WHEN ATTEMPTS ARE made through legislation to determine the ways in which Religious Education is taught, the laws that are enacted may be interpreted in ways that are contrary to the intentions of those who draft them. Government education departments may even choose to disregard these intentions. The battle for control of Religious Education in England and Wales following the coming into effect of the 1988 Education Reform Act provides a case study that shows how this may happen.
AyerstD., Editorial in Learning for Living, vol 5no 2, (November 1965).
2.
Circular 1/94, Religious Education and Collective Worship (HMSO, January 1994).
3.
CoxE.CairnsJ. M., Reforming Religious Education, the religious clauses of the ERA (London: Kogan Page, 1989).
4.
GrimmittMichael, Pedagogies of Religious Education (McCrimmons, 2000).
5.
HilliardF. H.The Teacher and Religion (London: James Clarke, 1963).
6.
HullJohn, The Act Unpacked (Birmingham, University of Birmingham/CEM,1989).
7.
KayWilliamSmithLinnet, ‘Can world religions in the secondary school be counter productive?’ in Digest, vol 26, no 1, (Autumn 1999).
8.
KayW. K.SmithD. L., ‘Religious terms and attitudes in the classroom (part 1)’ in British Journal of Religious Education, vol 22, no 2, (2000) pp. 81–90.
9.
Office for Standards in Education, The impact of new agreed syllabuses on the teaching and learning of religious education, OFSTED, 1997.
10.
Religious Education Council, Handbook for Agreed Syllabus Conferences, SACREs and Schools, REC, 1989.
11.
School Curriculum and Assessment Authority, Religious Education, SCAA Model Syllabuses: Model 1 Living Faiths Today, 1994.
12.
SmithD. L.KayW. K., ‘Religious terms and attitudes in the classroom (part 2)’ in British Journal of Religious Education, vol 22, no 3, (2000) pp. 181–191.
13.
Qualifications and Curriculum Authority, Religious Education and Collective Worship: An analysis of 1999 SACRE reports, QCA, 2000.
