To remove dd from RS

[MossandRoy]

The lack of balance is annoying. There is an assumption that there is a god. There is an assumption that everyone believes in that god. I can remove her. Has anyone done this successfully? I'm concerned she'll be given a hard time...

Why ask people to prove a negative?
Logical fallacy. Used by religious types who don't have proof.

@HeidiHaughton

You didn’t answer my question because you couldn’t.
Just like I couldn’t answer your initial question.

It is physically not possible to prove the existence or non existence of God. So your initial question was pointless.

Yes, I am.

Why is one more valuable than another?

@onesixseven

Yes, I am.

Why is one more valuable than another?

It isn't. But in a practical sense, something has to give. Otherwise we'd all spend the day running around saying oh well we can't have it but we can't not but we can't have it but we can't not. The world doesn't work like that.

I am not advocating forcing everyone into worship and indoctrinating them.

But what I am saying is that holding religious assemblies (which has become somewhat of a derailment here) and just letting anyone who says they don't believe in, is not the answer. Nor is cancelling them altogether for the rest of time.

From what I remember in early RE it was very much presenting the facts of the religions and their beliefs, without much criticism as such. It was my favourite subject at GCSE because it started to go into the ethics of biblical teachings and it was so interesting. I wonder if it is just that they are trying to teach the foundations and getting into debate on each and every thing at the early stages would put them behind on the curriculum.

I completely disagree with most of these posts and I'm very about the number of "atheists" shrieking that if you don't study Christianity you'll become non-British, magically lose the ability to read or enjoy art, become bigoted, small-minded, arrogant, entitled, and your head will fall off.

The National Curriculum heavily emphasises Christianity, there are other major world religions that are covered in a pretty cursory way, or not at all. It's also highly naïve to believe that every single teacher anywhere is a wonderful tolerant progressive person and that no teacher could possibly be biased or have their own belief system that colours their thinking. Have none of you actually BEEN to school? Teachers are just people like anyone else, good bad or indifferent. I sat GCSEs in the noughties, and my (non-faith school) RE teacher completely took it as an opportunity to spread fundamentalist propaganda, and be racist towards other religions. Plenty of religious minority Brits have similar stories.

And yes obviously it's important to know the basics of other religions but some posters are acting like children are being raised inside a cardboard box they're only allowed to leave for 2 hours a week to attend their RE lesson. I'm willing to bet most people learn far, far more about other religions and cultures from simply living in the world - meeting people, working with and having friendships/relationships with people of other religions, travelling and living abroad, visiting other parts of their own countries, living in ethnically diverse areas, watching TV, reading books, and just soaking up culture generally, than they did from taking a once a week RE lesson when they were 15.

I'm from a religious minority, my partner is from a different minority religion, the average person knows slightly less than sweet fuck all about our religions. If the intention of RE lessons is to turn out British adults who have a decent knowledge of all religions, then clearly it's a massive failure. Amongst my friends who have shown an interest or knowledge of my religion, every single one learned about it via books or films or via having friends/partners in that religion. Not a single one ever learned about my religion in school.

And the point about needing an RE GCSE to be able to "read most books and appreciate most art" is just bollocks. People learn FROM books and art; books and art are incredibly powerful tools for inflaming people's imaginations and curiosities and making them want to increase their knowledge. The idea that you can't possibly read and enjoy the Northern Lights trilogy unless you've already got a qualification in Christian theology already is just bananas. I've read the Narnia and Northern Lights books multiple times, I read the Narnia books as a young child before I had any understanding of the Christian themes, and those two book series were a thousand times more powerful in deepening my knowledge of both Christian theology and the ways religious belief can be exploited, than RE lessons did. I could name a dozen YA novels that contain more info about Islam in one book than RE. Similarly I have learned far more about religion by going to art galleries than in school. And really how much knowledge is someone really going to have about a specific minority religion from having yawned their way through the one or two lessons that covered that religion when they were 15?

*It isn't. But in a practical sense, something has to give. Otherwise we'd all spend the day running around saying oh well we can't have it but we can't not but we can't have it but we can't not. The world doesn't work like that.

I am not advocating forcing everyone into worship and indoctrinating them.

But what I am saying is that holding religious assemblies (which has become somewhat of a derailment here) and just letting anyone who says they don't believe in, is not the answer. Nor is cancelling them altogether for the rest of time.*

What you're saying is that if someone claims to be Muslim (or any other religion) you would automatically believe them but if someone claims to be atheist you wouldn't and would make them take part. How is that remotely fair?

@Pukkatea

From what I remember in early RE it was very much presenting the facts of the religions and their beliefs, without much criticism as such. It was my favourite subject at GCSE because it started to go into the ethics of biblical teachings and it was so interesting. I wonder if it is just that they are trying to teach the foundations and getting into debate on each and every thing at the early stages would put them behind on the curriculum.

These types of debates always have a token "My DS/DD asked a question and left/was thrown out" but IME, most teachers worth their salt would not do this. It is far more likely that said child was being obtuse and asking questions which were neither relevant or appropriate but designed to be controversial.

There is a time and a [place for asking things like why are some religions homophobic but mid lesson when the teacher is talking about something is not it, and teachers often need to deal with this as a disclipline issue unless they want complete anarchy. Doesn't mean they disagree, or that they are allowing things to go unchecked.

@onesixseven

*It isn't. But in a practical sense, something has to give. Otherwise we'd all spend the day running around saying oh well we can't have it but we can't not but we can't have it but we can't not. The world doesn't work like that.

I am not advocating forcing everyone into worship and indoctrinating them.

But what I am saying is that holding religious assemblies (which has become somewhat of a derailment here) and just letting anyone who says they don't believe in, is not the answer. Nor is cancelling them altogether for the rest of time.*

What you're saying is that if someone claims to be Muslim (or any other religion) you would automatically believe them but if someone claims to be atheist you wouldn't and would make them take part. How is that remotely fair?

You do have a habit of reading things and making up things I've said. I've never once said that I would "make someone take part" and "wouldn't believe them". Not once.

But given that I work and have worked in schools, I have seen the full spectrum. Children who strongly believe, children whos parents do but they have a loose connection, children who aren't really bothered either way, children who go because it's a laugh and a skive off double Maths, children who really absolutely are strongly atheist and will not go and have support from home on this, and children who say I don't believe I'm going so shove yer assembly.

We live in a world as shown on here by the many threads, the one the other week about how DD didn't like an exercise on a worksheet and the way it was worded and there were numerous encouragements of her to write a letter of complaint, argue with her teacher, walk out of hte classroom, refuse to return....

Children have to learn that sometimes they do things they don't believe in. In the workplace, they would have to.

It's a bit of a non argument as assemblies aren't a thing at the moment and won't be for a long time, and they aren't nearly as regular as they used to be anyway.

You seem to be pedalling the point that I'm somehow dismissing the thoughts of atheists which is odd as I've repeatedly stated I am one.

What i'm saying is, it's just not as easy as people are painting out.

@rosetylersbiggun I actually don't remember learning about Islam at all in RE. Hinduism yes, lots. Sikhism yep, lots. Greek orthodox, tick. But Islam, absolutely nothing.

We had nightmares in the last few years teaching Islam, as I'm sure you can imagine. But it is so important and so crucial that we did. I dealt with it by answering questions in a safe and controlled discussion environment, and I'm glad that we were able to do that, because if we didn't, children would be continuing to walk around with some horrendous opinions, brought from home, confirmed by the media, and without RE, would live their lives on them. And what a world that would be.

@rosetylersbiggun

I completely disagree with most of these posts and I'm very about the number of "atheists" shrieking that if you don't study Christianity you'll become non-British, magically lose the ability to read or enjoy art, become bigoted, small-minded, arrogant, entitled, and your head will fall off.

The National Curriculum heavily emphasises Christianity, there are other major world religions that are covered in a pretty cursory way, or not at all. It's also highly naïve to believe that every single teacher anywhere is a wonderful tolerant progressive person and that no teacher could possibly be biased or have their own belief system that colours their thinking. Have none of you actually BEEN to school? Teachers are just people like anyone else, good bad or indifferent. I sat GCSEs in the noughties, and my (non-faith school) RE teacher completely took it as an opportunity to spread fundamentalist propaganda, and be racist towards other religions. Plenty of religious minority Brits have similar stories.

And yes obviously it's important to know the basics of other religions but some posters are acting like children are being raised inside a cardboard box they're only allowed to leave for 2 hours a week to attend their RE lesson. I'm willing to bet most people learn far, far more about other religions and cultures from simply living in the world - meeting people, working with and having friendships/relationships with people of other religions, travelling and living abroad, visiting other parts of their own countries, living in ethnically diverse areas, watching TV, reading books, and just soaking up culture generally, than they did from taking a once a week RE lesson when they were 15.

I'm from a religious minority, my partner is from a different minority religion, the average person knows slightly less than sweet fuck all about our religions. If the intention of RE lessons is to turn out British adults who have a decent knowledge of all religions, then clearly it's a massive failure. Amongst my friends who have shown an interest or knowledge of my religion, every single one learned about it via books or films or via having friends/partners in that religion. Not a single one ever learned about my religion in school.

And the point about needing an RE GCSE to be able to "read most books and appreciate most art" is just bollocks. People learn FROM books and art; books and art are incredibly powerful tools for inflaming people's imaginations and curiosities and making them want to increase their knowledge. The idea that you can't possibly read and enjoy the Northern Lights trilogy unless you've already got a qualification in Christian theology already is just bananas. I've read the Narnia and Northern Lights books multiple times, I read the Narnia books as a young child before I had any understanding of the Christian themes, and those two book series were a thousand times more powerful in deepening my knowledge of both Christian theology and the ways religious belief can be exploited, than RE lessons did. I could name a dozen YA novels that contain more info about Islam in one book than RE. Similarly I have learned far more about religion by going to art galleries than in school. And really how much knowledge is someone really going to have about a specific minority religion from having yawned their way through the one or two lessons that covered that religion when they were 15?

I assume you mean me, but I wasn't shrieking anything.

I'm not claiming that you only learn in RE, but I don't agree with what you're claiming either.

and I'm glad that we were able to do that, because if we didn't, children would be continuing to walk around with some horrendous opinions, brought from home, confirmed by the media, and without RE, would live their lives on them. And what a world that would be.

I completely agree!

The National Curriculum heavily emphasises Christianity

There is no RE national curriculum.

Omitting it from the curriculum would produce a generation of children unable to understand culture and religion from any perspective other than "it doesnt exist".

Again, these magical children who are being raised entirely in locked rooms with zero exposure to the outside world other than their weekly RE lessons. Kids who never read books, never watch TV, don't have any friend, never leave the house and see people different from them and ask why...

It's one lesson. That a lot of kids are bored senseless through and don't pay the slightest bit of attention to. The idea that one single school lesson has such a massive impact is just laughable.

I dropped RE as a subject after three months because it was so preachy. I already had a very thorough knowledge of many major and minor religions thanks to growing up in a diverse area and having Christian, Muslim, Sikh, Hindu, Bantu and Zoroastrian friends, having attended services from different religions, and having parents who actively tried to educate me in different belief systems. I went on to do a masters degree in anthropology, which involved studying some pretty obscure religious practices. I'm pretty sure that as an adult I am not "unable to understand culture or religion" or "unable to understand and appreciate most books and art."

@rosetylersbiggun

Omitting it from the curriculum would produce a generation of children unable to understand culture and religion from any perspective other than "it doesnt exist".

Again, these magical children who are being raised entirely in locked rooms with zero exposure to the outside world other than their weekly RE lessons. Kids who never read books, never watch TV, don't have any friend, never leave the house and see people different from them and ask why...

It's one lesson. That a lot of kids are bored senseless through and don't pay the slightest bit of attention to. The idea that one single school lesson has such a massive impact is just laughable.

I dropped RE as a subject after three months because it was so preachy. I already had a very thorough knowledge of many major and minor religions thanks to growing up in a diverse area and having Christian, Muslim, Sikh, Hindu, Bantu and Zoroastrian friends, having attended services from different religions, and having parents who actively tried to educate me in different belief systems. I went on to do a masters degree in anthropology, which involved studying some pretty obscure religious practices. I'm pretty sure that as an adult I am not "unable to understand culture or religion" or "unable to understand and appreciate most books and art."

You are clearly well read, given your post on the Northern Lights and your degree in anthropology, growing up in a diverse area, having friends from all these backgrounds, etc.

Do you think your experience represents every, or even the average child?

@Flipflops85

The National Curriculum heavily emphasises Christianity

There is no RE national curriculum.

Neither of these posts are true

@RootyT00t

Find me the RE national curriculum then.

[quote Flipflops85]@RootyT00t

Find me the RE national curriculum then.[/quote]
I'm in Scotland which is different, but

in England even though there isn't a curriciulum there is a curriciulum framework. It's not just gung ho.

I agree with you OP in that the teacher shouldn’t be pushing God as fact and should be more objective. But I think it would be a great shame to remove her from class. It’s an opportunity to learn about other people’s culture and beliefs, to form your own opinions about really important topics like abortion, capital punishment, sexism etc. I would speak with the teacher first.

There isn’t a curriculum framework for RE in England.

There is non statutory guidance and then LAs set out their own non statutory guidance. There is no national curriculum or programme of study - unless you can find me it?

The government issue "non statutory guidance" on the teaching of RE, and of course faith schools tend to operate differently than non-faith schools in how they approach issues of religious education. So no, there's no one single "RE National Curriculum" that every school in the country teaches, but it's not like individual schools just make it up as they go along. The government issues clear and specific guidelines, and the National Curriculum website also has pretty detailed information.

At my children's school RE is taught in topics such as marriage or death, and what this means from different religious perspectives, and also get the children to discuss their own ethical beliefs and opinions. They had a class debate on abortion, including how much say the fathers to be should have, a difficult and emotive issue that some of them will have to face when not much older. They were very lucky to have an excellent teacher who gave them a lot to think about and open their eyes to other ways of thinking

Although it's a minority of people that are regular church goers, a lot of people would identify themselves as christian and to a degree believe in Christian ethics, which effects society in this country. Sectarianism has had a huge effect on British history and particularly in some areas still is a factor, where I live almost all schools are faith schools, and most people would identify themselves as being one side or the other. An elderly neighbour recently killed herself following the death of her husband, it was very much 'not talked about' and kept quite quiet, an attitude effected by the Christian belief that suicide is a sin. Another neighbour who is from the Far East was quite surprised as it is viewed much differently in her home culture.

No they don’t. They have a non statutory guidance.

It’s a locally agreed syllabus, but this is not statutory. Academies, for example, can set their own syllabus. They often don’t, but there is no nationally agreed guidelines.

One authority can look quite different to another.

Dd is in year 9 and just about to choose to as an option. She loves the philosophical discussions about ethics, morality with a dash of psychology thrown in. No pushing there is a god otherwise she would never consider taking it.

I don’t think pupils should be able to pick and choose and opt out of whichever subjects they don’t agree with.

So you don’t believe in choosing your GCSE options or A levels?