Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To think my son should not be forced to do a full GCSE in religious education

359 replies

ReallyTired · 28/12/2015 02:14

He would far rather do GCSE music. He had done RE since he was five. Surely an extra two years is not going to increase his knowledge of other religions that much.

OP posts:
merrymouse · 31/12/2015 14:52

Of course some schools can't offer some combinations of GCSE - but many, many, many schools can offer a wider choice at GCSE than compulsory RE, and pupils who don't have this choice are at a disadvantage.

Again, you can argue the toss about music and drama (which can be effectively studied outside school), but how can you have a choice of humanities if RE is compulsory?

merrymouse · 31/12/2015 14:56

We have a state religion.

But RE is not limited to Christianity or about being a Christian.

We all share the consequences of history, but there is no requirement to study history post 14.

IguanaTail · 31/12/2015 15:01

State religion in UK:

rationalwiki.org/wiki/State_religion

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_religion

www.bbc.co.uk/religion/0/21883918

www.crickcentre.org/blog/britain-need-state-religion/

Are you sure? (No need to capitalise and put your response in bold by the way).

longtimelurker101 · 31/12/2015 15:03

Got to love the ad hominem attacks on me above, I've always thought when you are lowered to criticising spelling on an internet forum then you are displaying the fact that you have no valid argument to make.

So, just as an aside, no one found issue with my spelling and grammar when I got my 1st at a prestigious Russell Group university ( ok it was long ago) and long before I came into teaching I worked as a journalist for more than one national newspaper. I don't always read back what I write on here, more stream of conciousness, so there are most likely errors and typos, but I certainly have nothing to prove to you.

"forcing children to take subjects that do not interest them and that they perceive will bring them no benefit". Have you met teenagers? Lots of them see no benefit in science, languages, even maths that is beyond simple addition, subtraction and multiplication. What you would find in most secondary schools is that behaviour problems are far higher in core subjects than they are in options.

We have looked at other models of how to deal with R.S ( as it is offically known), and neither the forcing everyone to do the full course, or the PSHE route seemed appropriate. We have gone down the route of everyone does R.S but only the short course unless you chose it as an option.

As stated previously the O.P's school have probably gone down the route of ensuring that each child will get the opportunity to get an EBACC, and by the sounds of it have them only studying 8/9 GCSEs which with the progress 8 measurement is going to become far more common. Neither of which we have chosen to do in my school btw as it doesn't meet the needs of all the students, but lots of schools have chosen to do straight EBACC subjects and limit their students to 8 GSCEs because of the new success criteria from the government.

I do get rattled with the constant calls on here for one child to have special provisions made for them because of what they "want" or because it doesn't suit them/their parents at that particular time, not what they need. In the schools I have been a member of the leadership team in (and yes there has been more than one) parents who shout about their child's "requirements" and think that we should hop to their orders are a continual thorn in our side. If your child has genuine needs we will of course provide for them, but not because little David has decided that he wants to have more options choices than everyone else. Especially when there are loads of extra curricular options for him to get the same standard of education.

If you really don't like the R.E thing, take it up with the government, the school will be doing their best with what they have.

merrymouse · 31/12/2015 15:06

Whether it's state or established, it's still not relevant to the study of RE in school, which is not a confirmation class.

longtimelurker101 · 31/12/2015 15:13

But then this argument is getting ridiculous, that is government policy, the schools merely impliment it.

Ta1kinPeece · 31/12/2015 15:14

that is government policy, the schools merely impliment it.
But there are lots of ways they can implement it
and its a shame that the academy programme so actively discourages sharing of best practice

IguanaTail · 31/12/2015 15:18

Ta1 - are you still sure there is no state religion?

merry - well it is in a way, because religion is the foundation of education in this country, and the understanding of other religions, their perspectives and cultures is important.

Dipankrispaneven · 31/12/2015 15:23

The opt out is choice.

No it isn't. If you opt out of history the likelihood is that you have the option of doing something like geography or drama. If you opt out of French you can probably do another language. As has been established upthread, if you opt out of RE the likelihood is that the best you can hope for is that you get to sit in the library doing homework.

No response to whether this is a faith school. Which makes me think perhaps it is then.

Try looking at the OP's posts, MistressDeeCee: she said it was a community comprehensive.

Ta1kinPeece · 31/12/2015 15:27

Iguana
Church of England is the established church in the UK
I had to pledge allegiance to the Queen when I became British, but not on a bible.
There is no requirement to be Christian to hold office in the UK
There are no penalties for holding other faiths (as in many Islamic countries)

And its all irrelevant to the RE that OPs kid will study as its at a comp so covers all faiths.

merrymouse · 31/12/2015 15:29

Have you met teenagers? Lots of them see no benefit in science, languages, even maths that is beyond simple addition, subtraction and multiplication. What you would find in most secondary schools is that behaviour problems are far higher in core subjects than they are in options.

Yes, I have met many teenagers who are motivated and interested in learning and who have the option to study their choice of humanities subject at GCSE (which hardly seems like making special provision for somebody's little snowflake).

merrymouse · 31/12/2015 15:33

because religion is the foundation of education in this country

It's part of the history of education, (go history!) but not the foundation.

My parents went to school in the forties and were taught that Jews murdered our Lord and that the 'Romans' (Catholics) were suspicious. Not sure if they came across Muslims outside the crusades (heroic Richard the lionheart!) and Othello.

merrymouse · 31/12/2015 16:01

understanding of other religions, their perspectives and cultures is important

Yes, but RE is only part of the understanding of other perspectives and cultures and doesn't provide greater understanding than history or geography.

Ta1kinPeece · 31/12/2015 16:05

TBH my kids are made to listen to doses of Radio 4 which covers most of the issues Smile

merrymouse · 31/12/2015 16:06

It seems that RE is a perfectly good humanities subject that may or may not be an easy option, but is somehow confused with the notion that Britain is a Christian country therefore it must be a compulsory GCSE - and so schools have a handy excuse to restrict choice and perhaps bump grades a bit.

ReallyTired · 31/12/2015 16:06

"Have you met teenagers? Lots of them see no benefit in science, languages, even maths that is beyond simple addition, subtraction and multiplication. What you would find in most secondary schools is that behaviour problems are far higher in core subjects than they are in options."

Most teens with more than two brain cells realise that they need maths and English for almost any kind of job. Certainly my son understands that maths, English and science are essential for someone who is serious about any kind of programming. Also these subjects are setted.

I am pissed off with government policy rather than my son's school. There is far too much prescription what a child should study.

OP posts:
Ta1kinPeece · 31/12/2015 16:09

It seems that RE is a perfectly good humanities subject that may or may not be an easy option, but is somehow confused with the notion that Britain is a Christian country therefore it must be a compulsory GCSE
Bazinga.
Merrymouse wins the thread.

IguanaTail · 31/12/2015 16:16

A state religion (or an established church - it's the same thing - there is no difference) does not necessarily mean a theocracy. The Queen is Head of the State Church in England but citizens are not in a theocratical state, like North Korea. I think you are confusing the two.

Yes the church founded and controlled many thousands of schools from the nineteenth century. Of course there was the odd village cobbler who helped out the local kids with basics now and again, but it was schools (started by the church) which were compulsory towards the end of that century. Public schools very often had (and many still do have) a strong religious core.

The history and the fact we have a state religion is relevant to the OP because the reason that we have RS on the curriculum is due to our roots in that education and the church have been entwined for so long. In France education is secular and so they don't have any religious teaching going on in school.

Whether or not it is now desirable to have RS taught in schools is a separate argument. Personally, I think it is valuable for children in our modern world to understand aspects of religions, their cultures and norms. But many disagree.

merrymouse · 31/12/2015 16:16
Grin
IguanaTail · 31/12/2015 16:18

Today 16:01 merrymouse

understanding of other religions, their perspectives and cultures is important

Yes, but RE is only part of the understanding of other perspectives and cultures and doesn't provide greater understanding than history or geography.

? Of course it does! It's an entire discipline!

IguanaTail · 31/12/2015 16:18

I don't think anyone said it should be a compulsory GCSE subject?

BertrandRussell · 31/12/2015 16:23

"I don't think anyone said it should be a compulsory GCSE subject?"
It is in many schools. And the study of it is compulsory in all.

merrymouse · 31/12/2015 16:47

? Of course it does! It's an entire discipline!

Good luck understanding why there is conflict in Israel or Ireland without studying their history.

You'll note I quoted "perspectives and cultures", not "religions, their perspectives and cultures". Religion is only one part of society and culture.

Again, I'm not arguing against RE being available as a subject, just that it isn't more relevant than history or geography.

merrymouse · 31/12/2015 16:49

I don't think anyone said it should be a compulsory GCSE subject?

Thread title:

"AIBU To think my son should not be forced to do a full GCSE in religious education"

redbinneo · 31/12/2015 17:06

Longtimelurker, you posted
"Got to love the ad hominem attacks on me above, I've always thought when you are lowered to criticising spelling on an internet forum then you are displaying the fact that you have no valid argument to make. "
Then you posted
"the schools merely impliment it"
Which leads me to conclude that you are either hiding your lack of literacy behind a defensive argument, or just trying to justify your inability to spell English words.
If you actually went to a RG University, I think it was either to collect the rubbish, or clean the toilets.
If you are truly in a leadership position within the educational system god help us all!

Swipe left for the next trending thread