|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Should RE be expunged from the EBac?
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Right-Believing Queen:
You'll have to find another reason to explain the appalling ignorance of Bristol students. Well, actually, you don't, as you've only cited the case of one student, a case that could be, and indeed almost certainly is, very atypical. For some reason, though, you seem to want to portray it as typical.
I was an associate tutor at Bristol Uni for 27 years and have been on the staff of the university church for 20 years - maybe you need to get out and about more.
--------------------
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 Chorister:
Regarding the teaching of RE as a compulsory subject, I'm surprised it was brought in, in the first place, up to age 16 - but then to drop it, having brought it in, seems complete nonsense. I guess that is one of the weaknesses of a constantly changing government.
Point of information: RE is compulsory up to age 18/19. That still stands in law - even if it isn't in the EBac, schools still have to 'deliver' it - what is now happening is that it is taught as an occasional one-off rather than as an exam. subject.
Now that Ofsted doesn't do subject inspections, nobody is policing compliance.
--------------------
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
John Keast, chair of the RE Council, has accused Gove of 'dismantling' RE and of putting 2/3rds of teacher training courses in it at risk. RE content has also been removed from the National Curriculum website.
He suggests that it is ironic that Cameron has underlined the significance of the religious dimension which underpins personal and communal values.
--------------------
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
|
|
Pre-cambrian
Shipmate
# 2055
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
Regarding the teaching of RE as a compulsory subject, I'm surprised it was brought in, in the first place, up to age 16 - but then to drop it, having brought it in, seems complete nonsense. I guess that is one of the weaknesses of a constantly changing government.
Point of information: RE is compulsory up to age 18/19. That still stands in law - even if it isn't in the EBac, schools still have to 'deliver' it - what is now happening is that it is taught as an occasional one-off rather than as an exam. subject.
Now that Ofsted doesn't do subject inspections, nobody is policing compliance.
This is really nothing new. My experience of education was that the legal duty wasn't being delivered as far back as the mid 70s - we were not taught Divinity, as it was then called, beyond the first year of secondary, and only certain days had full school assemblies, which were the only occasion collective acts of worship took place. If a law is being observed mainly in the breach then it is starting to look like an ass and it is time to question whether that law should be repealed.
--------------------
"We cannot leave the appointment of Bishops to the Holy Ghost, because no one is confident that the Holy Ghost would understand what makes a good Church of England bishop."
Posts: 2314 | From: Croydon | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
I'm talking more about RE as an examinable subject. The numbers went up in the 1990s, partly due to the half-GSCE which many more students took because RE was a compulsory subject, not just at assembly, and so therefore they might as well get examined in it and have it as one of their qualifications than choose an additional subject. (Probably due as much to laziness as religious fervour amongst the students..... but it did help a significant amount towards acceptability, it was OK to be seen to study RE, even if you were male.)
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
it also led to an increase in A' level numbers because they found the GCSE so interesting.
So even more sad that many will now be much less likely to discover this.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
More bad news. At a meeting yesterday, I was told hat only half of a PGCE cohort from a prestigious course got jobs at the end of their course, finishing July 2011. RE jobs were now being advertised as needing to include PSHE and Citizenship (the future of all 3 subjects is in doubt).
Most of the appointments were to those with some training in Citizenship and/or PSHE. So that adds yet further to the shortage of RE specialists.
It's hard to remember that, a mere two years ago, RE teaching was encouraged with a golden hello and extra bursaries because it was a shortage subject.
--------------------
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
|
|
lowlands_boy
Shipmate
# 12497
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
More bad news. At a meeting yesterday, I was told hat only half of a PGCE cohort from a prestigious course got jobs at the end of their course, finishing July 2011. RE jobs were now being advertised as needing to include PSHE and Citizenship (the future of all 3 subjects is in doubt).
Most of the appointments were to those with some training in Citizenship and/or PSHE. So that adds yet further to the shortage of RE specialists.
It's hard to remember that, a mere two years ago, RE teaching was encouraged with a golden hello and extra bursaries because it was a shortage subject.
Only a slight tangent, but very related to that. I'm aware of at least three schools (and I'm sure it's more common than that) where a large number of non EBac subjects are being wiped out as examination subjects since they are not attracting enough pupils at options time. It's not related to RE at all I don't think - I think the general issue is that the EBac is hammering any subject that's not included in it.
--------------------
I thought I should update my signature line....
Posts: 836 | From: North West UK | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Emma Louise
Storm in a teapot
# 3571
|
Posted
I'm begining to feel a bit glad that I've got a psychology degree as well so I do have a choice as to what I teach when I go back into teaching but it's such a shame.
"Philosophy and Ethics" was as popular as history (and both more popular than geography) at the last place I taught.
Posts: 12719 | From: Enid Blyton territory. | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lowlands_boy:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
More bad news. At a meeting yesterday, I was told hat only half of a PGCE cohort from a prestigious course got jobs at the end of their course, finishing July 2011. RE jobs were now being advertised as needing to include PSHE and Citizenship (the future of all 3 subjects is in doubt).
Most of the appointments were to those with some training in Citizenship and/or PSHE. So that adds yet further to the shortage of RE specialists.
It's hard to remember that, a mere two years ago, RE teaching was encouraged with a golden hello and extra bursaries because it was a shortage subject.
Only a slight tangent, but very related to that. I'm aware of at least three schools (and I'm sure it's more common than that) where a large number of non EBac subjects are being wiped out as examination subjects since they are not attracting enough pupils at options time. It's not related to RE at all I don't think - I think the general issue is that the EBac is hammering any subject that's not included in it.
I think that is true and, with hindsight, maybe all our subject specialists should have joined together to fight the EBac rather than going it alone.
However, the difference is that RE IS statutory but Gove has ignored and undermined that by recent decisions to remove, without any legal backing, that statutory nature e.g. in free schools and academies and by not allowing it to have any role in the curriculum review.
[ 25. January 2012, 19:23: Message edited by: leo ]
--------------------
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
Despite pressure from the RE Council and the bishop of Oxford, the government is still refusing to include RE in the curriculum review. Instead, it suggests that the RE Council do its own review. On the plus side, it means that we professionals continue to 'own' our subject and have a large input. on the minus side, it hints of ours being an 'also ran' subject.
They HAVE listened to ther shortage of RE specialists by increasing ITT numbers.
However, around here, this uni. trains Citizenship teachers. Both Citizenship and RE have uncertain futures so schools are hedging their bets by appointing Citizenship specialists to RE posts, thinking them to be more flexible if they have to be redeployed to another subject area. meanwhile, RE teachers are likely to remain unemployed (each advertised post is currently attracting 100+ applicants) unless they move to another part of the country.
--------------------
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
|
|
Saul the Apostle
Shipmate
# 13808
|
Posted
Leo said: quote:
I think that is true and, with hindsight, maybe all our subject specialists should have joined together to fight the EBac rather than going it alone.
However, the difference is that RE IS statutory but Gove has ignored and undermined that by recent decisions to remove, without any legal backing, that statutory nature e.g. in free schools and academies and by not allowing it to have any role in the curriculum review.
Maybe I'm being too conspiratorial here, but the agenda of this and previous government's is to talk clean & positive about the place of God, religion and the family, but to do **** all when it comes to actual real legislation.
I wrote to my MP Nick Gibb about the role of RE and the EBac. Gibb who is a Cameron patsy and Junior Schools Minister. All I got was waffle in reply.
Saul
--------------------
"I cannot forecast to you the action of Russia. It is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma; but perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest."
Posts: 1772 | From: unsure | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Emma Louise
Storm in a teapot
# 3571
|
Posted
100 applicants!? I'm hoping to go back to work in the next year or two and hoped to work locally... this may not happen...
Posts: 12719 | From: Enid Blyton territory. | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:
Leo said: quote:
I think that is true and, with hindsight, maybe all our subject specialists should have joined together to fight the EBac rather than going it alone.
However, the difference is that RE IS statutory but Gove has ignored and undermined that by recent decisions to remove, without any legal backing, that statutory nature e.g. in free schools and academies and by not allowing it to have any role in the curriculum review.
Maybe I'm being too conspiratorial here, but the agenda of this and previous government's is to talk clean & positive about the place of God, religion and the family, but to do **** all when it comes to actual real legislation.
I wrote to my MP Nick Gibb about the role of RE and the EBac. Gibb who is a Cameron patsy and Junior Schools Minister. All I got was waffle in reply.
Saul
Yes - everyone is getting waffly replies - usually that don't address the issue. I am in regular contact with about 150 'RE people' and they're all saying the same.
--------------------
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 Emma Louise:
100 applicants!? I'm hoping to go back to work in the next year or two and hoped to work locally... this may not happen...
Depends where you are. My city is especially hard because the uni trains both RE and Citizenship teachers so that doubles the competition.
Also, people regard this as a beautiful city and don't want to move away after their PGCE.
Ask around - if you know of any HODs or senior management who shortlist - they'd know what sort of volume they're getting.
Applicant numbers vary from time to time. The last time i had a post going in my dept. (about 8 years ago), i only had 4 applicants. I wouldn't have shortlisted ANY of them in normal circumstances.
10 years before that, I had about 50 applicants and agonised about the procedure - bundles of paper all over my living room floor, each representing a real human being.
--------------------
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 Right-Believing Queen:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
The Bible is supposed to be the living word of God. To dress it up in fancy olde English
Surely the Authorized Version isn't 'dressed up in fancy olde English'. It was written in the English of its time, which is modern English. The last point is of crucial importance: the English of the AV is only very slightly different from that of spoken and written today, and easily comprehensible to anyone with even a basic command of English. The same is not really true of the English Bible of Tyndale, or of Luther's German Bible.
quote:
so that kids cannot understand it means that they will assign it, and Christianity as a whole, to a quaint relic of the past which has nothing to do with their lives today.
Do you have any hard evidence for this rather alarming assertion. I personally have never met anyone who has ever had the slightest difficulty with understanding Jacobean English (and I like to think that I have a rather diverse set of friends, not all of them native English speakers). The only reference I can think of is from 'Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy', where a young boy in the prep school where Jim Prideaux teachers struggles to pronounce the word 'shew'.
If you'll forgive me, your assertion smacks more of an élite conception of what the illiterate masses know than it does of actual experience with these masses.
Come to think of it, I'm pretty sure that one of the kids on last week's episode of 'Glee' read from the Gospel of Luke, according to the Authorized Version (or the KJV, as Americans are wont to call it). So, we can add Lima, Ohio, to the places where the yoof know their thees and thous. Bristol must be a very strange place, if what you say is true.
I have just read an article about the king James Bible he has given to schools. Apparently it weighs a lot and it is printed in ye olde script with ye olde spellings e.g. 's' is printed as 'f'.
So when the little darlings read that phrase in the psalms: 'thereout suck they no small advantage'.....
--------------------
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
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Despite pressure from the RE Council and the bishop of Oxford, the government is still refusing to include RE in the curriculum review. Instead, it suggests that the RE Council do its own review. On the plus side, it means that we professionals continue to 'own' our subject and have a large input. on the minus side, it hints of ours being an 'also ran' subject.
Of course. Who would expect otherwise? No likely government is going to abolish compusolry RE and the "act of worship" (though the current crop of Tories are a bit less unlikely to than Labour was or will be). But no likely goernment is going to waste any time or much money on what they see as one of the most unimportant parts of school curriculum. So they will leave it up to the schools to sort.
Remember they do not want schools to teach RE. Neither do they want schools not to teach RE. They don't give a fart one way or the other. What they want to be able to do is to stand up in front of a TV camera and say they care about RE even though they don;t. So they will pass laws to make it compulsory. mumble a few platitudes about educating the whole person and upholding our mainly Christian heritage, and then ignore it and hope it will go away.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Right-Believing Queen:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
The Bible is supposed to be the living word of God. To dress it up in fancy olde English
Surely the Authorized Version isn't 'dressed up in fancy olde English'. It was written in the English of its time, which is modern English. The last point is of crucial importance: the English of the AV is only very slightly different from that of spoken and written today, and easily comprehensible to anyone with even a basic command of English. The same is not really true of the English Bible of Tyndale, or of Luther's German Bible.
quote:
so that kids cannot understand it means that they will assign it, and Christianity as a whole, to a quaint relic of the past which has nothing to do with their lives today.
Do you have any hard evidence for this rather alarming assertion. I personally have never met anyone who has ever had the slightest difficulty with understanding Jacobean English (and I like to think that I have a rather diverse set of friends, not all of them native English speakers). The only reference I can think of is from 'Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy', where a young boy in the prep school where Jim Prideaux teachers struggles to pronounce the word 'shew'.
If you'll forgive me, your assertion smacks more of an élite conception of what the illiterate masses know than it does of actual experience with these masses.
Come to think of it, I'm pretty sure that one of the kids on last week's episode of 'Glee' read from the Gospel of Luke, according to the Authorized Version (or the KJV, as Americans are wont to call it). So, we can add Lima, Ohio, to the places where the yoof know their thees and thous. Bristol must be a very strange place, if what you say is true.
I have just read an article about the king James Bible he has given to schools. Apparently it weighs a lot and it is printed in ye olde script with ye olde spellings e.g. 's' is printed as 'f'.
So when the little darlings read that phrase in the psalms: 'thereout suck they no small advantage'.....
The KJV is also useless when it comes to phonics, which Gove is so keen on.
--------------------
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
It gets worse. The latest news is that it ill have seven papers: English language, English literature, maths pure and applied (with an additional maths option), chemistry, physics and biology.
History AND (not 'or') Geography to follow later.
Even if the 'old' GCSEs remain for the other subjects, very few pupils are likely to be entered for them so while GCSE RE is still an option outside the EBacc., I can't see many takers.
[ 18. September 2012, 17:40: Message edited by: leo ]
--------------------
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
It's really starting to bite now. According to a survey of my subject association, the National Association of Teachers of RE: quote:
that one third of schools are failing to provide Key Stage 4 pupils with their legal entitlement to RE, and that a quarter of schools have cut posts for specialist RE teachers......Two-thirds of schools reported a drop in entries for the GCSE full course in RS, and more than half said that they had no entries for the RS short course for 2014. In one fifth of schools and academies, teachers were given less time in RS than in other subjects to prepare students for exams.
Their spokesperson said quote:
Educationally successful nations such as Singapore, often cited as an example by Mr Gove, increasingly perceived the importance of RE, and were increasing their provision in the subject
--------------------
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
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
