Recently the ABC show Compass did a special report on the ethics trial that has been causing such controversy in relation to SRE (Scripture) in New South Wales.
What I found particularly interesting from this program titled 'Schools of Thought' was the central idea that was used: an evaluative grid through which ethics and SRE must pass.
At its heart the core value being promoted was the capacity that young children have to be able to think deeply about the issues of their lives. To use ethical language: it is virtuous to respect and value children's thinking; it's a sin not to.
Clearly the production was aimed at promoting the value of teaching ethics and philosophy to children. The ethics trial was presented as the sort of class that respected and promoted a child's ability to think. The classroom became a community of enquiry where the teacher doesn't enter assuming they have all the answers or that there is any one answer. Instead, ideas are presented, defended, negotiated and improved. It's the sort of education needed for the 21'st century.
Meanwhile SRE gets presented as stifling creativity and going back to the past.
'Schools of thought' was not a presentation of the substantive issues surrounding the suitability or otherwise of ethics as an option for the SRE timeslot. But when the options are presented in such contrasting light the need for substantive issues tend to be diminished.
There's more that could be said in response to this program. Though I suspect that it would be more likely to generate repetitive argument rather than useful progress.
In the interests of progress then, can we who advocate for SRE consider the challenge contained in 'Schools of Thought'?
Is the criteria presented by this program valid? Should our teaching value a child's capacity to think and avoid the assumption that the teacher has all the answers?
Some may be uncertain of whether we can genuinely enter into an open discussion with children about Christian faith. It's a valid concern that we ought not fall into the relativism and me-ism that is such a pandemic in our society, especially amongst the young.
But the suggestion of a choice between 'everyone's point of view is right' and 'the teacher always knows best' is a false dichotomy. As SRE teachers we come as fellow listeners to the Word of God. There's a difference between saying that "I have all the answers" and saying that "God has all the answers". We can come into the SRE class and help lead children in genuine inquiry as we together seek to hear and respond appropriately to what God has revealed to us.
Will we ensure that our teaching is respecting and encouraging the capacity that children have to think and reason about their world? Where we are doing so already (as I believe we are), will we continue to do so more and more? Most of all, will we ensure that we give children the opportunity to hear God's word and respond to him?
'Schools of Thought' is available to watch or download from the Compass website.
