The conscience clause in religious education and collective worship: conscientious objection or curriculum choice?

Abstract

The ‘conscience clause’ allows parents to withdraw their children from religious education and collective worship; however, the reasons why parents might wish so to do are not stated in the legislation. This article looks briefly at the legal issues to do with the place of religious education in the school curriculum, the type of religious education to be provided in schools without a religious affiliation (including an exploration of the meaning of the ‘Cowper‐Temple’ clause), and at the grounds on which parents may wish to exercise the conscience clause. It shows conclusively that withdrawal may only occur on the grounds of conscientious objection, not as a matter of choice.

Notes

* 29 Farmdale Road, Lancaster LA1 4JB, UK. Email: [email protected]

In nineteenth‐century writing and in all legislation, ‘he’ is interpreted as including ‘she’, and ‘master’ as including ‘mistress’.

The story of the background to the two societies is well rehearsed in many history of education texts; see, for example, Cruickshank, 1964 and Murphy, 1971.

Technically, religious education and worship were the only compulsory subjects in the school curriculum until the Education Reform Act of 1988 created the National Curriculum.

Copley (1997) provides a useful account of the content of Agreed Syllabuses.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Lois M. R. Louden *

* 29 Farmdale Road, Lancaster LA1 4JB, UK. Email: [email protected]