SACRE meeting 12th March 2007
Discussion of draft RE syllabus (due for release in 2008)
At the last meeting, it was agreed that the new RE syllabus be
based on the Non-statutory Framework for RE, produced by the QCA
(Qualifications and Curriculum Authority). One of ehe main differences
between this and the existing syllabus is the inclusion of non-religious
worldviews. This is in accord with The Human Rights Act, which requires
that the term "religion" be replaced by "religion
and belief". The HRA also states that children have the right
to be exposed to all knowledge.
It was apparent that many members had not read the draft syllabus
prior to the meeting. The item most discussed was the inclusion
of "a secular worldview, where appropriate". Comments
were as follows.
Group A (other religions)
Baptist "Cut out the recommendation to teach secular philosophies,
especially the term "secular"
Catholic "We are talking about religion, Religion is a very
big subject. I don't think other worldviews should be included."
Buddhist "There is too much about belief in God in KS1 and
KS2"
Group B (C of E)
No comment
Group C (teachers)
Teacher "Buddhism is too difficult to teach at KS1 and KS2"
Group D (council)
"Replace "others" by "many" in the following
statement: Many pupils come from religious backgrounds, but others
have no attachment to religious beliefs and practices."
During the discussions, Nigel Bloodworth (RE advisor to the council)
made the following comments:
"Including "secular philosophies" is necessary
in order [for children] to understand all views out there."
"Leave the actual judgement [about non-religious worldviews]
up to schools. In practice, in primary schools in West Sussex, non-religious
world views are not taught. In secondary schools, there is often
a unit, e.g. on religion and science."
All groups recommended the removal of the following statement,
or at least the removal of the words "secular" and "worldview":
"Pupils should be taught … a secular world view, where
appropriate."
General Teaching Requirements
The SACRE decided to remove the General Teaching Requirements
at the back of the Non-Statutory Framework for RE, and distribute
it electronically, along with other teaching materials. This section
applies to all subjects, but is particularly relevant to RE. Here
is some of the content.
NOTE: The Non-statutory Framework for RE clearly states that inclusiveness
is an important principle underlining good RE.
Inclusion: providing effective learning opportunities for all
(a statutory inclusion statement)
Schools have a responsibility to provide a broad and balanced curriculum
for all pupils
… [it must] meet the needs of individuals and groups of pupils.
… to provide all pupils with relevant work at each key stage.
Applying these principles should keep to a minimum the need for
aspects of the national curriculum to be disapplied to a pupil [i.e.
withdrawal from RE]
Responding to pupils' diverse learning needs.
… pupils bring to school different experiences.
… so that all pupils can take part in lessons fully and effectively.
… securing their motivation and concentration.
… providing equality of opportunity through teaching approaches.
… all pupils can feel secure and are able to contribute appropriately.
… varying subject content and presentation so that this matched
their learning needs.
… planning work which builds on their interests and cultural
experiences.
… taking account of the interests and concerns of boys and
girls …
… taking account of [children's] specific religious and cultural
beliefs relating to the representation of ideas or experiences …
Overcoming potential barriers to learning.
… selecting tasks and materials sensitively to avoid unnecessary
stress for the pupil.
… providing positive feedback to reinforce and encourage learning
and build self-esteem.
Effective inclusion involves … [meeting] all pupils' needs
… and pupils from a wide range of ethnic and diverse family
backgrounds.
The framework also highlights the importance of pupils' specific
religious [or non-religious] beliefs and how religious education
can develop pupils' self esteem.
Vote for a Humanist representative on SACRE
The motion was to co-opt a Humanist onto the SACRE; co-opted member
cannot vote.
At the last meeting, each group was asked to consult the organisations
they represent. The votes and comments were as follows.
Each group has a single vote, which is determined by a majority
vote of its members. If the results is 2 to 2, the Chair has the
casting vote.
Group A (other religions): Unanimously against the motion
As in earlier discussions, the Baptist member led the way. His organisation
said that it was up to him to decide. He quoted DfES circular 1/94
which disallows Humanists to become full members of the SACRE (This
guidance contravenes the Human Rights Act which makes it illegal
to discriminate on grounds of belief. The BHA are mounting a legal
challenge.) He argued that allowing a Humanist representative would
open the floodgates to other minority religious groups. He claimed
that these religious groups had a greater membership than the BHA,
and therefore had a greater right to join the SACRE. The Chair pointed
out that no other group had applied for membership.
Group B (C of E): For the motion
They said that they didn't have a chance to consult the church in
the last 4 months. The Chair instructed them to vote on their behalf,
as they saw fit.
Group C (teachers): Forced to abstain because the teacher voted
for, the head teacher against. Another teacher was not present at
the previous meeting (in which there was a Humanist PowerPoint presentation)
and so withdrew herself from the vote. Another member of the group
was unable to vote because of a technical reason.
The head teacher said that he had consulted 3 or 4 other head
teachers, who were surprised about the SACRE considering a Humanist
member. Two of them said that it would be OK, but you will need
to include Wicca, pagan groups, scientologists, etc. His bishop
friend said that it would be like inviting a vegetarian to a turkey-growers
convention. The head teacher is ordained in the diocese and hadn't
come across a single person in the diocese that wanted a Humanist
representative. He said that members of the church find it a very
worrying idea, and doesn't seem to be what the SACRE is constituted
for. He said that the prime purpose of the BHA was to undermine
religion, e.g. removal of the bishops from the House of Lords.
The teacher reported that the Joint Consultative Committee (teachers)
thought it necessary for there to be a Humanist representative on
the SACRE, as a balance to religion, and that the BHA has had a
positive impact on RE.
Group D (council): Against the motion
No comment
Chair
The Chair had sounded out other Council members. She found them
to have mixed views: a need to be democratic; could open the floodgates;
many spoke as the head teacher above.
Summary of votes: 2 against, 1 for, 1 abstention
Note: If there had been a simple majority vote of the members,
the motion would still have failed.
Final note
During the meeting, the RE advisor Nigel Bloodworth invited me
to send comments about the first draft of the new RE syllabus, including
suggestions for materials. I presented him with a list of suggestions,
as I was not allowed to speak at the meeting.
The Chair also welcomed me as an observer at future meetings.
See also the press
coverage following this meeting.
Andrew Edmondson
|
|
|
|
