There has been much commentary among Christians about a proposal for Ofsted (the Office for Standards in Education) to extend their remit so that youth work in England (including those conducted by churches) are inspected to ensure that ‘British values’ are being complied with.
It has to be emphasised that it is only a proposal and not a policy decision. It originated out of the Prevent programme (where extremism, especially among Muslims, is countered) and in the light of the ‘Trojan Horse’ schools in Birmingham (where Muslim education was conducted in an atmosphere of intolerance and sexism). The suggestion that all youth activities were to be inspected were made in an attempt to be even handed and not seen to targeting any one part of the community.
It was first mooted by the Chief Inspector of Schools in England, Sir Michael Wilshere, in an LBC radio phone-in in January 2016. He commented that the Government was concerned about the radicalisation of children in unregistered schools. He then continued with the suggestion for Sunday schools, madrassas and after-school clubs to be registered. He claimed that not all the registered bodies would be registered, although they will be aware of their existence, and action would be taken as the result of tip offs by whistleblowers.
The youth and children’s work that would be looked at would not only be those run by religious organisations. It could include scouts, guides, youth military (such as army cadets) and first aid organisations, humanist and secularist organisations, and those run by other specialist groups (such as the National Trust).
The Prime Minister, David Cameron, has stated that he would not be bringing the proposal into operation. Furthermore, the Secretary of State for Education, Nicky Morgan, wrote to the Christian Institute: ‘We are not proposing to regulate institutions teaching children for a short period every week, such as Sunday schools or the Scouts,’ before continuing: ‘Nor will the proposed system apply to one-off residential activities, such as week long summer camps.’
In the House of Lords, the Education Minister Lord Nash reiterated the Government’s position: “We do not propose to regulate institutions such as Sunday schools and one-off residential settings which teach children for a short period every week.’ He continued: ‘We are looking specifically at places where children receive intensive education, which we think will be defined as more than six to eight hours a week.’
However, these comments have not stopped the alarming concern, including among Christian commentators. It has often included the word ‘could’ as a matter of supposition. One example given by an organisation was that churches in England who arrange residential weekends in other parts of the United Kingdom for their youth groups could have Ofsted inspectors travelling to inspect them out of the Ofsted jurisdiction – which is an instance of conjecture and would not happen as there is enough work in the England for them to be getting on with (such as the inspection of schools and the children’s provision by local authorities).
There is not only the lack of political will, including the recent upsurge in the coalition of unlikely allies in the cause of free speech, but also in the very practical nature that there are not enough Ofsted inspectors to undertake the inspections in schools and other institutions at the moment.
There is the probable reality at the moment of an appeals process being set up for schools to supply objections to an inspections findings (such as basis of some description, the quality of the inspection, even the timing of the inspection). The last thing any Government or other body would need is more organisations to inspect and cause a log jam in the inspection appeals process.
If the proposal were to become a reality, it would have to be asked whether our youth work would actually pass, not because of the values espoused in the evening or on the camp, but because the setup was not ‘fit for purpose.’ The leaders must be speaking and acting out as examples of how Christ wants young people to live (1 Corinthians 11: 1) The youth group should be in a position to develop life skills for its attendees (e.g. through the Duke of Edinburgh award scheme). Moreover, we should be ensuring that we are not being glorified childminders – it should be our aim to bring the Gospel to those who are lost so they have another opportunity to hear the good news of our Lord, to disciple those who have made their commitment to follow Jesus so that they will grow, and to bring Biblical truths to all in our care.
It is this last part that some will have particular problems with. We should be reasonable and responsible leaders as the response to any question from any young person should not be merely ‘it/they are wrong.’ The responses to such ‘sticky’ topics as same-sex relationships or other religions and beliefs must be given in the equal measure of love and truth. There must also be investigation (for not every youth worker will be an expert in all fields!), consulting books and people knowledgeable about certain subjects, so that the young person has as full explanation as possible to his/her query. Peter reminds us: ‘Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience…’ (1 Peter 3: 15 – 16, my italics).
It is important that youth workers have regular training so that the standard of the service that we are giving, as well as reading excellent publications such as Youthwork Magazine. Although there is not the need to be the fount of knowledge on all apologetics, ethics and morality, the youth worker should be kept abreast on the broad issues.
For example, with regard to other religions, it could be pointed out that followers of other beliefs are often sincerely, but the only way to Jesus is by accepting His finished work on the cross as we cannot earn our way to be with God in heaven. It appreciated that this is the easiest answer which is biblical and shows the sort of respect that Paul demonstrated in Athens (Acts 17: 16 – 34), and there will be harder questions to field particularly in the matters of morality.
Although there are very few people would relish appraisals, it would give the churches the opportunity to speak biblical truth to someone who might not otherwise be in contact with Christians as we are exhorted to ‘be prepared in season and out of season.’ (2 Timothy 4: 2) Instead of viewing it as a possible example of persecution (which it is not as many of our brothers and sisters in other lands can testify), we should grasp it as a possible opportunity for mission.
At the start of the article, there was reference to the Government’s ‘British values’ which have been defined as ‘democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, and mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs.’ It is the last aspect that often jars with some Christians but it does not state that we have to accept the beliefs of others as being right, otherwise atheists and agnostics would have to undoubtedly agree that we are right – a position that clearly does not occur. However, the value does accord with the Bible: ‘If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone’ (Romans 12: 18) and ‘Make every effort to live in peace with all men and to be holy; without holiness no-one will see the Lord.’ (Hebrews 12: 14)
The question arises as to whether we are seeing these Christian values, which supersede the British values, in our youth work. We have an opportunity to check whether the young people in our care are developing Christlike thinking that is grounded in the Bible and supported by evidence where possible from other sources (such as good books), which will transfer into acting in ways that will please Him and cause all (including the inspectors) to see that biblical thinking is reasonable.
If the answer is ‘yes’ to the last paragraph then our youth work will have no concerns if (and it is big ‘if’) the proposals become a reality and the inspections commence.
Comments