To think Religious education in schools should be replaced by AI education

[IsitRainin]

Looking at how quickly AI is advancing, our education system needs to be overhauled.
There's no benefit of subjects like Religious education in today's world and people can learn about it from their family. This should be replaced by AI studies and other STEM subjects which will prepare the Children to be ready and up to date with future advancement and at par with children from China, USA and rest of the world.

It's usually less than one hour a week.

That is a result of aggressive men using religion as an excuse to repress women and hurt men.
Similarly to the child sexual abuse, people blame religion but it is mostly men alongside a lesser amount of evil women.
If religion never existed, sexual assaults and wars would still be happening under a different guise.

So it's Schroedinger's subject - simultaneously a complete doss that takes up next to no class time and the most important topic on the curriculum that bears the weight of world peace on its shoulders

Well perhaps we need more than the one lesson a week then.

I actually agree. Children (secondary age) often don't take it seriously because it's one small lesson shoved into the packed curriculum.
It should be more.

Perhaps tell that to @IsitRaininwho has repeatedly compared us to China and the USA 🤷🏼‍♀️

RE isn't shoving religion down children's throats, any more than, say, learning about the Tudors forces people to give up modern life and live as if in Tudor times. Given that religion plays such a major part in modern society and politics, it really is important that children have at least some understanding of the topic.

For most of us all we need to know about AI is how to use it - which is pretty simple. Any education would be on how to write the best prompts. We no more need to know how it all really works than we need to know how computers really work. Or the workings of the internal combustion engine to drive a car.

On the other hand only learning about religion from your own family means you don’t learn about how other people think. I am very happy that my children whilst being brought up going to church also learnt about: Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Sikhism and Hinduism. The more we understand about other cultures, and religion is a big part of that, the better.

I'm not sure what people who think it should be front and centre of the curriculum are actually expecting. Learning how to use AI as an operator doesn't take very long. Learning to prompt an LLM, for example, isn't complex. Learning about the various models and their limitations - very useful, but that isn't particularly time-consuming either. Do we want schools turning into coding bootcamps, perhaps? I'm not convinced that everyone needs to have this skill and the comment by a pp that kids are sick of being told they'll need to work in STEM reflects a sentiment I can identify with.

Being able to think about how AI and other systems are used and what it does to us - you need subjects like RS and philosophy for those skills. How to evaluate sources? History. And so on.

In short, I think it's a kneejerk reaction to assume that whatever is now and of the moment needs to be given a correspondingly prominent amount of school hours. I recall the same from my secondary education in the 90s, when everyone was obsessed with learning about computers - my GSCE IT class was great fun, but it was so specific to the tech of the time that it hasn't been of any practical benefit. I really didn't need a GCSE to learn how to operate a PC. Meanwhile, I use the skills developed in humanities classes in the 90s every day.

Is it a bigger part of other cultures than, IDK, food or language? What is the logic behind making religion the compulsory gateway to intercultural understanding rather than any of the hundreds of other ways cultures have been shaped over history?

It’s not true anyway. Church attendance increased to 14% from 4% last year, the majority of the increase is young people.

There’s a general swing back across the world to conservative values which often includes religious observance.

We aren’t in a world where emmigrating abroad to work is welcomed. The arrogance that those of us from the UK can pop off anywhere we choose to work is ridiculous. Brexit saw off the need for MFL. Any jobs in Europe have to be given to European nationals first and there needs to be proof that a European can’t fill it.

I don’t think it’s just about culture as understanding both our own and others history. Christianity underlines much of European history, our institutions and yes, our art, music, writing etc. Other faiths do the same elsewhere.

I have noticed a big charge in attitudes towards religion from my generation, and
younger people interested in culture, ethics, plus recovering addicts who found the strength to recover from religion.
I think people realise how religion wasn't the cause of the issues, as the issues are no better without religion.

Part of RE lessons will include learning about festivals - which usually involve food or other special things like costumes, dancing, decorations.
A festival can exist because of a religion (ie Christmas) but the traditions around it (food etc) is cultural.
RE lessons will cover this.

The same is true of the main schools of Western philosophy. Is studying Plato and Sartre mandatory?

Why not the other way round? Teach a class called intercultural understanding that covers food, language etc with religion as one module alongside the rest.

Well, it touches on both of the topics you mentioned for starters - the use of language (sacred sounds in Hinduism, Latin and the Catholic church) and importance of food for religious communities in bringing groups together and religious practice are things I learnt about in RE classes. It has been so central in most societies until recently that it has connections with almost anything of importance.

Once you get to GCSE and beyond there is a great deal of content about philosophy, history and politics too. I took this subject at A' level and learning about the development of the early church and movements like Liberation Theology were very powerful lessons in political manipulation.

A level teaching is by definition not mandatory though

Have you actually looked at the curriculum across all Key Stages? Or are you making assumptions on what YOU think is being taught?

Anyway, parents can remove their children from RE lessons if they wish so there’s always that option 🤷🏼‍♀️

I'm biased as I am an RE teacher and have been for 7 years.

We do not shove religion down students' throats. We teach them different beliefs and how they are expressed, which is incredibly important given how diverse the UK is becoming - for the first time since the Census began, we are no longer a Christian majority country.

That includes teaching about non-religious views as well, just in case you were wondering.

That's pretty much what the modern RE curriculum is - some schools don't even call it "RE" these days.

In secondary the subject is Religion, Philosophy and Ethics (or variations thereof). So yes, it is. DD certainly did Plato.

All we need is a bit of Sartre, a bit of Camus, and our kids can become even more anxious, depressed and alienated. 🌈

A basic understanding of Christianity is fundamental to understanding our history, laws and culture. Due to the vast changes made within that last 100 years due to the ease of travel and immigration, it's important that at least a basic knowledge of other religions is taught too. For those reasons 'religious education' is important.

AI is a new subject and yes, should be taught as part of a wider knowledge of IT systems.