Evaluating the impact of the Hampshire agreed syllabus: ‘Living Difference’ on teaching and learning in religious education

Abstract

This article sets out the findings of an exploratory study which looked at the impact of the Hampshire Agreed Syllabus, ‘Living Difference’, on teaching and learning in religious education. The research was carried out in Hampshire, Southampton, and Portsmouth, UK, between April and June 2008. Twenty teachers were interviewed, all of whom were using Living Difference and all of whom had reported that they were finding the syllabus effective in relation to their previous practice. The aim was to find out what it was about Living Difference that these teachers felt was producing more effective teaching and more successful learning in RE and why. The study also examined what might need developing or changing in the syllabus and its implementation. The author compares with other pedagogies of RE aspects of Living Difference including contextualising and evaluating religious material, using concepts, assessing and measuring progression in religious education, differentiation, having one attainment target, developing higher order thinking skills, and enabling student voices to be heard. It also looks at issues in training teachers in using the Agreed Syllabus. The author suggests that Living Difference supports teachers and students primarily at the pedagogical level of objectives, or setting intending learning outcomes, using a framework of understanding pedagogy in RE at three levels: the level of aims, the overall aims of the subject; the level of objectives, of setting intended learning outcomes; and the level of methodology, the activities which enable and support students to achieve those learning outcomes. The article ends with some questions for religious education nationally. Does Living Difference offer a pedagogical model at the level of objectives which could underpin the National Framework for RE and RE in the primary and secondary curricula? Is one attainment target better than two in practice? Does initial teacher training and continuing professional development need to give greater emphasis to learning theory? Should all agreed syllabi provide a pegagogical framework at the level of objectives, like Living Difference does? Should local authorities support training of the kind which is going on in Hampshire?