Viewing archives for Assessment

Research Summary

The research is a case study of the Faith and Belief Forum’s School Linking programme, in the light of the proposed move towards a religion and worldviews curriculum in England. Through analysis of a large quantitative and qualitative data set, it emerged that though pupils report knowledge increases from participation in the programme, the type of knowledge gained does not accurately capture the religious and worldview plurality of the programme’s participants. The author finds that the weakness is due to the intergroup contact theory of the programme, and that a different type of contact theory, decategorisation, would offer improved pupil learning in future and be more compatible with a worldviews approach.

Researchers

Lucy Peacock

Research Institution

Centre for Trust, Peace and Social Relations, Coventry University

What is this about?

What are the implications of a move to a Religion and Worldviews curriculum for contact-based interfaith programmes in schools? What type of knowledge do pupils get from these programmes, and is it sufficient to convey the complexity of religious and non-religious worldviews?

What was done?

Quantitative and qualitative data were collected through 1,488 teacher and student surveys, teacher focus groups and participant observation in schools. 52 classes from 45 English schools were involved, of different religious characters. There were baseline and endpoint surveys (before and after participation in School Linking), pupil reflection forms; and participant observation and focus groups to assess how School Linking promotes peaceful relations.

Main findings and outputs

• Pupils reported learning more and more about the faiths and beliefs of their linked school, and feeling more and more confident to work with their peers there.
• But when they were asked to provide examples, these tended to be based on oversimplified or inaccurate ‘facts’.
• The language that the teachers used contributed to the problem, because it often homogenised groups. It appeared to draw from the perceived demands of RE teaching, reflecting current curriculum frameworks and examination demands.
• So exchanging individualised information (‘decategorisation’) would be better than assuming that individuals simply represent groups such as Muslims or Jews (‘secondary transfer’). Perceptions of group homogeneity should be actively questioned in the process. Interfaith programmes need to interact with the changing RE / R&W landscape.

Relevance to RE

The research probably has more relevance to RE / R&W than the article itself suggests. The article concludes that a different model is needed for interfaith programmes in schools, and that this model is in step with RE / R&W. However, the decategorisation model proposed might inform not only interfaith programmes but, in turn, all RE / R&W practice based on direct dialogue and encounter; so could be considered by teachers in relation to discussions taking place within their own classes, or during visits to faith or non-religious worldview communities. The findings of the research are useful to consider whilst planning curriculum around point 9 of the CORE national entitlement, specifically the part on direct encounter and discussion with individuals and communities.

Generalisability and potential limitations

The samples are fairly large. The research combines quantitative with qualitative approaches carefully. The data are analysed thoroughly and the analysis coheres with general themes of religion and worldview plurality and other sources on religion and worldview complexity.

Find out more

The original article is:
Lucy Peacock (2021) Contact-based interfaith programmes in schools and the changing religious education landscape: negotiating a worldviews curriculum, Journal of Beliefs & Values, DOI: 10.1080/13617672.2021.2004708

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13617672.2021.2004708

Research Summary

From the Conclusion section of the report (on page 39):

‘RE is vital in preparing pupils to engage in a diverse and complex multi-religious and multi-secular society. However, this review has also identified that there are significant challenges that limit high quality in RE, including:

• insufficient time to teach an ambitious RE curriculum
• school decisions that are not taken in the best interests of all pupils, such as decisions concerning the statutory teaching of RE, the opportunity to take a qualification in religious studies, or early examination entry
• a lack of consideration about what it means to ‘be scholarly’ in objective, critical and pluralistic RE
• a lack of clarity on what constitutes reliable knowledge about religion/non-religion, leading to teachers embedding unhelpful misconceptions
• teaching approaches that do not support pupils to remember the RE curriculum in the long term
• approaches to assessment that are poorly calibrated to the RE curriculum
• insufficient development of RE practitioners to address gaps in professional subject knowledge

That said, this review shows that there are well-warranted and constructive ways forward that could support improvements in RE. The literature suggests that many of these are already taking place in the sector in subject communities and in some schools. The significant interest that RE attracts from a range of organisations and associations may also indicate that there is sufficient capacity to support improvements in RE in primary and secondary schools for the benefit of pupils.’

Researchers

Ofsted

Research Institution

Ofsted

What is this about?

This is a research review, which ‘explores literature relating to the field of RE’. Its stated purpose is ‘to identify factors that contribute to high-quality school RE curriculums, the teaching of the curriculum, assessment and systems.’ It states that ‘there are a variety of ways that schools can construct and teach a high-quality RE curriculum and ‘there is no single way of achieving high-quality RE’. It:

• outlines ‘the national context in relation to RE’
• summarises a ‘review of research into factors that can affect the quality of education in RE’
• considers ‘curriculum progression in RE, pedagogy, assessment and the impact of school leaders’ decisions on provision’

(Quotations are from page 3 of the report.)

What was done?

The review drew on a range of sources, including specialist RE research outputs and Ofsted’s own Education Inspection Framework. These sources are summarised, and a range of factors are identified that can affect the quality of education in RE.

Main findings and outputs

The report’s general conclusions were presented in the Research summary section, above. There are other findings specific to particular issues, and some examples of these follow.
(In relation to knowledge, high-quality RE may have these features – ):

• ‘consideration of the knowledge that pupils build through the RE curriculum, because accurate knowledge about religion and non-religion can be beneficial for achieving different purposes and aims for RE.
• High expectations about scholarship in the curriculum to guard against pupils’ misconceptions.
• What is taught and learned in RE is grounded in what is known about religion/non-religion from academic study (scholarship).
• Carefully selected and well-sequenced substantive content and concepts.
• ‘Ways of knowing’ are appropriately taught alongside the substantive content and are not isolated from the content and concepts that pupils learn.
• A consideration of when pupils should relate the content to their own personal knowledge (for example, prior assumptions)’.
  (From page 9.)

(In relation to assessment, high-quality RE may have these features – ):
‘Different types of assessments are used appropriately:

• Formative assessments can help teachers identify which pupils have misconceptions or gaps in their knowledge, and what those specific misconceptions or gaps are. This can inform teachers about common issues, so they can review or adapt the curriculum as necessary. Formative assessments are less useful in making judgements about how much of the whole curriculum has been learned and remembered.
• Where summative assessments are used for accountability purposes, leaders can ensure that they are sufficiently spaced apart to enable pupils to learn the expanding domain of the curriculum.
• The purpose of the test should guide the type of assessment, the format of the task and when the assessment is needed.
• RE assessment needs to relate to the curriculum, which sets out what it means to ‘get better’ at RE.
• Leaders and teachers can consider whether existing assessment models in RE do in practice treat the curriculum as the progression model.
• Leaders and teachers can design RE assessments that are fit for purpose, in that they are precisely attuned to the knowledge in the RE curriculum that they intend for pupils to learn.
• Leaders who ensure that assessments are not excessively onerous for teachers.
• Professional development opportunities for leaders and teachers to reflect on how different assessment questions and tasks in RE can frame teachers’ and pupils’ expectations about engaging with religious and non-religious traditions.
  (From page 35.)

Other areas considered, with their own identification of factors that may support high quality, include systems, culture and policies; teacher education and professional development; and teaching the curriculum.

Relevance to RE

This report is of high relevance to RE and has, understandably, received much attention and discussion. Possibly its key strength in relation to relevance is its summary of a very wide range of sources into identification of characteristics that high-quality RE may have. This research report has contained its own necessarily brief summary of the original report, but readers are strongly encouraged to access the original report itself from the link provided at the end.

Generalisability and potential limitations

This is a very wide-ranging and comprehensive report, whose list of references would itself be valuable to researchers, master’s students or other interested professionals (there are 246 notes to published sources, and some individual notes are to multiple sources).

Find out more

The full report can be accessed at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/research-review-series-religious-education

Research Summary

Marking, though a vital part of teachers’ work, is a key driver of large workload. The purpose of the research was to find evidence that would inform teachers’ decision-making about marking. Time available for marking is limited, so what is the best way to spend it? The review found a striking disparity between the enormous amount of effort invested in marking books, and the very small number of robust studies that have been completed to date. While the evidence contains useful findings, it is not possible to provide answers to all the questions teachers are asking. The review therefore summarises what we can conclude from the evidence – and clarifies where we simply do not yet know enough.

Researchers

Victoria Elliott, et al

Research Institution

Oxford University / Educational Endowment Foundation

What is this about?

• The research is about marking.
• Marking is an oft-discussed aspect of teachers’ work, given that good feedback to pupils seems vital but marking demands generate large workloads.
• Teachers expend much time and effort on marking but the number of rigorous studies on its effectiveness is low.
• Some evidence can be offered, but several unknowns remain.

What was done?

• 1,382 practising teachers from 1,012 schools in the maintained sector in England completed a survey on their marking practices.
• A literature search was undertaken that included randomised controlled trials from other contexts such as higher education, small studies by classroom practitioners, intervention studies and doctoral theses.

Main findings and outputs

• 72% of teachers reported writing targets for improvement on all or most pieces of work they mark, the most common strategy of all ten practices asked about.
• The more traditional approach to marking (identifying and correcting errors) is also taken by over 50% of respondents, on all or most pieces of work.
• The different approaches taken have not yet been largely evidence-based.
• Evidence emerging from the review is as follows – “Careless mistakes should be marked differently to errors resulting from misunderstanding. The latter may be best addressed by providing hints or questions which lead pupils to underlying principles; the former by simply marking the mistake as incorrect, without giving the right answer.
• Awarding grades for every piece of work may reduce the impact of marking, particularly if pupils become preoccupied with grades at the expense of a consideration of teachers’ formative comments.
• The use of targets to make marking as specific and actionable as possible is likely to increase pupil progress.
• Pupils are unlikely to benefit unless some time is set aside to enable them to consider and respond to marking.
• Some forms of marking, including acknowledgement marking, are unlikely to enhance pupil progress.
• Schools should mark less in terms of the number of pieces of work marked, but mark better.
• More studies are needed, on issues such as – what is the best use of class time to enable pupils to consider and respond to marking? What is the impact of rare-grade, formative-comment rich marking?

Relevance to RE

Marking is as relevant an issue to RE teachers as it is to teachers in general; or perhaps even more so, given that an individual RE teacher may well have relatively large numbers of pupils. RE teachers or departments might consider the evidence given above, together with the advice given below, when developing their own effective marking policies and practices.

Generalisability and potential limitations

The researchers say that because the range of studies to date is small, their survey could not be as systematic or detailed as might be wished, and that the findings are therefore tentative. However, this makes it essential for schools to monitor the impact of their decisions about marking, and evaluate and refine their approaches.

Find out more

The report is freely downloadable from https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/evidence-summaries/evidence-reviews/written-marking/

Research Summary

Engagement of teachers in research about practice is a feature of professional learning and career development in the United Kingdom. But what are the challenges? This is a small-scale study of the experience of primary and secondary teachers conducting action research as part of a development project promoted by a school alliance with university researchers. Interviews took place about the teachers’ motivations, experience and outcomes. Though the teachers felt reluctant and constrained by management directives, the experience was ultimately beneficial, resulting in improvements to their teaching.

Researchers

Andrew Lambirth & Ana Cabral

Research Institution

University of Greenwich

What is this about?

• What do teachers stand to gain from engagement with research, in the sense of carrying out their own action research projects with the support of university researchers.
• What are the obstacles to such engagement – why might teachers feel reluctant to do it?
• What are the professional advantages to teachers of researching their own work?

What was done?

11 teachers from 6 schools in South-East London designed and implemented an action research project aimed at improving an area of teaching within their classroom and / or school. Regular meetings with university staff were held, where advice on e.g. research methodology was given and the projects’ progress reviewed.
The research draws on 9 semi-structured face-to-face interviews with the teachers conducted by the research team and field notes collected from a total of 9 meetings.

Main findings and outputs

• Teachers were compelled to take part in the project by managers, as part of accountability or ‘box-ticking’ exercises.
• These also affected project choices, e.g. ‘cognitive acceleration’ in Science or ‘data-driven improvement’ in literacy.
• But as the projects developed, the teachers began to develop a sense of their own agency, because they were having to think themselves about the changes produced by their actions and how to learn from them.
• They began to be ‘intrinsically’ motivated to think about what children think, like to do and are interested in. Adapting teaching to children’s responses was a new approach, experienced as just and democratic.
• Teachers who want to be researchers do need scholarship time, and support to publish.
• They also find high value in collaboration with colleagues from the university and other schools.

Relevance to RE

RE teachers might be encouraged by the research to undertake small-scale research studies of their own teaching, on the basis of the evidence that this promises valuable professional development. In line with the conclusions of the research, they should identify research questions arising as important in their own practice, rather than to satisfy managerial demands, press for scholarship time and seek collaborations with university staff and colleagues in other schools. The research underlines the potential of e.g. Farmington scholarships or master’s programmes to generate RE teachers’ professional development and development within RE.

Generalisability and potential limitations

The researchers acknowledge that the study is small-scale. The account of the pressures on teachers would be recognised widely, however, and the experience of the few teacher-researchers studied may illustrate possibilities for the profession in general. The findings resemble those of other studies. See e.g.

https://www.nfer.ac.uk/publications/IMUL01/IMUL01.pdf

Finding out about what motivates RE pupils and using the knowledge to build up RE pedagogy

Find out more

The full article is: Andrew Lambirth & Ana Cabral (2017) Issues of agency, discipline and criticality: an interplay of challenges involved in teachers engaging in research in a performative school context, Educational Action Research, 25:4, 650-666.

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09650792.2016.1218350

Research Summary

A trial was designed to identify whether use by schools of ‘Embedding Formative Assessment’ will improve children’s performance at age 16. Embedding Formative Assessment (EFA) is a two-year assessment for learning intervention. The main element is a monthly Teacher Learning Community (TLC) workshop. Each workshop involves a group of teachers feeding back on their use of formative assessment techniques. The primary research question was ‘How effective is the Embedding Formative Assessment programme compared to usual practice in terms of improving overall GCSE examination performance?’. Though practice varied across the schools, the impact was roughly equivalent to an improvement of one GCSE grade in one subject.

Researchers

Dr Stefan Speckesser (lead independent evaluator), Johnny Runge, Francesca Foliano, Dr Matthew Bursnall, Nathan Hudson-Sharp, Dr Heather Rolfe, Dr Jake Anders (National Institute of Economic and Social Research)

Research Institution

Education Endowment Foundation

What is this about?

The research set out to measure whether the Embedding Formative Assessment intervention worked under everyday conditions in a large number of schools. One hundred and forty secondary schools participated during the 2015/2016 and 2016/2017 academic years. The primary outcome was Attainment 8 GCSE scores for the 25,393 pupils who were in Year 10 (aged 14–15) at the start.

What was done?

The project was a randomised controlled trial. The resources supplied to participating schools focused on five key formative assessment strategies: ‘clarifying, sharing and understanding learning intentions’; ‘engineering effective classroom discussions and activities’; ‘providing feedback that moves learning forward’; ‘activating learners as instructional resources for one another’; and ‘activating learners as owners of their own learning’. Final GCSE scores were compared across intervention and control schools.

Main findings and outputs

1. Students in the Embedding Formative Assessment schools made the equivalent of two additional months’ progress in their Attainment 8 GCSE score, using the standard conversion from pupil scores to months progress. This result has a very high security rating.
2. The project found no evidence that Embedding Formative Assessment improved English or Maths GCSE attainment specifically.
3. The additional progress made by children in the lowest third for prior attainment was greater than that made by children in the highest third. These results are less robust and have a lower security rating than the overall findings because of the smaller number of pupils.
4. Teachers were positive about the Teacher Learning Communities. They felt that these improved their practice by allowing valuable dialogue between teachers, and encouraged experimentation with formative assessment strategies.
5. The process evaluation indicated it may take more time for improvements in teaching practices and pupil learning strategies to feed fully into pupil attainment. Many teachers thought that younger students were more receptive to the intervention than their older and more exam-minded peers.

Relevance to RE

The research suggests that RE teachers, like teachers in general, can boost pupils’ learning and attainment by sharing experiences of assessment for learning techniques and building up good practice together, for example, through peer observation and review. The Education Endowment Foundation’s press release gives the following example:

One example of a formative assessment technique is checking on pupils’ understanding by asking all students to show their response to a question at the same time, perhaps by holding up their answers on a mini-whiteboard or slate. The teacher can decide whether they need to review the material with the whole class, to identify a small number of pupils needing individual help, or ask the pupils to discuss their answers with their peers.

Generalisability and potential limitations

The researchers noted one limitation in particular, that some of the participating schools already had some established assessment for learning practice – they suggest that in future studies, some ‘baseline’ evaluation might be done at the outset.

Find out more

The full report is freely downloadable from https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/public/files/EFA_evaluation_report.pdf

For an introduction see https://educationendowmentfoundation.org.uk/news/real-time-knowledge-can-boost-pupils-grades-by-two-months/

Research Summary

Marking and feedback are essential parts of the teaching process, which allow teachers to know whether what they have taught has been learnt and therefore allow teachers to address the needs of pupils. They are also requirements for all teachers. However, they are time consuming and burdensome upon teachers. Technology has the potential to transform education, for teachers and for pupils. This study aims to investigate the role that technology has in the assessment of RE with the expectation that any benefits would also be felt in other curriculum subjects.

Researchers

Sam McKavanagh & Dr James Robson

Research Institution

University of Oxford

What is this about?

The planning was guided by these questions.

• In assessment, what can technology do that traditional methods cannot?
• How can the use of technology for assessment be beneficial to pupils?
• How can the use of technology for assessment be beneficial to teachers?
• How can technology allow us to meet the assessment objectives of RE?

What was done?

The three action cycles used different tools to assess pupils; multiple choice questions were used for each assessment.

• Cycle One (Traditional): pupils completed assessments using pen and paper.
• Cycle Two (Plickers): pupils held up unique pieces of card in different orientations to indicate their answer. The teacher’s smartphone could read and record the pupils’ response.
• Cycle Three (EDpuzzle) – through this website pupils watched videos that the teacher had embedded with questions. Scores were recorded so the teacher could track progress over time.

At the end of each cycle the following were conducted:

• whole-cohort questionnaires;
• small-group interviews; and
• teacher interviews.

Main findings and outputs

The findings show that technology:

• saved time;
• helped give quick and useful feedback;
• collated results;
• improved record keeping;
• reduced teacher workload; and
• increased pupil engagement.

In contrast, traditional methods of assessment failed to offer these benefits. Marking and feedback remained burdensome tasks for teachers and pupils did not respond favourably to them.

Technology has an important role in the assessment of RE. Pupils assessed using traditional methods and those assessed with technology showed no discernable differences in their results. The benefits to the teacher were clear: they saw a reduction in workload and were able to give immediate feedback and discuss issues with pupils which would not have had been possible with traditional methods. As Plickers and EDpuzzle can collate pupils’ results teachers can easily keep track of pupils’ performance across time, with minimal effort on their part. It is expected that these advantages would not only apply to RE and that teachers of other subjects, and in other school settings, would also benefit.

Relevance to RE

This was a piece of practitioner research and other teachers were involved in the collection of data. Therefore it will have real applicability to other teachers of RE.

The technology used is free to obtain and use and does not require pupil ownership of devices – this increases the accessibility to the technology.

One of the key findings was the savings in time for teachers whilst assessing and the production of useful real-time data, which they could use immediately to provide effective feedback to pupils.

Generalisability and potential limitations

Given the method of answer collection which the technology used, the research focussed on AT1/A01 (‘factual’ knowledge) the research did not attempt to assess AT2/A02 (‘learning from religion’) – whilst this should be possible, it was deemed that it would be stretching the research too thinly and that less clear results would be drawn. It would therefore be beneficial to retrial these technologies to attempt to assess AT2/A02 as well.

Given the length of the research project it was not possible to tell if pupils would become ‘bored’ or less enthused with the technologies the more normalised they became. A longer research process would uncover whether this is the case.

Find out more

McKavanagh, S. (2017). The role of technology in the assessment of RE (Master’s thesis). University of Oxford.

https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:27d8b9ef-0cab-4116-827a-d9b615627860

Research Summary

We Need to Talk about RE (London: Jessica Kingsley, 2017) is a collection of essays by established and emerging RE leaders commenting on theory, practice and policy around RE. The book focuses mainly on the English system, with European and wider global contexts referred to. Each chapter is a grounded, research-informed provocation. The book is edited by Dr Mike Castelli (currently Executive Chair of the Association of University Lectuters in Religion and Education) and Dr Mark Chater (currently Director of a charitable trust supporting RE).

Researchers

Mike Castelli, Mark Chater & Linda Woodhead

Research Institution

Several

What is this about?

The book as a whole promotes public discussion on what is needed from a new model of RE. The book argues that we need to talk about RE for several reasons: because so much is changing in the culture of schools; because teachers of RE are ‘cultural and religious heroes caught up in a conflicted education system’; because the kind of RE practised UK is unique, but gravely in danger of dismemberment and neglect; because of the urgent need to find consensus about the purpose and place of RE; and because wider society needs better ways of dealing with religious and cultural ‘otherness’.

What was done?

Each of the fifteen authors uses a distinctive methodology based on their own professional experience as teachers, researchers, practitioners, policy makers or consultants.

Main findings and outputs

Each chapter, written by a different author, offers a manifesto for change. The postscript, written by a serving teacher of RE, argues passionately for change based on clarity of purpose.

Relevance to RE

Trainee and serving teachers will find the book a stimulating, provocative and hope-inspiring daily companion to their practice.

Generalisability and potential limitations

There is no programmatic set of findings or recommendations.

Find out more

Castelli, M. And Chater, M (2017) ed. We Need to Talk about Religious Education: Manifestos for the Future of RE.London: Jessica Kingsley Publishing.

Research Summary

The project sought to trace the practice of Religious Education from official policy pronouncements, through professional interpretation, into classroom practice. Spanning secondary schools in Scotland, Northern Ireland and England, faith schools and non-faith schools, the researchers drew on perspectives from theology, philosophy and anthropology to understand the purpose and practice of RE for students and teachers. The researchers carried out focus groups with policymakers and experts, ethnographic observation in classrooms in 24 schools across the UK, textbook and policy document analysis, and a survey of Year 11/S4 pupils in order to understand the definitions teachers and students gave of good RE, and the reasons for studying it.

The project uncovered confusion as to the aims of RE, with the subject often being over-burdened with expectations beyond the substantive study of religions. These included contribution to faith nurture, collective worship, multi-cultural understanding, anti-racist education, discussion of contemporary ethical issues, critical thinking skills, social, civic, sex and relationships education. In addition, RE was often expected to deliver good results in high status tests (GCSE and Standard Grade) in significantly less classroom time than was given to similar subjects such as History. Teachers were often keen to present RE as a rigorous subject in the academic humanities, alongside History and Geography, while a majority of pupils saw the subject as more akin to Citizenship and PSHE.

Researchers

Professor James Conroy, Dr David Lundie, Professor Robert Davis, Dr Philip Barnes, Professor Tony Gallagher, Professor Vivienne Baumfield, Dr Nicole Bourque & Dr Kevin Lowden

Research Institution

University of Glasgow

What is this about?

The project was structured around three fundamental questions:

1. what are the stated policy intentions for RE in schools?
2. how are these intentions enacted through the pedagogical practices of teachers in classrooms?
3. what is the impact of RE on students and how is this evaluated?

What was done?

An ‘hourglass’ model was used to understand RE from policy into practice. At the top of the hourglass, at its widest point, are the ‘blizzard’ of policies, aims, interests and pedagogical models proposed by various stakeholders in the RE field – government, faith groups, academic and practitioner bodies. The hourglass narrows toward classroom enactment, and widens again when considering the diverse impacts of RE practice among pupils, faith communities and wider society.

Textual analysis was used to trace the influence of national policies on the textbooks, exam syllabuses, Agreed Syllabuses and other resources used in the classroom.

Ethnographic observations were carried out in 24 schools across Scotland, England (including several in Greater London) and Northern Ireland. Ethnographers spent a minimum of 10 days in each school, with a focus on students in the 14-16 age group (Year 10/11 in England, S3/4 in Scotland). In addition to observing lessons, researchers carried out student focus groups, teacher focus groups, analysis of student workbooks and visual displays, and the shadowing of a student through their school day, to understand RE’s similarities and distinctiveness relative to the wider curriculum.

Analysis of ethnographic fieldnotes focused on 9 key themes:

1. The role of examinations in setting the aims and content of RE
2. The fit between teacher, pupil and school values in the RE classroom
3. The level of resource and support given to RE
4. The language and treatment of immanence and transcendence, touching on pupils’ levels of religious experience and religious literacy
5. The level of intellectual challenge offered by RE
6. The frequency and practices of engagement with texts, including pedagogical and sacred texts, in the RE classroom
7. The impact of teachers’ pedagogical style on the experience and perceived aims of RE
8. The role and approach to multi-cultural awareness in the RE classroom
9. The implicit and explicit truth claims made about religions in the RE classroom.

A practitioner enquiry strand encouraged teachers in participating schools to carry out their own small-scale action research projects linked to the aims of the overall project.

A survey of students in participating schools was carried out in 2011, and students from some participating schools were invited to a forum theatre performance in which we elicited feedback on our interpretation of the findings by playing out fictionalised vignettes from the research data.

Main findings and outputs

Despite the confusion that exists about the meaning and purpose of the subject, the researchers concluded that it is meaningful to talk about RE as a single subject across faith and non-faith schools.

The examination syllabus has enormous power to drive, and also to distort, the meaning and purpose of the subject.

Religious education often stands in a counter-cultural position within schools, requiring a pedagogical openness which is uncommon in other academic subjects at qualification level.

Relevance to RE

The research points to a need for a shared sense of meaning in the RE classroom, an understanding not just of particular doctrines, practices or concepts in a religion, but of what it would be for the believer to find meaning in such concepts.

Teachers who demonstrated a ‘committed openness’, steering a course between dogmatic commitment and undifferentiated relativism, were best able to introduce students to these concepts in a way that did not distort students’ own beliefs and world views.

Headteacher support was acknowledged as vital to the provision of good RE, including adequate resourcing, specialist teachers and curriculum time.

Generalisability and potential limitations

The research project deliberately sought out schools which were confident of their RE provision, so cannot make any claim to be representative of RE across the UK. Nonetheless, even in schools which identified themselves as examples of good practice, there were significant challenges faced by RE.

Some elements of the research fieldwork, carried out in 2008-2010, may be dated, coming before widespread academisation, the 2013 REC Curriculum Framework and the revised GCSE and A-Level standards.

Find out more

Conroy, J C, Lundie, D et al. (2013) Does Religious Education Work? A multi-dimensional investigation. London: Bloomsbury Academic.

http://www.secularism.org.uk/uploads/does-religious-education-work-by-prof-c-conroy.pdf

Research Summary

This research is about issues of assessment and pedagogy in Religious and Moral Education (RME) in Scottish non-denominational schools. It is based on qualitative data collected from schools in five Scottish local authorities; as part of a moderation project, the schools put forward various examples of best practice in teaching and learning. The timing of the research was important (it was done during 2009-2011): a new 3–18 Scottish curriculum, ‘Curriculum for Excellence’ (CfE), had been introduced with the aim of improving standards over those of the previous ‘5–14’ Curriculum which had been in use since 1992. The ‘Curriculum for Excellence’ focused on the development of higher pupil thinking skills and competences. However, the research found many teachers still stuck in the former, more descriptive model. The researchers identify five areas of practice that need improvement: planning, religious knowledge, progression, self and peer assessment, literacy and values. These are assessment problems but also count against effective teaching and learning in RME.

Researchers

Lynne Grant & Yonah H. Matemba

Research Institution

University of the West of Scotland

What is this about?

• Assessment in RE is problematical. What should be assessed? How should it be assessed? Can it be assessed? The Scottish case is interesting: until 1981 any form of assessment of the subject was illegal in Scotland. In Scotland, in non-denominational schools, the subject is called Religious and Moral Education (RME).
• Recent policy and curriculum development represent attempts to give sound educational grounds to RME (and other subjects). A new ‘Curriculum for Excellence’ was introduced in 2009-10, with the aims of building pupil learning, citizenship, confidence and participation.
• Regarding RE, it aimed to replace the former descriptive approach to religions with higher-order thinking skills for pupils: analysis, reflection, investigation and research.
• Samples of RME work sent in to a moderation exercise were analysed by the researchers, in order to assess the success of the reforms up to that point. The researchers found that much practice was still stuck in the former model and that the planned improvements were still awaited.
• Five areas of assessment practice that also impact on pedaogy were identified as in need of attention: planning, religious knowledge, progression, self and peer assessment, literacy and values.

What was done?

The researchers analysed a large set of materials from a moderation project that involved a total of 100 schools (with the split being 87 primary and 13 secondary schools) and a total of 355 participants over a two-year period. Participants involved in the moderation work included: (a) 281 teachers with the split being 194 primary and 87 secondary school teachers; (b) 53 headteachers;
(c) 21 classroom support staff; and (d) 5 local authority quality improvement officers (one from each authority). Schools and local authorities submitted self-selected materials for moderation from different subject areas of the school curriculum including RME as examples of ‘best practice’. The materials included teachers’ planners and students’ work. In addition, formal discussions with a number of headteachers and teachers were undertaken.

Main findings and outputs

• Weak lesson planning and poor choice of tasks were evident. In primary schools much of the teaching, learning and assessment were based on simple worksheets involving colouring in, filling in missing words and so on. In secondary schools, assessment tasks were based on mere description of religious phenomena with little attempt at assessing critical thinking and reflective analysis of issues.
• Teachers often failed to assess knowledge of religions. Rather, the findings showed that teachers were more interested in assessing students ’generic skills such as listening or working in groups.
• Primary and secondary teachers did not collaborate on planning and teaching, so secondary teachers were sometimes assessing primary level learning.
• Self-assessment strategies failed to enable pupils to assess how much their knowledge of religions was developing.
• Little attention was given to pupils’ improvement of their knowledge of religious terms or facts about religions.
• There was little evidence that teachers had managed to assess how pupils’ values had developed as a result of their RME work.

Relevance to RE

The findings give a a series of challenges to RE teachers in relation to planning, teaching and assessing RE:

• How can lessons be planned in order to incorporate pupils’ development of higher order thinking skills such as comparison or evaluation? This wil not happen if it is left to itself.
• Teachers have to attend to pupils’ general skills development, but must balance this with appropriately detailed knowledge of religions.
• In the light of the latter point, primary and secondary teachers need to plan teaching jointly, to ensure that secondary teaching represents real progression from primary teaching.
• Teachers need to engage pupils in assessment of how their own values have developed as a result of their work in RE.
• More generally, for policy and curriculum developers, attention needs to be given to the possibility that improved frameworks are insufficient to improve planning, teaching and assessment. Evidently, teacher development issues are just as important.

Generalisability and potential limitations

The findings are based on a large sample of work. The conclusions provide RE teachers with a useful set of quality issues to monitor and assess.

Find out more

Problems of assessment in religious and moral education: the Scottish case, Journal of Beliefs and Values 34.1 pages 1-13 (published online 21 March 2013).

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13617672.2013.759338