Home Spotlight on Teaching From Traditions to Topics to Themes

From Traditions to Topics to Themes, within an Era of Technological Change - From Traditions to Topics to Themes PDF-NOTE: Internet Explorer Users, right click the PDF Icon and choose [save target as] if you are experiencing problems with clicking. Print

The vision of Arizona State University as a New American University retools the mission and, to a large extent, the structure of American higher education. Local, national, and global factors all contribute to this plan. The university’s web site devotes much space to presenting this vision and describes it in part in this way:

“In order to become that model for the New American University, Arizona State University [ASU] has undergone some radical changes over the last few years. We have undertaken a massive reorganization of our institution. We have torn down walls between disciplines and encouraged collaboration among diverse units. We have altered the trajectory of the university and reevaluated the role that universities play in society, in the economy, and in education at all levels.”

“Already, ASU has built a new physical and intellectual environment for learning and discovery. ASU has changed the community of people who inhabit that environment. And ASU has rewritten the objectives for the people in that environment as well as for the institution as a whole.”

“By breaking the mold, ASU has become a place where local solutions have global impact.”

One key feature detailed in the above is the desire and in many ways the requirement for collaboration among diverse units. Achieving this goal has resulted structurally in the reorganization of many academic units into schools. These new units often bring together faculty from a number of disciplines to investigate complex questions that cannot be answered by the knowledge and approaches of a single discipline. These new configurations in some cases have fostered growth in collaborative research, which has simultaneously had an impact on graduate education. But in terms of undergraduate instruction, although some new degrees have come into being, especially related to fields of applied studies, disciplinary faculties within these schools have for the most part continued to offer more “traditional” degrees, though with some modifications. Thus for example, the former Department of Foreign Languages became the School of International Letters and Cultures. It still offers degrees in French, Spanish, and German, with some new school-wide requirements. In the case of the School of Historical, Philosophical, and Religious Studies (SHPRS), each of the faculties remains responsible for its undergraduate degrees. But each of the units in varying ways has begun to rethink some of its offerings and overall requirements in part due to developments within its discipline and in part in response to changes at the university, including opportunities that emerge from our being now part of this school. Here I want to focus on our most important initiative: the identification of thematic foci of our undergraduate offerings and degree program.

Even prior to our being incorporated into our present school configuration, colleagues had undertaken a discussion to make explicit the larger questions that our course offerings considered. The intent was to make our offerings evident to the campus community and also to revise our major requirements to include classes with thematic concentration in addition to existing classes in traditions and religions based on geographic regions. Three themes emerged as key organizing frameworks for our various offerings, with many courses falling under more than one. These themes are: 1) Religion in global contexts; 2) Religion in public life and conflict; and 3) Text practice and representation. The descriptions in the course catalog for each of these themes identify clearly the specific issues a student will explore and also notes the context that gives rise to the importance of being able to analyze intelligently and communicate insights about these matters. For example the description for the “Religion, Public Life, and Conflict” course begins as follows:

“Students will look at the various ways in which religion interacts with civic society, including the role of religion in the public square, in relations between nations, regions, and cultures, and in the formation of public policy.”

The description then notes the contextual factors that make this a critical issue today:

“Relations between religion and civic society, in the United States and throughout the world, are far more complex than the apparently stable categories of ‘church’ and ‘state’ would suggest. Despite predictions to the contrary, religion remains a major force in the public square, in the formulation of public policy, and in relations between nations, regions, and cultures. The critical study of these dynamics under the thematic rubric of religion, conflict, and public life brings the analytic tools of religious studies into conjunction with those of political science, history, sociology, anthropology, economics, ethics, theology, and global, gender, and critical race studies.”

Additional paragraphs elaborate on the above matters, but what I want to underscore here is the effort made to identify in the final sentence the interconnections between the study of religion and knowledge gained in other units. The description for the emphasis in the “Religion in Global Contexts” course similarly underscores such connections. It states:

“Students will study the dynamics of religious continuity and change, both historically and in the contemporary global world context. Religion is studied as a site where cultures meet and transformation takes place.

 To study religion in global contexts is to attend to the dynamics of religious continuity and change in historical and contemporary times and in distinct sociopolitical environments. Students who pursue work with this thematic emphasis draw on the analytical resources of religious studies as these intersect with those of anthropology, global studies, transborder and diaspora studies, and the study of languages and literatures.”

This change in the description and options for our majors has already had some positive impact on our students. Our undergraduate advisor has reported that many students find this alternative way of completing our degree attractive and that it helps them see the broader interconnections between their study of religion and their other academic interests. Our faculty also is more cognizant of emphasizing these concerns in their teaching, and we have consistently offered as our required capstone seminar, “Problems in the Study of Religion,” courses that address one or more of these thematic emphases. Finally, in advancing various proposals to the administration, we routinely refer to these themes, as well as to a number of the tracks in our doctoral program, such as “Islam in a Global Context,” “Christianity in a Global Context,” and “Anthropology of Religion” so as to ensure they understand our “transdisciplinary” commitments and contributions to the mission of Arizona State University and to the advancement of knowledge.



 

This website contains archived issues of Religious Studies News published online from March 2010 to May 2013, and PDF versions of print editions published from Winter 2001 to October 2009.

This site also contains archived issues of Spotlight on Teaching (May 1999 to May 2013) and Spotlight on Theological Education (March 2007 to March 2013).

For current issues of RSN, beginning with the October 2013 issue, please see here.


Banner