Introduction

In 2008, the Québec Ministry of Education developed the Ethics and Religious Culture (ERC) Program, which became a mandatory course for all elementary and secondary school students in both public and private schools (Maxwell et al 2012). Though this was a well-intentioned initiative, the Ministry’s outline of the role of the ERC teacher has proven to be extremely problematic in practice. This paper will explore how the idea that ERC teachers remain neutral pedagogues in the classroom is not only impossible given the institution of education as ‘value-laden’, but also, grossly marginalizes and restricts the autonomy of the ERC teacher as an individual with their own respective life stories and experiences. 

I begin by showing that the concept of neutrality is rooted in the very culture of Québec, starting with the Quiet Revolution to the current practice of adopting a ‘state of individuals’ (Gutman 1999). I seek to demonstrate that the policy of neutrality has affected educational policies, most notably in the Ministère de l’Éducation du Loisir et du Sport (MELS)requirements for teachers of ERC, ultimately showing that neutral pedagogy is not only an impossible request to make of teachers, but also greatly contradicts the ethics of religious sensitivity and religious literacy that Québec is seemingly promoting as a result of the Bouchard-Taylor report (2008). 

Context of Québec

Background

Prior to the Quiet Revolution in Québec, the Catholic Church controlled many government institutions in Québec. The relationship between the Catholic Church and the British was formalized in the Québec Act of 1774. The Act granted the Church a “virtual hegemony over the lives of French Canadians” (Fenwick, 1981, p. 200) including the right for the Catholic Church to build and staff educational institutions.

With the Quiet Revolution in the 1960s, secularization became a priority. The Quiet Revolution began in part due to the rise of French nationalism in the 1960s and in part from the push for Québecois to be “masters of their own house” (Gosh, 2004, p. 42). Gosh (2004) notes, “the Roman Catholic Church’s role was greatly diminished in Québec society, resulting in a significant growth of the education system and making language, rather than religion, the distinguishing characteristic for the Québecois” (p. 58).  The most striking feature of the Quiet Revolution was the replacement of the clerical elite by the newly created Ministry of Education (Blad and Couton 2009; Laplante 2006). This was a deliberate attempt on the part of the new Liberal government to modernize the institutions in Québec in order to make them more relevant in a newly industrialized society (Laplante 2006). This marks the start of ‘secularization’ in Québec through the distinct separation between Church and State. 

The tumultuous history of education and religion has continued to the present day. After the Quiet Revolution, there was an absence of religious education in the secular school systems though the provincial government funded and continues to fund independent non-denominational schools (Rymarz 2012). Given the drastic increase of immigrants over the last decade in Québec, new changes have been made to the education system to accommodate this growing diversity (Gagnon 2008; Farmer, Ngouem, and Madibbo 2010). The growing diversity in Québec, especially given the large number of Muslim immigrants (Bibby 2009), has given rise to discontent over the reasonable accommodation of their cultural practices. Resulting from issues surrounding the reasonable accommodation of cultural and religious minority groups that surfaced in 2008, the Québec government, through the Commission on Accommodation Practices Related to Cultural Differences, produced a seminal report called the Bouchard-Taylor report of 2008. Its aims include:

  1. To take stock of accommodation practices in Québec;
  2. To analyze the attendant issues bearing in mind the experience of other societies;
  3. To conduct an extensive consultation on this topic; and
  4. To formulate recommendations to the government to ensure that accommodation practices conform to the values of Québec society as a pluralistic, democratic, egalitarian society (2008, p. 6)

This report, after examining some of the more popular and contentious examples of reasonable accommodation in Québec, concludes by affirming the necessity for interculturalism and religious sensitivity.  These conclusions have led to drastic changes in the education system in Québec, resulting in the creation of the Ethics and Religious Culture (ERC) Program for all secondary students in Québec.  

Québec’s History with Neutrality

I borrow from the Bouchard- Taylor report (2008) that defines state neutrality as the principle that the State must maintain a position of neutrality when faced with deep-seated moral convictions, whether they be religious or secular. Québec’s public policy reveals a history of state neutrality (Temperman 2010, Moon 2012).  This policy of neutrality has influenced all aspects of Québecoise life, most notably in their religious and educational policies. Amy Gutman (1999) describes three types of states: the ‘family state’, the ‘state of families’, and the ‘state of individuals’. The ‘state of families’ places authority in the hands of the government, fueled by the philosophy that the state knows best and can make decisions on behalf of the masses. By contrast the ‘state of families’ views parents as the ultimate authority figures best suited to make decisions for their children and their homes.  Finally, the ‘state of individuals’ values individual autonomy and provides a multitude of options for the individual to choose from. The third theory values neutrality as a choice (Gutman 1999).

The ‘state of individuals’ seems most apt in describing Québec’s state philosophy. However, Moon (2012) argues that the requirement of state neutrality to take no position on religious issues is actually indicative of a type of state agnosticism. If religious beliefs and values are a central element of an individuals identity, and religious symbols play an equally important role for a person of faith, the state’s position that some symbols have less worth (and can be removed) is a denial of belief that believers have equal worth in society (Moon 2012). Furthermore, the greater difficulty with state neutrality is that religious beliefs can have public implications. I would argue that this contradictory nature of neutrality has become immersed in their provincial education system, where the neutral approach to ERC has had a detrimental effect. I outline in the following sections that the ERC is not neutral in its approach despite its claim to be, and that the ERC’s educational aims and its approach to teaching are in contradiction with each other.

Problematizing the Approach of ERC: The Complexities of Teacher Neutrality

The complexity of the ERC lies in the contradiction that while the ERC program espouses an overall goal of recognizing the other, ERC teachers have explicit instructions from the Ministry of Education (MELS) to maintain a stance of neutrality, yet are encouraged equally to foster values of openness among students. To specify, teachers are asked to bracket their own worldviews and perceptions upon entering the classroom while simultaneously asking students to share their perspectives and opinions.  This professional stance has been referred to as “neutral impartiality” by educationalists (Morris, 2011; Kelly, 1986), which means that in the interest of procedural fairness teachers do not openly express their personal preferences. To elaborate, MELS instructs ERC teachers not to ‘‘promote their own beliefs and points of view’’ and maintain a critical distance with ‘‘respect to their own convictions, values and beliefs” while at the same time fostering values of “openness to diversity, respect for convictions, recognition of self” (QEPSC 2008). 

Though a valid argument can be made for the requirement of neutrality in the classroom, this concept has been largely born out of fears of indoctrination.  And though it is indisputable that indoctrination can occur without proper boundaries around a teacher’s professional epistemological stance, there also exists great harm in imposing neutrality in religious education. Charles Taylor (1992) speaks about the “politics of recognition” that is, the harm one causes in restricting the authenticity of an individual. Taylor likens this to a form of oppression in which we are engaging in “imprisoning someone in a false, distorted and reduced mode of being” (p. 101). 

While approach is taken to prevent bias and protect the rights of the children (Rymartz 2012), this is a weighty responsibility given that one’s worldviews permeate into every aspect of one’s life.  Berger (2002) and Perry (1991) argue that requiring adherents of faith to leave their beliefs behind when participating in public life is unreasonable, unrealistic and results in annihilation of a central part of their self. 

 The problematic neutral approach of the ERC is described in Douglas Farrow’s examination of the ERC curricular aims. Farrow (2009) asks, “ERC claims to be neutral about religion, and to aim at presenting religions in a neutral, objective manner. Is the ERC curriculum actually neutral in its approach to religion?” (p. 9). Farrow raises three points to counter the neutral approach of the ERC. I will go through each point to demonstrate the inherent contradictions borne out of a neutral curriculum. 

1. Neutral Pedagogy?

The first point addresses the philosophies and worldviews inherent in any pedagogy. Farrow questions how pedagogies can be neutral as they are rooted in specific philosophies and worldviews. This idea that pedagogy is devoid of fundamental principles and values highlights the fundamental error of the ERC.  In recalling the stages of educational reform in Québec, it is clear that the neutrality approach is trying to retain some sort of secularization in the education system. However the very institution of education is value-laden. The implications of the Quiet Revolution and the conception of the ERC to combat discrimination against new immigrants demonstrate the system of education as aneutral-freeendeavor. Thus the claim to maintaining neutrality in the approach to teaching of religion is highly flawed.

2. Teacher Voice and Agency

This brings up Farrow’s second observation regarding the aims of the ERC in promoting diversity in perspective and dialogue, while at the same time asking teachers to bracket their own worldviews (Farrow 2009). The integrity of the teacher, both as a professional and as an individual, is threatened. The ERC promotes the dignity of others while by the same token asks teachers to compromise their own dignity in the classroom. This is further complicated given that research shows teacher satisfaction is linked to feeling natural in the classroom (Shuck et al 2012). One of the major concerns with teacher education today is the lack of teacher voice and teacher inclusion in the decisions around curriculum matter and educational decisions (Wilson & Delaney 2010; Moore 2007). Moreover, by asking teachers to leave their religion at the door so to speak only serves to further marginalize and ‘other’ (Denzin and Lincoln 2000) the teacher by removing them from the conversation. This ‘othering’ and blatant exclusion of teacher voice, both literally and figuratively, only heightens the marginalization teachers feel when decisions in the educational institutions in which they are a part of fail to include their voice.

3. Role of the State

The final point concerning the approach of the ERC is that while it may require a level of passivity on the part of the educators, the state takes an active role in deciding how and what should be taught. To this end, Farrow (2009) observes, “by making ERC mandatory – universally mandatory – the State imposes its philosophy and its pedagogy on everyone” (p. 9). This point demonstrates the State’s agenda in promoting their value system through the ERC, while by the same token, stating the program is neutral in its approach. I would therefore argue that the “neutral impartiality” approach that the ERC imposes upon teachers is an impossible request given the very active role the state plays in the development of the curricular aims, values and approaches of the ERC. 

Concluding Remarks

The place of religious education in Québec’s public school system has emerged from a history of confessionalization.  Given the growing diversity in Québec, the ERC was proposed to negate the effects of a ‘clash of ignorance’ (Karim and Eid 2012) that has permeated much of the global world in its discourse around religion. I argue that while the ERC is an essential component of a child’s education, the goal for students to have a capacity for critical dialogue is contradicted by the pedagogical approach to the ERC. The neutral stance the ERC takes and its contradictory demands on the teacher to be facilitators of dialogue, who must also provide a critical distance only serve to uphold a limited representation of what Québec society actually is. 

The growing diversity in Canada only further heightens the need for religious education to become part of every school curriculum and the skill of religious literacy must be cultivated in every individual (Moore 2007). Because teachers have a very special role in the fostering of skills such as religious literacy, interculturalism and religious sensitivity, they need to be adequately trained and equipped to understand the magnitude of their responsibility as educators. Given the problems highlighted in the current approach in the teaching of religion in Québec, it is clear that a new approach in the teaching of religion must be presented. This approach must enable teachers to feel authentic in the classroom, without trespassing into the territory of indoctrination. In this regard, Harvard University’s program in Religion and Secondary Education (PRSE) can be used as an illustrative model. Harvard prepares its teacher candidates to engage their students in the diversity within particular traditions without adopting a devotional standpoint.  It is through strong teacher training programs that teachers can be equipped with the tools and confidence to teach religion responsibly.  

Finally, there currently exists a gap in literature representing the voice of teachers, yet as a group they are one of the most important stakeholders in actualizing these very important aims. The ERC can be successful in fostering values of religious literacy and religious sensitivity; however, the voice of the teacher must be included for improvement of the program. 

Bibliography
  • Berger, B. (2002). Limits of belief: Freedom of religion, secularism, and the liberal state. The Can. JL & Soc., 17, 39. 
  • Bibby, R. W. (1993). Secularization and change. The sociology of religion: A Canadian focus, 65-80.
  • Blad, C., & Couton, P. (2009). The rise of an intercultural nation: Immigration, diversity and nationhood in Québec. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 35(4), 645-667.
  • Bouchard, G., & Taylor, C. (2008). Building the future: A time for reconciliation: Abridged report. Quebec: Commission de consultation sur les pratiques d’accomodement reliées aux différences culturelles.
  • Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2000). The discipline and practice of qualitative research. Handbook of qualitative research, 2, 1-28.
  • Farmer, A., Ngouem, D., & Madibbo, A. (2010).  Current research compendium on franphone immigration in Canada. Montreal: Québec Metropolis Centre—Immigration and Metropolis.
  • Farow, D. (speaker) (2009). Ethics and religious culture: Why all the fuss? [Public lecture, McGill University, 2009, October 28]. (Podcast available at http://www.republiquedebananes.com/en-manchette/ethics-and-religious-culture-why-the-fuss.html)
  • Fenwick, R. (1981) Social change and ethnic nationalism: A historical analysis of the separatist movement in Québec. Comparative Studies in Society and History, 23(2),196-212
  • Gagnon, A. (2008). Québec: State and society. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
  • Gutman, A. (1999). Democratic Education. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  • Karim, K. H., & Eid, M. (2012). Clash of Ignorance. Global Media Journal, 5.
  • Laplante, B. (2006). The rise of cohabitation in Québec: Power of religion and power over religion. The Canadian Journal of Sociology, 31(1), 1-24.
  • Maxwell, B., Waddington, D. I., McDonough, K., Cormier, A. A., & Schwimmer, M. (2012). Interculturalism, multiculturalism, and the state funding and regulation of conservative religious schools. Educational Theory, 62(4), 427-447.
  • Ministère de l’Éducation, du Loisir et du Sport, Québec (MELS). (2008).
  • Québec education program: Ethics and religious culture. Québec, QC: Gouvernement du Québec.
  • Moon, R. (2012). Freedom of religion under the Charter of Rights: The limits of state neutrality. UBCL Rev., 45, 497-595.
  • Perry, M. (1991) Love and Power: The Role of Religion and Mortality in American Politics. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  • Rymarz, R. (2012). Teaching ethics and religious culture in Québec high schools: An overview, contextualization and some analytical comments. Religious Education, 107(3), 295-310.
  • Statistics Canada (2011). 2011 Population by selected ethnic origin, by census metropolitan areas. Retrieved from E-STAT http://estat.statcan.ca
  • Taylor, Charles. Multiculturalism: Examining the Politics of Recognition: An essay by Charles Taylor. Ed., Amy Gutman Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1992.
  • Temperman, J. (2010). State neutrality in public school education: An analysis of the interplay between the neutrality principle, the right to adequate education, children’s right to freedom of religion or belief, parental liberties, and the position of teachers. Human Rights Quarterly, 32(4), 865-897.
  • Québec curriculum ethics and religious culture (QEPSC). (2008). Québec: Québec Ministry of Education
  • Wilson, E., & Delaney, R. (2010). Changing career and changing identity: How do teacher career changers exercise agency in identity construction?  Social Psychology of Education, 13(2), 169–183.
Contributor Biography: Arzina Zaver

Arzina Zaver is a PhD student with the Department of Integrated Studies at McGill University (Montreal, Canada). She holds a Master of Teaching (MTeach) and Master of Arts in Education with a focus on Muslim Societies and Civilizations from the Institute of Education and Institute of Ismaili Studies (London, UK). Arzina is interested in areas around neutrality, teacher identity, third space and the pedagogy of religious education in secular states