An end to Special Religious Education in public schools

[Ernie]

In reply to MB0905
There is no education or discussion - just mindless chanting.
Well done MB0905, I think this is pure indoctrination. As an educator I can’t see how the thing we call religious education qualifies as education at all. In education the participants are encouraged to enter into the realm of critical evaluation.
To qualify as education (rather than just constitute an act of religious indoctrination) children should to be able to ask questions like:
· Does God really exist?
· Could the earth really have been made in six days?
· Does being religious really make me an autonomous moral being?
· Were the people described in the New Testament as being possessed by demons simply mentally ill?
This would elevate religious instruction to the level of education!
Eardstapper

[Craftycarp]

Originally Posted by RealityRules

A new website has appeared - whysre.com.au/

I knew that God loved me because I went to SRE

That cracks me up.

[Perspective]

I posted the letter I sent to the school under the thread 'Lords Prayer at school assembly' Basically it argues about moral concepts, a few legal frameworks and the idea of what it means to live in a contemporary multicultural society and how we teach that to our children in a secular environment.

I have spoken with both the principal, vice principal, member of the school council, p&c and other parents of children in the school.

Basically so far I have been given what feels like a 'pat on the head' now off you go .... Currently the issue is resting with the school council along with a copy of the DET policy on religious education and my letter.

For some reason, they still seem to believe that this is a voting matter where majority rules but in no way can I see any reference in the DET policies where that is legally acceptable.

Depending on what the outcome is, I still have another log to throw in the fire.....

[Sieveboy]

I don't know if anyone listens to to Triple M in Sydney in the morning (I channel surf) but one of the Grill team told a story something along the lines of the following about SRE:

"My daughter came home and asked me: Are you my father?"

When questioned his daughter told the presenter the story that the scripture teacher had said her dad was just a man and her real father was the Lord, or similar.

Now the Grill team presenter wasn't impressed (not sure which one it was). It descended from there when "The Spoonman" came in and dropped his load on scripture teachers, followed by a scripture teacher calling in and the whole thing got moved on very quickly before a Godwinesq verbal brawl developed between Spoonman and the scripture teacher. Might be a good chance for il Presidente to call Triple M tomorrow morning and get some air time. Work restricts my web browsing so I am not sure if I can find a sound byte for this.

[DanDare]

Originally Posted by MB0905

For some reason, they still seem to believe that this is a voting matter where majority rules but in no way can I see any reference in the DET policies where that is legally acceptable.

This is common across Australia and on all the battlefronts, chaplains, SRE, tax exemptions, employment discrimination you name it. They assume that democracy is "majority rule" with no reference to minority rights or justice. Undortunately, Australian civic education is so bad that many in Oz don't realise they are being hoodwinked. I gave a class at primary school a few years ago about the tyranny of the majority and the kids had a real hard time coming to grips with it. I posed the question "if the majority want a rule that everyone should dress as Goths is that democracy?". A few bright sparks finally started to catch on and began discussing with other kids in the class who had a real problem sorting the concepts.

[Craftycarp]

Originally Posted by MB0905

Depending on what the outcome is, I still have another log to throw in the fire.....

After this, take it up the chain. Keep at it. It may take you are year or more but you will get through in the end. The law is not there for government departments to "policy" their way around.

You've played the justice card, but I find that just gets people thinking a "good" argument is a valid answer. That they can argue back with their own ideals and they win by default as they are in the majority.

Just hammer away on any pure legal facts you have at your disposal.

[Ernie]

What is this horrible stuff?
I just had a look at that site supporting SRE. I’ve attained two formal qualifications in teaching, and have over twenty five years teaching experience (including teaching education to teachers). I still produce distance education materials. In my view the statement of educational outcomes on the whysre site is both amateurish and foolish. If a first year teacher trainee submitted this sort of stuff in an assignment they would deserve to fail.
How on earth can God our Father and Jesus Christ be an educational outcome? I think if these people are going to play at education they should be obliged to abide by the sensible rules pertaining to curriculum.
There are far too many problems with SRE. What (indeed) are the intended educational outcomes (expressed in educational terms)? How are these outcomes tested? How are these outcomes relevant in our modern multicultural society? Who teaches these classes?
Are these classes taught by a motley collection of true believers (that is certainly my experience)? More is required of teachers than belief in a god (or indeed gods). Teaching is a profession, and its members have a formal education and training that fits them for this. Teaching provides a vital service to the Australian community. There is no room for amateur enthusiasts in our schools (let alone courses that present ancient superstition as truth)!
This isn’t education!
Signed – (a very angry) Eardstapper

[Perspective]

Originally Posted by Craftycarp

You've played the justice card, but I find that just gets people thinking a "good" argument is a valid answer. That they can argue back with their own ideals and they win by default as they are in the majority.

Just hammer away on any pure legal facts you have at your disposal.

Quite right. I went the 'justice card' first in the hope they will just see reason. I don't really expect much from it though. I also have another letter based purely on legalities that is poised to go depending on the outcome. Actually it's from a fellow parent who is just as pissed. He will play the legal card if neccessary to back me up.