Why is RE GCSE COMPULSORY???

[Melondramatic]

Dd just got her choices. And RE is a core subject!! How ridiculous

The teaching is RE is compulsory as per the national curriculum, but it isn't compulsory for children to attend the lessons - you can withdraw your child from RE and collective worship.

Quite frankly, given the state of the education system, pontificating about the compulsory teaching of a subject that your child doesn't have to attend is the least of our problems.

My DS 17 is an atheist (as are all our family) he chose to do RS at GCSE as he loved the subject, it is very much more than the study of religion, it incorporates philosophy, ethics and moral considerations which are pertinent to everyday life. He still lives the subject and is now doing it for A level!

Re lessons are compulsory (it's mostly philosophy these days, and they can choose an atheistic perspective) but they don't have to sit the exam - and even if they do there's two options, short course and full.

I wonder if those schools who don't offer Computer Science GCSE or the ECDL cover the computing bit by incorporating IT into other lessons.

I suspect so. They won't actually be covering the curriculum though as general IT skills just don't cover it. Most will do some basic online safety stuff, and general IT. But they won't be hitting the requirements for computational thinking and coding elements.

"No need to do a GCSE in fairies for that...computer science would be much more useful"

I disagree actually - my dd goes to a Catholic school. We are not church goers. My concern was that she wouldn't learn about other religions- she does.

From what i can see a gcse in religion encourages analysis and critical thinking. It is not the teaching of faith per se.

Believe or not believe, religion is a massive part of society and culture. An understanding of people's beliefs and cultutes, especially in such a diverse society that we are fortunate enough to live in can surely only be a good thing?

Just to throw out a different perspective here. No, it should not be compulsory. I can’t remember if it was compulsory or not at my school - it was like 30 years ago - but I took the subject and got an o level in it.

And hand on heart, while I’m in no way religious and actually think people who genuinely believe in god are a bit crazy, I am so glad I did. Because it gave me a grounding in ethics; a really interesting subject to study and it’s really philosophical at its foundations when taught as a subject and definitely introduced me to critical thinking.

How ironic is that? So don’t just dismiss it out of hand as bible bashing.

Eh? The last 2 replies are different to the others. We definitely didnt study RE up to 16 when i was at school

The law says E is compulsory.

I went to school i the dark ages, I went to an RC school so RE was compulsory and you did an O Level or CSE in it.

My cousin started high school the same day in a non RC school, she did RE for what was then the first year.

While we have bishops it he house of lords RE will be compulsory.

Depending on the syllabus it can be a quite broad subject and look at ethics and philosophy. It can also be quite narrow and look at only two faiths.

Hmm, that’ll teach me to RTFT. Thought I was offering a different perspective after reading the first few posts but can see many have said the same.

It’s not indoctrination, OP. it’s knowledge.

... and knowledge is power.

History, geography, literature, MFL, sociology are knowledge too, but none of them are compulsory. And whether it's indoctrination very much depends on the individual school. Mine certainly was. The priest who taught us is also now in prison for sex offences, so forgive me for being cynical about the whole thing.

I took the full re gcse 20 odd years ago as I knew I wanted to go into a helping role eventually (just didn't know what) I saw it as an opportunity to learn about other religions /cultures that would impact people I would be working with.
I'm an atheist and it didn't sway me at all but it did open my mind a bit.

And whether it's indoctrination very much depends on the individual school. Mine certainly was.
My guessing is you went yo a faith school and are somehow surprised that the faith school had a faith element (that still happens on MN people push yo they their children into a faith school and then complain about the faith element).
Either way, faith schools teach more than just their religion these days.

FurryDice
I agree. Knowledge is power.
It's why I think it goes hand in hand with the sessions on relgious and political extremism in PSHE. The more people know and are educated and can be tolerant critical thinkers, maybe the less we'll have people thinking it's acceptable to have radical beliefs based on their own tiny world view being superior to everyonr else's.

It's called philosophy and ethics at the dc's school, then the gcse received at the end say RS!

hugoagogo
It's the same for the A Level.
The RS A Level offers many pathways. E.g. philosophy, ethics, Hinduism, Islam, Christianity etc They all require an understanding of different beliefs, debates within each section, evaluation.

Most schools near me do the philosophy and ethics route but the A Level is Religious Studies.
(It's a similar principle to History where the GCSE or A Level is History but some will look at Medicine and the rise of Nazi Germany whilst others look at Russia & War of the Roses - daft examples as I don't know the spec)

Yes I was at a faith school, I was sent age ten and didn't get much say in the matter funnily enough Surprise doesn't come into it, of course it had a faith element that I now view as indoctrination. The point is that it was entirely possible for a faith school to use compulsory RS teaching to push one "tiny world view" as you put it, to the exclusion of all others. Are you saying that all faith schools now teach a broad, inclusive RE curriculum? Are you sure?

I still maintain (and I realise that this is getting boring at this point) that there's nothing special about RS that differentiates it from any other broad humanities subject, and nothing you couldn't get less problematically from taking out the religious element and turning it into a broad philosophy and ethics course.

I used to teach mandatory RE.

RE (or RS) is supposed to be different to religious instruction. The latter is how to behave, the former is what people believe.
The cynic (and Masters in Politics) in me would say that RE remains near-compulsory as a trade-off with the church over gay rights, etc, arguments from a few years back.
Certainly, my experience of RE in 2ry school is that it is headed by a person of strong christian conviction and 90-95% of the course is on the bible and life of Jesus. There's then a few 'lets do a Diwali drawing' or 'make a buddhist wheel of life' lesson; before it's back to Bethlehem. There's certainly no mention of pre-christian faith* or agnosticism/atheism. TBH, there was more of that content during Vikings week at DS's 1ry school.
*you get the occasional '...and then civilisation came to the barbarians' reference.

So, the idea that you get knowledgeable, well-rounded sophisticated, urbane youth from this is laughable in practice (in my experience).

Oh, and btw Computer Science won't be dead in 5 years. That's like saying don't do English because language changes. Yes, content will progress; but those that take it forward will see progressive syllabi. For everyone else, a grasp of the fundamentals will help the use tech in the rest of their lives - even if it just lends a level of trust absent from those who've always been at a distance

AdamNichol
I've never seen that version of RE but don't doubt it may exist in places.

Every school I've been (including a faith one), students meaningfully study a range of religions, debate ethical issues and religious/non religious arguments for ethical issues. Usually 2 religions are picked for the GCSE. One will tend to be Christianity as that's the one students find easiest/typically have more frames of reference and then the other will depend on the specialisms of the staff when choosing.

DD had to do Citizenship GCSE. She hated it. They had to do group work, and she was let down by the other girl (there were two of them) who didn't do any work at all.

Sounds like a perfect preparation for later life ....

Is it? That's silly.

@MaisyPops - just to clarify that's my de-facto experience, not the de-jure design / purpose

Surely you checked this before sending your DD to the school? Has it changed that much in three/fours years?

After I'd already been at my secondary school for a few years it became a "specialist performing arts college". Everyone had to take a GCSE in one of art, dance, drama, or music.

So yeah, no guarantees that what a school does when you send your children there for year 7 is what they're still doing in year 11.

No need to do a GCSE in fairies...
I'm not sure there's any point in arguing with that level of ignorance and bigotry so I'll just say YABU OP.

The only place that I ever heard that RE is compulsory is on Mumsnet! My DS went to a 1300 pupil state funded secondary school and he did not study RE as a subject after Yr 9. He did not even have any timetabled RE lessons at all, never mind do a GCSE in it.

They did have visiting clergy from various churches attend assemblies on a monthly basis but other than that there was no RE taught after yr 9 unless you chose it as option. DS is 21 now so not that many years out of school.

And before anyone spouts that my DS hasn't had a broad education, he studied RE at school from the age of 4 - 14, quite long enough as far as he was concerned. He went to a CofE Primary and had decided by the end of it that he did not believe in any god.

It doesn't matter how many people say that their schools don't offer RE and so it can't be compulsory, it is still a statutory requirement. If a school chooses not to comply, it's up to them. They will presumably fudge something to satisfy OFSTED!

I imagine a lot of the “don’t do RE” schools sneak it in to PSHE lessons (or whatever the modern day equivalent is)