Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [Queensland University of Technology]On: 06 November 2014, At: 17:28Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK
Religious Education: Theofficial journal of the ReligiousEducation AssociationPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/urea20
Structural IdentityConsultation: Story Telling as aCulture of Faith TransformationIna ter Avest a & Cok Bakker ba Vrije Universiteit/VU University , Amsterdam, TheNetherlandsb Utrecht University , Utrecht, The NetherlandsPublished online: 02 Jun 2009.
To cite this article: Ina ter Avest & Cok Bakker (2009) Structural IdentityConsultation: Story Telling as a Culture of Faith Transformation, Religious Education:The official journal of the Religious Education Association, 104:3, 257-271, DOI:10.1080/00344080902881272
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00344080902881272
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Que
ensl
and
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
echn
olog
y] a
t 17:
28 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
STRUCTURAL IDENTITY CONSULTATION: STORYTELLING AS A CULTURE OF FAITH TRANSFORMATION
Ina ter AvestVrije Universiteit/VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Cok BakkerUtrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
Abstract
In this contribution we explore processes of Structural Identity Con-sultation (SIC) with primary school teachers, and the opportunitiesthis kind of team meetings offers for a nontraditional way to livewith religious tradition(s). We take our start in everyday classrooms,characterized by religious diversity. The thoughts of Levinas, andhis view on the relationship of “I” and “the other,” open our mindfor the encounter with the other, and the sensibility for the need ofthe other, resulting in an “answer-ability” for the other. StructuralIdentity Consultations in our view create an open space to explorediffering narrations on encounter. The narration of a young teacher,and the deconstructive reading of this narration as a text, shows theinnovative power of (religious) tradition. It is our conviction thatteachers’ story telling in Structural Identity Consultations enlargesreligious literacy and improves religious sensibility.
Life is not the life you have lived,but what is remembered,and the way it is rememberedin order to pass it on in narrations.—Gabriel Garcıa Marquez, Vivir para contarla (2002)
These days, in various European countries, the public demand isheard for a clear cut national identity. Whereas in the earlier daysthe newspapers would hardly give any space to a banner on religion oridentity, in these days the publication of a report of the Scientific Advi-sory Board for Government Policy (Wetenschappelijke Raad voor hetRegeringsbeleid, WRR) on religion and identity results in screamingheadlines in the newspapers. In 2007 the WRR published two reports,one on the role of religion in the public domain, the other on the pro-cess of identification in a globalizing world. Both the reports took astheir starting point the diversity of the Dutch population regarding theethnic and cultural background of the inhabitants, which was definedReligious Education Copyright C© The Religious Education AssociationVol. 104 No. 3 May–June ISSN: 0034–4087 print
DOI: 10.1080/00344080902881272
257
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Que
ensl
and
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
echn
olog
y] a
t 17:
28 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
258 STRUCTURAL IDENTITY CONSULTATION
as a problem. This problematic diversity also shows itself in schoolsand classrooms, focusing these days mainly on the diversity in religiousorientation. A so called islamization of the problem is at stake (Van derDonk et al., 2006). On this diversity in religious orientation we elab-orate in Structural Identity Consultations (SIC), which we describeas a “culture of story telling,” facilitating the religious development ofthe participants (cf. ter Avest & Bakker 2006; Copley 2007).
In the first section diversity is presented as it is perceived byteachers in Dutch classrooms. In the second section we elaborate onthe thoughts of Levinas, in particular his ideas on diversity, resultingfrom the meeting of the (O)other. In the third section we explore theconcept of encounter as we introduce it as a SIC in Christian schoolsin the Netherlands. Story telling is the subject of the fourth section.In the fifth section, entitled “Diversity, envy, and transformation,”we will show that a striking, yet until now underestimated, aspect ofencounter is the social comparison in which feelings of jealousy andenvy are involved. In the sixth section we emphasize the innovativepower of tradition and conclude that SIC can be a rich environmentfor story telling as a culture of faith transformation.
DIVERSITY IN DUTCH CLASSROOMS
Diversity, in the last decades, has become an important aspect ofchanging European societies, the Netherlands being one of those soci-eties. Starting with the arrival of guest workers in the sixties of the lastcentury, little by little “being different” no longer is an abnormality.On the contrary, this kind of “abnormality” seems to be “normal,” thatis: the standard, as is shown in the title of an educational project “Ikben gewoon anders, anders is heel gewoon!” (“I am just different, be-ing different is common practice!”). The Dutch homogenous, althoughpillarized, society1 changed during the last decades into what has beencoined as a “colorful society,” a name with the connotation of pointingat the multicolored and multicultural society in a positive way. Thisapproach of the growing diversity in ethnic and religious backgroundof the population of the European countries has been described by ourGerman colleague Peter Schreiner as a process of pluralization of soci-ety (Schreiner 2001, 253–266). Whereas Schreiner, in a rather neutral
1For an extensive description of the pillarized Dutch society changing into a secu-larized, post-pillarized society, see Ter Avest, Bakker, Bertram-Troost, and Miedema(2007).
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Que
ensl
and
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
echn
olog
y] a
t 17:
28 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
INA TER AVEST AND COK BAKKER 259
and objective way, relates the different approaches in Religious Edu-cation in European countries to the changes in the second half of thelast century, Bakker in the same volume gives an insight into the actualsituation the teacher meets in the classroom and critically explores theconcept of “diversity” (Bakker 2001, 103, 203–221). In line with thisview, our British colleague in Religious Education, Robert Jackson,completes the thoughts on diversity as a challenge, and sees the devel-opment from an assumed homogeneity to an articulated diversity asdesirable and of great value for developing societies in the postmodernworld. Jackson emphasizes the challenge of pluralism in the edificationprocess of pupils in a globalizing world (Jackson 1997, 2004).
As all teachers will agree, diversity in the classroom can be per-ceived in many different ways (Bakker 1999). The classroom is filledwith “others,” children who differ from each other. It is obvious thatchildren have different religious backgrounds, but there are a hostof other variables to consider: differences in character, in socioeco-nomic background, in intelligence, differences in knowledge acrossa number of different fields of knowledge, different learning stylesand different skills in cooperation and communication (Bakker 1999,59). In the public debate these days, however, the ethnic differenceis on the foreground, narrowed down into a religious difference. Inthe public debate, being different from the other has been islamized,2
which has serious implications for a teacher’s perception of pupils inthe classroom, as well as for a teacher’s conversations in team meetingswhenever “the other” is subject of deliberations. Before we elaborateon the consequences of islamization of “otherness” for the discussionin team meetings, we wish to turn to the thoughts of Levinas, whostarts with the meeting of “the other” from a developmental perspec-tive, stating that without the encounter with “the other” one’s ownauthentic and unique identity cannot come into existence.
LEVINAS: THE ENCOUNTER WITH THE OTHER “WHOCONTRASTS ME”
The encounter with the other is described by the French-Jewishphilosopher Emmanuel Levinas as an experience of contrast, at whichone becomes aware of the otherness of the other. The other is not
2With the concept of “islamisation” we point at the process in the media, whereany conflict with, in, and between minority groups is represented as or interpreted interms of “the danger from Islam.” “Islamization” has a negative connotation.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Que
ensl
and
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
echn
olog
y] a
t 17:
28 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
260 STRUCTURAL IDENTITY CONSULTATION
only different from me, he or she cannot do without me in order todevelop as a human being. It’s up to me to either respond to the needof the other or not. Levinas speaks of response-ability for the other.The awareness of the difference from the other, starts, according toLevinas, in face-ing the other. The process of learning to live togetherwith “the other,” is referred to as the development of a “complexpattern of behavior and attitudes” that cannot develop without takinginto consideration the interests of others and knowing one’s own place.For Levinas, in “knowing one’s own place” is included having an openmind, being receptive to and opening up for the needs of the other.“The other awakens me, alarms me, arouses me” (Levinas 1969/2003).In the encounter the feeling of responsibility for the other emerges.The presence of the other becomes an inner-presence in the form ofa fruitful and restless uneasiness that summons to responsibility andco-humanity (cf. Verhofstadt-Dene 1988/1995).
In Levinas’ train of thought “I” and “the other” are inseparable,although separate at the same time. The relationship between “I” and“the other” is not so much characterized by the wish to attunementwith the other, but more so in an open attitude toward the otherness ofthe other. In the encounter the other offers to me his or her represen-tation of his or her life view. This is a gift for the developmental processof my self-awareness and my authentic worldview-under-construction.In the encounter with the other a transformation occurs of the “I” thatalready exists.
In Levinas’ view, the human being is a responsive creature, re-sponding to the other. Just as I am, the other is there, representing“the painful difference” compared with me. This painful difference atthe same time is the pitfall for colonizing the other, “to turn a blindeye to this ‘difference’ and try to transform the other phantasmaticallyinto an identical ‘alter-ego”’ (Burggraeve 1985, 42). Listening to theother I have to resist my natural tendency to colonize the other—whenI describe him or her in familiar concepts and situating him or her inmy own frame of reference (cf. Verhofstadt-Dene 1988/1995).
Not colonizing the other, but meeting the other as a response-able person, results in a transcendent encounter. In Levinas’ viewtranscendence refers to “this relationship with the other that doesnot reduce the other to the same” (Levinas in Hardy 2002, 461).Meeting the other face to face, my idea of the other surpasses theimage I already constructed of her or him. The encounter with theother asks for respecting her or his otherness. I have to mend my waysand re-form my frame of reference in order to make room for the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Que
ensl
and
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
echn
olog
y] a
t 17:
28 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
INA TER AVEST AND COK BAKKER 261
uniqueness of the other and give her or him her or his own voice inmy Self. Characteristic for this “tuning in” unto the other is, that it isdone of one’s own free will, good will. We will turn to the matter of“good will” later, discussing the feelings of inferiority teachers mightexperience in contrast to the certainty in belief, in team meetingsexposed by orthodox Christian colleagues. Before we articulate thesecontrasting feelings, we clarify in the next section the concept ofStructural Identity Consultation (SIC).
ENCOUNTER IN SIC
In team meetings teachers most of the time meet each other to dis-cuss practical problems entailed in the pedagogical task of the school.The teachers’ subjective educational theory, part of their (religious orsecular) worldview, forms the frame of reference for these discussions.In these deliberations, theological as well as psychological aspects areinterwoven. We make them explicitly into the subject of debates onthe school’s identity, in the so- called Structural Identity Consultation(SIC).
In meetings and consultations with individual primary schoolteachers we notice that in their daily practice teachers hardly everdiscuss their personal commitment to the formal Christian identityof their school. It does happen that teachers even do not know whatis written on this subject in the school guide or the school curricu-lum. Very often teachers only are triggered to reflect on the Christianidentity of the school the moment they become fully aware of thedifferences in the worldviews their pupils are socialized in (Reijners& ter Avest 2007). In addition, we observe and see confirmed that theconcept of “school identity” is perceived in a narrow and restrictedunderstanding. For many of the primary school teachers it is in thefirst place that the subject of Religious Education causes a certaindegree of tension (Bakker and Rigg 2004). A personal commitmentto the subject of Religious Education, stemming from a personal feel-ing of belonging to a religious community, in the secularized Dutchsociety is rather rare. To improve the strength of the commitmentto Religious Education, we suggest a remedy that is radical inductivein its approach. In order to explore the personal commitment of theteachers, we invite them individually to describe a “critical incident”in which in their personal view the school’s Christian identity is atstake. As an example of such a “critical incident” we present in the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Que
ensl
and
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
echn
olog
y] a
t 17:
28 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
262 STRUCTURAL IDENTITY CONSULTATION
next paragraph the narration of a young male teacher in a Christianschool in one of the bigger cities of the Netherlands.
Worldview and life orientation constitute a person’s identity,which is “work in progress.” Not longer inherited by parents, givenby birth, identity has to be constructed by the person him- or herself(Taylor 1991). It is by story telling, in telling the personal biographyas a life (his)story, that a person constructs her or his identity. Nar-rative identity emerges from “critical incidents” being the milestonesthat shape the biography of the narrator. In our qualitative researchproject we have invited the teachers to tell us about such a “criticalincident” that in their opinion still has a deep influence on their “be-ing a teacher.” As is known from the literature, “critical incidents” and“critical persons” shape the professional identity of teachers (Kelchter-mans 1994; Beijaard, Meijer & Verloop, unpublished paper). It is inparticular the subjective educational theory as well as the normativeprofessionalism that are influenced by those events and persons, thatleft a profound impression in the teacher’s life. This idea of a nor-mative professionalism is crucial in the approach we develop in SIC.SIC in our view is a space of encounter, where the meeting of the(O)other(s) (in persons, as well as in narrations from religious tradi-tions) creates a culture of knowledge construction. It is in these storiesthat teachers tell what they think is meaningful and how they reflecton the significance of their professional behavior, that the authenticcharacteristics and profile of the school is actually generated. This isthe identity of the school, be it in a dynamic mode: a narrative cul-ture as a culture of transformation of faith, as a contribution to thecumulative religious tradition(s). In the next section we elaborate onthe culture of story telling in SIC.
SIC: A CULTURE OF STORY TELLING
Story telling seems to be a natural disposition of persons. In ev-eryday life people meet each other and inform each other about theirname, their daily activities of working, shopping, and eating, the eco-nomic discourse. However, this kind of story telling is not what weaim at in the SIC-processes. The way we introduce stories in SIC isas narrations being told whenever life seems to come to a standstill,and breath stops short. In SIC stories are presented as “critical inci-dents” (Kelchtermans 1994). Such stories, rather narratives, have thefunction of creating coherence, like “beads on a string”; stories on a
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Que
ensl
and
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
echn
olog
y] a
t 17:
28 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
INA TER AVEST AND COK BAKKER 263
variety of situations that are held together by the “string” of the plot ofthe life story (Hermans & Hermans-Jansen 1995). “Critical incidents”in our view are an essential aspect of identity construction. Religioustraditions have the texts that make you find out who you are up against,because they show an explicit worldview. In the Christian tradition,for example, the world is represented as a creation, good luck is anangel from heaven, the stranger is “thou neighbor to be loved” andthe future is represented as “Kingdom of God” (Englert 2007).
Collective story telling raises the awareness of shared as well asconflicting values. The legitimization of these values by references to(a) religious tradition(s), strengthens the awareness of the pivotal roleof faith in teachers’ biographies, in the context of a multicultural andsecularized country. Depending on the motivation of the participants,this role can be binding and bridging, as well as conflicting (Shadid2000).
In SIC it is through the construction of the personal and in partic-ular the professional identity of the teacher that the school’s identityis at stake. Identity construction is a long lasting process of tellingand retelling stories. Identity is a continuing story, “work-in-progress”(Ter Avest and Bakker 1999, Ganzevoort and Visser 2007, 112). Forthis process the concept of “biographizing” is coined by Giddens (inGanzevoort and Visser 2007, 50). In telling the story, a person’s (ora school’s) life is structured according to the red thread of the evercontinuing narration.
Narratives that are told in the cultural and religious context offerplots as examples of possible scripts for the life story. Religions offera language for the interpretation of life events that otherwise leavepeople speechless. Habermas sees religions as frames of reference forthe interpretation of a person’s life. For example, the religious conceptof “angel” enables people to communicate about situations in whichthey felt to have escaped from an accident, by telling the story asbeing saved by a ministering angel (in Englert 2007). Such a conceptcontributes to the religious literacy of the person. The personal andunique life story derives its credibility because of the role of angels inthe main narratives in the cultural context.
The Nijmegen psychologist Hermans emphasizes the fact thatmore than one example of possible scripts are offered, resultingin more than one perspective in the life story. This results in theconcept of the multi-voiced self “a dynamic multiplicity of rela-tively autonomous I-positions in an imaginal landscape” (Hermans& Hermans-Jansen 1995, 28). Voices of different I-positions tell the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Que
ensl
and
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
echn
olog
y] a
t 17:
28 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
264 STRUCTURAL IDENTITY CONSULTATION
life story from a different self-chosen perspective, according to a scriptlayed down in the main narrations embedded in the cultural context.After all, story telling is telling “what is remembered, and the way itis remembered, in order to pass it on in narrations” (Garcıa Marquez2001). An “example of good practice” can not be told without makinguse of culturally embedded stories. In the following section we presentan example of good practice, as it was told by a young male teacher inone of the SIC team meetings.
“EXAMPLE OF GOOD PRACTICE” IN SIC
In one of the SIC team meetings, a young male teacher starts hisstory with a beginning that reminds one of the words “Once upon atime.” He passes on his narration in the following way3:
Once there was a boy in my group of pupils, who came to me, one morning,saying: “Mister, the little brother that was born yesterday, he is in hospital.”I knew the baby had some heart-problems. It apparently bothered the boy,so I asked him: “Do you like to share this with the other children in yourgroup? Shall we tell them during our morning-circle?” He agreed.
So, at the start of the day he told his class mates about his little brotherin hospital. Well, everybody was . . . eh . . . they had questions, they all werevery impressed. Then I asked the pupils “What can we do? To help?” Thechildren had a whole bunch of ideas, like making nice drawings, going tovisit the little brother and so on. Well, eh, this was not very realistic, to gowith all of us to the hospital! Well, and then, one of the pupils suggested tosay a prayer.
I hesitated . . . and then I said: “Well, yes, but we all have a differentgod, how to say a prayer? For whom?” Then I asked children personally: “Ifwe say a prayer, for whom are you praying?” Well, one said he’d pray forAllah, an other child answered he’d pray for God, yet an other child toldthat she had a god of her own since her birth. Well, it turned out that everychild has an own god for whom he’d pray, and an own way to say prayers.I then said: “Well, then now I give you room to say a prayer, in your ownway.”
Well, and then . . . it was silent for more than five minutes. . . . Everychild said his prayer, in his own way, to his own god . . .
It still moves me, remembering this moment, and passing it on.
The story this teacher tells about the experience of silence, in itselfalready is a transformation of existing stories, texts, in the culturalcontext the school is embedded in. This narration we read as a text,
3See also ter Avest (2006).
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Que
ensl
and
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
echn
olog
y] a
t 17:
28 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
INA TER AVEST AND COK BAKKER 265
by way of “textually oriented discourse analysis” (Fairclough 2003).In this approach of the teacher’s narration, the text is considered tobe constructed in close interaction with the social context. It is aninteractive process of meaning making. The texts are seen in terms ofdifferent discourses, genres, and styles they draw on, and articulatetogether (Fairclough 2003).
The start of his narration reminds one of the beginning of famoustales; the end shows similarity with rituals of commemoration as itis known in the Netherlands. It must be stated at this point thatin the Netherlands, silence is not an unusual way of expressing ashared sorrow or grief, like at the end of a protest march against“senseless violence,” or, even more important in the Dutch culture,at the commemoration of the victims of the Second World War—thefourth of May every year.
In the Dutch context it is a common thing to face a classroom ina Christian school, most of the pupils being Muslims and the teacherbeing of a secularized Christian background. This teacher does notgive in to an islamization of the problem raised, but instead of yieldingfor the superior power of an easy going and practical solution (likemaking a drawing), in a very untraditional way this teacher exploresthe religious experiences of his pupils in close cooperation with thepupils themselves. As Roger Saljo (2004) states: “the trick is to focuson what happens outside the school itself, . . . to cultivate a culture ofreason, analysis and reflection, based on a certain shared knowledge”(163).
Speaking in a low voice, the teacher shows that he felt a bit uncom-fortable when one of the pupils suggested saying a prayer for the littlebaby-boy. However, he immediately solves the problem, by asking thechildren for whom they would say a prayer. Mark the way he puts thequestion by asking for whom the pupils would pray. The formulationshows that he is not familiar with religious language, although as apedagogue he is accustomed to opening up the room for pupils’ ownexperiences. Together with them he creates a new ritual, which echoesthe well-known ritual of “two minutes of silence” at the memorial ofthe death of the Second World War. In his narration the pragmaticdimension of the Christian tradition is echoed, Christianity-by-doing,by creating room for prayer, from which a shared silence emerges.
In the story narrated by the teacher, we see him learning withtradition in a nontraditional way (Englert 2007). Starting with an ini-tiative from one of the pupils, the teacher allows for experiencingcontrasting ways of praying among the pupils, and at the same time
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Que
ensl
and
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
echn
olog
y] a
t 17:
28 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
266 STRUCTURAL IDENTITY CONSULTATION
facilitating the construction of a new ritual, which shows the inno-vative power of traditions. The philosopher Hannah Arendt wouldcoin the way the situation is remembered and passed on as an ex-ample of natality, the unique quality of humankind to make a newand surprising beginning at any time (Arendt 1994/2004). Differencesin his classroom are bridged; the new ritual is performative in itsbinding commitment, experienced as a new way of social coherencein the classroom. Knowledge transmission is done by supplying thepupils with additional information on the practice of prayer in differ-ent religious communities; knowledge transformation is facilitated bypracticing the new ritual, stimulating the growth of the pupils’ com-petence of “religious sensibility” (cf. ter Avest 2007a). In processesof transmission and transformation, the teacher is pivotal (ter Avest,2007b).
In sharing with each other the meaning-making process laid downin their stories of “critical incidents” and “critical persons,” teach-ers themselves create tradition, that is the continuing story of faithtransformation. In doing so teachers bring into practice the originalmeaning of the Latin verb tradere.
DIVERSITY, ENVY, AND TRANSFORMATION
In the classroom situation given in the previous section, diversitywas not seen as a problem, but instead it was used as a chance fordevelopment, as is the case in the interpretive approach, developedby the British Religious Education pedagogue Robert Jackson andhis Warwick team. Their innovative approach is a direct result of therecognition of diversity and its stimulating role in the emergence ofan authentic religious identity of pupils and students. The emphasisJackson and his team lay on the representation of religion in the localcontext of the child, as well as the interpretation and reflection by thechild, accentuates the educational value and meaning of pluralism.It is by telling each other stories about habits and rituals at home,about signs and symbols of awe, about “critical incidents” like feastsand religious festivals, that children learn about and from each other’sculture at home, at their religious communities, and their religioustradition as it is represented in the local context. This interactiveprocess stimulates the development of one’s own authentic religiousidentity (cf. Vygotsky 1992, 1996). In this process in the classroom theteacher is of pivotal importance, as we have shown earlier.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Que
ensl
and
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
echn
olog
y] a
t 17:
28 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
INA TER AVEST AND COK BAKKER 267
Not always, as in the earlier example of the classroom discussion ofthe teacher with his pupils, does a situation of diversity stay away fromislamization, or conflict. Sometimes the result of social comparison isless favorable than we pointed at earlier, in Levinas’ theory, where“I” and “the other” come to the conclusion that they wish to answerto the need of the other. Good will is called in in that situation, andis involved in developing the attitude of answer-ability for the other.However, not in all situations does social comparison end up in goodwill to bear response-ability for the other.
In an interesting article the Italian psychologists Miceli and Castel-franchi (2007, 449–479) elaborate on the feelings of envy that resultfrom comparison with the other. Although envy is regarded as oneof the most widespread emotions, usually it does not receive the at-tention that it needs, and that is the same for psychological studies.Jealousy has received more attention, to which envy is closely related.The main difference between the feeling of jealousy and envy is thedifference between “loss” and “lack.” Jealousy starts with full hands,and one is afraid to lose something, whereas envy starts with emptyhands and one is suffering from lacking something.
The teacher’s uneasy feelings arise at the moment one of the chil-dren mentions the possibility of saying a prayer in the classroom, as ananswer to the need for comfort of the classmate whose little brother isseriously ill. Because the teacher obviously experiences a certain lackof religious literacy, the confrontation with the feelings of religiosityof his pupils makes him feel uncomfortable. His uneasy feeling, aswell as his experience of a lack of religiosity, might have resulted infeelings of envy. The Italian psychologists Miceli and Castelfranchi(2007, 450) describe two main characteristic elements of envy. In thefirst place, envy results from social comparison and the awareness onelacks something, and, secondly, that ill will is shown against the betteroff. The social comparison with someone rather close (a pupil in theclassroom, a colleague in school) results in the feeling that the otherhas or does something better than you, which results in feelings ofuncertainty, or even inferiority; in suffering from your part. The en-vious mind results from feelings of disappointment. The person feelsenclosed, imprisoned in the not self-chosen difference. The personhas to free him- or herself from the dominant difference and the ac-companying negative feelings and ill will, but on the contrary changehis or her perspective on the situation. Not the lack of something heor she would like to have, but a shared longing for doing somethingtogether—the good will—opens up the possibility to learn with the
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Que
ensl
and
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
echn
olog
y] a
t 17:
28 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
268 STRUCTURAL IDENTITY CONSULTATION
other. It is exactly this feeling of disappointment that might awaken adeeply felt desire for a common goal or a corporate activity. And in-deed, as we have seen in the earlier narration of the teacher, the pupilsshow the capability to change their perspective and overcome theirfeelings of disappointment, and create a shared space of encounter.Longing for binding results in bridging the difference and creates anew space of encounter, the space of attentive silence.
THE INNOVATIVE POWER OF TRADITION
In the preceding sections we have explored the character of Struc-tural Identity Consultation as a culture of story telling, a space of en-counter. As an example we quoted the “critical incident” of a youngmale teacher. We interpreted his “critical incident” as a narrative textand read it in a deconstructive way. This way of reading the classroomsituation revealed a possible underlying feeling of envy, transformedinto an untraditional way of working with religious traditions. Thisanalysis, in itself a transformed story, offers food for thought in teammeetings.
The result of our analyses opens up new aspects of religious knowl-edge in teachers’ lives, and shows postmodern ways of representationof religious traditions. Worded in everyday language, and using ev-eryday terms and symbols, the teacher’s story reveals new and untra-ditional interpretations of age-old religious traditions. The narrationshows nowadays’ ways of identification with religiosity the teachercommits himself to. He integrates this background as a religious di-mension of his professionalism, in other words: in this way he developsreligious sensibility as an important aspect of his normative profession-alism.
In (team) interviews with teachers, we learn that a majority ofteachers seems to be willing to face the difference in stories of theircolleagues. The prevailing culture in most of the primary schools in amulticultural context, on the one hand, is strong on social cohesion andsolidarity, engagement, and respect for each others’ differing opinions.On the other hand, there is a minority holding to fixed stories, for ex-ample on the pedagogic foundation of the school, the didactics, andthe school’s identity. Such a minority very often is not willing to facethe differences and enter into an open dialogue. Whereas the majorityis looking for new ways of transformation of the Christian tradition,and willing to turn the difference into a fruitful and development
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Que
ensl
and
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
echn
olog
y] a
t 17:
28 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
INA TER AVEST AND COK BAKKER 269
stimulating crisis, they at the same time value highly social cohesion intheir team of colleagues. It is this positive feeling of belonging, whichseems to turn into the negative feelings accompanying the perceivedhindrances to enter into a process of creating new stories, new knowl-edge to deal with the changed classroom population (Tillema 2004).Interesting is that conflicts in this view are seen as disturbing, and notas offering opportunities for growth (see also Vygotskij 1996), for ex-ample of the competency of “living together in difference.” We noticeda tendency to avoid conflicts, which must be characterized as a missedopportunity for development, withholding the teachers from the en-ergy to grow, as a result from the exploration of contrasts. An explana-tion for this behavior of avoidance can be found with Worchel, Woon,and Simpson (1992, 95). Following their train of thought the majoritymight feel uncomfortable, confronted with an outspoken and persua-sive point of view of the orthodox Christians, a point of view they proba-bly remember from their upbringing. It might be the case that they feeljealous or even envious, missing these kinds of clear-cut convictionsand beliefs that function as a directive in unmanageable daily practices.
Our own research shows that there is reluctance in team meetingsto discuss one’s own personal convictions (Bakker 2004). Because inthe second half of the last century secularization resulted in religionand belief becoming more and more a matter of individual choice,teachers no longer are accustomed to talk about religion and expresstheir religiosity in the public domain; in our case, in the SIC processesin the school. We noted that they were often unable to find the wordsto describe in a coherent way their personally felt religiosity and heldbelief system, like the teacher in our example stammering as soon asthe children offer a religious ritual to meet the need of their classmate.
From the analyses of the “critical incident” of our young maleteacher, we learn that illiteracy in the wording of the deepest feelingsof commitment is a serious problem. Confronted with strict religiousdoctrines, secularized Christians have no reply. What they need todevelop their answer-ability and face the new situations is the growthof their religious literacy. That might help them to overcome theirfeelings of uncertainty, which so often lead to the negativity of envy.The worst case is that these feelings of envy result in a negative am-bition of the majority to begrudge the minority’s feelings of certaintythey derive from their faith, instead of striving at an untraditional anddialogical way of discussing religious affairs.
The uneasiness in finding words for their deepest feelings con-cerning their ultimate concerns hinders team members to sharpen
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Que
ensl
and
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
echn
olog
y] a
t 17:
28 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
270 STRUCTURAL IDENTITY CONSULTATION
their minds in the contrast of differing stories, representing differingways of transformation of tradition. Necessary are refresher coursesthat facilitate re-iterating the teacher’s unconsciousness competency,his or her “practical wisdom” in Religious Education, aiming at anawareness of his or her own professionalism in Religious Education,to arrive at the competence of religious sensibility. Because in manyteams we meet a priority on social coherence and solidarity, we fearthis leaves no room for differing religious stories. Lacking is an untra-ditional way of learning with tradition, in articulating differences inSIC, as a community of faith transformation.
Ina ter Avest is senior researcher in Religious Education at the Vrije Univer-siteit Amsterdam and associate professor in Religious Education at UtrechtUniversity, the Netherlands. E-mail: [email protected] Bakker is professor in Religious Education at the Faculty of Humanities(Department of Theology) at Utrecht University, the Netherlands. E-mail:[email protected]
REFERENCES
Arendt, Hannah. 1994/2004. Vita activa. Amsterdam: Boom.Avest, I. ter. 2006. Contrasting colors. Pp. 195–214 in Researching RE teachers. RE teachers
as researchers, edited by C. Bakker and H.-G. Heimbrock. Munster/New York/Munchen/Berlin: Waxmann.
———. 2007a. The teacher pivotal in difference. Presentation at the EAWRE conference,Vienna, May 2007.
———. 2007b. Padagogik und Religion als Konfliktpravention? Pp. 77–87 in Religionen inder Schule, Bildung in Deutschland und Europa vor neuen Herausforderungen. Berlin:Herbert-Quandt-Stiftung, Societatsverlag Berlin.
Avest, I. ter, and C. Bakker. 1999. Annual Report on ICS. Internal Publication.Avest, I. ter, and C. Bakker. 2006. School identity, a living document. Presentation at the fourth
International Conference of the Dialogical Self, Braga, Portugal.Avest, I. ter, C. Bakker, G. D. Bertram-Troost, and S. Miedema. 2007. Religion and education
in the Dutch pillarized and post-pillarized educational system, historical background andcurrent debates. Pp. 203–219 in Religion and education in Europe, development, contextsand debates, edited by Robert Jackson, Siebren Miedema, Wolfram Weisse, and Jean-PaulWillaime. Munster/New York/Munchen/Berlin: Waxmann.
Bakker, C. 1999. Diversity as ethos in intergroup relations. Pp. 58–75 in Diversity as ethos:Challenges for interreligious and intercultural education, edited by D. Chidester, J. Stonier,and J. Tobler. Cape Town.
———. 2001. School as a place of diversity. In Towards religious competence, diversity as achallenge for education in Europe, edited by H.-G. Heimbrock, C. T. Scheilke, and P.Schreiner. Meunster: LIT Verlag.
———. 2004. Demasque van het christelijk onderwijs? Over onzin en zin van een adjectief [Un-masking Christian education. On sense and nonsense of an adjective]. Utrecht: UniversiteitUtrecht.
Bakker, C., and E. Rigg. 2004. De persoon van de leerkracht, tussen christelijke schoolidentiteiten leerlingdiversitei [The person of the teacher, in between school identity and diversityof population of pupils]. Zoetermeer: Uitgeverij Meinema.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Que
ensl
and
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
echn
olog
y] a
t 17:
28 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
INA TER AVEST AND COK BAKKER 271
Bakker, C., and I. ter Avest. 2005. School ethics and its religious dimension. Scriptura 89:350–362.
Beijaard, D., Paulien C. Meijer, and Nico Verloop. Reconsidering research on teachers’ profes-sional identity, unpublished paper.
Burggraeve, R. 1985. From self-development to solidarity, an ethical reading of human desire inits socio-political relevance according to Emmanual Levinas. Center for Metaphysics andPhilosophy of God, Institute of Philosophy, Peeters, Leuven.
Copley, Terence. 2007. The power of the story teller in religious education. Religious Education102(3), 288–298.
Donk, W. B. H. J. van der, A. P. Jonkers, G. J. Kronjee, and R. J. J. M. Plum (ed) 2006. Gelovenin het publieke domein [Faith in the public domain]. Amsterdam: Amsterdam UniversityPress.
Englert, R. 2006. Tradition und Krituk–Grand fragen religioeser Bitdung. In Albrecht GrafvonKalnein (ed), Religionen in der Schule Bildung in Deutschland und Europa vor neuenHerausforderungen. Herbert-Quandt-Stiftung (Hg), Berlin.
———. 2007. Tradition und Kritik. Pp. 29–34 in Religionen in der Schule, Bildung in Deutsch-land und Europa vor neuen Herausforderungen. Berlin: Herbert-Quandt-Stiftung, So-cietatsverlag Berlin.
Fairclough, Norman. 2003. Analysing discourse, Textual analysis for social research. New York:Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group.
Ganzevoort, R. and J. Visser. 2007. Zorg voor het verhaal. Achtergrond, methode en inhond vanpastorale begeleidung, Zoetermeer.
Garcıa Marquez, Gabriel. 2002. Vivir para contarla. Nuevas Ediciones De Bolsillo, Bogata.Hardy, Joy. 2002. Levinas and environmental education. Educational Philosophy and Theory
34(4).Hermans, H. J. M., and E. Hermans-Jansen. 1995. Self-narratives, the construction of meaning
in psychotherapy. The Guilford Press.Jackson, Robert. 2002. Religious education, an interpretive approach. Hodder & Stoughton,
University of Warwick.———. 2004. Rethinking religious education and plurality, issues in diversity and pedagogy.
Routledge: London and New York: Taylor & Francis Group.Kelchtermans, Geert. 1994. De professionele ontwikkeling van leerkrachten basisonderwijs va-
nuit het biografisch perspectief [Professional development of teachers in primary educa-tion, from a biographical perspective]. Universitaire Pers Leuven.
Levinas, Emmanuel. 1969/2003. Het menselijk gelaat [The human face]. Amsterdam: Essays,Ambo.
Reijners, M., and I. ter Avest. 2007. School identity, different teachers, differing views. Presen-tation at the EALRE conference, Oxford, June 2007.
Saljo, Roger. 2004. From learning lessons to living knowledge, instructional discourse and lifeexperiences of youth in complex society. Pp. 5–14 in Joining society, social interaction andlearning in adolescence and youth, edited by A. N. Perrenet-Clermong, C. Pontecorvo, L.Resznick, T. Zittoun, and B. Burge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schreiner, P. 2001. Towards a European oriented religious education. In Towards religiouscompetence, diversity as a challenge for education in Europe, edited by H.-G. Heimbrock,C. T. Scheilke, and P. Schreiner. Meunster: LIT Verlag.
Shadid, W. 2000. Communicatieve competentie in interculturele communicatie [Communica-tive competency in intercultural communication]. Psychologie en Maatschappij 90:5–14.
Taylor, Charles. 1991. The ethics of authenticity. Cambridge, MA and London, England: HarvardUniversity Press.
Tillema, H. H. 2004. Kennisproductiviteit van leren in samenwerkende teams van professionals[Production of knowledge in cooperative teams of professionals]. Management & Organi-atie, November/December.
Verhofstadt-Dene, Leni. 1988/1995. Zelfrelfectie en Persoonsontwikkeling, Een handboek voorOntwikkelingsgerichte Psychotherapie [Self reflection and personality development, ahandbook of development oriented psychotherapy]. Leuven/Amersfoort: Acco.
Vygotsky, Lev. 1992. Thought and language. Cambridge, MA and London, England: MIT Press.Vygotskij, Ljev. 1996. Cultuur en Ontwikkeling [Culture and development]. London: Boom
Meppel.Worchel S., W. Woon, and J. A. Simpson. 1992. Groups process and productivity. London: The
International Professional Publishers.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Que
ensl
and
Uni
vers
ity o
f T
echn
olog
y] a
t 17:
28 0
6 N
ovem
ber
2014
