What Do They Teach at These British Schools?
Matt Cardy / GettyAlmost two-thirds of British adults say school children need to learn about Christianity in order to understand English history, culture, and way of life, according to a new poll from Oxford University. But current religious education courses that teach Christianity can be "incoherent" or lack "intellectual development," says Oxford's Nigel Fancourt.
One solution, according to Fancourt, is a new program designed by Oxford's department of education to improve how Christianity is taught. The release of the poll, which surveyed 1,800 British adults, coincides with the program's release.
In England, state schools require mandatory religious education classes until the age of 16. Moreover, law requires that school curriculum reflects Christianity as the country's main religious tradition.
However, some teachers and humanist groups fear that teaching Christianity amounts to "evangelizing." Andrew Copson of the British Humanist Association points out that the Oxford poll "showed that people in Britain primarily viewed Christianity as a matter of history and cultural heritage rather than as a matter of religion."
The British National Secular Society also questioned the poll's results, speculating that it was conducted by "evangelical Christians surreptitiously pushing forward their agenda under a respectable academic cover."
But the debate over religious education in British schools has been long and ongoing—and recently sparked legal changes to a funding agreement for state-funded, faith-based "free schools."
In July, the U.K. approved the opening of more than 100 free, state-funded schools, a third of which identified themselves as religious schools. Twenty of those schools are "designated [as] faith schools and will be able to select some pupils on this basis," The Guardian reported. The schools are scheduled to open as early as September 2013.
But the program has prompted concerns about creationismbeing taught in the state-funded classrooms. The British Department for Education banned creationism from being taught in science classes, but education secretary Michael Gove said he would consider applications for those who wanted to teach creationismin other disciplines on an individual basis. In July, he approved funding for three "free schools" with creationist views.
Now, though, an amendment to the original approval will add a new element to creationist free schools' science curricula: evolution.
Original agreements allowed the schools to receive government funds as long as they pledged not to teach creationism in science classes. Now, a new clause in the schools' funding agreements states that schools also must teach evolution "as a comprehensive, coherent and extensively evidenced theory."
The amendments are the result of a campaign by secular and humanist groups, including the Royal Society, who argued that creationist free schools "could exploit loopholes in the rules" and still manage to present creationism as credible by promoting it in religious education courses and simultaneously omitting any mention of evolution in science classes.
According to the BBC, schools minister Lord Hill expressed his support for the change, stating, "While we have always been clear that we expect to see evolution included in schools' science curricula, this new clause will provide more explicit reassurance that free schools will have to meet that expectation."
Star Trek Into Darkness

(on articles open to the public, you must at least register for a free account).












Comments
Howard Pepper
I'm not a Brit, but appreciate the comments about getting our terminology right when reporting on matters in Great Britain and/or England. As to the subject, while the English system of religious education is necessarily a point of conflict, we in the US would do well to allow such conflict to penetrate our educational system more deeply. By that I mean that I think it should be clear we have far too little education ABOUT religion in public OR private schooling. Traditional Christianity has been, will continue to be resistant to being pooled together with other religions in a "neutral" (or as objective as possible) kind of education. But that seems the most workable and a much needed approach. What else can/should be taught that mostly side-steps specific dogma of ANY religion is a personal and social psychology of religion. "Psych of Religion" was an academic field in its own right for a couple decades arnd 100 years ago. Unfortunate it got relegated to a minor backwater.
Heather Macarthur
Indeed Dr Brown...I wholeheartedly agree. As to the schools...this report acts as if state funded religious schools were new to England (or even Britain in this context). I would think the Catholic Church and Church of England would be surprised by that idea as these institutions have maintained religious schools with state funds for many many years. I wonder how many of the new schools are of different faiths to Christianity and how then will they teach that curriculum requirement about Christianity??
DR ALISTAIR BROWN
Great article, and very interesting to a Brit living in Chicago area. But as a Scotsman I cannot help but notice you interchange 'Britain' and 'England' as if the words mean the same. England is only one part of Britain. The Oxford survey behind the piece, and I read the link you include, almost certainly only covers England and not the whole of Britain. (Note that in its report 'Britain' is never mentioned.) Scotland, for example, has its own education system. I know this sounds unimportant to most, but no true Scotsman can ever allow the word Britain to be equated with England!