Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

RE not counted as a humanity in the Govt's new GCSE 'EBacc' Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    History and Geography both go towards making the English Bacc up - but RE doesn't. This is a ridiculous oversight on the part of Gove and will lead to a decline in the status of a vital subject. What do you think?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    In all fairness, I found short course GCSE RE to be a laughably easy waste of time.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I had to do GSCE Short Course RE, I was asked questions such as 'does winning the lottery make you a better person' sure this is ethics, but hardly to do with Religion. If the syllabus was changed then maybe it would be worth including in the 'Ebacc'.
    If I'm honest we only ever watched videos and did quizzes yet it was the subject that got the most A*'s in my school . . . (either says something about my school or the subject haha)
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I don't really think RE is a full humanity. You could argue that politics is not featured in the Bacc, I think it should be reserved for true humanities. I got an A at Short Course by doing NOTHING, in fact I remember spending half the time on question and rushing the rest, I couldn't do that with Geography and History.

    If it was Philosophy and Ethics and was overhauled I could see it becoming part of the Bacc but certainly not in it's current form.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The national curriculum is *******s, and should only focus on necessary life skills.

    If people wish to specialise, then it should be from A-Levels upwards.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Silly Goose)
    In all fairness, I found short course GCSE RE to be a laughably easy waste of time.
    This is so true, i never went to any lessons and still got a B, one mark of an A xD
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Silly Goose)
    In all fairness, I found short course GCSE RE to be a laughably easy waste of time.

    (Original post by DesignFreak)
    This is so true, i never went to any lessons and still got a B, one mark of an A xD
    Agreed. I won the RE prize for having the highest grade (I only got an A, so everyone else must have ****ed up horribly) but I hid in the toilets for about 80% of my RE lessons because we didn't have a register, and when I did show up I just used to draw. Happy days.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BookWormShanti)
    History and Geography both go towards making the English Bacc up - but RE doesn't. This is a ridiculous oversight on the part of Gove and will lead to a decline in the status of a vital subject. What do you think?
    personally I think RE should be scrapped all together so we have more space for maths/ engineering etc.

    "Ey blad! Mans gonna pick RE A Level, Mad ting!", Ever heard that? yep.. half of the people who take RE at A level are mentally retarded 'gangter' people. They opt for it because it is easy.



    Exemplar question:

    "What is the meaning of the meaning of life? (30 marks)." I mean come on!

    Yes I'm exaggerating a little bit here but I made my point clear
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The RE here also seems ridiculously easy.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Many of the people here are misinterpreting GCSE RE as limited to a short course which covers a limited scope of philosophy and ethics. I can assure you that the full GCSE although very easy, does require effort in learning and regurgitating various aspects of Islam and examining ethics and extrapolating Christian views from numerous biblical quotes. It isn't a walk in the park as some of you make it out to be. Personally I feel RE is definitely a legitimate humanity just as much as psychology is a legitimate science. Having said that for as long as I've been in school every year GCSE students achieved an A* or an A at RE.

    To solve claims of GCSEs becoming soft, the government should get rid of subjects that actually take the piss in terms of their usefulness and versatility in real life applications. I'm referring to these supposedly "applied subjects" home economics, business studies, media studies, citizenship, general studies, PE etc. BTECs, DIDA, and these dual award nonsensical qualifications should also be got rid of. It's ****ing pathetic how year after year misguided students take these subjects, do no work at all, and increase their school grade average due to limited content pertaining to these qualifications.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BookWormShanti)
    History and Geography both go towards making the English Bacc up - but RE doesn't. This is a ridiculous oversight on the part of Gove and will lead to a decline in the status of a vital subject. What do you think?
    It's an outrage.
    I'm almost as offended as I was when they dropped "Tooth fairy studies" from the national curriculum...
    • Offline

      1
      (Original post by lechaton-x)
      Agreed. I won the RE prize for having the highest grade (I only got an A, so everyone else must have ****ed up horribly) but I hid in the toilets for about 80% of my RE lessons because we didn't have a register, and when I did show up I just used to draw. Happy days.
      Lol...no wonder the standard on Religious knowledge exposed on the T&R subforum is so abysmal.
      Offline

      3
      ReputationRep:
      That's probably because religion contributes to more inhumanity.
      Offline

      2
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by BookWormShanti)
      History and Geography both go towards making the English Bacc up - but RE doesn't. This is a ridiculous oversight on the part of Gove and will lead to a decline in the status of a vital subject. What do you think?
      Vital subject? Really?
      Offline

      2
      ReputationRep:
      Oh the humanity!
      Offline

      1
      ReputationRep:
      I do think that learning about other religions and cultures is important. Understanding other cultures is an important step towards tolerating them. But it seems clear that the current format of RE is poor.

      I also think that the RE course I was forced to take at my Catholic school should be scrapped or changed. It was 100% about Catholicism, and the syllabus got the definitions of "atheist" and "agnostic" plain wrong or in far too simplistic detail.
      Offline

      2
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by ilyking)
      personally I think RE should be scrapped all together so we have more space for maths/ engineering etc.

      "Ey blad! Mans gonna pick RE A Level, Mad ting!", Ever heard that? yep.. half of the people who take RE at A level are mentally retarded 'gangter' people. They opt for it because it is easy.



      Exemplar question:

      "What is the meaning of the meaning of life? (30 marks)." I mean come on!

      Yes I'm exaggerating a little bit here but I made my point clear
      gangsta/chavs don't usually pick RE, they always go to business studies and media. This shows how useless RE is tbh...
      • Offline

        1
        (Original post by milkytea)

        I also think that the RE course I was forced to take at my Catholic school should be scrapped or changed. It was 100% about Catholicism, and the syllabus got the definitions of "atheist" and "agnostic" plain wrong or in far too simplistic detail.
        I was not aware that any examination boards in the UK had a RE syllabus that was entirely concerned with Catholicism in particular.

        Which examination board was it?

        Regarding 'definitions' - these are very variable according to who is defining them.
        Offline

        15
        ReputationRep:
        I think the real issue is that the current RE specs are a crock of ****e. If the Philosophy options actually required the students to study philosophy or the Christianity options required students to study Christianity in any real detail, for example, introducing something like Aquinas' Summa Theologica, then nobody would be saying RE is a soft subject.
        Offline

        15
        ReputationRep:
        (Original post by yawn)
        I was not aware that any examination boards in the UK had a RE syllabus that was entirely concerned with Catholicism in particular.

        Which examination board was it?

        Regarding 'definitions' - these are very variable according to who is defining them.

        AQA 2B Roman Catholic Tradition

        I did it last year, it was a complete waste of time, and I didn't learn anything I didn't already know. It also minimalised or omitted completely the theological arguments against issues such as women priests. :rolleyes:
       
       
       
      Reply
      Submit reply
      TSR Support Team

      We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

      Updated: December 22, 2010
    • See more of what you like on The Student Room

      You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

    • Poll
      What newspaper do you read/prefer?
      Useful resources

      Groups associated with this forum:

      View associated groups
    • See more of what you like on The Student Room

      You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

    • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

      Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

      Quick reply
      Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.