Worrying about RE

Religious Education has been a part of the English school curriculum since 1870. At that time it was the churches who were the main providers of education and the new education act, which was designed to fill up the gaps - not replace the existing system - retained the obligation to teach RE. This was controversial even then, and pressure groups such as the National Education League opposed it. The compromise solution was to allow parents to withdraw their child from RE and/or collective worship in both state and voluntary schools.This amendment was tabled by William Cowper-Temple and is cited, even today, as the Cowper-Temple Clause. This position has remained ever since and has been reinforced by subsequent education legislation, notably the 1944 and 1988 Education Acts.  This is a potted history only - those who want to read more could do no better than read my book 'Leading a Faith School' (Optimus 2009), which they could  request from their local library (while we still have local libraries!)

Religious Education is no longer the Christian Bible-story-based curriculum it once was but is both an introduction to world faiths and belief positions and an opportunity for students to get to grips with deep questions that they may not be able to tackle in other subjects.  RE has enjoyed surprising growth at GCSE, especially with the introduction of the Short Course.

Although required nationally, RE is not subject to a nationally determined curriculum. Instead, each local authority is required to have a Locally Agreed Syllabus that is reflective of the religion and beliefs profile of the area. Each LA is required to have a Standing Advisory Council on RE (SACRE), which is the body charged with overseeing RE and collective worship in the authority. SACREs are comprised of four groups, representing the religious communities, professional teacher associations and the local authority. Their role is set down in Circular 1/94 (10/94 in Wales) and in the 2010 non-statutory advice on RE.

While there are - and always will be - those who oppose RE in schools, it is generally agreed that it is a Good Thing with an important role to play.  However, although the present Education Secretary says that he supports RE, this is not the message coming from Whitehall. One warning sign was the Academies Act, which makes no mention of RE at all (and therefore does not reinforced existing legislation). Mr Gove has surrounded himself with a coterie of 'experts' but none comes from an especially pro-RE perspective. Academies are supposed to deliver RE as it is in their funding agreement but pragmatic research indicates that many are in breach of this expectation. When challenged the Secretary of State merely responds that his intention is for schools to have free choice of their curriculum. Therefore, since they are free of local authorities, there is no regulatory role for SACRE - and therefore no regulation of RE in any academy.

The RE community is writing to MPs but keep hitting a brick wall. Colin Parker, of the Public Communication Unit says,

We recognise, as many schools do, the benefits that religious education (RE) can bring to pupils.  This is why the teaching of RE remains compulsory throughout a pupil's schooling.  Success in all subjects studied at GCSE will also continue to be recognised by other performance table measures, as it has in the past. We have not included RE as fulfilling the humanity requirement of the English Baccalaureate because it is already a compulsory subject.  One of the intentions of the English Baccalaureate is to encourage wider take up of geography and history in addition to, rather than instead of, compulsory RE.  However, the other messages suggest that RE is not protected. At a recent meeting of the Specialist Schools and Academies Trust, David Bell (once HMCI, now Parliamentary Permanent Secretary at the DfE) was asked directly about the future of RE. He refused to answer, simply saying 'that's enough, I've got to go now.' This does not inspire confidence.