Add criticism into relgious education.

I propose that equal criticisms of all religions should be taught in schools.

The entire key stage 4 of religious education is about Christianity and what the bible says. There should be sections on using logic to defeat god, evidence against relgion, bible criticisms, the evil in the bible (millions of murders in the name of god or ordered by god) or the morality of relgions that are wrong.

Why is this idea important?

I propose that equal criticisms of all religions should be taught in schools.

The entire key stage 4 of religious education is about Christianity and what the bible says. There should be sections on using logic to defeat god, evidence against relgion, bible criticisms, the evil in the bible (millions of murders in the name of god or ordered by god) or the morality of relgions that are wrong.

Secular Republic

Replace the monarch with an elected figurehead President.  Disestablish the Church of England.  Abolish religious indoctrination in schools.  Abolish "faith" schools.  Abolish all religious priviledge.

Why is this idea important?

Replace the monarch with an elected figurehead President.  Disestablish the Church of England.  Abolish religious indoctrination in schools.  Abolish "faith" schools.  Abolish all religious priviledge.

repeal the law that demands collective worship in schools

Rrepeal of the legislation requiring acts of worship in schools, and changes in legislation to give schools much more flexibility about how they conduct assemblies, with schools offering space for optional worship for those who want it.

Why is this idea important?

Rrepeal of the legislation requiring acts of worship in schools, and changes in legislation to give schools much more flexibility about how they conduct assemblies, with schools offering space for optional worship for those who want it.

Remove “faith schools” from our education system

Faith schools should not be funded by the taxpayer.  State and privately funded institutions should be governed by the same educational standards and not able to 'opt out' when it suits them.  The teaching of RE in any school should not be allowed to be used as a platform for religious proselytising by groups with very specific agendas.  Treat RE as a subject like any other with the same standards and subjected to the same rigorous and regular inspections.  

 

Why is this idea important?

Faith schools should not be funded by the taxpayer.  State and privately funded institutions should be governed by the same educational standards and not able to 'opt out' when it suits them.  The teaching of RE in any school should not be allowed to be used as a platform for religious proselytising by groups with very specific agendas.  Treat RE as a subject like any other with the same standards and subjected to the same rigorous and regular inspections.  

 

remove daily collective worship from non-faith schools

I think daily collective worship in non-faith schools leaves young people without access to their right to freedom of believe as its usually christian worship (what about the other religions).  I am an atheist and believe this is indrocination of my children. Also how come they know nothing of evolution yet when its scientific fact,

Why is this idea important?

I think daily collective worship in non-faith schools leaves young people without access to their right to freedom of believe as its usually christian worship (what about the other religions).  I am an atheist and believe this is indrocination of my children. Also how come they know nothing of evolution yet when its scientific fact,

Stop state funded schools selecting pupils on the basis of faith.

 

All schools funded in part or in whole by the state should have to accept the vast majority of their pupils on the basis of proximity to the school, or better still on a ‘Fair Bands’ system.   The current system allowing state funded ‘Voluntary Aided’ schools to select their pupils on the basis of faith should be abolished.

Up and down the country, if the best local school is Voluntary Aided, you’ll find aspirational parents making a show of attending the relevant church from the arrival of their firstborn in an effort to get their kids into this school.  In many areas this has created a polarization of pupils between schools; the church schools have the advantage of educating children of predominantly informed and proactive parents, those informed and proactive parents who fail to get their kids into the local church schools tend either to go private or to move to an area where they can afford a home within the catchment of a good non-selective state school (expensive, but cheaper than going independent), leaving neighbouring non-selective schools to struggle to provide a high standard of education without the advantage of having predominantly informed and proactive parents which the faith schools enjoy.  The local non-church schools therefore are attended by a disproportionate number of pupils who don’t come from families with such social capital, including those from ethnic minorities, refugees / new entrants to the UK, children for whom English is an additional language (EAL) and those with parents who aren’t informed enough about education to make an active choice about where their children are educated.  It is self evident that at a certain level of complexity, schools struggle to achieve the best in outcomes.  Even ‘outstanding’ teachers struggle to ensure that every child in their class fulfils their potential when they have to cater for an extremely complex set of needs.  We end up with one extreme of state school with vastly differing value sets, learning needs and aspirations or ‘complex urban schools’; and then the other extreme type of state school, the local Voluntary Aided church school, which brim with the advantages of social capital.   Neither type of school offers a child a social experience that is rounded or representative of our diverse country. 

Finland’s education system has no selection at all (not even independent schools exist); they have their share of poverty and other social problems and with a fully comprehensive school system they achieve outstanding results. Teaching children in accordance with their parents’ religious views in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights does not mean that children of parents with other beliefs should be discriminated against by being excluded from such education. 

The Coalition Government have promised they “will work with faith groups to enable more faith schools and facilitate inclusive admissions policies in as many of these schools as possible.”   They need to take this further and ensure that all schools with any element of state funding will have to select pupils predominantly on the basis of proximity to the school or on the basis of fair banding (which ensures that the school’s pupils are a representative mixture of the abilities of the population).  

If a school wants to select any of its pupils on the basis of faith, then it should be wholly independently funded and not take any kind of state subsidy.   Why should the state be funding schools that select children on this basis?  It would be more ‘Christian’ for a school to support and educate its direct neighbours.

Why is this idea important?

 

All schools funded in part or in whole by the state should have to accept the vast majority of their pupils on the basis of proximity to the school, or better still on a ‘Fair Bands’ system.   The current system allowing state funded ‘Voluntary Aided’ schools to select their pupils on the basis of faith should be abolished.

Up and down the country, if the best local school is Voluntary Aided, you’ll find aspirational parents making a show of attending the relevant church from the arrival of their firstborn in an effort to get their kids into this school.  In many areas this has created a polarization of pupils between schools; the church schools have the advantage of educating children of predominantly informed and proactive parents, those informed and proactive parents who fail to get their kids into the local church schools tend either to go private or to move to an area where they can afford a home within the catchment of a good non-selective state school (expensive, but cheaper than going independent), leaving neighbouring non-selective schools to struggle to provide a high standard of education without the advantage of having predominantly informed and proactive parents which the faith schools enjoy.  The local non-church schools therefore are attended by a disproportionate number of pupils who don’t come from families with such social capital, including those from ethnic minorities, refugees / new entrants to the UK, children for whom English is an additional language (EAL) and those with parents who aren’t informed enough about education to make an active choice about where their children are educated.  It is self evident that at a certain level of complexity, schools struggle to achieve the best in outcomes.  Even ‘outstanding’ teachers struggle to ensure that every child in their class fulfils their potential when they have to cater for an extremely complex set of needs.  We end up with one extreme of state school with vastly differing value sets, learning needs and aspirations or ‘complex urban schools’; and then the other extreme type of state school, the local Voluntary Aided church school, which brim with the advantages of social capital.   Neither type of school offers a child a social experience that is rounded or representative of our diverse country. 

Finland’s education system has no selection at all (not even independent schools exist); they have their share of poverty and other social problems and with a fully comprehensive school system they achieve outstanding results. Teaching children in accordance with their parents’ religious views in accordance with the European Convention on Human Rights does not mean that children of parents with other beliefs should be discriminated against by being excluded from such education. 

The Coalition Government have promised they “will work with faith groups to enable more faith schools and facilitate inclusive admissions policies in as many of these schools as possible.”   They need to take this further and ensure that all schools with any element of state funding will have to select pupils predominantly on the basis of proximity to the school or on the basis of fair banding (which ensures that the school’s pupils are a representative mixture of the abilities of the population).  

If a school wants to select any of its pupils on the basis of faith, then it should be wholly independently funded and not take any kind of state subsidy.   Why should the state be funding schools that select children on this basis?  It would be more ‘Christian’ for a school to support and educate its direct neighbours.

no act of worship

As a retired secondary headteacher I wish to record my concern that the Daily Act of Worship in schools remains on the Statute book after so many years and continues to present an issue for heads and managers of so many schools. Our present multicultural society is dramatically different from the 'perceived' society of the 1930's and 40's, for which the 1944 Education Act was designed. The notion of a daily, formal Act of Worship for all pupils, with prayers and hymns, is anathema to most educationists ( and certainly to most secondary pupils ) and runs counter to our philosophies of education. Most headteachers believe in the importance of sharing life experiences with all the students, encouraging reflection on core values and building a sense of community within the school. This can be achieved partially through assemblies, which should remain as an integral part of the school's week. Religious Education remains an important part of the curriculum and that is where religious issues are best discussed.

Because the daily  Act of Worship is technically still 'law', its none-appearance in school assemblies can be challenged by individuals whose religious convictions feel that it should be complied with and who are determined to identify those schools who appear to be deliberately flouting the law. That is what happened to me, and it placed the LEA and other heads and Governing bodies in a very difficult postion.

 

Surely it is time to remove this requirement entirely, which is probably more honoured in the breach than in the observance in any case.

Why is this idea important?

As a retired secondary headteacher I wish to record my concern that the Daily Act of Worship in schools remains on the Statute book after so many years and continues to present an issue for heads and managers of so many schools. Our present multicultural society is dramatically different from the 'perceived' society of the 1930's and 40's, for which the 1944 Education Act was designed. The notion of a daily, formal Act of Worship for all pupils, with prayers and hymns, is anathema to most educationists ( and certainly to most secondary pupils ) and runs counter to our philosophies of education. Most headteachers believe in the importance of sharing life experiences with all the students, encouraging reflection on core values and building a sense of community within the school. This can be achieved partially through assemblies, which should remain as an integral part of the school's week. Religious Education remains an important part of the curriculum and that is where religious issues are best discussed.

Because the daily  Act of Worship is technically still 'law', its none-appearance in school assemblies can be challenged by individuals whose religious convictions feel that it should be complied with and who are determined to identify those schools who appear to be deliberately flouting the law. That is what happened to me, and it placed the LEA and other heads and Governing bodies in a very difficult postion.

 

Surely it is time to remove this requirement entirely, which is probably more honoured in the breach than in the observance in any case.

End the requirement for compulsory collective worship in schools

It is right and reasonable that schools should teach pupils about the major religions, to help them better understand the society in which we live. However, the requirement for all state schools to perform a "broadly Christian" act collective worship every day is no longer reasonable in the 21st century. Religious worship is a private matter that parents may teach their children if they wish, but it has no place in the state school system.

Even if a group of non-religious parents wanted to start a school that did not force religious worship on children (which is exactly the sort of "big society" idea that the government supports), under current legislation they would be unable to.

I urge the government to abolish the requirement for collective worship as soon is is practically possible.

Why is this idea important?

It is right and reasonable that schools should teach pupils about the major religions, to help them better understand the society in which we live. However, the requirement for all state schools to perform a "broadly Christian" act collective worship every day is no longer reasonable in the 21st century. Religious worship is a private matter that parents may teach their children if they wish, but it has no place in the state school system.

Even if a group of non-religious parents wanted to start a school that did not force religious worship on children (which is exactly the sort of "big society" idea that the government supports), under current legislation they would be unable to.

I urge the government to abolish the requirement for collective worship as soon is is practically possible.

Scrap collective worship

Collective worship prior to morning assembly which I had to ask my parents to absolve me from makes an assumption that most children are Christian and Church of England.

Why is this idea important?

Collective worship prior to morning assembly which I had to ask my parents to absolve me from makes an assumption that most children are Christian and Church of England.

Replace compulsory Religious Education with compulsory Moral & Ethical Education

Over the years Relgious Education has evolved from being the detailed study of one or more religions to branch out into the study of morality and ethics.

RE, as it stands in its current form still focuses around a select number of religion and within them specific religious viewpoints.  Therefore when studying the ethics of abortion it is presented mainly from a religious perspective placing any other non-religious positions as secondry counter arguments.  This is negative for two reasons: select religious frameworks are presented as primary positions with other religious or non-religious ethical frameworks as secondry disagreements with the primary positions.  This is a distortion created by the fact that religion is the primary concern within the curriculum.

This is an unfair and prejudiced manner of presenting certain ethical frameworks over others in a manner which creates the illusion of discord between many ethical positions.

To progress the natural evolution of RE into ethics the curriculum should be changed to remove the traidtional theologicaly based detailed study of religions.  This way the ethics can be placed as the primary subject of study.  A more diverse range of ethical frameworks can then be studied and discussed alongside each other on equal footings.

Here are a couple of examples:  currently the study on the ethics of abortion would be first presented from the perspective of religious teachings (primarily Abrahamic teachings: Christian, Muslim and Jewish).  Any other ethical frameworks (e.g. humanism) are presented as being in disagreement and as an aside, not as a primary framework.

In ethics the subject matter of abortion would first be presented.  Then the position of different ethical frameworks would be explored: a liberal religious person (Christian, Muslim etc.), a humanist, or conservative religions and athiest (who would both argue from the perspective of family values).

Consider something that encompasses a wider range of perspecitves.  Food ethics would be currently presented as the differences between Christian, Muslim and Jewish.  In Ethics it would explore those ethical frameworks but also Vegetarianism (in both secular and religious) exploring the comonality, plus the Enviromental frameworks or even those proposing GM as a solution to food ethics (starvation etc.)

As you can see from the few examples Moral and Ethical Education is the only way we can teach children in a way that acknowledges the wide range and diversity of moral frameworks in a secular and multi-cultural society while exploring their similarities and differences in a fair and equal platform.

Why is this idea important?

Over the years Relgious Education has evolved from being the detailed study of one or more religions to branch out into the study of morality and ethics.

RE, as it stands in its current form still focuses around a select number of religion and within them specific religious viewpoints.  Therefore when studying the ethics of abortion it is presented mainly from a religious perspective placing any other non-religious positions as secondry counter arguments.  This is negative for two reasons: select religious frameworks are presented as primary positions with other religious or non-religious ethical frameworks as secondry disagreements with the primary positions.  This is a distortion created by the fact that religion is the primary concern within the curriculum.

This is an unfair and prejudiced manner of presenting certain ethical frameworks over others in a manner which creates the illusion of discord between many ethical positions.

To progress the natural evolution of RE into ethics the curriculum should be changed to remove the traidtional theologicaly based detailed study of religions.  This way the ethics can be placed as the primary subject of study.  A more diverse range of ethical frameworks can then be studied and discussed alongside each other on equal footings.

Here are a couple of examples:  currently the study on the ethics of abortion would be first presented from the perspective of religious teachings (primarily Abrahamic teachings: Christian, Muslim and Jewish).  Any other ethical frameworks (e.g. humanism) are presented as being in disagreement and as an aside, not as a primary framework.

In ethics the subject matter of abortion would first be presented.  Then the position of different ethical frameworks would be explored: a liberal religious person (Christian, Muslim etc.), a humanist, or conservative religions and athiest (who would both argue from the perspective of family values).

Consider something that encompasses a wider range of perspecitves.  Food ethics would be currently presented as the differences between Christian, Muslim and Jewish.  In Ethics it would explore those ethical frameworks but also Vegetarianism (in both secular and religious) exploring the comonality, plus the Enviromental frameworks or even those proposing GM as a solution to food ethics (starvation etc.)

As you can see from the few examples Moral and Ethical Education is the only way we can teach children in a way that acknowledges the wide range and diversity of moral frameworks in a secular and multi-cultural society while exploring their similarities and differences in a fair and equal platform.

Race

1st let me add that I am no way against any race no shape or form. Please can we not keep being Indian friendly? Keep it out of schools as this breeds racisim, I just read in the metro how certain muslim have instructed the school not to let their children learn about playing music Instruments as its againts the koran. Then with the new law about you can open your own school I suggest they open their own Muslim school as Catholic schools do and teach the bible as they see fit. I do believe that the curriculum  states that every child has to follow that instruction and that  is explained when you place the child ion that school.Also the "every child matters" come to mind that children have a choice in this country to have a choice and see children  from strong ethnics all ways on computers which is modern technology does not the koran think that is as bad as music? all this lets be polite to muslim should not come into our schools let children be children. One more thing, we were a catholic state when politics woke up then by default they invented Church of England.

Why is this idea important?

1st let me add that I am no way against any race no shape or form. Please can we not keep being Indian friendly? Keep it out of schools as this breeds racisim, I just read in the metro how certain muslim have instructed the school not to let their children learn about playing music Instruments as its againts the koran. Then with the new law about you can open your own school I suggest they open their own Muslim school as Catholic schools do and teach the bible as they see fit. I do believe that the curriculum  states that every child has to follow that instruction and that  is explained when you place the child ion that school.Also the "every child matters" come to mind that children have a choice in this country to have a choice and see children  from strong ethnics all ways on computers which is modern technology does not the koran think that is as bad as music? all this lets be polite to muslim should not come into our schools let children be children. One more thing, we were a catholic state when politics woke up then by default they invented Church of England.

Remove Religion from all State Activities Including Education

 

There should be a complete separation between the state and all religious views. This should be particularly applicable in education. No state pupil should be taught any religions ideology unless they choose to study religion.

In the 21 century, the state should operate and make decisions about the use of tax-payers money on the basis of objective, evidenced reason. Objective reason should have pre-eminence over medieval-esque subservience to theism.

I support the notion of showing tolerance and sensitivity to others’ beliefs but the development of such beliefs is a private matter and should be a matter for individual choice only.

Religion should have no place in primary school education what so ever. Until a child has developed sufficient skills of interpretation, they are vulnerable to indoctrination from others’ unverifiable beliefs founded on fear and superstition that contradict the grounding in objectivity, reason and a thousand years of human inquiry that  the school years should provide.

Why is this idea important?

 

There should be a complete separation between the state and all religious views. This should be particularly applicable in education. No state pupil should be taught any religions ideology unless they choose to study religion.

In the 21 century, the state should operate and make decisions about the use of tax-payers money on the basis of objective, evidenced reason. Objective reason should have pre-eminence over medieval-esque subservience to theism.

I support the notion of showing tolerance and sensitivity to others’ beliefs but the development of such beliefs is a private matter and should be a matter for individual choice only.

Religion should have no place in primary school education what so ever. Until a child has developed sufficient skills of interpretation, they are vulnerable to indoctrination from others’ unverifiable beliefs founded on fear and superstition that contradict the grounding in objectivity, reason and a thousand years of human inquiry that  the school years should provide.

Keep it..

I attended a Catholic School and was taught about all other religions. Its important for ones own personal growth, understanding of their beliefs and where they have come from. 

I feel it is important for Religious schools to ensure the learning and development to build an understanding and respect for other faiths in religious studies. 

Everyone must have an understanding of their own beliefs in order to build a respect for others.

Why is this idea important?

I attended a Catholic School and was taught about all other religions. Its important for ones own personal growth, understanding of their beliefs and where they have come from. 

I feel it is important for Religious schools to ensure the learning and development to build an understanding and respect for other faiths in religious studies. 

Everyone must have an understanding of their own beliefs in order to build a respect for others.

Abolish compulsory collective worship and religious education

Currently all maintained schools must provide daily collective worship for all registered pupils.  In the small print: "Daily collective worship must be wholly or mainly of a broadly Christian character".

Both of these, and indeed all statory rules on compulsory provision of relgious matter should be withdrawn.

Why is this idea important?

Currently all maintained schools must provide daily collective worship for all registered pupils.  In the small print: "Daily collective worship must be wholly or mainly of a broadly Christian character".

Both of these, and indeed all statory rules on compulsory provision of relgious matter should be withdrawn.

brainwashing

children should not be made to study other religions above there own. if they are.c of e. or r.c or any other religion this must come first and others second but in a lot of schools were the majority of the children are of one religion,the children who are in the minority have to just go with the flow and this is wrong they to have aright to learn about there religion first.

Why is this idea important?

children should not be made to study other religions above there own. if they are.c of e. or r.c or any other religion this must come first and others second but in a lot of schools were the majority of the children are of one religion,the children who are in the minority have to just go with the flow and this is wrong they to have aright to learn about there religion first.

scrap law that says school must hold collective worship

It is a basic human right to be able to choose one's own beliefs as one matures.  As schools should teach  'balanced' religious studies, both religious and non religious beliefs, it should not be necessary to then hold an assembly(ies) that is, by structure, similar or the same as a service of one particular belief. 

Why is this idea important?

It is a basic human right to be able to choose one's own beliefs as one matures.  As schools should teach  'balanced' religious studies, both religious and non religious beliefs, it should not be necessary to then hold an assembly(ies) that is, by structure, similar or the same as a service of one particular belief. 

The daily act of collective worship

It's about time this absurd part of the Education Act was removed (along with having bishops in the House of Lords). The 'daily act of collective worship which should be broadly Christian in nature' is an affront to civil liberties on many levels; it indoctrinates children into the assumption that there is a god, and that god is the Christian god; it is genuinely offensive to people of other faiths, and to those people with no faith. This ridiculous anachronism must be consigned to scrapheap of history. If people wish to worship their god, that is fine, but don't force schools to be part of what should be a very private matter, especially schools paid for by taxes from people who do not share this belief system. There is no place for this in children's lives – it is tantamount to child abuse, a sad relic of bygone days where the church wielded power in this country and inveigled itself into the education system as a means to prolong that power.

Why is this idea important?

It's about time this absurd part of the Education Act was removed (along with having bishops in the House of Lords). The 'daily act of collective worship which should be broadly Christian in nature' is an affront to civil liberties on many levels; it indoctrinates children into the assumption that there is a god, and that god is the Christian god; it is genuinely offensive to people of other faiths, and to those people with no faith. This ridiculous anachronism must be consigned to scrapheap of history. If people wish to worship their god, that is fine, but don't force schools to be part of what should be a very private matter, especially schools paid for by taxes from people who do not share this belief system. There is no place for this in children's lives – it is tantamount to child abuse, a sad relic of bygone days where the church wielded power in this country and inveigled itself into the education system as a means to prolong that power.

Repeal requirement for Christian education in schools.

The law which requires schools to teach Christianity should be replaced with one which requires the teaching of comparative religion in an unbiased manner. State subsidies for Faith Schools/Academies should also be withdrawn unless they teach Comparative Religion.    

Why is this idea important?

The law which requires schools to teach Christianity should be replaced with one which requires the teaching of comparative religion in an unbiased manner. State subsidies for Faith Schools/Academies should also be withdrawn unless they teach Comparative Religion.