Neutrality through the Lens of Teachers' Representations and Practices: A Principle Guaranteeing Pluralism or Generating Exclusion?

This proposal is part of my thesis project about the various "translations" (in the sense of interpretations and implementations) of the principle of neutrality by secondary school teachers in French-speaking Belgium. Neutrality, in its "exclusive" interpretation (De Coorebyter, 2014), can become a norm for controlling religious expressions, privileging practices stemming from "the majority cultural and religious tradition" when those of minority groups are othered and delegitimized (Torrekens, 2012). Indeed, certain behaviors and religious expressions (or perceived as such) tend to be judged as inappropriate because they are associated with particularisms or "oppressive norms" (Bozec, 2015), whereas the dominant practices (Catholic in Belgium) are considered as secularized, shared and legitimate "cultural" traits (Torrekens, 2012). Researchers working in France (Lorcerie, 2012; Bozec, 2015; Orange, 2016) have noted that debates surrounding neutrality (or laicity) in schools often focus on ethnic and religious minorities, especially Muslims. They point out that these pupils are more closely monitored and controlled, their clothing, attitudes and words being more readily perceived as an expression of religious radicalism threatening democratic values. To reference the ongoing controversy over the headscarf in Belgium, the "objective visibility" of symbols (Jacquemain & Brausch, 2010) has become a criterion for evaluating proselytism, making a cross pendant more acceptable regardless of the wearer's intentions. Through interviews and classroom observations, we will try to understand what attitudes teachers associate with problematic forms of religiosity that should be banned from the school environment. Is this treatment fair toward the different beliefs, or are some pupils more targeted than others, leading to inequalities in the distribution of the "social bases of self-respect" (Rawls, 2009) or to "parity of participation" (Fraser, 2004) in deliberations (ethical, epistemic, etc.) when their speaking, knowledge, or behaviors are excluded or devalued?