FIRIS has helped in the collection of a great deal of comments about SRI within our schools. Much of this comment is negative in different ways and ranges from the enquiring to the outright critical. While some parents support SRI being given in the School, the majority of parents whose opinions we have heard do not favour SRI continuing to be run in its current form. Additionally, leading religious educators have come to the conclusion that the way Religious Instruction is conducted is not meeting the needs of society.
When questioned, most parents cite one, or both, of two main areas of concern:
SRI is instruction, not education. It amounts to the preaching of a particular form of Christianity to our youngest and most impressionable children regardless of the beliefs of their parents or the children's ethnic or religious backgrounds. SRI is most certainly not, as many have been led to believe, the teaching of comparative religions or religious history.
The teaching of SRI is often felt by parents as being de facto compulsory. The opt-out provisions play to the politics of exclusion and conscientious objection, something that young children should not be forced to endure. It often appears as intolerant and rigid, quite contrary to most religious and ethical beliefs in the Australian community at large, with its belief in the "fair go", tolerance and the enjoyment of diversity. All other activities offered at schools are offered to parents as opt in, except for this one. Many parents simply miss the checkbox to opt their child out, which results in their default attendance.
We regard any instruction of children in matters of faith as a deeply personal matter that families and religious communities should take very seriously. It is not for the Government school system (currently influenced too much by some) to determine what children should be taught to believe about these matters or how and when they are taught it. It is a matter solely for parents and their communities to decide on and administer.
It is simply not good enough, if you conscientiously object to this system by withdrawing your children from SRI, that your children must spend time actively engaged in pencil sharpening or playing computer games while being made to feel they are outsiders.
The Victorian Governments Education and Training Reform Act 2006 provides that a government school may offer "special religious instruction" to its children. The relevant provisions are set out in Section 2.2.11 (Special Religious Instruction) as follows:
Special religious instruction may be given in a Government school in accordance with this section.
If special religious instruction is given in a Government school during the hours set apart for the instruction of the students-
the persons providing the special religious instruction must be persons who are accredited representatives of churches or other religious groups and who are approved by the Minister for the purpose;
the special religious instruction must be given on the basis of the normal class organisation of the school except in a school where the Minister authorises some other basis to be observed having regard to-
the particular circumstances of a school or schools; or
the preparation or conduct of a pageant, special event or celebration of a festival in a school or schools;
attendance for the special religious instruction is not to be compulsory for any student whose parents desire that he or she be excused from attending.
The two words highlighted in the above provisions clearly indicate that the offering of Special Religious Instruction is permissive, not mandatory. That is, a school may choose to offer SRI but does not have to offer it. Good process should then provide parents a fair chance to decide what they want.
This is consistent with basic community values as expressed in section 2.2.10 (Education in Government schools to be secular) of the same Act:
Except as provided in section 2.2.11, education in Government schools must be secular and not promote any particular religious practice, denomination or sect.
Subsection (1) does not prevent the inclusion of general religious education in the curriculum of a Government school.
A Government school teacher must not provide religious instruction other than the provision of general religious education in any Government school building.
In this section general religious education means education about the major forms of religious thought and expression characteristic of Australian society and other societies in the world.
What are our Children Taught?
While many of us believe that the SRI syllabus educates our children about comparative religions and their history, many parents report that the truth is for them very different.
The implementation of SRI in Victoria has become, under the current policies of the Education Department, the exclusive domain of ACCESS Ministries (with extremely limited exceptions). ACCESS Ministries is the newer name for the body formerly known as the Council for Christian Education in State Schools (CCESS) and is a political clerical alliance of some -but not all- Christian Churches and groups. ACCESS Ministries is the "default" provider of instruction in religion in the state curriculum, by ministerial and statutory authority.
A visit to the website of ACCESS Ministries website is well worthwhile. For example, our 4-6 year old children will be taught the following in SRI:
Launch, Ages 4-6 (Red Series)
Launch 1 Red
Launch 1 Red introduces children to some of the basic beliefs of Christianity:
There is a God who is able to be known. He loves me. I am special to God. I can talk to God. God made everything.
Launch 2 Red
Launch 2 Red introduces children to some of the basic beliefs of Christianity:
Friends matter. Children are special to God. We can talk to God. God loves us.
This teaching concerns only the Christian god, as presented by these particular Christian groups. As things stand, those in our community with beliefs centering on another god, or having no beliefs at all, have simply to put up with it. The Education Department has created a situation where ACCESS may, and has, decided that SRI's only purpose is to preach their particular religious beliefs regardless of how they might dress it up.
Who teaches SRI to our Children?
ACCESS recruits volunteers to carry out religious instruction - SRI in Government schools for 30 minutes each week. Volunteers are required because our Government school teachers refuse to administer SRI, a position they have maintained since 1950.
You may be interested to know that ACCESS will allow its volunteers to offer SRI to our children with as little as one day's training before embarking on their work. Yes, one day's training. This would not be accepted in any other form of activity in state schools.
The Victorian Education Act 1872 prescribed free secular education during regular school hours, which comprised two hours before, and two hours after, lunch. After formal school hours, religious instruction conducted by volunteers was permitted on the premises of Victorian schools. Victoria led the western world in offering a comprehensive system of secular education through its Government schools from 1870 until 1950.
The Victorian Parliament debated the role of religion in Government schools many times during the following 78 years and several denominational and interdenominational groups organized attempts to legislate religious instruction during school hours.
Ultimately, these lobbying efforts succeeded, and in 1950 an agreement was struck that forms the basis of the current "SRI" in Victoria government schools. Allowing the teaching of SRI in schools was motivated by a particular view prevalent in the post WWII and Cold War eras (a time which is also renowned for Government policies regarding 'white' only immigration.) A strongly conservative Government with majorities in both houses ensured the law was changed.
The agreement called for normal classes to cease for a school period whilst volunteers conducted their own classes in schools. The Protestant volunteers were organized by the predecessors of Access.
Interestingly, at the time of its introduction, and after 70 years of completely trouble-free secular education, Government school teachers have consistently refused to teach SRI. This is despite, as any parent knows, their keen interest in practical ethics, expressed in the great efforts they make to teach our kids to resolve issues through discussion, to respect difference and so on, which has played an enormous role in creating the tolerant and diverse Australian community that we all continue to enjoy. Even in 1950, with a largely mono-cultural population, teachers realized only too well that the preaching of Christianity had no place in the education of our children. Tensions between Catholic Irish, Anglican and non-Conformist groups that were deeply entrenched in Britain had been greatly eased in Australia, supported by the practical ethics of the state school system and reflecting many Australians' strong feelings that in a new country that should be left behind.
The only alternative for the Council for Christian Education in government schools was to use untrained volunteers to teach SRI in Government schools, a system that survives until today.
Despite this, the principle of secular education in Victoria continues to be enshrined in the current legislation. In the 2006 Education Reform Act, the Victorian Government reaffirmed its commitment to secular education clarifying the difference between 'general religious education' and 'special religious instruction'. It seems obvious that religious instruction should, like teaching kids to respect each other and be tolerant, seek to change belief whilst religious education presents knowledge that children should then decide what they think about.
While that may be the position at law, the Department has seen fit to affirm the practice of volunteers delivering special religious instruction during school hours and adopted a set of procedures to grant Access Ministries particular and privileged official status as an accrediting and administrative body for religious instruction in Victoria.
It is these administrative procedures and the way they are carried out that have pushed the religious instruction from a fair and reasonable elective option to a default standard, and created the situation which violates the secular principles of public education in Victoria.
Officially, SRI is taught on an opt-out basis in Victorian schools. If a parent does not want their child to attend SRI, the child can be removed from the class but this effectively punishes the child by refusing to allow him or her to receive any other form of (secular) education while other students are undergoing SRI. The Department's guidelines make it clear that secular instruction may not be timetabled while students from the class are attending special religious instruction.
Once again, this 'policy' has no basis in the underlying legislation. It is something that the Department, at the insistence of ACCESS, has decided to enforce.
Children who opt out of receiving the Access Ministries Christian syllabus are either forced to sit in the corridor, or be independently engaged in pencil sharpening or playing computer games. Teachers are reluctant to schedule any educational activity to non-attendees during the time that SRI is being provided to others, in case they run foul of the Department's guidelines.
This is akin to conscientious objection being imposed on children who are far too young to understand what is going on. The children are made to feel that they are outsiders. Children who opt out receive no education during this period despite paying the same school fees and State government taxes as other children.
The opt-out rule was included after aggressive lobbying from ACCESS. It is today enforced in such a manner that nothing short of an active opt-out by a parent in respect of his or her children will be effective. If a parent doesn't respond, they undertake SRI. ACCESS has recently been at pains to remind school principals of this "policy". It is this stance that has created the feeling amongst many parents that this is neither right nor fair. It takes, many have found, considerable efforts to effectively complain, to discuss, to get a fair hearing, as the practical application of the 'opt-out' policy makes disagreement close to an issue of non-compliance. Why, they are asked, do you want to be different?
Because SRI allows parents to remove their children from the class, it may be argued that the SRI is not compulsory. This is not a suitable response. A decent and fair environment is not merely one that trumpets that it allows people a way out. Seeking special treatment on religious grounds is felt by many to be discrimination that a secular public school system is designed to avoid. Many families feel the option of removing their children from the religious class provides no choice at all; the alternative often is felt as carrying a stigma and burden on our children. Our children are far too young to understand and are highly sensitive to being seen to fit in.
The secular standard in the school system requires that we never separate people according to their religious commitments, or design parts of the school day intentionally offering people the choice of removing themselves from the class on religious grounds.
Special religious instruction may only be delivered by accredited instructors who are approved by the Minister for Education. Instructors who deliver the non-denominational agreed Christian syllabus Religion in Life are accredited through ACCESS Ministries and not by the church to which the instructor may belong.
Catholic, Jewish, Greek Orthodox, Islamic, Buddhist, Bahá'í, Hare Krishna and instructors from other recognised religions should be accredited through the relevant religious authorities, which include the Catholic Education Office, Catholic Diocese, United Jewish Board, Greek Orthodox Diocese, and the World Conference of Religions for Peace.
Where parents request special religious instruction in a particular faith that is not provided at the school, principals should advise parents that such instruction can only be scheduled where the particular religious group provides an accredited instructor who is approved by the Minister for Education.
While this sounds representative of the multi-denominational society in which we live, the reality is, of course, that SRI is almost uniformly delivered as Christian religious education in the vast majority of Victorian schools by ACCESS, who are primarily a group of particular Protestant Christian Churches. Despite the fact that our society now comprises representatives of Catholic, Jewish, Greek Orthodox, Islamic, Buddhist, Hindu, Bahá'í, Hare Krishna and other faiths, children from those families are seldom if ever catered for. Instead, they are taught about Christianity by barely trained volunteers or they opt out.
Perhaps more significantly, there is now a majority of parents who do not practice or subscribe to any religion at all. The alternatives for their children is to be taught about Christianity by barely trained volunteers or, they opt out with the stigma that this entails.
The Department of Education effectively privileges and promotes this group of Protestant Christians over all other faith-based religions or beliefs with the active encouragement of ACCESS. This is not a true reflection of Australian Community beliefs about how children should be educated and instructed in important matters of belief, ethics and how to be a good person.
An argument used in favour of the current situation, and a claim made by ACCESS itself, is that their religious instruction is 'an extension of values education'. On the surface, this seems to be a mitigating factor, excusing a small suspension of the secular purpose of our schools.
In principle though, this justification is itself a core problem. The children who go to our state schools do not come from communities and families that necessarily share whatever values ACCESS asserts; this is why many parents are objecting they have different values. The basic compromise that keeps us together in the Australian Community is not reflected in the particular religious communities whose representatives dominate ACCESS. This is because these values are based upon tolerance and diversity, and that does not easily fit with religious instruction to state schools that contain children from different communities. A secular school system must avoid giving the impression that its values originate within a particular religious doctrine. Rather, it must actively work to help people of all persuasions understand that there is a meaningful distinction between 'values', which are universal and accessible to all regardless of creed, and religious tenents which are based on particular beliefs and occur in a diversity of forms across civilizations and history.
[The reason outside ministers are invited into the school therefore is not to provide some element of the education that is lacking, but to give people the choice to learn about specific religious ideas. The law that governs this situation in Victoria distinguishes clearly between 'religious education' and 'religious instruction' in a reasonable and clear way. The rules were not designed to empower volunteer religion teachers to instruct children in their own particular beliefs under the umbrella of the desire of a ministerial group to teach values.]
The purpose of "special religious instruction" (as defined by Victoria Law), is to "instruct children in specific religious tenets and beliefs". Though it may be argued that people can 'ignore the religious parts' and learn from the 'values' that accompany the ACCESS curriculum, there is a serious problem if a secular system that feels it must outsource 'values education' to religious instructors. Schools must be clear that religious instruction is not the same as values education.
School's are public institutions that should strive to create a feeling of community, based on our values, which are that we are treated on equally regardless of our race, class or creed.
Victorian Government Schools can only treat children with the respect they deserve by combating, with all available means, any sense of an "us against them" divide. Special Religious Instruction, does the reverse.
Quite clearly, the answer is no. In a 23 page legal opinion commissioned by the Victorian Humanist Society in 2010, Holding Redlich has concluded that "there appears to be a reasonable argument that the SRI being provided for in Government schools infringes both the Equal Opportunity Act 1995 and the Victorian Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006″.
Why did Holding Redlich reach this conclusion?
The Department's current administrative guidelines (that is, the way that the Department chooses to interpret the Act) makes 'Christian Religious Education' a de facto part of the curriculum and elevates a partnership between ACCESS and the Department of Education to "default" status above that of all other religious traditions in Victoria.
This reasoning from "majority wishes" creates an environment of exclusion for minority religions as well as families who view religion as a private or personal matter beyond the purpose of our Government schools.
Research from around the world highlights the benefits, for society, and for children individually, of developing understanding about the common values inherent in different religious and non-religious traditions. This is as true within diverse religious communities: a well-educated Muslim should surely know the differences between Sunni, Shia and other groups, just as well-educated Christian should know the histories of controversy between different Protestant groups, Catholics, Greek and Russian Orthodox, and so on. The research also indicates that a critical, multi-tradition approach, in non-segregated settings, is essential for those benefits (of more tolerant, enquiring, incisive and inclusive students) to become realized. Most within the Australian community know and believe this. Given the increased focus on religion in the public sphere globally, this area of public education is lacking in Australia, with many public school students showing disturbing levels of ignorance about faith communities in their own neighbourhoods. There are some indications that this ignorance exacerbates problems related to racial vilification. Tolerance and diversity go together with mutual familiarity, understanding and common engagement in shared education.
The time currently allocated for SRI in Victoria could be used to address this area of cultural understanding. A variety of models (which do not exclude, but allow some input by the various religious and non-religious traditions) have been researched elsewhere in the world. Victoria could lead the way for other parts of Australia by developing a much more inclusive, critically focused approach to education about religions and beliefs. Our children deserve it.
Contrary to what the Department of Education sometimes leads people to believe, the law does not require schools to offer Special Religious Education. Victoria's system, is failing to serve the interests of children and religions, because it presents children religious instruction divorced from the diverse traditions and practices of the many religious communities amongst us. It is imposing an unwelcome element of division and tension where none should exist. We need a system that situates such matters in the wider efforts of teachers and parents to produce children who are effective members of our community, tolerant of diversity, both religious and ethnic. We need to educate our children about the full range of religions that matter to us, and respect the basic point that families have a fundamental right in how their children are religiously instructed but that this should be outside of the normal school curriculum. Ultimately schools should teach about religion, not instruct children in religion. Then religion will become part of our parents' and our teachers' efforts to produce good Australian children, who make their own choices, and make good ones, when they grow up to be citizens, adults and parents themselves.
Why do you keep writing SRI??? That is absolutely false. CRE is part of the Education of hearing Christian religious beliefs. Australia was founded on Christian beliefs, so the children in CRE, hear why Australia celebrates Christmas and Easter and hears about the beginning of the Christian church. They hear and make up their own minds. Lets hope the next generation are more tolerant of Aussie Christians.
RE: See Above The Victorian Governments Education and Training Reform Act 2006 provides that a government school may offer "special religious instruction" to its children. The relevant provisions are set out in Section 2.2.11 (Special Religious Instruction) as follows:
I have read the approved launch curriculum, chapter 4 teaches Genesis, and how God made everything. This is no longer the believe of many Christian religions, the teaching of Genisis is better suited to Sunday school , than a secular classroom. Hence this is Special Religiousness education as it teaches a very specific form of Christianity.
There is no rational reason to continue SRE/SRI (or what ever you want to call it), in public schools. If parents want to send their children to faith based schools, so be it. But the Public purse should not be used to promote specific religions. SRE as it is today will eventually be removed from public schools, the only question is when? Let's fix this now.
I have sat in on many scripture classes and have found each to be very different and based on the individual's personal view of religion. They often have photocopied handouts about Jesus and often tell a version of a parable. What concerned me most about my time watching scripture lessons was that the wording and language used was not that of instruction, but of leading. For example, a scripture teacher teaching a kindergarten class explained that Jesus loved each and every one of them individually and that his heart was filled with love for them specifically. The scripture teacher then asked the children what they thought would be the best way to repay this love. She then answered for them that the only right thing to do was to love Jesus with all their hearts. She then gave them a picture of a smiling Jesus and asked them each to draw a picture of them with Jesus. Underneath the picture it said "Jesus loves me". Another example was with a year 5-6 class where the scripture teacher showed children youtube videos created by rather fundamentalist Christian groups in the States that claimed to prove scientifically without a doubt that the events of the bible were real and that "even the most cynical skeptic" would have to admit that their disbelief was unfounded. I am quite happy for those who wish their child to have a religious education, whatever that religion may be, to have access to their faith, however I do feel that the best qualified people to do this are the parents themselves and the leaders of the parents' church/faith. The information passed on by these volunteers is vastly varied, highly personal, and at times not motivated by a desire to teach, but by a desire to persuade, lead, and unfortunately at times, to manipulate.
I have taught RE for many years and enjoy teaching kids about Christianity. But, I must also say I agree with this move to open the topic to teaching about all faiths rather than just Christianity. I say this for two reasons:
1. The value of the individual and their community of origin. We should value each child as if they were our own. If my child were to be told something contrary to their home/faith, I would want to know about it and would expect that it was presented in a non-manipulative way. RE is often presented as "truth" rather than "values" and does not, in this regard respect the value of the individual and their community of origin. The argument that the kids "opted in" and therefore believe what is being taught is also misguided. We are Seventh-day Adventist Christians and many of the beliefs taught in the RE curriculum are "wrong" according to our doctrine. I know that teachers from various Christian denominations skew the teaching toward their views. I have always endeavoured to teach "about Christianity" rather than teach Christianity out of a love for the children and their families from which they come.
2. Learning should be done in cooperation not isolation. I have never liked the idea of the kids being taken out when I teach RE. I understand the parents fear that their children will be manipulated but I intentionally do not teach the material in that way. If we learn together alongside people who view things differently than us, we will learn that we like people who differ from us. This is a hugely important lesson to learn early in life. I am passionate about the importance of the formative years of our children's minds, hearts and souls. The information we give them is far less important than the environment we within which we provide it.
As a faith and values-based storyteller I have learned that nothing is more important in the telling of a good story than a great audience. Every audience, of whatever age and in whatever setting, is populated by individuals - each of whom deserve respect, compassion and a sense of inclusion.
@Debra I did sit in on one. More than one actually. You are partially right. There were no heavy 'you must believe' type statements. There were, however many dubious assertions stated as fact: God made the people and the world, God will help you, God loves you etc. All of which assume there is a God in the firstplace and that the Christian God is the only God. After the first class my son came home and asked me: "Mum, am I a person?". Confused I replied "of course darling, why do you ask?". "Because", he replied, " said I can't be a person if I don't believe in God".