Should Sacred Studies be part of a general public school curricula

I strongly agree.Teaching kids about the contributions to knowledge made by people of cultures other than western-european would be a good way of making them less xenophobic and less intolerant. It would have the happy consequence of giving them a grounding in philosophy and history. But we don't need to go overboard and put the history of religion into every class.As an alternative to jar's suggestion, might I make a suggestion of my own?A school class in the history of ideas. Professional philosophers and historians may sneers, but I think it would do the job that jar wants it to do, and would satisfy people like SuperDave as well.mick

The big issue I have with this is that Education is no a zero sum game. I do not want to see anything sacrificed. Nor is a detailed history of the field necessary.One thing I have seen here quite often is a statement similar to "Western Civilization is a product of the Christian Religion".Frankly, that's nonsense. In fact, Christianity has historically been one of the most backward and intolerant of all religions. These are things that need to be pointed out and included in anyones education.In math specifically, no modern math would be possible without the contributions of the Arabs, specifically, the Muslim mathematicians. That's something every student, whether a math student or just general should know and undderstand.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

A very great point and one that could lead to lots of worthwhile discussions among the kids. Oh, but I don't say that. In fact, I say almost the opposite of that.We also need to understand that religion quite often hindered the advancement of science. We need to know and understand the Negative potential for and of religion as well as we understand the positive, and we may need to understand the negative potential of religion even MORE than its positive potential.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Really? There are only 24 hours in the day, jar. I'm sure that we could make education more efficient, but we will reach a point at which there is only so much one can learn from the age of 5 to 16 (these are the age groups we're talking about, right?)I'm kind of torn two ways here. I KNOW that our kids are not stretched enough at school. Around one quarter of them are bored stupid, and around half drop behind because teachers don't have time for them, or because they think that school can't make their life better.Maybe there is room for your proposal in the timetable, but it would rely upon a complete revamp of our teaching methods. I am not a school teacher, and I don't know how the solution to this problem. For a while I used to work voluntarily at a pretty average primary school, teaching basic skills like reading and maths. The teachers were INCREDIBLY grateful just for the fact that I bothered to turn up. They definitely seemed worked off their feet dealing with the average kids, never mind the cleverer ones and the ones with problems. Adding extra stuff to the curriculum, saying that it is not a zero sum game, would have been met with despair! This is a deplorable statement. I agree. Maybe we should look outside of schools for the reason. Personally, every time I see an Arab on TV they are a terrorist rather than a mathematician. I certainly can't recall such an idea being taught to me at school. Maybe it is an idea that is picked up elsewhere. But it's definitely a reason to teach comparative religion rather than a single religion. It's an argument against private religious schools, for example. As far as I know, public schools (at least in the UK) don't teach such things.Perhaps the people who come to EvC are more likely than the general population to make such silly statements. I'm 100% with you on that one.

quote:

---

If this is a good idea how could it be implemented?

​

Just to make clear what I'm suggestiong, I'll try to do a short summary.

​

* a multi-year, multi-semester course.
* beginning about midway through Primary education and continuing until graduation.
* integrated with other disciplines, for example

​

o in history religious components of different cultures would be included.
o in mathematics, the contributions of the Greek and Islamic world would be included.
o in current events the influence and effects of religious viewpoints would be included.

​

* it would cover many different religions.
* philosophy, including naturalistic ones would be covered.
* testing would be done based on objective as opposed to subjective criteria.

​

questions would not be on what you believe but rather

​

o "What did Mencius say about ..."
o what is the "Eight fold Path?
o who drove the Jews out of Spain?
o who offered those Jews sanctuary and provided transportation for them?

---

What you suggest is very similar to our Religous education class that all school children take (for about between one and two hours a week) in England and Wales. Students are also able to take it as a G.C.S.E (our leavers exam system) option.If you want to have a go at some of the questions that you may find on a GCSE R.E. exam (if memory serves me):http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/re/god/index.shtmlThis second link is to one of the main examination boards and you can download a sample exam paper and the like:Edexcel | About Edexcel | Pearson qualifications

The fact that I can show examples of where such things are done, and that the program is replicable, seems to indicate that it's possible.In our 24 hour day, we can do all I have outlined and still provide a great, not good, general education.It is not easy. It is not inexpensive. But it can be done.The other choice is to not do so. And that seems to be the choice we have made here in the US. I wonder though if we made the choice knowingly, if those people making the decisions are aware of what actually can be done.Go back to Message 44 where there is a link to the curriculum at St. Paul's and to Message 49 where there is a link to the curriculum at St. Paul's School for Girls.Look them over. Do they reflect what you think would be a good basic education for every child? Would you want YOUR child to have those opportunities available?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Thanks for the link. I must say I was somewhat disappointed by the questions but perhaps that's to be expected. I'll spend some time and look them over more fully.There could be the makings of a whole thread there.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Okay, I took a look at the St. Paul's website. [qs=Jar]Well, the bit about the inestimable worth and dignity of each individual is admirable. But the stuff about a spirit of service before god, and the idea that each individual is made in the image of God, sounds like nonsense to me.Perhaps it's a great school. You say it fulfils all of my requirements, perhaps it does, I have no reason to doubt you. I don't want to pick a fight with St. Pauls, particularly. It's a religious school, probably indoctrinates its kids to some extent, like any other religious school.

Look at the curriculum. It's posted for both schools.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Just so people know what we are on about - those are the questions from the paper (Edexcel | About Edexcel | Pearson qualifications) on the christian religion (there is also one concentrating on the Catholic beliefs.EITHER QUESTION 1

quote:

---

(a) What is meant by religious conversion? (2)

​

(b) Outline the reasons a person might give for being an atheist. (6)

​

(c) Explain how religious experience may support a Christian’s
belief in God. (8)

​

(d) Children should be allowed to make up their own minds about
whether to believe in God.

​

Do you agree? Give reasons for your opinion, showing that
you have considered another point of view. In your answer
you should refer to Christianity. (4)

---

or question 2

quote:

---

(a) What does the word agnostic mean? (2)

​

(b) Outline ONE response of Christianity to the problem of evil. (6)

​

(c) Explain how the appearance of design and order in the world may lead to or support a Christian’s belief in God. (8)

​

(d) Miracles don’t happen today.

​

Do you agree? Give reasons for your opinion, showing that
you have considered another point of view. In your answer
you should refer to Christianity. (4)

---

EITHER QUESTION 3

quote:

---

(a) What is meant by the word immortality? (2)

​

(b) Outline Christian attitudes to euthanasia. (6)

​

(c) Explain why Christians believe in life after death. (8)

​

(d) Near death experiences do not show there is life after death.

​

Do you agree? Give reasons for your opinion, showing that
you have considered another point of view. In your answer
you should refer to Christianity. (4)

---

OR QUESTION 4

quote:

---

(a) What is contraception? (2)

​

(b) Some people do not believe in life after death. Outline their
reasons. (6)

​

(c) Explain why Christians believe that life is sacred. (8)

​

(d) People who are suffering should be allowed to take their own lives.

​

Do you agree? Give reasons for your opinion, showing that
you have considered another point of view. In your answer
you should refer to Christianity. (4)

---

EITHER QUESTION 5

quote:

---

(a) What is an extended family? (2)

​

(b) State Christian teaching about sex outside marriage. (6)

​

(c) Explain why Christians believe that family life is important. (8)

​

(d) Living together is better than getting married.

​

Do you agree? Give reasons for your opinion, showing that
you have considered another point of view. In your answer
you should refer to Christianity. (4)

---

OR QUESTION 6

quote:

---

(a) What is meant by cohabitation? (2)

​

(b) Outline Christian attitudes to divorce. (6)

​

(c) Explain how a Christian wedding ceremony may help a
marriage to succeed. (8)

​

(d) Without religion family life would collapse.

​

Do you agree? Give reasons for your opinion, showing that
you have considered another point of view. In your answer
you should refer to Christianity. (4)

---

EITHER QUESTION 7

quote:

---

(a) What does the word discrimination mean? (2)

​

(b) Describe the advantages of living in a multi-faith society. (6)

​

(c) Explain how biblical teaching affects Christian attitudes to the
roles of men and women. (8)

​

(d) It is wrong to try to convert other people to your religion.
Do you agree? Give reasons for your opinion, showing that
you have considered another point of view. In your answer
you should refer to Christianity. (4)

---

OR QUESTION 8

quote:

---

(a) Name TWO religions other than Christianity practised in the UK.(2)

​

(b) Outline the contribution of ONE modern Christian person or
organisation to racial harmony (6)

​

(c) Explain why there are differences among Christians in their
attitudes towards other religions. (8)

​

(d) Christians always treat men and women equally.

​

Do you agree? Give reasons for your opinion, showing that
you have considered another point of view. In your answer
you should refer to Christianity. (4)

​

You must answer ONE question from this section
You are advised to spend approximately 30 minutes on this section
You will be assessed on the Quality of Written Communication in this Section.

---

EITHER QUESTION 9

quote:

---

Religion and Media

​

(a) (i) Describe a religious theme of importance to Christians
presented in ONE film or television drama. (4)
(ii) Explain why this theme is important and whether the
presentation was fair to religious people. (8)

​

(b) The media always treat religion unfairly.
Do you agree? Give reasons for your opinion, showing that you have
considered another point of view. In your answer you should refer to
Christianity. (8)

---

OR QUESTION 10

quote:

---

Religion, Wealth and Poverty

​

(a) (i) Describe how ONE Christian agency helps to relieve poverty.(4)
(ii) Explain how Christian teaching may lead the agency to do this
work. (8)

​

(b) You cannot be truly religious and rich.

​

Do you agree? Give reasons for your opinion, showing that you have
considered another point of view. In your answer you should refer to
Christianity. (8)

---

General Krull,do you have to teach that stuff?Mick

When considering public education, that is paid for by a culturally diverse tax base, one must honestly ask this question:Can any religious dogma be equivocated to 'education'?With the exception of theology and maybe poetry, all disciplines of 'education' are based on some kind of physical evidence or observations, rather than faith, spiritualism, and mythology.Do we really want to waste a lot of student's time recapitulating all the myriad belief structures that exist ?Far better to keep public education COMPLETELY secular.That way all the bible-thumpers or Koran-thumpers or whatever can send their kids to their own brainwashing Sunday-schools if they so choose.
I don't want to have MY kids come home and have to spend time de-bunking a lot of mysticism they have been fed in school like so much mind-pablum.

well, yeah, as an atheist it would actually make my life easier if religion didn't exist at all. We could then all learn about the history of ideas in a detached manner. It's only these bloody believers who get in the way of such utopia. But never mind. Now THAT's something I find hard to stomach. I was sent to one of those brain-washing sessions every week, for years. I really don't see why my parents had the right to attempt to brainwash me. Children are meant to have human rights, including the right to their own freedom of conscience, aren't they?

I was sent to one too, but not for long.
I ended up being thrown out at the age of 6 or 7.
I asked far too many questions....I was brought up brainwashed as a protestant Christian, but I always rejected the simplistic rigidity of it all, the 'black and white', 'good and evil', 'heaven and hell' etc. etc.I instinctively knew there had to be more than 'poof' to the mystery of life....The problem is one of generational ignorance.
Parent believers WANT their children to be brainwashed into sharing their beliefs because that’s their anchor, their reference point, their stability. Any objective criticism of these beliefs shakes the shallow foundation of their self-justification.This message has been edited by EZscience, 05-08-2005 10:18 PM

EZScience,I don't think that religious *indoctrination* has its legitimate place in any school, public or private. Even if the cost of kids' education is covered by their parents who all belong to the same religious group, it still does not justify brainwashing these kids, or, especially, grooming them in the spirit of exclusivity and/or animosity to other religious doctrines.From much the same standpoint, I do not think that "broad public tax support base" justifies "making education completely secular" - if the latter means not teaching kids anything about religion, eliminating the mere word from textbooks, etc.Richard