Key stage 1 pupils should be able to:
- Identify some stories from the Bible
- Recognise Christmas and Easter stories
- Demonstrate awareness that the Bible is a special book for Christians
- Know why Christians listen to and read the Bible
- Respond imaginatively to Bible stories
Key stage 2 pupils should be able to:
- Demonstrate some awareness of how the Bible grew
- Look up references in the Bible
- Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of some key materials from the old and new testament
- Demonstrate a knowledge of some ways in which Christians use the Bible in life and worship
- Reflect on and respond imaginatively to Biblical material
Key stage 3 and 4 pupils should be able to:
- Demonstrate a knowledge and understanding of the nature of the literature being handled
- Demonstrate a knowledge and understanding of the historical context of the Bible
- Demonstrate a knowledge and understanding of the theological significance of the story within its context
All of the above may seem very simple and straightforward but there are hidden dangers about teaching and using the Bible within the classroom context that need to be addressed. There are both advantages and disadvantages about the use of the Bible and there have been numerous research studies conducted, most famously the work of Ronald Goldman (1964), whose research I will explore in this essay. The majority of the research conducted has its roots in areas of developmental and social psychology. Both of these are concerned with conceptual and cognitive development.
An interesting question to ask is whether children at starting school age are capable of reading the Bible and using it in the classroom? Goldman explored a perspective of developmental psychology which poses an answer to this question. In his research he drew on methods and theories of Jean Piaget (1896-1980). Goldman conducted in depth clinical interviews with 200 people aged between 6 and 17years. In his research he stimulated the young people by making them listen to three Bible stories, he then asked them a series of questions to explore how logical thinking about issues raised by these stories developed with age. The outcomes of these stories were analysed according to Piagetian categories of pre-operational thinking, concrete operational thinking and abstract operational thinking. On the basis of this analysis Goldman drew the controversial conclusion that the Bible should be kept until formal operational thinking has been achieved. By drawing this conclusion Goldman was suggesting that children under the age of 16years (this is the age that Piaget said this type of thinking would be achieved) were not capable of understanding the Bible at any level and should therefore not be exposed to it in any way, shape or form, he suggests that it is beyond their capabilities and only leads to confusion. However Goldman’s view of the unsuitability of the Bible for younger children has been seriously challenged and many other studies have been carried out of which I will discuss later, this does not mean to say that Goldman’s research is useless. Far from it, Goldman’s work has had a profound impact on both empirical research in the development of religious thinking and on the theory of Religious education itself. In both spheres Goldman’s influence extends to an international context. His work has attracted interest and debate and has influenced research as far a field as North America ( Peatling 1981, Elias 1979). Goldman’s studies have continued to be identified by subsequent researchers as a major text, providing the focal model for subsequent studies (e.g.: Francis 1979, McGrady 1983, Greer 1984).
Following Goldman’s study of biblical texts, there has been heavy concentration on children’s understanding of biblical or other religious texts and a wide range of religious textual material have been investigated. Following the publication of Goldman’s research and developmental model of Religious education a lively debate occurred about the validity of the research conclusions and educational arguments. Discussion of Goldman’s research has centred on several key issues, in particular, Goldman’s definition and model of religious thinking, the research design and procedures and the stage theory of the development of religious thinking. All of these areas are accompanied by criticisms of Goldman’s work.
Goldman’s research raises the issue of t he conceptualisation of religious thinking. He formally defines religious thinking as ‘the activity of thinking directed towards religion’ and maintains that ‘religious thinking’ is no different in mode and method than non-religious thinking. Priestly (1981), objects this view, arguing that religious thinking needs to be conceptualised in terms which take account of other dimensions such as symbolic, narrative, linguistic and interpretive dimensions. He also argued that Goldman was theologically biased toward Protestantism when he defined religious thinking.
Another inadequacy in Goldman’s work was that he simply assumed the applicability of a Piagetian model of cognitive development and a protestant model of biblical interpretation. In this sense Goldman’s research lacked validity, lacked depth and was one sided, it is important to remember that Piaget’s work had its own criticisms and weaknesses as well which Goldman did not consider. In Goldman’s research it is unclear whether the concept of stages is intended to function primarily as a descriptive device or whether it is intended to have some explanatory role. No account is given in his research of how development from one stage to the next takes place, yet this is crucial if the stage concept is to have and significance.
There are also problems with Goldman’s interviews design and content analysis. The interview design is problematic because of its selectivity and subjectivity. Goldman’s interview design can be criticized also due to the nature of the stories and the questions that he used. Mathews (1966) and Godin (1968) suggest that the three biblical stories used by Goldman were particularly difficult narratives and that they were not representative texts from which you can make generalisations about religious thinking. Another problem is that Goldman modified the narratives for his own use in the interviews and by doing this he decontextualised the stories and shifted the emphasis of the biblical texts.
Goldman in his research calls attention to both the wasteful effort of teaching the Bible too early and also the difficulties this makes for children of limited development. He does not however believe that no Bible teaching should occur before the age of twelve – this is a widespread misconception of Goldman’s work. What he actually believes is that before the age of twelve there should be a dramatic reduction of biblical material in syllabuses and he believes that the way the material is used is paramount. Goldman regards the Bible as the major source of Christianity for adults, he says that it is written by adults for adults, it is plainly not a children’s book. He believes that by inviting children to become familiar with the Bible too early results in boredom and confusion. Instead he thinks we should try to help children encounter experiences of the Bible at suitable ages of development. He believes that the content of the Bible should be carefully examined in the early tears, for it is only later that an understanding and appreciation develops of what the Bible has to say. A clear distinction must therefore be made between ‘teaching the Bible’ and ‘teaching from the Bible’. At primary age biblical material should be used simply to illustrate life themes found in Bible stories. It is important to recognise that at such young ages children will be unable to cope with the linguistic and intellectual demands the Bible has and because of this their understanding will be affected. It would be much better to teach from the Bible and simplify the messages of Bible stories for children by using pictorial images and drama. Goldman believes that we should use the Bible alongside other resources and in conjunction with children’s experience, by doing this both the Bible and personal experience are illuminated and gain significance. In the child’s view the Bible’s value is enhanced and is no longer seen as an endless and boring book but instead as a mine of relevant experience that is realistic. If this emphasis is fostered throughout the primary years, the young secondary pupil is prepared both emotionally and intellectually for the more sustained study of the Bible which occurs later in school. It is important to note that this process should not stop after the primary school but should continue into adolescence.
I think it is possible to conclude that Goldman’s research is of value in the sense that his views match the guidelines of syllabuses for Religious education in schools, his beliefs about what should be studied when are evident in the points I highlighted earlier in my essay for each Key stage. His work has had an influence on Religious education both as a subject in school and in daily life through religious thinking, but it is important to think about the weaknesses in his research as well so that you get a balanced view.
Whatever churches teach concerning putting the Bible in the core of Religious education in school we dare only introduce it into the classroom on sound pedagogical grounds. This in turn causes us to consider the ‘role’ of Religious education in schools. Basically what we want is to give pupils the necessary tools for making their present or future religious choices as meaningful as possible. We can do this in a number of ways and you do not have to rely on the Bible as the only resource, similarly if using it you need to consider its implications. The main function of the Bible in school is to enable pupils to express themselves in a world where religious symbols from the Bible such as good and evil are evident. By inviting pupils to transpose the biblical text into our cultural situation we give them an opportunity to communicate what they really feel. A good way to do this would be to use the Bible in different ways, when children write creatively, use a paint brush, a pot of glue, record Bible readings with a musical background or prepare a drama based on their understanding of a Bible story they can be themselves and this is an invaluable quality for both themselves and the teacher. At a younger age it would be much better for children to communicate with the Bible though picture, drama, dance and music. All of these skills are creative and allow children to be free and imaginative and to express their ideas and feelings. Children at primary age would learn more from acting out a Bible story and putting it to dance and music than by sitting in a classroom and reading it though. By using music and dance and drama children are gaining ‘experience’ at the same time as learning. The only problem with pictorial images is that the wrong message can sometimes be perceived, pictorial images stick in children’s minds and so they may not ever be able to progress an idea about a Bible story if they have always thought about it in a visual or pictorial form. Like everything these ways of using the bible have both advantages and disadvantages and these need to be considered, but as long as you use activities like Music, Dance and drama with the right age group and in the right context the outcomes should only be beneficial to the child.
There are other problems with using the Bible in the classroom that need to be identified and thought about. The main one being the problem of religious language. Religious language has many distinctive features such as it is logically odd. It is communal and is always rooted in a particular history/tradition and it is figurative and metaphoric in character, it uses myth, symbol, proverb, parable and story. All these features are fairly complex and many children at primary age would find them hard to comprehend. To be able to translate biblical jargon children need to have a sound knowledge and understanding of the English language and this obviously improves as a child progresses through school, you cannot expect a child of seven to be able to translate a bible passage and understand it, this skill will not come into much later, most likely when the child reaches secondary school. As long as a teacher looks carefully at a passage before they go to teach each and they ensure it is suitable then there should be no problems. The teacher must also decide on a clear purpose for the lesson and check that pupils are not becoming confused with the text.
It is possible to conclude from the research studies I have read and my own personal views that the Bible is a magical resource for children at any age if used correctly. If a child seems confused about a story then it is best left until they are older, if the story may cause fear anddistress it is best left because it will simply be rejcted by the child. When using bibloicsl material in a classroom it must fit into the overall framework of Religious education otherwise it is merely a story and not a Bible story, the context must be right so that the correct meaning is established. I think that as a teacher the most important thing to remember is that stories live and become meaningful as they capture the imagination and this should be the main aim of every RE teacher when using the Bible in the classroom, by capturing a child’s imagination their level of learning and understanding will obviously be very high.
Word count 2555