TruthBook Religious News Blog

(Religion Today is contributed by the University of Wyoming's Religious Studies Program to examine and to promote discussion of religious issues.)

Paul V.M. Flesher

“OK, class. Sit down. We’re going to have a test.”

That’s how Boston University religion Professor Stephen Prothero recently began the first class meeting of an introductory course about religion, as he relates in his recent book, “Religious Literacy.”

Nearly all students failed.

Perhaps some of the questions were obscure. For example, he asked them to name a Hindu religious text (any text!). Only a quarter of them could come up with the Rig Veda, the Mahabharata, or the Yoga Sutras, even though Hinduism is the world’s third largest religion. How about identifying the four noble truths of Buddhism, the foundational belief of the fourth largest religion? Few non-Buddhists could answer.

Some questions weren’t quite so foreign, but the results were still disappointing. Most students could not list the New Testament’s four gospels, and just one in eight could give the first five books of the Bible. Only one in six could identify “Blessed are the poor in spirit” as Jesus’ teaching in the Sermon on the Mount.

It is not just students who have poor religious literacy. National surveys reveal adult religious knowledge is just as low. Only half of American adults can name even one gospel, while most cannot identify the Bible’s first book. And, although I cannot believe it, most people in one recent survey said Jesus was born in Jerusalem-even though “O Little Town of Bethlehem” is sung every Christmas.

...this fall I gave a similar test to my own introductory students. They did significantly better when 85 percent could identify all four gospels. Even more knew that Genesis was the Bible’s first book, and about half recognized the first five books of the Bible. Their knowledge of non-Christian religions was not as strong. Although three-quarters knew that the Quran was Islam’s holy book, less than half could identify one of Hinduism’s sacred texts. Interestingly, about 40 percent knew that Ramadan was Islam’s month of fasting.

Overall, my students did better than Prothero’s class and other people questioned in various surveys. What accounts for this difference? Is it that my students were that much more knowledgeable? Not really.

The difference comes from the way we asked the questions. Prothero posed fill-in-the-blank questions. I gave them multiple-choice questions. Multiple choice expects students to recognize the correct answer when presented. Fill-in-the-blank requires test takers to come up with the answer out of their memory with no hints. Like phone surveys (where someone calls when you are in the middle of doing something and expects you to answer questions on some other topic), Prothero’s test was done “cold,” with no studying or warning.

The two question types differentiate between active and passive knowledge. Active knowledge is what we use everyday. We can marshall it at will, whether in carrying out tasks at which we are skilled or in carrying on conversations with our boss or family. Passive knowledge is knowledge we recognize and with which we are familiar, but which we do not think about from week to week or month to month.

Our brains automatically move information we need on a regular basis into the active category and that which we do not need into the passive category. Ever studied hard in a course to earn an “A” but forgot everything during summer vacation? You did not forget; your brain just shifted it from active to passive when you were no longer using it.

Studies such as Prothero’s fail to measure public knowledge accurately. Whether they investigate religious knowledge, historical knowledge, or the names of movie stars, they require passive knowledge to be as accessible as active knowledge.

Like a quiz show, they expect participants to hit the buzzer quickly; there is no time for recollection or preparation. They do not ask for recognition of correct information, but need immediate recall. Our active knowledge of religious information may be weak (since few of us are religious professionals), but our passive knowledge is stronger than most tests and surveys indicate.

Flesher is director of UW’s Religious Studies Program. Past columns and more information about the program can be found on the Web at www.uwyo.edu/relstds. To comment on this column, visit http://religion-today.blogspot.com.

Labels: knowledge, Paul V.M. Flesher, religious literacy, students

Permalink | Link to External Source Article

Thursday, August 16, 2007

Professor says religion is key to global view

Knowledge of faiths is central understanding of world events, according to university teacher

By Jean Prescott
MCCLATCHY NEWSPAPERS
08/11/2007

BILOXI, Miss. -- As the world grows smaller, and it does so every day, we find "the neighborhood" overrun with new and different people expressing unfamiliar ideas about which we understand little and care not at all.

What to do? Some advise: get smarter.

I don't care what field of endeavor you happen to be in," said Allan Eickelmann, a professor of religion at the University of Southern Mississippi-Gulf Coast Campus and an ordained United Church of Christ minister, "in this day and age, you'd better have some understanding of human diversity, because the fact is that globalization is not going away, and America is not going to become less diverse. In fact, it is going to become more diverse, if that's possible."

A recent count places the number of religions in America today at about 1,800, Eickelmannsaid. He hasn't had time to keep up with them all.

"Knowledge leads to understanding, and understanding human diversity is absolutely essential for our society to function," Eickelmann said.

He deals in knowledge -- about the religions of the world and the people who practice them.

"there is no better way to come to an understanding of human diversity than to understand the diversity of religious expression."

In fact, he and a couple of colleagues recently drew a standing-room-only crowd to an Issues=Answers lecture in downtown Gulfport, Miss. Several hundred people turned out to hear them talk about religion and violence, a hot-button topic. The question-and-answer segment that followed their presentations not only did not dissolve into a riotous affair, but many in the audience seemed reticent, unsure of how to frame a question for which they wanted, perhaps desperately needed, answers.

How do we become better informed? "Take a class" is the logical answer, though that can be expensive at the university level (we provide a thumbnail of what's available locally when fall sessions begin).

Why not begin before university? Why not offer courses in religion, something like basic world religions, in high school?

"There are several practical reasons why it's not done broadly," Eickelmannsaid, notable among them being the difficulty of fitting a religion elective into the overall curriculum.

"History, English, math, science all are offered for four years. ... And when you have one or two spots for electives, you probably can offer only one course for religion." A certified instructor is needed, nevertheless, and unless the school has thousands of students who could fill a day with religion classes, "one course wouldn't keep the teacher busy."

And high schools are quite concerned about indoctrination, "which is verboten," Eickelmann said. "The issue of equal access under the law comes up.

"It's all related to the First Amendment," he said, "which has two clauses tied together. The first is freedom of speech, which people in (journalism) know about, and freedom of religion." The framers of the Constitution, he said, declared that if the government (and by extension, public schools) were to favor one particular form of religious expression over another, it would disallow the free exchange of religious ideas. That's indoctrination, and the Constitution prohibits it.

Eickelmann stands by his claim, though, that at this time in human history it is imperative that we understand what motivates even those whom we observe to be least like ourselves.

"If you don't understand diversity, you don't understand how to be an American in the 21st century; you don't understand how to be a citizen of the world."

Labels: diversity, faith, first amendment, Jean Prescott, knowledge, religion