Viewing archives for Archive

The very first time I stood in front of a class of expectant twelve year old faces with permission to ‘deliver’ Religious Education, the advice from my head of department was clear in my mind: “They did chapter four last week so see if you can get them through chapter five and set them the comprehension questions for homework if you feel like it.”

This was 1980 and the reaction of the twelve year olds indicated that this was exactly their expectation of Religious Education. The later polite chat with my head of department, in which he told me that I was “doing fine”, confirmed that all was well.

The rest of the 80s proved to be a rather more exciting time as I worked alongside teachers who had abandoned textbooks and embraced open and active learning. For most of the 90s I led a department in which we saw ourselves as prophetic experimenters and I have to admit that the memory of some of our wilder ideas made me cringe when, in my 21st century role as a school leader, I recalled these days. Thank heavens there were no leadership ‘learning walks’ to disturb the calm of my extended stilling exercises and guided visualisation.

After ten years leading schools I am now restored to my first vocation in the world of Religious Education at a time of widely perceived threat to the subject. The collateral damage from recent government ‘initiatives’ may have undermined the established status of RE but I believe it also liberates the subject. The protection of legal requirement has for too long been a false justification. The new challenge to leaders in the world of RE is to prove how valuable the best RE is to learners and how imaginative and creative we can be in delivering learning through flexible approaches to curriculum planning. I want RE to be at the forefront of innovation not screaming for protection from the artificial devices of the past. I believe that the best of what we have to offer young people is irresistible: The mediocre is not worth preserving.

The increasing autonomy of schools and the decline of local authority structures make many of our traditional expectations about RE’s hallowed (5%) sanctuary in the curriculum irrelevant. Those days are gone and we may weep all we like. They are not about to return. Far better then that we look up and ahead to opportunities to startle those with out of date attitudes to the subject.

I have seen huge improvement in the learning experience of young people over my 34 years in the world of education and I now want Religious Education to be driving development not dragging its heels. There is so much that RE has to offer in a rapidly changing world.

Mahatma Gandhi once concluded that there are seven things will destroy us:

• Wealth Without Work
• Pleasure Without Conscience
• Knowledge Without Character
• Commerce (Business) Without Morality (Ethics)
• Science Without Humanity
• Religion Without Sacrifice
• Politics Without Principle

Re-reading this made me realise what a powerful manifesto we have for our subject.

At a time when those who speak loudest about education promote it as the route to economic well-being through managing expectation and aspiration, I want RE to be the ingredient in the learning mix that prompts the difficult questions of all forms of authority and challenges young people to develop the character, principle and humanity that they will need if they are to be catalysts for change in the world.

It is now pretty clear to me on reflection that, as I have absolutely no recollection of ‘chapter five’, it is unlikely that any of my class of 1980 will either. Some of my students of the 1990s do recall spending lots of time on reflective exercises during which they speculated about whether I was of sound mind. I met two of them only last week. Both now teach RE. The challenge for us now is to make sure that RE is so challenging, so relevant and so effective that it cannot be ignored.

People today are connected in ways that were unimaginable in the recent past. Living as we are, in an interconnected world, surrounded by and exposed to diverse people, brings with it opportunities and challenges. Meeting people, physically, and now virtually, shows that the nature of human beings is such that they need contact and interaction. It follows, therefore, that a lack of opportunity afforded to them to meet and interact, and live ‘separate’ lives may result potentially in experiences which might lead to ignorance. Such distance can potentially progress to hostilities. Hence, empowering people with knowledge and understanding of each other is crucial for making working communities (DCLG, 2012). Visiting sacred places offers a genuine opportunity to discover faith communities.

My experience with undergraduate trainee teachers suggests that visiting sacred places is an influential component for the development of mutual respect and much more. Teacher education programs are designed in ways that form the basis of students’ initial conceptualizations of education and its role in society, and influence their philosophies, attitudes, practices and lives. Thus, at this stage of their careers, it is beneficial for them to encounter a variety of faith traditions. In order for teachers to be in a better position to be able to allow their learners an opportunity to discover sacred places, it is useful for them to have such an experience in the first place.

For the development of relationships between and across faith communities, providing students access to and interaction with members of religious communities in their own settings is sensible. Unsurprisingly, given the opportunity, student teachers have responded enthusiastically in visiting places of worship as a way of building relationships among other things.

In this article, based on information gathered from a group of students, I present and reflect, on the benefits of visiting sacred places for interfaith work and building relationships. The aim is to demonstrate the significance of engaging trainees with visits to sacred places. I begin by outlining some of the values of visiting sacred places before sharing responses from the students. Thereafter, my reflections follow and a conclusion.

Sacred places as places of learning

Sacred places are said to have at least two dimensions: the physical and spiritual (Holm and Bowker, 1994). For some students visiting a place of worship as undergraduates might be their first encounter with a different faith. For others, it might be a first encounter within their own faith tradition. This means that there are issues both of intra-faith and inter-faith relationships when visiting sacred places.

The relationship between education and religion is filled with controversy and contestations. Therefore, teachers are expected to promote religious understanding, discernment, and respect and challenge prejudice and stereotyping in their classrooms (QCA, 2004). Many teachers achieve these by visiting places of worship with their children.

As an active learning approach, being in a sacred places gives students sensory experiences as there are ample opportunities to see touch, smell, hear and even taste. Indeed, the power of these places is such that at times thoughts are enlightened, souls stirred, bodies healed and spirits lifted. The Ka’bah, in the sacred precinct in Makkah, for example, mysteriously charms millions of Muslims annually. On return, sometimes, there are narratives of extraordinary experiences and visions.

Beyond these benefits, there is another perspective which I want to stress in this article: that of interfaith relationships. I believe through such visits students gain a deeper and better understanding about different religions and their practices, and as a result, this contributes towards the reduction of negative and prejudicial views.

Contribution to interfaith relationships

I enquired from a group of students the extent to which visits helped them recognise the significance of interfaith relationships. In response, they reported that it ‘took away a lot of the misconceptions’ which some of them had held of other religions. Not only did they gain important understandings from visiting places of worship, but they were able to observe how different religious communities interacted with each other in Birmingham.

Some students found it interesting to learn new things about different religions such as Christianity, which, according to them, helped them ‘to understand why people live differently’ as well as putting religious practice into perspective. The visits were thought-provoking to other students as they were enabled to observe how others worshiped and seeing the building in life made them aware of the place of worship.

Some students acknowledged that the visits contributed towards their personal and spiritual development. In explaining this, a student revealed: ‘I have never been to a mosque before, so it was interesting to see how different people worship’. This valuable experience seems to have had an impact on their future relationship with faith communities. Another student clarified: ‘broadening my knowledge of various religions has made me feel confident about entering places of worship’, whilst another student felt ‘confident to take a class trip to places of worship’.

In describing their personal and spiritual development, some students became aware of different religious beliefs which informed the worldview of their peers. Indeed, a student stated that these visits ‘showed me that it is important to have a religion’.

The most significant aspect of visiting places of worship, according to some of them was ‘gaining more insights into the different types of worship’ and listening to ‘the views of the speaker’. In addition, talking to and being with people from various religious traditions ‘corrected misunderstandings previously [held]’. Others found observing ‘worship in action’ as significant and ‘how religion has affected individuals’. That they met a religious figure appeared to have had a particular impression as well. Such sentiments were echoed in the following quote: ‘meeting the religious leaders and hearing about their experiences’. This direct contact was also endorsed by another student who declared: ‘Seeing different religious buildings and learning about faiths directly from the person presenting it’.

Reflections

Below I recount some prominent outcomes which I feel have been significant for trainee teachers.

Context

To enable students to understand and engage with different religious traditions, it is important to make the context accessible to them. Visiting sacred places is a gateway towards understanding the significance of beliefs, values and practices so that deeper insights into religious traditions are gained (Albera and Couroucli, 2012). The hub of a religious community is often its place of worship. Outsiders observing behaviours and actions of insiders in their revered places allows for contextualisation, which is critical for relating lifestyle to religious teachings and worldviews.

Influence

In addition to learning about the key features and the significance of historical artefacts and devotional utilities within sacred places, for student teachers, the proximity becomes minimal, at least temporarily, and consequently, it provides them more than physical acumen (Gwynne, 2009). They witness the symbolic meanings and influence of religious practices in the lives of believers and accordingly they are invited to think critically and recognise the role religions play in society.

Language

Moreover, there is capacity for developing religious literacy. Sacred places afford student teachers opportunities to develop their knowledge of associated language and terminologies by listening and observing vocabulary which denotes the distinctive features of each religion (Gwynne, 2009). Having said this, they make connections of various kinds. For instance, they recognise that although some actions are similar, the names given to these are different or that the purposes of some artefacts might be similar but their physical properties are different. The exposure to ‘weird’ language and literacy of religious traditions emphasise, for some student teachers, the need to acquire sufficient articulation so as to be able to apply it in their context. In other words, internalisation of a religious language takes place (Holm and Bowker, 1994). This is significant for relationships as such acquisition allows for better communication and common understandings are complemented. The ‘weird’ now becomes a part of them.

Experience

The study of places of worship is a fundamental part of the overall religious education curriculum in Britain, achieving the dual purposes of cognitive and affective learning (Bastide, 2007). It acts as a foundational block for equipping students with transferable ideas to other areas of the curriculum. From the viewpoint of the curriculum, they begin to recognise its potential for broadening their teaching to include aspects of sacred writing, arts, music, aesthetics, geography, design and narratives about the life of religious personalities. These visits develop their appreciation and imagination and make them become curious. They are invaluable multisensory experiences which add to their experiences of life in general. Importantly, in my experiences, they enhance the confidence of many students to arrange their own visits.

Introspection

Visiting sacred places may well ‘force’ some to think about their personal values and spirituality and encourage them to search within themselves for their own beliefs, values, spiritualities and philosophies. In other words, there is potential for improved self-awareness in encountering ‘the other’ (Grimmitt, 1987). Empathy with such transformative possibilities in sacred places allows for appreciating critical, creative and sensitive teaching of religious education for those who are to take charge of future classrooms.

Educational aims

However, beyond these, some student teachers progress to consider how visits to places of worship contribute to the achievement of the aims and values underpinning the National Curriculum. Students reflect on how bringing children to sacred spaces contributes towards children’s spiritual, moral, social and cultural development.

Personal growth

In the safety of a learning environment, student teachers, in a sacred place, have an opportunity for dialogue, conversation and question and to begin making connections between their own special place/s and the religious building/s concerned. Here they recognise similarities and differences in what makes space significant not only for people but for animals too. Students guide their own learning so that they ask questions which are meaningful and relevant to them at that particular moment in time (Copley, 1994).

Conclusion

Visits to sacred places are a significant contributor for the promotion and continuity of positive interfaith relationships. Student teachers learn about the meaning of belonging and observe the commitments of religious groups and as a result are equipped with some knowledge and understanding which they can utilise constructively and objectively in classrooms. These rich experiences enable them to explain what inspires and influences religious communities.

Students develop positive attitudes towards other people, places, values and beliefs which are essential attributes for teachers so that they can make positive contributions in schools and in society in terms of achieving social good and understanding.

References

Albera, D., and Couroucli, M. (Eds.) (2012) Sharing Sacred Spaces in the Mediterranean, Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Bastide, D. (2007) Teaching Religious Education 4-11, London: Routledge.

Copley, T. (1994) Religious Education 7-11, London: Routledge.

DCLG, (2012) Creating the conditions for integrating, London: Department for Communities and Local Government.

Grimmitt, M. (1987) Religious Education and Human Development, Great Wakering: McCrimmons

Gwynee, P. (2009) World Religions in Practice, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Holm, J. and Bowker, J (Ed.) (1994) Sacred Places, London: Continuum.

QCA (2004) Religious Education: The Non-Statutory national framework, London: QCA.

Rae Hancock – Teacher of RS PSHCE and SEND/LGBT Inclusion Champion.

February is Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender History Month which provides a timely opportunity not to shoehorn LGBT issues into lessons but instead to consider ways in which to build an RE classroom that is inclusive for all, throughout the year. Like it or not, this is an issue inextricably linked with religion and Religious Education and it is vital that RE teachers are bold enough to provide the forum in which young people can forge their own opinions and attitudes toward sexual identity.

Homosexuality – and by extension homophobia – is still a controversial issue, in a manner that racism no longer is. Some schools decide not to teach pupils about different families, LGB relationships or trans*[1] identities, while other schools provide a more open forum but teachers may feel poorly equipped or supported to teach a topic that provokes extreme reactions and soul searching. In my own practice I personally found clarity and reassurance in hearing Andrew Wright speak not on teaching tolerance but about our duty as RE teachers to teach intolerance. If I understood him correctly, the strength in our subject comes from equipping young people to deal with extremism and to understand and appreciate difference. This requires us not to tolerate those who are different from us but instead to critically engage with and challenge those who hold extreme views; teach pupils to be intolerant of racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia and so on. What follows is a suggested scheme of work that addresses aspects of LGB issues in a sensitive fashion. It focuses on sexual rather than gender identity and so does not set out to address trans* identities although there is still a need for trans* voices to be represented in the RE curriculum.

This notion of teaching intolerance to extremism informed a KS3 scheme of work, ‘Belief and Practice’. The aim was to examine what people believe and why, and how they might put those beliefs into practice. A focus on inner beliefs and outer practices allows emphasis to be placed on freedom of thought whilst allowing discussion of how people can and should behave in a community of others. We are each entitled to our own beliefs but how we act on them must take into account the freedoms of others. It is therefore vital to be aware that for some pupils this remains a taboo subject, and it is worth pausing to remember and remind your class that the issue being discussed is not sex in a PSHE sense but sexual identity. Moreover, I would encourage colleagues to work with their classes to establish, or re-establish, safe space rules; rules drawn up with an awareness that we each come from different families.

The scheme of work began with a wide scope, examining the core beliefs and practices of figures involved in the rights movement: Martin Luther King Jr., Gandhi and Mary Lamb (a proto-feminist if ever there was one!). We asked the question, ‘what did they believe and how did they put that into practice?’ The learning intention for the lesson on Mary Lamb went further and set the direction of the lesson toward exploring whether our opinions of someone’s beliefs change as we learn more about them. In 1814 Mary Lamb, under the pseudonym Sempronia, published an article On Needlework that called for the recognition of typically women’s domestic tasks such as sewing. With recognition should come pay she argued, so allowing many women a level of independence previously unknown to them. Using this information the class were then able to explain what Mary Lamb believed and how she put that into practice. They gave their own opinion of her work and were able to offer an alternative perspective, the view of a Victorian man or woman for example. The class were then introduced to the other, less salubrious aspects of Mary’s life; that she suffered from poor mental health during her life, stabbed her mother to death and seriously injured her father as the consequence of a mental breakdown and subsequently spent the reminder of her life in the care of her brother and in and out of mental facilities. Pupils were understandably shocked by this extra information and were given the opportunity to modify their opinions and alternative perspectives based on this new information. For example, did Mary’s experiences reinforce her claim that the banality of needlework could send women mad or instead prejudice and undermine her argument?

Next, by looking at Milgram’s famous experiment into obedience, the class was able to offer answers to the question, ‘why don’t some people put what they believe into practice?’ The experiment demonstrates how close ordinary people will come to harming a stranger, all because an authority figure tells them to. It is a thoroughly thought-provoking and engaging piece of research that fits perfectly into the RE classroom. Throughout this first phase the pupils were continually invited to reflect on what they themselves might believe about the issues discussed, and in a more general sense and critique possible methods of putting these beliefs into practice.

Then began an examination of the current equal marriage debate; ceremonies are due to take place this year in the wake of the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act. Pupils took part in preparatory lessons responding to social and religious representations of LGB people. A brief history of the UK LGB rights movement gave context to the steps forward and backward. For example Team GB’s participation in Sochi is of particular relevance this year; Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and Allout.org have up-to-date news on Sochi protests and arrests. There is also an interesting discussion to be had with pupils as to why there are so few ‘out’ athletes in particular sports. Whilst there are many lesbian athletes in all kinds of top-level sports and more and more athletes like Tom Daley are feeling able to be open about their sexuality, it seems that male team sports have a long way to go to create a culture of safety for their players.  When covering religious perspectives on equal marriage it was important to allow pupils to encounter multiple religious voices and perspectives in order to reflect the complex dialogue that many religious people have with LGB issues. There is for example, a long history of LGB activism in the Church of England, a controversial struggle represented well I feel, by the work of the redoubtable Rev. Dr Malcolm Johnson, one of the first openly gay Anglican priests and one of the founders of the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement.  In his recent autobiography he sums up the position of gay clergy quite succinctly; “[t]he way people regard LGBT people has changed beyond all recognition over 50 years; who would have imagined a Conservative government backing gay marriage? Sadly it will take away and Anglican priest’s discretion to take such a service.” Further, during 2010 the fantastic series 4thought.tv (Channel 4) presented six religious people answering the question “is homosexuality a sin?” These short clips provide challenging views expressed clearly and can be used to compare and contrast responses to LGB issues within and between religions.

Ultimately though, this case study phase of the scheme of work aims to give pupils a lens through which to shape and focus some of their beliefs and to hypothesise how they might go about putting them into practice. It also facilitates reflection on acceptable and unacceptable methods of expression and can be linked explicitly or implicitly with equalities law, human rights or the school’s own ethos toward homophobic bullying.

Johnson, M. (2013) Diary Of A Gay Priest: A Tightrope Walker. Christian Alternative. Hants.

Hunt, R. and Valentine, G. Love Thy Neighbour: What people of faith really think about homosexuality. Stonewall.

http://www.stonewall.org.uk/documents/love_thy_neighbour.pdf

Kate Christopher, Head of RE, Southend High School for Boys, Essex

At the end of the winter term 2012, in the middle of last-minute marking and enjoying the Christmas revelries at school, I answered an advert for places on a writing group contributing to the REC’s review of the RE Curriculum. Thus began one of the most intense and fascinating few months of my professional life.  Our group’s brief was to consider the aims and purposes of RE, consider what assessment might look like in light of these, and to draft an exemplar programme of study. We sat in a tiny office in Spitalfields, high above the fragrant bustle of Brick Lane and the glass and chrome edifices of the City of London, laying bare what RE has become, and what it could be.

I almost didn’t apply, snowed-under as usual and lacking confidence. But despite the extra workload and nerves, I felt that the chance to have some say in what I and my colleagues all over the country teach was too important to ignore. I have been at the delivery end of RE for the last decade, and I felt at the time that I couldn’t go on for another term without some serious thinking about what it is I teach.

I have taught various agreed syllabuses and exam board specifications over the years and have increasingly questioned the amount of extra research, thought and creativity that has been required to turn them into anything which resembles good RE. Of course the conceptualisation, design and implementation of my own schemes of work is the heart of what I do as a teacher, and it is a process which seems to exist in as many forms as there are teachers.

However, I do question the value of an agreed syllabus which is a list of content I could have gleaned from Wikipedia in a few minutes with no interest in the diversity, evolution or contested aspects of religious beliefs. My schemes of work that demand most from my students, that develop them as active learners, that reflect the complexity and fluidity of convictions, where the historical and contemporary context are put on a continuum, where the students leave the classroom buzzing and I hear at parents’ evening that this became a topic of conversation at the family dinner table, go a very long way beyond what is asked for by my agreed syllabus. It was time to put myself in a scary place; to stop complaining; and to put my skills and knowledge to the test.

Of prime importance to our group was to describe good RE in the new curriculum in a manner that communicated not just how good RE should be, but also how brilliant it would be to teach it. The skills articulated in the framework are aspirational in that they meet the most exacting vision of RE, however difficult that might be to deliver.

For example, the intention is to ‘extend and deepen understanding’ (RE Curriculum Review, p.24) of religious concepts, practices or beliefs, and to ‘engage seriously’ (p.15) with them, through a ‘systematic’ (p.22) study of such ideas. Deep engagement with complex and controversial ideas need to be made available to all students; their field of study needs to be meaningful, focused and to fairly represent the complexity of religions and worldviews. The framework also articulates the need to build on ‘prior learning’ (p.22) so, for example, students at key stage 3 develop a more sophisticated ability to evaluate the material that they have explored at key stage 2. The framework expects the challenge of the course of study to increase as pupils mature, so they can engage ‘with increasing discernment’ (p.14) with the deep philosophy of a topic, or the ethical discrepancies, or the many instances of diversity and plurality in religious expression.

Finally, the framework expects students to use the disciplines of religious studies to analyse the nature of religion; for example, ‘Students use methods of study from history, theology and philosophy to assemble a coherent case’ (p.26).

This is music to my ears. Not only does it allow for different pedagogies of RE – such as textual analysis or the interpretive approach – it implies that there should be some sort of systematic method of analysis underlying the learning. The framework should be seen as a guard against the tendency to superficial, anodyne and tokenistic RE which plagues our subject.

As a classroom teacher of 11 years standing, I am acutely aware of how unwelcome the prospect of change is, which, however necessary, inevitably brings with it more work. The draft programmes of study are deliberately aspirational – but what will this mean for the average classroom teacher? According to a recent Ofsted report, ‘too many schools were not giving a high enough priority to RE and this was having an impact on the progress that pupils were making’ (para. 25). In addition, too few schools were providing adequate training opportunities for staff in RE (para 27) (RE: Realising the Potential, 2013, Ofsted).

Furthermore, the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for RE described a subject hampered by cuts, oversights and a general lack of interest at policy level as to the future of RE (APPG Report, RE: The Truth Unmasked, 2013, REC).

Thus the NCFRE has been designed first and foremost to describe good RE to teachers, school leaders, governors, parents, pupils and SACRE members and agreed syllabus designers, as well as to communicate how exciting and satisfying it would be to teach it.

What the NCFRE means for the average classroom teacher then, is an attempt to cut through the undemanding exam specifications and meagre agreed syllabuses, the extremely demanding but centralised Ofsted criteria for teaching and learning, and offer a clear and coherent vision of good RE. The framework, in line with the new National Curriculum, is slimmed-down and knowledge-based, offering a core curriculum upon which teachers can build according to their local context as well as their particular approach to RE. It might represent more work, but that work is being done anyway to reconceptualise, augment and vivify paltry syllabuses and specifications. It is not clear what will happen to SACREs or the exam boards, it is not clear what assessment will look like and it is not clear what the future holds for RE. However, if RE is to have any sort of future it must start to be universally, reliably good, and the Framework offers a vision of how good RE could be.

Updated version of an article that appeared in REsource 36:1 Autumn 2013. RE Today Services. Reproduced by kind permission.

The problem with ‘RE’

‘The trouble with religious education’, according to one pupil, ‘is that is contains the two words that children hate most’.

‘The trouble with religious education’, according to one parent, ‘is that it sounds like you’re trying to make people religious’.

‘The trouble with religious studies’, according to one former HMCI, ‘is that it is not an ‘ology’; I would never advise any bright child to follow a course that contains the word ‘studies’.

‘The trouble with religious education, according RE teachers, is that many people, from members of government to the general public, simply don’t “get it”’.

I have paraphrased the things people say about RE above, but we all recognise the sentiments. The pupil, the parent and the inspector may all be wrong, but RE has a problem. And it’s not just an image problem: the name religious education no longer does what it says on the tin.

Things have moved on since the 1944 Education Act that introduced religious education as a compulsory part of school life (comprising ‘religious worship’ and ‘religious instruction’) and locally agreed and denominational syllabuses for RE were made mandatory.

Since around the mid 1970s when Ninian Smart’s analysis of religious experience began to filter into the thinking of those interested in religious education, those who saw ‘RE’ as a subject that aimed to develop children’s ‘religiousness’ have suffered a dramatic and irreversible decline.

The situation now

Now: there is broad agreement that development of children’s ‘faith’ is the role of the family and the specific community. (Though increasing numbers of parents go even further and have preferred to leave their children’s choice of worldview up to them.)

Now: there is a rapidly growing interest in the development of children’s ‘spiritual’ awareness – though some contest the term ‘spirituality’ as being unhelpful.

Now: there is a consensus in the RE world that the subject is about helping children and young people to learn from the wisdom of the world’s religious and philosophical traditions so that they can (a) make the best of their lives and (b) find the resilience to cope with life’s tragedies and disappointments.

The 2004 non-statutory National Framework for RE (nsNFRE) expressed it all in a statement on the importance of the subject, speaking of opportunities for personal reflection and spiritual development as well as developing knowledge and understanding of religions and worldviews. In one key phrase, the statement advises that RE:

‘challenges pupils to reflect on, consider, analyse, interpret and evaluate issues of truth, belief, faith and ethics and to communicate their responses’.
(QCA, DfES, (2004), Religious Education: The non-statutory national framework, QCA, p 7.))

Back in the 1970s, Brian Gates spoke of pupils becoming ‘religiate’, referring to those who can think spiritually, ethically, theologically and philosophically; those who can:

‘understand the faith of others and develop their own equivalent faith by which to live – and be equipped to be able to make effective moral judgements’ (REC National Strategy Document, July 2001).

One of RE’s problems, according to a former RE Adviser, is that it is not a ‘discipline’, in the sense that History or Geography or Science are ‘disciplines’. The Russell Group of universities say that such disciplines are ‘facilitating subjects’; that is, they provide students with the skills and understanding required to enable success in a variety of fields beyond the subject itself. But RE is not yet a discipline: it is seen as a cuckoo subject that tries to be all things to all people; jumping on every bandwagon because it has no direction of its own.

The truth is that RE makes use of several subject disciplines – theology, philosophy, psychology, anthropology, sociology and history included – in pursuit of its aims. At times, an understanding of the scientific method, mathematics, geography, art and linguistics can be useful too. Then you might even have to know classical languages such as Arabic, Greek, Hebrew, Gurmukhi, Sanskrit, Pali and Latin!

Learning from the cuckoo

But, like the cuckoo, RE possesses the cunning to survive. Like many a successful religion, and like successful education itself, RE adapts to meet the changing needs of the people it serves.
So, is it (a) desirable and (b) feasible that RE should become a discipline? My contention is that it may be desirable, but that it is not feasible unless it changes its name and, to some extent, its aims and content.

Academics tell us that RE should be about something called ‘truth’, or ‘faith’, or ‘justice’, or ‘morality’, or ‘objectivity’, or ‘phenomenology’, or ‘empathy’, or ‘spirituality’. Or being ‘religiate’.

Look at it this way: if you do well at History you may become a historian. If you do well at Geography, you may become a geographer. At Maths – a mathematician, at Science – a scientist. OK, so you don’t become German by doing well at German, but you might become a linguist. What do you ‘become’ if you do well at RE? Religious? But that’s no longer the aim, is it? A Theologian? But that is not an inclusive enough term for humanists and many Buddhists, for example. Spiritual? How so? Wise? May be. Human? Don’t go there. One attainment target, two attainment targets, three attainment targets, four. Five attainment targets, six attainment targets, seven attainment targets, more!

RE took a decisive turn when it ceased to be mainly about faith development. And we cannot turn the clock back, no matter how much some would wish to. So where on earth are we going?

In the days when RE competed for pupils at options time in Year 9 with the other Humanities subjects, one of the historians used to tell the pupils in the school in which I taught that ‘History is about this world; RE the next’. I retorted that History was a thing of the past; RE is about the present – and the future. Word play of course, but now is the time for the reinvention of RE and yet another manifestation. And this is the most cunning transformation of all.

RE’s transformed future

This is RE’s future – exploration of life itself. We need a study of ‘religious’ values; of wisdom. Today, religious education must involve a study of what things in the public world mean to us, personally and socially.

So here is a proposal. Let’s be clear about the overarching aims of the subject that used to be ‘religious’ education. Let’s be clear about the broad concerns and content of that subject. Let’s outline a discipline for that subject that will make sense to the general public as well as politicians and those within the ‘RE community’.

So I have a suggestion, and it is one I have resisted until now, because it removes the ‘R’ word altogether. As Terence Copley once observed:

‘Some secondary schools have even re-named the RE department to keep religion out of the shop window, which seems strange given that religion is a potent force in the lives of women, men and children across the planet. Not that being a potent force makes religion necessarily true, or good, which is why we don’t need to worry about the R word appearing in the title.’

http://reonline.org.uk/supporting/re-matters/news-inner/?id=3896

The danger, as Copley pointed out, is a real one, namely, a tendency in some RE to secularise religious material. So, for example, again with Copley:

‘Joseph is treated like the liberal secular hero of the Amazing Technicolor (©) Dreamcoat rather than the Joseph of the Hebrew Bible or Yusuf of Sūra Yūsuf in the Qur’ān. Any dream will not do in these sacred texts, as dreams are seen as one way in which God communicates.’ (ibid.)

The schools Copley was talking about used such titles as ‘Philosophy and Ethics’ or ‘Beliefs and Values’. But such titles, as well as omitting the ‘R’ word, are clumsy and often misleading in nature. They are difficult to abbreviate for the timetable and confusing for pupils, parents and colleagues.

Yet ‘RE’ will no longer do. We need to coin a new term, one that does justice to the real nature of what RE actually is and what it should become.

A study of wisdom

There are clues to what we need in the nsNFRE’s importance statement quoted above and also in the words of Jim Conroy, Professor of Religious and Philosophical Education at Glasgow University, following the recent three-year investigation into the aims, purposes and practice of RE. Conroy says that good RE involves:

‘the creation of space for serious and critical exploration of the meanings and values by which we live’.

http://www.gla.ac.uk/news/archiveofnews/2012/february/headline_223678_en.html

This exploration of different layers of meaning and value is what I would call the search for and study of wisdom. And I mean wisdom as relating to all the world’s experience and learning as expressed through its established religions and philosophies of life and through the exponents of those worldviews. It will include the ‘wisdom of the heart’ as well as the ‘mind’.

This is supported in the recent review of RE by the REC and the accompanying ‘national curriculum for RE’, 2013. Here it is recommended in the ‘purpose of study’ statement, that pupils ‘learn to weigh up the value of wisdom from different sources, to develop and express their insights in response, and to agree or disagree respectfully’ (A Review of Religious Education in England, October 2013, p. 14).

We could, therefore, call the subject ‘wisdom studies’, but, mindful of the need to ensure that the subject contains and sustains a ‘discipline’ of its own, why not combine the Greek terms ‘Sophia’ (wisdom) and ‘Logos’ (study) and centre our efforts on developing a new subject of the school (and university?) curriculum, namely, ‘Sophology’.

This is not a new idea, of course. There is already a Sophology Society with a website devoted to the study of wisdom: www.sophology.org, but that is not to prevent the initiation and development of Sophology as the natural inheritor of the RE tradition.

No doubt, people will raise difficulties and objections. Perhaps the word sounds too much like ‘sophistry’ (with all its negative connotations). Perhaps it sounds as though everyone who studies it will suddenly become ‘wise’. Perhaps religious communities will not like the removal of the ‘R’ word from the title. But these objections are superficial. Similar objections could be levelled at most other curriculum subjects.

There will be those who think any arguments for changing the name are a distraction and what we really need is to keep on promoting good practice in ‘RE’: ‘what matters is what’s in the tin, not the label’. But while it is true that no name change alone will be sufficient to change poor practice to good, the challenge to teachers and learners to search for, study and critically interpret received wisdom in the religions and philosophies of life might just raise everyone’s game a notch.

There will be longer term practical difficulties too, particularly surrounding the statutory place of RE in the curriculum. So my proposal is not one for the faint-hearted. But we do need a subject that is fit to be called a ‘discipline’ in the 21^st century; one that will attract new recruits to the teaching profession; and one that will bring real benefits to all children and young people.

Implications of a new discipline

An academic ‘discipline’ is a somewhat slippery concept, but here are some thoughts as to how the discipline of Sophology can be established.

First, we need to refer to the ‘founders’ of the developing RE / Sophology tradition; amongst whom we might count Ninian Smart, John Hull, Michael Grimmitt, Bob Jackson, Eleanor Nesbitt, Trevor Cooling, Andy Wright, Vivienne Baumfield and others, whose pedagogies, methodologies and approaches to RE, from phenomenology to ethnography, from ‘concept cracking’ to ‘critical realism’, have put us on the trail of how we might find wisdom in the multiple traditions available to us now. Of course, it remains to be seen whether any of these giants of the RE world recognise the pattern I have detected here. But the point is to trace the key movements in the development of what has become ‘RE’ in order to establish the subject’s enduring value.

Next, we will need to draw some lines around the ‘content’ of Sophological study. Here it will be for each country or region to set its sights, but I am thinking here of the particular religions and philosophies of life that will be chosen for study. Traditionally, in the UK, ‘the major world religions represented in Britain’ have featured in RE syllabuses. In recent years the ‘big six’ of Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, Judaism and Sikhism have been joined by Bahá’í, forms of Paganism, Rastafarianism and Zoroastrianism in some RE programmes. And it is surely time that various forms of Humanism are recognised by all syllabuses as philosophical traditions and worldviews worthy of study.

Any discipline will need to define its distinctive approaches to study. Here, as I have indicated above, Sophology would, like RE, continue to be polymethodic, employing the research methods of the social scientist, anthropologist and ethnographer; the systematic thinking of the philosopher and the analytical approaches of the art historian, the psychologist and so on. But Sophology will make use of its own technical vocabulary, namely the key concepts used by the religious and philosophical traditions themselves as well as those of the scholar of religion and belief.

A reinvigorated part of Humanities

Sophology, though distinct in its traditions, content and methods, would not need to set itself apart from the rest of the curriculum. In fact, it would be ideally suited to reinvigorate its place in Humanities-based interdisciplinarity, dealing as it would with the ever-changing, surprising and diverse human world. It will be in a better place to do this than ‘RE’ because it will be a better fit for the critical interpretive approaches that lie at the heart of the Humanities. Sophologists will not mind that their contribution to such inter-disciplinary studies will be partial, tentative and limited – such is the complexity of human knowledge and understanding – but they will be assured that such contributions will be taken seriously as the products of a disciplined, dare I say, rigorous, approach to the matter in hand, rather than mistaken as an attempt to make the world or its inhabitants, ‘religious’.

References

Conroy, J. (2012), quoted in Glasgow University News [Online], Available: http://www.gla.ac.uk/news/archiveofnews/2012/february/headline_223678_en.html [26 Nov 2012]

Copley, T. (2012), Putting the R back in RE, [Online], Available: http://reonlineorg.wpengine.com/supporting/re-matters/news-inner/?id=3896 [26 Nov 2012]

QCA, DfES, (2004), Religious Education: The non-statutory national framework, QCA.

Gates, B. (2001), REC National Strategy document.

Dave Francis is an education consultant with current contracts as Lead Consultant for RE:ONLINE and Adviser to North Somerset and Somerset SACREs. His email address is dfmayfly@icloud.com

It may sound obvious but nevertheless it is probably wise repeating it: before you set about buying anything, you should carry out a complete audit of your RE resources: text books; reference books; CDs; DVDs, software, hardware, artefacts, contact details for places of worship, staff and parents – in fact everything and anything that you can draw on to enhance your teaching and make your lessons a truly educational experience. This holds true whatever Key Stage or ability level you are teaching.

A template has been included at the end of this article to start the process.

Once you know what you have available, the next step is to look at what you are intending to teach. For community schools, the first step will be to check on the requirements of your locally Agreed Syllabus. Church and Faith schools, Free Schools and Academies will need to look at their trust deeds and/or funding agreement to find out what they should be teaching. Many of these will also simply advise following the locally agreed syllabus, perhaps with some additional emphases to suit a particular context and pupils.

Agreed Syllabuses vary in style. Some will be fairly general in scope but may be backed up with more detailed schemes of learning in a guidance document. Others may be detailed. With this information in front of you it is now time to think about exactly what you are going to teach and how you are going to deliver it. You may already have a particularly good resource, e.g., a film that you wish to use as a starting point, so on your scheme of learning include an area where you can note down the resources you will need.

Alternatively, you may have an idea or may have seen a particularly effective lesson delivered using a specific resource, e.g., an artefact that you do not already have. Note that down in your scheme of learning too and add it to your wish list.

You will need to do this for all the key stages and units of learning that you will be teaching and at the end of the process you should have a wish list of those items that you need to deliver your syllabus.

This may seem a daunting task but you do not have to do it on your own. Involve other staff. Working together and sharing ideas can bring staff on board, and will help to develop a more cohesive approach across the department or school and help to avoid duplication.

Then comes the fun part!

Gather together all the catalogues that you can find and start finding and costing out your requirements. Be open minded about this. You may see something that really catches your eye and that you believe could form the basis of a good alternative lesson. Add it to your wish list and be prepared to adapt your planning to accommodate it.

Now check your wish list and existing resources to see if you are happy with it.

• Will the resource serve the purpose for which it is intended and are all the features accurate?
• Do you have a broad and balanced list of resources?
• Are your resources balanced between books, artefacts, films and posters etc?
• Can they be used to encourage a variety of teaching strategies, e.g., group learning; individual learning styles; inter-personal skills; differentiated learning; discussion; active participation etc?
• Are there issues of sensitivity surrounding the resource?
• Do they give an accurate picture of each religion or is one element emphasized more than others or do they present a stereotypical image of people or the religion? For example is the world wide nature of Islam apparent in your selection or does it depict a particular view of Islam?
• Are they sexist? Do they convey a positive image of women and ethnic or religious groups? Could they cause offence?
• Do they cover the whole spectrum of style within a religion, e.g., in Hinduism, do you have both cheap plastic murtis as well as images of beautiful elaborate temples?
• Are they safe for pupils to handle? (Some local authorities, e.g., have banned kirpans in school.)

If you are new to using artefacts in Religious Education, a useful starting point might be: http://www.re-handbook.org.uk/section/approaches/using-artefacts-in-religious-education#tab-2

or: http://www.natre.org.uk/rg/index.php for more detailed guidance produced by NATRE (The National Association of Teachers of RE).

Once you have sourced your wish list you may have to prioritise the items depending on your budget. Remember, that it may be possible to borrow some items from other members of staff or parents or the local faith community or another school. Some local authorities still have resources that can be borrowed or you may be lucky enough to be close to an RE Centre. (see http://reonlineorg.wpengine.com/supporting/re-matters/news-inner/?id=21686)

In some areas, local primary schools cluster together and buy more expensive items to share while investing in cheaper, seasonal items for their own schools (e.g., Divali lamps are best bought by individual schools but a set of tefillin would be something that could be shared between schools). Other primary schools team up with their local secondary school. Generally speaking secondary schools have larger budgets and therefore can afford the more expensive artefacts, which are not age specific resources. They may be prepared to share with their local primary schools and this could be an excellent way of aiding transition as well.

Sometimes it is possible to substitute photographs, virtual tours or DVDs for actual artefacts. In some cases you may be able to persuade your head to give you extra in your budget if you can make a strong case for why you need a particular resource.

Buy what you can this year and then revisit the wish list next year when you receive your new allocation of money. It is also worth remembering that sometimes, if there is an underspend in the school’s total budget, departments may be able to bid for extra money. Be ready with your wish list so you can be first in line… and always spend all your budget. Sometimes departments who underspend receive a cut or at least no increase in their next year’s budget on the basis that they don’t need such a large allocation.

Once you receive your resources, catalogue them carefully so that others know what they are and where to find them. You will also need to give some thought to how you will store your resources. Holy books, especially the Qur’an, should be placed on a top shelf with nothing above it. Artefacts generally should be treated with respect and thus stored appropriately; posters tear easily and may need to be laminated first and so on.

The whole process should be seen as a continuous cycle:

Finally, think about introducing all the staff to the new resources with a spot of continuing professional development (CPD). Ask them to help evaluate the resources in use and use this information to revise your wish list.

Today’s RE teacher has such a wide range of resources available to him or her. Make the most of this opportunity and enjoy!

For more information on where to look for RE resources to buy, try:

• www.articlesoffaith.co.uk offers a wide range of artefacts and RE resources across all key stages.
• www.tts-group.co.uk offers a wide range of artefacts and RE resources.
• www.artefactstoorder.co.uk boxes of artefacts.
• www.parrotfish.co.uk offers multi-cultural and religious education resources.
• www.nelsonthornes.com for GCSE Religious Studies books.
• www.hachettechildrens.co.uk formerly Wayland.
• www.rmep.co.uk religious education and assembly books.

Appendix 1

This table can be adapted for your own school use. Each religion, theme or festival taught could have its own table.

Kathryn Wright
Lead Consultant CPD4RE, Culham St Gabriel’s Trust
RE Adviser, Diocese of Norwich

Kathryn Wright presented the following paper at an event launching the RE Review held at the Institute of Education in London on November 5th 2013 and has kindly agreed to share it with RE:ONLINE.

‘The journey is the reward’- this is a Taoist proverb and it is one I used a couple of weeks ago to explain the importance of continuing to learn as a teacher when speaking at the Learn, Teach, Lead Conference in the South West.

The journey that this review has begun, and I say begun quite deliberately, has been one of much learning. I believe the journey that has already been taken, and the one we are about to begin, has already brought reward and will bring even greater reward…

The journey so far, that Mike has outlined has involved many people from diverse belief and faith communities, from many phases of education, and from many professional organisations. The Review, which includes the National Curriculum framework for RE, presents much to consider for those who must now continue the journey, hopefully as a result of this document, working much more closely together.

The purpose of RE outlined in the NCFRE speaks of engaging young people in challenging questions, encouraging an aptitude for dialogue and enabling them to learn about and from religion and belief. In many senses we might say there is nothing new here, but it is clearly defined and articulated here and brings many views about the nature of RE together. However, the little phrase which caught my eye was that children and young people are to learn to weigh up the value of wisdom in different traditions. Wisdom…Wisdom is the synthesis of knowledge and experiences into insights that deepen one’s understanding of relationships and the meaning of life. Albert Einstein once said, ‘Wisdom is not a product of schooling but of the lifelong attempt to acquire it.’ Such a process is a lengthy and arduous journey, which teaches the pursuer patience and humility.

Yes, if only our children and young people were seeking wisdom…. What a great purpose for RE… To help children see the best in the wisdom of others, but also to seek their own understanding of wisdom…what greater educational aim could there be?

For me this is the heart of what RE is about.

As Einstein suggest, to become wise is a journey… One in which I am definitely still on! And the way in which the NCFRE sets this ‘wisdom journey’ out is clearly defined and goes some way to ensuring a progression of understanding. To me there is a deepening insight into religion and belief through the key stages and an enriching through reflection on life itself as the subject makes links with other curriculum areas.

The three aims of RE are expounded clearly and refer to knowledge and understanding, expressing ideas and insights, and gaining and deploying skills. These aims move away from the traditional ‘learning about’ and ‘learning from’ and begin to forge a new pathway. I see this as a positive move. The second of these aims picks up in particular on one of the issues raised in the recent Ofsted report- that children and young people do not understand the impact of religion and world views on people’s lives. This is something which we identified as a issue in Norfolk some time ago and we have been working on this area already. It is great to see that we are on the right track.

The third area, also highlights the importance of enquiry, an approach to teaching and learning highlighted as best practice in the recent Ofsted report. So there is much to celebrate here, and local Diocese like my own would do well to ensure that they are promoting these aims in all their schools.

The purpose and aims, and the more detailed subject content, in my view are broad enough to be embraced by both local SACREs, academy providers and Diocese. The subject content which is outlined in NC style makes requirements for different key stages clear, and provides some useful examples. If I was to criticise one thing! It would be the over use of the word respond and not enough use of the words analyse, reason, evaluate and enquire. This probably betrays my own pedagogical approach more than anything else, but I think this is a missed opportunity to embed best practice that Ofsted have highlighted recently. However, on the whole, I love the emphasis on the difference faith and belief make to people, the focus on meanings behind rituals and actions, and the focus at Key Stage Three on using a range of philosophical and theological disciplines although it would be even better if this was at Key Stage One and Two as well! To me this focuses RE back on the heart of the matter- beliefs- and avoids a superficial tour of religious practice which has neither relevance or meaning for children and young people.

The phasing of the requirements and the examples given will provide much useful material for those of us working with schools in developing coherent curriculums, as well as supplementing agreed syllabus documentation. In the future, it will help support the review of the Norfolk AS, although having only just launched the last one this is a few years away.

So for me, the first part of the document provides clear signposts for the next stage of the journey, there may be particular things I will want to pack on my ‘wisdom journey’ that are not emphasised here like the enquiry approach and more focus on reasoning, but the essential items for a journey that can take place together with other RE professionals are here.

My belief that the journey of the review has been the reward, is particularly evident in the second half of the document. Here important recommendations are made which potentially could transform religious education teaching and CPD for teachers nationally.

From my perspective the wider context section is as important, if not more important than the first part of the document and in my role at CSTG along with colleagues from the REC CPD group and NATRE we are already beginning to consider ways forward, especially in relation to recommendations 1 and 4. To me research must connect with teachers, and vica versa.These two recommendations are intrinsically linked. (I referred back to Mike hear and agreed with his observations on research) In a recent Think Piece for RE:ONLINE I talked about the value of research based CPD! unknown to me that this would be in the review!!! AT CSTG we are already looking at developing regional collaboration more strategically. So watch this space!

In my Diocesan role, we have recently encouraged three new NATRE networks to start, with a view that they may in the future join for more local and regional collaboration. I am in discussions with the a local university about it becoming a hub for CPD- negotiations in early stages but potentially could have a big impact in the eastern region. We are also piloting an action research approach linked to the REQM and creating hubs of best practice across three counties…. All these little developments now need to come together more strategically and this document provides a framework for this to happen. I have questions like, Who will pay for this? How will it work? But the review asks, Is it viable? and my answer to this is- oh yes I think it is and I am excited…

So to come back to my journey metaphor….and to wisdom.

I believe it is time for the RE Community to come together more effectively….to be wise in the constantly changing educational climate. I think that perhaps we have been on parallel journeys,or sometimes on different journeys altogether in the last few years. If we- researchers, advisers, teachers, Faith communities are wise, then we will see the huge importance of this review and it’s implications. Personally, I think that the importance of research and regional collaboration are the key next steps on our journey together as an RE community. I will be endeavouring to promote both these in my role as a Diocesan adviser and as lead consultant for CPD for CSTG, as well as using the NC framework to support teachers understanding of the purpose and aims of the subject.

I believe, the next steps on our journey will be the greatest reward….

The core message of the latest Ofsted report on RE is clear: RE at its best makes a great contribution to the academic and personal development of children and young people; but it is not good enough in too many schools.

The report goes on to try to analyse some of the reasons why RE needs to ‘up its game’. The purpose of this Think piece and the linked Forum debate in the RE Café, is to explore some of the ideas which underpin the report.

One key thread relates to the continued confused sense of purpose about RE which underlies many of the weaknesses in its provision. The 2013 report is unrepentant in stating what lies at the heart of the subject – the promotion of religious literacy. If RE is to sustain its claim to be a serious academic subject it needs to state its credentials clearly. The report suggests, perhaps too obviously, that the legitimate area of enquiry in RE should primarily be concerned with helping pupils’ make sense of the world of religion and belief. To achieve this, the report (para 1) suggests pupils need to develop:

• an ability to offer informed responses to a range of profound religious, philosophical or ethical questions
• an understanding of the way in which the beliefs, practices, values and ways of life of specific religions and non-religious world views are linked
• an understanding and interpretation of the distinctive nature of religious language
• a deepening understanding of the diverse nature of religion and belief in the contemporary world
• an increasingly sophisticated understanding of the impact, both positive and negative, that religion and belief can have on individuals and society.

But immediately it is important to stress that this study should be broad, recognising the very diverse, ambiguous, controversial and complex nature of that ‘world’ of religion and belief. Dr Lynne Revell speaking at the 2013 Worcester Conference on The Future of RE explored this brilliantly emphasising the need to get beyond a narrow and rigid view of religion. You can find her talk here:

ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwifuFr6nqI&list=PLmXqO5g2FfqHlfSOiEx_FwzNPsM0gvIy0&index=2

To stimulate further debate I would like to suggest three dangers to which RE falls prey when thinking about the way we define that ‘legitimate area of enquiry’. Too often we are seduced by the temptations to:

• chase relevance
• become too cross-curricular
• cosy up too close to spiritual development.

Chasing relevance – to suggest we try too hard to be relevant may sound scandalous. To be clear – it is crucial that planning and teaching ensures pupils can see the purpose and have ownership of their learning. But there is a real danger in designing the curriculum on the basis of what pupils will see as relevant to their lives. The RE curriculum needs to be designed on the basis of the concepts, principles, fundamental operations, and key areas of knowledge which underpin the subject. Too often we lose sight of these key elements of the ‘legitimate area of enquiry’ of RE. Most obviously, in seeking to focus on ethical and social issues which are believed to be ‘relevant’, much GCSE provision fails to contribute to the students’ religious literacy. It fails to address its own aim to enable pupils ‘to adopt an enquiring, critical and reflective approach to the study of religion’. This tendency can be seen creeping slowly into much of the provision for RE at Key Stage 3.

Becoming too cross-curricular – being cross-curricular is often seen as a bonus, but there are serious dangers. RE can contribute very powerfully to cross-curricular topics. But two principles must apply. First, the topic must be genuinely cross-curricular and engage meaningfully with other subject areas. Second, the RE contribution must be defined by those concepts, principles, fundamental operations, and key areas of knowledge which underpin the subject’s ‘legitimate area of enquiry’. Too often we see RE topics which are effectively cross-curricular matters: Who am I?, The Environment, Rights and Responsibilities, My community. To be effective such topics need to engage with other subjects: citizenship, geography, history, science, economic understanding. In trying to pursue these within the confines of the RE curriculum we are pursuing the worst of all possible worlds. In discussing the environment, for example, we often just end up with poor quality geography, science and theology mashed together!

Cosying up too close to spiritual development – again, the link between RE and spiritual development is often seen as a strength and a core part of the rationale for RE. But the relationship and the boundaries need to be carefully defined in the interests of each. If the relationship is poorly defined both partners are impoverished. Spiritual development is genuinely cross-curricular – all subjects can and should contribute to its promotion. For some pupils the arts, English, mathematics, PE or design technology could be the trigger for their own sense of the spiritual. The Ofsted report highlighted that one factor preventing RE from realising its potential was the unresolved tension between, on the one hand, the academic goal of extending and deepening pupils’ ability to make sense of religion and belief, and, on the other, the wider goal of contributing towards their spiritual development. It went on to say: ‘….too often teachers thought they could bring depth to pupils’ learning by inviting them to reflect on or write introspectively about their experience rather than rigorously investigate and evaluate religion and belief’. Too much RE relies on the interior life of the child as its key resource for learning at the expense of investigating the concepts, principles, fundamental operations, and key areas of knowledge which underpin the subject’s ‘legitimate area of enquiry’.

Throughout this piece I have re-iterated the notion that in defining the content of the RE curriculum we need to be very clear about the ‘concepts, principles, fundamental operations, and key areas of knowledge which underpin the subject’s ‘legitimate area of enquiry’. I would welcome contributions to this debate.

Paper for RSA Investigate-Ed Summit, 4 October 2013 

Mark Chater, Director, Culham St Gabriel’s Trust

The RSA is leading a series of investigations on key education issues across the UK. These aim to propose new ideas for policy and practice in response to emerging evidence and changing contexts. Speedier than a commission approach, but more in depth and reflective than a traditional seminar, these investigations will give senior policymakers, practitioners and other stakeholders structured spaces to diagnose problems and generate solutions.

The first investigation will examine the current state of play concerning SMSC for schools and pupils. In England SMSC is currently part of the Ofsted school inspection framework and included in draft National Curriculum documents. Faith schools put a premium on building spiritual and moral ethos, whilst many new academies and free schools place a strong emphasis on school ethos and character development. New learning approaches that focus on developing the emotional intelligence and social resilience to live confidently in a global context are coming to the fore. Such developments are turning the spotlight increasingly on SMSC, although other pressures on schools may also be leading to a decline in focus and provision. The promoting of community cohesion remains a legally established priority and creates a focus for exploring cultural diversity. 

The SMSC investigation will address these and other questions: How do different schools define SMSC and how successful are they in transforming their vision into effective practices? What practices enable SMSC to engage pupils and the wider community? What are the development and support needs of senior leadership teams and teachers? How effective is school inspection as a lever to focus schools on SMSC outcomes? In an era of increased autonomy over curricula, how can schools re-engage with SMSC? The investigation will analyse, through use of inspection datasets and selected school case studies, relationships between SMSC and school performance, and try to ascertain the key factors that make for effective approaches to SMSC in different contexts.

This investigation is supported by the Culham St Gabriel’s Trust, the Gordon Cook Foundation, and the Pears Foundation.

The Following think piece has been written by Mark Chater, Director of Culham St Gabriel’s Trust and has been part of the RSA SMSC Investigation.

Vision

Every learner a meaning-maker

Every learner an ethical agent

Every learner an active citizen

Every learner a creative contributor

Every learner. Every teacher. Every leader.

Summary

The spiritual, moral, social and cultural development of pupils (SMSC) is an inspectable requirement in all maintained schools in England, and forms part of the accountability frameworks for all schools in the UK. This paper is an invitation to dialogue and collaboration. It summarises Culham St Gabriel’s starting point as a trust, supporting research, development and innovation in SMSC, ethos and RE. This paper is offered as part of the RSA’s Investigate-Ed project in SMSC. Although it is written largely from the perspective of schools in England, I hope that the issues raised can have resonance and traction across the UK.

1. SMSC: a dimension in search of a strategy

1.1 The spiritual, moral, social and cultural development of pupils and of society has been an aim of education since 1944. It is currently an element of the school inspection framework. In an adapted form (spiritual, moral, cultural, mental and physical) it is part of the curriculum expectation of the new draft national curriculum documents. Although schools willingly affirm the importance of SMSC, they have variable success in implementing it. SMSC is seen as an indispensable vision and purpose of education, but as an element of the educational enterprise it is often homeless, unconnected to the wider work of the school and its community.

1.2 Normally SMSC is ‘carried’ by a number of key ingredients that include the whole curriculum and approaches to teaching, and the ethos and expectations of the school as evidenced in assemblies and the school’s dealings with parents, families and the wider community. These are exactly the same ingredients that make for school improvement and rising standards. Yet very little is made of this close connection; and in many schools SMSC activity is considered as a ‘bolt-on’ to the core business. In particular, collective worship in the sense meant by the 1988 Act (‘wholly or mainly of a broadly Christian character’, as interpreted in Circular 1/94) appears to be in long-term decline in community secondary schools, where it is blurred into all-purpose assemblies and is not a strong strategic element of a community school’s overall ethos, values or curriculum aims.

1.3 Variations between schools in the quality of SMSC are becoming wider, and their need for support is becoming more complex. The churches put considerable resources into fostering the spiritual and moral ethos of their schools. They usually have a more explicit provision of SMSC and collective worship, although the latter is not yet as reflective of distinctive church school ethos as diocesan advisers would want. Section 48 inspections provide the main context for articulating how SMSC is nested in the school’s ethos, values and leadership.

1.4 However, in community schools the picture is more mixed. After the burst of government and research activity in the 1990s and despite occasional boosters since then, very little is now on offer to help teachers understand SMSC and know how to make it a reality across the curriculum in community schools. Professional development opportunities on SMSC have to compete with other priorities. The language of SMSC, particularly spirituality, is quite abstract and sometimes alarming for teachers who are not immersed in RE.

1.5 To some extent, rightly or not, SMSC has been eclipsed by overlapping initiatives that have recently come and gone, such as the duty to promote Community Cohesion, Social and Emotional Aspects of Learning, Healthy Schools, Personal, Learning and Thinking Skills and Every Child Matters. Alternative curriculum models, such as Philosophy for Children and the RSA’s Opening Minds, have also overlapped with elements of SMSC. The set of values and dispositions that accompanied the QCA three curriculum aims – successful learners, confident individuals and responsible citizens – enshrined some aspects of SMSC. What these initiatives have in common is their direct discourse on outcomes for pupils, making them more accessible and attractive than the quite abstract language of SMSC documents. Schools are accustomed to dealing in outcomes, so any initiative that cannot explain itself in those terms might be vulnerable. Nevertheless, many teachers recognise overlaps between the recent initiatives and the older SMSC. These overlaps serve both to enrich provision and also to confuse effort and focus. Schools are often doing more about SMSC than they think, but have difficulty in articulating it or approaching strategically. This ‘unconscious competence’ may originate partly in the difficulty of SMSC terminology and also in a confusion between SMSC as doing extra things and SMSC as a way of working.

1.6 From this overview we can derive four assumptions, all of them debatable:

a. SMSC is not composed solely of RE, or even mainly: the whole curriculum should be engaged with SMSC, although RE can take a lead in helping the whole school to understand, implement and articulate it;

b. SMSC is not ‘an extra thing’: it is embedded in the standards agenda, in all subjects, in pedagogy and in school ethos including assemblies. Raising standards and SMSC are not either/or: they need each other, since both are focused on outcomes that promote human flourishing for young people and society;

c. Schools need a definition of SMSC in their own terms, fully respecting diversity, closely engaging with the core business of teaching and learning, speaking the language of outcomes and accessible enough to be grounded in practice. They need to own their definition and be able to articulate it to each other, to the community and to inspectors;

d. Teachers and leaders at all levels of a school need to understand and articulate their school’s ethos and values in order to implement them effectively.

1.7 SMSC is a substantial and complex challenge, best met by a coherent set of interventions that bring together assembly/collective worship, school ethos and whole-curriculum thinking in a single strategy supported by a partnership of professionals at different levels.

1.8 Several recent factors add urgency to the challenge, prompting us to engage again with the needs of teachers in relation to SMSC. The structural factors are:

– The new school inspection framework’s priority on SMSC;

– The sharper Ofsted focus on school improvement;

– The emergence of new academies and free schools with diverse curriculum and ethos approaches;

– The DfE’s final repudiation of the collective worship elements of Circular 1/94, creating opportunities to define good practice in new ways.

1.9 Pedagogical factors are also at work in adding urgency and importance to a re-engagement:

– The new science of how children learn more effectively through emotional engagement, meaningful real-world contexts and useful activity;

– The moral collapse of authority structures in spiritual, moral, social and cultural contexts (churches, politics, finance, sport, media);

– The imperative that education focus on preparing children with knowledge and emotional skills to face complex global issues in the present and future rather than focussing mainly on a spiritual, ethical and cultural heritage from the past.

2. Partnership and collaboration

2.1 The time is propitious for new partnerships and networks on SMSC, using the links provided by new social and professional media and responding to the new freedoms offered to schools. We would like to start conversations with potential key partners who are recognised experts in five inter-related fields of competence that we see as essential to making SMSC work:

a. School leadership and school improvement – including SLT and governing body members who have articulated and implemented SMSC as an embedded part of school ethos, closely related to the school’s core business of teaching and learning

b. Curriculum design and pedagogy – including those practitioners who have a track record of growing capacity for SMSC in a variety of forms

c. Children and young people’s developmental needs in relation to spiritual, moral, social and cultural aspects of life – including professional perspectives from religious/belief communities, researchers, professionals in the workforce (e.g. careers, arts, counselling and chaplaincy)

d. Providers of continuing professional development and/or resources – including those whose professional ethic focuses on the whole child

e. Technical expertise in social media communication, web design and development of key messages – whose role will be crucial in designing effective interventions.

2.2 Additionally, key funding sources could be invited to take part and to consider placing their resources together, as ring-holders and partners in planning, into a well-designed effort to re-engage with SMSC. Lastly, and most importantly of all, children and young people themselves, whose evidence can identify authentic and compelling experiences, approaches and strategies in schools, are vital in gaining new understanding of effective practice.

2.3 As the RSA initiates this investigation into SMSC, partners in the five fields of competence, including funders, could collaborate with each other in an exploration of the challenge of re-engaging with SMSC. Key questions arising from the Culham St Gabriel’s perspective are:

a. How are we defining SMSC? Do schools ‘get’ the definitions on offer? Do they need help in taking ownership of their definition at all levels?

b. What has changed in school-based provision of SMSC? Does the focus on outcomes, rather than provision, change the way SMSC needs to be addressed?

c. What are the children and young people telling us about SMSC needs and school responses?

d. What kind of intervention is needed? Do we have the right partners for it? For example, would a suite of case studies, leading from the heart of the school’s mission and inviting partners to adapt, be helpful?

e. Who is willing to work collaboratively in developing proposals for re-engagement?

I look forward to working with all partners in this investigation and in any collaborations that emerges our discussions.

Read this think piece as a pdf: http://reonlineorg.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Final-Draft-Mark-Chater-SMSC-Thinkpiece.pdf

Read a related blog post by Jonathan Rowson, Director of  the RSA’s Social Brain Centre, which is working on a 20-month project called ‘Spirituality, tools of the mind, and the social brain’. It will culminate in a final report and event at the RSA: http://www.thersa.org/fellowship/journal/archive/summer-2013/features/the-brains-behind-spirituality

Justin Welby’s recent criticisms of payday loan companies stirred headlines for many reasons.  Firstly, the short-term high-interest forms of lending given out by companies such as Wonga have been making the news all by themselves, meaning that criticism from any public figure was likely to send the story shooting to the top of the page.  With recent stories including Papiss Cisse’s refusal to wear a football shirt emblazoned with the Wonga logo^[1], and the OFT’s ultimatum to the top 50 lenders^[2], it doesn’t take much to bring the companies back into the public eye.  However, I think that the story was notable for much more than the subject of the critic’s ire – it caused debate because it marks another circumstance where the Anglican Church has taken a stand on issues that go beyond the scope of spirituality.  Like Rowan Williams’ 2011 call for the Coalition’s welfare cuts to be abolished^[3], Welby’s criticism of Wonga et al creates discussion because it brings the Church into the realm of wider society, and not everybody will be happy about that.

As with all news stories involving religion, this one is ripe for exploitation in the classroom.  In this article I will be outlining the different lines of enquiry that students can follow in order to use this summer’s story as a case study for different topics.  Primarily, I would suggest that this story would support the topic of Christianity and money (or materialism), and Christianity and the poor.  By linking back to Williams’ criticism of government cuts, we can also use it to discuss the relationship of Christianity and the government.  While I won’t discuss it in much detail here, there is also scope with older or more advanced classes to compare this relationship to those in other countries, most notably the separation of Church and State in the US.

I feel it’s worth mentioning that, when discussing payday lending, I am aiming to be objective.  I do have my own personal opinion about whether these services are a positive or negative thing (and consider that there are significant arguments for either side of that debate), but to espouse that here would detract from the point of this piece.  What I am looking at is how Justin Welby’s criticisms of payday loans – a legally available service – can show us the relationship between the Church and society.  Whether he is objectively correct or not is another debate for another article.

Christianity and the Poor

One of the main charges levied at payday lending is that those who use the service are often already in financial difficulties (typically with poor credit) which are potentially made a lot worse by the terms offered.  Firms such as Wonga advertise their fees upfront, but if deadlines are repeatedly missed then interest and charges stack up quickly.  It might only cost a couple of tenners to borrow £300 for a month, but when loans designed for the short-term are taken for longer they can become become unmanageable.  One of the main areas of concern for the critics of payday lending is that they cause the poor to become poorer and don’t make adequate provision to protect the more vulnerable members of society.  These concerns make the current debate a great way to start talking about Christianity’s responsibilities towards the poor.

One approach that may be fruitful is to consider The Golden Rule and how it can relate to poverty.  For younger students this might be simply to present them with an outline of how a person in a tough financial situation feels about it and ask them what help they would want if they were having that experience.  For older students, particularly GCSE candidates, this task can be taken further to examine the limitations of how help can be given (i.e. lack of public funds) and come up with a plan that they think the Church would present to the government.

Another consideration, rooted more in the day-to-day life of the Church, would be to ask students to find out what Christians are actively doing right now to help the poor.  With a little direction, KS3 students will find a wealth of schemes to research, from food banks^[4] to the support of the credit unions being championed by Welby^[5].  Some of these projects are nationwide and supported by the whole Church, some will be small groups acting out of their local congregation, but they are driven by the faith of their members and reflect real, everyday Christianity.

Christianity, Wealth and Charity

Criticisms of payday lenders aren’t just about a perceived targeting of the poorest in society, they also relate to the charges and rates of interest levied by these companies because an APR of 4000% and profits of £1 million a week^[6] are generally considered a little excessive.  This brings us onto another topic that’s important for understanding how Christianity relates to the world of poverty and finance – how do materialism and charity fit into a Christian worldview?

The classic Bible reference for this is the eye of the needle in Luke (18:18-30), in which Jesus advises giving up all worldly possessions as they prevent man from reaching the Kingdom of God.  Younger students could use this story to think about what their absolute necessities in life are, are what examples they can think of to illustrate excessive consumption (a quick perusal of MTV’s Cribs or various celebrity reality shows may throw up some useful examples).  Of course, care must be taken not to make young Christian students feel guilty for owning an iPad…  Older students can examine the parable in more depth, examining the concept that the Kingdom of God could be a spiritual state that materialism prevents access to, rather than a physical place at the end of life.

Given that this parable suggests giving money away to the poor, it seems natural to move on to looking at charity within Christianity.  In particular, I think it would be helpful to focus on how charity doesn’t always require money, because time and action can also be donated.  There are scores of examples to choose from, but I think that Jesus’ story of the Sheep and the Goats (Matthew 25:35-40) works well here.  Younger students can look at the specific examples of those in need and research how our current society works to help them.  Older students can begin to explore what Jesus meant when he said that he was there with the least of those who were in need.  For A-level students doing theology modules, this could even be linked to some of the Liberation Theology concepts.

Finally, we come to the topic of usury.  As this excellent article from the BBC describes^[7], there is a large amount of Old Testament precedent for not charging interest on loans at all, but this was re-interpreted during the Reformation.  Despite this, there is still an argument to be made in Christianity that making money from excessive interest rates (particularly when lending to the poor) is unethical and incompatible with a Christ-led outlook.  As this concept is more complicated, it’s probably best for GCSE students and above to consider, but I think there is definitely mileage in asking students to compare their thoughts on the Golden Rule with their opinions on high interest rate lending to those with little money or income.  For those studying Christianity alongside Islam, usury is an excellent topic for comparing the stances of the two religions.  Students could expand this to draft letters or articles about payday lending written from the point of view of a Christian and a Muslim, using suitable scripture references to back up their ideas.

Christianity and Government

What is perhaps notable about Welby’s criticism is that he didn’t call for legislation to abolish the payday loans industry – instead he plans to beat them at their own game by running and supporting competing credit unions to provide consumers with more choice.  Compared with Williams’ aforementioned moral stand against government cuts, this is a marked difference in approach, and I think that this comparison can help students to consider the place of the Church in society.  This can be built on in many ways, like exploring the place of bishops in the House of Lords, and of faith schools in the local community.  Some classes may even grapple with the concept of political parties set up to represent a faith worldview, such as the Christian People’s Alliance^[8].

For stronger GCSE students, a good way to engage with this topic is likely to be through debate.  Given both stories for background, pupils can be asked to draw up a list of pros and cons for the Church involving themselves in matters beyond spirituality (e.g. don’t represent sections of society, but may have society’s best interests at heart).  How the debate or discussion functions is obviously up to you, but I quite like the approach of having half the class think up the pros, the other cons, and then swapping students around so that they teach each other, before nominating spokespersons to feed back to the class.  An ex-colleague of mine used to set up a boxing ring between the two debating sides, and for every point of argument the students developed they got to pretend to punch their opponent in the face.

For older and more able students I think there’s a lot of merit in a comparison with a different country.  Given the separation of Church and State in the USA, which runs alongside an expectation that senior politicians will be religious, students can use the comparison to get to the heart of whether they think the same is expected of our politicians, even in a different religious climate.  Depending on the personal beliefs of your students, you’re probably quite likely to get some staunch responses about the place of religion in politics, and perhaps even some references to the current turbulence in Egypt.

My old Head of Department used to say that Religious Studies was different because today’s news could be in tomorrow’s exam paper, and I always took this to mean that we should use current stories wherever possible to link our subject to current affairs.  Justin Welby may not have explicitly had charity or materialism in mind when he challenged the CEO of Wonga, but the very fact that his faith caused him to take a stand over finances means that we can use his statements to discuss how Christianity relates to concerns over money, whatever they may be.  Similarly, the way his predecessor addressed the government but Welby didn’t can give us a perfect background resource to challenge our students to say which approach they think is appropriate for today’s society – the information is ready-written and the topic already live.  I hope that I have given some ideas here that can act as a starting point for others.