Viewing archives for Blog

“It’s all very well, this worldviews stuff but I really think 5-7 year olds just need to know what’s in a mosque!”

An interesting conversation with a Key Stage 1 (KS1) colleague really prompted my thinking when I first joined the Worldviews teacher-led framework group. We were working to create a curriculum framework informed by the Religious Education Council (REC) Religion and Worldviews Approach to RE Toolkit written by Stephen Pett.

After a few minutes of back-and-forth, she said… “but do they actually need to know what’s in a mosque or do they need to know about the people?”

Worldviews start with people

To be religiously literate, children do need to know about the mosque. However, a mosque is nothing without the people- so how do we find out about the people?

Case studies might sound scary for our very youngest children but, to me, they are about hooking children into the learning. Early Years and KS1 teachers are masterful at this but can case studies be for our youngest learners?

What is a case study?

It comes down to what you view as a case study. When working with the premise that Worldviews starts with people (or objects, places, stories as used by people), then case studies, for me, start in Early Years when we introduce our persona dolls.

Yes, Tessa is a doll but she is a Christian and can tell us (through the teacher) about her life, which of course includes her Christian practice and belief. She can show us important artefacts, her special place, her favourite Christian stories. We can then look at other important stories for Christians, introducing the idea that Christians do not think the same and may make choices- just like the children do.

Composite case studies

I don’t believe that case studies need to be real and can be just as meaningful when they are rooted in reality. The value of fictionalised (not fictional) case studies are highlighted in both the work of Paul Hedges and Meredith B. Mcguire.

Tessa, therefore, is not based on one Christian, she combines experiences common to many Christians. This is called a composite case study and can combine the experiences of different people allowing us to create characters who are based in real life experiences.

When we then introduce Alya and her Muslim worldview, we begin to expand, for our youngest learners, the idea that people hold different beliefs and so can they. By starting in this way, we are allowing our RE to go from the particular to the general rather than the other way around.

The children love Tessa. They are excited to see her. They come to tell us- this belongs to Tessa, it’s her special object. She’s a Christian! Our Muslim children see Alya and feel confident to tell us “I’m a Muslim too!” They see her prayer mat or Qur’an and tell us “I have one of those at home!”

Transformed teaching

In KS1, case studies have transformed our unit on places of worship. Now, real people who come regularly to school as part of our whole school worship (from local, Christian churches) take us on a virtual tour of their place of worship and tell us what they mean to them. Bob shows us round the Methodist church and tells us what it means to him, Reverend Kevin does the same with our local Church of England church. We also look at the New Life church through our local New Life Children’s pastor- another regular visitor to worship. We look at some similarities and differences- so the meaning of places of worship, rather than what they contain, becomes central to the learning.

We return to these case studies on our unit on Christian baptism, looking at the font in the Anglican and Methodist church and ask “Where is the font in the New Life church?” From the very secure position of three familiar people, we begin to find out about Christian baptism and start to recognise some of the diversity within Christianity. The children know and are familiar with these visitors so are able to better link learning. They are able to know and remember more about the people.

We take a wonderful unit of work from RE Today about Dr Hany-El Bana, originally written for Key Stage 2 (KS2), and bring it down to a KS1 level. Once the children are familiar with his story, we learn that he is motivated by his worldview of Islam and begin to understand what that means for other people. We link this to what we have remembered about Alya and her belief in the five pillars of Islam.

People and their experiences

R.E. is essentially a subject about people and their experiences. By moving the people we are studying to the front and centre of our units, we create learning which is deeper and more memorable. Linking the learning to people and case studies puts the people first and begins to enable an understanding of the lived reality of religion.

On the 9^th of March, the policy paper Protecting What Matters: Towards a more confident, cohesive, and resilient United Kingdom was published (Gov, 2026). The policy aims to foster tolerance,  community, stand against increasing societal division and polarisation, and sets out several ways to achieve a more unified society. One way they suggest doing this is by “celebrat[ing] faith and belief communities” through an expansion of interfaith week, greater engagement with SACREs, and most importantly and nebulously, by “strengthen[ing] the role of Religious Education”. Despite a society’s religious education not ending with formal schooling (see: Rich, 2026) it is a system that the vast majority of children and young people will go through, and therefore the quality and accessibility of RE within schools is of vast importance for helping to create a tolerant and religiously-literate* populous.

The details of how faith and belief communities will be celebrated however, does not actually include any concrete information of how Religious Education will be strengthened. Scrolling to another part of the policy, bringing people together, it explains that this ‘strengthening’ would be coming from the possible inclusion of RE within a national curriculum, but then offers no further information. Although the inclusion of RE into the national curriculum is not the focus of this blog – it’s a huge debate in itself – a standardised national curriculum would hopefully lead to more resources, more subject-specialists, and more CPD for teachers. Therefore, its inclusion could lead to more high-quality RE across the country, but the policy appears to be missing the most fundamental aspect of ensuring the continued provision of high-quality religious education – teachers. Although I am sure that inclusion within the national curriculum, working more closely with SACREs, a £92 million fund to help religious heritage buildings, and an expansion of interfaith week will positively (if indirectly) impact RE provision in England, it would not replace the impact of more subject-specialist teachers, especially those who are able to supplement their work with professional development

The 2024 Deep and Meaningful Religious Education Subject report noted that in more than half of the schools visited RE was not taught by a specialist, nor had they had any subject-specific professional development (Gov, 2024). If RE is to be strengthened, then surely beginning with the teachers is the simplest way to do so. The RE teacher training bursary has been scrapped, leaving no extra incentives to join the profession and the effect of the bursary removal is already being recorded. The Education Workforce in England’s summary report (2026) suggests that between 2025 and 2026 the number of people starting teacher training dropped more than would have been expected in the subjects where bursary amounts were lowered or removed completely, RE included (p.14). Whilst this policy paper sets out concrete and actionable steps against polarisation and division, it is overlooking the simplest way to improve RE. If more people were interested in becoming RE teachers, then perhaps PGCE courses would not have to close – RE is sadly no longer offered as a PGCE at the University of Oxford.

The history of teacher training bursaries, especially for RE, is not a linear one, they have been introduced and scrapped multiple times, with charitable trusts stepping in to fill the gaps. You may think that this would be a process that was learned from; bursaries are removed, numbers of trainee teachers drops, this effects teaching, and therefore bursaries are reintroduced and kept – but this is not the case. Bursaries being removed and reinstated is not new, as with the main arguments within Protecting what matters – governmental policy has been highlighting education – yet interestingly not religious education – as a way to enhance ‘community cohesion’ since 2019, with the Building Cohesive Communities: an LGA guide writing;

“Schools have a hugely important role in promoting cohesion through shaping the values and behaviour of their pupils […] ensuring that their curriculum and topic-based learning promote the values of tolerance, respect for diversity, knowledge and understanding of different faiths, as well as an understanding of British values” (2019 p.35)

Yet after this document was published, particularly highlighting the importance of education (and I would argue specifically RE) for the promotion of community cohesion, the bursary for RE was dropped, reinstated, and dropped again.

Protecting What Matters is a positive report, containing many actionable steps that would hopefully fight against increasing polarisation across the UK. Yet by invoking the use of RE and underestimating the scope of what is needed to meaningfully improve religious education provision, it is missing a fundamental avenue by which to improve greater understanding of different cultures and peoples, with more tolerance and acceptance of different communities. Perhaps with the possible introduction of RE to the national curriculum, RE bursaries will once-again be reinstated, and there will be an increase in high-quality RE provision across the country, but it is not enough to suggest that RE is a useful tool (which it is) without giving the teachers and pupils the necessary funding, resources, and time to make use of it properly.

*there seems to be no agreed consensus among scholars at to what “religious literacy” actually means, in this case, I’m using it to refer to a basic knowledge and understanding of major religious traditions and their practices.

Bibliography

Gov.2024. Deep and meaningful? The religious education subject report. Available via: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/subject-report-series-religious-education/deep-and-meaningful-the-religious-education-subject-report#context

Gov. 2026. Protecting What Matters: Towards a more confident, cohesive, and resilient United Kingdom. Available via: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/protecting-what-matters-towards-a-more-confident-cohesive-and-resilient-united-kingdom/protecting-what-matters-towards-a-more-confident-cohesive-and-resilient-united-kingdom#chapter-2-confident-communities

LGA. 2019. Building Cohesive Communities: an LGA guide. Accessible via: https://www.local.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/10.31%20Community%20cohesion%20guidance_04.2.pdf

NFER. 2026. The Education Workforce in England. Accessible via: https://www.nfer.ac.uk/media/b4obvtfw/the_education_workforce_in_england_2026_summary_report.pdf

Rich, H. 2026. Beyond the Classroom: Informal Religion and Worldviews Education in the UK. Accessible via: https://www.theosthinktank.co.uk/cmsfiles/Beyond-the-Classroom.pdf

The unique context of RE in Alternative Provision

Walk into an Alternative Provision classroom and you will quickly see the complexity of the work. You will also see the importance of getting the curriculum right. Within our wider approach to progress the social, emotional and academic outcomes for our young people, RE holds a particularly powerful place.

RE in Alternative Provision is not an “add-on” subject. It is a space where some of our most vulnerable children and young people can explore identity, meaning and belonging. Many of our learners have experienced disruption, exclusion or trauma. RE gives them something rare: the chance to ask big questions, to be listened to, and to encounter perspectives beyond their own.

This is not about worksheets or surface-level tasks. It is about engaging with meaningful questions about belief, morality, justice and the world we live in. In AP, where relationships and relevance are everything, RE naturally creates both.

Balancing ambitious curriculum content with social and emotional need is not straightforward. Readiness to learn cannot be assumed. Some days, regulation and trust-building must come first. In that context, a content-heavy curriculum can feel overwhelming for staff and students alike.

So, we make deliberate choices.

Slowing down: depth, dialogue and readiness to learn

We prioritise depth over breadth. We slow things down. We aim to create space.

When students explore questions like “Should Christians be greener than everyone else?”, the goal is not to rush to an answer, but to connect learning to their own lives and to what environmental stewardship means. When discussing topics such as “What is good and what is challenging about being a Muslim in Britain today?”, we aim to make room for dialogue, reflection, empathy and disagreement.

Similarly, philosophical questions like “Why is there suffering?” or “Should happiness be the purpose of life?” cannot simply be “covered.” They need to be held carefully, with time for students to think, speak, and be heard. This is where some of the most meaningful learning happens. Building oracy, building language and challenging thinking-and showing how to disagree-is fundamental to our broader intent.

Educational visits are also fundamental to our approach. They bring the curriculum to life, providing real-world context and often prompting the most thoughtful questions and deeper learning. For many of our students, these experiences make learning tangible in a way the classroom alone cannot.

Ultimately, RE in AP is about more than curriculum coverage. It is about helping young people make sense of the world and their place within it.

Holding challenge and compassion together

Our curriculum is ambitious because our students deserve rich, thoughtful learning. But it is also compassionate, because without meeting social and emotional needs, that learning cannot happen.

At Wave, we are clear: challenge and nurture are not opposites, they are inseparable. Our young people deserve both, and it is in holding that balance that the most powerful learning happens.

Joe Kinnaird

Hachette Learning

Joe Kinnaird’s Secondary Religious Education in Action offers a clear and practical guide to teaching Religious Education (RE) in modern schools. While much of the book explains curriculum, pedagogy, and assessment, one unusual and thought-provoking idea stands out: the claim that the name of the subject “RE” is misleading and limiting.

Kinnaird argues that debates about whether the subject should be called “Religious Education”, “Religious Studies”, or “Religion and Worldviews” are a “red herring” (a distraction). Instead, he believes teachers should concentrate on the purpose of the subject, curriculum design, and classroom thinking. This is unusual because many educators strongly believe that the name of a subject shapes how it is understood and valued.

This idea links to wider debates in education. For example, the Commission on Religious Education (2018) recommended changing the subject name to “Religion and Worldviews” to better reflect diversity and modern society. This suggests that names do matter, as they influence how inclusive and relevant a subject feel (CoRE, 2018). However, Kinnaird challenges this by suggesting that practice matters more than labels.

There is strength in Kinnaird’s argument. In many schools, RE suffers from low status, limited time, and inconsistent delivery. The book highlights that many schools do not even meet their legal duty to teach RE properly. In this context, changing the name alone may not solve deeper problems. Kinnaird is right to push teachers to focus on high-quality teaching, rich knowledge, and meaningful discussion. As Ofsted (2021) argues, the quality of curriculum and teaching has a far greater impact on learning than superficial changes.

However, there are also weaknesses in this view. Ignoring the importance of language may underestimate how powerful words can be. The term “Religious Education” can suggest a focus on religion alone, which may exclude non-religious worldviews. In a society where 37% of people identify as having “no religion”, this could make the subject feel outdated or irrelevant. A name like “Religion and Worldviews” may help students see the subject as broader and more inclusive.

In addition, names shape identity. Subjects like “science” or “history” are taken seriously partly because their names are clear and widely understood. If RE has multiple names across schools, this can cause confusion and reduce its status.

Overall, Kinnaird’s argument is valuable because it shifts attention to what really happens in the classroom. His focus on student thinking, critical enquiry, and understanding human experience reflects the deeper purpose of RE. However, his dismissal of the importance of naming may be too simple. Both language and practice matter.

In conclusion, Secondary Religious Education in Action is a useful and engaging book. Its most unusual idea; that the subject’s name does not matter—encourages readers to think critically about what RE is really for. Even if one disagrees, it opens an important debate about the future of the subject.

An illuminating book-vital reading for all involved in secondary Religious Education.

Dee Cowan is a secondary school Religious Education teacher and ECT1 in a school in Surrey, developing my practice through classroom experience and educational research.  I have a strong interest in the academic study if religion and l am enjoying teaching Old Testament Hebrew and New Testament Greek to deepen understanding of sacred texts. Dee is part of the Culham St Gabriels Masters Scholarship programme.

During the last academic year I have been in the fortunate position of having the opportunity to design from scratch our Trust-wide curriculum. As part of this I wanted greater clarity about the kinds of knowledge students encounter in Religious Education.

Not just what they learn—but how that knowledge is constructed.

RE draws on multiple disciplines: theology, philosophy, sociology, history, psychology to name just a few. But too often, these are blurred together. Students learn content, but not how that knowledge is shaped, interpreted, or contested. But we also need to recognise the starting point of our students, introducing such terms too early risks disengaging pupils.

Therefore in our curriculum, I’ve taken a slightly different approach: build the thinking first—then name it.

Year 7: building knowledge through multiple lenses

Our Y7 programme is grounded in substantive knowledge and comparison.

Students explore both Dharmic and Abrahamic traditions, building breadth before moving into greater depth within the Abrahamic faiths. Along the way, they begin to encounter different ways of knowing—without these being explicitly labelled.

• They work with religious texts, exploring what these might mean and how they shape lived religion.
• They act as “data detectives”, using sources such as census data to explore patterns of belief and belonging.
• They study the history of religion in the UK, considering how religious traditions have shaped—and been shaped by—historical events.

By the time students reach our unit on the person and nature of Jesus, they are beginning to bring these strands together. Here, the lens is primarily theological and historical:

• What do Biblical and non-Biblical sources say about Jesus?
• How have these accounts been interpreted?
• How has his life and teaching influenced belief and practice over time?

Students are not just learning about Jesus—they are beginning to engage with questions of interpretation, influence, and meaning. But at this stage, we are not labelling these approaches. We are simply ensuring students are doing them.

Year 8: making ways of knowing explicit

At the start of Year 8, we make the shift visible.

Students encounter an explicit unit asking: What does it mean to study religion academically? Here, we introduce lenses such as theology, sociology, psychology, and history.

We explore ideas of bias, perspective, and interpretation. Students begin to see that different disciplines ask different questions—and may reach different conclusions.

The aim here is for a moment of clarity – what they experienced in Year 7 is now named and organised. They have prior knowledge and experience onto which to connect this new learning.

Following this, students apply these lenses to the study of lived religion across Hindu, Buddhist, Jewish, and Muslim traditions. They explore not just beliefs, but how these are lived out—and how they have developed over time. The historical lens remains important here: religion is not static, you cannot understand the current manifestation of a faith without understanding its history.

Year 9: thinking more critically

By Year 9, students are ready to engage more explicitly and critically.

They begin to think as philosophers—exploring questions of morality, truth, and meaning. They evaluate arguments, compare traditions with greater precision, and recognise complexity within and between religions.

Because the groundwork has been laid, this feels like a natural progression rather than a leap.

It is important to note that this is the first year of implementation of this curriculum. While it has been carefully planned as a three-year journey, we have not yet seen a full cohort move from Year 7 into Year 8 and into Year 9, encountering the explicit teaching of these disciplinary lenses. What we are seeing so far is promising, but this is work in progress. The real test will be how successfully students make those connections over time.

Why this matters

Across our Trust, RE is taught for one hour per week at Key Stage 3, often by non-specialists. Our curriculum needed to be clear, coherent, and teachable, while still maintaining academic depth.

Focusing on ways of knowing has helped us achieve that balance.

It gives structure to the subject, supports teachers in understanding what kind of thinking is required, and helps students move beyond surface-level answers.

Perhaps most importantly, it shifts RE away from being seen as a subject of “opinions” and towards one rooted in structured, academic thinking.

By the time students encounter terms like theology or sociology, they have already experienced them in action. The language doesn’t introduce something new—it gives shape to something familiar.

If there is one principle underpinning our approach, it is this: build the thinking first, name it later.

In all I do I always start with vision. What do I want great RE to look like and what is best for the pupils in front of me?

If we are preparing students to navigate an increasingly complex, multi-faceted and diverse world, they need more than knowledge. They need to think well. That’s why I am convinced a multi-disciplinary, academically rigorous and engaging RE curriculum is the way forward.

I often think of this through the image of a stained-glass window.

• The glass is the substantive knowledge: beliefs, texts, practices.
• The lead is the disciplinary knowledge: theology, philosophy, social sciences.
• The light is the student: their worldview, questions and reflections.

Without the structure, the glass is just fragments. Without the light, it has no meaning. High-quality RE brings all three together.

A disciplinary approach matters because it moves us beyond learning about religion into thinking with it. It gives students access to how scholars make sense of the world; through interpretation, reasoning and evaluation.

One of the most powerful ways to do this is through a philosophical lens.

What does a philosophical lens mean?

Using a philosophical lens means treating RE as a space for big questions, careful reasoning and conceptual precision.

It shifts us from:

• What do people believe?

to

• Does this idea make sense?
• What follows if it’s true?
• How convincing is this argument?

In my classroom, this centres on three things:

• Clarifying concepts
• Constructing arguments
• Engaging with disagreement

Importantly, this doesn’t make RE more abstract—it makes thinking more visible.

What does this look like in practice?

For 11-14 year olds, this fits naturally within the Cornwall Agreed Syllabus, which we follow. The key is not to bolt philosophy on, but to draw it out of the enquiry questions already there.

Start with a big question

Instead of beginning with content, begin with a puzzle. For example, in some of the units of work we teach:

• “How do Sikhs put ideas of equality and service into practice?”

 “Can people ever treat everyone equally?”

This opens up debate before exploring sewa and equality in Sikhi

• “What is so radical about Jesus?”

“What makes an idea or person truly radical?”

Students can then test Jesus’ teachings against their own criteria

• “The Buddha: how and why do his experiences and teachings have meaning for people today?”

“Can suffering ever be a good thing?”

Creates a strong philosophical bridge into the Four Noble Truths

• “How far does it make a difference if you believe in life after death?” – “Would you live differently if you knew what happens after death?”. Sets up the entire evaluative focus of the unit

Use thought experiments

When teaching Buddhism, I use the Ship of Theseus to explore identity. I begin with a philosophical problem:

If something changes completely over time, is it still the same thing?

Students then apply this to themselves:

• If your body changes, are you still the same person?
• If your memories change, what makes you you?

I probe their thinking:

• “What makes you think that?”
• “Could someone disagree?”

Students begin to:

• clarify what they mean by “self”
• give reasons
• recognise alternative views

Only then do I introduce the Buddha’s teaching of anatta (no fixed self). At this point, it isn’t just new information—it’s a response to a question they already care about.

We then evaluate:

• Does this idea make sense?
• What are its strengths?
• What might challenge it?

The thought experiment isn’t just a hook—it structures the lesson. Students are thinking philosophically, not just learning content.

3. Teach the language of argument

If we want students to write academically, they need to be able to think and to talk like philosophers and therefore we must teach them how to build arguments.

In the unit “Should Christians be greener than everyone else?”, I begin with a question:

Do Christians have a greater responsibility to care for the environment than others?

I model a reasoned argument:

• “One reason for this is that Christians believe the world is God’s creation…”
• “However, this might be challenged because people of any worldview can care for the environment.”

Students then practise:

• “One reason for this is…”
• “This might be challenged because…”

I probe their thinking:

• “Why is that a strong reason?”

Only then do we introduce stewardship and dominion. Students evaluate these ideas, not just learn them.

The result? Students move from “I think” to structured reasoning—in both discussion and writing.

In summary

Using philosophical tools doesn’t require a complete overhaul.

The most important shifts are small:

• Start with better questions
• Build in thinking time
• Insist on reasons
• Normalise disagreement

When these become routine, the impact is clear. Students speak with more confidence, write with more precision, and engage more deeply. We are moving through a sphere of good knowledge and understanding towards deep thinking and philosophical discussion.

In this RE:Online focus week ‘Ways of Knowing: Diving into Different Disciplines’ we asked several teachers to share how they use a particular discipline in their classroom. John Semmens is a primary school teacher and philosophy expert. He shares one way of introducing the tools of philosophy into the classroom.

Philosophy, meaning love of wisdom, is an ancient field of study that encompasses huge swathes of human enquiry. Philosophy concerns itself with questions like:

What is real?

How do we know?

How should we live?

What is the point of life?

These Big Questions can take your classroom enquiry to encounter many exciting places and ideas. However, it is difficult to pin down exactly what philosophy is and how it might be used in the RE classroom. As there is a philosophy of almost everything it can be a wishy-washy subject. It can also be a deeply elitist subject full of obscurantism and excessive verbiage. It has a ‘canon’ which can obscure its global and historical diversity and can easily be taught without leaving Europe at all. But it is a universal subject, found in everywhere from Africa, to China, to Baghdad, to Greece and throughout British history. If you are looking to get closer to authentic voices from other cultures then philosophy can help.

Why?

For anyone who has spent any time around small children they will have been asked this question, sometimes hundreds of times a day. In the classroom this question comes up often, and it is good practice to turn the question round and ask, ‘Why do you think?’  This invites children to call upon their own knowledge and understanding, using whatever wisdom they might have to construct a hypothesis. Why not introduce the Socratic Method to class discussions?  You might find that you teach like Socrates already by eliciting understanding from the child rather than simply topping up their heads with knowledge as if they were empty vases. Questioning the world, testing ideas and thinking about your thinking makes for stronger thinkers, after all.

Who?

Who to study is a complex question. I have a philosophy timeline on my wall that ranges all over the world and begins in Ancient Egypt with Ptahhotep and ends with Phillipa Foot, Peter Singer and Prof. Olúfẹ̣́mi Táíwò. It’s important to know at least a little about the people on the timeline so you can link children’s thoughts to the great thinkers of the past. Over the years children have contributed their own philosophers, if they’ve felt someone was missing, and each has struck a chord with that child for a particular reason. As many different cultures, religions and worldviews are present on the wall, the children can see that philosophy is something that all people do. It is part of their heritage, whatever that heritage may be.

How?

A great place to start is to look at a ‘Big Question’, perhaps it’s been raised in conjunction with another study – such as ‘the nature of God’. When looking into something like this, exploring deities from the monotheism of the Abrahamic faiths to the polytheism of Paganism, children might ask how much power does a/the God have? Exploring this question can take you to all sorts of interesting places and philosophy can be one of them. You can take a logical approach: If God is all powerful and all knowing (you could always trace where this idea comes from), does He know what I am going to do before I do it? Does that mean it’s ‘pre-decided’? Thinking about predestination can bring in thinkers from all over the world: Augustine of Hippo, Al‑Ghazālī of Persia, Śaṅkara of India, Chrysippus of Greece or John Calvin of France.  To forge a strong oracy focus you can indulge in wonderful class wide or small group discussions based on thought experiments[1] about actions and their causes, thinking about huge concepts like: Free Will and Fate, the Problem of Evil and Determinism. You can then challenge these classroom ideas with the words of great thinkers, simplified if needs be.

It is a good idea to set out some kind of structure for your class when bringing in philosophy. They aren’t just learning about philosophers, they are philosophers. So, thinking about thinking is the best place to start. Try something like:

In philosophy we:

• Ask Big Questions – these cannot simply be ‘Googled’
• Listen carefully – hear and even repeat back what someone else has said to make sure you’ve understood
• Give reasons – ‘I think this because…’ as a way of ensuring children reason out their thoughts
• Respect differences – understand that reasoning can lead to alternative conclusions
• Change our minds when we need to – I tell my class that ‘you are not married to your ideas and can change your mind if necessary’.

As you can tell from this brief structure you are inviting children to think carefully, this is metacognition at its base and can be complex for some learners. The reasoning aspect is perhaps most important and encourages children to know what they think and why they think it. It is this examination[2] of ‘knowledge’ that makes for the most interesting use of philosophy.

Philosophy can be an articulated orally, it can also be written or expressed artistically. Importantly, it can be a lens to view fundamental questions where all the children in your class can join a conversation that has been raging through history since the dawn of language.

[1] For more on this: How I… teach Phillipa Foot’s Trolley problem to 9-year olds – RE:ONLINE

[2] For more on this: https://www.philosophyinks2.co.uk/post/philosophy-is-about-thinking-sedimentary-my-dear-watson

Why ‘Ways of Knowing’ matter in RE

‘Ways of knowing’ have been spoken about for many years in RE (Ofsted, 2021) and it has become clear that in order to teach high-quality RE it is crucial that pupils are not just taught about ‘what to know’ (substantive knowledge) but that they must be taught ‘how to know’ (disciplinary knowledge). In our new Gloucestershire locally agreed syllabus this push towards explicitly discussing and exploring scholarly methods has seen a toolkit approach introduced so that pupils can consider the tools available to them to investigate concepts, practices or beliefs.

In my classroom, one lesson in particular, showed me the impact that ‘Ways of Knowing’ can have as it radically altered my relationship with my pupils.

Let me explain.

The tool I used: ‘Looking at Data’

One of the tools our syllabus encourages us to use while exploring the history and current​ situation of the Jewish community​ in our area is titled ‘Looking at Data’.

Now I have used data before but in a very limited way. My previous approach would have been to organise the latest national census so that I could highlight the responses of the local Jewish population. During the lesson, we would have briefly discussed how the local population was quite small and identified that the local population is focussed in one locality. I might have answered one or two of the children’s questions, but primarily the encounter would have been managed by me with pupils looking on. I would have been the tour-guide pointing out what I felt was interesting, relevant and useful while ignoring those I felt were irrelevant or confusing.

This time around I decided that embracing ‘Ways of Knowing’ meant me dropping the tour-guide role to become a fellow-traveller.

Moving from ‘tour-guide’ to ‘fellow-traveller’

I started the lesson by explaining what a census was and how the information was collected. We then explored census maps relevant to their locality. As we talked, questions were raised and some answers were suggested but there were also times where we recognised that to answer our questions we might need to explore the locality’s history or complete further surveys. I was reflecting, evaluating and analysing alongside my pupils. I felt that my position had shifted my tour-guide to experienced fellow-traveller. This experience only grew richer when I presented them with the local data responses.

Again, previously, I would have directed their attention towards the data I wanted them to see so that they could come to the conclusions that I wanted them to make. This time, I was determined that to hand the hermeneutical baton over to them.

So, we went through the data slowly allowing the pupils to review it themselves and identify what they felt was ‘noticeable’. This altered my comments from explanation to provocation from “This is because…” and “You can see that…” to “What might this mean for these people?”, “How might it feel to live here?” or “How could you explore that information further?” Interestingly, pupils began to reflect on the population data across different worldviews and how this might lead to them engaging with one another. We did eventually talk about the responses of Jewish people, but we came to it together.

This exploration allowed us to interpret pictures of the local synagogue and its community in a different light. Pupils reflected on how living in a place with fewer Jewish people might impact the way the community gathered or the buildings in which they gathered. We also considered how living in a place with people of similar or differing worldviews might impact your identity or relationships with others.

What changed when I taught ‘Ways of Knowing’ explicitly

After this lesson, I reflected on how explicitly using ‘Ways of Knowing’ altered our RE experience:

1. Explicitly showing a ‘Way of Knowing’ had allowed me to transition from tour-guide who holds all the knowledge to fellow-traveller noticing, exploring and questioning alongside my pupils.
2. The children had embodied the role social-scientists, activists, architects and theologians. Instead of being given my conclusions and those of others they had been empowered ‘to be’ the scholar and to come to their own conclusions.
3. The children had seen that a person’s worldview as well as their traditions and practice might be shaped and formed by their local or national experience. For children in a school whose pupils are pre-dominantly from White-British backgrounds this is powerful. Might this have ramifications for their ideas on race, religion, politics? I would hope so.
4. The children’s confidence with the census and data meant that I could use this in other areas of the unit such as exploring the concept of ‘ethno-religion’.

This experience has encouraged me to embrace ‘ways of knowing’ as a key aspect of my RE teaching. I know that I have a way to go, but I am determined to take that path as a fellow-traveller and not as a tour-guide.

If students leave secondary school knowing what religious people believe, but not how we know it, have we missed something?

This question has shaped my thinking while developing a Religion and Worldviews curriculum across a multi-academy trust. I have made a conscious effort to ensure that students do not just learn content, but are introduced to the multidisciplinary nature of RE. Alongside theology and philosophy, they learn how social sciences help us understand religion and worldviews in the real world.

Why ‘how we know’ matters in RE

Our first unit in Year 7 is What is a worldview? From the outset, students are explicitly introduced to theology, philosophy and social sciences as different ways of knowing. Crucially, they are taught the tools and methods of each discipline so that, as they move through the curriculum, they can recognise these approaches and begin to use them independently.

Learning to think like a social scientist

For social sciences, we introduce a character called Sunil, a social scientist, who guides students through the process of setting up a small-scale sociological study. We start with a familiar context: how people celebrate Christmas. Students generate questions Sunil might ask and then distinguish between those best suited to a survey and those more appropriate for an interview.

Students then design their own small study with classmates. They consider whether they need qualitative or quantitative data and how to design questions that produce reliable results. Finally, we introduce published data from Big Questions Big Answers Vol. 2 – Investigating Worldviews, which explores how people celebrate Christmas. Students compare this with their own findings, identify surprises and discuss what conclusions they can draw.

As the Ofsted Research Review: Religious Education (2021) makes clear, students need to employ disciplinary skills as well as understand how these help us know more about the lived reality of religious and non-religious people.

Exploring lived religion through data

Sunil reappears throughout the curriculum so that students recognise when they are being asked to think like a social scientist. In a Year 8 unit on what it means to be a Sikh in Britain today, students use data from the 2018 British Sikh Report (available via Investigating Sikh Worldviews). Before seeing the data, they predict which of the Five Ks are most and least likely to be worn.

Comparing predictions with the data leads to rich discussion. Why might younger Sikhs be more likely to wear a kara? Why are Sikhs often portrayed as wearing a turban when only around half of Sikh men do?

Questioning evidence and challenging stereotypes

Students are encouraged not just to use data, but to question it. They consider how survey questions might be interpreted and whether a sample can ever fully represent a diverse community. Over time, this helps students move beyond stereotypes and engage more deeply with the complexity within religious traditions.

A further example comes in our Year 9 unit What is religion and is it dying? Students analyse 2021 census data, comparing national trends with their local area. They ask critical questions: what does it mean that the religion question is voluntary? What assumptions sit behind asking, ‘What is your religion?’

We then introduce frameworks such as Grace Davie’s believing, belonging and behaving to help interpret the data. Students also consider global contexts, including Nigeria and India, where patterns look very different. Alongside this, they engage with the work of Linda Woodhead on values, spirituality and the growth of alternative worldviews.

Building confident, critical RE students

As students progress through Key Stage 3, they grow in confidence handling data, questioning sources and recognising patterns in belief and behaviour. Most importantly, they come to see RE as a serious academic subject that requires evidence, interpretation and critical thinking.

If we want students to truly understand religion and worldviews, we need to induct them into how these are studied. RE is not just about what people believe, but about how we come to understand those beliefs in the real world.

 In developing Theology within our Key Stage 3 curriculum, our department has been heavily influenced by a session I attended several years ago at Strictly RE, where Professor Bob Bowie introduced ‘Teachers and Texts: The Practice Guide’. This has shaped both our thinking and classroom practice, particularly in how we explicitly teach pupils the disciplinary skills needed to “think like a theologian”. As the guide suggests, RE has the potential to allow pupils to “inhabit the place of a sacred text scholar”, grappling with texts, exploring multiple interpretations, and recognising the complexity of meaning-making within religious traditions.

Introducing hermeneutics at Key Stage 3: teaching pupils how interpretation works

Too often, pupils encounter religious texts in fragmented ways or as soundbites. This is especially evident at GCSE, where many learn a bank of quotations to support exam answers rather than developing a deeper understanding of the text, its context, and layers of meaning. We wanted to address this at Key Stage 3, ensuring that pupils begin their GCSE studies equipped with the theological knowledge and interpretive skills needed to engage meaningfully with sources of wisdom and authority.

To support this, we have embedded hermeneutics into our Key Stage 3 curriculum as a way of introducing pupils to the process of reading and interpreting texts. Pupils explore multiple meanings within a passage, consider the historical, cultural and religious context, and examine how different individuals and communities might interpret it in different ways. They are also encouraged to reflect on their own perspectives as readers.

Choosing your lens: Thea, Phil and Parker as “Ways of Knowing” in the classroom

We introduce pupils to the disciplines of RE through three characters: Thea the theologian, Phil the philosopher and Parker the social scientist. This helps them recognise the different lenses they might use in a lesson, as well as the types of questions and scholarly approaches associated with each discipline.

Before studying a text in detail, we focus on the person behind it:

• Who is believed to have said or written this?
• When did they live?
• What was life and society like at the time?
• Why is this individual regarded as a source of wisdom and authority today?

Establishing this foundational knowledge allows pupils to engage more confidently with the text itself. We also ensure that key vocabulary, both subject-specific (Tier 3) and more general academic language (Tier 2), is either pre-taught or clarified during reading.

Read like a theologian: guided reading, LAaSMO, and deeper text work

Promoting reading has been a key whole-school and departmental priority in recent years. Our approach includes structured reading strategies, which you can explore further here: https://www.broughtonhigh.co.uk/docs/Curriculum/RE/Reading_strategies_in_RS.pdf

Initial engagement with a text typically involves a guided reading process, where the class reads together and responds to questions designed to support both comprehension and analysis. This often leads into more detailed exploration using the LAaSMO model, as set out in the Practice Guide. This provides a clear and structured approach to help pupils unpack sacred texts in increasing depth. For example, when exploring the Parable of the Good Samaritan from the Bible, we begin by considering the literary form, discussing why parables are used as a method of teaching and how storytelling shapes meaning. Pupils then explore author and audience, developing their understanding of Jesus not only as a religious figure but also as someone responding to the social context of his time. This is deepened through consideration of the setting and character choices, helping pupils recognise why the parable may have been controversial. With this contextual understanding in place, pupils are better able to consider the meaning at the time, interpreting the message as a challenge to social and religious boundaries. Finally, they explore meaning and application today, discussing what “loving your neighbour” might look like in contemporary contexts – locally, nationally and globally – and reflecting on the relevance of sacred texts in the modern world.

Meaning then, meaning now: helping pupils connect sacred texts to contemporary life

The Curriculum and Assessment Review in England emphasises that a successful curriculum should be fit for purpose and equip young people with the knowledge and skills needed to thrive in a rapidly changing world. In RE, exploring how sacred texts might inform responses to modern ethical, social and global challenges helps pupils to engage more meaningfully with the subject, develop critical thinking skills and see the value of what they study in their own lives. By encouraging pupils to evaluate whether religious teachings still hold relevance today, we support them in developing as thoughtful, reflective individuals who can engage with different perspectives and apply their learning beyond the classroom.