the relationships which can develop as a result, are equally, if not more, important. As such, we would suggest that the term 'expert' in interfaith tandem learning refers to the expert knowledge which each individual learner has about their own individual religious life, beliefs and practices. It is this 'expertise' which ensures authentic and meaningful tandem experiences, which lead to understanding and self-reflection which, together with the acquisition of knowledge, represent the true benefit of tandem interfaith activities.

In the revised curriculum, all participants in the programme are reminded from the outset that their partner is an expert only in their own religious beliefs, and that their interpretation of faith and the practices they follow may differ from those which are more commonly held within their religion. It is stressed that while their partner is of course a source of a great deal of knowledge, they are not qualified teachers, and if points need clarifying following a tandem session they should seek the advice of the Multifaith Chaplaincy Service Chaplains.

In turn, participants are also required to attend a group listening session, designed to help them develop the necessary listening skills to make the most of their interaction and conversation with their tandem partners. This involves acknowledging the value of encountering another religion as a lived experience, as relayed by their tandem partner, whilst respecting that their beliefs may differ from those more commonly held by members of their faith community.

Apart from the two group sessions cited above, plus another group session at the end of the programme entitled 'Final Session: feedback and reflection', which invites participants to share their views and experiences together, the group session element from the original curriculum has been disregarded in the revised version. We felt that because of the practical difficulties, alongside the potential ambiguity in content of the group sessions, it was prudent to remove them.

This will ensure that autonomy and the value of personal communication and interaction between tandem partners are stressed and allow participants to get the most out of the programme by defining and fulfilling their own learning outcomes.

Conclusion and the Way Forward

'Identity' as it stands is closely modelled after the language tandem learning programme of the MLTC at the University of Sheffield. This provides a well-tested way of ensuring autonomy for the participating students in regard to the content and strategies of their learning, while at the same time incorporating a process of accountability that is needed if some form of formal recognition is to be awarded upon the completion of the programme. For the participants in the 'Identity' programme, this recognition will be given within the framework of the Sheffield Graduate Award.

Given the emphasis on the learner's autonomy in tandem learning, it has been necessary to state the envisioned learning outcomes that a participation in 'Identity' is to yield in rather general terms. Still, the set-up of the interfaith situation as a personal encounter reasonably justifies the assumption that participants will be able to gain not just knowledge in the sense of factual information, but more significantly an understanding of what it means practically to be an adherent of their tandem partner's faith. In the same way it can be expected that self-reflection is to result from the attempt to explain one's religious identity and practices to another. It is the goal of both the devised curriculum and the learning materials to facilitate this progression in learning outcomes while also offering suggestions in regard to possible topics.

In our deliberations between the project board and the research assistants, authenticity emerged as a primary value we attributed to the tandem interfaith encounter. This authenticity has shown itself to be attractive to potential participants. The focus on individual practice and belief meant we had to wrestle with the issue of expertise, as not every practitioner of a faith is automatically an expert in its teachings. Yet, as we were primarily aiming for students to gain an understanding of how religious beliefs play out in the embodied experience of everyday life, we decided that accurate knowledge of doctrines was of secondary importance and could be obtained by students, where needed, by consulting encyclopaedic resources readily available to them through the university library and the Internet.

It is our hope that the Multifaith Chaplaincy Service at the University of Sheffield will employ the tandem learning curriculum developed over the last ten months and run the 'Identity' project in full in the current academic year.

This report acts as part of the dissemination which was stipulated as an objective at the outset of the research for 'Identity'. It is our intention that other information will become available in due course at www.shef.ac.uk/ssd/chaplains/identity.html, such as learning materials and resources, which can be used by the wider HE Chaplaincy community to engage students in their own interfaith tandem learning projects.

We believe that the potential for tandem learning in interfaith dialogue to promote a progression from knowledge to understanding to self-reflection offers students a challenging, intellectually stimulating, fun and unique brand of interfaith activity, which lends itself to develop meaningful relationships with members of other faith communities and encourages a deep, personal and authentic interfaith experience.

Bibliography

Brammerts, H., 'Autonomous Language Learning in Tandem: The Development of a Concept' in Autonomous Language Learning in Tandem, by T. Lewis and L. Walker (eds.) (Sheffield: Academy Electronic Publications, 2003) pp. 27- 36.

Braybrooke, Marcus, Pilgrimage of Hope: One Hundred Years of Global Interfaith Dialogue, (London: SCM, 1992).

Inter Faith Network for the United Kingdom, Religions in the UK: A Multi-Faith Directory, (Derby: University of Derby in association with the InterFaith Network for the United Kingdom, 1993)

Kessler, Edward, 'Developments in the Field of Inter Faith Dialogue and Academic Study', in Challenge and Opportunity: Changing Patterns of Inter Faith Engagement in the UK, edited by Inter Faith Network for the United Kingdom. (London: Inter Faith Network for the UK, 2006) pp. 8-13 available online: http://www.interfaith.org.uk/publications/challenge2006meeting.pdf

Ladds, Debbie, 'New Funding Streams, New Possibilities for Developing The Faith Dimension of Community Cohesion', in Challenge and Opportunity: Changing Patterns of Inter Faith Engagement in the UK, edited by Inter Faith Network for the United Kingdom. (London: Inter Faith Network for the UK, 2006) pp. 29-34, available online: http://www.interfaith.org.uk/publications/challenge2006meeting.pdf

Lamb, W., 'IDENTITY Learner Diary.' (Sheffield, 2008), 'Tandem Learning Project Definition.' (Sheffield, 2007). Lewis, T. 'The Case for Tandem Learning', in Autonomous Language Learning in Tandem, by T. Lewis and L. Walker (eds.). (Sheffield: Academy Electronic Publications, 2003) pp. 13-25.

Munn, Meg, 'Faith Communities, Inter Faith Engagement and Government', in Challenge and Opportunity: Changing Patterns of Inter Faith Engagement in the UK, edited by Inter Faith Network for the United Kingdom, (London: Inter Faith Network for the UK, 2006) pp. 35-40, available online: http://www.interfaith.org.uk/publications/challenge2006meeting.pdf

Patel, Eboo, and Brodeur, Patrice (eds.), Building the Interfaith Youth Movement: Beyond Dialogue to Action, (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2006).

Weller, Paul, (ed.), Religions in the UK: Directory 2001-03, (Derby: Multi-Faith Centre at the University of Derby in association with the Inter Faith Network for the United Kingdom, 2001)

Appendix 1

An example Task Sheet: CHA 100.2. Feasting and Fasting

As a tandem pair discuss between you the significance of food within your respective traditions.

After this discussion, plan an 'interfaith' dinner between a number of people from each of your traditions.

Be sure to take into account seating arrangements, food, prayers, dietary requirements, etc.

Of course, if you would actually like to put this dinner plan into practice, by all means do so!

Aim

To discover the significance of food, including rituals associated with food, sharing meals and providing food for others.

Objectives

On your own and with your partner define your objectives for this tandem exercise. What do you want to learn?

Consider asking yourself:

Consider asking your tandem partner:

You may ask all or none of the suggestions above plus:

Things to reflect on together:

Endnotes

  1. http://www.shef.ac.uk/thesheffieldgraduateaward/, retrieved 05 May 2008, 12.21pm.
  2. An example is the World Conference on Religion and Peace. (Weller 2001:82) Cf. also http://www.wcrp.org/ (Accessed November 17, 2008). There are many such initiatives. For a more comprehensive list of those who are active in the UK, refer to Weller (2001:79-109).
  3. A good example of a more theologically oriented project is the Woolf Institute of Abrahamic Faiths in Cambridge (www.woolfinstitute.cam.ac.uk). See also Kessler (2006).
  4. This funding for interfaith dialogue initiatives is part of a funding scheme generally concerned with community development. See Ladds (2006) and Munn (2006). See also http://www.gos.gov.uk/gose/news/newsarchive/397781/ and http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/third_sector/news/news_releases/071212_community.aspx.
  5. 'Capacity' refers to faith communities' ability to participate in civic and public life; 'Capacity building' thus aims to provide them with resources and skills that are needed for such participation. It is also concerned with 'trust and understanding between different faith groups'. (Munn 2006:37) See also Ladd (2006:29).
  6. The Tandem Learning modules offered by the Modern Languages Teaching Centre at the University of Sheffield are a good example of this. For more information see http://www.sheffield.ac.uk/mltc/courses.
  7. Respondents for the trial included 30 attendant at the introductory session and representatives from 33% of the tandem pairings attendant at the follow-up focus groups. The relatively small sample was a result of the unfavourable period within which we had to carry out the trial, with it being around exam time. While the evidence drawn from this sample cannot be viewed as conclusive, the data does strongly suggest trends highlighted within this article. All respondents were fulltime undergraduate students at the University of Sheffield. The following faith communities were represented in the trial: Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, Hindu and Pagan.

Return to vol. 9 no. 1 index page

 

This page was originally on the website of The Subject Centre for Philosophical and Religious Studies. It was transfered here following the closure of the Subject Centre at the end of 2011.

 

-
The British Association for the Study of Religions
The Religious Studies Project