A summary of a lecture given to the Hull & District Theological Society on Wednesday 3 March 2010 by John Keast (Deputy Chair of the Religious Education Council for England & Wales, Senior RE Adviser to the Department for Children, Schools & Families, and Adviser to the Tony Blair Faith Foundation)
Summary prepared by Ann Eccleston
John began his lecture by explaining the context of Religious Education in the past to today. In the past Religious Education was seen as an exploration of God’s truth, nature and creation, revelation, covenant, and activity in history – in these days Theology was known as the queen of the sciences. The ethical dimension of Religious Education was inseparable from religious belief. Education without religion was regarded as simply making people into clever devils. The Church in the past was the only provider of education. Then the State produced some schools and by 1944 there was a dual system. This partnership was reaffirmed in 1988. These Acts, 1944 and 1988, made possible Agreed Syllabi, which were non-denominational.
Gradually there was a decline in traditional Christian practice and influence, which was mirrored by the decline of Collective Worship in schools. More new religious perspectives emerged from the differing form of the multi-cultural dimension of society. There was a new theology in the 1960s with publications like “Honest to God”. The intellectual change revised the concepts of truth and ethics. The provision of education became more secularised.
Circumstances changed the expectations of the 1944 Act. In the sixties, seventies, and eighties there was more multi-cultural and multi-faith Religious Education despite the legislation. The Education Reform Act in 1988, which brought in the National Curriculum, changed education in our schools. There was enormous change in education through the expectations of levels of performance and accountability.
Religious Education is controlled through S.A.C.R.E.s (locally-based standing advisory councils for RE) or, in the case of faith schools, the relevant faith communities. The 1988 Act demanded that the Agreed Syllabi had new requirements. In 2004 the non-statutory National Framework for Religious Education provided illustrative programmes of study like the National Curriculum. Now Humanism was recommended as a world view which should be studied.
There has been a growing acceptance of Religious Education within the curriculum. For example, Teachers, Unions, politicians, and the Humanist Association accept the need for Religious Education in schools. This is because Religious Education is seen as important for personal, spiritual and moral development. It is needed to create a greater sense of personal and social values to combat social problems. Religious Education is important in the understanding of the culture and history of Britain. It helps to create harmony through developing respect and tolerance of differing religious cultures within Britain. These four reasons have allowed Religious Education to flourish as politicians fear negative publicity.
There has been a rise in the standards of the teaching and expectations of Religious Education. There now appears to be more integrity than in the past. There has been a dramatic increase in those gaining G.C.S.E.s in Religious Studies.
John then went on to explain some of the problems encountered within the field of Religious Education today. The first was the insufficient number of specialist teachers of Religious Education. There is a great disparity between Local Authorities over staffing and standards expected. Due to the lack of specialist teachers, there are problems for Local Authorities staffing their schools. There are major issues over the training received by Religious Education teachers. Last, but not least, is the survival of Religious Education as the National Curriculum demands are met. However there is an extremely good sense of communication between Religious Education and faith communities. The present government has built up the Religious Education Council. The faith communities ensured this.
The purpose and nature of Religious Education can be a key problem, but also a possibility. Religious Instruction became Religious Education in the 1988 Education Act. Religious Instruction was the induction of children into a kind of truth, which linked with the Act of Collective Worship in school – a confessional approach. The change in name was never debated. In G.C.S.E. and ‘A’ level examinations, the subject is called Religious Studies. It is the study of phenomena to do with religion. The 2004 National Framework agreed that the nature and importance of Religious Education is the learning about and the learning from religion. The “learning from” is more controversial as it emphasises the impact on an individual learning in religion – this is debated too in some other European countries. The New National Guidance, 2010, reaffirms that Religious Education is learning from, as well as learning about religion. The issue of community cohesion is thought by some to be a way of instrumentalising Religious Education. However, community cohesion is of highest importance for the government. Religious Education teachers are being trained by a Re-silience project to promote community cohesion.
Religious Education is the one subject which is under Local Authority control through the S.A.C.R.E.s. This gives ownership of the subject to the Local communities. Developments have been made because of the National Guidance. This is to equalise standards between schools. The government are still committed to local control.
One of the major problems is the content of the subject. The Education Reform Act said that the curriculum should reflect the fact that the main tradition is Christian but must reflect the other main religions. But what does “other main religions” mean? This has been interpreted as Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Judaism and Islam. However, Ba’hai, Jainism, Zoroastrianism and Humanism also exist in this country. As a result of this interpretation of Religious Education, the content is no longer an in depth study of one religion but the study of many. There are huge rafts of knowledge and understanding within Religious Education. The study of religions includes, beliefs, practices and relationships. The content may be less important than the quality of experience of study of religion being produced in schools.
There has been a great change in the context of Religious Education. There have been changes in the political background of the country, social change, concerns over the environment, and experience in which communities exist. All this challenges curriculum change in Religious Education. How the changes are implemented is very important. There are new qualifications being developed, for example the new diploma from 2011 onwards. There is also the question over the relationship between Citizenship and Religious Education. Both in Europe and globally there is the issue of facing the diversity between peoples. This creates the issue of how to live with difference. In the Balkans, the link between religion and identity played an important role in the diversity and lack of community cohesion.
To close, John Keast quoted from the Archbishop of York, John Habgood, who said in 1993, “If we can solve the problems of Religious Education, we will have solved the problems of theology.” Religion and belief will never cease to be relevant because they are part of being human. They will continue to be contestable, controversial and vital to human affairs. As a result Religious Education will continue to be part of the curriculum.
