Controversies, Complexities and Contexts: Teaching Islam through Internal Feminist Critique of the Religion
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This paper attempts to offer a new pedagogical approach to teaching Islam particularly for the upper-secondary school students in the Nordic countries. I think that the author’s discussion is timely and a potential to contributing to the scholarship of teaching Islam in public education. I personally agree that the education of Islam as a world religion often suffers the binary views: orthodox and progressive views. So, I recognize a possible contribution of the author’s new pedagogical approach with Muslim feminist internal critique to show various voices and a wide spectrum of thought in Islam.
Having said that, I think that the author’s presentation still shows a methodological deficiency and some logical flaws. As the author makes it clear, one of the important elements of the main objective of this paper is to offer a new methodological idea in educating Islam for the upper-secondary school students. Any reader would expect that this paper would bring in an in-depth discussion of some practical applications and implementations of the suggested approach. However, the author intentionally excludes this important element (line 89). He or she states that the objective of this research is not about a pedagogical implementation but about the value of the new approach, which I assume is theoretical.
I think that the author’s heavy emphasis on the idea is weakening the unique value of his or her discussion rather than strengthening it. What’s the worth of talking about various thoughts about the status of women in the Muslim community, particularly when also seeking its pedagogical value? In other words, the author’s discussion includes a meaningful conversation of the Islamic understanding of women but not engages in the discussion of its practical applications or representative cases.
This paper also suffers some logical flaws. The target learner for the author’s new approach is the upper-secondary school students. The author’s methodology of utilizing a controversial issue, which is the feminist internal critique in his or her case, has to premise the fact that the learner already has some basic understanding of Islam because the type of approach that the author wants to try definitely belongs to a high-level learning involving critical thinking and analysis based upon the acquisition of basic, factual knowledge for a given subject. Any reader would wonder how the teacher can provide a meaningful learning, with a feminist critique, which is (highly) scholarly in nature, for the student without the basic understanding of “general Islam.” I don't think it is impossible. But, the author needs to offer a good showcase, whether pedagogical or even theoretical.
In addition, some critics can argue that the author’s thesis is self-contradictory. His or her thesis is a creative response to the binary views in teaching Islam because they often misrepresent Islam. What about the author’s approach? It premises the fact that it is not possible, too controversial, or too ambiguous for the learner to find a general Islam. It seems that the author has given up or does not believe the possibility of a positive normalcy of Islam as we can easily see in other world religions. Could the author’s approach not be unwittingly fallen to a danger of setting the general, universal, formative tradition of Islam as abnormal and even dangerous?
The reader can ask why not just focusing on correcting misunderstandings of Islam presented by the media. What makes the author’s approach better than teaching a general Islam particularly when we assume that the learner is struggling with the idea of normalcy in understanding of Islam because of the media misrepresentations? How can the author’s approach drawing lots of controversial and conflicting internal views give the learner in a beginning level a clear sense of understanding of Islam and a sense of normalcy as a world religion? What would be the actual process through which the author’s approach can ultimately build a solid learning of Islam?
I don’t think that bringing diverse views to the beginner in the knowledge of Islam is a good solution. Nor is it a logical step. I recommend that the author reconsider his or her framework that I’ve just pointed out about (1) the logical problem and address the missing piece on (2) pedagogical applications.
Author Response
Thank you for the feedback. I have made major revisions to the article. I have read your feedback. However, I found it less relevant than the comments offered by the other reviewers. I have therefore mainly focused on the feedback of the two others reviewers.
Thank you.
Reviewer 2 Report
This is an interesting conceptual study that attempts to engage with the important pedagogic question of how Islam is taught within secular, non-confessional RE in modern Europe ( the Nordic countries). The paper starts by highlighting the often noted stereotyping and misrepresentation of Islam concern (curiously not Muslims !) in none confessional RE. The paper suggests using ‘controversial issues’ approach (i.e. Islamic feminism) while teaching Islam so that diversity of views and ways of being Muslim are properly represented in the RE.
However, the study lacks a rigorous methodical framing and gives the impression that is rather a good literature review, a reflective essay.
Although the problem described is pedagogical in nature no pedagogical, in fact educational thinking, is discernible in the paper. How could controversial issues be turned in to a curriculum area or form a distinctive pedagogic approach has not been considered at all. The paper reflects a social scientist’s curiosity about how religion is/should be studied. As a result, towards the end, the discussion moves from RE onto methods in religious studies. The shift from RE to RS (these are two different ways of exploring religion) has not be properly contextualised. The discussion on Islam is largely based on secondary literature indicating no familiarity with scholarly study of Islam.
I suggest that paper is revised. The following might be helpful whilst carrying out the revisions:
Line7: What is meant by ‘religious education’, what type of RE and in which educational system? What stage of schooling? Religious Studies subject or RE?
More importantly, what constitute 'Muslim feminist internality '? For some Muslims the notion of ‘Muslim feminism’ itself would be considered as a misrepresentation, a western depiction of Islam and its critique?
What is the nature misrepresentation of Islam in the RE system? How widespread is this problem? What is the nature of the secondary literature/evidence here?
The expression ‘women question in Islam’ already indicates a presumed view on the issue. As a researcher how do you position your own voice? What method is guiding your conceptual study? How do you overcome possible view that your approach is actually too sympathetic to Islam hence there are signs of Islamophilia as apposed Islamophobia ?
What is meant by ‘non-normative perspectives on Islam’? what is normative in Islam ? Are you accepting that the paper might be advocating to deconstruct Islam as it assigns Muslim feminism as higher value ?
Why should Islamic perspective on relationship between men and women be only viewed by looking at the Quran verse 4:34? Why such an atomistic view of the scripture ?
Line 47 : ‘a critical-hermeneutical approach to teaching Islam in religious education’ interesting but the paper does not explain what this would entail ?
Line 48:’ The main argument of this article is that teaching Islam through Muslim feminist interpretations portrays internal diversities within Islam’. This could be perceived as an implicit way to satisfy the western secular, liberal public that Muslims also are capable of overcoming the oppressive traditional perception of womanhood too. (unconscious bias ?)
What is ‘the processual and discursive structures of the religion’ ? explain this further.
Line 67 ‘education about rather than from religion’. Pedagogically significant concepts but what do they mean? Why should an emphatic understanding of religion deny diversity in religion ? Is this meant be a critique of phenomenological approach to RE ?
‘Teacher competence’ perhaps has lot to do with misrepresentation of Islam in RE context. Expertise on Islam and Islamic theology are missing in the training of RE teachers in Europe which is a bigger concern.
Line 153: ‘..Swedish school textbooks, Härenstam found several examples of Islam being portrayed as a patriarchal and oppressive religion (2009)’ Is not this what Muslim feminists also claim to be the case ?
163 : ‘Another misrepresentation of Islam in religious education relates to Sunni Islam being presented as the default version of Islam’ How does this relate to the focus of this inquiry ? It may well be that all versions of Islam (Shia, Sunni, Ibadhii, Ahmedi) women question remains a problem? May be it is to do with class and wider culture rather than theology?
The most controversial verse (ayah) in the Quran dealing with gender is found in surah 4:34 According to whom? How about Q: 2 : 282 ?
Line 199: There are too many over generalisations which need to be qualified.
For example: ‘However, how to interpret the verse has been widely disputed within Islam’.. There is not much controversy within the classical commentary tradition on the verse.
Line: 220 Misunderstandings regarding the technical vocabulary.
For example, tafsir might be exegesis but critical explanation of the Quran is usually identified as ta’weel i.e. interpretation /hermeneutics .
Misleading statements ‘the historical contextualization approach’ and intra-textuality are suggested as if they were discovered and used by modern Muslim feminists !. This contradicts the observation in the paragraph starting with line 248
Be aware of the inaccurate statements : ‘ibn Taymiyyah (d. 1328), a Sunni scholar and author of a classical tafsir collection’ . ‘Parts of the Quran explaining other parts’ is certainly not first discovered by Ibn Tamiyyah. It is part of the Quran’s self understanding as the Qur’an’s text shows awareness of its on contextual and dialogical characteristics. Also Ibn Tamiyyah did not write a systemic Tafsir actually. What became his tafsir was collections of his reflections on the Quran or discerned from his learned opinions (fatwas) on verses and issues….
Line 340 Confusing sentence constructions: ‘A key challenge in teaching Islam in non-confessional religious education deals with the representation of the religion’ What is meant by religion here? If Islam then why not say stereotyping Islam?
Pages 9-10: ‘power issues involved in religious interpretations, as well as a contextual understanding of the religious interpretations…” but this is a different focus, how religious authority functions in Islam is a different focus, requiring different set of analysis.
Then the discussion moves onto an interesting but poorly framed problem: ‘Lack of critical scholarship in the study of Islam’ where contemporary western academic study of Islam is discussed. Almost entire discussion is based on the polemical writings represented for example by the writings of Aaron Hughes.. Here the discussion moves from pedagogy to methodical approaches to studying religion.
I suggest this section is omitted all together. Modern critical biblical study and its application on Islam- essentially a Protestant understanding of religion- has dominated the study of religion. Orientalism is an example of how this approach has been applied to Islam. The discussion is not nuanced here. There are critical scholars who are also committed Muslims i.e. F. Rahman. One doesn’t need to necessarily abandon faith in order apply rigorous critical schorlship on one’s faith !
The last section should focus on how such a teaching of Islam through controversial, challenging issues could be turned into a curriculum or pedagogic approach. This appears to be the original contribution of the inquiry and needs a coherent articulation.
Author Response
First of all: A big thank you for the feedback! It has helped me in developing the arguments in this article. Much appreciated!
I have made major revisions to the text, and here is a list of the most significant changes I have done:
Line 13: Non-confessional and secular added as advised
Line 12, 178 etc. “Muslim feminist internal critique of patriarchal interpretations of the religion”, “biased representations” and internal debates among Muslim feminist to show internal differences have been added to avoid presumed view on the topic, as advised.
Line 254-408: The section on verse 4:34 have been replaced by three longer sections elaborating on women’s religious leadership in Islam. Hence, misunderstanding on technical vocabulary has also been removed.
Line 114-115: – processual and discursive structures explained.
Line 176 (previous version): The relevance of internal diversities within Islam have been explained.
Line 213-235 (previous version)– removed section with generalizations
I have also made a number of other revisions (that partly build on you feedback and comments) throughout the text.
Thank you!
Reviewer 3 Report
Very interesting, timely and wellargued suggestion on teaching about Islam.
Author Response
Thank you for the positive feedback.
Reviewer 4 Report
A very well written and interesting article. It explores a concrete example that highlights a theme of broad relevance regarding the didactic challenges by addressing controversial issues in religious education. Generally, som more references could be included.
Suggestions for possible improvements:
9, 178
"Muslim feminist internal critique of the religion" presupposes that the religion as such is patriarchal. I therefore recommend replacing it with something like: "Muslim feminist internal critique of patriarchal interpretations of the religion"
10, 28, 38, 41, 49, 124, 136 and more:
I recommend the term "misrepresentation" to be replaced – at least for two reasons:
From a believers' perspective, it is legitimate to talk about true representations of a religion as opposed to misrepresentations, but academical research cannot distinguish between what dogmatically are correct representations of a faith as opposed to misrepresentations. Moreover: As the article emphasizes, there actually exist a great diversity within Islam, as illustrated by the wide range in views regarding gender roles. Neither a patriarchal nor a feminist interpretation can be labelled a misrepresentation since both are true representations of views actually existing within a great diversity. If only one of the two interpretations are presented, it is not a misrepresentation but a biased representation. I therefore suggest replacing "misrepresentation" with "biased representation".
41, 49
Here it might seem as if patriarchal interpretations of Islam are regarded as misrepresentations. Seen from a feminist perspective large numbers of Muslims internationally support some more or less patriarchal interpretations. That means these patriarchal interpretations are in fact representative. Seen by Western eyes the same interpretations may be regarded as less ethical or supporting negative stereotypes, but that does not mean these interpretations are misrepresentations. (In a meeting I recently had in Kuala Lumpur with the Malaysian based organisation Sisters in Islam, they told they only have about 40 members internationally and now risk being prohibited as extremists in some local Malaysian states. They are extremely unpopular among the majority of Muslims in the country. This illustrates that in Malaysia, traditional interpretations of Islamic gender roles are far more representative then the feminist interpretations. Most Malaysian Muslims regard Muslim feminism as a Western misrepresentation of Islam).
70-71
Suggestions of additional references: (McCutcheon 1999, Eidhamar 2019)
136-143
Very good examples of strongly biased representations (but not misrepresentations).
162-172
Very good examples of narrow and one-sided representations.
195-214
Only the first half of ayah 4,34 is discussed, while the second more controversial part is left untouched. Additional references should be added to the single reference mentioned here (Barlas 2002, Silvers 2006, Mubarak 2005, Chaudhry 2008).
309-336
The Muslim feminist internal debate could be used to illustrate the great diversity regarding gender roles within Islam. If the feminist voices (unintentionally?) are described as more representative then other views, that might be by itself be biased and reduce the actual diversity. Relevant references from Wadud, Barlas, Mir-Hosseini, Ali, Mernissi and others may be included in this part of the text.
369
The opinion of ordinary Muslims is of vital importance for the presentation given in education. International polls show that the large majority of Muslims hold moderate views and condemns extremism and terrorism. At the same time large numbers of Muslims in several Muslim countries support traditional interpretations regarding gender roles, while a large majority of 2nd generation Muslims in the West support feminist interpretations (Eidhamar 2014, 2017, Samani 2016, Khurshid and Saba 2018, Smith and Woodward 2013). These variations between different topics and geographical areas may be added to give a more nuanced description.
389-476
An excellent chapter. In some other parts of the article one might ask if the apologetic normative feminist agenda is preferred to dominate the educational presentation over the more traditional Islamic perspective on gender roles. For traditional Muslims it is important that also their views are presented in a way they could recognize and experience to be respectful. Fighting negative stereotypes is a legitimate aim. At the same time this needs to be balanced with presenting all parts of the diversity in a nuanced way.
487-500
The article might discuss further the basic question if religious education only should provide descriptions as neutral and nuanced as possible, or if it also should be based on certain basic values – here exemplified by gender equality.
511-518
A well written end of the article. It softly touches the question if religious education should regard it normatively positive if gender equality is a value that influences the ethics of the religion in focus.
References:
Barlas, Asma. 2002. " Believing Women" in Islam: Unreading Patriarchal Interpretations of the Qur'an: University of Texas Press.
Chaudhry, Ayesha. 2008. "The Problems of Conscience and Hermeneutics : A Few Contemporary Approaches." Comparative Islamic Studies 2 (2):157.
Eidhamar, Levi Geir. 2014. "Rett kontra godt. Holdninger og resonnementer blant unge norske muslimer i spørsmål om kjønnsroller og seksualitet (Right versus good. Attitudes and reasonings among young Norwegian Muslims regarding gender roles and sexuality)." DIN - Tidsskrift for religion og kultur 2:27-66.
Eidhamar, Levi Geir. 2017. "‘My Husband is My Key to Paradise.’Attitudes of Muslims in Indonesia and Norway to Spousal Roles and Wife-Beating." Islam and Christian–Muslim Relations:1-24.
Eidhamar, Levi Geir. 2019. "Innenfra eller utenfra, faglig eller personlig? Perspektiver i religions-og livssynsundervisningen belyst ut fra internasjonal debatt." Prismet (1):27-46.
Khurshid, Ayesha, and Alexis Saba. 2018. "Contested womanhood: women’s education and (re) production of gendered norms in rural Pakistani Muslim communities." Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 39 (4):550-563.
McCutcheon, Russell. 1999. The Insider/Outsider Problem in the Study of Religion: A Reader. London: A&C Black.
Mubarak, Hadia. 2005. "Breaking the Iterpretative Monopoly: A Re-Examination of Verse 4:34." Hawwa 3.
Samani, Shamim. 2016. "Between Texts and Contexts: Contemporary Muslim Gender Roles." Islam and Christian–Muslim Relations 27 (3):319-332.
Silvers, Laury. 2006. "‘In the Book We have Left out Nothing’: The Ethical Problem of the Existence of Verse 4: 34 in the Qur’an." Comparative Islamic Studies 2 (2):171-180.
Smith, Bianca J, and Mark Woodward. 2013. Gender and Power in Indonesian Islam: Leaders, Feminists, Sufis and Pesantren Selves: Routledge.
Author Response
First of all: A big thank you for the feedback! It has helped me in developing the arguments of this article. Much appreciated!
I have made major revisions to the text, and here is a list of the most significant changes I have done:
Line 12, 178 etc. – The phrase “Muslim feminist internal critique of the religion” is replaced by “Muslim feminist internal critique of patriarchal interpretations of the religion”
Line 15, 64, 68, 149, etc.. – The term “misrepresentation” has been replaced by “biased representations”
Line 96, 145-146, etc. Additional references have been added
Line 254-408 The section on verse 4:34 have been replaced by three longer sections elaborating on women’s religious leadership in Islam
Line 342-409 References added, and diversities among Muslims feminists have also been added to portray diversity among this branch of Muslim thinking as well. By doing so I have tried to meet the reviewer’s concern that feminist voices are portrayed as more representative than other more conservative Muslim voices.
Line 136-148: The perspectives and views of ordinary Muslims has been brought in + additional references as advised.
Line 558-562: A discussion on RE as neutral or based on certain values (gender equality, diversity) has been added
I have also made several other revisions (that partly build on you feedback and comments) throughout the text.
Thank you.
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Author
Since your revision does not respond to any of my comments and criticism, my original decision stands. I agree with your point that the understanding of the discursive nature of Islamic teaching, which you articulated with the diverse voices on the status of women in the Muslim community, would complement the current model of RE in Europe. You have successfully presented it.
However, unfortunately, your discussion is weak in your point on didactics for RE. It missed the most important element of any type of RE. Who is your target learner? Are you thinking of secondary school students or college students? Do you mean just RE in general? Considering the type and particularly the level of conversation that you brought in and utilizing the Blooms Taxonomy, I think that the learners seem to be students in higher education. If you argue that your approach can be applied to all levels of RE, then the reader would wonder how it can work for the learners with varying degrees of competence.
Of course, the discussion of didactics for RE can be broad and general. It doesn't have to always cover the concern about issues related to learning objectives. However, the level of conversation that you're presenting in this paper, which covers a great deal of high level learning objectives, necessarily makes the reader wonder how the discursive approach can be translated into the didactics particularly for secondary students.
In other words, your discussion is dedicated too much to highlighting the feminist conversation and its legitimate place in the intellectual world of Islam. It is weak in the conversation of RE, which should be your main focus.
Author Response
Thank you for taking the time to go through a second round of review of my draft article. Although you might not find that I have responded directly to your comments, they have still been important in the revision of the article. In this version I have added information on the level of students that is targeted in my article. I have also clarified how the discursive approach can be translated to such students. I have also checked and corrected the spelling in the text.
I hope you will find that this second revised version of the article is improved and acceptable for publication.
Reviewer 2 Report
I am pleased to see that most of the revision suggestions are addressed. Thank you. The article is much improved. However there are few more points, listed below, that the author is invited to consider:
Line 35'.... decade, this article explores the didactical potentials and pitfalls that adopting the controversial.' The word didactical is fine but pedagogical is a much widely used concept in English speaking world.
38'My starting point in writing this article is in didactics of religion'. Similarly teaching or pedagogy of religion would read better.
43'therefore sets out to primarily address didactical tools'....May be it is better to say pedagogic tools...
71 ' The main argument of this article is that teaching Islam through Muslim feminist internal debates of Islam portrays diversities within the religion'... Make it explicit, Islam
224'thought and interpretations. At present, Amina Wadud is the most renowned school.... 'one of the most'....is a more modest expression'. In addition if you are going to flag up Wadud's scholarship then you need to note the fact F. Rahman, her PhD supervisor, shaped her understanding of the Quran and its contextual interpretation.
I think it is better to be cautious here. There are degrees of difference among the types of Islamic feminism advocated by Waduud, A Barlas and K. Ali. K. Ali's version perhaps is less concerned with having an Islamic theological perspective on the issue.
400 '....contexts, it has become a recurrent topic of debate among more progressive Muslim communities.......and 408 let us return to the didactical issues at stake in teaching Islam.'
The above presented discussion is fine but I thought considering the main purpose of this article it actually highlights complexity of religious and spiritual authority in Islam. This legitimises, Islamically so to speak, teaching Islam via controversies. You might consider stressing this more coherently.
409'Didactical challenges in teaching Islam' Can you revise this as didactic
and teaching point to the same meaning..
466.' As Alberts suggests, we need to look to the academic and critical study of religions'... This is an interesting idea. Certainly academic study of religion can produce resources for RE but do you see a difference between RE and RS (Religious Studies)? if so you need to qualify reference to this great scholar of religion.
606'feminist internal critique of Islam, is that it adds information on the method of internal religious..607 debates that are predominant in Islam and supply insights into how such issues are debated to a great'. Do you mean the inquiry provides pedagogic resources for Islam in RE ?
My main recommendation would be to consider replacing, mostly, the word ‘didactics’ with ‘pedagogy’ in this inquiry.
I also suggest you to look at the suggestion by A. Sahin (2013, 2015) ( https://www.theguardian.com/profile/abdullah-sahin ) that religious extremism, another controversial topic, can be used to teach Islam critically and contextually in Europe. He argues how British Muslim youth exhibits diverse religiosities, some of which remain prone to extremism. As a Muslim educator he shows (internally) the connection between traditional Islamic pedagogies and formation of diverse Muslim religiosities. Instead of securitising teaching of Islam in Europe (i.e Prevent policies), he argues, RE practitioners, including Muslim educators, need to facilitate a critical religious education provision as a way forward to overcome the stereotyping of Islam within the pedagogic discourse of non-confessional RE in Europe. Just an idea/a reference for you to consider.
I am sure that the article, once revised for the final time, will make an excellent contribution to the emerging critical and contextual teaching of Islam in non-confessional European RE models.
Author Response
Thank you for taking the time to go through a second round of review of my draft article. In this version I have checked and corrected the spelling in the text. I have also followed your advice on highlighting religious authority in the discussion, and elaborated on the differences between RS and RE.
I hope you find that this second revised version of the article is improved and acceptable for publication.
