The new national framework for RE in England and Wales: a critique

Abstract

The article sets out to discern the aims and objectives of the proposed National Framework for RE and finds them biased towards the study of other people's religious traditions. It observes the differences between religious studies and religious education and the consequences of confining the latter to the former, notably that moral and attitudinal dispositions are not implicit in religious studies. The article further notes that what the proposed Framework recommends is misleading and does not adhere strictly to the law. Many of the concepts and terms used by the Framework are confused and in some cases are disparaging towards religious life. Finally, it observes that the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) did not follow the process set out for agreeing RE syllabi in devising its Framework, to which many of its deficiencies might well be attributed.

Notes

See the protocols to the European Convention on Human Rights.

Contrary to general expectation, evidence from Northern Ireland has revealed that children deeply rooted in their own traditions show more tolerance towards others.

See Circular 1/94, para. 11, p. 10.

See P. Thompson (2004), Whatever Happened to Religious Education? (Cambridge, Lutterworth Press).

The framework uses this term inconsistently. At times it refers to positions ‘independent of any religious belief or affiliation’, at other times it is inclusive of religious views.

This was given with respect to its 1975 syllabus, as a close reading of the text will reveal.

Acts, ch. 2.

There is a brief mention that ‘themes should ensure that both [attainment targets] are covered with sufficient breadth and depth’ (p. 13).

It is a pity that these levels of attainment make no real religious judgements; nor even take into account the work done in developmental psychology.

Perhaps in the future we shall read ‘their very own views’ or ‘their very, very own views’!

In correspondence.