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

[ReallyTired]

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.

"Schools also have to do a daily act of worship of a broadly Christian nature."

Fortunately, the stance of the Church of England is so wishywashy these days, that just about anything would count as a suitably themed assembly. Even belief in God seem optional for that denomination sometimes.

More seriously, if your schools population is predominantly of a different religious group then the requirement can be modified.

"no longer assuming that people have any prior knowledge or have read the thread, RE in the only non core academic subject that is compulsory to be studied (although not examined) until the end of year 11.

This is not correct.

Schools must provide it. But parents can opt their DC put of it.

It is one of only two subjects where parents can do that.

It is not compulsory, and never has been, to actually take the class.

Oh yes, the old "you can always opt out so it's absolutely fine" argument.

Do you really not have any issues at all with one world view being the norm and being something you have to "opt out" of in a state funded non faith school?

But it's not a one world view. DD's RS covered a range of religions and different viewpoints.

OK. Let's turn it round.

Why should RE be compulsory?

Why should RE considered more important than, for example, History?

My childrens school has weekly assemblys

They do have phse once a week as well which as everyone probably knows covers drugs, drinking, abortion, experimenting on animals, sex, morals, ethics etc

As others have stated that covers the "religious" aspect but (in the case of my childrens school mentions no religion)

Bit Of a cop out really

And that is the world view I was talking about, by the way- the world view that says religion is more important than any other non core subject. I know that the curriculum should cover a range of faiths.

There is no RE in schools in France. They do philosophy instead. I think that's much better.

Probably in six pages of messages this has been brought up but just in case... Timetabling in a secondary school is very complicated and its not just as easy as saying withdraw from RE and pick up another GCSE.

It depends on what lesson is being run at the same time as RE. Your child would only be able to access the lessons that are going on at the same time as RE is being taught. So there is no guarantee that GCSE music is happening at the same time as RE. (Although you might be lucky - you will need to ask).

Probably because the whole of the year group have RE its more likely that it runs at the same time as another GCSE which the whole year group take. Eg in my previous school half the year group would have RE and half would have English and vice versa.

Option lessons tend to run at the same time.

Most schools really try very hard to accommodate individual requests, but there are practicalities attached to managing 1000 - 1500 students ensuring that they are all in the right place at the right time for approx 25 hours a week, which can not be easily rearranged.

Twist but that is because France's education system is totally secular and ours is not. Our education system was founded by the Church of England.

In France they also ban any religious clothing or jewellery / symbols in schools.

There is a lot which is fantastic about the French education system, but I think they should be teaching them about world religions and helping to improve tolerance and understanding of other cultures and their religions.

"There is a lot which is fantastic about the French education system, but I think they should be teaching them about world religions and helping to improve tolerance and understanding of other cultures and their religions."

Because compulsory RE has made such a brilliant job of this in the UK........

Take music!

Loads of Neuroscience papers would be backing you and your son in your choice.

If you are truly interested I can find some and upload. Most of the stuff I have relates to strings, I don't know what instruments your son plays.

From acuity of hearing, long term memory, executive functions, fine motor functions particularly of the non dominant hand, planning, to long term brain health.

There was a guy in one of our classes doing music and education. He knows that he will be able to pick up money with his degree as a private teacher.

Having gone for private lessons with my violin, all I can say is I wish I had stuck at music as a kid and not swimming and gymnastics!

Your lad could likely still continue with music as an elective at uni I think, I tried but I was too rubbish a player.

Yes Bertrand, our society is indeed more tolerant.

Evidence please Iguana. I fail to see why religion needs years of study as a special subject. By all means cover the bare bones of the major religions in six weeks of history classes but years of separate study is a monumental waste f time.

Are you wanting me to provide you with evidence to persuade you that RE is an important subject? You fail to think of it as important, and I do. It's not an "evidence base" it's an opinion.

You think philosophy is "better" (although that is taught during RE at GCSE and A Level). You might have difficulty with some philosophical concepts if you want to base everything on evidence.

My son loves singing and playing his guitar. I think that music helps people all kinds of ways which neuroscience probably doesn't know yet. Playing guitar and singing gives my son a way to relax. I feel that music teaches self discipline as most musical instruments are hard.

Sees, evidence that th e uk is a more tolerant socity than France as in your response to Bertrand.

Sees? WTF, that should say no.

Oh! That it's intolerant - that's a given!

Homosexuality:

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/france/10065168/France-least-tolerant-country-in-Western-Europe-of-homosexuals.html

Racism:

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/10061025/Worlds-most-racially-intolerant-countries-mapped.html

Religion / community cohesion

books.google.co.uk/books?id=ktnQAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA133&lpg=PA133&dq=uk+more+tolerant+than+france&source=bl&ots=6dlXBoughV&sig=xfG9Rqc_xLmqS3Giq5RHMnTKnco&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiNiajjkIHKAhXM2xoKHYpoC00Q6AEILzAF#v=onepage&q=uk%20more%20tolerant%20than%20france&f=false

Politics - the National Front party
This from Dec 15th 2015

During the first round of voting, the FN took 6,018,672, or 27.73 percent of the vote on a turnout of 49.91 percent. In the second round, the overall turnout increased to 58.5 percent—and of this, the FN’s share of the vote jumped to 6,820,147 votes—a significant increase in just a week.

I'm not sure what you're worried about OP. So far my daughter's RE GCSE that she has been learning about (and has been tested on) is differences between Christian and Muslim approaches to marriage, sex, family and relationships ... And you dont want your child to learn about this? Yeah I think it's weird, but apparently this is what they need to learn. Its the curriculum apparently.

Bert apologies for misunderstanding what you meant by one world view. I agree with a lot of what you say, but I believe it is important for our children to understand cultural differences and RS does a great job of this, alongside history etc as well.

And I think as someone else said they just have to write a load of stuff (showing they memorized something) and illustrate that they can build an argument about differences, and the kids will probably get an A*. Easy work I suppose.

Yes - 6% of RE GCSE entries achieve an A*.

The trick is to now get the other 94% who don't to get this easy grade.

Why should RE specifically be compulsory?

Why should RE considered more important than, for example, History?

Why should it not be compulsory? Why is it better for our young people not to have any education in religions?

It doesn't count as an Ebacc subject and parents can withdraw their children from it. I don't think that makes it more important.