This overview can be summarized as a systematic literature study regarding deliberately arranged teaching about democracy and civic in social education. There is immersive research about deliberation since the 1990´s around deliberative democracy and in which way this model can be used in a classroom with the purpose of forming students into good citizens. The results of this kind of research have been contentious for example some types of researches points towards that some school programs have more advantages in a classroom deliberation than others. Other methods  have  shown  that  deliberative  dialogues  in  the  classroom  is  beneficial  for  developing  broader knowledge among the students. Therefore,  this study will be focused on gathering and categorizing different  types of studies regarding deliberative education amongst students. There has also been an emphasis on showing how this research defines the concept of deliberative education. This  overview  categorizes  studies  with  an  emphasis  on  classroom  climate,  studies  that  focus  on  the teacher’s role as well as studies that focus on the student. The research will show what view the teachers and students have about deliberative education. Such as what positive images and experiences are there and what problems can be found with deliberative education. What effects does deliberative education have on knowledge, values and involvement and is the view unambiguous or is it contradictory. This paper enriches further studies by show holes in the research. Society is in constant change and there are new demands on the knowledge mediation. By compiling results and conclusions this overview can show holes in the research or at least give inspiration to further studies. Since the deliberative dialogues requires different opinions and perspective it can be seen as a method among others to include students to share each other's differences. This can be seen as important especially in regards of future classrooms with a larger variation of people from different backgrounds, both ethnically, culturally, and religiously.

Rooted in philosophy of education, the overall purpose of this dissertation is to renegotiate the relationship between education, religion, and democracy by placing the religious subject at the centre of this renegotiation. While education is the main focus, the study draws its energy from the fact that tensions around religious beliefs and practices seem to touch upon the very heart of liberal democracy. The study reads the tensions religious pluralism seems to be causing in contemporary education through a post-structural approach to difference and subjectivity. The purpose is accomplished in three movements. The first aims to show why the renegotiation is needed by examining how the relationship between education, democracy, and religion is currently being addressed in cosmopolitan education and deliberative education. The second movement introduces a model of democracy, radical democracy, that sees the process of defining the subject as a political process. It is argued that this model offers possibilities for seeing religion and the religious subject as part of the struggle for democracy. The third movement aims to develop how the relationship between education, democracy, and religion might change if we bring them together in a conversation whose conditions are not ‘owned’ by any one of them. To create this conversation, Hannah Arendt, Jacques Derrida, Søren Kierkegaard, and Emmanuel Levinas are brought together around three themes – love, freedom, and dialogue – referred to as ‘windows.’ The windows offer three examples in which religious subjectivity is made manifest but they also create a shift in perspective that invites other ways of seeing the tensions between religion and democracy. The aim of the study is to discuss how education might change when religion and democracy become questions for it through the perspectives offered in the windows and what this implies for the particular religious subject.