Book Review: Reaching for the Crescent

The findings from the focus groups with recent religious studies graduates and the questionnaires are highlighted in the third chapter. It additionally became clear that they were unaware of the limited opportunities for employment in civil and public service after graduation when they decided to pursue religious education at the university level. The struggles encountered by graduates from nations including Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, and Indonesia were clearly addressed, as well as various learning experiences. They must continuously learn new skills in order to get employment. Unfortunately, currently, Islamic studies graduates join the gig economy by taking up odd jobs and teaching religion from house to house (Page 72). As the number of graduates in this field increases yearly, mosques and Malay/Muslim organisations in Singapore are unable to accommodate them all.

The fourth chapter’s primary focus is the present-day undergraduate students studying Islamic studies. It offered additional details on the main driving force for madrasah graduates pursuing advanced education in Islamic studies. There are differences in the method that religion is imparted and acquired in different countries. In Jordan, students are more satisfied with the university's modern infrastructure than they are pleased with the standard of instruction, and opportunities for interaction with academics, such as online exams, while students at Al-Azhar University placed a strong emphasis on classical texts and enjoyed informal learning sessions such as the halaqah (study circles) culture. Overall, students in Eygpt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia expressed that they were solely exposed to the lecturers at their own universities and were not exposed to contemporary scholarship in their field of study. On the other hand, because of its lecture-tutorial and modular approach, Malaysian students believe that the Islamic International University Malaysia (IIUM) satisfies the requirements of a contemporary institution. Additionally, IIUM's promotion of the Islamisation of knowledge draws more students to the university. Regardless, a significant number of current Islamic studies undergraduates are unaware of progressive religious thinkers in the Middle East and Southeast Asia because they were not exposed to contemporary scholarship that might be relevant to the Singapore context, as well as global issues (Page 93). Students in the field of Islamic studies may have trouble integrating into Singapore society if they are unaware of current events in Singapore, and are not equipped with the knowledge and views of modern progressive religious thinkers.

In the fifth chapter, issues such as career prospects in Singapore for graduates of Islamic studies, as well as measures taken by the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore (MUIS) in order to ensure that graduates of Islamic studies get the skill sets necessary for job opportunities, are explored. Islamic studies graduates have fewer employment options since they are unaware of the certifications necessary to work in fields other than the religious sector. Furthermore, since Arabic or Malay is the primary language of teaching on Islamic college campuses, few graduates of these institutions have strong English language proficiency. The authors mentioned that generally, the religious education has always been increasingly traditionalistic, less objective, and less critical, which leaves graduates of Islamic education unprepared for comprehending the complexity of contemporary society (Page 136). MUIS created programmes like the Asatizah Recognition Scheme (ARS) and the Postgraduate Certificate in Islam in Contemporary Societies (PCICS) to tackle the employment issue and professionalise the asatizah. In relation to the creation of the Committee on Future Asatizah (COFA), it is believed that the asatizah could help the community in areas like estate planning and finance, in addition to the religious domain.

The sixth chapter centres on the religious discourse that the asatizah in Singapore actively promotes. Given that it will have an effect on society, it is crucial to evaluate the religious discourse that is being pushed. The religious discourse that is often pushed among asatizah in Singapore is divided into two distinct types. Firstly, asatizah who promote religious traditionalism, and secondly asatizah who promote religious revivalism. Both asatizah groups have had different effects on the surrounding communities. For instance, believers of religious traditionalism frequently hold on to beliefs and practices that were developed by earlier religious thinkers and then, disseminated to the general public without comprehending the social circumstances and historical context of that period. Secondly, asatizah who supported religious revivalism through a selected theological text and tradition tended to support a simple binary worldview, such as the Islamic versus non-Islamic or secular world. The Islamisation of knowledge paradigm continues to have an impact on asatizah, thus deciding between ‘Islamic’ and secular’ education fosters suspicion of the objectivity of the education (Page 189).

The book’s final chapter notes that stakeholders involved in religious education and asatizah training, as well as policymakers, may both benefit from it especially in addressing areas where the religious education sector could improve, such as the integration of social sciences and philosophy with religious education. This book also offers recommendations on how to improve Singapore’s religious education through measures that are compatible with Singapore’s demands by taking into consideration Singapore’s multi-racial, multi-religious urban and global settings, and in exposing Islamic studies undergraduates to the contemporary realities of the world today. ⬛