Children’s existential questions – recognized in Scandinavian curricula, or not?

ABSTRACT

Do curricular texts address children’s existential questions and how are such questions to be met in school? This is the crucial question of this study. It consists of a comparative content analysis of Swedish, Norwegian, and Danish national curricula for religious education, in use in 2019. To provide a background to this content analysis the varying and shifting ways in which Swedish curricula from 1969 up to 2011 expressed ‘livsfrågor’ and educational responses to them have been studied. As a new theme ‘livsfrågor’, meaning existential questions, was introduced in 1969 in the Swedish curriculum for compulsory school. A comparison of the Scandinavian curricula of today shows that the Danish one most explicitly addresses the importance of children’s existential questions; the Norwegian subtly emphasizes a dialogue with school children; while the Swedish syllabus links existential questions to worldviews, general systems of thought, and not to addressing students’ own questions. In the characterization of the curricula, two curricular codes, a proclamatory and a dialogical, as suggested by Hartman , and the three purposes of education by Biesta (qualification, socialisation, and subjectification)  have been used. Although it studies students’ existential questions in religious education, this study contributes towards general didactical discussions on the role of children’s questions and possible educational responses to them.

KEYWORDS:

• Existential questions
• children
• Scandinavian curricula
• ‘livsfrågor’
• religious education

Introduction

Contemporarily there is a strong emphasis on assessment and accountability in education (Hopmann, 2008), which can be interpreted as derived from a prime interest in the outcomes of education. But how can such emphases be understood from the perspective of children and youth approaching their schooling with their own questions and concerns? Framing a question like this might be seen as somewhat one-sided, and simplifying a complex matter by pushing one part of a relationship—the students’ questions. But, as already argued by Dewey, 1966, the relationship between children and youth, their questions and the curriculum as such, cannot be regarded as opposing realities, but these two elements rather have to be understood as complexly related.

The concept of ‘livsfrågor’, here translated as ‘existential questions’, was introduced in the Swedish curriculum in 1969 in the school subject ‘religionskunskap’ [knowledge of religion] to open up space for the questions of children and youth. In this article this unique development (unique also in an international perspective) is followed up on in the further Swedish curricular development till today, but with an extension and the main analytical focus laid on a comparison between the three Scandinavian countries, Sweden, Norway and Denmark and their curricula in use 2019. These three countries do to some extent culturally influence one another and show similarities but also differences contemporary, while it is of interest to compare their curricula in more detail—as ‘livsfrågor’ have a standing in all three of them. The chosen school subjects are in the field of the study and teaching of religion. In an international perspective such subjects vary as to whether they are intended to be confessional or non-confessional; and if descriptions such as objectivity, impartiality and neutrality are used, also the significance of these concepts can vary due to the understandings of them in different contexts (cf. Franken & Loobuyck, 2017). In international research practice these school subjects are often referred to as ‘religious education’ (or ‘religion education’) with a short-form being RE. Here I use ‘religious education’, or RE, when in general referring to the Swedish, Danish, and Norwegian school subjects but will indicate their names in the respective languages which gives some indication of their confessional/non-confessional status. However, the research interest of this study is the relationship between child and curriculum. Given this interest the questions of whether and how the existential questions of children and youth are addressed and understood in these curricula can be of importance for didactics in social science subjects and schooling more generally. It has to be noted though, that this study of mainly contemporary curricula, has the limitations that curricular studies have, that neither class-room practices nor in-depth historical studies of curricular developments are done justice to, but have to be developed.¹

Aim of the study, limitations, and terminological issues

With an interest in students’ questions, this paper compares Swedish, Norwegian, and Danish curricula in use in 2019. The aim is to study and analyse how students’ existential questions are mentioned in the curricular texts and how such questions are to be met through teaching, thus focusing on the relationship between the child and the curriculum. Tools for analysis are adapted from Hartman (2000) and Biesta (2009a) and elaborated on below. Based on the comparison of the varying curricular approaches to the questions of children and youth, a critical discussion follows.

As indicated the study limits itself to syllabi from the Swedish school subject religionskunskap and its Norwegian and Danish equivalents. The use of the concept ‘livsfrågor’ in four Swedish curricula from 1969, 1980, 1994, and 2011 provides a background to the comparison. Based on a critical reading of the texts, nuances and shifts in emphases are important in the characterization of the curricula.

The curricular introduction and use of the term ‘livsfrågor’ has been critiqued for the conceptual vagueness of the term (Grönlien Zetterqvist, 2009; Nilsson, 2018). However, as the research interest of this study is the significance of ‘livsfrågor’ in the studied curricula, the interest is not per se whether the concept has remained the same over time, or whether it can be seen to have conceptual clarity or not, but rather what variations the studied texts exemplify in the relationship between the child and the curriculum. Additionally, the search in the studied texts for ‘livsfrågor’ was broadened opening to a search also for ‘frågor’, for questions, and thereby also addressing students’ questions more generally.

‘Livsfrågor’ is in this paper translated into English as ‘existential questions’. Another term that has been used is ‘vital questions’ (cf. Hartman, 2010), but ‘existential questions’ is preferred as children’s questions while learning here are understood to have existential significance to them. On a different note, this study exemplifies a study with interest in curricular matters of content (cf. Friesen, 2018).

Sweden in the 1960s and studies of ‘livsfrågor’

When the former Swedish school subject knowledge of Christianity [Sw. kristendomskunskap] was renamed to knowledge of religions [religionskunskap] in the curriculum adopted in 1969, the concept of ‘livsfrågor’ came to play a crucial role, not least in relation to the curricular discussions that took place during the 1960s. Part of the background to the processes of curricular change were the intense societal debates on the role of the Lutheran Church, Christianity, and Christian education in school, and the role of Theology in the academy. The debates were initiated by the atheist philosopher Ingemar Hedenius (cf. Jansson, 2018) and came to influence not only school education but also the development of Swedish academic theology (cf. Girmalm, 2006).

Empirical studies of ‘livsfrågor’ came to follow the insertion of the concept into the curriculum; this with the intent to identify what existential questions children actually posed (cf. Hartman, 1986a, 1986b) and also followed up on later (Hartman & Torstenson-Ed, 2007) and more recently regarding youth by Risenfors (2011; see also Ristiniemi et al. 2018). There are also surveys from 1969, 1980 and 2006 pointing to the interest of children and youth in an emphasis on ‘their’ questions supporting such a curricular focus (Jönsson & Liljefors-Persson, 2006; Skolöverstyrelsen, 1969, 1980). Furthermore, the processes of change in the compulsory school curriculum have been described and discussed by several researchers, for example, in a historical curricular perspective of 200 years and more (Hartman, 2000), or as to how the curricular change was taken up and ‘livsfrågor’ approached by teacher educators (Falkevall, 2010), or comparatively how it relates to the corresponding curricular development in upper secondary school from the 1960s and thereafter (Selander, 2018). There are also examples of studies among educational researchers with a conceptual focus intended to capture various existential dimensions of the thinking of children and young people. For example, Gunnarsson (2008, 2009) has discussed the concept of ‘livsfrågor’ in relation to worldviews [livsåskådningar]. Alternatives to ‘livsfrågor’ have also been suggested, like ‘life-understanding’ [livsförståelse] (Osbeck, 2006), ‘life-interpretation’ [livstolkning] (Hartman & Torstenson-Ed, 2007) or ‘existential configurations’ (Gustavsson, 2013).

On the role of students’ questions, more recent Swedish studies in the Social Science subjects demonstrate tendencies by teachers to leave students’ questions aside and focus on what they understand should be taught and can be measured in line with the new curricula from 2011, e.g. the school subject of History (Persson, 2017) and more generally in Social Science (Strandler, 2017). In a comparative classroom observation study in grades 5 and 6 in religious education, Osbeck (2019) researched the role of questions. The study showed this to be important, not only for the interest of the children in schoolwork but also for the way they performed; that is, it was of importance also for the results of their education. Given the studies above what the present one adds is the specific focus on the relationship child and curriculum in a contemporary comparative perspective.

Methodology

Material—RE-curricula

The material of this study is texts, i.e. national curricula for religious education, RE- subjects in compulsory school. Three of them were in use in 2019 and are from Sweden, Norway and Denmark.² Additionally, the older Swedish curricula, Lgr 69, Lgr 80, and Lpo 94, plus Lgr 11 presently in use, have been studied as a background to the comparison of the three Scandinavian curricula. Thereby Lgr 11, the present Swedish curriculum gets a double role, both as part of the background and in analysis. The reason for treating Swedish curricula in this special way is that ‘livsfrågor’ initially appeared in the Swedish curriculum while a development over fifty years can be traced through the four curricula.

Analytical focus and process

With a research interest in the relationship between the child and the curriculum (cf. Dewey, 1966), three overall questions have guided the analysis of the texts, namely: a) Whose existential questions are to be studied?, b) How are they to be studied?, and finally, c) How can the relationship between the child and the curriculum be characterized? The third question then sums up the responses of the first two.

Initially, a careful search of key-terms of the complete syllabus texts has been carried out both to provide opportunity to see the frequency of relevant terms, identify their more or less central positioning as a goal for the subject, and their specific context within the text. Vaismoradi et al. (2013) discuss content analysis as a spectrum of approaches. This study exemplifies, within a discussion as theirs, a thematic analysis with a focus on content, demanding a close reading of the texts with a focus on nuances and contexts of the terms searched for.

An obvious search term to be used in the content analysis of Swedish curricula is the word ‘livsfrågor’ [existential questions]. To capture more of the actual context and possible complexities of the use of this search term, other words are also used, namely, ‘livsåskådning’ [worldview], ‘livstolkning’ [life-interpretation], and also ‘frågor’ [questions]. In Norwegian the corresponding words are: ‘livssyn’ [worldview], ‘livstolkning’ [lifeinterpretation] and ‘spørsmål’ [question]. Finally, the Danish search terms used are: ‘livsoppfattelser’ [understandings of life], ’livsfilosofi’ [philosophy of life], ‘livstydning’ [meaning of life], ‘livstolkning’ [interpretation of life], and ‘spørgsmål’ [question]. The fact that more search terms have been used in the Danish case is a consequence of the plurality of terms connected with ‘life’ (as in ‘livsfrågor’, ‘livstolkning’, etc.) in that curriculum. Consequently, the Norwegian and Swedish curricula demonstrate fewer terms connected to ‘liv’ or ‘life’. In the analysis of these texts, the overarching goals of the respective syllabi have been given a certain priority over other elements of the texts.

Given the use of the key-terms and the search for them in the texts, the first analytical step gave a result indicating frequencies³ of the search terms in the respective syllabi. However, when as a next step analysing in depth the specific quotes where the search terms appeared, as well as the place within the curricula where they were positioned, patterns began to become visible as to whose questions were to be studied, how this was to be done, and tentative understandings of a relationship between the child and the curriculum could begin to be recognized. For the further characterization of the three curricula in use, two different analytical tools have been used, Hartman (2000) and Biesta (2009a).

Analytical tools

Sven G. Hartman (2000), in a discussion of how to characterize the development of the Swedish RE subject from 1686 up until the present by codes, describes two different ones. Starting in what was schooling in Sweden in the late 17^th century and into the 20^th century, he concludes that teaching was strongly influenced by the Lutheran Church. The efforts to teach the population how to read took place within an ecclesiastical context, while the simultaneous introduction of the theological content of the church was of importance. Hartman develops two codes and characterizes the first phase of RE education by a proclamatory code. This code has, as a basis, the belief that what is taught is also what is learnt. Furthermore, the code, as described by Hartman, is characterized by a belief in the teacher having the initiative, that the quantity of education is of importance, and if interest by students is lacking, then more teaching will be the solution. In contrast to this code, Hartman sees a dialogical code where the crucial moment of the pedagogical process is the interaction between the one talking and the one listening, or the encounter between a written text and the reader. Furthermore, the quality of what a student gets out of the pedagogical process is of importance. Hartman also adds that a dialogical approach is difficult to combine with uniformity in the encounters with students (Hartman, 2000, pp. 231–251). These two different codes, understood as poles in a continuum, are used in a first characterization of the three Scandinavian curricula.

The next analytical tool is the distinction between three functions of education as described by Biesta (2009a), namely qualification, socialization, and subjectification. By qualification, a major function of education, Biesta points to how school and other educational institutions provide children and young people with knowledge, skills, and understanding, but also with dispositions and forms of judgment which will make them able to ‘do something’ in a societal context (Biesta, 2009a, p. 39). The second major function of education Biesta names is socialization. This function relates to the ways in which children and youth ‘become members of and part of particular social, cultural, and political “orders”’ (Biesta, 2009a, p. 40)—that is, in brief, how they become members or citizens of a society. The third function of education is connected to processes of individuation, or in Biesta’s terminology, ‘of becoming a subject’ (Biesta, 2009a, p. 40). When Biesta elaborates on this, he points to how becoming a subject is contrary to inclusion into a society, into its orders, but rather is about becoming more independent and autonomous in one’s thinking and acting. In another of his texts (Biesta, 2009b), Biesta elaborates on subjectification; philosophically then starting his own discussion in that of Immanuel Kant, in Kant’s understanding of human beings as autonomous and independent. However, Biesta departs from Kant’s understanding of human nature as having its essence in rational autonomy. Against such an understanding of human nature, Biesta links his discussion to that of Levinas pointing to the nature of human existence to be a uniqueness in responding to the encounter with an ‘other’, an encounter where subjectification is about the questions asked to the subject, the human being, her or himself. By using such a kind of (ethical) questioning, Biesta lays a foundation for his understanding of subjectification and later develops, then underlines, the importance of the subject’s own questions and being questioned in unique processes of subjectification (Biesta, 2017).

With the interest of this study in children’s own existential questions, it is of interest to link up with Biesta’s concept of subjectification where the uniqueness of human beings, their questions, and being questioned is central. However, the other two functions of education, qualification and socialization, are also crucial for the characterization of the curricula and emphases in them, while Biesta’s framework will be used to interpret and characterize the texts of the three Scandinavian curricula. But before coming to that analysis the Swedish curricular development is described starting in 1969.

‘Livsfrågor’ in Swedish curricula, 1969–2011

‘Livsfrågor’—a start in Lgr 69

The curriculum for the compulsory school, Lgr 69,⁴ comprises nine years of schooling. When ‘livsfrågor’ for the first time appears as content in a Swedish curriculum, the word is explicitly mentioned three times, two of them in the RE subject. ‘Livsfrågor’ is mentioned when the five main parts [huvudmoment] of RE are elaborated on, for grades 7–9. After Christianity, other religions, come as the third main part ‘essential existential questions’ [väsentliga livsfrågor]. The text describes essential existential questions as a main theme in the following way:

Essential existential questions: Questions regarding worldviews and ethics with particular emphasis on topical problems with actuality for young people, enlightened partly from the Christian faith and worldview, as well as other worldviews. (Lgr 69, p. 176) [Translation by author].

Here it is emphasized that the questions are to be of importance for young people and that the questions are to be enlightened from a plurality of worldviews [livsåskådningar]. The second time ’livsfrågor’ is mentioned is shortly thereafter, initially, actually the second paragraph in a longer presentation of content of the RE subject. Then existential questions are described as being important to children and youth and examples of ‘livsfrågor’ is given. The text reads:

Fundamental existential questions of a personal and social nature are experienced strongly by children and youth. They include, for example, life and death, responsibility and guilt, suffering and compassion, fear and safety, loneliness and community. It is urgent as such that for children and youth essential questions of a worldview and ethical nature be studied in a versatile way, therefore without teaching becoming a systematic treatment of worldviews. With this starting point, teaching ought to provide insight into contemporary foundational worldview and ethical questions and actualise questions regarding facts and values. (Lgr 69, p. 176) [Translation and italics by author].

Here one can note that young people’s existential questions are to be a starting point in grades 7–9. The role of the questions can be said to be to ‘open’ the study and they are to be approached in a versatile way. Examples are also given of what they can consist of, and it is stated that fundamental existential questions are experienced strongly, not only by youth, but also by children.

The third time ‘livsfrågor’ is explicitly mentioned is in the subject Knowledge of Children [Barnkunskap], a subject only in grade 9, and the treating of ‘livsfrågor’ is to take place in cooperation with the RE subject. In addition to the thrice explicitly mentioned ‘livsfrågor’, there are also in the RE subject combinations of ‘livsåskådning’ [worldview] and questions, foundational questions, etc., i.e. similar vocabulary ten times in the syllabus.

Looking into the wider context of the curriculum to understand the context of ‘livsfrågor’, it is interesting to note how initially in the very first pages the task of school and the individual development of the students is described. Then it is stated that students are to have their interest alerted to the ‘big and common foundational questions of life that pertain to worldviews and views on society’ (Lgr 69, p. 14). Overall, in the general parts (Lgr 69, pp. 10–84) of the curriculum the role of a plurality of worldviews can be noted. For example, students come from various backgrounds (Lgr 69, p. 42), teachers have their own worldviews (Lgr 69, p. 42), and teaching of worldviews, ideologies, and values demands objectivity and versatility (Lgr 69, pp. 41–43). The plurality of worldviews is linked with fundamental questions, but the plurality is also described as potentially creating controversy, but it is to be treated to orient students as members of the society.

In the Lgr 69-approach it is obvious that ‘livsfrågor’ are regarded as being of interest to students, and that the existential questions crucial to young people are to be a starting point in the study of RE, grades 7–9. A plurality of worldviews is recognized as a societal condition and presupposition for the study, forming a critical background to teaching that demands objectivity and versatility, but where existential questions can be the start. Additionally, interesting to note given the intense debates of the 1960s is that a possibility of religious devotion is mentioned (Lgr 69, p. 67). If it is to take place, it should be within an atmosphere of freedom and broad-mindedness. It can also be noted that the RE subject is mentioned as the first of the ten subjects of orientation [orienteringsämnen], that are the non-compulsory subjects, meaning that it is mentioned before the other social science and natural science subjects, which is not alphabetically motivated, but which may be interpreted as a prioritized position that could mirror the societal and political tensions around the RE subject and its status characteristic of the 1960s.

‘Livsfrågor’—an expansion in Lgr 80 to a key-role

In Lgr 80⁵ ’livsfrågor’ plays the role of the crucial concept when the content of the RE subject for grades 1–9 is described. The term ‘livsfrågor’ is frequently used, and the RE subject has a new name, namely ‘Human beings’ questions before life and existence: Knowledge of religion’ [Människans frågor inför livet och tillvaron; Religionskunskap]. This clearly indicates the focus on existential questions, making them become the focal point to which the study of religions is connected. When the content of the subject is elaborated on, which is done separately for three stages, grades 1–3, 4–6 and 7–9, the text starts with three keywords: ‘Livsfrågor, tro och etik’, [existential questions, faith and ethics], (Lgr 80, pp. 127–128). After these keywords it is mentioned how various ethical stances guide human beings’ actions and their positioning in relation to various existential questions—another example of the crucial role of ‘livsfrågor’. Thereafter existential questions are exemplified for the various three stages. For grades 1–3 the following is suggested:

… The actual existential questions can be of the kind, our responsibility for one another and for all living beings, questions about matter, life and death, similarities and differences between human beings, friends and family relationships, to solve conflicts, loneliness, community, security, comfort, friendship, honesty, justice. (Lgr 80, p. 127) [Translation by author].

A pervasiveness of content regarding ‘livsfrågor’ for the first three grades is also noticeable for grades 7–9 where the following content is stated:

… varying life experiences of the human being, how our norms and values originate, relationships, responsibility, sexual ethics, interplay with nature, the use of free time and technique, conscience, guilt, and forgiveness, crime and punishment, salvation and grace, meaning and absence of meaning, quality of life and escape from reality. (Lgr 80, p. 128) [Translation by author].

It is stated for all three stages that the teaching shall start from and be linked to the experiences of the students, but also relate to actual events, phenomena, and contemporary people. The importance of a religious faith when you take a stance regarding ‘livsfrågor’ in different ways is also emphasized (Lgr 80, pp. 127–128).

Studying the syllabus for RE in Lgr 80 it becomes obvious that ‘livsfrågor’ has now entered centre stage in the described didactical approach. It is the hub that RE education is to circle around, strongly emphasized in the first part of the content description of RE. When studying how other parts of the RE subject are to be studied and taught, only three to four bullet points are given, being all the direction that is given. For example, for grades 4–6 these bullet points are:

• the bible, for example, the creation stories, the prophets, the encounters of Jesus with people,

• knowledge of the church, for example, Peter, St. Francis, Birgitta, Luther. 1700^th and 1800^th centuries,

• individuals, points of views within a few denominations and religions. Adequate songs and hymns. (Lgr 80, p. 128) [Translation by author].

To repeat, after the initial and quite extensive description of existential questions, these bullet points are all the guidance given.

The wider curricular context of this RE syllabus is that Lgr 80 has a strong emphasis on students’ active access of knowledge by the engagement of their own experience in creative processes, but also the widening of the students’ experiences through their encounters with content and problems in their education, and this is to form an education guided by a clear purpose (cf. Lgr 80, pp. 14–15). This is underlined as an emphasis for example, when teaching is said to start with students’ understanding of reality, connecting with their curiosity and letting them formulate questions, but with an equal emphasis on taking students further and expanding their understanding of reality (Lgr 80, p. 48).

It is obvious that in Lgr 80 ‘livsfrågor’ have become central to RE, and furthermore that teaching is to be connected to the experiences of the students. However, ‘livsfrågor’ in itself is now not primarily understood as being personal convictions of students, teachers, or parents as a background motivation to their importance, but they are rather exemplified in terms of content for teaching, like life and death, guilt and forgiveness, or responsibility for one another or nature, as indicated above. Questions of worldviews, held differently by people, are also part of what school should orient students about.

‘Livsfrågor’—in Lpo 94 being replaced by worldview [‘livsåskådning’]

In the RE syllabus of Lpo 94⁶ ‘livsfrågor’ is mentioned only once and the former hub in RE has been replaced. The only time the word ‘livsfrågor’ is explicitly mentioned is as one of the five goals that students after completed studies, after grade 9, shall have reached:

The student shall

• be able to reflect over and express themselves concerning important existential questions [livsfrågor] and religious and ethical questions, … (Lpo 94, p. 24) [Translation by author].

Here important existential questions are what students are to be able to reflect over and express themselves about, together with religious and ethical questions. The other goals for concluded RE studies emphasize knowledge about Christianity, its practices and texts, other religions, and foundational thoughts of a non-religious worldview. The goals formulate a shift towards a study of worldviews, religious and non-religious, with a knowledge emphasis in the study. The first sentence of the RE syllabus makes the same emphasis:

It belongs to the tasks of school to provide students with opportunities to access knowledge about and stimulate reflection around different religions and worldviews as a basis for students’ own positioning. (Lpo 94, p. 24) [Translation by author].

In a search for the use of ‘livsfrågor’ and ‘frågor’ in the syllabus one also notes that three times, the Swedish term ‘existentiella frågor’, literally existential questions, is used. However, from the context it is obvious that ‘existentiella frågor’ gets a different connotation than ‘livsfrågor’ earlier had. Twice ‘existentiella frågor’ is mentioned together with ‘questions of faith’ [trosfrågor] as something students need to reflect over for their own positioning. The use of these two concepts in connection to one another indicate that ‘existential questions’ is an area then seen as questions within a secular worldview and different from questions of faith. The third time ‘existential questions’ is mentioned is in the first overall goal for the school’s RE education and what it is to strive for:

… that the student

• reflect over, develop and deepen his/her knowledge about religious, ethical and existential questions as a foundation for their own positioning. (Lpo 94, p. 24) [Translation by author].

Here ‘existential questions’ are a matter in a row of questions to be treated and for students to know and reflect over. This indicates a shift from the role for ‘livsfrågor’/existentiella frågor’ as a centre, or hub, to being less central, and not being students’ own questions.

When noting frequencies of the use of terms and how the various concepts are given importance, it becomes obvious that ‘livsåskådning’ [worldview] is what increases in number and is more centrally placed than ‘livsfrågor’, and an emphasis on the acquisition of knowledge replaces an emphasis on the students’ experiences. The importance of forming a personal position is in Lpo 94 emphasized in relation to ethical concerns. It is understood as a lifelong personal developmental process expressed in this way:

In contemporary Swedish society, the choice of faith or worldview is not something self-evident. To be able to make these kinds of choices the students need to process questions of faith and existential questions. Being able to view existence from an ethical perspective forms part of a personal, life-long process. Teaching therefore needs to give ample space for students’ own reflections as well as the answers from different religions and worldviews. (Lpo 94, p. 24) [Translation by author].

In addition to emphasizing ethical positioning as a lifelong process, this quote also describes students’ own participation in the form of reflection over questions and answers—exemplified also in earlier quotes.

Lpo 94 represents a break from the increased space for ‘livsfrågor’ from Lgr 69 to Lgr 80. The emphasis from Lgr 80 on students’ experiences that are to be broadened in the educational process is in Lpo 94 replaced with an emphasis on knowledge and reflection, as students’ responses in the study are centred around worldviews. The focus on students’ questions, ‘livsfrågor’ or other questions, is lost.

‘Livsfrågor’—Lgr 11 a comeback?

In Lgr 11,⁷ ‘livsfrågor’ is somewhat more present than in Lpo 94. In the three-fold structure of the syllabus, it appears in all the parts: aim, core content, and knowledge requirements. It is for example, expressed as one of the four themes of core content for grades 4 to 6 and 7 to 9, then as ‘identity and life issues’ (Lgr 11, pp. 220–222)⁸; that is, existential questions are connected to matters of identity formation. The connection between ‘livsfrågor’ and identity is repeated also in one of the five overall abilities the teaching in the RE subject is to give students an opportunity to develop, found in the aim section of the syllabus. The third ability is to:

• reflect over life issues and their own and others’ identities, (Lgr 11, p. 218).

This same connection to students’ reflections over life issues and their own identity is found also in another part of the section of the aim of RE. The reflection over ‘livsfrågor’ is then also connected to ethical attitudes:

Teaching should encourage pupils to reflect over various issues concerning life, their identity, and their ethical attitudes. (Lgr 11, p. 218).

From both these quotes it is obvious that what is students’ own, what belongs to their subjectivity, is termed as identity and ethical attitudes, but ‘livsfrågor’ is ‘various’ and does not explicitly belong to the students.

Furthermore, when under core content ‘life issues’ are mentioned for study, for grades 4–6 they are to be found in ‘religions and other outlooks on life’ (Lgr 11, p. 221), and for grade 7–9 ‘in popular culture’ (Lgr 11, p. 222), but there is no mention of them as being students’ own issues. The closest Lgr 11 gets to describing ‘existential issues’ as personal to students is in the core content for grades 1–3 where it is said:

Life issues of importance for pupils, such as good and evil, right and wrong, friendship, gender roles, gender equality and relationships. (Lgr 11, p. 219).

Here the teaching is to be guided by what is regarded to be of importance to students with a few examples given. Other concrete examples of questions the syllabus mentions for grades 4–6 are ‘what is important in life and what it means to be a good friend’ and ‘views on love and what happens after death’ (Lgr 11, p. 221); and for grades 7–9 ‘the purpose of life, relationships, love and sexuality’ (Lgr 11, p. 222). However, in grades 7–9, it is how these issues are depicted in popular culture, and for grades 4–6 popular culture plus religions and other outlooks on life, but words expressing that existential questions could be connected to the students, and could be their own, are not present. What students in Lgr 11 are to develop is their identity and their ethical stance. Furthermore, the focus from Lpo 94 on knowledge about religions and secular worldviews, here in Lgr 11 expressed as ‘religions and other outlooks on life’, remains central and is the first theme in the aims’ section and under core content. ‘Religion and society’ is the second theme, followed by ‘identity and life issues’, and fourthly, ‘ethics’ is separated out as a theme of its own. The almost total dissociation of ‘livsfrågor’ from students, the emphasis on the study of worldviews, a knowledge emphasis on teaching and learning, plus an emphasis on individual identity formation and the encouragement to take a personal ethical stance, is obvious.

Four curricula—brief summary

Summarizing the Swedish curricular development related to ‘livsfrågor’, it is obvious that the role that ‘livsfrågor’ has been prescribed to play as a part of the RE subject is quite varying in the four curricula. Briefly brought together, being at first a suggested starting point for RE, later becoming the hub, then almost forgotten, and finally restored as something to assist in students’ personal identity formation and the forming of an ethical stance. It also becomes obvious that the role ‘livsfrågor’ could play, or was asked to play, depended on both the societal situation and general pedagogical ideas expressed in the overall curriculum, but reflected also in the RE syllabus, where the progressivist approach of Lgr 80 can serve as a powerful illustration, followed by the knowledge-emphasis in Lpo 94. It is obvious that both whose ‘livsfrågor’ is to be studied, how this is going to be done, and consequently how the relationship between the child and the curriculum can be formed, has shown many variations above. However, it is reasonable to conclude that it matters didactically if ‘livsfrågor’ on the curricular level is considered to be students’ own questions, or if students are to identify the questions of others; at the same time as it matters how students’ questions are to be addressed and related to knowledge from worldviews, from systems of thought or popular culture (cf. Nordgren, 2017; Young 2013).

‘Livsfrågor’ in Scandinavian curricula 2019

The next step is now to compare the Norwegian, Danish and Swedish RE syllabuses in use in 2019 to see how ‘livsfrågor’ are handled in these three neighbouring Scandinavian countries. In so doing I use the work of Hartman (2000) and Biesta (2009a) as tools in characterizing the syllabi. In my presentation of them I introduce the respective name of the RE subject, indicate the length and main parts of the syllabus document, and by numbers indicate the frequencies of search terms. The paragraphs indicating the aim in the opening parts of the texts are given priority in the analysis otherwise guided by the search terms and their appearance in the texts. The translations to English of the Norwegian and Danish texts are my own. The Swedish curriculum has an official translation, which I use. As a background to my aim of characterizing the relationship between the child and the curriculum, question c) above, in the comparison of curricula my questions a) Whose existential questions are to be studied? B) How are they to be studied? are used. And, as indicated, Lgr 11 now plays a double role, described as part of the background, but also analysed in the ensuing comparison.

Norway—Kristendom, religion, Livssyn og Etikk

The RE school subject in Norway is named Kristendom, Religion, Livssyn og Etikk [Christianity, Religion, Worldview and Ethics] abbreviated KRLE.⁹ The syllabus encompasses 10 school years and the studied syllabus is the one that was in use 2019. It consists of 10 pages and was adopted in 2015.¹⁰ The KRLE syllabus is organized with an opening where aims for the subject are formulated, thereafter follow the main areas, and then the competence goals for the grades 4, 7, and 10. The main areas of the subject are organized as Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Worldview [Nor. ‘livssyn’], plus Philosophy and Ethics. Half of the time in KRLE is to be spent on Christianity, argued for out of its importance as cultural heritage to the Norwegian society. In relation to the main areas, the competence goals indicate what the students are to know. To describe what the students are to know the syllabus uses a number of various verbs like explain, discuss, carry out a dialogue, listen to, tell about, describe, present, and converse about, etc.

Following up on the Swedish ‘livsfrågor’, the search terms used were ‘livssyn’ [worldview], ‘livstolkning’ [lifeinterpretation] and ‘spørsmål’ [question]. ‘Livssyn’ is the one most frequently used, 49 times, followed by ‘livstolkning’ 14 times, and ‘spørsmål’ 12 times. The opening paragraph of KRLE is:

Religions and worldviews [livssyn] reflect human beings’ deepest questions and have throughout history contributed to shaping the individual, the community, and society. (KRLE, p. 2)

Here, a relationship is established between questions of human beings and religions and worldviews [livssyn] as systems of thoughts and practices. The rest of the introductory paragraph emphasizes the importance of knowledge about religions and worldviews for children and young people in a situation of cultural plurality. The opening sentence of the next paragraph makes the following statement:

“Christianity, religion, worldviews, and ethics as general education subjects [allmenndannende fag] shall contribute a common knowledge base and frames of reference, contribute to new insights, and provide space for dialogue for varying age levels”. (KRLE, p. 2) [Italics by author].

Consequently, dialogue depending on students’ age is to be an important means in the RE subject, providing a common knowledge base.

When following up on the use of the search terms, ‘livssyn’, as above, in general refers to secular views on life, i.e. worldviews that are not religious. And, it is mentioned 49 times and on one occasion out of the these 49 times it refers to a personal worldview. This is when a warning is issued towards organizing education so that confessional parts of the education could conflict with religious or other personal convictions of parents or students (KRLE, p. 2). ‘Life-interpretation’ [livstolkning] is neither in general connected to students, but connected to religions and worldviews (KRLE, pp. 2, 6–9), and does not take on personal dimensions as something students could be in the process of forming as their own. ‘Spørsmål’ [question] is in the opening sentence connected to human beings as bearers of questions, but further on in the syllabus questions are without exception connected to the thought systems or to ethical issues, and children and young people are not explicitly addressed as bearers of questions.

To summarize the above, ‘livssyn’, ‘livstolkning’ and ‘spørsmål’ is in general not connected to children and young people, but rather to religions and worldviews as traditions and for students to become knowledgeable about. But one crucial point where students are connected to the curriculum, and not primarily as ‘knowers’, is through the emphasis on dialogue adapted to the different ages of the students as a crucial initially stated aim. This didactical approach, pointing to more than merely an emphasis on students as acquirers of knowledge, could also be seen as expressed in the rich and varied use of verbs in the competence goals, illustrated above.

Denmark—Kristendomskundskab

The Danish RE subject is called Kristendomskundskab [Knowledge of Christianity] and the syllabus in use in 2019 encompasses nine school years and consists of 78 pages.¹¹ The four thematic areas to which competence goals are formed are called: Life-philosophy and ethics, Biblical stories, Christianity, and non-Christian religions and other worldviews. Competence goals are formulated for students having finished 3rd, 6th, and 9th grade. Given the extensive text, 78 pages, as compared to the Norwegian and Swedish equivalent texts, the Danish syllabus develops didactical matters more.

As already noted the Danish curriculum has several different words starting with ‘life’ like ‘livsoppfattelser’ [understandings of life/worldviews], ’livsfilosofi’ [philosophy of life], ‘livstydning’ [meaning of life], and ‘livstolkning’ [interpretation of life], all in all together mentioned 162 times in the syllabus with ‘livsoppfattelser’ being the one most frequently used and in more than half of the cases. ‘Eksistentielle’ and ‘spørgsmål’ [question] are also found in the syllabus, but less frequent.

The opening paragraph of the Danish syllabus reads:

In the subject Knowledge of Christianity, the students shall acquire knowledge and skills which will make them able to understand and relate to the significance of the religious dimension of the worldview [livsopfattelse] of the individual human being and her/his relationship to others. (Kristendomskundskab, p. 7) [Translation by author].

This aim expresses a focus on providing students with knowledge and skills to understand the personal worldview of human beings, and the religious dimension thereof. Following up on this aim and what can be meant by the religious dimension of the worldview of the individual human being, the syllabus states:

The concept the religious dimension is interpreted to mean that all human beings pose questions [spørgsmål] to their lives. This means that in the subject, the human being is understood as a creature seeking meaning in existence, and it is this search for the foundational conditions of existence which is defined as the religious dimension in the objective of the subject. (Kristendomskundskab, p. 25) [Translation by author].

Consequently, in the Danish RE subject the human being is understood as a creature searching for meaning, and the search for the foundational conditions of existence is at the centre of the RE subject and called the religious dimension. Furthermore, when the relationships between the four thematic areas, as mentioned above, are described, the area ‘life-philosophy and ethics’ is described to have the capacity of integrating the studies in RE:

The competence area life-philosophy and ethics can within the work of the religious dimension preferably integrate the other competence areas, so that students can raise questions from their own experiences of existence, but also meet questions and answers, as they are expressed in Christianity and other worldviews. (Kristendomskundskab, p. 27) [Translation by author].

From the point of view of students’ questions, the position of the Danish RE-syllabus is clear, students’ own experience of existence can be a base for their questions and through their education they can encounter questions, as well as answers, from within the Christian tradition and other worldviews.

In the opening paragraph of the syllabus, already quoted, it is also stated that the students ‘shall acquire knowledge and skills which will make them able to understand and relate to the significance of the religious dimension’ (Kristendomskundskab, p. 7) of worldviews. Although when the identity of the RE subject is elaborated on and the subject defined as a subject with a focus on interpretation of life and understanding of culture (Kristendomskundskab, p. 26), the importance of views both from within and outside the studied worldviews, and distancing from the normativity in the studied material, is simultaneously emphasized. A historic and social situating of worldviews as well as students’ acquiring of adequate terminology [Dan. fagsprog] is additionally mentioned (Kristendomskundskab, p. 26).

In the Danish syllabus, all human beings, students included, are understood as existentially searching. To understand this and life-interpretations as cultural phenomena expressed historically and socially, as worldviews, is crucial in the RE subject. Related to this focus is the importance of acquiring knowledge, given perspectives both from within and with a distance to worldviews, and the importance of an adequate terminology (Danish: fagsprog) is underlined.

Sweden—Religionskunskap

The Swedish syllabus for Religionskunskap, to a certain extent already introduced, consists of 10 pages, covers nine years of schooling and was issued in 2011. The opening paragraph of the syllabus reads:

People throughout the ages and in all societies have tried to understand and explain their living conditions and the social contexts of which they form a part. Religions and other outlooks on life [livsåskådningar] are thus central elements of human culture. In today’s society, characterized by diversity, knowledge of religions and other outlooks on life is important in creating mutual understanding between people. (Lgr 11, p. 218)

Here it is emphasized how religions and other outlooks on life are central to human culture and knowledge about them crucial in today’s diverse society. The next part of the text, the first sentence under aim, follows up on this by stating:

Teaching in religion should aim at helping the pupils to develop knowledge of religions and other outlooks on life in their own society and in other parts of the world. By means of teaching, pupils should become sensitive to how people with different religious traditions live with and express their religion and belief in different ways. (Lgr 11, p. 218)

In this quote, and the former one, knowledge of worldviews in contemporary diverse societies is given priority and being emphasized. The analysis above of Lgr 11 regarding the role of existential questions resulted in the conclusion that they are not given importance as student’s own questions, as compared to identity and ethical attitudes which are matters students are to reflect over as their own.

When following up now on how ‘livsfrågor’ are expressed in the syllabus part of knowledge requirements the patterns that the questions are to be identified in phenomena surrounding students is confirmed, for example, in the knowledge requirements both for grades 6 and 9 (Lgr [Sw] 11, pp. 220–223). In the requirement for grade 3 when the life issues are mentioned they are described so as to be ‘elevnära’ [close to students]. However, it is a difference between being close to, and being students’ own questions.

Summarizing this, the Swedish RE syllabus has a focus on knowledge of worldviews in a diverse society. Existential questions understood as explicitly relating to students’ own experiences are not mentioned. Identity formation and forming an ethical stance are processes given more attention and regarded as students’ own in the syllabus.

Comparison between the Scandinavian countries

Given these three presentations of Norway, Denmark and Sweden, respectively how do these syllabi compare when it comes to the relationship between child and the RE curriculum? If starting by characterizing them with the help of the two codes of Hartman (2000), the dialogical and the proclamatory code, the Danish syllabus explicitly regards students as bearers of questions regarding their existence which is to be brought into the RE study. In this sense that syllabus offers teachers and students extensive possibilities for dialogue, not least given a focus on how life-philosophy can integrate the RE study. In the Norwegian syllabus, there is explicit mentioning of dialogue as an important means, and by relating it to the age of students and a variety of dialogical verbs in the competence goals, it indicates a didactical interest in students’ experiences and their thinking, however, this emphasis is not as strong as the Danish. Given the focus on the acquisition of knowledge, plus the focus on ‘livsfrågor’ as being something to be found outside of students, the Swedish syllabus seems to be the most proclamatory one of the three. A search for the word dialogue in the syllabus text shows it is absent.

Moving next to the by Biesta (2009a) coined concepts of qualification, socialization and subjectification and using these to characterize tendencies in the studied syllabi here, the functions can preferably be seen as overlapping. The syllabi are examples of a certain ‘mix’ of the three functions—a balancing of them—here evaluated from the point of view of how the relationship of child and curriculum is played out with the students’ questions, existential questions, as the main indicator.

Starting with qualification—out of the three syllabi the Swedish one is the one where this function dominates. Emphasis on qualification is present also in the Norwegian and Danish syllabi, but in those syllabi, it is balanced up by emphases also on the other two functions, socialization and subjectification. Socialization is as well present in all three curricula. In the Norwegian syllabus, it is given a didactical emphasis through its explicit mentioning of dialogue, depending on students’ age, and in relation to a multicultural society. The Danish syllabus speaks of a dialogical classroom environment in considerably more of a consistent approach than the Norwegian syllabus. In the Swedish syllabus, there is no mentioning of classroom dialogue but the importance of the RE subject in contributing to understanding between human beings of various worldviews is mentioned, as well as in the Danish and Norwegian syllabi. With a focus on subjectification there is no doubt that the Danish syllabus comes out as the one with the strongest emphasis, with the Norwegian coming next, and the Swedish showing the least tendencies in this respect.

Given the observations and the analyses above, it is reasonable to conclude the following regarding how children’s existential questions are responded to in the studied curricula:

Norway: through dialogue as a platform for teaching and learning socialization into a multicultural and multireligious society is emphasized, to which aspects of qualification and subjectification are added.

Denmark: through a strong child/student-centred approach, the meaning-searching questions of students are recognized, which provides a strong subjectification emphasis, where aspects of socialization and qualification as well are present.

Sweden: with a strong qualification approach with aspects of socialization integrated into it, but with less aspects of subjectification included the curricular interest in children’s existential questions is unclear.

Concluding discussion

Although the Scandinavian countries are geographically and presumably also culturally close, there are considerable differences between them and their RE subjects as noted above. The Swedish societal debate of the 1960s came to influence the curriculum Lgr 69 and form the background to the insertion of ‘livsfrågor’ in the curriculum, while the Lgr 80 and its emphasis on ‘livsfrågor’ came in a curriculum where progressivist pedagogical ideals and ideas were strong, to be replaced by other tendencies in the 1990s and 2000s. In Norway during the 1990s and early 2000s a discussion was ongoing, in relation to the Swedish development of ‘livsfrågor’, whether, and if so how, to include dimensions of life-interpretation also in the Norwegian curriculum (Gravem, 1996; Skeie, 2002). Skeie positions himself in favour of an opening the RE subject to recognize the interest of the students’ and their questions, this over against a focus on the objective content of the subject. As presently, a new RE syllabus is introduced in Norway it could be interesting to follow up on how matters of dialogue and questions of children and youth are to be didactically approached in the new KRLE. The Danish focus on life-philosophy has been in depth studied and elaborated on by Böwadt (2009, 2019) pointing to the influential work of the theologians N.F.S. Grundtvig (1783–1872) and K.E. Løgstrup (1905–1981). Böwadt’s work sheds critical light on the Danish cultural synthesis between the theology and philosophy in ‘life-philosophy’. In the Danish syllabus can also explicit mentioning of a historic-critical approach to studies of Bible texts also be found, pointing to also other contextual aspects of the Danish situation. The comments above point to and exemplify how contextual cultural variations are represented in these curricular texts, although not being a main focus of this study but possible to explore more in depth.

Above we have seen different roles for questions, for existential questions, as expressed in the studied syllabi. They have been seen as a starting point, a hub, as neglected, being made into an integrative nucleus, or a dialogical platform. A variation of how the questions can be responded to is noticeable, but it is obvious that for them to be responded to they must first be recognized. The Danish syllabus, the Swedish Lgr 80 and to some extent the Norwegian KRLE in different ways indicate ways that questions can be responded to. Generally speaking the answers given is that it is by connecting to, and widen the questions of the children and youth to, or by, answers from worldview traditions, ethics, surrounding culture and facts. To map such responses in further detail could be a future study in line with Nordgren’s (2017) discussion, here in a search for detailed didactical analyses of forms and means of connecting the questions of children and youth with powerful knowledge.

Given the research interest of this study and the existential questions of children and youth as a starting point in the exploration of the relationship child and curriculum in syllabi, it is obvious that subjectification as elaborated by Biesta becomes that function of education that gets a special interest. Biesta (2009a, 2009b, 2017) elaborates on the significance of individual uniqueness when understanding subjectification and the role of existential questions in education. A crucial question, for the RE subject but also other subjects, is how that dimension can be didactically handled. The study by Osbeck (2019) points to the significance of students’ questions for both their interest and results in schoolwork.

In international discussions the work of Grimmitt (1987) or Jackson (1997) is often used when discussing RE didactical approaches, however for this study the work of another British RE researcher, Clive Erricker (2010), could be more adequate, as he emphasize experiences and thoughts of children in his discussion of curriculum and didactical approaches, in some ways reminding of Dewey. Erricker’s suggested approach reminds of the ones found in the Danish curriculum and the Swedish from 1980, Lgr 80.

Initially I commented on terminology, on my use of RE as denoting the subject under study. Reflecting over my own use of another of the concepts at stake, worldview, I have used it to include both religious and non-religious views on life, but also been careful to represent formulations in the syllabi in line with the language used there. It can be noted that for this kind of study a distinction by van der Kooij et al. (2013) between ‘worldview’ as a system of thoughts, and ‘worldview’ as a personal worldview, then denoting a person’s convictions and beliefs, can be valuable, not least when understanding children and young people and their questions as important in a personal worldview under formation.

Concerning the method used with search terms and Hartman (2000) and Biesta (2009a) as tools for the characterization of syllabi, it can be said to run the risk of reducing nuances and details, but on the other hand it helps to bring tendencies out. To the limits of any curricular study of texts, the critique can be directed that what takes place in the classroom may be different from what the curricula state. On the other hand, what curricula state opens up for possibilities, encourages, as well as can limit, and direct, while it is a worthwhile study in itself.

Given how syllabi in this study have demonstrated various versions of relating to the questions of children and young people what could be next to study would be to systematically review curricula for versions in more detail of how they want to relate knowledge to the questions/subjectivity of children and youth. This would be in line with the discussion initiated by Young (2013) on powerful knowledge but followed up on with a more didactically detailed focus by Nordgren (2017). Such studies could also include countries outside of the Scandinavian peninsula to include more variation in terms of RE subjects. More in depth studies of historical backgrounds to the curricular developments sketched here and reasons behind them, as well as studies of children’s actual existential questions and class-room studies would also be most valuable.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Vetenskapsrådet [2018-03435].

Notes on contributors

Karin Sporre

Karin Sporre is Professor in Educational Work at Umeå University, Sweden. Her curricular research presently focuses children’s existential questions as expressed in Northern European curricula. Recently she has compared curricula from three continents regarding various aspects of ethics education. In two other projects she presently studies a) children, sustainability and hope, and b) ethics education through fiction reading in compulsory school.

Notes

1. This curricular study is part of a wider research project The Child and Curriculum where children’s existential questions over a period of fifty years, as well as historic studies e.g. on research supporting the curricular development of ‘livsfrågor’ in Sweden are studied. See https://www.umu.se/en/research/projects/the-child-and-curriculum.-existential-questions-and-educational-responses/

2. The present-day curricula are electronically available and were downloaded on 11 October 2019. More information on all studied curricula is given when they are described in detail.

3. Although frequencies play a role in the assessment of the use of the search terms, the frequencies have rather served as indicators and pointers into the texts, opening up to the more detailed analysis. The varying nuances but also the use of similar terms (i.e. not the exact search terms) in each of the three languages have rendered it difficult to report on frequencies in the format of e.g. a table. Therefore, instead in short texts, curriculum by curriculum, the usages are summarized and the qualitative characterizations of the meaning of the wording of the curricular texts are prioritized, this as an interpretive process takes place throughout the detailed analytical work carefully looking at nuances in language.

4. The full title is Lgr 69, Läroplan för grundskolan, [Curriculum for compulsory school]. It was issued by Skolöverstyrelsen, Stockholm and is presently available through libraries. When referenced, Lgr 69 will be used.

5. Full name Lgr 80. Läroplan för grundskolan. Issued by Skolöverstyrelsen. Available as a book through libraries. References to book.

6. Full name Lpo 94, Läroplan för det obligatoriska skolväsendet, [Curriculum for the compulsory school]. Several revisions took place after 1994. Here the original RE syllabus is used from the governmental document SKOLFS 1994:3, issued on 29 April 1994.

7. Lgr 11, full title Läroplan för grundskolan, förskoleklassen och fritidshemmet, revised 2019. Both Swedish and English versions are electronically available. Swedish: (https://www.skolverket.se/getFile?file=4206). English: (https://www.skolverket.se/getFile?file=3984). The analysis is based on the Swedish version, but when quoted, the English official version is used, if not otherwise noted.

8. In the English official translation of Lgr 11 the terminology ‘life issues’ for ‘livsfrågor’ is used.

9. Downloaded from http://data.udir.no/kl06/RLE1-02.pdf

10. A comprehensive curricular reform for all school subjects is ongoing in Norway with new curricula beginning to be introduced in autumn 2020 and in years to follow, but as already indicated the syllabus in use in 2019 is studied.

11. Full name: Kristendomskunskab, Faghefte. Downloaded from https://emu.dk/sites/default/files/2019-08/GSK.%20Fagh%C3%A6fte.%20Kristendomskundskab.pdf