 |
Send an email |
 |
020 7898 1518 |
John G., the Church of England's spokesperson on RE, writes:
If anyone suggested there should be 150 different syllabuses for teaching geography or history or citizenship they would receive little support. Yet this is the position in RE with each local authority being responsible for its own RE syllabus. There are good reasons why this was appropriate historically but contexts have changed since 1944. The imperative now is to ensure that 21st Century RE is relevant, attractive and meets the educational and spiritual needs of the next generation of pupils and students.
In 1992, the Archbishop of York, John Habgood, in a keynote address to the St Gabriel's Conference, recommended that RE should become nationally rather than locally determined. His arguments were extremely persuasive but for many he was too radical. However, government responded positively and a broadly based syllabus committee developed two national model syllabuses. These were to assist local authorities when they revised their own syllabuses. Further sets of national guidance followed from the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) and this March it published a milestone report: A non-statutory framework for RE: the report of a feasibility study (Circular 180).
In this report QCA argues a powerful case for a more national focus, 'there is no agreement on the standards to be expected of pupils in RE, continuity in the RE curriculum is variable, there are many different approaches to the assessment and reporting of RE, and the degree of resourcing and support for RE varies.' Essentially the local determination of RE has made it the odd subject out.
The report highlights further problems of the present position including:
In terms of benefits, QCA sees a national framework being advantageous for:
Just before Easter, a small group met to consider a Churches' response to the national framework proposal. There was unanimous agreement that it would be an important step forward. However, because it would be advisory only, there would be a great risk of it being least influential where it was most needed. Although ten years of non-statutory guidance and advice has had an appreciable effect, there was still a long way to go. In terms of raising the quality of RE, the arguments for an advisory national framework applied even more strongly to a statutory national syllabus. So, in a letter to Charles Clarke, the Bishop of Portsmouth as Chairman of the Division of Education, in conjunction with his Free Church counterparts, has strongly recommended a statutory national syllabus.
How might this new national RE syllabus be developed? A national syllabus conference could be established, officered by QCA and bringing together representatives of the Churches and faith communities with RE professionals (teachers, teacher trainers, inspectors and advisers) and with government. This would essentially reflect at a national level the careful balance of interest groupings already devised for local syllabus conferences.
The syllabus itself should contain plenty of choice thereby allowing teachers maximum scope for taking account of local circumstances and pupil needs. There is no reason at all why a national syllabus should have a constraining and centralising effect. A national syllabus broad enough to cover all contexts and which enables teachers to make the choices rather than the local authority conference is the best way forward.
None of this would diminish the important role of local SACREs - it is only the Agreed Syllabus Conferences which would go, and these meet infrequently as syllabuses only need revising every five years. SACREs would continue to play a key role in supporting RE. It is also recommended that their increasingly significant work in interfaith dialogue and in contributing to local community cohesion should be added to their formal brief. SACREs would thus have an enhanced role.
The majority of Church of England schools (i.e. most voluntary controlled schools and about 40% of voluntary aided schools) already follow the local agreed syllabus, usually with additional guidance and material from the diocese. As we would be playing a significant part in the development of a national syllabus, almost certainly we would be recommending its use as a baseline for RE teaching in Church schools, again with additional diocesan support.
Some argue that RE is already in a precarious position with hawks circling for the kill. Therefore nothing should be done which disturbs the status quo - 'hold on tight to dear old nurse, for fear of finding something worse.' But RE is not fragile. There is a powerful case for its place in the school curriculum. Religion is a universal dimension of human life and without an understanding and appreciation of it a child's education is short-changed. In terms of immediate relevance, one needs to look no further than recent international events and some of the tensions in our own communities.
RE's biggest success story recently has been the phenomenal increase in the proportion taking RE/RS at GCSE level, now 50% of all students. Furthermore, RE exam scores are the third highest of all subjects. Most significantly, this is the one area where RE is taught according to a national exam board syllabus.
Perhaps the critical question is what RE teachers would find most helpful? OFSTED's evidence is that most would prefer a national to a local syllabus. Especially for primary teachers and for secondary non-specialists, there are many advantages in having RE framed like the other curriculum areas.
The overarching aim must be to improve the quality of RE. To assist RE teachers in achieving this, the Churches are clear that a national syllabus is both desirable and necessary and have advised Charles Clarke accordingly. The development of a framework would be the first stage. But in order to ensure that RE can take its rightful place alongside the other main curriculum areas and not always be seen as the odd subject out, the second stage must immediately follow - a statutory national syllabus. Undoubtedly this will best equip the RE teacher of the future to make a major contribution to the education of our children.
John G. is the Church of England's spokesperson on RE and Director of the Culham Institute in Oxford. He has trained both primary and secondary RE teachers and sits on Oxfordshire's SACRE.
FAQ on the Churches' proposal for a national syllabus for RE
© The National Society (Church of England) for Promoting Religious Education 2003-4 | National Society Sitemap |