What do you think?
Rate this book
Taking Religion Seriously Across the Curriculum
In this book, Warren A. Nord and Charles C. Haynes chart a middle course in our culture wars over religion and public education--one that builds on a developing national consensus among educational and religious leaders. While it is not proper for schools to practice religion or proselytize, it is not permissible to make them into "religion-free" zones either; schools must take religion seriously. Unfortunately, religion is taken far from seriously in the K-12 curriculum, as the authors' review of textbooks and the new national content standards makes clear. In Part One Nord and Haynes explain why schools should take religion seriously, and they outline the civic, constitutional, and educational frameworks that should shape the treatment of religion in the curriculum and classroom. In Part Two they explore the major issues relating to religion in different domains of the curriculum_in elementary education, and in middle and high school courses in history, civics, economics, literature, and the sciences. They also discuss Bible courses and world religions courses, and they explore the relationship of religion to moral education and sex education. The result is a book that is unique in the scope of its consideration of the relevance of religion across the curriculum. Anyone interested in the future of public education will find much that is worth considering in this timely, thoughtful, and provocative volume.
- GenresEducation
Paperback
First published July 1, 1998
16 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews
January 30, 2013
This book made me incredibly angry. I am an agnostic, who is open-minded. I read a large portion of this book for a morals in education course I am taking. The book made me angry because the author is an expert at using logical fallacies to make his point, and most of the public will buy into this, hook, line, and sinker. The case is made (repeatedly, ad nauseum) that the second amendment means we cannot privilege religion OR NON-RELIGION in the public schools. That schools have a legal, moral, and ethical obligation to include religion in all facets of the curriculum. It is not OK to expose children to a secular, irreligious education, but it is OK, apparently to require students to take a religious studies course. And no, the author is not just talking the historical, academic treatment of religion in history and literature. The author expects us to provide "alternative viewpoints" in the science classroom, math classroom, and economics classroom. No joke, neo-classical economics is secular and value-free, and teaching this without a balance from the Bible conveys to students to think uncritically about the world around them.
The book does a good job of seeming reasonable at the beginning and slowly lapsing into straw man and loaded question type fallacies. Time spent reading this book is time I won't ever get back.
The book does a good job of seeming reasonable at the beginning and slowly lapsing into straw man and loaded question type fallacies. Time spent reading this book is time I won't ever get back.
September 18, 2015
Well, if you want someone to back up your argument for including more religion in the curriculum, I guess Nord and Haynes are your guys. If you want someone who will equate religion as an equal to science, again, these are your people.
Alternately, if you want to get really mad at someone because you think that's asinine, Nord and Haynes are also your guys.
Alternately, if you want to get really mad at someone because you think that's asinine, Nord and Haynes are also your guys.
July 11, 2022
Read chapters 1, 2, 6, and 8 as part of coursework for “Religious Worlds of New York: Teaching the Everyday Life of American Religious Diversity” @ Union Theological Seminary, Summer ‘22
I enjoyed this— especially the “Suggested Readings” at the end of the chapters! My TBR list just got a lot longer! He makes some (at times) startling arguments— e.g., the Bible should be taught in school, not just as literature but *as Scripture* — that I am sure get a lot of people really riled up. [“However important the Bible is as literature or history, however great it’s influence has been on later literature and history, it’s primary importance has clearly been as religious text, as Scripture… To read the Bible simply as literature and history would be a little like reading poetry as if it were no more than prose; it would be to miss a dimension of meaning that is in Scripture.”] But his arguments are (to me) very interesting. Excited to discuss with others.
**
“Public schools must be religiously neutral in two senses: they must be neutral *among religions* (they can’t privilege one religion over another); and they must be neutral *between* religion and non-religion (they can’t privilege religion generally over non-religion). WHAT IS NOT OFTEN APPRECIATED is the fact that neutrality is a two-edged sword. Just as public schools can’t promote religion, neither can they inhibit or denigrate religion… We will argue that it is anything but neutral to ignore religion. Neutrality cannot mean hostility or even silence” (18).
**
“But there are both secular *and* religious ways of asking, reflecting on, and answering these unavoidable ‘existential’ questions. An educated person should have some understanding of the major ways of thinking about them, and the resultant answers. Whether or not we think the various answers that religious traditions have given to these existential questions are reasonable, we must acknowledge the profundity of the attempts, their powerful influence on people’s thinking and lives, and the universality of the concerns they address. It is truly extraordinary to think that we can claim to educate students while ignoring religious approaches to the deepest questions of human existence” (38).
I enjoyed this— especially the “Suggested Readings” at the end of the chapters! My TBR list just got a lot longer! He makes some (at times) startling arguments— e.g., the Bible should be taught in school, not just as literature but *as Scripture* — that I am sure get a lot of people really riled up. [“However important the Bible is as literature or history, however great it’s influence has been on later literature and history, it’s primary importance has clearly been as religious text, as Scripture… To read the Bible simply as literature and history would be a little like reading poetry as if it were no more than prose; it would be to miss a dimension of meaning that is in Scripture.”] But his arguments are (to me) very interesting. Excited to discuss with others.
**
“Public schools must be religiously neutral in two senses: they must be neutral *among religions* (they can’t privilege one religion over another); and they must be neutral *between* religion and non-religion (they can’t privilege religion generally over non-religion). WHAT IS NOT OFTEN APPRECIATED is the fact that neutrality is a two-edged sword. Just as public schools can’t promote religion, neither can they inhibit or denigrate religion… We will argue that it is anything but neutral to ignore religion. Neutrality cannot mean hostility or even silence” (18).
**
“But there are both secular *and* religious ways of asking, reflecting on, and answering these unavoidable ‘existential’ questions. An educated person should have some understanding of the major ways of thinking about them, and the resultant answers. Whether or not we think the various answers that religious traditions have given to these existential questions are reasonable, we must acknowledge the profundity of the attempts, their powerful influence on people’s thinking and lives, and the universality of the concerns they address. It is truly extraordinary to think that we can claim to educate students while ignoring religious approaches to the deepest questions of human existence” (38).
July 19, 2021
This book uses weak arguments to justify adding a lot of religion to K-12 public school classes. For example, the authors believe that the scientific method is only one way to make sense of the world, and it is inherently inadequate because it doesn't allow us to explain "miracles." They claim that some things can only be known through religion, so religious ways of looking at the world must be added into all curricular areas, including science. Why anyone would think that complicating science with imaginary deities taking imaginary actions is a good idea is beyond me. Read this book if you must, but definitely apply the secular critical thinking skills you learned in school to decide what you believe for yourself.
March 25, 2016
Excellent reference for public and private school teachers alike.
Provides frameworks for defining religion and understanding its influence in all aspects of life.
Gives guidance on how to acknowledge its place in human experience and learning, while honoring diversity and avoiding State sponsorship of any one particular religion.
Authors do slip up and use "God" even when referring to general religious ideas, but they make clear that there are religions with various god (or no god) concepts.
Provides frameworks for defining religion and understanding its influence in all aspects of life.
Gives guidance on how to acknowledge its place in human experience and learning, while honoring diversity and avoiding State sponsorship of any one particular religion.
Authors do slip up and use "God" even when referring to general religious ideas, but they make clear that there are religions with various god (or no god) concepts.
Displaying 1 - 5 of 5 reviews