Those GCSE proposals: a lament for Lucy Jo!

Spare a thought this week for Lucy Jo Olorenshaw. Having read the DfE’s GCSE proposals, she posted: “I give up! The decision to leave teaching and open a vintage tea room in Cornwall is becoming ever closer”. Do you need a pastry chef, Lucy? I regularly watch Bake off! Don’t give up quite yet!

Just in case you haven’t seen them the consultation documents are here: https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/gcse-and-a-level-reform-religious-studies

Here I want to focus on GCSE – but there are further issues around A level which are concerning.

Ofsted, of course, is to blame! Who else? Yes, the last Ofsted report called for a thorough review of GCSE; for more ‘religion’ in religious studies; for more challenge; it did question the way the dominance of philosophical, ethical and social issues was distorting learning in RE.

What we needed was a careful look at the idea of religious literacy. And, to repeat my favourite quotes from Tim Oates, … doing fewer things in more depth so students really master fundamental concepts in subject; securing deep learning in the central concepts and ideas in the subject.

So the good news in the proposals: two religions – good but no humanism; determination to raise challenge  – good but no more RS timetabling on the cheap;  more ‘religion’ – good but it needs to be ‘done right’; still some Phil and Ethics – good but not properly integrated into the whole.

Big reminder: these are criteria – they often look dull. It is for the exam boards to work with these criteria to create the examination course specifications. That’s when it should get interesting.

 Elsewhere I have put my support behind the BHA campaign to include humanism as a major worldview.

What’s the problem? The danger of draining the lifeblood from religious studies

I must constrain myself to 3 points:

-Most generally – religion is a highly contested, ambiguous, inspiring, dangerous, controversial, bewildering and exciting dimension of human life. As they stand these proposals appear to drain all the lifeblood out of the subject. The danger is: Dull, dull, dull!

-The study of religions in Part ONE is burdened by far too much undifferentiated content. There is TOO MUCH STUFF! Annex A is depressingly familiar with content just put under the four tedious old headings of Beliefs and Teachings; Sources of Wisdom and Authority; Practices; and Forms of Expression. No dynamic, no energy, no controversy. There is no sense of that principle of ‘do fewer things in greater depth’. No sense of the importance of ‘central concepts and ideas’. A real concern that this is where the students and teachers will lose the will to live.  I can see Lucy off to Cornwall! I think the criteria themselves could encourage a more creative approach – but it will be up to those exam boards to try to turn the stuff into exciting courses.

-The section in Part TWO ‘Religious, philosophical and ethical studies in the modern world’ (RPES) brings us to a critical point.  Studies D-J are the crucial ones. Looks like familiar fare. Hopefully the stronger study of religion in Part One will give this more credence and avoid the problems of ‘tacking on’ poorly understood religious perspectives. Hopefully – but I am doubtful. BUT crucially what is missing is the really interesting study of religion itself!  I am still waiting for a Religious Studies GCSE that attempts a serious study of religion – What is it? What’s happening to it? Is it changing? Is it a force for good or bad?? Does it contain any wisdom or is it largely fanciful superstition?

How could it be improved?

I think I would suggest 5 things:

1.  Crucially – cut down and differentiate the content in Part 1. What is the core knowledge to be explored in depth? What is peripheral and only useful to exemplify the core? Cut out much of the KS2 and KS3 stuff about practices etc.

2.  Create a more interesting structure to energise the study of religions in Part 1. How about:

• What are the core beliefs and ideas of the religion? With an on-going question about whether there is any real agreement about those core ideas.
• How are these ideas expressed and interpreted in different ways within the religion?
• How is the religion affected by life in the modern world?
• What are the areas of contention and debate within the religion?

3.  Integrate aspects of Part Two within Part One – this might still be possible by examining areas of debate WITHIN the religion that relate to wider social and ethical concerns. Why do some Christians reject evolution? What is the approach of Islam to gender equality? What are the debates within Judaism about Zionism? etc etc….

4.  Re-configure the ‘issues’ themes in Part 2 to include opportunity for some study of religion itself.  Maybe themes around:

• The changing pattern of religious life in the modern world/in Britain today and a contrasting country?
• New patterns of religious life and modern alternative forms of spirituality
• A study of humanist/secular views of religion and being spiritual without religion!
• Religion and spirituality. E.g. Do religions foster or undermine the human spirit? What is spirituality?
• Making sense of the language of religion – linked to religion and science
• Religious issues in the modern world – religion and politics

5.  I would also call for a clear split of Short course from Full course. The accredited ‘RE for all’ programme needs to focus on issues all pupils find interesting and not try to be a watered down ‘religious studies’ approach.

Is there a way out?

The consultation may achieve something …………….but I fear it will result in a very fragmented and contradictory set of responses which will not confront the vested groups who want to fudge the issues for their own interests.

The exam boards could produce some highly creative ways of using the ‘subject content’ to produce exciting and innovative GCSE courses (specifications)……………….but don’t hold your breath. They will be chasing profits and numbers in the competitive market. However, I am hopeful that some boards will try something different – maybe re-introducing the ill-fated OCR course Specification C which looked at religion in the contemporary world. We need to put strong support behind the exam boards to encourage them to be creative. The initial set of pathways (on page 4 of the main document) offers flexibility and may be a way in which Boards can be creative.

We will find pragmatic solutions and we may now need to brace ourselves for a decline in GCSE numbers. It is difficult to see how this can be delivered on the truncated 1 period a week model that is being used in some schools. Is that a good thing or bad thing?

We knew what we had to do. We had to try to make more sense of the ‘R’ in religious studies; we had to make the study of religion more challenging and exciting; we had to build better bridges between the study of religions and philosophical/ethical/social issues; and, we had to keep the punters interested.  We have gone some way but it will take considerable creativity from the exam boards to turn these criteria into exciting specifications. The criteria themselves need to be improved to really encourage that creativity.

My dream – an exciting challenging optional subject that attracts those with an interest in this area of life but allows others to get on with the subjects they find exciting. I just thank goodness for the subjects I was allowed to drop at KS4 – art, music and design/technology!

The bigger picture: _you may say I’m dreamer but I’m not the only one!

GCSE is a crude instrument. In the case of RE/RS this crudeness is made worse by the need to do too many things and serve too many masters. We remain saddled with the need to try to offer:

• an exciting, rigorous GCSE studying religion and its place in the contemporary world and its relationship with issues that matter (an academic subject of interest to some but not all)
• an opportunity for students to look at big issues facing them in the contemporary world but ignored elsewhere in the curriculum (of interest to many – but it’s not religious studies!)
• A way of accrediting the compulsory nature of RE at KS4 (highly questionable as a curriculum requirement and becoming a burden)
• A qualification to satisfy ‘faith’ schools demand for a GCSE to meet their perceived needs (no comment)

What we probably need is:

-An end to compulsory RE at Key Stage 4 – dangerous but the only honest educationally justifiable position.

-A ‘new’ student entitlement in the  KS4 curriculum  (and qualification?) drawing from the best of PSHEE, RE and Citizenship looking at those big philosophical, ethical, political, economic and social issues which are important to all pupils (including some matters related to religion, diversity, values etc)

-A strong optional Religious Studies GCSE inside the EBacc – for a minority of students (maybe 25%) who want to carry their academic interest into KS4

-A second strong optional GCSE in Philosophy and Ethics – unburdened from the necessity to keep referring artificially to religious perspectives but including some aspects of philosophy of religion.