Religious Education and Worldviews - ACT position
ACT Response to the REC
As an organisation, we recognise the value of teaching about non-religious beliefs and perspectives. It is good practice to present non-religious perspectives in Religious Education, and indeed “worldviews” are being discussed in many, of not the majority of, RE classrooms in state schools.
We value the discussion of these views, and understand the rationale for a ‘lens’ through which to frame ‘lived experience’ and the development of personal belief.
However, we have concerns about the significant overhaul of Religious Education, and specifically the proposal for a National Entitlement of Religion & Worldviews Education.
Worldviews as a concept
‘Worldview’ is potentially problematic. It is broad, abstract philosophical concept that has been the subject of much disagreement. We feel it has not been defined adequately, despite much discussion as to what is meant by the term. The REC board sees ‘worldview’ as primarily about an approach to the subject content, at the same time noting that content cannot be separated from approach. It is a danger that we may so caught up with what is meant by ‘worldview’ that we miss the reality that the study of Religions will be diluted if the CoRE Report is accepted in its entirety. The National Association of Standing Advisory Councils on Religion Education (NASACRE) states that worldviews being ‘used as a catch-all for all belief systems may lead many to miss the importance of the study of religions’.
Whilst it could be possible to say that religions such as Christianity ‘have’ a worldview- a view of the world that is shaped by the Bible, or other sacred texts- this is distinct to what we feel is being proposed when it refers ambiguously to ‘institutional or ‘personal’ worldviews. This designation, we feel, advocates for a framework that construes religions primarily as worldviews yet ignores the importance and historic nature of foundational beliefs within most world religions.
Practical concerns and compliance
RE and Worldviews has the potential be excessively academic and difficult to access for teachers and students alike if taught as the REC board propose, yet runs the risk of altogether being ‘dumbed down’ in reality. Schools will in all likelihood find it impractical to meet such demands and offer a superficial, simplistic version of the curriculum without much academic rigour.
RE is an already stretched and under-resourced subject that suffers with compliance in a significant number of schools. The additional subject matter would put further pressure on timetables and mean that the religious components are streamlined.
Threat to faith representations
The prospect of Religious Education morphing into a subject more akin to Philosophy, Sociology or Anthropology, rather than having a focus on world religions (and so even less emphasis on Christianity) is a real concern for Christian educators, as well as other faith groups. At the moment, the law requires ‘Religious Education’ to be delivered, and ‘in the main’ the content of this education should be Christian in nature.
Recommendation 4 of the CoRE report would also remove the requirement for local authorities to convene Agreed Syllabus Conferences. This would not only remove the statutory safeguards that entitle religious bodies to have veto over content in the curriculum, but severely weaken the contribution of the significant religious bodies in the locality, professional and elected local representation, and so weakening local democracy and, less opportunity for local faith groups to shape Religious Education according to local traditions and religious constituencies through the production process. This endangers the opportunity for the Christian voice in Religious Education to be heard.
Conclusion
The Association of Christian Teachers does not support the statutory expansion of the subject of RE to formally include religious and non-religious ‘worldviews’, as proposed in the CoRE report, as we believe it will weaken the subject of Religious Education rather than ensuring its flourishing. As Christians who are also educators, we consider that the teaching of Christianity will also be profoundly undermined by the recommendations.