This special issue of Intercultural Education considers the contribution of ‘inclusive’ religious education to intercultural understanding, focusing on the relationship between non-confessional and ‘inclusive’ religious education – often seen as a broader subject also including some study of ‘non-religious worldviews’ (e.g. Religious Education Commission 2018) – and intercultural education, seen in the context of the education systems of democratic states. The articles focus on issues discussed in the Council of Europe book Signposts: policy and practice for teaching about religions and non-religious worldviews in intercultural education (Jackson 2014). Of course, both the terms ‘religious education’ and ‘intercultural education’ are (and have been) used in academic and professional discourse in some very different ways, as have associated terms such as ‘religious literacy’ and ‘multicultural education’ (Jackson 2014, 27–31). The articles are written by scholars affiliated to the Signposts International Research Network (SIRN), a group of European researchers and curriculum developers concerned to improve the quality of religious and worldview education in schools, who are engaging in independent research projects, but whose work also addresses issues identified by education ministries in Council of Europe member states, and reported in Signposts (Jackson 2014) (http://www.theewc.org/Content/What-we-do/Other-ongoing-projects /Signposts-International-Research-Network-SIRN). SIRN currently includes researchers from the UK, Sweden and Norway who are conducting school-based research projects on classroom religious and worldview education, and others who are engaged in curriculum development related to such research. The curriculum developers include colleagues based at the European Wergeland Centre in Oslo who have produced a teacher training module (see Jackson and O’Grady 2019, below). Since the Council of Europe classifies its work in religions and education as ‘the religious dimension of intercultural education’, it is important to clarify what is meant by this, and to correct misapprehensions, such as the idea that the Council of Europe reduces ‘religion’ to ‘culture’. The articles in the present issue illustrate that this is not the case, and engage with topics arising from experience of teaching about religions and beliefs in mainly state-funded schools in some European countries. Part of the explanation for misapprehension of the Council of Europe’s work in this area is the INTERCULTURAL EDUCATION 2019, VOL. 30, NO. 3, 237–246 https://doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2019.1539356

中文翻译：

---

路标和欧洲委员会：关于“包容性”宗教教育对跨文化理解的贡献的特刊

本期跨文化教育特刊考虑了“包容性”宗教教育对跨文化理解的贡献，重点关注非忏悔和“包容性”宗教教育之间的关系——通常被视为一个更广泛的主题，也包括对“非宗教世界观”的一些研究'（例如宗教教育委员会 2018 年）——以及跨文化教育，在民主国家的教育系统的背景下看。这些文章侧重于欧洲委员会著作《路标：跨文化教育中宗教和非宗教世界观教学的政策和实践》（Jackson 2014）中讨论的问题。当然，“宗教教育”和“跨文化教育”这两个术语都（并且已经）在学术和专业话语中以一些非常不同的方式使用，以及“宗教素养”和“多元文化教育”等相关术语（Jackson 2014, 27-31）。这些文章是由隶属于 Signposts 国际研究网络 (SIRN) 的学者撰写的，该组织是一群致力于提高学校宗教和世界观教育质量的欧洲研究人员和课程开发人员，他们从事独立的研究项目，但他们的工作也解决欧洲委员会成员国教育部确定的问题，并在《路标》（Jackson 2014）（http://www.theewc.org/Content/What-we-do/Other-ongoing-projects /Signposts-International-研究网络-SIRN）。SIRN 目前包括来自英国、瑞典和挪威的研究人员，他们正在开展关于课堂宗教和世界观教育的校本研究项目，以及从事与此类研究相关的课程开发的其他人。课程开发人员包括位于奥斯陆的欧洲韦格兰中心的同事，他们制作了教师培训模块（见下文 Jackson 和 O'Grady 2019）。由于欧洲委员会将其在宗教和教育方面的工作归类为“跨文化教育的宗教维度”，因此澄清其含义并纠正误解非常重要，例如欧洲委员会减少“宗教”的想法。 '到'文化'。本期文章说明事实并非如此，并涉及一些欧洲国家主要由国家资助的学校教授宗教和信仰的经验所产生的主题。对欧洲委员会在该领域工作的误解的部分解释是 INTERCULTURAL EDUCATION 2019, VOL。30，没有。3、237–246 https://doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2019.1539356