Writer Becky Hunter Kelm reflects on the first Northern Ireland primary teacher in a decade to withdraw from teaching Religious Education, using a conscience clause within the Education and Libraries (Northern Ireland) Order 1986. She considers what the decision means for how RE is taught in today’s schools.
Apparently, there is a 40-year-old law that allows teachers to withdraw from teaching religious education (RE). Who knew? I certainly didn’t, and I’m married to a primary school principal, did half of an RE PGCSE after uni, and spent 10 years as a schools worker supporting RE departments!
So what’s the law that Javed Love, aged 40, implemented to withdraw from teaching RE? The Education and Libraries (Northern Ireland) Order 1986 requires that schools hold ‘collective worship, whether in one or more than one assembly’ every day. It also holds that schools deliver RE lessons based on the ‘Holy scriptures’, but governing boards in different schools have input into what is delivered in RE lessons, so long as it aligns with the statutory curriculum.
READ MORE: What does the future hold for religious teaching in schools?
Article 22 of the law continues to stipulate that a teacher has the right to withdraw from teaching RE or from attending collective worship, such as assemblies. Teachers who wish to withdraw can make a request to the school governors solely on grounds of conscience.
So why did Love engage this clause? He told BBC News NI that he was not ‘anti-Christian,’ and did not ‘have a problem teaching children about Christianity,’ but the current RE system has ‘one dominant worldview’.
Love stated that the current RE and collective worship presented one perspective, and didn’t help students to think critically, so they come to their own conclusions and choose what to believe and what not to believe.
READ MORE: What do the new rules around sex education mean for your child?
The Supreme Court agrees, with the judges ruling that: RE was not taught in ‘an objective, critical, and pluralistic manner,’ and that could amount to ’indoctrination.
As a Christian, and despite Christianity being the main religion in Northern Ireland, I think Love has a valid point. RE needs to be taught objectively - and the Supreme Court agrees, with the judges ruling that: RE was not taught in ‘an objective, critical, and pluralistic manner,’ and that could amount to indoctrination. The RE Syllabus is going to be reformed, and Love said he would absolutely return to teaching RE if this were the case.
I think it’s vital that RE is taught objectively, giving children broad perspectives on world religions and on life without religion. When RE teaches children to be self-reflective, this is also a key tool that equips them for so much more than picking a faith as they grow up- it helps them make decisions, tell right from wrong, and become self-aware. In a fast-paced global society, children need to learn how the whole world thinks, and believes because those beliefs impact the decisions that make the world go round!
I agree with Love’s point that Primary RE should be inclusive of other world religions, but I think the way they are more fully covered in secondary school is beneficial. Love said: ‘I just think it places a burden on a six-year-old or a seven-year-old to understand where Christianity sits in relation to other religions or no religion,’ he said. But have we ever considered that learning the foundations of Christianity first could be a helpful starting place for children? Surely we should support young minds in solidifying their understanding of how one faith works before they consider the plethora of other worldviews in our beautiful, diverse world?
READ MORE: Taylor Swift’s religious lyrics prove Mr Bennet right
Of course, RE in primary school should not indoctrinate, and it is certainly not the place for evangelism.
Of course, RE in primary school should not indoctrinate, and it is certainly not the place for evangelism. The RE curriculum recognises the role of people of faith in RE, and so there is an opportunity for the church to get alongside their local primary school and see how they can support teachers, not to tell children to ‘become Christians’ but to provide them with real-life examples of what faith looks like lived out.
Parents can withdraw their children from RE under the law, so it makes sense to extend that same right to teachers. Fair play to Love for living out his convictions. I live in a Türkiye where one lesson per week is on religion, solely on Islam, and as a Christian family, we chose to withdraw our 11-year-old from those lessons, and interestingly, it is not the only child of parents who chose this.
My son has recently been asking us about why we made this call. He wants to learn about world religions, so we will be doing our due diligence as parents and homeschooling this part of the British curriculum. I want my son to understand that faith looks different for different people. I want him to be empathetic and understanding of different worldviews. My prayer, though, as his Christian mum, is that his RE experience would cause him to dive deeper into faith for himself. And I think this should be the role of RE in schools in general.
No comments yet