Centenary Conference - Consultation Analysis
Introduction
The consultation was conducted nationally as part of the St Gabriel's Centenary Conference, RE - Essence and Development, which was held on 30 September 1999. The intention was to obtain as many views and ideas as possible, which could then inform the conference discussions.
Three questions were asked:
- Question 1: Please identify up to three developments which have taken place over the last five years at your own local and/or national level which you feel have helped to improve RE's status and standing within the curriculum.
- Question 2: Please identify up to three future developments at your own local and/or national level which you feel would particularly help to improve RE's status and standing within the curriculum.
- Question 3: What relationship, if any, do you think there should be between RE and the various elements of the framework for PSHE and Citizenship within the school curriculum?
The third question was discussed with John Keast of QCA, who had been working on this issue on behalf of QCA. We are grateful for his advice.
Method
Details of the consultation were circulated to:
- readers of RE Today (June 1999 - circulation 8,300). An article explained the consultation and detailed the questions, inviting readers to participate;
- recipients of the St Gabriel's Programme newsletter - 750 RE professionals, including all diocesan and LEA RE advisers, and 400 RE teachers and co-ordinators;
- everyone invited to the conference.
Recipients were asked to pass the details to their colleagues, or in the case of organisations, to their members. The closing date for replies was 31 July 1999. This was after the end of the consultation on the Secretary of State's proposals for curriculum change.
Inevitably, respondents have been self-selecting. Efforts were made to encourage responses from teachers: the consultation details specified that some individual respondents would be invited to participate in the conference and that cover costs would be paid to enable RE teachers or co-ordinators to do so. In addition, time was provided at the St Gabriel's Programme RE Teacher Weekend for delegates to discuss the consultation questions.
Some respondents did not limit themselves to three points as requested when answering questions one and two. All the points they raised have been included in the analysis. Not all respondents answered all three questions.
Where responses received from teachers were at variance with those from non-teaching RE professionals, or supported issues not normally perceived as important to teachers, this has been noted.
An overview of responses
Altogether replies were received from 28 groups of RE teachers (covering 250 individual teachers between them), and from representatives of 22 RE-related organisations. Additional individual replies were received from 7 teachers and 10 other RE professionals. Given the nature of the consultation, this is a very encouraging response, and can be taken as representative of many of those working in RE.
Question 1
Three main developments emerged as being widely perceived to have improved the status of RE.
- RE GCSE Short Courses. The majority of responses mentioned this. Over half of these responses
came from groups of teachers. Comments included:
- 'the GCSE short courses have enabled many more students to study RE to an examination level'
- 'provided a framework for accreditation for all students at the end of 11 years of RE'
- 'more taking A level'.
- Agreed Syllabuses, both in principle and in practice, were mentioned by a considerable number of respondents. Responses from groups of teachers tended to praise them more generally, probably because the teachers were using different syllabuses. However, two-fifths of responses praising a particular Agreed Syllabus came from teachers. The requirement to review Agreed Syllabuses was important to a small group. A few of those who praised Agreed Syllabuses also valued the Model Syllabuses.
- The effectiveness of Ofsted. A third of all responses mentioned this, half of which were
from groups of teachers. Comments included:
- 'the pressure which Ofsted has placed upon headteachers to fulfil their statutory obligations in relation to RE'
- 'the role of Ofsted in highlighting attainment, progress, response and the quality of teaching in RE'.
Other developments regarded by roughly a quarter of the responses as having helped improve the status of RE were:
- national events, such as the RE Festival and JC 2000;
- RE as part of the core in the primary phase.
A number of responses (between 4 and 10 in each case) mentioned:
- the appointment of RE Advisers (diocesan or LEA) (9). RE Advisers were mentioned again in responses to question 2;
- local INSET (8);
- local networks (6 - all these responses were from teachers);
- Dearing's recommendation of 5% of curriculum time for RE (4 - all these responses were from teacher groups). This issue was mentioned by teacher groups in response to question 2;
- RE's contribution to Spiritual, Moral, Social and Cultural Development (5);
- more resources (4 - all these responses were from teachers);
- QCA advice/guidance (4). This was mentioned again in responses to question 2.
Question 2
Unsurprisingly, there was considerably less consensus in answering this question. A number of ideas were generated, but in many cases, featured in only one response. The two areas of most concern were national standards and training, particularly in-service training. In each of these instances, over half of the responses raised the issue, and these two areas were by far the most significant in the responses received.
- Training. There was a strong feeling that more training was required, particularly in-service training, to improve the quality of teaching. The primary phase, mixed mode courses for co-ordinators and training for non-specialists were identified as particular areas of concern. A few teachers wanted a national programme of training, and some called for more government funding.
- National Standards. A considerable number of respondents wanted national standards or levels of attainment, but one response actively opposed this, arguing that RE had a distinctive status and should not be treated the same as other curriculum subjects. A small number (3 responses) wanted RE as part of the national curriculum. A slightly larger number (6) wanted a national Agreed Syllabus. These 9 responses came entirely from teacher groups. One individual respondent wanted national co-ordination of the subject to reduce the subject's dependence on LEAs or individual schools.
Additionally, reasonable numbers of responses (between 7 and 11) mentioned each of the following areas.
- Networking. Several respondents called for better local links, with a couple of responses saying this was particularly needed in the primary phase, where good practice could be shared. There was also a call for regional conferences.
- ICT. There was a clearly perceived need for more use of ICT in RE, and for a better-developed and - understood rationale for this.
- Some respondents wanted more national events to promote RE, including another National RE Festival and the use of the millennium as an opportunity to raise the subject's status.
- Some responses from teacher groups wanted improvements to the status of RE in terms of time allocation in schools (in particular, the application in practice of the Dearing proposals). Some respondents called for more support from the SMT or headteacher. There was a suggestion that RE should be part of the core in the secondary phase.
- A number of teacher groups drew particular attention to KS 5. It was felt that more RE was needed post-sixteen. There was a suggestion of further integration with vocational courses, and another suggestion of a modular approach.
- Multi-faith RE was another area where more practical help was required, focussed by one respondent on primary RE. There were several requests for more opportunities for pupils to visit faith communities.
A number of issues were raised by smaller numbers of respondents (between 2 and 6). These included the following points.
- The role of the LEA. Two responses suggested that LEAs should be required to have an RE Adviser. It is perhaps surprising that so few responses highlighted this, an area of concern for many RE organisations since the reorganisation of LEAs into unitary authorities. Nine responses to question 1 listed the appointment of an RE Adviser as having helped to improve the status of RE.
- The role of QCA. There were requests for schemes of work supporting recent curriculum developments to be produced, and for more guidance in general.
- Special Educational Needs. Three responses wanted more work to be done at this level.
- Collective Worship. There were a few calls to end Collective Worship, and a number asking for a rationale for RE distinct from Collective Worship.
- More resources. Only three responses called for more resources, two of which came from teacher groups. This is perhaps fewer than might have been expected.
- There were some requests for more government support, including a public statement from David Blunkett supporting RE.
- Two responses raised the issue of 'learning from' RE; one suggested classroom-based research on it, the other asked for more guidance. It is perhaps surprising that not more respondents raised this issue.
Other suggestions included from individual teacher groups:
- removing the conscience clause;
- educating influential people about RE;
- improving communication between QCA, LEAs, SACREs and schools.
Question Three
This question produced a wide range of views, and considerable ambiguity. Many respondents were clearly not yet decided on what the relationship should be between RE and the various elements of PSHE and Citizenship. Some had not even decided if there should be any relationship. Most responses contained a variety of arguments, although the responses from teachers were often less ambiguous and more likely to express reservations, particularly about practical arrangements for the curriculum changes.
Among one-third of responses from which it was possible to detect a strong general position on whether there should be a relationship, opinion was divided equally.
Of the respondents whose general position was discernible, those who were teachers were much more likely to view any relationship negatively. There was a strong sense among their replies that RE should maintain a separate position. Their biggest concern was that Citizenship and PSHE would deprive RE of curriculum time. These teachers also thought that RE is a distinct subject, no more linked to PSHE and Citizenship than any other. One response from a group of teachers said that other subjects might be better placed than RE to make a relationship with PSHE and Citizenship, while another said there ought to be a link between every subject. Some of these teachers also thought that RE teachers should not be expected to teach PSHE; one response said that to do so would lower the status of RE.
Underlying all the negative comments about a possible relationship there was a sense that RE would suffer if linked to PSHE and Citizenship. This is not at all surprising, given that all these respondents were writing from the perspective of RE professionals. One view that received support was most neatly summarised by the respondent who wrote 'RE should not be subsumed within a "catch-all"! curriculum area, which is likely to be dominated by the Government's current agenda.' One respondent said that 'care should be taken to ensure that RE does not feel compelled to jump onto every new bandwagon and risk losing its status as a subject in its own right.' The danger to RE was perceived by one respondent as being a shift of focus to the socio-ethics content of religion, at the expense of other aspects. Another response, from a group of teachers, feared that RE would lose its questioning and spiritual aspects if it was seen as PSHE. There was, however, a further fear that RE would have to assume aspects of PSHE and Citizenship in order to survive, and a sense that RE teachers would do this if necessary.
The majority of those respondents who were positive about a relationship between RE and PSHE and Citizenship saw clear 'relationships between the three and distinctive areas for each'. Several respondents suggested that an audit of RE would identify areas of overlap, and enable the subjects to function separately. There was a strong feeling that many of the aspects of PSHE and Citizenship were already covered by RE. One respondent listed several items in the curriculum proposals that could be considered in 'learning from' or 'learning about' religion. Close liaison and interlinking is needed, not least to ensure pupils do not get different messages from different teachers. One respondent saw strong potential for interlinking, and several respondents saw this as occurring in areas such as rights, responsibilities, community, identity and belonging. This was seen by some as a genuine opportunity for a cross-curricular and team approach.
Several respondents saw Citizenship as the secular side of RE, needing to be underpinned by beliefs and values. Some respondents thought RE should be proactive and engage with Citizenship and PSHE, taking a lead in planning these subjects. This was extended by other respondents to cover the rest of the curriculum. Both those respondents who favoured a relationship, and those who did not, emphasised that PSHE should relate to all aspects of the curriculum. One respondent called for 'less defending of perceived distinctive territories and more recognition that both religious and non-religious beliefs are significant in the development of values, attitudes and choices.'
One respondent was positively encouraged by the thought that RE could usefully be part of Citizenship education, and an element of PSHE. Another felt that giving the moral aspects of the subject to Citizenship would enable RE to concentrate more on the study of religion.
There was some criticism of the Secretary of State's consultation papers, and one respondent felt Bernard Crick's 'personal secular stance' had been 'privileged in the curriculum review as no ideology or religion ever should be.' Several respondents wanted more clarity about the proposals.
The responses revealed many different perceptions of education and RE, only a few of which were discussed explicitly. One respondent saw the current notion of education as too limited. Another suggested a more radical review, splitting the confused areas into RE (Attainment Target 1[Learning about Religions]), Moral Education, Citizenship, and Relationships, all of which would be National Curriculum subjects. One respondent pointed out the irony that RE, PSHE and Citizenship would all be taught mostly by non-specialists.
Conclusion
As was hoped, the consultation succeeded in collating a wide range of ideas and opinions. These provided a starting point for discussions at the centenary conference.
