Introduction (2 of 2)—Children's spirituality, life and religious education: socio-cultural and religious traditions and perspectives
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
An individual’s spiritual development, as proposed by some scholars (adapted from Benson 2006, 489; Roehlkepartain 2014, 10) and from a socio-ecological perspective (King and Boyatzis 2004, 2015), is influenced by and interacts with culture (including language, norms, customs, etc.) and social contexts such as family, school, religious communities, peers, media and so on as well as shaped by significant life experiences over time, and creating and inheriting narratives, myths and interpretative frameworks about what is good and important, ideal life and person and the reality, all of which echo and address an individual’s meaning and purpose of life, moral duty and personal motivation to realise one’s life values and make contribution to the family, society, nation and the world. Within this framework, there are a range of sociological constructs that could assist us to make sense of changes in spirituality. These constructs include those related to religion and change (e.g., secularisation, world views, religiosity), pertaining to social change (e.g., individualism, pluralism, cultural postmodernity, relativism, intercultural communication), associated with institutional change (e.g., de-institutionalisation), related to social psychological constructs (e.g., identity, meaning and purpose, wellbeing, character and virtues) (Rossiter 2010, 132–134). In addition, there are a spectrum and a variety of models of spiritual development ranging from traditional models that include indigenous models, Western models and Eastern religious models to integrative-philosophical models and psychological models entailing psychology of religion, transpersonal psychology and neurobiological models (Friedman et al. 2012, 210–217). Apart from the well-established Western religious models and research-based Western, psychological models of spirituality, there could be insights drawn from the indigenous models and Eastern religious models. In a review of instruments on indigenous spirituality and resilience in the context of Indigenous/First Nations communities in North America, the components of enculturation maintaining bicultural characteristics and cultural spiritual orientation were identified. This review suggested that Aboriginal spirituality could serve as a resource for life education and for transcendence (Fleming and Ledogar 2008). In addition, a recent document in Canada recommended the development of Indigenous-specific early childhood education training programme taking into account Indigenous worldviews and indigenous languages (Halseth and Greenwood 2019, 53; Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, 2014). There are also discussions on shamanism as one of the examples of indigenous models of spiritual development which is conducive to spiritual healing and therapy (Eliade and Diószegi 2017; Friedman et al. 2012, 210–211; Vadala 2019).
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».