News 
 Local News 
 News 
 General 
 Firth comes forth in favour of ethics classes 

Firth comes forth in favour of ethics classes

26 Oct, 2010 04:16 PM
EDUCATION Minister Verity Firth said last week that the report on a trial of ethics classes offered as an alternative to scripture in 10 NSW schools had "found high levels of engagement among students".

"It also found that the course met the aim of introducing students to the language and nature of ethics and ethical issues," Ms Firth said.

She said ethics courses would complete existing scripture classes if they were introduced throughout NSW rather than compete with them.

"(It) would simply provide an alternative without diminishing in any way the importance of religious classes for other families," Ms Firth said.

The Reverend Peter Lin, the Fairfield Anglican minister, said he would be happy to see an ethics course offered to every student but that he had reservations about the way the trial was conducted.

"I'm unhappy about them being given as an alternative to scripture," Mr Lin said. "There's no reason ethics classes can't be taught at another time; there's no practical reason to put them against scripture."

Mr Lin said students had always been able to "opt out" of scripture classes but that the mood in public schools over the past few years had been reversed, so that now students had to actively "opt in".

"If nobody tells parents they have to 'opt in', their kids are just sent to the library or something like that," he said. "I certainly think a church presence in the schools has benefits beyond the scripture classes.

"We encourage the kids in our congregation to be involved in the school community and the parents to be involved and volunteer and things like that."

Fairfield Teachers Association president Glenn Hokin said it was important to give students and their families the opportunity to make their own decisions about religious education.

"Ethics classes are an important alternative," Mr Hokin said.

"In general, teachers are always in favour of providing as many opportunities as possible for students to make the best use of their time.

"Rather than kids sitting there doing nothing, surely it makes sense to get them engaged in some other valuable activity."

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Dear Peter Lin, the 'practical reason to put them against scripture' is to provide the SRE 'Opt-Out' kids with something meaningful to do!
Posted by Michelle, 26/10/2010 8:53:26 PM, on Fairfield Champion
If what Mr. Lin suggests, viz. students having to actively "opt in", then I don't understand the objection of the introducing the ethics classes as an alternative to scripture. Surely this suggests that parents in his community are actively choosing religious eductions classes. None of the arguments that have come from the religious institutions deal with the issue that presently there is no alternative to religious education. The fact is that there are parents in this country that do not wish their children to attend religious education classes largely based on their, mainly Christian, religious context. What religious institutions should be doing is finding a way to incorporate the publicly available ethics course material into their SRE classes. In this way children attending SRE are taught both moral instruction and ethical enquiry to complement. The simultaneous ethics classes are then for children whose parents prefer ethical enquiry over moral instruction. Everyone is happy!
Posted by Victor, 26/10/2010 9:17:13 PM, on Fairfield Champion
Scripture is important and should not be devalued by placing a worthwhile subject in opposition, when all kids could benefit from such classes. In some ways, this will make inroads into formalising scripture classes, which I think the state should not be anywhere near. It is disingenuous of ALP to suggest that this is anything other than an assault on scripture. It has been handled that badly and no amount of weasel words regarding ethics values will sideline that truth.
Posted by DD Ball, 27/10/2010 9:31:54 AM, on Fairfield Champion
Hear hear Victor and Michelle. I don't believe Mr Lin has his facts straight. Students at our school at least have to actively 'opt out', and those who do are not supposed to be given alternative activities. Bring on ethics classes as a worthwhile alternative.
Posted by Andrea, 27/10/2010 4:41:09 PM, on Fairfield Champion
Ethics education is already incorporated in the education system so I think this is a kind of overkill that does nothing. The fact remains Australia has always been based on Christian faith, it is in our legal system and its what has made us strong, just look at other places in the world where they have chosen to ignore God in their education, do we want to follow their path? We have done well with scripture classes for decades, why follow the examples of other countries such as America who have completely failed in their ethics and standards of morality. It has not worked over there, it is ridiculous to even consider. I don't think we Australians want that to happen here. So no to these so called ethics classes.
Posted by Eddy, Wetherill Park, 27/10/2010 11:10:15 PM, on Fairfield Champion
In one sense, I agree with Daniel Ball - the State should have nothing to do with the teaching of scripture. That's purely something for the various religions themselves. State schools should, however, have a role to play in the development of social mores - not in the relic of instruction in the Semitic religions.
Posted by Bill Cashman, 28/10/2010 5:06:02 AM, on Fairfield Champion
Peter Lin's comments include fundamental mistakes (or are they part of the deliberate, highly unethical and relentless Church misinformation strategy?). The ethics classes are not an alternative for kids whose parents have a faith; they are an alternative for the kids whose parents don't have a faith or one that has no SRE and otherwise twiddle their thumbs for an hour. For parents with a faith it is business as usual. Is the real issue here that Mr Lin lacks confidence in the strength of faith of parent's with kids in SRE and that they will be seduced away to Godless ethics classes? The current DET policy clearly requires children to be opted out and this is what schools do. Further more your statement "I certainly think a church presence in the schools has benefits beyond the scripture classes" is offensive. Our schools and government are deliberately secular and for good reasons and only after a long struggle. The church has no place in schools and if I was in charge all kids would go to SRE as you suggest but SRE would be conducted after school and not on government property. However, let's just take one step at a time.
Posted by Robert Quinn, 28/10/2010 8:53:10 AM, on Fairfield Champion
So Eddy, what do you propose doing with the children who opt out of Scripture? At the moment they are not allowed to do anything according to the law. Just for your information, America is one of the most religious countries in the world, and has the biggest number of people who believe in the Christian god and that the bible is god's literal word. Your argument seems flawed in that respect.
Posted by Andrea, 28/10/2010 1:51:19 PM, on Fairfield Champion
Thank you all for your comments. Michelle, well managed schools do provide meaningful activity already when scripture is on. Victor, scripture is full of moral instruction. Everything we teach has life application - eg. be kind, don't bear grudges, don't lie, be other centred etc. As for the trial, it was supposed to "complement" scripture. I'm not sure how it does that when it is on a the same time. Andrea, I did not say all schools do this. There are schools who are "opt out" but there are those who have and are "opt in". These are the facts. Bill, Christianity has been a massive part of our heritage, and is a current reality in society. Even if children are not Christian, is it so terrible that they learn about it? It's part of our history. Gosh, Christmas is celebrating the birth of Jesus. As for the "relic of instruction" I'm sad that helping the poor, forgiving one another, caring for the vulnerable and the like is seen as instruction that is obsolete. Robert, rather than respond at length, it may be worth just checking why there is SRE in the first place. As for deliberate misinformation, that's uncalled for and untrue. SRE is supposed to be offered to all students
Posted by Peter Lin, 28/10/2010 10:08:09 PM, on Fairfield Champion
When you say America is the most religious country in the world, do you mean God, or do you really mean money? Yes it has a large number of Christians, but statistics show they are decreasing, and as a consequence as I said before, ethical standards because they have chosen to ignore God to follow a self-centred lifestyle of excess and immorality. When I was discussing this with an American friend he unhappily put it to me, "Money is the god here".
Posted by Eddy, Wetherill Park, 29/10/2010 2:13:53 AM, on Fairfield Champion
1 | 2  |  next >

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Unconvinced: Fairfield Anglican minister Peter Lin is not convinced that ethics classes would make a suitable alternative to scripture in NSW public schools. Picture: Wesley Lonergan
Unconvinced: Fairfield Anglican minister Peter Lin is not convinced that ethics classes would make a suitable alternative to scripture in NSW public schools. Picture: Wesley Lonergan

Most popular articles


Design an ad 070512
 
Jeep Raffle 180512
 
Homeshow 180512


Fairfield Champion







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...