to be outraged that RE is a compulsory subject at GCSE level and History or a language aren't?

[seeker]

Well am I? I thought it was just my dd's very old fashioned school that insisted they study RE even if they aren't doing the exam, but I find out that it's a statutory requirement. So they can drop Modern Languages, History, Citizenship......but they have to do RE. And religious people say that thier faith doesn't impose on my life at all.

ANd I undersstand that it consits of reallly intersting discussion about issues of the day, and is really all about morality and philosophy and is mportant stuff, but why call it RE?

What MFL do you want them to do though? I live in Belgium, and the majority speak English and want to practise it, so I don't get much chance to use my Flemish. French is no longer the language of diplomacy, Spanish not much good in Africa where French might be a help, but useful in S America and the US as well. If yo want Chinese, Mandarin or Cantonese? Is German any use now?

Any would be better than none, but you could argue that English and Maths alone should be compulsory. I still see no reason why RE should be considered more important than a MFL.

Completely agree with RE being compulsory...

As for history? I'm 32 and there has never been a day where I missed out because I didn't study it. In this climate where the public sector and most large organisations are focussing on diversity I think it's really important to learn about other religions and it sets a good base for learning about the differences between us all. It certainly has helped me. More than my A levels in maths and physics have.

Trainee police officers in my area have to learn about different religions and how to interact with people with different faiths, which includes visting different religious establishments. They are also confronted with their stereotypes such as somalians and gysies.

This is something I think should be rolled out to schools.

I don't get the need for MFL at all, a complete waste of lesson time. DS has dyslexic problems and had to do french and german from year 7. He couldn't spell in english let alone cope with learning two further languages.
He is now yr10 and is taking german, because he knows he needs a language for university, but if he had a real choice he would not be taking a language. There are so many languages in this world, that chosing just one as compuslory is fairly pointless.
I can see the point of studying RE as it does create a greater understanding of others.

DS is taking the compulsary half a gcse RE and would have quite happily taking the twilight course to make it a full GCSE, however he is taking another twilight so just can't fit it in.

My son was unable to take music GCSE (we are now paying £20.00 pw in order that he can take his Grade 5 music theory privately). In order to have been able to study music at GCSE level he would have had to give up either art or D & T - he hopes to go onto university to study Engineering, and at age 13, had to make the decision to give up a subject he enjoyed for one he had no interest in. On Parents Evening,his music teacher was doing all in his power to persuade him to give up another subject so he would continue with music.

He would have more than happily done 13 subjects but was told by school that this was not possible.

I feel that a good grounding in R E could be beneficial up to GCSE, but that it should not be compulsory after that.

Grade 5 Music Theory is actually quite different to the Music GCSE exam course and, though it's very good to have, it counts for little on a university application. From memory, I think only grades 6 and 8 in ABRSM music exams count for points on a UCAS application but I may be a year or two out of date. He could make use of it in his personal statement however.

When my DC was choosing her GCSE options 5 years ago I was keen for her to choose a Humanity subject. RE was a compulsory GCSE at her school and she wanted to do as much Science and Maths as possible so I was satisfied that RE would 'count' as her humanity. It did....then. She's happily on the university course she wanted.

BUT the choices that she made for GCSE and that she was so successful in would not have counted as an Ebacc. under the sneakily introduced measurement M. Gove has retrospectively imposed on schools because she does not have a GCSE in History or Geography.

I would guess that schools up and down the land are currently reassessing their GCSE option policy.

It's a bit like foreign food - if you haven't tried it you can't say you don't like it.

Don't have a problem with it at all.

RE is in many ways, the study of other cultures. Understanding of other people's faith helps to breed tolerance. It also highlights extremeism so that we don't end up in a Daily Mail frame of mind as a country where all Muslims (or other) are dangerous terrorists.

I think its stupid making a modern language complusory when many DC leave school functionally illiterate. I feel that there is far too much complusory at 14 years old. Children learn better when they are interested in a subject. Bottom set year French in a comprehensive is fairly hellish for all concerned.

I think the brighter children could be pushed to get more GCSEs out the way earlier in their school career. For example I did GCSE maths early and some of the girls in my school opted to do GCSE art in a year instead of AS maths.

Doing Religous studies is not like "GCSE Aesopp's Fables". Its learning about other cultures and relgions. For example my nine year old son is learning about siekism at the moment. I could not teach him about Siekism as I know nothing about it myself.

I think a knowledge of other cultures is useful for careers like nursing or social work. Religion is important to many people and a better understanding helps with emotional needs.

Prehaps bright kids could get GCSE RE out the way in year 9.

See, but I think that if you study History rather than RE you can get that understanding of other cultures as well (though I'm biased - I have a degree in the subject). Though, I think the current UK school syllabus should be expanded beyond Europe somewhat to accomodate it. IME, it's not until you get to degree level that you cover Asian, African history etc. (like I did a course on Turkey from the abolition of the caliphate, Ataturk and so on - interesting to see what's happening now).

What's the quote - "those who don't learn from the past are doomed to repeat it"? For example, all the recent events in North Africa - it's interesting looking at it with the knowledge of various revolutions that have occurred before (French, Russian etc.) and the patterns they have followed (popular uprising, oppressive regime coming in and removing all traces of previous regime, stabilisation. For a bit).

I also strongly believe that learning a foreign language is incredibly important for many reasons:

• taking you outside your comfort zone
• languages reflect the culture/mindset so it's an interesting insight into another society (e.g. french expression for times when you're living in poverty - living on love and fresh water)
• it makes you appreciate being an English speaker, and the struggle for people who have to learn another language.

It is so easy, being a native English speaker, to just rely on it and not bother with anything else - it's a pretty universal language and you can travel to many, many countries without speaking another language. But where's the fun in that? You don't get the same satisfaction as when you first make yourself understood in a foreign language, or if you understand it unconsciously (without having to translate).

And honestly, having learnt various languages over the last 25 years of my life, learning it when you're young is much much MUCH easier than trying to learn it as an adult. And laying those foundations early on makes it easier to improve/learn other languages later in life.

RE is compulsory?

Whatever next? Compulsory voodoo lessons?

Most RE courses can have value, because they can make children think, and not just about themselves. History, and Geography fulfill the same function. It opens their eyes. In Geography, they think about issues such as migration, and exploitation, rather than just believing everything they might come across, and about their place in a wider world and society. History teaches them about why we have the life we do, and about tolerance and people making things change. I firmly believe they help improve tolerance, as well as teaching useful skills. I think they are more relevant than literature in lots of ways.

haven't read the whole thread and should hold my hand up as an RS teacher first (an atheist one) but it has been compulsory since the 1944 education act so way before the NC was in place in 1988. It is compulsory up to 16 which is why many schools do some form of GCSE in it but many class it as PSE etc. It is (depending on the modules taken) largely about ethics and broad arguments for and against faith in general, not one particular one. It requires students to develop arguments and write at length, in a coherent and fluent manner. It promotes an understanding of others' views, and provides a place in which dangerous stereotypes can be discussed and hopefully dismantled. For church schools it can be more traditionally religious with the choice of different modules but that would be fair enough in my view.

Maybe it should be complusory to do a half GCSE in a humanity subject rather than forcing teenagers to do RE if they have not reached certain standard by year 9

Yanbu...I can't believe they have dropped languages and history, a sad state all around.

RE was compulsory when I was at school, its in every school now I think

I was at secondary school in the 70s, I remember doing RE (just bible stories, no comparitive religion) in the first two years but not thereafter - I'm sure I didn't do it in the GCE years.

Just looked at my DDs school curriculum, they do an hour a week RE in yrs 7,8 and 9 but no mention of it in 10 and 11 - RS is one of the none-core GCSE options, and then "The Year 10 and 11 curriculum is completed with Citizenship, P.E. and Personal, Health and Social Education." - no mention of RE.

The school gets excellent OFSTED ratings so if they are missing it in 10 and 11 its obviously not seen as a problem.

Haven't read entire thread so apologies if already mentioned but RE is not a compulsory subject at any level - parents have the right to withdraw their children from RE throughout school.

See here for more info

i haven't read all the thread, but am amazed that some schools have compulsory RE GCSE - is it just because it is an 'easy' one to pass?
My son's school has it as an optional extra.