chairman bill wrote:Merge sometime soon? http://www.rationalskepticism.org/news-politics/telegraph-accuses-re-advisors-t35872.html

Why request a merge?

They are 2 completely different stories.

Mods, please don't do this to us again!

My mistake. Sorry.

Nora_Leonard wrote:

HomerJay wrote:

chairman bill wrote:Merge sometime soon? http://www.rationalskepticism.org/news-politics/telegraph-accuses-re-advisors-t35872.html

Why request a merge?

They are 2 completely different stories.

Mods, please don't do this to us again!

I agree, it's not the same topic.

Obviously someone begs to differ, Nora.

Well both Homer and I tried!

ETA: I've now reported it and asked for it to be separated again, but somehow I doubt that will happen.

It's the same topic. "Whither RE?" Some people want to de-emphasise teaching about xianity in RE, some people lament the idea. A majority support continuance of RE. Is that a rational argument for the continuance of RE? No, it's politics. Nothing to discuss here, folks. Move along. Move along.

Thanks to The_Metatron!

I don't understand what point there is in 'religious education'. It seems really bizare to me. Why is religion even considered a unique subject outside of cultural heritage?

In public schools around here it would be covered under "social studies", along with other cultrual traditions.

Shouldn't that be considered a success story?

reddix wrote:I don't understand what point there is in 'religious education'.

"Underwater basket weaving".

reddix wrote:I don't understand what point there is in 'religious education'. It seems really bizare to me. Why is religion even considered a unique subject outside of cultural heritage?

In public schools around here it would be covered under "social studies", along with other cultrual traditions.

I think it has to do with the history of education in the UK.

wikipedia wrote:Prior to the 19th century, there were very few schools. Most of those that existed were run by the church, for the church, stressing religious education. The Church of England resisted early attempts for the state to provide secular education, and church schools are still an integral part of the state school system.

There's an informative article on the history of RE in the UK here.

Thank you for that, Nora.

Does that mean that the main reason religious education is taught is because that is what has always been done?

I understand that it is in the educational law, but why not simply abolish that law if there is no reason to keep it and schools would rather not bother with it anyway?

reddix wrote:Thank you for that, Nora.

Does that mean that the main reason religious education is taught is because that is what has always been done?

Practically, yes. But the subject as taught has changed massively over the years. For instance it used to be called "religious instruction" and it was akin to catechism.

reddix wrote:I understand that it is in the educational law, but why not simply abolish that law if there is no reason to keep it and schools would rather not bother with it anyway?

Well for two reasons. Contrary to what some people here would have you think, there's lots of pupils/students/schools who like the subject. Some people will cite falling numbers of teachers failing to enrol in specialist RE training, but that is because the government cut both the places and the funding for that (as part of their global cutbacks).

I suspect the second reason is the Bishops in the House of Lords and the power the Church of England still holds. Oh, and of course there is no separation of church and state in the UK as in the US. The Queen is both the head of state and the head of the Anglican Church.

Thinking aloud: It seems a bit like teaching political party ideologies because some ancestor liked it, as if those ideologies were a 'thing' worth valuing in and of themselves.

I appreciate that things have changed (and are changing) as far a curriculum goes given that it is manditory by law, and if my children were attending school in the UK I would be thankful for what seems to be a great effort by some to make religious classes as inclusive as possible, but I still can't help but think that the whole idea is odd.

Religion is only a part of a person's set of ideas, if at all, why not focus on culinary traditions and preferences instead?

/thinking aloud

My cynical-head answer to that would be that in order to remain current, it has been morphed into something which can hitch a ride on the back of multiculturalism by people who want religion to keep going in some way. I don't know much about it though. What I do know is as Nora said, it used to be 'Religious Instruction', as in 'this is how things are - learn it'. It has become 'these are the main religions, and this is how people who belong to them do stuff, and this is what they believe.' I don't have a problem with the idea, but as you say reddix, I'd much prefer it to have less prominence. It's also important to bear in mind that the Secretary of State for Education is a massive twat.

Sorry, that last bit's not relevant, I just felt it needed to be said.

reddix wrote:I don't understand what point there is in 'religious education'. It seems really bizare to me. Why is religion even considered a unique subject outside of cultural heritage?

In public schools around here it would be covered under "social studies", along with other cultrual traditions.

Schools are or were owned or subsidised by the church, they therefore got their 'say'. Social studies & traditions are a bit of a new thing really.

Nora_Leonard wrote:Contrary to what some people here would have you think, there's lots of pupils/students/schools who like the subject.

What's not to like about a classroom dedicated to evaluating descriptions of the dimensions of the imaginary in splendid detail? Except that one can develop the very same skill set by learning how to play whist.

reddix wrote:Thinking aloud: It seems a bit like teaching political party ideologies because some ancestor liked it, as if those ideologies were a 'thing' worth valuing in and of themselves.

I appreciate that things have changed (and are changing) as far a curriculum goes given that it is manditory by law, and if my children were attending school in the UK I would be thankful for what seems to be a great effort by some to make religious classes as inclusive as possible, but I still can't help but think that the whole idea is odd.

Religion is only a part of a person's set of ideas, if at all, why not focus on culinary traditions and preferences instead?

It seemed strange to me at first as well, coming from a place and time where religion was effectively banned from schools. Although having said that, by the time my sister had kids in high school I gather they could have taken comparative religion if they wanted.

From what I can tell about the history of education here, schools started as a kind of extended "Sunday school". So it isn't surprising that the subject has such a toehold. (And believe me, at this point in time, RE is just clinging by it's fingers and toes, which I'm sure will make many people here enormously happy. Not me, though.)

Another thing you might not realise is that the curriculum for RE is determined locally in each borough. It is not part of the national curriculum, although there have been national guidelines. And there is no denying that the set of RE syllabuses across the country vary in quality.

Oh, and we have a unit that looks at religion and food, one of which allows teachers to bring in all kinds of tasty treats reflective of the festival being studied that week. So we've got the culinary traditions covered.

I remember Religious Instruction - we kids used to treat it as a 'free period', most irreverent. The teacher - a Mr. Magit - was a short rotund fellow with a round head to match. So we nicknamed him 'Peanut'. I don't remember anything of any import that he tried to teach us about religion.

Those were the days!



Ah well, back to the discussion...

How can schools fail in teaching mumbo jumbo and fairy tales.

RE is not required.
Not taught in Dutch public schools and Dutch kids seem to manage without it.