Living Together in Year 10
Ms Farrugia teaches at a state secondary school in Malta. In her Year 10 cohort of 120 students, 48 are Catholic, 30 are Muslim (mostly Libyan and Somali), 12 are Orthodox, 2 are Jewish, and 28 have opted for the Ethics class. Under the current arrangement, students who do not wish to follow Religious Knowledge take Ethics instead. The head has asked Ms Farrugia to design a six-week module called 'Living Together' for a mixed group of 25 students drawn from both classes. A Muslim parent has complained that Ethics teaches 'western secularism and relativism', while a Catholic parent has complained that her son is now 'learning about Islam' and wants him withdrawn from all religion lessons. The school's policy is 'inclusive education'. Ms Farrugia has one hour a week, no textbook, and a class that includes a boy who has just arrived from Eritrea and speaks little English.
1. Explain the legal and educational framework in Malta for Religious Knowledge and Ethics, and how it applies to the head's request.
Read the worked answer
The constitutional and legal frame. Malta's Constitution recognises the Catholic religion as the religion of the Maltese Islands (Article 2) and guarantees freedom of conscience and worship (Article 40). The Education Act provides for religious education in state schools, and since 2014 an Ethics programme has been offered as an alternative for students who do not wish to follow Religious Knowledge. Parents retain the right to withdraw their children from religious education.
What this means for the head. The school may not compel a student to receive confessional catechesis. It must provide a genuine alternative, not a punitive 'opt-out'. The Ethics class is not a 'no-religion' class; it is a space for reasoned reflection on moral questions. The head's request for a mixed module is lawful and educationally sound, provided it does not become covert catechesis for one group or a debunking exercise for another.
The distinction that matters. Catechesis aims at formation in the faith; religious education aims at knowledge and understanding. A state school can do the second, not the first. Ms Farrugia should be clear about which she is doing.
2. How would you design the module to be inclusive without treating all religious and ethical claims as equally true?
Read the worked answer
Start with aims. The module should have three aims: knowledge (what Catholics, Muslims, Jews, Orthodox and secular humanists actually believe and practise), skills (how to listen, ask questions, disagree well), and dispositions (respect, curiosity, honesty). These are not the same as 'accepting that all religions are equally true'.
Use a phenomenological approach. Study real texts, artefacts, festivals, and testimonies. Invite a Muslim parent, a Catholic catechist, and a humanist speaker - not as exhibits, but as conversation partners. Use primary sources: a passage from the Qur'an, a psalm, a secular ethics case. Compare how different traditions answer the same question: What is a good death? Who is my neighbour?
Avoid relativism. Distinguish 'tolerance' from 'indifference'. The class can study truth-claims without pretending they are all the same. Students should learn to say: 'I disagree with you, and I want to understand why you think that.' That is harder than either relativism or polemic.
Include the Eritrean boy. Prepare visual vocabulary, pair him with a bilingual peer, and allow him to contribute from his own experience without making him a representative of 'Africa'. The module should be a place where his language and faith are a resource, not a problem.
3. How would you answer the two parental complaints?
Read the worked answer
The Muslim parent. Begin by listening. Her fear is that Ethics will teach her son that all religions are equally false or that Islam is a problem. Explain that the module is not secularist indoctrination: it includes religious voices, it teaches argument and respect, and it does not ask students to abandon their faith. Offer to show her the scheme of work and the resources. Remind her of the right to withdraw, but do not present withdrawal as the expected outcome.
The Catholic parent. Her complaint assumes that RE is catechesis and that learning about Islam is a threat. Explain that the Church's own teaching (Nostra Aetate 2–3) calls Catholics to regard Muslims with esteem and to engage in dialogue. Knowledge of another faith is not conversion. The module is about understanding, not syncretism. If she still wants her son withdrawn, the right remains, but the school should explain what he will miss.
The school's response. A meeting with both parents, separately if necessary, and a written rationale. The head should defend the module publicly while making clear that it does not replace catechesis. The worst outcome would be to cancel the module because of complaints; the second worst would be to impose it without explanation. Ms Farrugia's task is to make the case for a genuinely educational space, not to win a culture war.