Policy Futures in Education

Volume 6 Number 6 2008

www.wwwords.co.uk/PFIE

Islam, Christianity and Secularism

in European Education

HOLGER DAUN
Institute of International Education,
Stockholm University, Sweden

ABSTRACT At a very general (‘civilisational’) level, compulsory and upper secondary

education in Europe is based in the Christian tradition and does not easily tolerate other
types of education. Europe is the only continent that has been able to combine
modernisation and secularisation, and this has continuously favoured religious schools of the
Christian type but disfavoured Muslim initiatives. Also, during the past decade all the
education systems have been required to produce competitiveness and social cohesion. The
first requirement has made education more focused on intellectual, technical and cognitive
features and less on values and morals. The second requirement derives from the cleavages
resulting from the drive for competitiveness as well as flows of immigrants and minority
demands for their rights. However, none of the pressures, drives and requirements has
resulted in any deep-going change in the multicultural direction of European education.

Introduction
In Europe educational policies were largely conditioned by factors internal to each country up until
the 1980s. Today education, in particular religious education, should be seen in the context of
globalisation and its impact. This impact, both direct and indirect, is evident in the elite–mass
divide in cultural values, beliefs and preferences and the increasing Muslim presence in Europe.
Traditionally, religion seems to have been the major factor in the demand for private education, at
least at the compulsory level (James, 1991). Today, the global elite see education as a means for the
formation of human capital and increasing competitiveness. The masses, however, have broader
considerations for their children. The demand for moral-religious training is particularly strong
among some Christian, Jewish and Muslim groups (Jackson & Steele, 2004; Schreiner, 2005;
EFTRE, 2006).
This article reviews the educational situation in Europe before globalisation started to
accelerate in the 1970s and presents the development of policies related to private/religious
education in the context of national as well as globalising factors. Principal features of globalisation
and the spread of world models for education are then described. While traditional differences in
educational systems have survived to some extent, new aspects have been added due to
globalisation. A combination of some key variables seems to determine children’s access to and
opportunity for religious education.
Some twenty European countries are compared using a combination of key variables. The
article is based principally on data reported by the different countries to the European Commission
(EC) and its units (e.g. Eurydice, 2000; Eurybase, 2005) as well as on other documents and research
reports. Although the EC requests standardised reporting, the terminology used and the
information provided by the different countries varies considerably.

730 http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/pfie.2008.6.6.730
Islam, Christianity and Secularism in European Education

The Concepts of ‘Religious Education’ and ‘Private Education’

What is meant by ‘religious education’ and ‘private education’ differs substantially among the
European countries (Walford, 2001). Most sources, though, do not make a clear distinction
between moral and values education on the one hand, and religious education on the other. Here,
religious education refers to the teaching of religious issues in public and private schools. In some
countries, religious instruction is given as an extra-curricular activity and takes places outside the
ordinary school day.
Definitions used by the various countries for ‘private’ do not always make a clear distinction
between civil society (not-for-profit) and market (for-profit) arrangements (Levin, 2001). In some
definitions of ‘private education’, ownership is the only criterion. In other definitions it is unclear as
to the amount of public funds, regulations and/or adherence to a state-defined curriculum that are
required before schools are classified as public sector. In Ireland, most of the schools are owned and
run by religious associations or churches but in all other aspects they correspond to public schools
and they are called public schools. Only those few schools that neither teach the centrally
established curriculum nor receive state subsidies are called private. In the report published by
UNESCO (1995), however, 100% of the primary school students were identified as attending
private schools, while OECD (1995) placed 99% of the same students in public schools. Instead of
‘private schools’, other terms, such as independent schools [1], are sometimes used.
In this article, private schools are those owned and run by private interests regardless of other
features or what they are called by the countries themselves. Another distinction is also important
to make – that between approved and non-approved schools. Approved schools are those that have
an agreement or contract with the state. In countries where there are non-approved schools there
are also usually avenues, such as standardised tests, students can go down in order to gain state
validation of their education.

Europe Traditionally
Over time Europe has maintained a Christian foundation in its educational systems; however, the
elites have increasingly come to a more technocratic and secular understanding of education
(principally as formation of human capital). The overriding aims of the educational systems are to
make education contribute to Europe’s competitiveness (Sultana, 1995; EC, 1997; Eurydice, 2005).
In large parts of Europe, modernisation and then ‘post-industrialisation’ were accompanied by
secularisation and a declining importance of traditional religious values (Berger, 1998; Davie, 1998;
Norris & Inglehart, 2004). Despite trends of convergence, however, the populations in the various
European countries tend to see education (at least at the compulsory level) and social policies as
primarily a national concern (Giordani, 1993).
The education provided by western European countries has primarily evolved through
interaction with national and local societal characteristics and demands. The educational systems
therefore differ from one another in certain important dimensions. Differences in religious
instruction, prior to accelerated globalisation, were to a large extent found in (i) cultural
characteristics (degree of cultural homogeneity–heterogeneity) and especially the ethnic and
religious composition of the national population; and (ii) church–state relationships, among other
features (Daun, 1997, 2002b). The Nordic countries formed their own specific group within Europe
in that their educational systems developed a more egalitarian, welfare and child-centred
orientation (Eide, 1992; Grubb et al, 2005; Nicaise et al, 2005). As we shall see, some of these
differences still prevail among the European countries despite tendencies of convergence in
educational governance.

Cultural and Religious Features

In countries that were comparatively homogeneous in terms of culture and religion, the state
developed a unitary public education system. This is the case in Finland, France, Norway and
Sweden. Denmark is an exception, in that while its population is comparatively homogeneous, for
historical reasons, it has had very generous rules concerning religious initiatives in the
establishment of schools. In more heterogeneous countries some degree of diversity had to be

731
Holger Daun

accepted by the state. This is the case, for instance, in the Netherlands. By tradition, culturally or
religiously heterogeneous countries often have had a comparatively high rate of enrolment in
private schools (e.g. the Netherlands and Spain), while culturally homogeneous countries that have
a state church have had comparatively low rates of private school enrolment (less than 1% in four
of the Nordic countries).

Church and State

In most European countries, the church established schools centuries ago. With the development
of the state in the nineteenth century, the role of the church in educational matters became
dependent upon the church–state relationship. Here this relationship is classified into three
principal types: incorporation, corporatism and autonomy. Incorporation means that the church
became subordinate to the state (a state church). This was the case in Protestant countries (e.g.
Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden and the UK) where Protestantism became the state religion.
In these cases there was later a gradual change from a religious-oriented approach to education to a
non-religious one and finally this evolved to the point where the church was to a large extent
marginalised from educational matters.
Under corporatism, the church is separate from the state but there is a more or less permanent
cooperation whereby church representatives participate in the preparation of state decisions on
educational matters (Johnson, 1987; Badelt, 1988; Therborn, 1992; Gilbert, 2004). For instance, in
Catholic countries the church has never been incorporated (there is no state church); however,
there are cases (e.g. France, Greece, Ireland and Spain) where the church has been able to exert
influence over the state’s educational policies (Fowler, 1991; Altrichter & Posch, 1994; Hanson,
2000). Finally, autonomy means that the church is an actor in the civil sphere of society but does not
to any large extent participate in decisions related to matters such as education. This has been
typical in some of the former communist countries since the beginning of the 1990s (e.g. Czech
Republic, Estonia).
In eastern Europe, the societal and educational changes after the collapse of the communist
system were conditioned, to some extent, on the particular pre-socialist characteristics of each
country and their interplay with the monolithic politico-economic system. In other words,
important elements of the pre-communist cultures survived the decades of communist regime
(Inglehart, 1997; Norris & Inglehart, 2004). The role of the church differed between these countries
during the communist period. It played an important role in Poland and to some extent in
Hungary, but not in the other countries (Kozma, 1992; NIPE, 1996; Offe, 1996). It is interesting to
note that the process of liberalisation and relaxation of state control started before 1989 in both of
these countries (Swain, 1992). After 1990, certain groups in eastern Europe and the Baltic states
wanted a return to the pre-war situation and a revival of the educational arrangements that existed
at that time (e.g. private religious schools), while other groups argued for westernisation, human
capital formation and pluralism (Misztal, 1995; Filer & Munich, 2003).

Europe in the Context of Globalisation

Globalisation implies increasing planet-wide interactions and interdependencies of various types.
This global economic, political, cultural and educational interplay affects religious education via
general societal changes as well as, and more specifically, changes in educational models. With
globalisation, economic imperatives have become dominant, and thus so have pricing,
marketisation and commodification of societal activities, including in the field of education (Saul,
1997; Cox, 2000; Gill, 2000). Meanwhile, in the religious sphere, Islam is the most expansive
religion today and, more than ever before, the world religions are competing and challenging one
another, each of them claiming the possession of ‘exclusive and largely absolute truths or values’
(Turner, 1991, p. 173; see also Lechner, 1991; Beeley, 1992).
Globalisation impacts education indirectly as well as directly. The indirect influence may be
seen in the restructuring of national economies, changes in the labour force and subordination to
the drive for competitiveness (Freeman & Soete, 1994; Dale, 2000). Direct influence derives from
borrowing educational features from world models. According to Meyer et al (1997), a world polity

732
Islam, Christianity and Secularism in European Education

exists as a complex of cultural expectations constructed in and disseminated from international

organisations. The world models derived from this polity include features as diverse as human
rights and children’s rights (emphasising individual autonomy); cultural minority rights (e.g.
freedom of religion); neo-liberal views (the self-interested and utility-maximising man, freedom of
choice); privatisation in education; and a move from regulation of input to monitoring and
evaluation of output, and so on (Robertson, 1991; Wilson, 1997; Dale, 2000). The universal right to
one’s own culture ‘has gained political legitimacy and has reached the political agenda of the
countries in Europe’ (Soysal, 1997, p. 513) and the same applies to the right to be taught in one’s
mother tongue. In the 1990s, Islamic groups in the diaspora started to connect their demands and
claims to the global discourse on cultural and human rights. There is also a large proportion of
Muslims in the diaspora who want their children to have a distinct moral training. At the same time
there has been a revival of Christian values and norms in some areas, especially in eastern Europe
(Norris & Inglehart, 2004, p. 115).
Since the beginning of the 1980s, educational systems have borrowed from world models and
this has resulted in some convergence in policies related to private education. For example,
regulations of private schools have been relaxed and subsidies increased in countries where the
former were strong and the latter small. In other countries, where control was loose, the
conditions for receiving state subsidies have implied increased control and regulation.
It also seems that a culturally adapted form of education is increasingly seen as a way to reduce
school drop-out rates and improve social cohesion. For example, according to BBC (2006),
‘religious schools are expected to play an increased role in the secondary school system in England
as the government prepares to increase its subsidy for church-sponsored schools’ (from 85% to
90%).
Contradictory international, national and local needs, demands and requirements are implied in
globalisation. Two of these are: (i) religious-moral vs. secular education; and (ii) principally
formation of human capital and merits vs. broad personality development (Daun, 2002a). These
contradictions manifest themselves along the elite–mass division (Norris & Inglehart, 2004). The
elites in Europe tend to be more internationally oriented and global in their world view. They
demand secular-oriented education producing cultural and human capital. The opposite view exists
mainly among the lower classes and minorities who see education in broader terms (Andeweg,
1996; Norris & Inglehart, 2004; Steenbergen et al, 2006).
In all, adoption of elements of the world models, immigration and the drive for competitiveness
have resulted in certain changes in European educational systems, not least in regard to private
schools. There also remain considerable differences between Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox
areas of Europe and in degrees of religiosity. The populations of Austria, Ireland, Italy and Spain
are the most religious (Christian), while the populations of the Nordic countries, England, France,
and the Netherlands are the most secular as measured along the dimensions used in the World
Values Study (Norris & Inglehart, 2004). Also, the Nordic countries and the Netherlands have the
largest proportions of people with post-modern values (Norris & Inglehart, 2004, p. 22). These
values are post-materialist and oriented towards, for example, direct participation in political and
social activities, secular values and ecological issues.
Traditional ethnical or religious minorities exist in several European countries (e.g. Czech
Republic [CR], Hungary, Poland and Spain). Some of these existing minorities have been allowed
to make adaptations to national curricula and to teach in their minority language, a privilege rarely
available to new immigrant minorities (at least not Muslims). The countries have varied
immigration policies, and consequently vary in the percentage of students with immigrant
backgrounds (from less than 1% in Finland and Poland to 15% or more in Belgium and Germany).
Thus, immigration has added to the traditional diversity, and Muslims may be seen as one of the
most sensitive categories of immigrants.
In fact a large number of Muslims have lived in Europe for generations. In 2000 there were
more than 23 million Muslims living there (Karic, 2002, p. 436), representing different generations,
sects and degrees of secularisation. One principal feature shared by many Muslims is the desire to
have their children trained in Islamic moral values and norms. Since the 1980s, Islam in Europe has
emerged from a private and invisible sphere to a cultural and religious phenomenon in the public
discourse (Euro-Islam, 1995; Soysal, 1997; IHF, 2005). During the first phase of ‘officialisation’ of

733
Holger Daun

Islam’s presence, there was some politicisation of Muslim issues; however, the younger second and
third generations of Muslims now seem to reject the Islamic ‘communitarianism’ (participation in
local, religious life) and tend to be more individualistic, areligious and apolitical, at least in France
(International Crisis Group, 2006).
Most Muslim parents in Europe want to enrol their children in public schools rather than in
separate Muslim schools, which they often perceive of as being of lower quality. However,
choosing a Muslim school is sometimes a response to the lack of moral and values education
and/or to the racism and lack of consideration of multi-cultural and multi-religious issues some
Muslims perceive to exist or have experienced in public schools (see, for instance, Daun et al, 2004;
Walford, 2004). Some Muslims even prefer Christian to secular public schools, and others enrol
their children in non-formal Quranic schools for complementary moral training after regular school
or on weekends (Euro-Islam, 1995).
There are numerous national and international Christian organisations that provide moral
support for religious schools and lobby for maintaining or increasing religious (meaning Christian)
studies in schools (EFTRE, 2006). In the case of Islam, several international organisations have been
established to support, strengthen and augment its following. For instance, since the 1970s, the
Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization has supported educational projects
everywhere in the world (ISESCO, 1985, 2006a,b). Several governments and organisations in
Muslim countries provide funds for schools in Europe, as is the case, for example, in the
Netherlands (Jacobs, 2004; Driessen & Merry, 2006).

Private and Religious Education in Europe

With regard to religious education, European countries differ in: (i) the extent and way in which
public schools include religious matters; and (ii) the opportunities available to establish private
religious schools.
Practically all countries regulate what can and cannot be taught in compulsory education. They
usually have a national (core) curriculum or a national framework. In a few countries (e.g. Italy),
they refer to their constitution, indicating that private school education should not violate what is
stated in the constitution. Approved schools often get some kind of subsidy and are subject to
inspection and regulation of different issues: exams and tests, certificates, minimum number of
students when starting a school, and so on. Also, approved schools have to admit students without
discrimination.
In western Europe, at least, the proportion of school time dedicated to religious education
differs considerably (Taylor, 1994), and so does the way religious education is organised.
Sometimes there is even variation within a country. In countries with a mixture of religions, the
religion (Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox) predominating in an area is the one taught in the area of
the schools (Jackson & Steele, 2004). In some countries (e.g. France and Greece) no religious
teaching is offered at all (Eurydice, 2000; Eurybase, 2005). Religious education can vary from being
compulsory for all students (in practice) to being optional – where it is decided by individual
schools or is offered if requested by a certain number of parents. For example, in Italy, 90% of the
students take voluntary religious lessons (EFTRE, 2006), while in Estonia, schools can organise
religious studies on the basis of a request from parents, but in actuality only a small fraction of
schools organise such education (EFTRE, 2006).
The approach to teaching religion also differs between countries. Schreiner (2005) identifies
three approaches: (1) education in religion; (2) education about religion; and (3) learning from
religion. According to him, most countries have education about religion in all compulsory
schools. However, according to Jackson & Steele (2004) and EC documents (Eurydice, 2000;
Eurybase, 2005), the studies offered are non-religious, meaning they provide education about
religion, only in England, Denmark, Sweden and Norway. In Sweden, for example, students are
taught about the world religions. On the other hand, education in religion takes place in Belgium,
the Czech Republic, Estonia (on request from parents), Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands and Poland
(Eurydice, 2000). According to the same sources, no religious education is offered in public schools
in France and Greece. Finally, religious education can, like civics education, be integrated into
other subjects, such as social studies, or it can be taught as a separate subject (Taylor, 1994).

734
Islam, Christianity and Secularism in European Education

What has been described above relates to Christianity. The picture changes when it comes to
other religions. For example, in Germany, despite a general willingness among the ‘Länder’
(provincial governments), it has not been possible to introduce Islamic religious education as a
standard subject in any of the jurisdictions (Eurydice, 2000; Henze, 2004).
Certain key variables in combination are crucial for understanding the variation in opportunities
for establishing private religious schools. According to James (1991), in the 1980s the number of
private schools varied with religious patterns and demands, and along two key variables: (1) the
degree and type of subsidy and financial support; and (2) the degree of regulation and control
(Levin [2001] adds support services). Today, these two variables have to be refined if we are to
better understand the conditions for the emergence of private religious schools (Christian, Muslim,
and so on). These refinements include: (a) whether compulsory education is allowed to take place
in non-approved private schools; (b) whether private schools are subsidised, controlled/regulated,
inspected; (c) whether private schools have to teach a centrally established curriculum; (d) whether
the students acquire a valid and recognised diploma/certificate from private schools; and (e)
whether religion is a part of the curriculum. These refinements can be applied since practically all
countries tend to have a specific pattern of regulation and subsidisation for compulsory (generally
primary and lower secondary) and upper secondary levels (Daun & Arjmand, 2005).
Also important to note is that since the beginning of the 1990s the implementation of market
forces (e.g. voucher programmes) has changed the patterns of school choice, at least in England
and Sweden. Certain categories of parents increasingly choose according to human capital
preferences rather than religious and pedagogical convictions. On the other hand, in countries such
as those in southern Europe, market mechanisms have not been implemented to any large extent
(Eurybase, 2005).
Rules for approval of schools vary by country. For example, in the Netherlands, schools not
seeking approval only need to report their existence. In France, schools have to function for five
years without subsidies before they can be considered for approval. However, even schools not
seeking approval in France are required to respect compulsory attendance and standards and they
have to correspond to the overall educational plans and needs of their local area. This additional
criterion also applies in some other countries (e.g. Austria, Germany and Finland) (Eurydice, 2000).
In the latter two countries it is up to the concerned municipality to judge what needs must be met.
Non-approved private religious schools (without state subsidies) are legitimate alternatives for
compulsory education in some countries but not in others. In England, for instance, private Islamic
schools can substitute for compulsory public education. Sweden, on the other hand, does not
recognise institutions that do not follow the national curriculum and regulations: such entities are
not allowed to function as primary or secondary schools. In several countries (e.g. Germany,
Ireland, Norway and Sweden), all schools run by religious interests are integrated into the public
sector. They are private in terms of ownership and governance but they must follow the state
curriculum and regulations and are subsidised.
That there exist laws supporting the right to establish a private school does not mean that the
laws are automatically applied. This is the case in some eastern European countries that recently
obtained EU membership (see, for instance, Rýdl & Uiberlayova, 2004), and in England and France
in the case of subsidies for Muslim schools. Even when Muslin schools live up to the stated
requirements and are formally eligible for subsidy, they are not approved to same extent as
Christian and Jewish schools. It has been difficult to obtain data, but available sources indicate that
until 2004 only four compulsory-level Muslim schools had been approved in England (Walford,
2004), and in France in 2006 only one Muslim secondary school had been approved by the state
(Islam for Today, 2006).[2]
Schools approved by the state are controlled and inspected and most, but not all, approved
schools are subsidised. Greece seems to be the only exception among the countries reviewed here;
there, the traditional Muslim minority in the north receive subsidies for their Muslim schools, but
other private and approved schools do not. In most countries, schools are subsidised if they accept
all the conditions set by the state. Exceptions are often schools which charge fees or obtain funds
from private entities. The latter is the case mainly in Catholic or mixed-religion countries.
Normally, religious schools are not run by commercial interests so they tend not to charge fees.
Approved schools also tend to be obliged to participate in evaluations and inspections, and the

735
Holger Daun

certificates they offer are in general considered valid. The amount and form of subsidies can vary a
great deal (Barro, 1996): teacher (and sometimes also other staff) salaries can be paid by the state;
premises can be offered rent free; investments can be paid by the state; or schools can receive a
lump-sum payment per student, and so on. There are also differences in the way subsidies are
estimated, such as per student or sometimes according to some other criteria. In some cases
schools that receive subsidies are allowed to charge fees at the compulsory level (e.g. Finland); in
other cases they are not (e.g. Sweden). The level of subsidy varies from very little to 100% of the
cost per student in public schools at the same level, i.e. primary schools at primary level and
secondary schools at secondary level (Eurydice, 2000). Also, especially in Catholic countries,
schools can obtain funds and donations from other entities instead of or in addition to state funds.
Non-approved schools are not eligible for subsidies in England, Greece, Italy, Portugal or Spain. In
some other countries they can establish different contracts with the state and the subsidies vary
according to the contract established with the state (e.g. France, Italy, Portugal and Spain).

Control/Regulation
Regulations for schools differ between countries (Cibulka & Boyd, 1989). Traditionally, regulation
has been proactive – that is, certain criteria have to be met before a school can be approved. With
the dissemination of the world models, a gradual move to retroactive control of output is taking
place. Proactive regulation and control normally includes such things as: quality of the premises;
student health; student admissions; teacher qualifications; administration and budget; curriculum;
certificate-examinations; minimum number of students, and so on. For example, in Portugal a
school can start with five students, while the minimum requirement in Denmark is twelve students
during the first year after approval. Retroactive measures of control mainly consist of: monitoring;
evaluation; self-reporting; and inspection.
In most countries, a centrally established curriculum has to be taught if the school is to be
approved. The few exceptions are, for example, alternative schools in Austria, complementary
schools in Germany, and purely private schools in Ireland and Italy. In some countries, private
schools are allowed to make certain exceptions. For instance, Muslim children are not forced to
attend sex education in English Muslim schools supported by the state. In Sweden, on the other
hand, sex education is required to be given to all children – there are no exceptions.

Certificates
The validity of certificates provided by private schools varies in relation to state regulation and
subsidies. Generally, when schools are approved and receive subsidies from the government, they
also offer certificates valid for further education or in the labour market. Private schools in Greece
are an exception.[3]

Comparison and Discussion

It seems that the majority of private schools in Europe are approved. If they are not approved it is
because: (a) they have chosen to be completely independent within the framework of the country’s
constitution and/or education laws; or (b) they do not fulfil the requirements for approval.
Generally, regulation goes with approval, although there are exceptions, such as complementary
schools in Germany, schools with simple contracts in Portugal and Spain, and for-profit schools in
Finland. Appendix 1 presents the most common combination of conditions for private schools in 19
countries. The different terms used by the countries themselves in their descriptions have been
maintained.
Patterns or trends emerge when the countries are categorised. In this case countries were
classified, first, according to predominating religion(s) (Catholic, mixed and Protestant); second,
according to a cultural/religious dimension (homogeneity–heterogeneity); and third, according to
the three types of state–church relationships (incorporation, corporatism and autonomy). In all
cases, the long-term conditions and patterns were used, not short-term changes such as the

736
Islam, Christianity and Secularism in European Education

transformation of the Swedish state church into an independent church a few years ago. Table I
presents the results using the first two classifications.

% enrolled in private school (compulsory) Religion

Catholic Mixed Protestant
n=9 n=4 n=6
Variation 1.4-99.0 2 - 67 0.6-11.9
(1.4-44.5**) (2-5***)
Median 9.9 (8.6*) 5 (5***) 7.1
Education in non-approved schools allowed
Yes 6 0 0
No 3 4 6
Subsidies to private schools, %
Variation 0-100 50-100 75-90
Median 92 95 82
Religious education in public schools
Yes 3 3 5
Optional 3 1 1
No 2 0 0
No information 1 0 0
Muslim schools approved
No 2 3 1
Few 2 0 3
Several 1 1 0
No information 4 0 2

*Greek orthodox included. **Excluding Ireland. ***Excluding the Netherlands.

Table I. Predominating religions and some educational parameters for compulsory private schools in Europe.

There are large variations in enrolment in private compulsory schools within each religious
category of countries. The range of variation is largest in Catholic countries. The median is the
highest for these countries even if the extreme case of Ireland (99% in private education) is
excluded. The median enrolment is lowest in countries with a mixed religious pattern and the
range of variation becomes the lowest if the extreme case of the Netherlands (67%) is not included.
In countries where there is a corporatist relationship between the state and the church, the level of
private-school enrolment is significantly higher (even when Ireland is not included) than for
countries with other church–state relationships. Thus it seems that a corporatist relationship is
more advantageous for Christian interests in education than other relationships.
Among the cases studied here, non-approved schools are legitimate educational alternatives
only in Catholic countries. Traditionally the state has been less likely to intervene in religious and
other matters in these countries (with the exception of France) (Gilbert, 2004). Also, this
educational arrangement is more commonly accepted in heterogeneous than in homogeneous
countries and only in countries with corporatist state–church relationships. Where churches have
been comparatively strong, they have also been able to make the state establish a corporatist
relationship, and, from this platform, religious interests have been able to influence educational
systems. Subsidies vary most in Catholic countries, from none to 100% (depending on the type of
contract). The median subsidy is lowest in Protestant countries, but in these countries there are no
non-profit private schools that do not have subsidies.
The cultural homogeneity–heterogeneity dimension does not make any significant difference
with regard to subsidies. Incorporated churches (all in Protestant countries) have the lowest
median but also the highest minimum level of subsidy to private schools.
Teaching religion in public schools is more common in Protestant countries. It is to some extent
optional in Catholic countries. In two of the homogeneous countries, there is no religion taught in
public schools. When it comes to church–state relationships, public schools in all countries with

737
Holger Daun

incorporated churches teach religion (education about religion), while the pattern is mixed in other
countries (Table II).

% enrolled in private school (compulsory) Cultural/religious pattern

Homogeneous Heterogeneous
n = 14 n=5
Variation 0.6-99 (0.6-14.7**) 2-67 (2-44***)
Median 7.1 (7.0**) 33.5 (19.2***)
Education in non-approved schools allowed
Yes 4 2
No 10 3
Subsidies to private schools, %
Variation 0-100 0-100
Median 85 90
Religious education in public schools
Yes 8 3
Optional 3 2
No 2 0
No information 1 0
Muslim schools approved
No 4 2
Few 4 1
Several 1 1
No information 5 1

*Greek orthodox included. **Excluding Ireland. ***Excluding the Netherlands.

Table II. Cultural pattern and some educational parameters for compulsory private schools in Europe.

It might look like a paradox that subsidies are as high as they are in countries with incorporated
churches, but it has to be mentioned that two of the countries (England and Sweden) apply a neo-
liberal market approach to education (funds follow the student). Thus, real school choice in these
countries is only possible with high subsidies to private schools. This seems to be the reason for the
comparatively high level of subsidies in this overall category of countries.
What has been presented so far has dealt with Christianity and Christian schools. When it
comes to Muslim schools and Islamic education the picture is very different. There are six countries
for which there are no available data. Only two countries have several (15 or more) Muslim
schools: Greece and the Netherlands. Greece, since its formation as an independent state, has had a
large minority of Muslims in the north. The Muslim schools in this region are approved and
subsidised (Benincasa with Karavia & Despoina, 2004). There are no differences related to cultural
and religious homogeneity–heterogeneity with regard to Muslim schools. It seems that countries
where the church is incorporated and the state controls religious education have been more
permissive in relation to Muslim schools. The determinant factor, however, is the pattern of
immigration. The countries with a small proportion of Muslims (such as the eastern European
countries) have not approved any Muslim schools. While it is not known whether any applications
have been made, in the case of Czech Republic the state has, on the one hand, agreed to follow
international rights (that being one of the conditions for membership in the EU), but on the other
hand, it has a practice of not allowing new minorities such as Muslims to establish their own
schools (Rýdl & Uiberlayova, 2004). Also, applications for Jewish schools have been treated
favourably compared with those for Muslim schools, at least in France, and this has been criticised
by Muslims (International Crisis Group, 2006).
Several countries (the eastern European countries and Finland) have a very small proportion of
students with immigrant backgrounds. Although the percentage of immigrants in the Netherlands
is not higher than in Belgium, England, France or Germany, for example, the country has many

738
Islam, Christianity and Secularism in European Education

more Muslim schools than any other country (41 primary Muslim schools in 2005, according to
IHF, 2005, p. 113).

Some Concluding Notes

Traditional educational patterns in Europe have survived to a large extent. Catholic countries, for
example, allow non-approved private schools to exist, with looser controls and regulations, while
other countries do not. At the same time, different changes work in different directions. On the one
hand, globalisation generates pressure for competitiveness and a focus on cognitive skills, and
questions and challenges religious cultures and lifestyles. The European elites have to a large extent
adapted to the human capital of education (focusing on cognitive skills), while local as well as
religious communities respond to these pressures differently.
Christianity and Islam in Europe are going through a process of diversification into different
sects or groups, each with its own view on education and its own educational demands. At the
same time, there is revitalisation of cultural and ethnic minority values, and in other layers of the
populations a general ‘post-modernisation’ of values. All this is likely to result in more demands but
also more specific demands on education, and ultimately, in an increase of private (often religious)
schools (Norris & Inglehart, 2004).
Within each country, the elites are more internationally and globally oriented than the masses
and they are pushing for formation of human capital and economically oriented knowledge and
skills. They are also the ones influencing education policies more than ‘others’ do. The number of
private schools in general and religious schools in particular has increased in Europe and will, due
to the reasons mentioned, most likely continue to do so.
The dissemination of the world models (human rights, minority rights, cultural rights, and so
on) works in two seemingly contradictory directions: producing standardisation of structure and
content of education, while at the same time defending the request for plurality and diversity and
cultural-religious rights among different groups.
In the 1970s and 1980s, states have tended to respond to the changes (secularisation, moral and
social problems) by introducing or increasing values education, but this will not be enough in the
future, as education based more in religious values will be demanded.
Some convergence in educational systems between the European countries has taken place, in
that regulation and subsidies are being adapted to the ideals of the world model. Countries with
loose control of private, religious schools have tightened the retroactive regulation (e.g. monitoring
and evaluation), and countries with low subsidies to such schools have made some efforts to raise
their subsidy levels. Furthermore, countries with unified education systems and monolithic policies
seem to be more responsive to diversified demands than before.
Finally, a review of the field makes it easy to argue that there needs to be more basic objective
research and less normative research in this field. Many of the reviews of religious education have
been conducted by people or organisations that have obvious vested interests in a stronger position
for religious (read Christian) education.

Notes
[1] For example, in Sweden, ‘independent’ is used, but Swedish ‘independent schools’ are no more
independent than private schools are in other countries, since they receive as large subsidies and are
objects of as much control and regulation as ‘private’ schools in other countries. Also, they are very
different from ‘independent’ schools in other countries, such as those in England; such schools are
neither controlled nor receive subsidies.
[2] According to the International Crisis Group (2006, p. 23), there were two Muslim secondary schools
in 2006. Whether they received subsidies is not mentioned.
[3] The detailed data for each country and along the dimensions discussed here can be obtained from the
author on request, at Holger.Daun@interped.su.se.

739
Holger Daun

References
Altrichter, H. & Posch, P. (1994) Austria: system of education, in T. Husén & N. Postleithwaite (Eds)
International Encyclopedia of Education. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Andeweg, R.B. (1996) Elite–Mass Linkages in Europe: legitimacy crisis or party crisis? Oxford Scholarship
Online Monographs, 22, 43-164.
Badelt, C. (1988) Government versus Private Provision of Social Services: the case of Austria, in E. James
(Ed.) The Non-Profit Sector in International Perspective: studies in comparative culture and policy. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Barro, S.M. (1996) How Countries Pay for Schools: an international comparison of systems for financing
primary and secondary education. Paper prepared for the Center of the Consortium for Policy Research
in Education (CPRE), University of Wisconsin.
BBC (2006) Religious Schools to Increase. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/1166110.stm
Beeley, B. (1992) Islam as a Global Force in Global Politics, in A.G. McGrew & P.G. Lewis (Eds) Global
Politics. Oxford: Polity Press.
Benincasa, L. with Karavia, O. & Despoina, S. (2004) The Greek State, the Muslim Minority of Western
Thrace and Education: shifts under way? In H. Daun & G. Walford (Eds) Muslim Educational Strategies in
the Context of Globalization. Leiden: Brill Publishers.
Berger, P.L. (1998) The Desecularization of the World: a global overview, in P.L. Berger (Ed.) The
Desecularization of the World: resurgent religion and world politics. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdman.
Cibulka, J.G. & Boyd, W.L. (1989) Introduction: private schools and public policy, in W.L. Boyd &
J.G. Cibulka (Eds) Private Schools and Public Policy: international perspectives. London: Falmer Press.
Cox, R.W. (2000) Political Economy and World Order: problems of power and knowledge at the turn of the
millennium, in R. Stubbs & G.R.D. Underhill (Eds) Political Economy and the Changing Global Order, 2nd
edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dale, R. (2000) Globalization and Education: demonstrating a ‘common world educational culture’ or
locating a ‘globally structured educational agenda’? Educational Theory, 40(4), 427-428.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5446.2000.00427.x
Daun, H. (1997) National Forces, Globalization and Educational Restructuring: some European response
patterns, Compare, 27(1), 19-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0305792970270103
Daun, H. (2002a) Globalization and National Education Systems, in H. Daun (Ed.) Educational Restructuring in
the Context of Globalization and National Policy. New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
Daun, H. (2002b) Education for Competitiveness and Diversity in the Richest Countries, in H. Daun (Ed.)
Educational Restructuring in the Context of Globalization and National Policy. New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
Daun, H. & Arjmand, R. (2005) Education in Europe and Muslim Demands for Competitive and Moral
Education, International Review of Education, 51(5-6), 403-426.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11159-005-0666-x
Daun, H., Brattlund, Å. & Robleh, S. (2004) Educational Strategies among some Muslim Groups in Sweden,
in H. Daun & G. Walford (Eds) Muslim Educational Strategies in the Context of Globalization. Leiden: Brill.
Davie, G. (1998) Europe: the exception that proves the rules? In P.L. Berger (Ed.) The Desecularization of the
World: resurgent religion and world politic. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdman.
Driessen, G. & Merry, M.S. (2006) Islamic Schools in the Netherlands: expansion or marginalization?
Interchange, 37(3), 201-223. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10780-006-9001-0
Eide, K. (1992) The Future of European Education as Seen from the North, Comparative Education, 28(1), 9-17.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0305006920280102
Euro-Islam (1995) Conference on Relations between European and Islamic Cultures and the Position of
Muslims in Europe. Swedish Institute, 15-17 June, in Stockholm, Sweden..
European Commission (EC) (1997) Accomplishing Europe through Education and Training. Brussels: European
Commission.
European Forum for Teachers of Religious Education (EFTRE) (2006) Religious Education in Europe.
http://re-xs.ucsm.ac.uk/eftre/reeurope
Eurybase (2005) Eurybase 2005 – Eurydice database on education systems in Europe.
http://194.78.211.243/Eurybase/frameset_eurybase.html
Eurydice (2000) Private Education in the European Union: organisation, administration and the public
authorities’ role. http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/ressources/eurydice/pdf/0_integral/012EN.pdf

740
Islam, Christianity and Secularism in European Education

Eurydice (2005) Integrating Immigrant Children into Schools in Europe.

http://www.eurydice.org/ressource
Filer, R. & Munich, D. (2003) Public Support for Private Schools in Post-Communist Central Europe: Czech
and Hungarian experiences, in D.N. Plank & G. Sykes (Eds) Choosing Choice: school choice in international
perspective. New York: Teachers College.
Fowler, F.C. (1991) One Approach to a Pluralist Dilemma: private school aid policy in France, 1959-1985.
Summary of dissertation. Paper Presented at symposium on Division A at the Annual Meeting of the
American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, 3 April.
Freeman, C. & Soete, L. (1994) Work for All or Mass Unemployment. London: Pinter.
Gilbert, N. (2004) Transformation of the Welfare State: the silent surrender of public responsibility. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Gill, S. (2000) Knowledge, Politics, and Neo-liberal Political Economy, in R. Stubbs & G.R.D. Underhill (Eds)
Political Economy and the Changing Global Order. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Giordani, J. (1993) École, identités nationales, identité européenne, in A. Collot, G. Didier & B. Louelsati
(Eds) La pluralité culturelle dans les systèmes éducatifs européens. Lorraine: Centre régional de
documentation pédagogique.
Grubb, N., Jahr, H.M., Neumüller, J. & Field, S. (2005) Equity in Education: thematic review. Finland:
Country note. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/10/5/ 35892546.pdf
Hanson, E.M. (2000) Democratization and Educational Decentralization in Spain: a twenty-year struggle for
reform, Education Reform and Management Publication Series, 1(3).
Henze, J. (2004) Muslim Minorities and Education in Germany – the case of Berlin, in H. Daun & G. Walford
(Eds) Muslim Educational Strategies in the Context of Globalization. Leiden: Brill.
Inglehart, R. (1997) Modernization and Post-modernization: cultural, economic and political changes in 43 countries.
Princeton: Princeton University Press.
International Crisis Group (2006) La France Face à l´Islam: Emeutes, Jihadisme et depolitisaton. Report 192.
International Helsinki Federation (IHF) (2005) International Helsinki Federation for Human Rights: intolerance
and discrimination against Muslims in the EU. Developments since September 11. Vienna: IHF.
Islam for Today (2006) Muslim Schools, Education, Children and Family Life.
http://.www.islamfortoday.com/schools/htm
Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (ISESCO) (1985) Organisation Islamique pour
l´Éducation, les Sciences et la Culture: deuxième conference. Islamabad: ISESCO.
Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (ISESCO) (2006a) Education directorate.
http://www.isesco.org.ma
Islamic Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (ISESCO) (2006b)
http://isesco.org.ma/English/Plans.html
Jackson, R. & Steele, K. (2004) Problems and Possibilities for Relating Citizenship Education and Religious
Education in Europe. Paper for the Global Meeting on Teaching for Tolerance, Respect and Recognition
in Relation to Religion or Belief, 2-5 September, Oslo, Norway.
Jacobs, E. (2004) Muslim Education in the Netherlands in the Context of Globalization: counter-hegemony or
integrated constituents? Unpublished course examination paper. Stockholm: Institute of International
Education.
James, E. (1991) Public Policies toward Private Education: an international comparison, International Journal of
Educational Research, 15(5), 359-375. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0883-0355(91)90019-O
Johnson, N. (1987) The Welfare State in Transition. Brighton: Wheatsheaf Books.
Karic, E. (2002) Is Euro-Islam a Myth, Challenge or a Real Opportunity for Muslims and Europe? Journal of
Muslim Minority Affairs, 2(2), 435-442.
Kozma, T. (1992) The Neo-Conservative Paradigm: recent changes in eastern Europe, in R.F. Arnove,
P.G. Altbach & G.P. Kelly (Eds) Emergent Issues in Education: comparative perspectives. New York: SUNY
Press.
Lechner, F. (1991) Religion, Law and Global Order, in R. Robertson & W.R. Garret (Eds) Religion and Global
Order. Vol. 4: Religion and the Political Order. New York: Paragon House.
Levin, H.M. (2001) Privatization in Education, in H.M. Levin (Ed.) Privatizing Education. Boulder: Westview
Press.
Meyer, J.W., Boli, J., Thomas, G.M. & Ramirez, F.O. (1997) World Society and Nation-State, American Journal
of Sociology, 103(1), 13-47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/231174

741
Holger Daun

Misztal, B. (1995) The Uses of Freedom: post-Communist transformation in eastern Europe, in

M. Darnovsky, B. Epstein & R. Flacks (Eds) Cultural Politics and Social Movements. Philadelphia: Temple
University Press.
National Institute of Public Education (NIPE) (1996) Education in Hungary, 1996. Budapest: National Institute
of Public Education.
Nicaise, I., Esping-Andersen, G., Point, B. & Tunstall, P. (2005) Equity in Education: thematic review.
Sweden: Country note. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/10/5/35892546.pdf
Norris, P. & Inglehart, R. (2004) Sacred and Secular: religion and politics world-wide. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Offe, C. (1996) Modernity and the State: east, west. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (1995) Education at a Glance 1995. Paris:
OECD.
Robertson, R. (1991) Mapping the Global Condition: globalization as the central concept, in M. Featherstone
(Ed.) Global Culture: nationalism, globalization and modernity. London: Sage.
Rýdl, K. & Uiberlayova, M. (2004) Education and Muslim Minorities in the Czech Republic, in H. Daun &
G. Walford (Eds) Muslim Educational Strategies in the Context of Globalization. Leiden: Brill.
Saul, J.R. (1997) The Unconscious Civilization. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Schreiner, P. (2005) Religious Education in Europe. Paper presented at Oslo University, 8 September. Berlin:
Comenius Institute.
Soysal, Y.N. (1997) Changing Parameters of Citizenship and Claims-making: organized Islam in European
public spheres, Theory & Society, 26, 509-527. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1006886630358
Steenbergen, M.R., Edwards, E.E. & Netjes, C.E. (2006) Who’s Cueing Whom? Mass–elite linkages and the
future of European integration.
http://www.unc.edu/~hooghe/downloads/SteenbergenEdwardsNetjes_Who’sCueingWhom.pdf
Sultana, R.G. (1995) A Uniting Europe, a Dividing Education? Supranationalism, Euro-centrism and the
curriculum, International Studies in Sociology of Education, 5(2), 115-144.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0962021950050201
Swain, N. (1992) Global Technologies and Political Change in Eastern Europe, in A.G. McGrew (Ed.) Global
Politics. Oxford: Polity Press.
Taylor, M. (1994) Values Education in Europe: a comparative overview of a survey of 26 countries in 1983. Paris:
National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER)/UNESCO.
Therborn, G. (1992) Pillarization and Popular Movements. Two Variants of Welfare State Capitalism: the
Netherlands and Sweden, in F.G. Castles (Ed.) The Comparative History of Public Policy. Cambridge: Polity
Press.
Turner, B.S. (1991) Politics and Culture in Islamic Globalism, in R. Robertson & W.R. Garret (Eds) Religion
and Global Order. New York: Paragon House.
UNESCO (1995) World Education Report 1995. Paris: UNESCO Publishing.
Walford, G. (2001) Privatization in Industrialized Countries, In H.M. Levin (Ed.) Privatizing Education.
Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Walford, G. (2004) English Education and Immigration Policies and Muslim Schools, in H. Daun &
G. Walford (Eds) Muslim Educational Strategies in the Context of Globalization. Leiden: Brill.
Wilson, R.A. (1997) Human Rights, Culture and Context: an introduction, in R.A. Wilson (Ed.) Human
Rights, Culture and Context: anthropological perspectives. London: Pluto Press.

742
Islam, Christianity and Secularism in European Education

Appendix 1
Varieties of Conditions for Private Schools in Europe
Approved Subsidised Certification Regulated Examples
Yes Yes Yes Yes Austria (statutory), Czech Republic (all private schools),
England (voluntary, aided), Denmark (denominational,
free), Finland (not-for-profit), France, Germany (substitute),
Greece (Muslim schools in the north), Hungary (not-for-
profit), Ireland (full contract), Italy (scuole paritarie),
Netherlands (most private), Norway, Poland (all private),
Portugal (full contract), Spain (grant-aided), Sweden
(compulsory private)
Yes Yes Yes No Belgium (denominational)
Yes No Yes Yes Belgium (non-denominational.), Estonia, France (‘partial’
contract), Hungary (for-profit), Norway (for-profit), Sweden
(secondary, for-profit),
Yes No No Yes Greece (all private except Muslim schools in the north)
Yes No Yes No Germany (complementary), Portugal (simple contract)
Yes No No No Finland (commercial/for profit)
No Yes Yes Yes Denmark (immigrant school)
No No No Yes England (independent), Netherlands (for-profit)
No No Yes No Austria (alternative schools)
No No No No Belgium (non-contracted), Finland (non-authorized), France
(no contract), Ireland (fully private), Italy (‘transition’
private; fully private), Netherlands (non-contracted),
Portugal (no contract), Spain (non-aid-granted)

HOLGER DAUN is Professor of International and Comparative Education. His main research and
teaching areas are globalisation and education reform. Correspondence: Professor Holger Daun,
Institute of International Education, Department of Education, Stockholm University, SE-10691
Stockholm, Sweden (holger.daun@interped.su.se).

743