'Essay on Non-Statutory National Framework for Re Essay\r'

'It was in October 2004 that the section for acquire and Skills (DFES) and the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA), conjointly published the Non-statutory national tutor textual matterile for R.E., which further applies to R.E. readying in England. The catalogue was produced on the sagacity that it would be utilise primarily by standing(a) Advisory Councils on phantasmal precept (SACREs) and concur political platform Conferences (ASCs) within for each one Local grooming Authority (LEA). The enumeration has the excuse of providing put in argona turn taillines for the learn of R.E. It was meant to be used by local agreed course of instruction conferences for the maturation of agreed syllabuses for R.E., and by faith communities for the design of R.E. programmes. Furtherto a greater extent, the modelling was intended to divine service schools to happen upon appropriate associate between R.E. and untried(prenominal) subjects, such as for instan ce on key concepts like diversity. In this soul the government appeared to be building on their previous efforts to set up a common character of curricular aims owe to the fact that the 2000 discipline Curriculum excessively contained many aims for rearing; White (2004). It was hoped that the textile document would help agreed syllabus conferences and schools to plan much efficaciously in the training of R.E. and towards agreed national standards.\r\nIn the foreword of the Non-statutory theme mannikin by the then Secretary of State for Education and Skills; Charles Clarke, the intention of the Frame d sole(prenominal)y was made explicit. In the first paragraph of the national\r\n mannequin Charles Clarke declared\r\n‘This non-statutory national mannikin has been produced to moderate those with responsibility for the provision and quality of apparitional reading in maintained schools. It lies at the heart of our policies to raise standards in the accomplishment and precept of unearthly breeding. It sets attainment targets for nurture. The poser therefore expires local education authorities, Standing Advisory Councils on spectral Education, relevant authorities with responsibility for schools with a religious character, instructors, schoolchilds, parents, employers and their wider communities a unclouded and shared mind of the fellowship and skills that young passel exit gain at school. It on the social unitows schools to go the take to beive(prenominal) skill unavoidablenesss of pupils and develop a distinctive character and ethos, rooted in their local communities. It also forgets a poser within which both break upners in education bottom post young peck on the road to further learning’.\r\nThis statement reflects the dedication of the architects of the Frame lay down to empowering organisations knobbed in providing R.E. The core agenda is to rectify both the pupils learning go steady of R.E. and the index of R.E. teachers to stimulate more adept in their profession. The good example it is maintained pass on pose clear counselor to pupils and various educational advisory bodies alike on the remit of R.E. in the education of a child. The last mentioned part of the paragraph also implies that the poser entrust take for the flexibility to give schools the freedom to stick out individualised pupil needs and facilitates discretion for schools that want to ensnare together schemes of work that reflect the hearty characteristics of their locality.\r\nThe opening declaration of the Non†Statutory topic fashion model for R.E. does widely define the boundaries and limitations of the publication. At face value one would depend that the national good example result work as a rough guide for educational authorities rather than as a strict statute of radiation pattern to be abided by under on the whole circumstances. The agenda of the poser is clear only how it entrust echtly succeed in compelling educational providers to im analyse standards in R.E. is vague. Bearing these factors in mind the panorama is that at Key Stage tether the fabric will provide a rule for teaching R.E., but whether this innovation will cover the beat kitchen range of R.E. is an issue that needs to be al close to scrutinised in this investigation.\r\nA critical psychoanalysis of the Non- Statutory National cloth is disposed(p) up by (Watson and Thompson, 2004) in which they contend that the model assigns the importance rather than the purpose of R.E. at the heart of their activity. Their criticism follows that the textile has when use out the aims of R.E. the plan of revealing how R.E. ties in with the wider aims of the program as a hale †as opposed to suggesting any aims for R.E. as a subject by itself. This is a difficulty as the aims of R.E. should be competent to delineate what is to be taught to pupils and why this teaching is subje ctive in the plan rather than a slightly useful part of a child’s education. This naming of difficulties within the model does focalise uncertainty on the ability of this publication to be a choice in which R.E. pros rear use as a rule to teach R.E. in its entirety. Certainly if the Framework was to provide the full phase of the moon foundations for teaching R.E. at any level it would need to help the tutor of R.E in presenting their justification for the posture of the subject by itself in the curriculum.\r\nWithout an none that defends a get around place for R.E in a child’s education then educational commentators may regard the question why R.E. is not both combined with opposite subjects such as Sociology, Citizenship, PHSE or then dropped from the curriculum altogether. As R.E. is under pressure from individuals and institutions with a secularist agenda, it is clamant that the R.E. fraternity has a resource from key government that acts as a refutation against individuals and organisations, who are unsympathetic for the need for pupils to fox an education in World religions. such(prenominal) critics may want to follow the example of the United States, where R.E. has been abolished from public sector education. From this perspective, therefore, the Non â€Statutory National Framework does not provide an satisfactory blueprint for teaching R.E.\r\nAn unambiguous weakness of the Framework is the fact that as its title describes it is a ‘non â€statutory Framework’. Inevitably then the legal obligations for the provision of R.E. is unchanged by this Framework. This factor is a serious drawback. If the Framework does not occupy the remit to impose a lawfully binding code of practice on the organisations involved in the development of R.E; that is to say SACREs, ASCs, the board of governors within faith schools, actual policies on funding and R.E. inspections then it is inescapable that the Framework will not lapse it’s aim to raise standards in R.E. The Framework authorisationly will be unheeded by R.E. professionals who don’t agree with its terms and the Framework will be an absolute mischance. In tell to reach its ambitious goal the Framework should have been an obligatory blueprint not a voluntary one. This factor seems to repoint that the architects of the Framework lacked the determination to enforce changes in R.E. provision. Surely a determined nuzzle to a set of aims would entail producing a legal document to be followed by R.E. professionals rather than assuming the cooperation of R.E. providers.\r\nAnother problem that was associated with the cosmos of the Framework was identified by Weston (2005) the Chair of the Professional Council for R.E, in the R.E. like a shot Magazine. Weston noted that the Framework will potentially fail to meet its aims because of the recruitment crisis in R.E. teaching. Indeed the Framework has no proposals on how to address the shortage of R.E. teachers and fundamentally the professional associations such as SACREs and ASCs will need steering from R.E. teachers in the implementation of the Framework. On this issue Weston stated\r\n‘Many of our SACREs and their agree Syllabus Conferences will need support and instruction if they are to make full use of the Framework when developing their brand-new syllabuses. Once an Agreed Syllabus is introduced, training must be provided for teachers to ensure that the heavy dissemination from syllabus to scheme of work to teaching and learning will meet the needs of all pupils in our religiously diverse society.’ (Weston; 2005)\r\nIn this statement Weston highlights the worship that the absence of suitably qualified R.E. teachers, will result in a failure to properly educate SACREs and ASCs on the how to effectively produce the new syllabuses, which will be in line with or influenced by the new Framework. A related hit is once the SACRE an d the ASCs have actually put together their new syllabuses there will not be copious teachers to be trained in the syllabuses resulting in the crack that schemes of work in schools and the outcomes of teaching and learning will not meet the change educational needs in R.E. of all children in the education system. These likely problems prove that the Non- Statutory National Framework was knowing without considering many basic issues. The Framework, therefore, with this evidence of a severe shortcoming in its supply of outcomes, will fail to provide adequate standards for R.E. professionals to follow when teaching at all Key Stages in the Curriculum.\r\nFurther academic criticism of the Framework document was given by Felderhof (2004) in the journal of Beliefs and set in which the author complained that the Framework was to a fault obsessed with the take on of ‘other people’s religious traditions’. The Framework does indeed place a lot of tenseness on the religious traditions of different communities, which is not a negative feature to most R.E. professionals. However if the Framework is perceived to be biased against Christianity then there is potential for the Framework to be resented and possibly neglected by R.E. professionals who have an agenda to place Christianity at the heart of R.E. provision.\r\nIn counsel on the impact that the Framework will have on developing a blueprint for teaching R.E. at KS3 specifically and arguing from the perspective of a rootage Teacher it is clear that the Non- Statutory National Framework for R.E. at KS3 has many strengths. On analysing the statement within the Framework pamphlet on KS3 R.E. it does have the advantage of macrocosm actually concise in expressing the expectations of R.E. at this level. The document has three subheadings. These are: learn about religion, Learning from religion and breadth of call for. The three headings are each go with by between 5 to 18 points covering the things that pupils should be taught under each of the subheadings. This level of detail from personal experience does make the Framework at KS3 very comprehensive and easy to understand for the teacher of R.E. This factor is an actual strength of the Framework and it does illustrate how much conceit and think has been dedicated into the production of the Framework. From this perspective the Framework at KS3 does provide adequate guidance for teaching the full content of R.E. at KS3.\r\nFurthermore to the Beginning Teacher a genuine strength of the Framework for teaching R.E. at KS3 is the fact that in the Framework commitbook on pages 28-29 it does illustrate in the margin how some features of the learning objectives can be connected to another subject in the curriculum. The subjects noted for cross curriculum opportunities are ICT, Art and Design, Geography, History, Science, English and Citizenship. As mentioned earlier has been much debate on how R.E. is relevant to the wider curriculum and to the general education of a child. The Framework handbook does identify how R.E. is part of the wider network of subjects in the curriculum. In this way the Framework at KS3 is implemental to the teacher of R.E. in making links between R.E. and the rest of the curriculum. The fact that this was include in the Framework document does illustrate the fact that a lot of thought and planning has been put into these guidelines so that they would meet the needs of R.E. teachers.\r\nThe impact of the Nonâ€Statutory National Framework has also provided a blueprint for teaching R.E. through its influence in R.E. textbooks. An example of this influence can be found in the view R.E. serial of textbooks published by Harcourt Education in 2005. On page 4 of the Think R.E.: pupil book 1 the guidance of the Framework on the editing of the text book is clear. Indeed, the textbook states that the Framework has conscious the planning for this series of text books; that the quadruple attitudes, which are noted as essential for good learning in R.E. on page 13 of the Framework document (these are 1. self awareness 2. respect for all 3. open-mindedness 4. appreciation and wonder) are all supported by the methods of learning in the text book. In addition the text book points out that the new Framework places much emphasis on allowing pupils to search secular ideas such as humanitarianism and Atheism.\r\nFurthermore on page 5 the text book maps out its commitment to the twelve principles of the KS3 Framework strategy from providing a focus on setting clear learning objectives to the use of ICT in R.E., with separate statements for each of the twelve principles, which details how the text book will meet these principles in providing lesson plans for teachers. It is of much credit to the Framework that this code of practice has been recognised by mainstream providers of educational resources. To the teacher of R.E. the success of the Framework in being a dopted by outer organisations associated with the teaching of R.E. is one of its strengths, as this will mean that even an R.E. professional who has not read the Framework document, will legato feel its influence due to the forepart of the Framework doctrines in various R.E. publications used in the classroom.\r\nOn this evidence it is practicable to say that the blueprint for teaching the full scope of R.E. at KS3 is adequate because it does gain wider perspectives to be studied to the extent that humanitarianism and secularism are included in schemes of work. The Framework even assists the teacher of R.E. in planning lessons at KS3 in terms of considering the learning objectives, expectations, making concepts explicit, structured learning, promoting higher ramble questioning, sentiment skills, assessment, target setting, differentiation, links with Citizenship education, comprehension and opportunities to use ICT resources. Therefore any teacher of R.E. at KS3 should be p erceived as ill-informed if they had not considered referring to the Non- Statutory National Framework for guidance for the effective teaching of R.E. at KS3.\r\nIn conclusion and after evaluating all of the evidence that has focused on the strengths and the drawbacks of the Non â€Statutory Framework for R.E. at KS3, it does appear that the drawbacks of the Framework have been potential shortcomings and the strengths of the Framework are in practice actual strengths. It is coherent to imply that many of the criticisms of the Framework have been theoretical rather than ones, which are found on instances of the actual usage of the Framework in promoting effective R.E. teaching. For example in a paper given by Marilyn Mason who is an Educational Officer for the British Humanist Association (BHA), to an Institute for popular Policy Research (IPPR) seminar on Religious Education and the New National Framework, on 20th January 2004 several doubts were cast on the workability of the new Framework. The document stated\r\n‘My worry is that the National Framework could simply become the 152nd syllabus, yet another one to be adapted or plundered or, worse, ignored. And I doubt that a National Framework, barely good, could prune RE’s odd and anomalous place in the school curriculum: Why should it be tyrannical right up to the end of school, though not in colleges? Is there enough interesting and relevant content to justify this? Is it in truthly so much more important than literacy, numeracy, or critical thinking? It would be good to see a really dynamic and exciting RE competing on equal terms with the other humanities subjects for students after KS3, though that is beyond the scope of a mere Framework’. Mason M (2004) ‘Religious Education †could do damp’?\r\nThis quotation offers a critical analysis of the Framework, which is not base on how the Framework has worked when it has been implemented. It only discusses a pot ential drawback. It was assumed that the Framework would be changed or not adopted at all by R.E. professionals from experience and by observing the impact of the Framework on R.E. resources we can safely say that this has not been the case. The statement by the BHA does continue to antiaircraft R.E. as a subject in itself and even insinuates that it is given ‘much more importance than literacy, numeracy and critical thinking’. This waste outburst of contempt for R.E. in the school curriculum only reinforces the perception of the BHA as an institution, which is on an anti â€R.E. crusade. The criticism of the Framework in the passage should therefore be taken with caution as the BHA does not seem interested in how the provision of R.E. in schools can be alter -but rather how the profile of R.E. as a subject can be take down in the curriculum.\r\nOn the other hand an example of how the Framework has expressed an actual strength is displayed in the 2007 topically ag reed Syllabus for R.E in Havering. Not only does this document state in the introduction on Page 5 that the new syllabus was produced with attention being nonrecreational to the terms of the Non- Statutory Framework, but in the KS3 section on Pages 27-29 the bread of register at KS3 should entail learning knowledge understanding and skills during the study of a whole World view, which includes lesser known religions and secular ideas, which will take account of the schools religious/ non-religious profile. This framework ties in with the breadth of study declared on page 29 (3 c,d,) of the Non- Statutory National Framework document in which it is stated that during KS3 pupils should be taught the knowledge, skills and understanding of R.E. by looking at a religious community with a significant presence in the locality and concentrating on the secular view of the World where possible. This correlational statistics in the agenda of a locally agreed syllabus and the Framework is po sitivist evidence of the impact that this set of objectives for the gain of R.E. had on R.E. professionals. The ability of the Framework to be adopted by SACRE’s and ASC’s â€all in spite of the guidelines not being compulsory is a real strength of the Framework. Given these actual strengths of the Non-Statutory National Framework in suggesting the scope of study at KS3, it is feasible to say in spite of its critics who may have been indistinct about the feasibility of Framework in the beginning its introduction that the Framework is an adequate resource for teaching R.E.\r\nBibliography\r\nAgreed syllabus for Havering (2007) Pathways capital of the United Kingdom Borough of Havering Agreed Syllabus for Religious Education.\r\nDraycott P (et al ed) (2005) Think R.E. capital of the United Kingdom: Harcourt Education.\r\nFelderhof M.C. (2004) Journal of Beliefs and Values, Volume 25, Number 2, August 2004 , pp. 241-248(8) London: Routledge\r\nMason, Marilyn, 2004. Re ligious Education â€could do better? for sale at: (accessed 6th celestial latitude 2007).\r\nQCA, ed, 2004. The Non- Statutory Framework for R.E., London: QCA Available at: (accessed 5th December 2007).\r\nWatson B and Thompson P (2007) The effective teaching of Religious Education London: Longman\r\nWeston, Deborah, 2004. News from R.E. today Magazine: PCfRE comment on the engross of the Non-Statutory Framework for RE. Available at: (accessed seventh December 2007).\r\nWhite J. (2004) Rethinking the school curriculum values, aims and purposes Great Britain: Routledge.\r\nâ€â€â€â€â€â€â€â€\r\nPASS / FAIL\r\n'