Global terms: Blog Categories

Book Review: Secondary Religious Education in Action

Dee Cowan | 22 May, 2026

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 In a society where 37% of people identify as having “no religion”, this could make the subject feel outdated or irrelevant.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.

About

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.

See all posts by Dee Cowan

How We Use ‘Ways of Knowing’ in Our New Trust RE Curriculum

Natalie Parkin | 22 May, 2026

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.

About

Natalie Parkin is the Strategic Lead for Religious Studies and Personal Development at a large Multi-Academy Trust in the North of England. She supports 28 secondary schools in curriculum development, alongside teaching A Level Religious Studies, and has a passion for ensuring every student receives high-quality RE, regardless of postcode or staffing. Currently Natalie is coming to the end of her second year of the Culham St Gabriel's Leadership Scholarship Programme

See all posts by Natalie Parkin

From “What Do They Believe?” to “Does It Make Sense?”: Using Philosophical Tools in Secondary RE

Greg Parekh | 21 May, 2026

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.

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.

About

Greg Parekh is a Head of RE and T&L lead. He is on the NATRE exec, and is a professional consultant to Cornwall SACRE. He is currently participating in the Culham St Gabriel's Leadership Scholarship Programme.

See all posts by Greg Parekh

Why Do You Think That? Using Philosophy to Deepen Learning in Primary RE

John Semmens | 21 May, 2026

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

About

John is the new chair of Norfolk SACRE, blogs about philosophy and teaches in Norwich. Follow him on Twitter @philosophyinKS2 or read his blog at www.philosophyinks2.co.uk

See all posts by John Semmens

Book review: Ways of Knowing: A Toolkit, Primary

Khadija Mahir | 20 May, 2026

Julie Childs, Julia Diamond-Conway, Stephen Pett and Debbie Yeomans

RE Today 2026

Sample pages are available to download here. 

Ways of Knowing: a Toolkit- Primary, which comes as part of a National Association of Teachers of RE (NATRE) membership and is also available to purchase separately, explores how ‘ways of knowing’ can be explicitly taught within the RE classroom. While pupils can often be given answers about religion and worldviews, this does not always equip them with the skills to investigate and make sense of ideas independently. Aimed at primary teachers and RE leaders, the resource addresses a key gap in curriculum design and offers practical strategies to support more meaningful and thoughtful learning. In a context where curriculum intent and implementation are under increasing scrutiny, it feels both timely and relevant.

A central idea in the toolkit is that RE is not only about what pupils know, but how they come to know it. It builds on a model of progression that moves beyond simply teaching facts and skills, towards helping pupils understand when and why to use different approaches. These are organised into the interconnected strands of tools, methods, and disciplines, shifting learning from the delivery of content towards a clearer focus on how knowledge is formed, tested and understood.

The toolkit introduces disciplines such as theology, philosophy, and the human and social sciences. While this may initially feel ambitious for primary pupils, it reflects a purposeful approach to RE that prioritises depth of thinking over surface coverage. This ambition, however, requires careful sequencing and teacher judgement to ensure it is developmentally appropriate and does not lead to cognitive overload.

One of the strongest features of the toolkit is its use of visual icons and practical resources. These create a shared language that can be used consistently across lessons and year groups, supporting both teacher clarity and pupil understanding. If embedded well, they have strong potential to improve curriculum coherence within schools.

There is also potential value beyond individual settings. A more consistent use of shared approaches to disciplinary thinking could support stronger continuity between primary and secondary RE, contributing to a more coherent and cumulative learning journey for pupils.

A key strength of the toolkit is its emphasis on gradual progression and explicit teaching. It aligns well with approaches commonly used in primary classrooms, such as “I do, we do, you do”, where learning is carefully modelled before being applied independently. This structured approach supports teachers in introducing complex ideas in manageable steps, which is particularly important in a subject often taught once a week.

Initially, the breadth of disciplines and methods presented can feel ambitious for a primary context, particularly given limited curriculum time for RE. However, the age-related guidance and staged approach help to address this by encouraging schools to start small and build over time. This reflects strong pedagogical understanding and feels realistic for primary classrooms, where teachers are constantly making decisions about how to balance depth with coverage.

From a leadership perspective, the toolkit provides a useful framework for strengthening curriculum design in RE. It supports schools in developing a shared language for learning, improving consistency across year groups, and embedding metacognitive discussion more deliberately into teaching. It also has clear potential as a driver for staff development, curriculum mapping, and improving subject leadership practice.

In my role as RE lead, I would begin with a small number of carefully selected ways of knowing, such as stories, objects and questioning. These would be explicitly modelled using consistent visual resources and embedded across Key Stage 1 before gradually being extended into Key Stage 2. This phased approach supports staff confidence, reduces cognitive overload, and ensures pupils build secure understanding over time.

Overall, Ways of Knowing: a Toolkit offers a thoughtful and practical framework for strengthening RE teaching. Its focus on how pupils come to know rather than only what they know has the potential to deepen curriculum thinking significantly. While it requires careful implementation and whole-school commitment, its long-term impact could be considerable in developing pupils as reflective, critical learners who can engage meaningfully with religious and worldview questions.

This is exactly the kind of CPD I’ve been waiting for to help move RE forward in my school – a toolkit that immediately shifts the way you plan and teach, and deserves a place on every teacher’s desk.

About

Khadija Mahir is a Primary RE Subject Leader and is currently taking part in our Leadership Scholarship Programme.

See all posts by Khadija Mahir

Looking at Data, Learning to See: A ‘Ways of Knowing’ Lesson in Primary RE

Chris Mooney | 20 May, 2026

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.

About

Chris Mooney is a Deputy Headteacher and RE Subject Leader at a primary school in the Cotswolds. He is the lead practitioner for RE across The Diocese of Gloucester Academies Trust and is passionate about supporting teachers to deliver teaching across the curriculum.

See all posts by Chris Mooney

Thinking Like a Social Scientist in the RE Classroom

Charlotte Newman | 20 May, 2026

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.

About

Charlotte is a Trust Lead for Religious Studies for Archway Learning Trust. She is on the Steering Group for the National Association for Teachers of RE (NATRE) and the Oak Academy Expert Group for RE. She is also a member of Cambridgeshire SACRE and has until recently led an RE local group, only stopping due to a geographical job move. She has delivered much CPD on RE nationally.

See all posts by Charlotte Newman

Thinking Like a Theologian: Practical Tools for Reading Sacred Texts in the secondary RE classroom

Joanne Harris | 19 May, 2026

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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

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.

About

Joanne Harris is a Religious Education teacher at Broughton High School and Vice Chair of NATRE. She is widely involved in national work supporting high-quality RE, including curriculum development, teacher professional learning and advocacy for the subject. Joanne regularly contributes to discussions on classroom practice and leadership in RE across the UK.

See all posts by Joanne Harris

Empowering Students as Sacred Text Scholars: Three Ways to Support Pupils’ Reason as Theologians

Ryan Parker | 19 May, 2026

The move to disciplinarity in religious education is exciting. Helping pupils learn how to learn about, and reflectively engage with, religious and non-religious worldviews is crucial; through knowing and using appropriate tools, methods and questions they can more effectively make sense of and navigate future encounters with religion and belief both within the classroom and outside it.

One key discipline which helps pupils make sense of the diverse religion and belief landscape of which they are participants is theology. Theology, as contextualised for a school setting, is the study of beliefs. For me, theology is not a direct arrow to an answer, but a conversation. For instance, going beyond simple and often misleading notions of ‘this text/teaching/concept means X’, pupils can consider a range of questions, methods and tools to help them richly consider why different people hold the beliefs they do. I like the idea of bringing pupils into the scholarly conversations within theology. They are commentators of and contributors to these vibrant discussions – not merely observers.

Many theologians are interested in what happens when readers encounter sacred texts (an area called hermeneutics – a fancy word for interpretation).

  • How do different people engage with them?
  • What do different people think they mean?
  • And why do different people interpret them differently?

This is an area with lots of fascinating questions – particularly as there are wide-ranging views as to how texts could, should and should not be read. Helping pupils understand and consider some of the questions that theologians might ask of texts and readers supports them in understanding how the same text can be interpreted differently by different people and the implications of this.

Below are three ways to support pupils to reason as theologians when engaging with sacred texts. I wonder which of these you might try out this term?

Explore the context(s). Stories/texts emerge from particular places and times.

  • Who told/wrote this story?
  • Where?
  • When?
  • Why?
  • Who for?
  • What response were they hoping from listeners/readers?

Out of these, which ones can we ever truly know – and does this matter? Exploring different ideas, where possible, helps students recognise that discussions around context are continuing and shifting fields of understanding. Based on the ideas offered, what do pupils currently think?

Focus on people. Just as considering the (hypothetical) first reception of a story/text is useful, so is exploring how different people – from different times and contexts – engage/have engaged with a text. I particularly like using artwork here. For instance, here are three different artists’ responses to the Parable of the Prodigal Son:

Invite pupils to compare these artworks and then pose the following questions to help students consider the role positionality can play in interpretation:

  • Why do you think the artist painted it? What meaning(s) and response(s) do you think the artist was trying to convey/provoke?
  • How do you think the artist’s context and worldview has shaped their artwork? (AI can usefully bring some background information here)
  • Which artwork do you think most reflects your view of what this text is about?
  • If you were to represent this biblical text, what might you depict? Why? How might this idea be shaped by your worldview? Why might someone take a different view?

Additionally, if possible, invite actual people from inside or outside the school to share their thoughts on a text. What has shaped their view? Have they always thought this?

Power and parameters. Many theologians raise questions about power and parameters. Why not explore the following as a class?

  • Many texts are preceded by titles – the Parable of the Prodigal Son is a case it point. Yet, these titles vary in different parts of the world. To what extent do particular titles influence what readers takeaway from the text? Who decides on these titles? What could other titles be? Does this reflect our biases?
  • Can texts be interpreted however we want, or are some interpretations inaccurate, inappropriate, or even irresponsible? Who gets to decide this, and on what grounds? Anthony Thiselton’s responsible hermeneutics is great for ideas on the limits of interpretation here.

About

Ryan Parker is the RE and Christian Ethos Adviser for the Diocese of St Albans, with teaching experience across primary and middle school settings. He recently completed a PhD at the University of Birmingham, focussing on knowledge-rich textual enquiry in primary RE. You can read more about his PhD in this recent Research Spotlight. He also hosts the ‘Flourishing Together’ podcast series which invites discussion around various aspects of high-quality RE. X: @ryanparker1991 BlueSky: @ryanparker-91.bsky.social

See all posts by Ryan Parker

Book Review: Ways of Knowing: A Toolkit, Secondary

Lyndsey Leech | 18 May, 2026

Stephen Pett, Knut Aukland, Trevor Cooling, Chris Cotter, Julia Diamond Conway, Jane Gatley, Is’Haaq Jasat, Richard Kueh, Jon Lanman, Carissa Sharp, Rachel Shilltoe, Simeon Zahl

RE Today 2026

Sample pages are available to download here.

Intended as a contribution to the discussion on implementing ways of knowing into the secondary curriculum, this publication is a comprehensive guide which covers why it is a piece of work worth undertaking, what the disciplines entail and how to begin introducing them into the curriculum. It includes contributions from those in the RE world and the disciplines such as Theology, Sociology and Philosophy among others. It is a great resource for those looking for a place to begin in this area and is also food for thought for anyone wanting to take this work to a deeper level and therefore has pearls of wisdom for teachers at all stages of curriculum development.

The publication, which comes as part of a National Association of Teachers of RE (NATRE) membership and is also available to purchase separately,  begins with an introduction to where the term ‘ways of knowing’ came from. For many classroom teachers, their first exposure to this may have been the Ofsted research review (2021) and its follow up ‘Deep and meaningful? The religious education subject report (2024). The resource highlights that in order to fully understand what ‘ways of knowing’ truly are, we have to look at how this concept has evolved, beginning with the work of Rob and Giles Freathy on methods of study (Introduction to the RE:searchers approach, 2018)  This model introduced the practice of considering methods when teaching substantive knowledge. It was then adapted by the RE Today team in the Challenging knowledge in RE series (2021) before appearing in Ofsted reviews and being included in the RE Council’s Handbook for Curriculum writers (2024). Setting out the journey in this way for the reader shows that a focus on ways of knowing is not simply a requirement of Ofsted but that it has been considered an important part of teaching in RE for some time and is therefore worth investing in.

The toolkit then lays out a rationale for including methodology in the curriculum which is compelling. Hearing the different perspectives on why we should include this element in our curriculum can only inspire teachers to action.

Pett tells us that it brings a transparency to the curriculum so that pupils do not simply have to accept what they are being told. He notes that drawing students’ attention to methods and disciplines will also help them to apply these themselves, creating independent learners. Referencing the work of Jo-Fraser Pearce and Alexis Stones (2023) which calls those who are able to research and critically evaluate ‘epistemic haves’ and those who are not able to do these things ‘epistemic have -nots’ it is made clear to the reader that not including ways of knowing in the curriculum could cause some students to be further behind than their counterparts in other schools who have had this experience.

Dr Knut Auckland raises the issue that students need to become comfortable with the fact that scholars do not always agree and be able to take a neutral approach after looking at different sides of the argument. Given the content that we teach in RE and the reaction that it can bring from students, this is an important thing to consider. Introducing students to methodologies and disciplines can therefore support them in looking at questions they often find so challenging.

Dr Richard Kueh adds that it is important to support students in considering where evidence comes from and whose account should be accepted in a world of false information. This will help them to make informed decisions.

Finally, Professor Trevor Cooling proposes that to achieve the scholarly RE we all aim for, we can take lessons from how PHD students approach their work, with a focus question followed by selecting the best methods to find the answer and then examining their own position.

Therefore, to achieve academically rigorous RE which creates independent learners with the skills required to study our subject to the highest level, it is imperative that students are exposed to ways of knowing in our curriculum.

As a curriculum planner, it is difficult to know where to begin with this task. The resource continues by suggesting that we do not simply need to dive straight in to including different disciplines in our lessons. We can build in methodology in small steps with our younger students by asking questions, analysing data and observations. This introduces the skills that underpin the disciplines before exposing students to them on a deeper level. The icons in the resource are a helpful way to alert students to when they are using these skills and support dual coding in our resources. The icons are clear and easy to interpret. Repeated exposure to them in lesson materials will show students that they already have the skills required to think like a Theologian or a Sociologist and will alert them to where they need to apply these skills.

The publication moves on to show how we might move from incorporating methodologies into the curriculum to a position where students are able to consider issues through the disciplines. It includes a helpful guide from a Theologian, a Sociologist, a Philosopher a Religious Studies expert and an Anthropologist on what questions they ask and how they approach finding out the answers. This is a valuable overview for teachers which allows them to be crystal clear as to what each discipline is about. It is too easy to link any lessons on religious belief with theology and any challenging questions with philosophy and this section of the guide sets out what the discipline involves and which areas of the curriculum it might link to. This information supports teachers in ensuring they are not including surface level references to disciplines in lessons, but that they truly understand the value of each area and how it might enhance the student experience.

Finally, the publication exemplifies how we might take a multi-disciplinary approach to answering questions in the classroom. It uses the example of the Exploring Atheism project and shows how disciplines might be used to evaluate the reasons for non-belief in God. Using a step-by-step guide, the reader is shown how to introduce this in the classroom. The icons highlight which disciplines and methods are being used. Seeing the project broken down like this gives a clear structure for extending this kind of approach to other topics within the curriculum which require our students to evaluate. It makes the process of introducing ways of knowing on a deeper level more manageable.

Having read this publication, the reader will be left with a rationale for developing ways of knowing in their curriculum, a clear idea of the disciplines they might include, a step-by-step guide on how to do this and a way to take it to the next level. The toolkit ensures that this area of the curriculum is not simply paying lip service to the recommendations of documents but is in place and is enhancing the learning and skills of our students. It Truly demystifies this vital area of our subject.

This book is a must read for all secondary teachers of RE. It’s the guide I have been waiting for, whilst having a go on my own!

About

Lyndsey Leech is Head of Religious Studies in a Secondary School in Oldham. She is Vice Chair of Oldham SACRE and in Year 1 of the Culham St Gabriel Leadership Scholarship. Lyndsey is a passionate advocate of educating the whole child by emphasising the academic side of the subject inside of the classroom and providing opportunities for students to use and extend their learning outside of the classroom.

See all posts by Lyndsey Leech