...to expect students and parents to take my subject seriously?

[TeacherAnonymous123]

Issue coming from another thread I posted, so thought I would ask for people's opinions.

I teach Religious Studies at a Catholic Secondary School. As it is my subject, I am clearly biased, but I believe that students learning about other religions and cultures is extremely important for their development and attitude towards the world and other people.

As it is a Catholic school, students must take RS at GCSE. Their first exam in it is tomorrow morning and some of them are still apathetic, telling me that parents have said not to bother trying as it isn't an important subject and it doesn't matter if they fail.

Obviously this leads to a battle in lesson which I cannot win as I do not have support from parents.

So parents - do you think RS is an important and relevant subject? If not, why not?

Ditto my DC. They, and I, considered it a total waste of time and effort.

They looked at religions, plural, in what was then PSE. They didn't need to do an exam, they could have been doing a more useful or interesting subject to GCSE.

People saying "I don't remember anything I learnt in RE"... I think that's perhaps not the point.

I think it's the fact that we were exposed to different faiths and cultural practices through school throughout our education, and what that does to our mindset and approach, rather than necessarily being about retaining specific facts on religions.

Just imagine how different it would be if we weren't regularly taught about and encouraged to discuss and think about a wide variety of faiths, religious practices, cultural practices and philosophical opinions throughout our schooling. I genuinely think we take it for granted! We're so used to being gently exposed to different cultures and practices from an early age that we don't see how different we'd be without having had that, and how alien so many things would seem to us. And what the impact of that would be on society and on our own mindsets.

StopStartStop, nice rude responses there to other people who have rightfully pointed out that in some cases having an random extra gcse in an unrealted subject makes no difference to your future career.

Agree.
Mine are at a Catholic school and you don't get to say "I want the great education and the hard working ethos but not the rest of it".
You make a choice and know what you're signing up for.

I went to a Catholic school. GCSE R.E was compulsory. We didn't look at any other religions for those 2 years, just Christianity. I vividly remember the exam questions - "What is the Catholic church's view on marriage?" "What is the Catholic church's view on abortion?"

I just regurgitated everything I'd been taught (indoctrinated) and got an A*. Easiest exam I'd ever sat. I'm a staunch atheist now.

So parents - do you think RS is an important and relevant subject? If not, why not?

My son was really keen on taking RS GCSE. During the GCSE evening he spoke to the RE teacher who successfully managed to put him right off.
This is the teacher that said during a previous parent teacher interview "DS has nice handwriting for a boy". I could feel DS wince as he said it, knowing I would challenge him.

He said there was loads of essays to write and it didn't suit boys so much.
That it was mainly girls that took it (I wonder why).

FFS.

Anyway, that's not really what you asked OP.
telling me that parents have said not to bother trying as it isn't an important subject and it doesn't matter if they fail.

Bloody hell. As far as I see it, I have chosen to send my son to this school and therefore he needs to do what is expected of him and I need to support him in that. If we disagree, we go through the right channels.

That said, when my older son was taking GCSE Art and realised the amount of course work there was, I did advise him (knowing that he wasn't taking art further) to do what he needed to do to pass so that his other subjects didn't suffer.

OP, I got an A in my RE O level. It was the only A I got.
Catholic comp.

I have brought my children as humanist, within that I would hope that they would be respectful and listen in lessons so they can by empathetic to others in everyday life. However, I don't know how relevant they think it is to their life and I wouldn't be bothered if they didn't want to choose ot at GCSE.

Personally I feel religion has no place in schools or society, and I’d be quite happy to see it abolished altogether. However I’m in the minority and while it’s still taught in schools then parents and students should be taking it seriously.

RS isn’t my subject, but I’ve taught it up to GCSE for several years. It’s compulsory in all schools, isn’t it? We get an hour a week which isn’t really manageable. My DS gets 5 hrs a fortnight in his CIW school. I love teaching RS and find it a valuable and interesting subject. I also teach another compulsory subject-Welsh-and here also it’s hard to get kids and parents on board.

Since you asked OP, my opinion is that your subject is at best a waste of time and at worst actively harmful, and I'm very glad it's not taught at all in my kids' school (not in the UK[.

I am an atheist, as are my (now adult) children. However my view was that to understand history, culture, art, then understanding beliefs is critical. They don't have to believe it themselves, for it to matter. 2 subsequently studied to A level - really enjoyed it and found it valuable.

YABU, it's completely their right to feel however they want to about your subject.
For what it's worth I agree with many of them that it's not a vaguely useful subject, even though it might be interesting to some. Ridiculous of a school to make it compulsory, even if it's religious. By all means teach children about religion but making them take it to GCSE level is absurd

As it is a Catholic school, students must take RS at GCSE.

As we're all products of history, is history compulsory? We all have bodies, is PE compulsory?

I used to work for an education company. Every so often, we'd receive a "curriculum" from Catholic or CoE authority that they insisted must be implemented by our programmes for their schools. They were always, without fail, dogmatic dogshit.

Better no RE than that.

@LiterallyOnFire
Err, it isn't compulsory to learn RE until 16. Not in England. Where are you?

I would add that in large swathes of the UK, in rural areas, there is no realistic alternative to the local religious-based school, so it's like it or lump it.

I feel much the same way.

I'm in the US, where the specific subject isn't taught. Instead, it's incorporated into a World History survey type course that millions of students take for a year in public (i.e. state) high school, because obv religion has been a factor in social and political history in many different contexts. Of students go on to do AP US History and/or AP European History they will encounter more detailed exposure to religions, both in terms of belief systems and roles.

My DCs went to a RC elementary school and had 'religious education' classes that focused on RC religious practice and doctrine, and prepared for RC sacraments in second and fourth grade (confirmation prep was an after school course).

In about 6th grade, they learned something of other faiths and did tours of churches, mosques, meeting houses, and synagogues in about a ten mile radius.

Local RC high schools have mandatory RC theology courses. They mandate four years of theology. In one, the four year course sequence is Scripture, Mission of Jesus/ Sacraments, Moral Theology, Interreligious Dialogue, with the opportunity to do an AP Seminar on The Bible and Society. In another, the courses o er four years are Intro to Catholicism, Intro to Sacred Scripture, Catholic Ethics, World Religions, with optional courses in Faith and Science, Catholic Imagination, Spiritual Masters, Social Justice theoretical and practical.
So quite a rigorous set of courses. Obviously the set up in American education is decentralized and schools develop their own courses. Individual school districts and private schools have their own graduation requirements.

I personally see very little evidence of either tolerance or factual knowledge of Catholicism in particular on MN. Clearly there are many people who surreptitiously did homework for other classes or zoned out during their GCSE RS classes in school. The current curriculum seems pretty wishy washy - neither fish nor fowl really. I think an RC school should offer serious theology coursework.

When I was in school in Ireland, Religious Ed was basically a debate class on current topics and it was very intense (Ireland in the late 70s and early 80s was changing fast). It wasn't an exam class.

And I should add, the subject that almost nobody took seriously was Home Economics, which was compulsory for girls when I first started in secondary.

No not important at all, if someone likes it and wants to take it fair enough, they shouldn't be forced into it as what a waste of a GCSE slot when there are so many options.

I think it's more for you to argue why you think it is important. We already have English Literature and History, not sure what else RE brings to the table at GCSE level. It's always the same things covered by the previous three years already.

I find it odd that it's mandatory at a Catholic school when presumably a lot of parents would be of the belief that Catholicism is the only real religion and want a church to teach that - and not have other religions discussed or "promoted"

When I was at school, I believe RI/RE was the ONLY compulsory subject.

It's surely time that it was scrapped; religion can be indoctrinated elsewhere.

Long ago and far away we had RE when I was about 11. I think the course was 1 term long so maybe 10 classes in total. As I recall we discussed the differences between Protestants and Catholics. Vaguely. There might have been a slight mention of Judaism. And then something incredibly vague about "some other countries do other stuff" with a nod towards "but that's not important so we don't need to worry about them". No wonder a few years later when doing Shakespeare the teacher could quite happily comment about Shylock "but Jews are like that."

Quite frankly I think I learned more about the Reformation in one conversation with my OH. And have picked up some other bits as I met other people over the following decades. Given I'm of an age of some world leaders it's no wonder that some of them haven't a clue about other cultures let alone religions.

RE is important. Maybe mention that all the middle east conflicts and 911 might not have happened if RE was taken a bit more seriously.

@DeadbeatYoda it compulsory for Local Authority schools in England to teach RE but not compulsory for children to take it. Parents can choose to withdraw their children.
(Of course most English schools are no longer LA ones - they are mostly Academy schools now.
Academy schools are now such "the normal" that a lot of people don't realise their child's school is one !)

I think learning about other cultures and customs is very useful and it should be very interesting.
However I wonder if it could be taught in a much more dynamic and engaging way if there wasn't an exam at the end of it. Maybe it could be bundled in with philosophy and also debating skills.

Don't worry about R.E was exactly the advice we have to our nephew who needed high grades in maths and sciences to continue in his chosen line of study.
I wouldn't expect him to make the teacher's life miserable in class though.

@Needmorelego
Well, I see that it is compulsory to offer it but my Ds 19 didn't study it in the upper school (yr 10&11) - his school was still LA at the time. However, they were the Covid years so maybe they just didn't bother. My DD 15 is at the same school (yr10) but it is an academy now and they definitely don't make them do RE.
My middle child took it as a gcse, didn't like it much but it was an easy option. He thinks it could just as well have been covered in PHSE.

I can understand why kids and parents think learning about the supernatural is a waste of time 🫤