Abstract
This worthwhile monograph is the revised and translated version of the 2013 doctoral dissertation that Philipp Klutz successfully defended at the Faculty of Catholic Theology of the University of Vienna (Austria). The respective German version has been published in 2015 as volume 28 of the same series. Klutz divides his book into five chapters.
Chapter one (pp. 12–49) provides an instructive and learned introduction into Religious Education (RE) in Austrian public schools. The ideologically neutral government has entrusted the sixteen legally recognized churches (e.g. Catholic, Evangelical, Orthodox, and Protestant) and religious communities (e.g. Buddhist, Islamic, Jewish, and Mormon) with the organization and inspection of respective denominational/confessional RE classes. These are state-funded and taught one or two hours per week. Even though they are compulsory, pupils do have the possibility either to opt out or to follow a non-confessional ethics course.
Chapter two (pp. 50–81) explains how, when, and where the research was carried out. In the school year 2011/12, using both a digital dictation machine and a video camera, Klutz recorded qualitative interviews/group discussions in two secondary public schools in Vienna. The exact identities and locations of these schools remain confidential. School A is a Gymnasium offering general education. The majority of its pupils are affiliated with Christian churches (Catholic, 61%; Protestant, 10%; Orthodox, 3%). 24% of the pupils do not have any religious affiliation; very few Muslims attend the school. At School B, vocational education is being offered. Among its pupils, the Catholic (39%) and Islamic (34%) affiliations are almost equally represented. 16% of the pupils belong to the Orthodox Church. In both schools, Klutz spoke with both a group of RE teachers and a mixed group consisting of representatives of pupils, teachers, and parents. In School A, the principal also participated in the discussion.
Chapters three (pp. 82–140: School A) and four (pp. 141–199: School B) make up the heart and bulk of the book because they present and analyze the transcribed versions of the recorded group discussions. The present review will highlight the general opinions expressed by the participants and that are often quite telling. According to the RE teacher group of School A, for instance, “RE becomes more attractive the less it deals with religion-specific subject areas” (p. 100). Also, “ethics education is clearly seen as a competitor to RE” (p. 98). The teachers point out “the non-existent significance of religion in the daily life of this school” (p. 104). This impression is shared by the mixed group interviewed at the same school. Further, “both groups generally accept the idea of RE for all jointly organised by the churches and religious communities” (p. 139). Such openness is not expressed in the two group discussions carried out in the religiously much more diverse School B: “Members of both groups are worried about difficulties that would arise if ‘RE for all’ were to be established. In part this type of RE is rejected outright” (p. 198).
On the basis of the research findings gained in Schools A and B, the concluding chapter (pp. 200–236), by drawing on preceding religious education studies (see the comprehensive bibliography on pp. 237–259), provides seven promising “pleas” regarding the organization of RE (in Austria) in the future. These include, for instance, “Religion and religious plurality must be addressed as part of school development processes” (p. 206), “Strengthen RE structurally” (p. 221), and “Make RE distinguish itself and make its general educational value known” (p. 222).
The insights from this study are both comparable and applicable to other cities and countries. In Brussels and Belgium, for instance, the system and situation of RE in public high schools are quite similar to those in Vienna, Austria. In many places around the world, religious education faces the challenge of religious plurality. Those of us involved in organizing and/or teaching RE can, thus, learn and profit from the fine research coming from Vienna.
The publishing house is to be commended for making Klutz’s findings available to a broader audience in an English translation. However, in view of the vast number of layout mistakes (i.e. often no spacing between words), the question remains as to why the instructive, relevant, and groundbreaking contents of the book have not been edited more carefully.