Simon Barrow (London, Ekklesia): It seems the National Union of Teachers thinks it can square the circle. Rightly critical of single-faith schools segmenting education, it is suggesting instead that all schools should become practising multi-faith institutions, so that existing faith schools can be stripped of their powers to control their own admissions, select pupils according to their religion, and screen out teachers or heads with the ‘wrong' outlook.
The media has particularly highlighted the suggestion that pupils from different faith backgrounds should be offered instruction in their own religion, provided with prayer facilities and offered a choice of religious holidays. The legally required daily act of "mainly Christian" worship would be widened to include all faiths, the NUT's annual report suggests.
As a way of provoking a debate, this is bold but problematic. The idea is that strong religious lobbies can be brought on board with publicly funded schools being for pupils of all backgrounds (a wholly laudable aim) by making special provision for faith formation within, not in addition to, the normal patterns of school life. Not surprisingly, the National Secular Society objects. So does the Church of England, partly because this would dilute its existing interests, but also because, as it points out, the role of a school should be to teach people about religion, not to bring them up within a faith, which is the job of religious communities.
On this last point, I strongly agree and would want to carry that insight to its logical conclusion. The 1944 Education Act provisions on Religious Education and collective worship, reinforced in the 1988 Education Reform Act in England and Wales, have long had their day. In today's plural society, pupils certainly need to be given the opportunity to learn about the different world religions and also about non-religious beliefs and life stances. We are harmed by ignorance of the various convictions that continue to shape (and sometimes misshape) our world. But this is about critical learning, not propaganda. As for worship, that is the business of faith communities, not public institutions like schools. Assemblies should be civic and inclusive in character.
As part of the recognition of the place of schools in their local and global communities, it is also right that provision should be made for believers to have space for voluntary devotions and for after-school activities related to their beliefs - in exactly the same way as other clubs, social and non-religious cultural activities are recognised. This is something that both believers and non-believers should be able to support, in addition to properly pedagogic (informative and evaluative) education within the curriculum concerning our different life stances and beliefs.
What the NUT seems to be proposing, on the other hand, goes in a very different direction - towards making "confessional" (conviction based) religious teaching a core school activity. That confuses the role of the school with that of the church, mosque, temple, gurdwara or synagogue. Moreover, as currently conceived, a ‘multi-faith agenda' will not make proper provision, as it should, for the needs of the growing number of non-religious pupils.
Working out how pupils from different faith and non-faith backgrounds can be supported, recognised and encouraged to learn from one another in diverse community-based schools is an important task. But this is not the way to do it.
