Nitpicky? Hell yes.
Started by Recusant, November 25, 2015, 07:40:49 PM
QuoteIn a landmark judgment handed down in the High Court today, a judge has ruled in favour of the three humanist parents and their children who challenged the Government's relegation of non-religious worldviews in the latest subject content for GCSE Religious Studies. In his decision, Mr Justice Warby stated that the Government had made an 'error of law' in leaving non-religious worldviews such as humanism out of the GCSE, amounting to 'a breach of the duty to take care that information or knowledge included in the curriculum is conveyed in a pluralistic manner.' The British Humanist Association (BHA), which was responsible for bringing the case and has supported the three families throughout, has welcomed the landmark decision.While the Government will not be immediately compelled to change the GSCE, religious education syllabuses around the country will now have to include non-religious worldviews such as humanism on an equal footing, and pupils taking a GCSE will also have to learn about non-religious worldviews alongside the course.[Continues . . .]
Quote from: Essie Mae on December 01, 2015, 08:47:05 AMA good decision. Pupils need to see that having a religion does not make you morally superior in an way. (In fact, sometimes inducing a belief that other believers and 'nones' are worthless). Discovering that non-believers of all types are not only as law-abiding as everyone else, and even altruistic and self-sacrificing, will be a much needed revelation.
QuoteSchools must teach pupils that Britain is a Christian country and are entitled to prioritise the views of established religions over atheism, the Education Secretary has said.Nicky Morgan, the Education Secretary, today publishes new guidance to non-faith schools which makes clear that they do not need to give "equal parity" to non-religious views.It comes after humanists won a landmark High Court victory which found that the Education Secretary had unlawfully excluded atheism from the school curriculum.Mrs Morgan is concerned that humanists are using the courts as part of a "creeping ratchet effect" which will ultimately see primary schools forced to teach children about atheism.[Continues . . .]
Quote•Schools and Agreed Syllabus Conferences (ASCs) should be free to determine their ownapproach to the teaching of RE and the selection of the appropriate RS GCSE.• There is no requirement for an individual school's curriculum to mirror the make-up of thenational or local population, curriculums should continue to be locally determined.• Schools and ASCs are at liberty to use a range of relevant factors to determine their REcurriculum, including the intellectual rigour it presents and its role in supporting pupils'development as world citizens.• There is no obligation for any school or ASC to give equal air time to the teaching ofreligious and non-religious views.• Curriculum balance (and, therefore, compliance with statutory requirements) can beachieved across the key stages. There is no obligation on any school to cover the teachingof non-religious world views (or any other particular aspect of the RE curriculum) in keystage 4 specifically. Rather it is for schools and ASCs to determine how they meet theirwider obligations across the key stages.