Josh Cass, FoRB in Education Case Studies
Human Rights Education and Freedom of Religion or Belief (FoRB): deepening an understanding of HRE for the development of FoRB Education
Education is often cited in FoRB spaces as being an under-developed tool in the promotion and protection of FoRB in societies around the world. Recognizing and exploring the conceptual framing provided by developments in what constitutes Human Rights Education (HRE) is illustrative in terms of deepening an understanding of how Education for FoRB could work.
This briefing seeks to, unpack in broad terms what Human Rights Education is, briefly reflect on the current state of FoRB Education, and begin to pose some questions to the FoRB community as to how it wants to engage with Education in the future. Inevitably, this is a short paper, the intention to provide material for stimulus rather than to be prescriptive. Nonetheless questions emerge, specifically as they relate to capacity development (within the sector) and the scope for partnerships and collaborations.
Introducing Human Rights Education
The founding of the United Nations in 1945 and the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in 1948 established a globally recognised framework of rights applicable to all human beings.
Crucially, the UDHR itself contained an explicit educational mandate. Article 26 not only proclaimed the right to education but stipulated that education “shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.” This provision made education, and by extension, human rights education (HRE) a matter of international obligation, not mere aspiration.
The fall of the Berlin Wall and the subsequent end of the Cold War opened a new chapter for HRE. Three developments stand out.
First, the 1993 Vienna World Conference on Human Rights produced the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action, which explicitly identified HRE as “essential for the promotion and achievement of stable and harmonious relations among communities and for fostering mutual understanding, tolerance and peace.” This political endorsement gave fresh impetus to national and international efforts.
Second, the United Nations proclaimed the decade 1995–2004 as the UN Decade for Human Rights Education. Member states were encouraged to develop national action plans for HRE, and a substantial body of guidance materials, teacher-training resources, and assessment frameworks was produced under UN auspices.
Third, the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) created strong obligations around children’s rights education specifically. Article 29 of the CRC echoed the UDHR, specifying that children’s education should develop “respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms.” Importantly, rights-based approaches to education encouraged schools not merely to teach about rights but to embody rights in their institutional practices — in how teachers relate to pupils, how discipline is administered, and how student voice is welcomed.
Freedom of Religion or Belief, FoRB, and Education
Concurrently, discussions were taking place about FoRB and Education, and those ideas were formulated in the 2007 Toledo Guiding Principles on Teaching about Religions and Beliefs in Public Schools which were published by the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe’s (OSCE). The rationale for Toledo was two-fold: first, that there is positive value in teaching that emphasises respect for everyone’s right to FoRB, and second, that teaching about religions and beliefs can reduce harmful misunderstandings and stereotypes.
Subsequent publications such as the Council of Europe’s 2014 Signposts – Policy and practice for teaching about religions and non-religious world views in intercultural education, have contributed to a growing body of work which connects education about religion and belief, with societal freedoms in general and FoRB in particular.
While it is the case that these documents have provided a conceptual framework within which FoRB Education might have been expected to develop, for many years FoRB education in action (i.e. interventions being delivered systematically informal educational settings) remained an under-developed space. However, in recent years that has started to change.
Human Rights Education – typologies and approaches
The human rights developments of the last 30 years have been matched with a pedagogical development as to what HRE looks like and how it should be taught. As FoRB is a human right, consideration of these developments is critical when considering the role of education, specifically HRE, in the promotion and protection of FoRB as a human right.
A key development was the formulation of the ‘learning about / through / for’ HRE triad which was solidified in the Council of Europe’s manual, Compass: A Manual on Human Rights Education with Young People[1]. Starting from a place where it is understood that the purpose of HRE is the development of the learner’s own relationship to universal rights, the manual makes recommendations about how human rights should be taught in formal and non-formal educational settings.
In the Compass formulation ‘learning about’ is concerned with knowledge transfer: enabling young people to understand what rights are, their history, their legal instruments, and the cases where they are violated. Meanwhile ‘learning through’ refers to the processes and pedagogies implemented by educators. Specifically, the idea that the experience of being taught should embody rights principles, through participatory methods, respect for learner agency, and democratic classroom relationships. Finally, ‘learning for’ focusses on the outcome of learning, specifically the orientation toward action, agency, and the cultivation of active defenders of human rights.
The authors of the manual suggested that this combination creates a level of human rights awareness that empowers learners which stays with them through life and enhances democratic citizenship in the longer term.
The Compass approach can be read alongside with the work of influential HRE scholar Felisia Tibbetts who proposes a slightly different typology.
In contrast to the Compass model which takes a more conceptual approach to HRE, Tibbetts’ typology focusses on particular target groups and strategies for societal change and human development. In her analysis there are three HRE ‘models’: a values and awareness model, an accountability model and an activism-transformation model.
For Tibbetts a ‘values and awareness’ model of HRE is typified by a focus on knowledge transfer of what human rights are, and a non-critical engagement with how human rights might be applied (or indeed violated) in the learner’s context. Meanwhile, an ‘accountability’ model of HRE seeks to develop the motivations and capacities of learners in relation to human rights in their context so that they become better able to promote the application of human rights. Finally, an ‘activism-transformation’ model is designed specifically to bring about social change and is therefore often, but not exclusively, targeted at minority groups or those experiencing human rights violations.
Both these formulations have been valuable in the development of curricula in a range of countries. As already noted, the years after the Vienna World Conference saw countries develop their own approaches to HRE with notable work taking place in South Africa, England, Turkey and the Philippines. However, the example of Moldova is particularly illustrative.
Between 2010 and 2017, Amnesty International worked in partnership with the Ministry of Education and National Council for Curricula to develop and implement the first Human Rights Education curriculum and HRE materials which included modules on non-discrimination and sustainable development.[2] In doing so, the partners developed a curriculum which understood the typology expressed by Tibbetts whilst embedding the formulation established by Compass.
There are other noteworthy examples of HRE organisations developing teaching materials which are used in schools. For instance, Facing History and Ourselves (FHAO), a US-based education organisation, has been regularly the subject of external evaluators who have noted the alignment between pedagogies promoted by FHAO and the principles of HRE outlined in Compass and by Tibbett.[3]
Elsewhere, the launch in 2006 of UNICEF UK’s Rights Respecting School Award was a clear example of an attempt to embed the ‘learning through’ element of the Compass formulation. To date, over 1.5million children have been reached through this project which aims to promote equality, dignity, respect, non-discrimination, and participation in schools.
In other words, the application of the Tibbetts typologies and Compass formulation are well established, mainstream and well understood. Therefore, it is in the context of these framings that FoRB education needs to be understood and situated.
Human Rights Education for FoRB – findings from academia and classrooms
The publication in 2024 of a global review of the FoRB and Education landscape served to highlight the state of the sector.
Commissioned by Culham St Gabriels (CStG), a leading organization in the development of Religious Education as a curriculum subject, it revealed that the academic literature, though diverse, was based on academic conceptualization more than in-classroom delivery. In other words, the researchers struggled to find examples of the systematic teaching of FoRB-focused initiatives in formal education settings anywhere in the world. Nonetheless, there were important findings including establishing a definition for what constitutes FoRB Education.
When examining the academic sources, the researcher noted consensus on several points. Firstly, they noted agreement on the point that FoRB protects freedom of choice in religious and non-religious convictions and practices, it does not champion religious causes, nor can it conflict with freedom of expression or the right to education. They also noted that context matters considerably: whether a religion dominates a state’s education system or parents have chosen a faith school as an expression of their own FoRB, the setting shapes application, including the extent to which it is consistent with human rights more broadly. For instance, it was noted that religious education is a right, but one that must foster understanding of religious pluralism and be grounded in respect, regardless of whether a school has a religious or non-religious character. Underpinning these reflections was a broader divergence in how scholars approached the field: some examined how education can promote or undermine FoRB principles; others focused on pedagogy; and others explored how particular teaching approaches themselves either advance or compromise those principles.
In reviewing the global landscape of classroom-based FoRB-focused initiatives researchers found that though were a very limited number of interventions which focused exclusively on FoRB. The study draws heavily on work done in Iraq by US-organisation Hardwired, and in the UK by CStG. By reviewing the methods and objectives of those initiatives the researchers proposed that FoRB Education must provide learners with opportunities to:
- talk about their own religion or belief, experience ways in which other people explore and express meaning, and, to learn about where and how their religion or belief may be different to others;
- talk about freedom, what it means to be free, what it means for others to be free, and what it might mean or feel like to have those freedoms restricted specifically in relation to FoRB;
- learn about Human Rights, that they are for everyone everywhere and that FoRB is a human right.
In addition to interventions which focused on FoRB, the researchers also identified a larger pool of interventions working on “FoRB-adjacent” themes. These included interventions which tackle religious hate (anti-Semitism, anti-Muslim hate), promote concepts of inclusive citizenship, promote intercultural/inter-religious understanding and promote ideas of tolerance.
It is noteworthy that there is alignment between the FoRB Education objectives and the Compass formulation. In other words, there is evidence to suggest that the interventions identified in the global survey align with the principles of HRE.
Conclusions and Questions
Given the state of FoRB violations globally, and the body of research which has identified FoRB as a bellwether right for the health of societies more broadly, it is unquestionably the case that action is needed to support education which promotes and protects FoRB and which enables the emergence of a generation of young leaders committed to championing FoRB. Sadly, it is also the case that there is a relatively (to other human rights) narrow field of actors working on education for FoRB. It is with this in mind that conclusions and questions are articulated for those with a stake in the future of FoRB.
When considering the state of FoRB Education, the picture which emerges is one of a small number of FoRB Education initiatives delivered systematically in formal settings, with those interventions aligning with established HRE norms. Additionally, there is a somewhat larger number of initiatives being delivered globally on FoRB-adjacent themes whose delivery also aligns with HRE norms. For those with an interest in the future of FoRB, these actors could be considered as strategic partners in efforts to promote and protect FoRB.
Meanwhile, there is a larger and more established infrastructure of organisations delivering HRE in formal settings, but which may not fully understand or engage with FoRB. The frameworks (Compass, Tibbetts) which those organisations make use of are as applicable to the educating about FoRB as any other human right. For that reason, actors delivering broader HRE work could be considered as partners in efforts to promote and protect FoRB.
Questions for consideration
- Partnership and collaboration
Given the limited resources of the FoRB community and recognizing the pressing need for the work, is there scope or appetite for partnership work? What might that look like? Are there partners we have in mind? Are there barriers (reputational, in terms of alignment of values, or some other form) which prevent these from happening? Does the FoRB community have a track record of partnership? Are there examples the community could draw on? Is there a need to educate possible partners on what FoRB is?
- Organisational and sectoral capacity development
Is there a need to support actors within the FoRB community to deepen their understanding of how their work intersects with Education, specifically and the principles and approaches to HRE more generally? Has mapping been conducted to evaluate gaps within the sector or individual organisations as they relate to Education? How might those gaps be addressed? Equally, has such a mapping revealed specific strengths and assets which could be deployed to enhance education for FoRB?
While it is beyond the scope of this paper to make recommendations, certain points emerge from which a way ahead could emerge.
- The FoRB Education sector is small, but examples of best practice exist, to scale up successful initiatives will require investment.
- Given the scale of the global challenge, new partners will be needed.
- Similarly, given then scale of the global challenge, new and successful models of FoRB Education will be needed and will emerge.
- FoRB violations are understood and reported as violations of human rights, connecting education for FoRB with HRE is therefore appropriate.
Consideration of these points could serve as a useful stimulus for the development of FoRB Education.
Selected bibliography
Toledo Guiding Principles on Teaching about Religions and Beliefs in Public Schools; prepared by the ODIHR Advisory Council of Experts on Freedom of Religion or Belief
https://cdn.osce.org/sites/default/files/f/documents/c/e/29154.pdf
Signposts – Policy and practice for teaching about religions and non-religious world views in intercultural education:
Tibbitts, F. “Evolution of Human Rights Education Models.” In Bajaj, M. (Ed.), Human Rights Education: Theory, Research, Praxis. University of Pennsylvania Press. A ResearchGate version is accessible here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314606886_Evolution_of_Human_Rights_Education_Models
Compass: Manual for Human Rights Education with Young People
https://www.coe.int/en/web/compass
Surveying the Freedom of Religion or Belief and Education Landscape – a review (2024)
[1] Published in 2002 it was updated in 2017 as the The Reference Framework of Competences for Democratic Culture.
[2] https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/education/2019/06/moldova-national-human-rights-curricula/
[3] See for instance, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282375153_A_Randomized_Controlled_Trial_of_Professional_Development_for_Interdisciplinary_Civic_Education_Impacts_on_Humanities_Teachers_and_Their_Students