Child Theology and everyday practices in classrooms. A reconstructive analysis concerning the relationship between the normative program of Child Theology and the implicit rules and norms inherent in routines in Religious Education

在过去的十年中，儿童神学的教学计划得到了广泛的建立。然而，该计划尚未大规模实施到宗教教育（R.E.）的日常课程中。该项目侧重于实施的这一方面，并询问儿童神学的规范程序如何与那些可以在R.E.课程实践中观察到的规则和规范联系起来。该项目从两个不同的角度解读R.E.课程的录像场景。第一个观点是受到儿童神学课程的启发。它寻找良好实践的例子，并将儿童神学的规范作为这种良好实践的标准。第二种视角是通过练习转向获得的。这一观点搁置了良好实践的问题，并试图重建那些构成R.E.课程的实践中固有的规则和规范。实践被定义为社会领域中被参与者视为理所当然的惯例。从儿童神学的角度来看，可能被解释为错失机会的事件，表明教师专业能力的缺陷，因此可以被描述为冲突规范的事件。该项目的目的有三个方面：首先，它分析在日常R.E.课程中可以找到多少儿童神学。其次，它阐明了R.E.课程中一些被认为理所当然的方面。第三，它描述了儿童神学与那些在构成R.E.的实践中有效的规则和规范之间在规范方面的潜在冲突

The pedagogical program of Child Theology has been widely established during the last 10 years. However, the program has not yet been implemented into everyday lessons of Religious Education (R.E.) on a larger scale. The project focusses on this aspect of implementation and asks how the normative program of Child Theology relates to those rules and norms which can be observed in the practices of R.E. lessons. The project interprets videotaped scenes from R.E. lessons from two different perspectives. The first perspective is inspired by the program of Child Theology. It looks for examples of good practice and regards the norms of Child Theology as criteria of this good practice. The second perspective is informed by the practice turn. This perspective suspends the question of good practice and tries to reconstruct the rules and norms which are inherent in those practices which are constitutive of R.E. lessons. Practices are defined as routines in a social field that are taken for granted by its participants. Incidents which, from the perspective of Child Theology, might be interpreted as missed chances, indicative of deficits in the teachers professional capacities, can thus be described as incidents of conflicting norms. The aims of the project are threefold: First, it analyses how much Child Theology there can be found in everyday R.E. lessons. Second, it elucidates some of the taken-for-granted apects of R.E. lessons. Third, it describes potential conflicts over norms between Child Theology and those rules and norms which are effective in practices that constitute R.E.