COMMENTS ON WORKING PAPER 7

p.2  Q.1a

Mr. Forsyth takes us straight to the philosophical problem at the heart of the R.E. discussion. Is R.E. to be taught from a standpoint of belief or non-belief, and is the society from which the children are drawn a Christian one? If the curriculum is to be relevant to a plural, multi-ethnic and multi-faith society it is essential in the first place that its philosophical basis be clear and explicit. What does the curriculum development team understand by religion, in what complexity and variety do they consider society, and why do they think it necessary to teach the former to the children of the latter?

Religion sits uneasy in a secular curriculum, as secularists see no intellectual justification for what a believer considers to be simple truth, and must therefore attempt to teach a subject that is outside their experience or understanding. In this situation it is indeed possible to follow a secular-anthropological approach, but hard to see why the agnostic eye should look any more favourably on one manifestation of the illogical than another. I think that such an approach needs to be free to examine all shades of religious experience, as well as all expressions of dogmatic and illogical beliefs including politics and the natural sciences. At least that would be honest.

This may well suit the parents of agnostics. If such a teaching approach is used in R.E. for children committed to the faith of their parents, however, it is hard to see how it can be other than a challenge to their faith while simultaneously unsuited to the provision of any real education as to how they might defend it. The secular approach also has great difficulty in justifying moral values without the philosophical underpinning of faith, leading to an inevitable undermining of those values.

If it is felt that even the Christian faith needs to be directly sustained within the classroom as an integral and essential part of our society, this is a different curriculum entirely, though not necessarily any easier to construct. Whose understanding of Christianity is to be taken as a norm, Free Church or New Age; the Church of Scotland, Unitarians, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Quakers, Baptists, Jehovah's Witnesses or Moonies? Even if such differing views could be reconciled, however, such a curriculum could never suit the requirements of the plural society which it must serve.

If Christianity is to be the basis of syllabuses of R.E. in all schools, I would rather that it was taught from the viewpoint of believers rather than secular non-believers. Nonetheless, in either case it must be expected that many muslim parents will wish to withdraw their children from such classes, as the very least they would expect from their children's R.E. curriculum is that their faith is treated with impartiality.

Q.1b

How does Mr. Forsyth define religious observance, and what does he consider to be its value? Does he have any preformulated justification for such a statement, or is his opinion based on personal belief, faith or dogma? Are any and all varieties of religious observance to be treated as equally valid and perhaps interchangeable, or is Christian worship of some specific kind considered to preferable? Does his recommendation mean that muslims will be provided with time and facilities within the school to make their obligatory prayers at the required times.

p.3  Q.2

From a secular point of view this is reasonable, but from a faith viewpoint religion is more than a significant area of human experience. It is worthy of study because it provides a basis for understanding Truth.

Q.3

Defining moral values as separable from religion and relevant in a cross-curricular fashion in a way that R.E. is not, simultaneously defines religion as something which is not relevant in a similar universal way. If religion is seen to be separable from moral values it entirely loses its point, divorcing it from essential truths, its societal practicality and it complete integration into the conceptual structures of the individual. Religions become defined by what makes them different, rather than what they contribute to the understanding of the truth of the human condition. Values by their nature are unquantifiable, and as such are only justifiable in relation to eternal values. I therefore consider all moral values to be intrinsically religious. If you pluck the wings from a butterfly they may be examined for their distinctiveness and beauty, but they no longer have the capacity to fly.

Q.4

Without the ultimate justice of the afterlife (should you believe in it), what justification can there be for suggesting that honesty and fairness are preferable to cheating, opportunism and lies? There is more to values than appreciation of their commonality. In the personal process of clarifying values and decision making, which is essential to the education of the individual, are any norms or limits to be defined?

p.4  Q.5

"identify ... experience" - The problem with this section is not so much what it says but what it doesn't. For example, who is to define what are important characteristics - believers in the faiths being considered - or not? Unfortunately, it is only possible to ascertain the constraints of definition from the body of the document, and whereas it may possibly be a satisfactory structure for examining Christianity, it is really inadequate for dealing with Islam.

"appreciate ... others:" - Who decides which common values are worthy of appreciation, and what reasons can be given for the "assimilation" of such values. (See Ans. Q.4)

"develop ... ways" - Are pupils to be encouraged to critically evaluate the religious beliefs of their parents?

Q.6

This reduces the teaching of moral values to less than 1% of the curriculum, less than 10 minutes a week. This is totally and ridiculously inadequate. Can it really be that moral values are worth so much less than physics or chemistry?

Q.7

No violent reaction.

p.5  Q.8

This grouping may suit the Christian or agnostic child, but giving precedence to Christianity in this way, while bundling all other world faiths into one ill-fitting bag is hardly ideal for the muslim child. (See Ans. Q.1) Of course it can be said that muslim children need to understand the Christian culture and heritage that surrounds them, but is it not at least equally important that they understand the Islamic culture and heritage they share with their parents? If it is recognised that Christian children require the time allocation devoted to the study of Christianity that is suggested, then is it not more important for muslim children, surrounded by proselytizing Christian groups, with Harry Secombe on T.V. on Sundays, and Christmas decorations in the shops from September, to be given as much time devoted to their own spiritual traditions. Do muslims need more or less knowledge of Christianity, more or less educational inclusion of Islam, than Christian children in these same surroundings?

Q.9

O.K.

Q.10

The identified strands may be a satisfactory approach for Christians, and even for those from other religions if they are considered standing alone. The problem comes from trying to find one universal format that covers all faiths. It may be possible to look at Islam from the points of view set out in the strands, but there are serious faults in this system which can be seen quite clearly when one applies it to Islam. The strands are used to shape Islam to a secular anthropological viewpoint. The authors of the report clearly believe it possible to fit all religions into one pattern, suggesting that this is a detached "objective" stance, disregarding the fact that the way you group things determines the way you see them, and seemingly unaware that muslims may well not recognize their own religion from their description. Is it more useful to a child to learn what muslims think, or what non-muslims think they think. On the curriculum development group there seems to have been an equal number representing each minority - i.e. zero. Is religion to be taught from outside or within? Music can be taught as notation, notes explained as frequencies, but it is not the same as listening to it.

By forcing Islam into a conceptual framework that is not its own, comparisons between religions are suggested which are not necessarily relevant.

"Celebrations, Festivals, Ceremonies & Customs" often delineate and separate religions rather than showing their commonality, and whereas ceremonies may be central to Catholicism, they are not that important to a muslim. Similarly with

"Sacred Writings, Stories, and Key Figures". How do you define a Sacred Text? It has often been pointed out that the Qur'an in Islam is not equivalent to the Bible in Christianity, but has a significance more akin to Christ in Christianity. This point is important to understand whether a muslim or not. Who are the key figures in Islam, the Companions, Al-Ghazali or Ibn Khaldun or others who shaped muslim thought? In Christianity does it include Thomas Aquinas as well as the Apostles, and is Jesus comparable to these?

"Beliefs" - what do we mean by belief? Do we mean belief without proof i.e. Faith, and do we also consider dogma in science and politics? (See Ans. Q.1) 

"Sacred Places, Worship, and Symbols" - how do we define worship? In Islam worship is not a ritual, but a 24 hour a day spiritual practise involving working, studying, and playing the best we can for the greater glory of God. Salaat is not Prayer as non-muslims might understand it, and might well be better compared to Communion. My position with regard to Moral Values and Attitudes, I have already described. (See Ans. Qs. 3 & 4)

In relation to these strands, every faith except Christianity is grouped in a sub-section , "Other Religions", shared by Muslims with Buddhists, Hindus, Jews, and Sikhs to mention just those named. What percentage of the syllabus teaches Islam to a muslim child? It is necessary for muslim children to be able to extend their faith and moral values across the curriculum, and to have their religion presented to them in a way that reflects their religion's own conceptual basis, not in a way that suits their educators. The education system has more than a responsibility to the child when it takes the child from the parents on trust and their taxes are paying for the service.

p.6  Q.11

With regard to the identified strands for Personal Search, the topics considered of course have great importance in Islam, but as with the strands for the "Other World Religions", they seem quite arbitrary and unrelated to the conceptual structures of Islam itself.

Q.12

In the light of prior criticisms, I am pleased to see that teachers are urged to use the Attainment Targets in a flexible manner. I don't see how it can be done any other way.

Q.13

For muslim children's education to be considered comprehensive and progressive, it is necessary for them not only to acquire information but also learn how to live out their moral values (assimilating them indeed!). For a muslim it is pointless to be able to give a list of moral values if they are not being put into practice.

Q.14-18

Not being involved at classroom level, I am not qualified to comment on these.

p.9  Q.19

O.K.

Q.20

Ah, well it can be guaranteed that Islam will get a special mention when equal opportunities and women's rights are mentioned. Is it possible that the group have failed to shake off a few preconceptions and stereotypes of their own?

p.10  Q.21

O.K.

Q.22

Are serious efforts yet made "to ensure that religions are presented in a fair and accurate way that adherents of that religion would recognise and subscribe to"? If so, how is it possible that all the major world religions are expected to fit into the same thematic boxes?

p.11  Q.23

(See Ans. Q.1)

Q.24

O.K.

p.12 Q.25

As provision is made for denominational schools in Scotland, presumably there is no theoretical objection to the setting up of muslim schools as part of the system equivalent to Catholic schools. If such muslim schools should come to pass, is it really being suggested that this working paper would be useable in their R.E. classes?

Q.26-32

Pass