Viewing archives for Curriculum

Reflections on religious education, the Francis review and the national curriculum in England, with a little help from W.B. Yeats’ ‘Second Coming’ (1919).

Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world…
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand…
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

Yeats’ poetic thought-world is thrilling. His poetry imagines chapters of history turning: one epoch making way for another.

Might we be on the verge of an educational chapter in England wherein religious education (RE) occupies a strengthened position in the school curriculum? If so, might the fortunes of the subject be much improved?

Surely some revelation is at hand.

Before we think about the next educational epoch or chapter, let’s look back. Let’s contrast our current educational epoch – one in which the Francis Curriculum and Assessment review is being conducted – with one that came before: the era of the legislation which underpins RE’s current status.

It’s clear that the kind of educational assumptions sitting behind the 1988 legislation, and reflected within it, do not reflect the realities of schools today:

• school structures have evolved: not all state-funded schools are maintained by local authorities (40:1(1)a,b,c);
• assessment has moved on: practices are not shaped by end of key stage attainment targets (40:2(2)a);
• historical duties are not enacted: it is simply not that case that “all pupils in attendance at a maintained school… on each school day take part in an act of collective worship.” (40:6(1))

In this legislation, RE sits as part of the “basic curriculum”. The basic curriculum for state-funded schools was imagined to include the national curriculum and RE. Yet, today, leaders and governors appear to have collective memory loss of this fact. But even the language of the “basic curriculum” has largely been lost in the annals of time.

The kind of educational epoch which placed RE within a “basic curriculum” is quite different from the current one. Indeed, today, if any “curriculum” is perceived to be “basic” at all, it’s the national curriculum. What once obtained, no longer suffices.

Clearly, the status of RE has not benefitted from this historical distinction, however worthy or defensible the reasons for it were at the time. It would be very hard indeed to argue that the subject is thriving, with pupils across the country equitably enjoying high-quality religious education in schools. In my final RE subject report at Ofsted, I reflected on a sad state of affairs for RE in many schools within the research sample. I (and my colleague Hazel Henson, HMI) found:

• RE that didn’t help pupils prepare for living in a complex world
• RE that gave pupils at best a superficial grasp of religious and non-religious traditions
• RE that didn’t help pupils interrogate claims and statements about religion and non-religion
• Worryingly unreliable assessment practices in RE
• An absence of professional development in RE for teachers, mirrored by pupils being left with profound misconceptions

It would be hard to argue that the status of RE outside the national curriculum has served pupils in England’s schools well.

The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity

Yeats uses the line “the best lack all conviction” from Shakespeare’s Hamlet to refer to the aristocracy. But these words also helpfully illuminate the current dilemma of RE: it is those with the greatest potential who may struggle with doubt and uncertainty about change the most.

When it comes to RE being included within the national curriculum, rather than sitting awkwardly adjacent to it, there is much enthusiasm from RE stakeholders (by which I mean RE leaders, teachers, practitioners, advisers and professionals). There are also some who have expressed displeasure with the idea.

Why might they object? Some religious communities who run state-funded VA schools (and ex-VA academies) can determine ‘denominational RE’. This kind of RE is outside the remit of Ofsted to inspect. Others like existing arrangements that RE content in maintained schools can be decided at local authority level. Though they positively advance and prioritise RE, these individuals and institutions prefer the current arrangements. Question: is it worth giving up control?

Yet I can see policy positions that can offer resolution. Mitigations could still be built into any post-Francis-review national curriculum. The current national curriculum for history, for instance, already includes flexibilities on studying local history.

In the case of schools with a religious character, it is more likely the case that these schools offer more RE curriculum time than their non-religious character counterparts. There should be nothing to prevent them from teaching beyond a minimum entitlement (a position that reflects the current Secretary of State’s approach to teacher pay, which might have a ‘floor’, but no ‘ceiling’).

Slouching towards Bethlehem, ready to be born

On the 8th January 2025, the second reading of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill in the House of Commons included a discussion of the Francis review. In it, the former Secretary of State Damian Hinds discussed his perception of the dangers of an over-specified, overly-prescribed National Curriculum:

“…in sensitive subjects like history, like English literature, like RE, we’ve always in this country, since the start of the National Curriculum, taken an approach of not specifying what kids will learn… it’s not a list of things you will learn in schools… it’s a broad framework that helps guard against the… over-politicisation of education.”

Whether or not you agree with Hinds, his wording suggests that RE is already part of the National Curriculum! Misconceptions are rife.

RE – and those responsible for leading and teaching it – deserve some clarity at the very least. RE’s journey to the present hasn’t been the smoothest of paths. The inclusion of RE in the next chapter of the National Curriculum is evidently one way to obtain clarity and more-secure footing. Slouching towards Bethlehem is certainly apt, if it is indeed to happen at all.

RE plays a vital role in helping students make sense of the multicultural society we live in. Yet, its provision across schools remains a postcode lottery, often undervalued and an afterthought, as Ofsted identified in its 2023 annual report [1]. While I was initially sceptical of calls to include RE in the National Curriculum, I am now convinced that it is the only way to ensure equitable, high quality RE for all.

As a Trust Lead for RE, I see firsthand the disparities between schools, even within a MAT that values the subject. A lack of specialist teachers is a persistent challenge, with only 51% of secondary lessons taught by specialists due to insufficient government funding for teacher training. Although teacher bursaries have recently been reinstated, years without them has left a significant gap. Teachers with other specialisms lack the confidence to deliver RE effectively, leading to superficial teaching and a deficit of religious literacy [2]. This carries societal risks.

We have seen an obvious rise in divisive narratives and political extremist ideology, amplified by propaganda on platforms like Tik Tok, which is having a profound effect on our young people, perpetuating stereotypes and exacerbating ignorance. High quality RE equips children with critical thinking and ethical awareness that enables them to navigate an increasingly diverse society. As Chine McDonald aptly states, ‘[studying] theology and religious studies [is the superpower needed] to open our eyes up to the variety of different beliefs and worldviews that exist in our world’. [3]

Another key reason for my advocation is the absence of an agreed body of learning for RE. Local Agreed Syllabi (LAS), created by over a hundred Standing Advisory Councils on Religious Education (SACREs) working in isolation, vary significantly in depth and quality. Many are underfunded and are unable to fulfil their statutory duties. Some LAS are outdated and religious representation on SACREs can sometimes lead to vested interests undermining a balanced view. Ofsted’s ‘Deep and Meaningful?’ report highlighted this inconsistency and the need for clearer guidance [4].

With a National Curriculum in place, schools can focus on supporting teachers with specialist training to implement and adapt it to reflect their local context, using centralised resources. SACREs, freed from the burden of creating LAS, could provide schools with guidance on local case studies and resources to complement the national framework [5], preserving their valuable community specific insight.

The National Content Standard for RE, developed by the Religious Education Council [6], is a strong starting point, eliminating many of the issues that face the subject by ensuring every child is entitled to robust, academically rigorous RE, while holding schools accountable to a clear benchmark.

However, embedding RE into the National Curriculum is not without challenges. A key concern for me is who will determine its content. Historically, governments have provided limited support for RE and there is a risk that political agendas could skew its focus. To avoid this, while input from faith communities, academics and policy makers is important, the voice of teachers at the coalface must be central. Practitioners are uniquely positioned to translate curriculum frameworks into meaningful lessons. They understand better than anyone the realities of the classroom – what engages students, addresses misconceptions and meets diverse needs. Teachers must at the heart of decision making to ensure the curriculum is effective, practical and objective.

To conclude, the structural issues facing RE leave little alternative but to include it in the National Curriculum. This would raise standards and ensure they every child has access to the RE they deserve. By addressing the challenges head on and empowering teachers, we can unlock RE’s transformative potential: inspiring young people to engage meaningfully with the complex, pluralistic world around them.

[1] The annual report of His Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Education, Children’s Services and Skills 2023/24 – GOV.UK

[2] Why RE matters – Theos Think Tank – Understanding faith. Enriching society.

[3] Chine McDonald: Superpower to see other viewpoints  

[4] Deep and meaningful? The religious education subject report – GOV.UK

[5] A National RE Curriculum with a Local Touch – RE with Mrs McGee

[6] National content standard for Religious education in England

Does RE need a government national plan of support? Absolutely. Should RE be compulsory for all schools? No question. Should that requirement be enforced more effectively? Of course. Should RE be included in the National Curriculum (NC)? Hmmm – I’m not so sure about that.

There’s no doubt that the situation around the provision of RE is not good. But let’s not forget what we have achieved in RE in the UK. This was brought home to me last summer when I worked in Australia for three months. RE in government schools is weak, often non-existent. Let me introduce you to someone that I met.

Herbert is a social entrepreneur from Melbourne. There is no RE in government schools of his State of Victoria. He’s the CEO of Faith Values, a start-up, charitable company seeking to bring RE back into the curriculums of both Victorian schools and ultimately into the other States and Territories. Faith Values is seeking to model our REC by drawing together faith communities and Education professionals. Herbert is working in partnership with the State Curriculum Authority. It has chosen to integrate a Religion and Worldviews approach into their curriculum because they recognize the quality educational experience it offers pupils.

How is this case study relevant to the NC debate? I take you back to the genius recommendation of the Commission on RE, namely the proposal of a National Statement of Entitlement (NSE) not a call for RE to be a NC subject. This is important because the focus of the NSE is to define a vision and a standard, not curriculum content. This has two very important consequences.

First, it focuses attention on what teaching RE is seeking to achieve, not just on enforcing its presence in the curriculum. This stimulates discussion about the educational benefits of RE rather than just securing a slot in the timetable. A mindset of innovation rather than conformity is promoted. The value of the NSE approach is indicated by the Australians turning to the UK when they want to introduce quality RE into their schools.

Second, it avoids stimulating a political bun fight between warring parties who want to secure control of the NC. Of course, the RE community won’t sink to such squabbles (note irony!), but there would be nothing to stop a Schools Minister deciding that they knew best (there is past form).

The REC has published a National Content Standard for RE using the NSE, which models the NC documents of other subjects. However, it’s not a curriculum, but a standard for benchmarking different curriculums. This means that professional discussion about different approaches in different contexts can flourish without someone imposing a straightjacket curriculum on every school.

Is being part of the NC a good idea for RE? Possibly as it should compel schools to timetable the subject. The danger is that the huge benefits of the NSE with its emphasis on vision, contextual innovation and standards gets lost in conformity to an imposed NC. That would be a significant loss.

Religious Education was the first subject to be required by law to be taught in the school curriculum. RA Butler’s 1944 Education Act represented a compromise between the Churches and the State both of which had for centuries provided school education for communities throughout the country.

The current, nationally mandated, National Curriculum was established 44 years later. The 1988 Education Act requires all public schools to teach all children the main subjects. RE was excluded from this national curriculum quite deliberately – apparently because of concerns about extending parents’ right to withdraw pupils from the RE curriculum to the whole national curriculum. Whether this fear was well founded or not, the exclusion of RE from the national curriculum had serious consequences.

RE found itself in the anomalous position of being required by law to be taught in all schools but not as part of the national curriculum. It was a half-way house which, particularly in community schools, led many teachers, parents and pupils to downgrade the study and understanding of religion and other beliefs. Efforts became increasingly focused upon strong academic performances in the national curriculum subjects, so not including RE.

Despite the interest of many pupils in the study of religion and the related subjects of beliefs, morals, ethics and philosophy it became increasingly difficult to timetable RE in the school week (except in faith schools); the general quality of RE teaching and assessment has fallen, and recruitment of RE teachers became increasingly difficult. In very many schools the basic legal requirement to teach RE is not being fulfilled.

The time has come to re-establish the importance of RE in the school curriculum.

The opportunity arises with the establishment of the curriculum and assessment review. This will report on an interim basis early this year and then finally in the autumn. This will be the most thoroughgoing review of the school curriculum for decades. Issues which are not addressed in this review are unlikely to be tackled seriously in coming decades. It is an important point of decision.

This means that all those concerned to establish a balanced place for religion in our national life and in our schools face a choice between 3 possible outcomes.

First some will argue that religion has no place whatsoever in our schools. They will cite countries like France and the United States which, on the basis of their histories, prevent publicly funded schools from teaching about religion. I believe this view to be profoundly wrong, whatever your individual religious beliefs. The plain fact is that religion is an inescapably important aspect of our modern world. Even those who hoped that social and scientific progress would lead to the decline of any form of religious belief concede the continuing significance of religion. The most cursory examination of the world today demonstrates the importance of religion and belief in the affairs of the world. Moreover, high quality religious education promotes community cohesion.

Second is the course of inaction, making no change to the current arrangements. This will commend itself to those who hope to steer clear of thinking about the problems of the status quo and to avoid stirring up hornets’ nests. However, procrastination will not make the issues disappear. It would be dangerous to allow RE to continue in its current anomalous position – outside the mainstream school curriculum, ignored by many and declining – as described by Ofsted – in many respects.

Neglect simply allows unbalanced, even propagandistic, pictures of religious beliefs to be fostered in ways which can stimulate dangerous conflict. High quality religious education in schools is the best weapon to tackle that. The reformed curriculum should promote this.

The third option, which should now be seized, is to put RE into our national curriculum and give it the status it deserves as an essential part of a child’s education about the world in which we live.

This is not straightforward. There are important issues about the name of the subject itself (I favour ‘Religion and Worldviews’), about who should determine the content of the RE curriculum, and about the new role, if any, of the local Standing Advisory Councils on Religious Education (SACREs) However these are subsidiary questions.

The fundamental choice, which I hope that the curriculum and assessment review body will recommend, is to include RE in our new national curriculum to equip children as they address the challenges of our modern world.

Imagine…

You are a 14-year-old pupil about to choose your options…you are wondering whether to study GCSE religious studies… You have had a mixed experience of the subject so far. You attended a Primary Academy in Key Stage 1 where you learned primarily about Christianity and Judaism. At Key Stage 2 your parents moved house to the neighbouring county and the state maintained primary school you attended followed the locally agreed syllabus. This syllabus specified that pupils would start learning about Judaism at Key Stage 2 so you ended up learning about all the things you’d done in Key Stage 1 all over again. However, you had to learn very quickly about Islam as you hadn’t learned about that before yet everyone else in the class had. On top of that RE was often on a Friday afternoon (maybe so Ofsted wouldn’t look at it?) and sometimes your teacher just ‘ran out of time’ for the lesson. You felt disadvantaged.

You were looking forward to joining a secondary academy which is part of a large MAT. You hoped things would improve. However, as everyone had done something different in RE in the primary phrase (some had followed an agreed syllabus, some a MAT curriculum, some came from schools with a religious character), the curriculum did repeat some things you had done before. Your teacher is not qualified to teach RE either, they are a geography teacher who has some spare time on their timetable apparently. You like the religion and worldviews approach though which focuses on real lived experience of believers. You’re puzzled that friends who have gone to different secondary schools don’t have the same experience. One friend said they didn’t have RE at all but had a few lessons on religion in life skills. Another said the way their religious practice was presented in the classroom didn’t reflect her own experience. Another was more positive saying they had three lessons a fortnight to learn in depth and everyone was required to do GCSE Religious Studies. You really want to know how different people live in and view the world but are not sure you’re prepared for a GCSE based on your experience, but sadly your school doesn’t offer statutory non-examined RE. You wonder why there is so much inconsistency and incoherency in the RE curriculum. It all feels rather unjust and unfair to you…

Like many individuals, schools and organisations, I am currently working with colleagues to submit our evidence to the curriculum and assessment review. As we look deeply at the evidence from over the last 10 years a key theme has come through strongly.

Inequity

• The weak position of RE within the basic curriculum means that its vulnerability leads to inequity of pupils’ experience.
• The provision of RE curriculum is inconsistent, this means some pupils are not receiving their entitlement to the subject thus leading to inequity.
• There are no common curriculum standards for RE, meaning that expectations of pupils in terms of outcomes are inequitable.
• There is a lack of consistency and continuity of content in relation to RE, thus pupils’ experience of the subject is inequitable.

This inequity means that some children and young people are inadvertently being disadvantaged. Currently inequality, lack of diversity (e.g. within worldview traditions, cultural representation) and injustice are built into the system in terms of the curriculum for religious education. Many, if not all, of these inequalities are not intentional. I don’t think anyone who is involved with the subject sets out to bring inequality, but this is increasingly how it plays out in practice. I think it is time to say the status quo is not acceptable for our children and young people. It is time to restore an established entitlement to the religious education curriculum for all pupils in all schools.

However, this is extremely challenging, because for RE, the curriculum is bound up with structures. To call for RE to go into a new National Curriculum, for example, means that the whole religion and worldviews community will have to come together for the common good. This will mean humility of approach, service to others, building consensus and seeking resolutions together; this is crucial if we are to bring justice. It will not be easy, but I do believe it is possible.

I also think it is vital. If the new national curriculum is to be applied to all schools (including academies), then as a religion and worldviews community we need to ask ourselves what would happen if RE is not part of a new national curriculum? Provision is already at crisis point, recruitment and retention of teachers of RE is hugely challenging and funding of the subject by previous governments has been inadequate. If the subject is not part of a new national curriculum, it could be further side-lined; it is I believe an existential moment for the subject.

So I offer a brief summary of the key points of our submission to the call for evidence. It sets out why we believe the only solution to the four areas of inequity is for RE to be in a new national curriculum. The RE community would need to work out what this meant in practice, but the National Content Standard for RE in England provides a very good starting point.

The issues:

Position: The subject has a vulnerable place in the basic curriculum. In addition, its position as a compulsory subject is not valued and the introduction of the EBacc has impacted negatively on the subject. Sitting outside a new national curriculum which would apply to all schools, including academies would place the subject in an even more vulnerable and inequitable position.

Provision: The amount of time given to the RE curriculum is inconsistent. In some cases RE is not taught in certain year groups or key stages. Some schools are not familiar with the current legal framework. Some curricula require all pupils to study GCSE religious studies to meet the current statutory requirement, whilst others do not. There is an evidenced correlation between studying GCSE Religious Studies and a better overall Progress 8 points score, particularly for those who are socio-economically disadvantaged but some pupils do not receive this opportunity. Some pupils are epistemically disadvantaged by not receiving a quality RE curriculum, leading to educational and social injustice.

Standards: There is no national benchmark for the subject leading to inequity in terms of standards. This means there is inconsistency in terms of expectations, pupil outcomes and therefore standards. There are over 100 different agreed syllabi, plus syllabi developed by MATs and providers of schools with a religious character. This makes it difficult to hold schools to account. It raises questions about effective progression and assessment when there is so much variation. There is often repetition of content leading to low standards, lack of knowledge and skills.

Content: There is inconsistent religious education content across all types of school due to the variety of syllabi (e.g over 100 agreed syllabi, numerous MAT curricula). This leads to poor sequencing, weak progression and diversity of pupil experience in terms of developing religion and worldview literacy. Pupils who move from one school to another or in/out of alternative provision, are from a transient community or whose parents are in the armed forces are particularly disadvantaged. The lack of consistency means there is no coherent progression between key stages. There is too much, and out-dated content at GCSE, which does not reflect the lived religion and belief landscape, nor different disciplinary lenses. Pupils (and teachers) are often unable to see themselves in the curriculum.

Restoring Equity- a proposed solution

After much discussion and consideration, there is only one way forward which adequately addresses all four equity issues. This is for RE (religion and worldviews education) to go into a new National Curriculum because it will confirm the status of RE as an equal subject to others and ensure it is not disadvantaged by weak resourcing and curriculum time. The National Content Standard for RE in England (2023) published by the RE Council of England and Wales provides an important way forward, a starting point for discussion, a place for negotiation to begin.

Position: This proposed solution addresses the issue of inequity of position by placing RE alongside national curriculum subjects. Parity is restored.

Provision: This proposed solution addresses the issues of inequity of provision. All schools would be required to follow a new national curriculum for the subject. I am aware consideration would need to be given to EYFS and to non-examined Key Stage 4 and 5 provision. In our submission we make suggestions for the latter relating in relation to preparedness for work and engagement in a complex, global society.

Standards: This proposed solution addresses the issues of inequity of standards by providing a common benchmark for all schools. There is already consensus among the religion and worldviews community around the National Content Standard for RE in England. Expectations of pupils would be the same regardless of what type of school pupils attended. Having a common benchmark would enable the subject to be compared to other curriculum subject standards more appropriately and would support bodies such as Ofsted to hold schools to account.

Content: This proposed solution addresses inequity of content by providing as a minimum a National Content Standard (2023). In addition, there should be a move towards a religion and worldviews approach, considering the lived religion and worldviews landscape, including the diversity in and between different worldviews. There should be a move away from a world religions paradigm. Steps should be taken to build an inclusive curriculum where pupils are be able to see themselves within it. A new GCSE, or equivalent, should consider the real religious landscape, disciplinary knowledge and different ways of assessing (including oracy) pupils’ substantive knowledge. There should be a focus on the educational intent of the curriculum for RE.

In addition, in our submission we have raised the following points which we believe contribute to ensuring equity for all pupils in all schools in relation to religious education. We are advocating for all these elements of a religion and worldviews education to become part of a new national curriculum.

The importance of:

• the contribution of religion and worldviews education to positive community relations
• the contribution of religion and worldviews education to preventing Antisemitism, Islamophobia and Far Right Extremism
• the contribution of religion and worldviews education to promoting and protecting freedom of religion or belief as a human right
• religion and worldviews education for positive mental health and well-being
• religion and worldviews education in preparedness for work and for university readiness
• a hermeneutical approach to religion and worldviews education for development of critical thinking and resilience
• the local dimension, including a role for local or regional advisory groups similar to those found in other humanities subjects.

I believe it is time for the religion and worldviews community to come together for the common good of all children and young people. Culham St Gabriel’s vision is to seek a broad-based, critical and reflective religion and worldviews education contributing to a well-informed, respectful and open society. We have a unique, once in a generation opportunity to move towards realising this vision.

Kathryn Wright
CEO, Culham St Gabriel’s
November 2024

This is the view of Culham St Gabriel’s staff and a significant majority of the Culham St Gabriel’s trustees.

As this is a summary I have not cited all our evidence. However it includes the following:

A New Settlement Revised (2018)
Annual Church of England SIAMS Report (2024)
DfE Workforce Data (2024)
NATRE Primary Survey (2022).
NATRE Secondary Survey (2023)
Ofsted Subject Report (2024)
Ofsted Annual Report (2023)
Policy Institute Report (2023)
RE for Real (2015)
The Bloom Review (2023)
The Commission on RE (2018)
The Commission on Religion and Belief in Public Life (2015)
The Religion and Worldviews Suite of Resources (2024)
Understanding Unbelief (2015)

Culham St Gabriel’s Campaign Policy Briefings available at www.cstg.org.uk
Culham St Gabriel’s Focus Group (October Meeting, 2024)

As Head of Department in a Secondary School, I had heard the idea of ‘worldviews’ and disciplinary knowledge and was keen to understand more. From talking to others and attending conferences it soon became apparent that while this move is potentially very positive for our curriculum, it is not straightforward. Mentioning ‘worldviews’ occasionally would not be sufficient.

I started with Making Every RE Lesson Count by Louise Hutton and Dawn Cox. This offers a clear summary of the concept of worldviews and disciplinary knowledge, which gave me confidence in understanding the shift in thinking in the RE world. I also gained some idea of how this could be implemented in the classroom.

I am lucky to have the opportunity to work with Jennifer Jenkins on the REC’s Curriculum Handbook; a project to bring to life religion and worldviews curriculum frameworks. I also benefitted from a Farmington Scholarship which hugely expanded my understanding. My contribution has been to connect worldviews thinking and disciplinary knowledge, in order to support teachers across the Key Stages, in their understanding and practical approaches.

Two ‘stand out’ moments had a big influence on my thinking. Firstly, encountering Tim Hutchings and Celine Benoit’s research with teachers and worldviews opened my eyes. Their research shows that a grasp of ‘worldviews’ is varied and inconsistent in the RE world. This led me to ask how teachers can reach a consensus on what is meant by worldviews?

The second ‘stand out’ moment was aligning the Warwickshire Agreed Syllabus and worldviews thinking with Jennifer Jenkins and Alice Thomas. We imagined a curriculum where progression and connections in knowledge were embedded throughout. We realised we were talking about a complete change of approach and vision, not just the addition of some worldviews to what we already had. This was an exciting, and scary, realisation!

This journey started over two years ago. My thinking is certainly in a very different place. Although I feel more secure in my understanding of the religion and worldviews approach, I would not claim expertise, as we are all still learning. I think one of the most important aspects of my work was to network and talk to many different people about the changes. The aim of the work is to support teachers with the new approach. There are a wealth of CPD opportunities out there for RE teachers, I feel that supporting others to access guidance and support has been a key part of my contribution.

When I look back to the start of this journey, I can see my understanding has grown and changed. A religion and worldviews approach does not describe stand-alone lessons at the start of each year, where pupils reflect on their own worldview. For the new approach to be effective and meaningful it must be embedded through single lessons, medium and long-term plans, with careful consideration of progression and sequencing. It is important for pupils to encounter a wide range of different worldviews, covering individual, community and global worldviews. This endows the breadth and depth of understanding needed if pupils are to reflect on and explore their own worldviews. Disciplinary questions used to frame the subject knowledge helps to ensure a breadth and depth of exploration. This could be achieved by analysing data, personal stories or art to offer a rich and connected understanding of worldviews in all their forms. When I look back at my experiences, learning and understanding, it is clear there is a way to go, but I feel positive and hopeful as to the value of this shift within the subject.

Dawn Cox and Louise Hutton (2021) Making Every RE Lesson Count: Six Principles to Support Religious Education Teaching, Crown House Publishing

It seems wonderful to be able to purchase a scheme of work that enables your school to teach excellent RE, equipped with PowerPoints, lesson plans, assessment tools, and so on. However, the expense may not just be to your school budget but may also be at the expense of teachers’ understanding and pupils’ learning.

This dilemma is not just found in RE but resounds throughout the curriculum.  In recent research on primary maths, Marks, Barclay and Barnes (2023) noted schools curating of curriculum materials from a range of sources but highlighted concerns about the quality of these curriculum resources and textbooks. They found resources of dubious quality, with a particular concern about the limited cognitive demand of resources. Many resources focus on the pupils’ tasks, rather than the underpinning mathematical concepts. A similar research audit has not been conducted in RE but from enabling trainee teachers to teach RE in any school anywhere in the world with any syllabus I have had to examine many schemes and resources.  I offer up a simple guide or checklist for you to assist with any consideration of purchasing a scheme.

The key areas to consider are conceptual understanding, knowledge and progression. Often schemes focus on subject knowledge but you need to ask questions about conceptual understanding and progression as well.

Conceptual Understanding

Does the scheme have a strong conceptual basis in the subject?

Does it enable teachers and pupils to develop that understanding?

Are you and your teachers confident about what the key concepts are in RE?

Anyone who has been involved in education for more than a few years knows that key terms and ‘buzz words’ change rapidly. Schemes need not just to pay lip service to these but to engage with conceptual understanding.

Progression

Is there clear progression through year groups and key stages?

Are skills repeated over the years or engaged with at greater depth?

Is progression in the scheme just a case of more subject knowledge added each year or is there a clear development of understanding in religions and non-religious worldviews.

Within RE, a further cautionary note is on whether the scheme conflates RE and collective worship. These are two separate and distinct entities with different purposes and nature so do avoid any attempt to marry the two.

This questioning process will take you a little extra time but will be worth it in the long run as you enable your pupils and teachers to teach excellent RE. There are many examples of excellent and exceptional RE in schools across the UK. Let’s seek out exceptional RE resources but let’s be clear about what that looks like.

The Big Ideas for Religious Education project was inspired by the work of US curriculum experts Wiggins and McTighe.

Barbara considered the arguments they made about the curriculum also applied to RE. In 2016 she convened a group to explore this, chosen for the breadth of their academic and professional expertise within RE. The group benefited from the chairing of Michael Reiss, a member of the ‘Big Ideas for Science’ group. The publication was received positively and attracted interest around the world.

The development group identified six ‘Big Ideas’ which focus on what is most important for pupils to grasp in RE. They seek to provide criteria for curriculum content selection, have in-built progression and knowledge transferable to life outside the classroom.

We were concerned that RE curricula no longer reflected society. RE continued to focus on ‘six world religions’ while over 50% of the adult population and a considerably higher proportion of young people no longer held any affiliation to organised religion. Moreover, research had established that these ‘Nones’ were particularly disenchanted with the very aspects of religion that occupied so much space in the RE curriculum, such as organised religion and liturgical worship.

So it was obvious that worldviews other than ‘religious’ ones should feature in the curriculum. Religions have a direct or indirect impact on the lives of most people in Britain, whether they are religious or not. Big Ideas is a curriculum which reflects the world young people experience, and seeks to provide the means for them to make sense of it.

The Big Ideas that emerged were:

• Continuity, Change and Diversity (within and across traditions, through time and places)
• Words and Beyond (expression/interpretation through texts and creative arts)
• A Good Life (being a good person, living a good life, ethics)
• Making Sense of Life’s Experiences (life experience, religious experience, ritual)
• Influence and Power (social, cultural, political influences and interactions)
• The Big Picture (overall account of life/universe/everything).

The Big Ideas project very much fits with a Religion and Worldviews approach. It was developed alongside the REC’s Commission on Religious Education (2016-18), which suggested renaming the subject ‘Religion and Worldviews’. Some of the Big Ideas team were involved the Commission, and in the REC’s subsequent ‘Religion and Worldviews’ Project. There has been synergy and mutual influence between the two projects.

Big Ideas now has a website https://bigideasforre.org aimed at both curriculum developers and individual teachers. The website offers guidance for developing Big Ideas curricula for pupils aged 3-18 and growing number of exemplar units of work, written by a team of teachers and other specialists ­(27 to date).

As well as developing new teaching material the Big Ideas project is currently trialling and evaluating units of work with a team of 13 teachers in a variety of classroom contexts. Four West Yorkshire Local Authorities (Leeds, Bradford, Kirklees and Calderdale) have drawn extensively upon the Big Ideas project in developing their latest Agreed Syllabus. In an exciting development, the team behind this, Pennine Learning, is also adapting this curriculum for the primary section of the Oak Academy RE curriculum.

We hope teachers will feel confident to check out the Big Ideas. We recommend starting here: https://bigideasforre.org/the-essential-guide-to-big-ideas- for-re/

Teachers might find it takes time to move from a curriculum driven by content to a curriculum focusing on the Big Ideas. At KS3, for example, where a teacher might have taught ‘rites of passage’, the Big Ideas approach suggests that students explore how ‘experience of religious rituals… helps people make a connection with God or gods and with each other, or with what is most important to them.’ This would be Big Idea 4, allowing pupils to consider how such experiences allow connection, meaning and wisdom. Here you can see a richer, deeper encounter with the complexity of our subject. It is well worth the effort.

Further reading

The full narratives for each age group are found here: https://bigideasforre.org/what-are-big-ideas-for-re/

Wiggins, G. McTighe, J. (2005) Understanding by Design (2nd ed). Alexandria VA. ASCD.

The original 2017 publication, along with later publications, can be found here: https://bigideasforre.org/Big-Ideas-Publications/

As well as being Head of Department, I have the privilege to lead the amalgamated Secondary RE Network for Leeds, Calderdale, and Kirklees. As part of this work I review curricula, conduct professional conversations, and undertake reviews of member schools’ RE.

While leading RE in my own schools has given me great exposure to the religion and worldviews approach, it has been interesting to see how the paradigm shift is perceived by other teachers I work with. There is enthusiasm for new life in the old bones, but there are also reservations, such as:
• lack of confidence as to what it means to adopt a religion and worldviews approach
• lack of confidence in adapting an existing curriculum
• concern about potential workload
• uncertainty as to whether a religion and worldviews approach is the right approach, given the dissenting voices they have heard.

Network meetings have been key to addressing these concerns, and in this collaborative setting I have seen enthusiasm grow. We can explore the concept of a more authentic expression of religion and worldviews with a greater emphasis on lived experience. Teachers acknowledge that monolithic expressions of religion are inaccurate and imagining a shift away from an anonymous approach is generally greeted by nods and smiles. As well as this, our discussions facilitate a cognitive transition from unconscious to conscious competence. Teachers realise they are actually quite skilled and they can certainly embrace a curriculum shift!

This brings to mind a dilemma experienced by many small churches in rural Yorkshire; how to move the piano to the front of the church without unsettling the congregation, surprised by the change? If you have any experience in Christian worship, you will know this can be a really big deal. In any case, the answer is; ‘an inch at a time’. The piano was always there, but sat out of the view at the back of the church. Much in the same way, the religion and worldviews approach has been inching forward and now it has come into full view. It is about to take central place at the front of the RE congregation, and while many are embracing the new expression, there are still (and will continue to be), those who resolutely prefer the piano at the back of the church.

So what can be done to support empower and encourage those who are not convinced by the prospect of a multi-disciplinary approach to RE? Is the answer producing more exemplar materials, and if so, where should these come from? In fact, it seems that much of this ‘inching forward’ is happening quite organically. Take for example Zoe Higgins’ worldviews teacher support database, a project which brings together existing expertise and applies this expertise to new materials. In the process of ensuring accurate and rich representations of beliefs, those involved are imbued with confidence, and benefit from the experience of collaboration. My work with my own SACRE allows me to curate and distribute a wealth of existing materials to members and educators to support the shift to religion and worldviews. Moreover the new West Yorkshire Syllabus, and accompanying training and advisory support, takes a religion and worldviews approach in conjunction with the Big Ideas framework. The piano inches forward.

It would very much seem that things are harmoniously in motion. The planets are aligning, and the age of the piano has dawned. And so we shall sing the refrain of quality RE, sufficient religious literacy, and accurate representation for all… we just need time for the new expression to bed in.

Check out Zoe Higgins’s Religion and Worldviews curriculum offer for Kapow Primary

Using faith visitors to support RE lessons is a fantastic way to develop pupils’ understanding. Encountering someone who lives their faith, who can draw on real and authentic experiences, can really make the religion come alive.

In an essentialised, world religions paradigm, using faith visitors was simple, essentially, ‘this person represents their religion, children, and whatever they tell you is what all of the other people in their religion believe as well.’ However, in a religion and worldviews approach, the relationship between faith visitors and the curriculum needs to be more nuanced. No longer do we want pupils to equate the experiences, values and beliefs of one person with all members of a religion. Faith visitors in a religion and worldviews approach is exciting, but also tricky. How to tease apart the institutional and personal elements of a visitor’s worldview, for example? Below are three practical tips:

1 – Notice essentialism in the curriculum

In the past I have certainly been guilty of posing questions such as, ‘What do Hindus believe?’ When we ask questions like this we are broadcasting to pupils that there is only one way to be a ‘proper’ Hindu. In a curriculum like this, when pupils meet a faith visitor they make all sorts of simplistic assumptions. In being aware of essentialism we can acknowledge that members of a religion act and think in very different ways, and this is completely normal. This allows pupils to interact with the knowledge in a much more explorative way.

2 – Listen to many voices

Another way that we can help pupils to explore diversity is make sure pupils hear a variety of voices. This might not always be easy or straightforward, but there are ways and means. While a real-life interaction has the greatest impact academically, if this isn’t an option then there are a plethora of videos to be found on the internet by all sorts of people on a huge array of subjects. The inclusion of any of these in lessons, will help to build up pupils’ understanding and normalise diverse perspectives for when a visitor does come in.

3 – Introduce hermeneutics

Hermeneutics seems like a complicated word, in fact Ofsted’s 2021 Research Review describes hermeneutical thinking many times without mentioning the word!  Essentially hermeneutics is the idea that everyone interprets things differently. You can find a fantastic guide to it here: RE:Online – Hermeneutics. When pupils are used to exploring different interpretations, including their own, it becomes much easier to see a visitor’s interpretation as just that; one view among many. In a religion and worldviews approach, faith visitors are able to represent their religion in their own way and not answer for all other members.

As well as intellectual benefits of diverse voices, there are social benefits too. For many teachers who work in areas of low diversity, there may be local prejudice towards people who are perceived to be ‘different’. Welcoming a faith visitor provides an excellent opportunity for pupils to meet those they might not encounter outside school. These contact experiences can develop understanding and interest, and potentially decrease prejudice.

Moreover, as the religion and worldviews approach deliberately avoids associating one visitor with an entire religion, it is possible that prejudicial views will decrease as reductive and essentialising ways of seeing are no longer on the menu.

I would suggest that following a religion and worldviews approach means faith visitors are just as welcome to the classroom, for academic and social benefits. It could be argued that with this renewed emphasis on cultural context and diverse voices, faith visitors can have an even bigger impact in allowing young people to explore the connected, complicated world we live in.