Has anyone withdrawn a secondary age child from religious education?

[Sadik]

DD is yr 9, going into yr 10. She's very interested and engaged in questions of philosophy, ethics etc, and has always had good reports/results in RS.

But, both this year and last, one of her fortnightly RS lessons has been taught by a vicar who doubles as a part time teacher to help out because of staff shortages (he became a vicar after retiring from teaching). DD has found it very frustrating, in that essentially he uses the RS lesson as a vehicle for Christian teaching.

They're now going into year 10, have just started their GCSE timetable for the last weeks of term, and she's found out that they'll have him as their only RS teacher now for the next two years.

She's considering asking us to request her withdrawal from RS - just wondering if any others have done this, and if there are any drawbacks I haven't thought of. (FWIW her set are going to do the full course GCSE within their compulsory RS lesson times, so she would lose one GCSE, but they have plenty, and written subjects aren't a particularly strong point for her.)

[PotteringAlong]

We're a secondary school; I'm head of RE!

The point Pico is that when they leave the premises they're not our responsibility; when they're in school they are. So they need to be supervised. We provide that supervision in lessons. If you don't want to do that lesson you provide your own supervision.

[Pico2]

So if the parent said fine - they can walk home for that lesson, wouldn't that do?

To be honest, I think that asking parents to supervise them is being deliberately obstructive. Putting them in the library, an office, the place where children go for internal suspensions, the back of a different class, there are lots of options that don't require a parent to supervise a 14 year old.

[PotteringAlong]

Honestly, I don't know. I've worked there for 9 years and no one has ever asked to withdraw their child from my subject, even as an enquiry to how to go about it, so I'm not sure what SLT would say. In theory we don't allow pupils off site in the school day but you are allowed to apply to flexi-school so maybe you could get round it that way?

I'm not sure - it would be a decision far above my pay grade

[PotteringAlong]

The policy was in place long before I worked there too - I imagine it's never changed because we've never needed it.

[apple1992]

Putting them in the library, an office, the place where children go for internal suspensions, the back of a different class, there are lots of options that don't require a parent to supervise a 14 year old.
What if when your child does this, the rest of the class wants to do the same. Is there room in the library or office? We definitely wouldn't place them in the isolation room, and I bet oarents would complain if we did!

[Pico2]

If the rest of the class wants to do the same then you need to rethink your RS provision.

[Pico2]

And I'm sure that parents could make a reasonable decision if you offer for them to either pick the child up to supervise them or let them sit quietly at a desk in the isolation room to get on with homework.

Parents shouldn't be blackmailed into sending their children into what sound like religious doctrination sessions.

For those of you who are teachers, I doubt that you are in favour of RS lessons that don't give a broad and balanced view and if you are part of the RS team at your school, does this actually sound like something you'd condone?

[apple1992]

Therefore the OP should challenge the provision, not withdraw the child.

[fruityb]

I have never heard of pupils being removed from premises if they don't study a subject and I work at a faith school! They work elsewhere for that session either in the SEN dept or with another staff member one to one.

[PotteringAlong]

I wouldn't condone it in the slightest. I've taught with someone who was both a trained teacher and a priest and, if anything, her lessons were too unbalanced the other way as she was desperate to avoid any cry that she was indoctrinating pupils.

[Sadik]

"Therefore the OP should challenge the provision, not withdraw the child."
Yes, but what is the school supposed to do if they can't recruit another teacher? That's a serious question - the other welsh language RS teacher is moving to a HoD job elsewhere, hence elderly vicar teacher being back yet again. I'm not sure that challenging the school is going to help them or dd. (Sadly I can't ask for her to be moved into the English stream RS lessons due to timetabling differences.) Frankly IMO the only people to 'blame' here are the government for the rubbish conditions for teachers causing a recruitment crisis, hence why I'm considering just asking to remove her - esp as it's only 2 lessons per fortnight.

[apple1992]

Recruiting another teacher is not the only option, they should be improving the current bloke...

[swingofthings]

Yes, but what is the school supposed to do if they can't recruit another teacher?
Have a serious talk to him that his methods are not following the ethos of the school (assuming they are not!) and that unless he is prepared to accepts to teach about all faith in equal measures and leave his personal opinion to himself, he is not right for the job.

DD took RE at GCSE and loved it. She hasn't been brought up in any religion but she finds the subject very interesting. Her teacher was amazing. They took one trip to London visiting both a mosque and a synagogue in the same day. DD has not idea what religion her teacher affiliated with and that's how it should be.

[Mishaps]

Speak to HT - the government guidelines of RE are very clear, and what your DD is getting is not it.

Governors also have to have an eye on the direction of the presentation of the curriculum, so if you get no joy, that would be your next port of call.

Is she taking GCSE in this subject? - it does not sound as though this guy is following the curriculum for that.

[peachpudding]

DS is very interested in Philosophy and would have loved to do a GCSE in it, unfortunately RE, philosophy & ethics was just to religious for him. In school the full examined RE was 'compulsory' so after standing our ground we demanded he was withdrawn from the class. School was reasonable and allowed him to sit in library and self teach instead.

He is still doing 10 GCSE's, revision load will be less, and so we expect his other results to be boosted.

Partly as a result of this, the school reconsidered and has made RE optional for everyone now. I am told more than two thirds of Y9 have dropped it as a GCSE and the school is consulting on whether or not to drop it completely as a GCSE choice.

So my advice is just withdraw from class, its a waste of time studying and revising a subject you dont need and dont like.

[Roomba]

Is RE a waste of time, though? I absolutely agree that in this case, it sounds as though the curriculum is not being followed, and this guy should not be teaching the subject as he should be - so this needs discussing and action taken if needed.

But to say that the whole of RE is a waste is not true, in my opinion. Not because I think that people need to understand what others believe, develop tolerance etc. (though I do believe this also).

RE, particularly knowledge of Christianity and the Bible in the UK, is vital to understand the context and application of so many other subjects, and daily life in general. If you have zero knowledge of the Bible, you don't have the background to explain why our laws have developed the way they have, why certain behaviours are considered unacceptable, why many events happened in history, how ethics in science have developed... and if your child takes A Level or degree level English Literature they will struggle to see the many allegories and grasp the background of so many writers, poets and their subject matter. How can you understand Shakespeare's plays with no knowledge of how Elizabethans viewed their world through the lens of their religions? Many common English phrases hark back to Christianity and its teachings.

So - I wouldn't write it all off as useless. My ex wanted to withdraw DS1 from RE and assemblies at primary school, but I explained this to him and he was then happy not to withdraw him - as long as it was being presented as 'Christians believe x', 'Sikhs believe y'. The issue is the way this teacher is working, so discuss it with the Head and see what they say, OP.

[peachpudding]

Not saying its a waste of time for everyone but for those who dont want, or dont need it, then it is pointless having it compulsory.

Roomba You need zero knowledge of the Bible to understand daily life, what are you talking about? Most so called Christians haven't even read the Bible. You seem to be suggesting RE should be some sort of Bible study class. You clearly have no experience of the GCSE RE curriculum?

If RE was replaced with a class that taught tolerance and understanding of all human beings instead of teaching theoretical historical differences between two religions the world would be a better place.

[swingofthings]

I agree with you Roomba, I think RE has its place amongst the compulsory subjects (and I am not religious at all, nor are my parents, husband etc...). The problem is in the name. When DD said she wanted to take it at GCSE, I was quite surprised as she'd never shown an interest in any particular religion, but then she showed me the curriculum and I realised that it was much less about religion than it was about sociology, ethics, morality, psychology, science as a whole. She said that a number of lessons overlapped with what she was learning in biology and even physics. I feel that it gave her a very well-rounded understanding of how our world and people function and has certainly contributed to her being a very mature teenager for her age.

[Sadik]

peachpudding, many thanks for your experience, it's great to hear from someone who's actually done it.
I guess the question is, is the path of least resistance - assuming things don't improve next term - to try to get school to Do Something (which I think they may already have tried in the past, given he's retired 3 times already and only come back as a last resort), or just to withdraw.

[Mybeesmummy]

I've taught with someone who was both a trained teacher and a priest and, if anything, her lessons were too unbalanced the other way as she was desperate to avoid any cry that she was indoctrinating pupils.

Yy^
I'm a CofE priest and I also teach RE in a non faith school. I always start sentences with 'Christians believe' and never 'we/I believe' and also insisted I also taught a religion other than Christianity for balance!
I'm a qualified teacher so when I'm in school that's my capacity, despite the dog collar.
It's a shame that it's so unbalanced for op as its not doing the church much good either if people only associate vicars with proselytising

[peachpudding]

Sadik - yes I was worried about the path of least resistance.

But you will never get the school to change, parents have no very little ability to affect anything academic in year. Just imagine the head saying ok, we will sack this teacher because you dont like them, or or we will completely change the GCSE curriculum it took us a year to compose just because you dont like it. It is what it is.

I think the school was originally worried too many children would pull of RE and not all of them are able to self teach, so they essentially lied about it being compulsory. But once I presented the legal facts and carried through they found it wasn't a big deal. In fact they were able to increase the number of periods spent on Maths, so the kids doing GCSE RE now have one less maths lesson a week.

If you're doing 8-10 GCSE you are better to concentrate on them and not try and add on another RE exam that you dont need or want.

RE helps with science wtf, is that scientology or creationism?
Do you know what would help in science classes... more SCIENCE classes.

What actually worries me is that they dont teach morality, they teach what a few religions think is moral. Almost as if its a pick and mix what you think is right or wrong. I dont want my child learning what's right and wrong is dependant on which religion you want to identify with. I want them to learn critical thinking so that they can work out right and wrong themselves.

[Laniakea]

we withdrew our dd at the end of year 8 - for exactly the same reason. Lessons were basically propaganda & indoctrination for a quite nasty branch of Christianity. The teacher had only a tenuous grasp of facts (e.g. fetal development, LGBT rights, equality laws) and had an unfortunate habit of referring to the class as 'we' i.e. I believe & it goes without saying that you do too.

For my atheist-gay-feminist daughter who is quite happy to argue her point it became an unhealthy & hostile learning environment. She's now in year 10 and her extra hour a week spent in the library or support centre on homework, revision or reading is far more useful than anything she was exposed to in that class.

We had no interest in challenging the provision - there was nothing that could usefully be provided in compulsory RE that isn't covered in PDP sessions. Incidentally the teacher no longer works at the school & dd has heard on the grapevine that lessons have improved but has no desire to rejoin!

[peachpudding]

I would add you do need your DC to be able to cope with standing out as a little bit different. They will get asked by other kids why are you allowed out of class when I am not... Not all DC can cope with being even the tiniest bit different.

[Laniakea]

ah dd hasn't found that to be problem at all - the only comments she's had are from other kids wishing their parents would withdraw them too - though tbh she isn't even remotely concerned about being different.

[Sadik]

I don't think it'd be a big deal for her - I think by yr 9 they've sort of all got to know each other well enough that standing out is less of an issue IYKWIM.