A challenging article on the state of Religious Education in English
state education, and what we should do about it, by Corax
Bobcat has asked me to write something for these pages about Paganism
and education in the Secondary School. I suppose that I had better start
by unpacking my credentials for writing this; I’m a Pagan (Wiccan,
for those of you who are picky), and also Head of RE (religious education)
in a large Comprehensive state school, so I have a good appreciation (I
hope) of what goes on either side of the fence!
In order to discover where Paganism stands in relation to good practice,
let us start off by examining what RE is about, in the most general sense.
The “aims” of RE, according to a variety of different individuals
may include:
- Making pupils more aware of their Christian heritage (with a hidden agenda of making them good
Christians)
- Making pupils more aware of the diversity of our multi-cultural society.
- Making pupils more moral (!?!)
- Helping pupils to develop their own spirituality
- Helping pupils to ask and formulate answers to ultimate questions
- Plus a host of other things.
This is not helped by the fact that RE is not centrally proscribed; while
there are examples of good practice that people are supposed to cover,
RE is locally agreed by each education authority’s “Standing
Advisory Council on Religious Education” (usually known as SACRE),
which means that RE in one education authority may have a different emphasis
from the neighbouring authorities, depending upon the constituent members
of the SACRE. SACRE is usually composed of Teachers, Union representatives,
Church of England representatives, members from other churches, and members
from other religions. In practice, the Church of England usually have
more representatives than other groups, thus ensuring a Christian bias
to each SACRE. “Other religions” are usually co-opted members
who represent the major six world religions that are supposed to be the
focus of RE (Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism and Sikhism).
Thus, for the vast majority of classroom practitioners, Paganism is not
a part of their understanding of RE.
As a digression about the Church of England, about ten years ago I attended
a conference on the Future of Religious Education at St. George’s
House, Windsor Castle. This is an establishment think tank about religious
issues; and the attitudes of the establishment were obvious; for these
guys (and I use the word advisedly), RE was about increasing “market
share” in the future. The conference members were, with two exceptions,
clergy men, and the only other teacher present was the Chaplain of Eton
College (who I felt lacked a certain knowledge of the state sector). So
this agenda, largely discredited in the public sector, still lurks in
the church.
Each SACRE publishes a syllabus of what is supposed to be studied at
each key stage, and RE departments are assessed by OFSTED in how well
they meet those criteria. Although at school level, much of what is taught
is determined by the Head of Department; if they are of the opinion that
RE is primarily about Christianity, then their teaching and syllabus will
reflect that. The diversity of views amongst practising RE teachers means
that school (a) may well teach RE primarily as an exploration of Christianity,
with a nod towards the rest of the big six, while neighbouring school
(b) may have an emphasis upon developing pupil’s spirituality, which
is much more pupils centred. Of course, the other influence here is the
academic interest of the teachers; most of whom have “Theology”
degrees, which really only give an insight into the Near Eastern Monotheistic
traditions (Judaism, Islam, and Christianity). Eastern religions are generally
taught very badly (if at all), and sometimes I think that it is better
that they are not done, than someone does such a poor job that the religious
ideas don’t get across.
RE in each school is also heavily influenced by the attitude of the management
team; in schools where it is seen as unnecessary, the management team
may go out of their way to obstruct it; limiting funding, timing and staffing;
in schools where it is seen as important, it may do well. Again, this
may be influenced by the Head of Department; if they are persistent enough,
they maybe able to change the attitude of management. There are also a
lot of schools where the RE department is limited to one specialist who
has to produce resources and lesson plans for co-opted non-specialists
who are forced to teach a little RE to top up their timetable. (The few
who are enthusiastic about this inevitably bring their own agenda to it).
Other significant individuals include governors and parents. Governors
are ultimately responsible for hiring and firing, and I know from personal
experience that their prejudices may effect the employment of an RE teacher
who does not share their views. Parental pressure is also important to
management teams, who may be cowed by a wave of letters from a particular
church (again, this is something that certain evangelical churches can
be quite organised at). Also, this is one subject where everyone is an
expert; Maths teachers don’t get parents telling them what they
should teach, but ask any RE teacher how often this happens.
So what can Pagans do about this? Well, there is no reason why you should
not be on a SACRE (as far as I’m aware there are no Pagans on any
SACREs, although I would be delighted to be corrected). Don’t go
with a heavy duty agenda though; you’ll just piss everyone off,
and only demonstrate that everything they were scared of is true! More
practically, Schools are crying out for governors (although Parent Governors
are elected, and your chances of running successfully on a solely pagan
ticket are limited). You should also remember that these positions are
ones of great responsibility, which means interminable meetings, lots
of politics, and no thanks whatsoever. You have been warned!
So with all this, it’s a wonder that any RE actually gets taught
at all! So many people who think that they own it, each with their own
agenda of what it is about, and what it’s outcomes should be! Few,
if any of these groups would be enthusiastic about Paganism.
Then we move onto classroom practice. I will begin by differentiating
between EXPLICIT paganism and IMPLICIT Paganism. By Explicit Paganism
I mean Paganism treated as another religion to be studied, examining its
teachings, beliefs, practices, texts, characters etc. By Implicit Paganism
I mean “Pagan attitudes” or “Pagan-ness”; an openness
to individual expressions of spirituality, an enthusiasm for finding your
own way.
So, let us imagine that we are an RE department who has determined to
teach a module on Paganism in the UK. Leaving aside the other issues (such
as what we leave out from elsewhere, because, don’t get me wrong,
teaching the big six is important, even if only for cultural understanding),
we are faced with some difficulties.
If we are going to teach explicit paganism (in the way that we might
cover say Buddhism or Islam), what are we going to teach; Wicca, Druidry,
Asatru, Chaos Magick, Thelema? One of the glories of Paganism for me is
it’s eclectic nature, which militates against being able to do it
justice in the classroom. Is there a single statement that we could make
about the beliefs and practices of all pagans? I doubt it, and herein
lies the difficulty. When we, as Pagans can’t put our fingers on
common ground, how will the non-pagan, yet keen, RE teacher do so? A little
bit of research might be done, but the vast majority of books on the subject
are, lets face it, crap (and you can quote me on that). There are a few
good academically inclined surveys (Adler, Harvey, Hutton, Luhrmann),
but these are not terribly accessible to the seeker. The Pagan Federation
publish some good introductory leaflets, but these, again, only represent
one facet of what Paganism is. So our teacher is stumped. There are no
places to go to, and it is difficult to find people to come in and talk,
so it’s pretty difficult. (Plus of course, you don’t want
delegations of evangelical Christians blockading the Head’s office,
or your picture on the front of the News of the World)
The other difficultly is who owns Paganism; whose Paganism is going to
be taught? A good way to understand this is to look at Hinduism (which
is very like Paganism in that it isn’t really a thing at all, nor
even a loose collection of similar things, but a vast, inchoate, and complex
structure). When Hinduism is taught in schools it often focuses upon one
aspect of the tradition; “Hindus believe in many gods” for
example. Now while this is true for some Hindus, it is not true for those
who are either monotheist, or atheist vedantins. Different parties are
trying to gain control of “what Hinduism is”; ISKCON and the
Swaminarayans are good examples of this; both teaching their vision of
dharma, and saying that “this is Hinduism”. Now of course,
they are both correct, but it is their individual vision of Hinduism,
and comes nowhere close to encapsulating the whole. The same difficulty
exists with Paganism; Paganism is not Wicca, nor is it Druidry, nor Thelema,
nor Asatru. Whose Paganism is going to get taught?
Implicit paganism is a much better bet. You could try some of the following
ideas:
- A module on tribal religion in the early years; you can examine shamanism, spirits, and the
formation of beliefs based upon the surrounding environment.
- The regular practice of stilling / meditation / guided fantasy.
- An open selection of reading in the school library.
- Inviting nationally known pagan speakers to sixth form conferences (Bobcat is good at this!)
- Doing optional sixth form modules on the practical aspects of creating a ritual
Above all, RE that is open, friendly, and enthusiastic, that responds
to pupils’ ideas and beliefs in a positive way, and that is open
to spiritual development, is one that will strengthen all pupils’
development.
So, for success, I suggest that we look at spirituality, another word
that has been mired in educational slime for a while, as schools are supposed
to be responsible for the spiritual development of their pupils. One of
the problems here is that nobody really knows what spirituality is (although,
of course, members of different faith communities all have a good idea).
In my last few schools I have used the following working definition, which
does not seek to define spirituality per se, but only to give an idea
of what we are talking about, when we talk about it (if that makes any
sense).
SPIRITUALITY.
As part of the whole college responsibility to nurture pupil’s spiritual
development, Religious Education has a particularly important role to
play. Spirituality is an innate part of the experience of being human.
It is a quest for wholeness and \ or happiness, which may be articulated
in a very wide variety of individual or corporate ways.
In religious terms it may involve the search for experience of the transcendent
(external) other, through religious experience and practice, worship,
and ecstasy. It may involve participation in an organised religious group.
It may be the search for the immanent (internal) other through silence,
introspection, and meditation. It may be a highly individualised and idiosyncratic
quest.
It may be articulated psychologically as the search for the higher, individuated
self.
It may be articulated through emotions, aestheticism, existentialism,
the arts, music, sport, and participation in group activities.
It may be numinous, in that it is incapable of articulation.
It may be articulated using the language of monotheism, polytheism, pantheism,
panentheism, agnosticism or atheism.
It may be articulated as part of an idiosyncratic discourse.
This definition may be clumsy, as any attempt to express the human relationship
to the numinous, whether transcendent or immanent, will inevitably be
so. It is, however, essential that we define what we mean by spirituality,
so that confusions about the nature of nurturing spiritual development
do not arise.
The RE department views the nurturing of spiritual development as a key
part of their role, but acknowledges that this may take particularly individual
forms. The RE department has no confessional basis, and thus all expressions
of spirituality will be welcomed and celebrated as equally valid and precious.
The role of RE
RE has an important role to play in the delivery of spiritual education,
but there are some initial caveats that need to be stated.
Spirituality is not limited to RE, nor will all RE lessons or activities
be explicitly delivering spiritual education.
Religious Education may help in the effective delivery of spiritual education
in many ways, these are merely some suggestions:
Through subject content. Religions are often (though not always)
attempts to express spirituality. Thus the study of religion gives pupils
the exposure to the language and practice of spirituality.
Through opportunities for reflection. Pupils will have many
explicit opportunities for reflection, either upon themselves, specific
ideas, or upon silence, in Religious Education. This reflection, particularly
when it is upon themselves, forms a key skill for spiritual development.
Through silence and stillness. Pupils will be encouraged on
many occasions to be silent and still. Such activities have been identified
by David Hay as the key experience that leads to the nurturing of spiritual
development in young people.
So there you go, possibly a taller order than “Teaching Paganism”,
but one that will lead young people to be able to express and develop
for themselves.
So why is the lack of Paganism in schools not a bad thing?
Well, there are various points that need to be made here (and these are
my opinions, and you may well disagree with them)
Fairness. Many religions are “missed out”, some
of which are numerically bigger than the “Big Six”. There
are more Mormons, Jehovahs Witnesses, Bahai’s or Christian Scientists
than Buddhists, but they don’t get a look in. To argue for inclusion
on numerical grounds is difficult, and indeed, even with the current Census
data, somewhat controversial.
Mystery. Many Pagan religions are rooted in mystery traditions;
i.e. the mystery is revealed to you in a Gnostic (in the sense of knowledge
gained through experience) way. Until you’ve had the experience
of initiation, you can read all you want, and never understand it. This
means that Paganism is often deliberately private, and any attempt to
publicise those ideas is contentious; it may well rob them of their impact.
Finally, I would like to mention a quote from one sixth former who had
just heard Steve Wilson speak on Goddess Worship. “He wasn’t
like the others (speakers at the conference), he didn’t tell us
what to believe, he just said what he did, and then said that if we ever
found ourselves in the same place, we should start looking for them”.
This, I would suggest is important.
Most of us Pagans have ended up here as part of our own journey, a journey
that has lead us away from “normal” places into special and
wonderful places that we share with a few others. That journey is rarely
easy, and often involves sacrifice. There is, I think, a substantial argument
in favour of keeping things the way that they are; who would want to express
themselves in a way that you learned about in school?
If you want to rant and rave at me, or swap ideas for schemes of work, you can get me at corax_pagan [at] hotmail [dot] com.
