...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?

As a staunch atheist, luckily i went to a secular school. I never attended what was then called RE lessons - i just went to the library and completed homework from my other subjects.

is it 100% clear to parent that when non-Catholic children get places in a Catholic school, that one GCSE option will be used up on RS? I don't have children but this is the first i've heard of it - never considered it before!

Ours isn't a church school. Just a very large comp albeit in an affluent area.

Yes perhaps ethics is more fitting.

I do feel it's the quality of the teaching that's made it so popular.

I can only speak as I find. I had a preconceived idea about it too but having watched DC and how much they've learnt I must admit I was well off the mark. Dd particularly enjoyed studying about women, things like honour crimes, circumcision etc..it piqued an interest in feminism that she will carry throughout her life now.

That sounds great and if my DCs learn and debate about things like that then I'm all for it. This is why I think it should be more ethics and philosophy than having to do half the paper of religious studies that they have been doing since year 7.

@DataColour so if the GCSE was called Philosophy and Ethics you'd be ok with it ?

Except it isn't is it.

It is just a one sided, sanitised, exclusionary version of "New Speak".

FGM is wrong!

But circumcision of young boys for "religious" reasons is fine.

Coercive Control is wrong, unless it's for "religious" purposes.

If your White, you are automatically a racist and "privileged" and you need to apologise to all other for your existence.

Climate Change is bad! But recycling your drink cartons will save all the Polar Bears. Just don't ask about the causes of it, because the truth would mean that the kids would have to give up their iPhones.

Tell them to sit down in the middle of the road instead.

Remember kids, telling Mummy not to drive so much will convince the poor, South American farmer to not cut that tree down. He will be more than happy to stay poor for the benefit of your conscience.

They will never be told the truth.

It's a sieve.

I dislike militant atheism as much as I dislike religious zealotry (I am agnostic, bordering on atheist myself) as it is a form of bullying others to conform to what you think.

There is so much ignorance on this thread about the RE syllabus and how it is taught (assuming it is taught well) these days.

If you believe it is a waste of time studying ‘fiction’, why not pull your children out of English too? What is the point in studying ‘made up’ books?

It is also really important and useful to understand what a substantial proportion of humanity still believe and to be able to understand so much of the biblical referencing in classic literature. I would say the majority of pupils I have taught (science, private school, KS4 and 5) have no idea of the origin and meaning of what I thought were common English phrases like ‘good Samaritan’, ‘prodigal son’, ‘tower of babel’ etc. I think losing these biblical sayings loses some of the texture of the English language%

As for the woke agenda, at least at my son’s school, this is far more heavily pushed in English than RE, which allows for more freedom of thought in contrasting today’s values to those in traditional religion.

And, as I said upthread, it is not just about facts but about skills. You can learn the skills of essay writing, arguing critically and referencing just as well in RE as any other humanity.

Just across the channel is a country where religion is actively excluded from schools, is barely touched upon in history lessons, and where people nonetheless grow up to be well-rounded, responsible citizens in the main 🤷‍♀️

@AuxArmesCitoyens ,

But so what? RE is an academic subject, not PSHE. You could say the same about History, Geography, Latin, Economics etc.

Its goal is to create well educated people, both in terms of knowledge and skills ( the bit which is often forgotten by people who dismiss its study).

RE is not teaching pupils to be religious, it is teaching them the different belief systems and fitting those in with ethics and morality. A student can score a nine without believing any of it.

There is huge unrest and tension in France over religion and cultural differences. Islamism in particular. I'm not sure it's a good example tbf.

Exactly.

I think perhaps some posters are confusing the two.

DC RS teacher is an atheist. It makes no difference because its not about teaching them to believe, its simply studying a subject.

If it's 'barely touched on in history lessons' then I don't know what history they're teaching. It certainly isn't the history of France.

So why in a Catholic school have they selected an RE curriculum where the main focus is on Catholicism? How is that actually teaching them about different belief systems? Other than a bit of a nod to Judaism, I'm not sure that it is teaching them about different belief systems at all.

I agree that it's good to learn about different faiths and to develop critical thinking skills etc.

But a Catholic school choosing an RE curriculum which primarily focuses on Catholicism doesn't really inspire me with confidence in their commitment to teaching critical thinking.

There's huge unrest and civil tensions in the UK over religious and cultural differences too, over Islamism in particular, despite everyone studying RE as a subject in its own right for years at school. That's the point.

@Medschoolmum ,

I am curious as to what syllabus allows this. The syllabus my son studies has two papers, one ethics/philosophy (50%) and the other World Religion (50%). In paper 2, they have to study all the major religions.

At the first (COE) school I taught in, they had to study RE to GCSE, but only as some sort of certificate (worth 1/2 a GCSE) with half the teaching time. A full GCSE was an option. Maybe it is somethIng like that?

Because English is a actual language. And knowing how to read is an essential life skill.

Knowing the origin of "Prodigal Son" isn't.

@AuxArmesCitoyens that's an interesting thought.
RE is taught right from the start in (English) schools - I mean a big part of the first term in Reception is a nativity play.
So I wonder when it goes from learning these basic facts to grown adults not knowing things like the difference between a Sikh Temple and an Islamic Mosque?

English is the basis of all written subjects. Every teacher is a teacher of English.

We had to include literacy in all our work schemes. We didn’t have to include RE.

@Hereyoume is knowing the inner meaning of books such as "Of Mice and Men" or plays such as "Hamlet" a life skill?
Because that's what the compulsory English Literature GCSE is all about.
(I actually think English Lit should be optional for GCSE).

Yes if it just contained that.
I think 3yrs of learning religious doctrine in secondary schools and also in primary schools is enough to be able to understand the concepts of various religions. Not to be tested at gcse level for 50% of the paper.

@Hereyoume ,

‘Because English is an actual language. And knowing how to read is an essential life skill.

Knowing the origin of "Prodigal Son" isn't.’

You do realise that RE is a reading and essay writing subject?! And the language they do this in English (I would be impressed if they were teaching the bible in Aramaic, the Koran in Arabic and the Torah in Hebrew!!).

And why is knowing the origin of ‘Out, Out, damned spot!’ of greater value than ‘prodigal son’…….very confusing.

I have no idea. I am merely going by what the OP has said about the GCSE that she teaches.

Nobody spends multiple years in school studying Hamlet or Of Mice and Men! Plus aren't books part of everyone's culture? Not like Buddhism for example which is part of some people's culture.

I have no Idea . As I said ours isn't a church school and I can only speak about our experience. There are far more non denominational schools than religious ones though.

This one https://www.aqa.org.uk/subjects/religious-studies/gcse/religious-studies-b-8063/introduction

https://www.aqa.org.uk/subjects/religious-studies/gcse/religious-studies-b-8063/specification-at-a-glance