but as a wider concept it requires  the State to treat all religions equally Ê and from this principle  there could be no discrimination against members of minority religions and no favourable treatment of the members of a majority religion.Ê (Hamilton, 1996, p. 2)It is perhaps a step too far to accuse the Government of infringing pupilÊs human rights however this act does seem to be a negative step in promoting equality and unity between faith groups in the UK. While considering pupilÊs views it would also be useful to consider the impact on teachers. Teachers are given the task of leading an assembly in which they must balance their own beliefs and also take into consideration those of the pupils as well. TeacherÊs often shy away from faiths other than Christianity due to a fear of causing offence through ignorance (Cheetam, 2000). There is also the pressure on non-Christian or atheist teachers to present assemblies mainly slanted towards a faith they do not believe in. There appears to be a clash for teachers between the framework of liberal education, which has developed in many schools and views religion as a private matter, and the impetus to present a faith based assembly. It seems unfair to force teachers to balance all these tensions without specific training in how to do so. The promotion of childrenÊs moral, social, spiritual and cultural development is something to be admired and supported. However this particular law appears to be an archaic and possibly detrimental way of achieving it. It is offensive to both religious and secular groups and is opposed by large numbers of pupils and teachers. 21 st -century Britain is an incredibly diverse place and that is something to be celebrated. Schools should serve as an example of the increasingly plural and liberal nature of society, a place for unity rather than segregation.
which affect them the most, perhaps due to the fact that many adults view them as apathetic towards their education. While this is true of some it is certainly not true for all. Interviews with children from the beginning of primary to the end of secondary education provided interesting insights about pupilÊs attitudes to the act of collective worship. Two main concerns of the pupils were the divisive nature of the worship and the apparent pressure to believe. The first of these issues was simply summarized by a girl in year 11 discussing worship conducted by a vicar, Â ItÊs fine if you believe in what he believes, but there are a lot of people that donÊt and then assembly isnÊt assembly Ê (Gill, 2004, p. 188). Students appear keen to hang onto their community spirit but feel this is damaged by an emphasis on a particular belief system. The reaction of many to studentÊs complaints that they are being forced to participate in something they donÊt want to, is that this is just adolescent rebellion. This probably has some truth to it however there is also an element of a desire for independence. Children do not want to be told what to believe; instead they seek to be allowed to discover things for themselves. ÊThese children accept that their school has a particular responsibility to promote the Christian tradition, they nevertheless reject any pressure for belief or commitment.Ê (Gill, 2004, p. 188) There is also a legal issue surrounding pupils. It has been questioned whether the policy of collective worship infringes on the religious freedom of pupils. ÂEveryone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religionÊ (Article 9, European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, 1950) It is true that parents have the right to excuse their children but his is not a right afforded to children below sixth form age. The definition of religious freedom is vague
39
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker