|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Should RE be expunged from the EBac?
|
Moth
Shipmate
# 2589
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Moth:
My old B grade O level french from 35 years ago is far, far better.
Unless they improve language teaching, or at least the assessment process, I wouldn't give much credibility to the language element of the EBac.
Maybe. I was at a grammar school doing O-levels a little bit more than 35 years ago and there was no way I could have dreamed of passing French. I got a grade 9 at O-level in the end, which is almost the worst you could get. (Grades 1-6 were passes, I think you had to physically assault the examiner to get a 10) So either I was very stupid, or else the teaching was very bad.
Well, at least you got a low grade. SC actually got a pass at grade C - and I assure you, he has no functional French at all. He should have failed. That's what I'm worried about. I wouldn't be concerned about needing a language to get into university - if he can get a C, my cat could as well.
--------------------
"There are governments that burn books, and then there are those that sell the libraries and shut the universities to anyone who can't pay for a key." Laurie Penny.
Posts: 3446 | From: England | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
The Church Times news item relating to this thread is generally available for interested readers.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tom Day
Ship's revolutionary
# 3630
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican't:
quote:
Originally posted by Tom Day:
I won't be surprised if one of his [Michael Gove's] next announcements is the return to grammar schools.
We can only hope.
Why? I know that I have got no experience of grammar schools - having been educated in a comp, and taught in a comp, but why are grammar schools the answer? Surely you'll then get even more of a have / have not society. Isn't it better to have a mainly inclusive education system where children / teenagers can mix with all abilities - and the more academic can see and learn from the less academic and vice versa? (Yes I know this is probably utopian but then the majority of public services are based on a utopian idea)
As a teacher I like having mixed ability students to teach, and they can help each other progress. Maybe I am being a little optimistic but I do hope that we stick with something like we have at the moment.
--------------------
My allotment blog
Posts: 6473 | From: My Sofa | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marinaki:
At the moment I teach both History and RE (I have two degrees which make this possible). They are equally rigorous subjects, and contrary to 'oldandrew's' assertion RE GCSE does require facts - and lots of them.
As I recall I did not simply assert it, I said that it was what RE teachers had said on this forum in a previous discussion. This is also consistent with Leo's knowledge-free list of what he thinks makes RE count as rigorous.
quote:
Originally posted by Marinaki:
It also requires analytical and evaluative skills.
Unfortunately, you have now shown us some RE papers and so I stand by my original claim, it is possible to teach RE in a rigorous, academic way, but it is not necessary in order to pass at grade C as, with the right exam board required content, is minimal.
[ 29. January 2011, 05:56: Message edited by: oldandrew ]
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marinaki
Varangian Guard
# 343
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
Unfortunately, you have now shown us some RE papers and so I stand by my original claim, it is possible to teach RE in a rigorous, academic way, but it is not necessary in order to pass at grade C as, with the right exam board required content, is minimal.
Really... this specification has no content? or this one? It doesn't say much but I think you'll find content is specified.
Although, the same charge could be made for Geography which is in the Bacc or in some cases History "with the right exam board". There are options popular in some schools such as "History of the Media" and "History of Medicine" as well as the usual lashings of Hitler and the Industrial Revolution.
I fail to see why a belief in a memory test of facts is any way useful or relevant.
(Although GCSEs are in the main a regurgitation of facts across the board, and even the first year of A levels is]
It amazes me, oldandrew's blog "Scenes from the Battleground" complains and complains and complains about education, behaviour and management. Is it really a Battleground? I work in London schools. I've worked in some of the toughest areas of the country, and in some of the best schools in the country (that's with the EBacc criteria too!). It is true because of societal breakdown young people come to school with serious behavioural problems and lacking respect for authority. (Although I think this has been the grip of teachers down the ages). While we cannot fix broken marriages, and drug-addicted parents, general poverty and the like. However,good teaching,that excites and engages them actually has an effect.
Personally, I don't think much of a lesson called Citizenship - often nicknamed "Shitizenship" (I don't think anybody really does). However it was in just such a lesson (all staff teach it) that one of my charges, a boy with a seriously unstable home life, on the verge of being kicked out of school, bright but always in trouble learnt about consumer rights. "What you mean miss the jacket I bought last week and the zip was broken, I can take it back?" Apparently, his experience of dealing with a difficult shop manager and being able to quote the Sale of Goods Act 1979 has now turned him on to becoming a lawyer. Apparently he has become incredibly focussed in History and English lessons, because he needs these to become a lawyer. It might just happen. Although his friend in the same class who knows that all he wants to be is a plumber is just waiting out school until he can get to college, because no real vocational courses exist.
I have taken over some classes where they had six months of useless, child friendly teaching. I've come in, put in place rules, expectations, and "old-fashioned" lessons. After initial distress at not getting their own way, the students have really appreciated it. Of course, it didn't fit what management at that school wanted. Management who chopped and changed at every government initiative (much like many schools now). My results were excellent. However, I didn't stay there long, because I hated the 'target-culture' and ineffectual management. Some of the kids found me years later, now studying for good degrees at University, and have thanked me for actually bothering to teach them!
I don't know what the solution is. I don't think Gove has got it, mainly because of the mixed messages coming out.
I wonder if schools will now be interested in my skills of Biblical Hebrew and ancient Greek, now that it is in the EBacc criteria, especially given that RE teachers are being made redundant and some schools are now overtly breaking the law by not providing it at all in KS4. Although, I'd much rather be teaching GCSE RS for two hours a week to kids who want to study it, than a half-hour 'discussion lesson' in form time with years 10 and 11, which is what RE is about to revert to.
--------------------
IC I XC "If thou bear thy cross
---+--- cheerfully, it will bear
NI I KA thee."
Posts: 696 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marinaki:
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
Unfortunately, you have now shown us some RE papers and so I stand by my original claim, it is possible to teach RE in a rigorous, academic way, but it is not necessary in order to pass at grade C as, with the right exam board required content, is minimal.
Really... this specification has no content? or this one?
Where did this straw man come from? I said that it is possible to get grade C with minimal content. This is not a claim that there is no content in any of the specifications.
quote:
Originally posted by Marinaki:
It doesn't say much but I think you'll find content is specified.
Although, the same charge could be made for Geography which is in the Bacc or in some cases History "with the right exam board". There are options popular in some schools such as "History of the Media" and "History of Medicine" as well as the usual lashings of Hitler and the Industrial Revolution.
Whether the other subjects have been dumbed-down too much is another issue. It might well be including any humanities subject in the EBacc is a waste of time, but whether the standard is too low is a different argument as to whether it is too high. I'd be interested to see if you can find a history paper as dumbed down as some (but not all) of those RE papers were.
quote:
Originally posted by Marinaki:
I fail to see why a belief in a memory test of facts is any way useful or relevant.
(Although GCSEs are in the main a regurgitation of facts across the board, and even the first year of A levels is]
Who simply wants a memory test? By all means test understanding of the knowledge that has been committed to memory. The important thing though, is that knowledge is actually taught. As long as sharing opiniions, and vague thinking skills are commonly thought of as the point of RE then, even if it is interrupted by a bit of rote memorisation in order to pass exams, it does not deserve to be considered an academic subject.
quote:
Originally posted by Marinaki:
It amazes me, oldandrew's blog "Scenes from the Battleground" complains and complains and complains about education, behaviour and management. Is it really a Battleground? I work in London schools. I've worked in some of the toughest areas of the country, and in some of the best schools in the country (that's with the EBacc criteria too!). It is true because of societal breakdown young people come to school with serious behavioural problems and lacking respect for authority. (Although I think this has been the grip of teachers down the ages). While we cannot fix broken marriages, and drug-addicted parents, general poverty and the like. However,good teaching,that excites and engages them actually has an effect.
The emphasis in state schools has been on excitement and engagement rather than learning for decades now. Ask employers and universities what effect it has.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marinaki
Varangian Guard
# 343
|
Posted
Whatever I say you will still rubbish Religious Studies. I'm sure you could get a C in many subjects with minimal content - possibly even your own. I don't teach to the minimum standard? Do you?
Here's an idea oldandrew ... it is quite possible to make teaching exciting and engaging without dumbing it down or detracting from content. One does not equate the other. Are you suggesting that all learning should be dull and boring? Do you really learn when it is unengaging? One can quite easily teach any subject, of any depth or rigour and ensure that it is either engaging or mind-bashingly dull. I'm guessing we have all had an experience of teachers who could make even the most engaging of subjects as dull as ever, and others who would seemingly dull ones come to life.
Are you suggesting that teaching should not engage students?
What motivates us?
[ 29. January 2011, 10:04: Message edited by: Marinaki ]
--------------------
IC I XC "If thou bear thy cross
---+--- cheerfully, it will bear
NI I KA thee."
Posts: 696 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marinaki
Varangian Guard
# 343
|
Posted
A clarification:
Engagement is not the end, but the means for education. Where people go wrong is interpreting that as the end in itself or criticising this as the end in itself.
Personally, I would have a Philosophy GCSE (not the Philosophy and Ethics in RS at the moment). Currently, Philosophy is only available at A'Level.
Why? Philosophy graduates are smarter.
--------------------
IC I XC "If thou bear thy cross
---+--- cheerfully, it will bear
NI I KA thee."
Posts: 696 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marinaki:
Whatever I say you will still rubbish Religious Studies.
If you can demonstrate that no RE teacher uses the more dumbed down of the exam papers you linked to, and that the various RE teachers who criticise the teaching of facts are not really RE teachers, then you might have a chance of changing my mind. However, if the facts remain unchanged then how can I possibly accept the RE GCSE as an academic qualification?
quote:
Originally posted by Marinaki:
I'm sure you could get a C in many subjects with minimal content - possibly even your own. I don't teach to the minimum standard? Do you?
I never said you did. The point is not that the content is minimal for the subject, but that it is minimal for a qualification.
quote:
Originally posted by Marinaki:
Here's an idea oldandrew ... it is quite possible to make teaching exciting and engaging without dumbing it down or detracting from content. One does not equate the other.
I've heard this claimed a lot. But when teachers get observed, what's the first thing they do? Pick the most interesting and engaging topic.
There are topics that are just not that interesting and there are massive differences between what students find interesting. I'm yet to meet the teacher who never taught a boring lesson but I have met many teachers who regularly fail to get enough knowledge across because they were trying to "motivate".
quote:
Originally posted by Marinaki:
Are you suggesting that all learning should be dull and boring?
What a ridiculous straw man. I am suggesting that entertainment value is not that important.
quote:
Originally posted by Marinaki:
Do you really learn when it is unengaging?
Yes. I mean, not because it is unengaging, but yes, I have learnt things that didn't immediately engage me.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marinaki
Varangian Guard
# 343
|
Posted
The topic was not interesting, but you became engaged and that's the point.
If teacher's are being observed properly they have to teach what is in the scheme of work.
I've amazed myself in making some aspects of the industrial revolution engaging. Looking at the way Holy Communion is celebrated in
Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant traditions and
how these reflect differences of belief is not always the most engaging topic for today's teenagers. We make it interesting.
--------------------
IC I XC "If thou bear thy cross
---+--- cheerfully, it will bear
NI I KA thee."
Posts: 696 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marinaki:
The topic was not interesting, but you became engaged and that's the point.
If teacher's are being observed properly they have to teach what is in the scheme of work. I've amazed myself in making some aspects of the industrial revolution engaging. Looking at the way Holy Communion is celebrated in
Orthodox, Catholic and Protestant traditions and
how these reflect differences of belief is not always the most engaging topic for today's teenagers. We make it interesting.
Well I'm glad you believe that you can make any topic interesting without harming the amount of learning to be done.
I hope your students feel the same. My experience is that teachers are rarely successful in attempting this because it is not terribly practical in a lot of cases (particularly if you are preparing 20 hours of lessons a week) and because students differ in what they find interesting. On the second point, if they aren't interested in the same TV programmes, why would they all be interested in the same lesson activities?
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marinaki:
It amazes me, oldandrew's blog "Scenes from the Battleground" complains and complains and complains about education, behaviour and management. Is it really a Battleground?
Undoubtedly it is for some.
The ineffective teacher has a battle on her/his hands to keep the kids in their seats, or even in the room.
The teacher who believes that pupils are ignorant and bad project a sort of contempt on to the pupils who pick up on it and behave badly.
The teacher who believes that her/his philosophy of education is superior to the ethos of the school and who doesn't follow the standard procedures of classroom management adopted by his/her colleagues gets bad reactions from classes.
The teacher who fails to motivate, believing that motivation is a fad, bores pupils into misbehaviour.
[ 29. January 2011, 18:01: Message edited by: leo ]
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marinaki
Varangian Guard
# 343
|
Posted
Differentiation...and working bloody hard (arriving at 7 and leaving at 6 or later - working through lunch running clubs and activities). Fortunately, I work with lots of amazing colleagues who do just that too.
Differentiation is about knowing your students. It's not about different coloured worksheets for ability. I have little truck with that. It's about knowing the individuals in each and every class you teach - knowing if they are fostered, if mum's disabled, if their dog died last week.
I have 423 students on my register. Some I see more often than others. Some are in classes of 30 and others in classes of 15. I make a point of greeting them by name when I see them in the corridor. Luckily I have a good memory for names. All 423!!
Not everything is going to inspire them all the time, but the vast majority of the time the students are enjoying my lessons and making progress, sometimes quite above what their expected grades are. But then I'm a harsh marker and tell them that I expect better. I have taught some of the worst "nutters" in the school, I had a class of boys with a reputation outside school where just one in the classroom would send colleagues up the wall. A quirk of the timetable meant I taught a class of these lads who've all been in trouble with the police. In my class they had their heads down working all lesson - taking in facts, knowledge and information. They did it because they knew I actually liked them, and they didn't want to let me down. I'm not their friend; I'm their teacher. They know that but want to work hard.They also saw the value of what they were learning. They all had predicted grades of well below a C (History ... before you snarl about RE). They all got well above that. It's amazing how hard kids will work just because the teacher actually likes them despite who they are, despite their label. They go off and produce amazing work and projects that I have not asked them to do as homework, much better than any homework I could set, simply because they are interested and know that their teacher will be pleased in their efforts. I rarely give merits or rewards, although I have been known to make a cup of tea for a class just because I can! Usually, the reward is in the learning alone.
I know how well they are doing both from their results and the work they produce and from their own feedback.This is because I get them to write my report every term. This is part of the process of them looking at where they've done well, and what they need to improve, as well as me telling them what they need to do. With the right guidance and continual feedback most kids are able to articulate where they need to improve and with the right encouragement act upon it.
School is about learning and making you smarter. It needn't be tedious and dull. Although that is often the easy option for the teacher who cannot put the time in. I also know that despite one of my subjects not being in the EBacc the kids will still choose it because they see it as interesting and worthwhile and it won't be as boring as colouring in and joining the dots (aka Geography). Schools in their misguided attempts to please the latest Minister of Education will try to force them to do one thing over the other, but students will always choose subjects they enjoy and that they feel they learn something in and will be worthwhile. There has been a huge uptake in RS in the last decade, and that has a lot to do with how the subject has changed and more specialists are teaching it. Students are the first to complain about lessons where they don't learn anything. I once took over from a History teacher who had made the kids sit in silence and copy from the board for hours on end. Their books were filled from end to end with notes. They understood not a jot of it! They wanted to understand it but were not given the opportunity
As for watching the same TV programmes! Most are playing computer games, aren't they?
I really and truly fail to understand why boredom equates with rigour. I certainly do not dumb the curriculum down. It is not necessary. Kids rise more to a challenge. I have taught A Level Philosophy to ordinary working class 13 year old boys, and they've passed with reasonable grades. This was outside of lessons. The topics of themselves are interesting.
I am not alone. The vast majority of my colleagues really push each and every child to reach his full potential in their subject. They do this by making the lessons engaging and challenging.
Every time I read your posts in any forum, oldandrew, I feel so sad that you seem to have such a negative experience of teaching and it all seems such a battle for you.
I love teaching and have little time to post or keep a blog about education.
There are places where it could be a nightmare to teach - I've taught in some rough schools - where senior management are not supportive, but it is also down to what the individual teacher does in their classroom that makes a difference.
--------------------
IC I XC "If thou bear thy cross
---+--- cheerfully, it will bear
NI I KA thee."
Posts: 696 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
Well said, Marinaki.
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
The ineffective teacher has a battle on her/his hands to keep the kids in their seats, or even in the room.
The teacher who believes that pupils are ignorant and bad project a sort of contempt on to the pupils who pick up on it and behave badly.
The teacher who believes that her/his philosophy of education is superior to the ethos of the school and who doesn't follow the standard procedures of classroom management adopted by his/her colleagues gets bad reactions from classes.
The teacher who fails to motivate, believing that motivation is a fad, bores pupils into misbehaviour.
Of course, everyone who disagrees with you about the state of the education system must be a bad teacher.
Perhaps you could follow this stream of ad hominems with one of your claims that your subject is useful because it teaches respect for the views of others and how to engage in rational debate?
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marinaki:
Every time I read your posts in any forum, oldandrew, I feel so sad that you seem to have such a negative experience of teaching and it all seems such a battle for you.
Every time I read a long essay about how wonderful somebody thinks their own teaching is, I think of all the people, usually managers of one sort or another, who I've heard make similar claims in real life only later to discover the truth about their classes and their level of learning. There's no shortage of people willing to declare everything (particularly themselves) to be wonderful and the system not to be broken, but the exam results, the surveys of employers and academics, the attrition rate among teachers, and the surveys asking teachers about their experiences all suggest otherwise.
Do you never have to deal with the horror experienced by kids who have just arrived in this country and literally cannot believe the chaos of an English school (or for that matter student teachers who were educated in other countries)?
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marinaki
Varangian Guard
# 343
|
Posted
My results both in terms of grades and student success in chosen academic and career paths speak for themselves over the past 10 years. Do yours?
On the other point, since I teach in London students from other countries appear quite frequently. (I always ensure that they can have appropriate vocab in their own language until they learn English well enough.) They are not shocked as I do not allow disorder to occur in my classroom, and our headteacher does not allow it to occur in his school - which is fully comprehensive.
Chaos happens when poverty, low aspirations, low expectations are combined with poor teaching and a negative attitude towards charges. The biggest factor in this is the quality of teaching. While it would be easier, I guess, to teach in the leafy suburbs rather than schools where kids come from broken, drug addicted homes, with gang culture rife- the fact still remains, if teaching is poor, behaviour is poor. In my experience young people naturally want to learn and want to be smart. It helps if they have dedicated teachers.
Fortunately, I have nearly always worked in well-run schools.
[ 29. January 2011, 22:48: Message edited by: Marinaki ]
--------------------
IC I XC "If thou bear thy cross
---+--- cheerfully, it will bear
NI I KA thee."
Posts: 696 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marinaki:
My results both in terms of grades and student success in chosen academic and career paths speak for themselves over the past 10 years. Do yours?
Yes, thanks. If I hadn't seen how much I can achieve when I teach the way I want to, then I wouldn't be so frustrated at all the forces trying to stop me achieving it - often on the grounds of "engagement", "motivation" and all the rest of the alternatives to learning.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
The ineffective teacher has a battle on her/his hands to keep the kids in their seats, or even in the room.
The teacher who believes that pupils are ignorant and bad project a sort of contempt on to the pupils who pick up on it and behave badly.
The teacher who believes that her/his philosophy of education is superior to the ethos of the school and who doesn't follow the standard procedures of classroom management adopted by his/her colleagues gets bad reactions from classes.
The teacher who fails to motivate, believing that motivation is a fad, bores pupils into misbehaviour.
Of course, everyone who disagrees with you about the state of the education system must be a bad teacher.
Perhaps you could follow this stream of ad hominems with one of your claims that your subject is useful because it teaches respect for the views of others and how to engage in rational debate?
Have you read the context within which I posted that?
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Have you read the context within which I posted that?
The context appeared to be that of you losing it when your educational views come under any kind of challenge.
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
No - the context was an answer to a question by Marinaki: 'It amazes me, oldandrew's blog "Scenes from the Battleground" complains and complains and complains about education, behaviour and management. Is it really a Battleground?'
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cod
Shipmate
# 2643
|
Posted
Surely philosophy would be a more appropriate subject for this EBAC than Religious Studies?
Even leaving aside the question of whether Religious Studies has sufficient academic content, it would seem that philosophy would be a better all-round fit: RS being perhaps rather too focused on a particular strand of ethics.
Posts: 4229 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
No - the context was an answer to a question by Marinaki: 'It amazes me, oldandrew's blog "Scenes from the Battleground" complains and complains and complains about education, behaviour and management. Is it really a Battleground?'
And this context (a direct reference to my blog and my opinions) makes it look less like an attack on me and people with my views? How exactly?
[ 30. January 2011, 17:15: Message edited by: oldandrew ]
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Marinaki
Varangian Guard
# 343
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Cod:
Surely philosophy would be a more appropriate subject for this EBAC than Religious Studies?
Even leaving aside the question of whether Religious Studies has sufficient academic content, it would seem that philosophy would be a better all-round fit: RS being perhaps rather too focused on a particular strand of ethics.
Currently Philosophy is only available at A'Level and is quite a challenging subject. It also forms a major component of the International Baccalaureate.
That said, the most popular GCSE RS courses are increasingly Philosophy of Religion, and this is often followed through in A'Level where Philosophy of Religion courses are also the more popular ones. This is partly because the course is more accessible to students of all religious/secular backgrounds. The availability of Philosophy in the curriculum currently of course depends on the ability and competence of the teachers. Theologians per se and philosophers don't really have difficulties in teaching philosophy. Some RS graduates, in my experience, do.
There certainly is a place for Philosophy in the curriculum.
--------------------
IC I XC "If thou bear thy cross
---+--- cheerfully, it will bear
NI I KA thee."
Posts: 696 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I think you are being over-defensive.
The question I answered was about why teaching can be a battleground for some and I outlined typical reasons why someone might find teaching a battleground.
Have you suffered amnesia? A post ago you were saying it was to be understood in the context of my opinions on my blog.
That said I don't particularly care whether you are insulting me personally, or insulting every teacher who disagrees with you. Either way, it's a very poor argument on the part of somebody who has in the past claimed to be an authority on how to express opinions politely and with respect.
[ 30. January 2011, 20:02: Message edited by: oldandrew ]
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
Much as I dislike spoon-feeding, here is the quotation - actually taken from one of OldAndrew's posts: Originally posted by Marinaki: It amazes me, oldandrew's blog "Scenes from the Battleground" complains and complains and complains about education, behaviour and management. Is it really a Battleground? I work in London schools. I've worked in some of the toughest areas of the country, and in some of the best schools in the country (that's with the EBacc criteria too!). It is true because of societal breakdown young people come to school with serious behavioural problems and lacking respect for authority. (Although I think this has been the grip of teachers down the ages). While we cannot fix broken marriages, and drug-addicted parents, general poverty and the like. However,good teaching,that excites and engages them actually has an effect.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marinaki
Varangian Guard
# 343
|
Posted
Fellow RE teachers on these boards we'd better make this good - then...
Celebrating RE month
It starts off with a launch at the Houses of Parliament. I'll be writing to my MPs (Home and School) reminding them to go along for the launch. I'll run it by my Headteacher and see if some of the kids could remind the MP (rather than me) and say how we will be celebrating RE in School (and invite them along).
--------------------
IC I XC "If thou bear thy cross
---+--- cheerfully, it will bear
NI I KA thee."
Posts: 696 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
To compound the threat, there is to be a 30% cut in initial teacher training places for RE specialists and the bursary is going to be removed.
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
There is an Early Day Motion.1375 hoping to get signatures - to put RE into the Bac.
According to the TES, ‘Almost one in three secondary schools is planning to slash the time devoted to teaching RE from September’ and ‘Schools appear to be feeling that it’s quite safe to cut RE without any fear that they will be held to account’ are just two comments which indicate the nature and extent of the problem facing RE.
A NATRE survey - which gathered almost 800 responses from 4,200 state and independent schools - found planned cuts to both short and full-course GCSEs in religious studies from this September. In some cases schools are reported to be ignoring their statutory duty to offer RE at all.
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
kankucho
Shipmate
# 14318
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
...a bishop ... saying:
"The Church of England is pretty astonished at the omission of RE. I want to fire a warning salvo that there will be huge objection from the church and many other parts of society if it is not part of the core curriculum," he told the newspaper.
The Bishop noted that religious education is a tool that can be used to create the kind of cohesive society that we are seeking.
He warned that we neglect the subject "at our peril".
Now, I wonder why he would say that - him being a bishop ’n’ all.
See also: four of the five people you similarly cited in your first follow-up to your OP.
--------------------
"We are a way for the cosmos to know itself" – Dr. Carl Sagan
Kankucho Bird Blues
Posts: 1262 | From: Kuon-ganjo, E17 | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
Yesterday, I received a reply from my MP. He quoted Nick Gibb MP, Minister of State for Schools: the Government is in agreement that RE is an essential part of the curriculum and so will remain compulsory for children to take throughout their school life. It is for this reason that RE is not included as a humanity subject in the English Baccalaureate scheme...
I am going to reply on the lines of:
Mr. Gibb is out of touch with what really happens in schools
The BAC WILL affect study in other areas such as RE because it will be perceived by pupils and parents as a second class subject
If schools obey the letter of the law, RE will return to the one lesson per week timetable slot – and less because senior staffs in some schools commandeer pupils out of it to do litter clearance or arranging chairs in the hall
Pupils don’t take it seriously when thus timetables but muck about. – and it is hard for the RE teacher to keep order when such timetable results in him/her teaching about a thousand different pupils and it is difficult to know their names.
Other schools will simply disobey the law and not teach RE at all – who is going to police them to ensure compliance when OFSTED recently said it will no longer inspect compliance – this is to be left to local SACREs but SACREs have no power to require schools to tell them anything.
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spawn
Shipmate
# 4867
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Mr. Gibb is out of touch with what really happens in schools
I hope you're going to be more polite than this in your letter. Telling people they're out of touch is counter-productive - they're less likely to listen.
But the trouble is that the teaching of RE is so uneven and inconsistent throughout the country that there's no sense putting it in the EBAC. The first step should be to take it out of the hands of local SACREs and give it a greater status in the curriculum.
In my daughter's school it's about right it gets 50 mins each week - I haven't been impressed by the rigour with which it's taught. I'd happily however see the school give up on pointless things like Life Skills and SEAL and TAG and give more time to academic subjects.
Posts: 3447 | From: North Devon | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
50 minutes per week is below the recommended curriculum time of 5% - it should be 3 x 50 mins per fortnight.
Most SACREs are improving and buy in specialist help if it is lacking. The potential loss of local authorities may threaten to this.
I have sat on two SACREs at different times, totalling 33 years. Both were/are excellent and my current SACRE got a glowing OFSTED report.
If RE were nationalised, it would require a change in the law. No government wants to open such a can of worms. Interestingly, the strongest voice in favour of a national curriculum status for RE is the British Humanist Association.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
Another casualty. I heard yesterday from a RE teacher who said: From September 2012 we will not be offering GCSE Full course RS only short course. This will be delivered in Year 10 so the students will not have any taught RS in Years 9 and 11. I had to battle to secure this situation with some colleagues happy to see RS disappear from the
curriculum completely.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spawn
Shipmate
# 4867
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
50 minutes per week is below the recommended curriculum time of 5% - it should be 3 x 50 mins per fortnight.
Most SACREs are improving and buy in specialist help if it is lacking. The potential loss of local authorities may threaten to this.
I have sat on two SACREs at different times, totalling 33 years. Both were/are excellent and my current SACRE got a glowing OFSTED report.
If RE were nationalised, it would require a change in the law. No government wants to open such a can of worms. Interestingly, the strongest voice in favour of a national curriculum status for RE is the British Humanist Association.
I'm not complaining that RS in my daughter's school doesn't comply with five per cent of curriculum time for the following reasons. I have no confidence that it is taught well. Furthermore too much curriculum time is already taken away from genuine academic subjects by nebulous and trendy subjects such as Live Skills.
Finally, RS is deeply suspect as an academic subject - it seems to me very often to be a hotch-potch of comparative religions, theology, philosophy. There isn't anything resembling an academic method or an agreed approach to the subject matter.
Posts: 3447 | From: North Devon | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
The non-statutory National Framework gives a standard approach and methods though there are too many non-specialists teaching it (and Gove has imposed a 30% cut of initial teacher training places which will make it worse).
The conference I attended during the run up to the framework reported: A key issue for primary schools is the development of teachers’ subject knowledge and their understanding of how pupils learn in RE. In many schools RE never features on the school development plan, thus limiting the opportunities teachers have to benefit from CPD even when offered by providers
My experience of involvement with providing CPD is that even when we offer free day courses, the same small number of schools never avail themselves of it. You need to question the head teacher.
The Framework sets out the key skills and subject content - but it depends what you mean by 'academic'. To some, it simply means dry learning of facts. That is Religious Studies.
RE, historically, has always been more than that in England and Wales. It should make a contribution to a child's personal development.
As for 'Life Skills', I think that most parents want their kids to more than pass exams. They need to learn to work collaboratively, in preparation for the workplace. They need to know how to keep safe - crossing roads, knowing about drugs and sex etc.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
Reading Spawn's post again, the problem seems to be that the school he is involved with does not follow the agreed approach.
BTW 'comparative religion' has always been frowned on by professionals - we don't compare, simply educate.
The notion of comparison was bought in by evangelicals who wanted to show that Christianity was somehow superior to other religions.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Spawn:
I'm not complaining that RS in my daughter's school doesn't comply with five per cent of curriculum time....Finally, RS is deeply suspect as an academic subject - it seems to me very often to be a hotch-potch
If it doesn't get enough time, it cannot be taught properly - so you shouldn't condemn RE nationally on the basis of one school teaching it badly.
As for a hotch-potch - I think that is something to do with its parent discipline, theology. My theology degree was very traditional and was, itself, a hotch-potch:
Hebrew
Greek
Church History
Philosophy of Religion
History of Biblical Interpretation
Dogmatics
Our prof. said that the Queen of Sciences was like a cuckoo who laid its eggs in others' nests.
But it is an academic subject, recognised and moderated in this country's universities, Russel Group as well as redbrick.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
oldandrew
Shipmate
# 11546
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Spawn:
I'd happily however see the school give up on pointless things like Life Skills and SEAL and TAG and give more time to academic subjects.
TAG?
--------------------
Teaching Blog at: http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/
Posts: 1069 | From: England | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
Welcome back, OldAndrew. I had to look TAG up - google is our friend. Something to do with 'engaging creativity'. You and I might agree for the first time ever that it's a time-waster.
However, the acronym also seems to have something to do with sign language for the deaf.
Yet again, there is some theatre in education group who calls itself 'TAG.
There's also: TAG Toys are designed for all children from one to six years of age, with the clearly defined goal of stimulating the development of sensory motor skills and thinking abilities.
Maybe Spawn will stop buy and enlighten us. I fancy the toys, myself.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spawn
Shipmate
# 4867
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by oldandrew:
quote:
Originally posted by Spawn:
I'd happily however see the school give up on pointless things like Life Skills and SEAL and TAG and give more time to academic subjects.
TAG?
Sorry, I gave it the wrong acronym. I meant 'G&T' (Gifted and Talented) which as far as I can gather seems to mean taking about a fifth of pupils in each year group out of classes for half a day every term to do team building exercises. I'm very proud of my daughter but I have no illusions that she's genius material. In fact, I'd prefer her to have extra maths and science lessons. I wonder whether schools devote any attention to children who are average or mediocre at School and what the acronym would be?
Leo referred to the need for Life Skills. I just wish schools weren't used as a one-stop-shops to make up for either the failings of parents, or the desire of politicians and bureaucrats to interfere in each and every aspect of life.
Posts: 3447 | From: North Devon | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
The problem is that many parents are fairly inadequate so these sessions are needed.
Gifted and Talented has grown from dealing with a small number of brilliant, outstanding kids to an understanding that any kids have a particular skill in a particular area and this needs recognition and encouragement.
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
Unfortunately, because the general public have to hear phrases such as (think Vikki Pollard), 'I'm gif'ed an' talen'ed, inni?', from such a wide group of people, it's become rather a joke.
How would you measure 'Gifted and Talented' in RE, I wonder?
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spawn
Shipmate
# 4867
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
The problem is that many parents are fairly inadequate so these sessions are needed.
So do we have to cater for incompetent parents because I can tell you that is holding other children back. Just give the help to children who need it and don't make it into a universal thing.
quote:
Gifted and Talented has grown from dealing with a small number of brilliant, outstanding kids to an understanding that any kids have a particular skill in a particular area and this needs recognition and encouragement.
All children must have prizes. What a complete waste of time. Children are only gifted if they do exceptionally well in a subject. Not all children have skills in a particular area some of them are dense and talentless across the board - but no less loveable because of that. In fact, the vast majority of children will go on to make little difference to the world - nothing wrong with that, but they don't need telling that they're gifted and talented when they're not.
Posts: 3447 | From: North Devon | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
