Posts Tagged ‘Religious Education’

The Moral Education of Children

March 15th, 2010



Many parents are concerned about laying a good foundation for their children that they might grow to become moral, responsible adults. In part, parents often rely on Sunday school or other types of religious education to help convey the message of morality. In raising moral children, there are a few points that bear remembering.

First, child rearing is a developmental endeavor. That implies that children progress through moral stages and understandings at a certain (variable) pace. There is little evidence that children can be hurried along the developmental journey. There is a developmental track for moral development, social development, and cognitive development. All areas of development come into play in our efforts to raise moral children. Jean Piaget, the famous developmentalist, reminds us that young children have not yet arrived at the stage of formal, symbolic thought.

Many parents will attempt to moralize with children in abstract, moral discussions-suitably “watered-down,” or so they think, to meet their kids where they are. However, if research on cognitive development is at all correct, it is unlikely that children are being “converted” to a moral or religious stance. They may say “yes” and seem to get the point, but it is unlikely that they do.

A much better approach is to work on actions involving simple reciprocity, things like sharing of toys and friends. Young children are naturally egocentric. By involving them in such simple understandings as “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours,” children come to see simple morality as pragmatic, paving the way for the later stages when formal reasoning makes children receptive to more abstract appeals.

In terms of social development, Erik Erikson would no doubt point us to those natural conflicts that occur at each advancing stage of development. In the early stages when a child struggles between trust and mistrust, and shame and guilt vs. autonomy, children need reassurance. If they are subjected to constant moralizing and put-downs, they will likely adopt an outlook of inferiority. In addition, they will become increasing likely to look to an outside locus of control. The best way to raise autonomous, responsible adults is by acceptance as opposed to constant correction. Erikson’s theory predicts that someone might “get stuck” at an early stage if that stage is not successfully navigated.

Furthermore, problems may appear during the adolescent identity crisis of even later in adulthood. Lawrence Kohlberg was a theorist of moral development. His theory reminds us that young children do not see the world in such philosophical categories as moral or immoral. Here the focus is on reward and punishment. What is good is what brings a reward. They also develop a sense of parity; one hand washes the other. “If you are nice to me, I’ll be nice to you,” is one of the earliest orientations. In late childhood, children reach a stage of wanting things to be fair and law-driven. Here they are concerned about following the rules. It is not until adolescence or later that kids begin to see right and wrong in truly moral terms. From this perspective, the best we can do is “play along” with development. We must never expect young children to have a truly moral view of things. This is something they are “nurtured into.”

If caregivers follow the rule of gentle persuasion and fairness, children will naturally move into an understanding of morality. What about religious instruction? James Fowler has spoken to this at length. Combining theories of earlier theorists, he has noted that the earliest claim to faith is affiliative. Children make “professions of faith” to please their parents and feel a sense of unity with them. It is very doubtful that children really understand the notion of freely chosen conversion before early adolescence. How do we put all of this together to get some direction?

Follow the developmental curve. Meet children where they are. Do not moralize with them, and do not expect more than they are able to deliver. Keep discipline mild, and aim it towards learning such socialization skills as sharing in a polite and caring way. Do not expect little ones to be too selfless. Remember that childhood is not a race; the stages cannot be bypassed. Accept children where they are developmentally, and provide a warm nurturing environment. If we “teach from behind,” letting the child’s natural developmental stages take the lead, we will be doing the best we can to raise moral, responsible children who grow into moral, responsible adults.

By: James Alexander

Why Public Schools Must Teach Religious Education

January 11th, 2010



I have many old friends which, I would imagine, seeing the title of this article would be fairly shocked. These folks are well aware of my personal history. Having become a convert to Christianity during the Jesus Movement of the early 70’s, I fully embraced fundamentalist Christianity. I was ever so certain that the world was going to hell in a hand basket-being subverted by the godless institutions of our society. These institutions included liberal churches, the Democratic Party, the federal courts and judges, and public schools. When I entered the teaching force in 1977, I knew it would be difficult. Somehow, I had to get God back into the classroom. Yet, the law did not permit this. I clung to a Higher Law, watching my back on one hand and speaking about my faith whenever possible on the other.

Later, I attended seminary and became a minister. I lived in the hills of southwest Virginia. In my community, the public school paused before lunch while the principal offered a brief prayer over the speaker system before the students went to the cafeteria. It would seem as if my ideal world had come, but not so.

Something happened to me during the seven years since I began teaching until I began attending seminary. I call that something sanity. I came to see that the public school cannot become a supporter of any religious agenda. Although this was in the early days of the Moral Majority, and my Virginia parish was not far from Lynchburg, I could clearly see that things had gone too far. The school is a place for all, a place where much of our socialization takes place, and early ideas about democracy and living together find root. Yet, right in the midst of it all was a strong effort to make Christians of the school’s most vulnerable clientele.

Later, I was to earn a doctorate in education. Until that time, I was largely unfamiliar with the concept of a hidden curriculum. The hidden curriculum consists of all the little things that schools do to convey the message to conform. The hidden curriculum also punishes nonconformity. During the days of my doctoral program, I often thought back to the school down the road in Virginia. I wondered what the hidden curriculum was teaching secular children. Perhaps they were learning that prayer is just some words you say before lunch with no real conviction. What was it teaching the Jehovah Witness children? Did they desire to be coerced into prayer in a manner of which their parents might not approve? What did it teach those from families that attended church in this very fundamentalist environment? Perhaps they learned that everyone is a Christian, or ought to be one, at any rate.

I thought about all of this long and hard. I felt a sense of shame that I did not speak up about a practice I questioned because I was concerned about my status as a minister in the community. I questioned if any type of school sponsored prayer was ever appropriate. Thinking as a minister, school prayer seemed to water down the devotion I tried to convey to my congregation when I preached. It had to be so nuanced, nothing that would upset many folks. As an educator, I wondered if it didn’t somehow cross the line and involve government in the business of religion. As an educator and a Christian, I wondered if it didn’t somehow diminish the role of both faith and politics.

Schools must provide children with a religious education. By that I mean that religion is a prevalent and historically important force in the American experiment. Schools that desire to provide any type of well-rounded, liberal education can’t just ignore religion.

Neither can they ignore diversity and the absolute right to have one’s own religion or no religion at all. I think diversity is a good starting point for the public endeavor of religious education. Students need to know that the United States is a widely diverse nation in terms of race, culture, lifestyle, and religion. They need to learn lessons of respect and tolerance for those of religiously diverse points of view. To do that, they must have some understanding of the experiences of others. It would seem that by religious education in the public school setting, we are talking about teaching for tolerance.

It is a lesson that we had better teach well and teach soon. Thinking back on the events of 9/11, I am horrified to consider what actions may be encouraged by religious and cultural intolerance. Listening to the voices of conservative religious commentators and pundits, I hear the rising tide of intolerance and fear among America’s evangelicals and fundamentalists who continue to see Islam and other religions as the enemy.

We need religious education in the schools so that children will learn that it is acceptable for a Christian to befriend a Muslim. We need religious education so that children will know that not all people are believers and that the majority of those who aren’t are decent, caring people.

Our nation is diverse. Our schools are diverse. Diversity is bound to grow with each passing year. We need religious education in our schools and we need it now.

By: James Alexander