Agenda item

Copy of Syllabus review progress provided as a separate document.

Jan referred to the Hub meeting notes and talked members through the Powerpoint summary of the syllabus review so far, elaborating on some elements, e.g. slide 3, discussions at network meetings showed that some teachers were already teaching about Islam and others wanted to, so Islam is now to be included by the end of Key Stage 2. Teachers are to have more flexibility.

Slide 4: Humanism (or another secular worldview) to be included at Key Stage 3. Discussion arose over the interpretation of ‘secular’ and what resources are available for Humanism.

Slides 5-7 covered how the questions pages for the ‘Learning From’ and ‘Learning About’ groupings had been reorganised. The key questions pages showing suggested content to be taught are now all together in the main body of the syllabus, sequenced as KS1 and then KS2. Only a small amount of content had been changed.

Slide 8 emphasised that ALL students have a statutory entitlement. Stephen suggested strengthening the wording for post-16 ages. (p.40). The statutory entitlement for each child stays the same and schools can follow their own syllabus but they have to follow the same principles as are applied to designing an agreed syllabus.

Slide 9 covers attainment targets. In mapping Discovery RE, Jan was surprised how few other syllabi had been revised in line with the 2013 framework. Learning About/From structures have been retained in many revised syllabi , but it is each SACRE’s job to decide on how closely to align their revised syllabus with the 2013 framework or not at all. Jan emphasised that teachers did not want much to be changed.

Slide 10 – the enquiry approach has been retained and the 4-step teaching and learning process has been made more explicit.

Slide 11 indicates that assessment has not yet been revised as decisions are yet to be made. At a SLT meeting last week, Emily Waddilove asked primary senior leaders what they would like assessment to look like. They wanted to keep the 3 descriptors process, working at, towards and beyond. This will be discussed at the next Hub meeting. Regarding concepts, more theological literacy is to be included, listing questions under appropriate concepts.

Some schools don’t teach RE, e.g. a Humanist school. Sue informed members that Piggott Secondary School have sixth-form weekly Friday slots of an alternative to RE.

Michael said some ATL people have asked if it is legal to get rid of RE. Some schools have alternative options, e.g. ‘ethical days’. Stephen suggested taking views to the September event, once the syllabus is launched and the curriculum is proceeding.

Ofsted must be able to see spiritual, moral, social and cultural development opportunities demonstrated; that is a statutory requirement.

It was suggested that we discuss secondary KS4/5 RE at the November SACRE meeting, and Julian Bushell of the Secondary Federation could be invited to attend, after an initial informal chat with him.

The next SACRE Hub meeting is April 24^th when the final draft of the Syllabus will be discussed. Jan referred to the red text in the Hub notes, which lists actions, next steps and deadlines. Point 4 – the syllabus will need to be signed by the WBC Chief Executive before it can be presented to WBC and printed, and Point 6 – forewords need to be written by each SACRE. Members discussed having USBs or providing the syllabus online (more economical); all voted in favour of accessing it online.

Shahid asked if all SACREs are making their views known to NASACRE about the current state of RE provision. Beth reminded everyone that NASACRE is the National Association of SACREs, so they are the voice of SACREs. Jan agreed that in previous years it was felt that NASACRE was not doing enough as the national body, however, it has recently re-thought its role to include a more collaborative/co-ordination role. Beth suggested speaking to the Regional Commission for Academies. Shahid asked if we could write to NASACRE. Stephen offered to work with Jan on drafting a letter.

Action: Stephen and Jan to draft a letter to NASACRE.