Religion classes in school - Megathread

Daniel Chase13 said:😁

I don't think so—mostly because we already have plenty of alternatives available in high schools. In fact, about 82% of students in American high schools choose religious studies as their elective, while only 18% opt for an Ethics course instead.

So, if you look at what's actually happening on the ground, there isn't really any fear surrounding religious education in our schools. Honestly, I’m all for introducing more diverse elective options.

After eight years of kids going to religious studies in elementary school just because "that's what everyone does," or "I don't want them to be different," or "I don't want my kid unsupervised"...
it's kind of weird, I guess

Daniel Chase13 said:😁

I don't think so—mostly because we already have plenty of alternatives available in high schools. In fact, about 82% of students in American high schools choose religious studies as their elective, while only 18% opt for an Ethics course instead.

So, if you look at what's actually happening on the ground, there isn't really any fear surrounding religious education in our schools. Honestly, I’m all for introducing more diverse elective options.

The thing is, you guys are forgetting that in certain parts of the US, prom dates have been shifted to different semesters, and attending religious studies is a prerequisite for graduation. 😍
That means all those excuses about "what will the neighbors think" or "I need to graduate for my grandma" basically stop people from picking Ethics like they originally planned.
And honestly, someone choosing religious studies just because they want to collect all the Pokémon is a whole different issue entirely.

Matthew Kim88 said:If we're talking about something like a Christmas pageant, why is it such a big deal if there's religious content in it?
If your kid was happy participating in the play, why did you stop her?

The thing is, it was never actually a Christmas pageant—it was just a mid-year school assembly. And by the way, every single student was forced to attend. If the whole school has to be there, regardless of faith, then why force all that religious content on everyone?

I didn't take anything away from her. What happened was she got kicked out of the group by people who wouldn't even let her participate in parts that had nothing to do with Jesus Christ. I never told her she couldn't dance, or sing, or recite poetry...

Luckily, she hasn't let it get to her for a while now. She caught on pretty quick.

Daniel Chase13 said:The reality is that almost every student who attends religious education in elementary school through their First Communion (around 3rd grade) tends to stick with it year after year.
In fact, the number of students dropping out of these programs after 3rd grade is incredibly small—nearly everyone who starts in 1st grade continues all the way through 8th grade without missing a beat.
Most parents who choose this elective for their children aren't actually struggling with the curriculum or the content; they genuinely want their kids to participate in these school-based religious classes consistently from 1st through 8th grade.

It would be really interesting to see how many more kids might actually show up to these classes if they were held where they belong—in actual churches... ☕

Joseph Sanchez10 said:After eight years of kids going to religious studies in elementary school just because "that's what everyone does," or "I don't want them to be different," or "I don't want my kid unsupervised"...
it's kind of weird, I guess

Does anyone know if there's a way to check the average final grades by high school class for both religion and ethics courses? 😬

Even asking that feels kind of ridiculous, since teachers are allowed to teach both anyway. It's enough to make your head spin.

Daniel Chase13 said:😁

I don't think so—mostly because we already have plenty of alternatives available in high schools. In fact, about 82% of students in American high schools choose religious studies as their elective, while only 18% opt for an Ethics course instead.

So, if you look at what's actually happening on the ground, there isn't really any fear surrounding religious education in our schools. Honestly, I’m all for introducing more diverse elective options.

Ethics isn't really a subject; it’s just a necessary evil.

If they actually tried offering something useful and high-quality—like advanced math, chemistry, physics, or French—then we'd see some real interest.

And apparently, kids starting high school now want this whole new subject where they have to learn everything from scratch 😁

Sarah Hall53 said:The thing is, you guys are forgetting that in certain parts of the US, prom dates have been shifted to different semesters, and attending religious studies is a prerequisite for graduation. 😍
That means all those excuses about "what will the neighbors think" or "I need to graduate for my grandma" basically stop people from picking Ethics like they originally planned.
And honestly, someone choosing religious studies just because they want to collect all the Pokémon is a whole different issue entirely.

Only a small fraction of students receive Confirmation during high school—for the most part, it happens in the 8th grade. So, even with the argument that Confirmation happens later, the percentage of kids choosing religious studies over an Ethics course would still be significantly above 60%. Besides, when it comes to grades, students find it just as easy to pull an A in Ethics as they do in religious studies. It’s essentially the same deal.

The reality is quite simple: when given the choice between an elective in Ethics or religious studies, the vast majority of students consistently opt for the latter.
That’s just how it is.

Joseph Sanchez10 said:I honestly wonder how many kids would actually show up for religion class if it was just another elective offered during the afternoon shift instead of the morning one.
Or, you know, if getting access to sacraments wasn't tied directly to whether they sat through those classes.
I can't tell you how many times I've heard parents say, "Ugh, let them just power through this year since they need their First Communion... once that's out of the way, we're done."

After chatting with some students in a typical middle school classroom over in Washington, D.C., I found out that about three-quarters of them are only sitting in religion class "because their parents make them," while they personally "don't really care" or "don't believe in that stuff" (to quote the kids directly).

The funny thing is, these exact same students ask all sorts of "awkward" questions and really try to challenge the teacher during class—though the instructor usually shuts them down pretty quickly—but they've ultimately just accepted that it's just another grade to chase, requiring them to memorize a bunch of stuff for a test.

To them, it feels like a total waste of time.

Jason Ortiz5 said:Does anyone know if there's a way to check the average final grades by high school class for both religion and ethics courses? 😬

Even asking that feels kind of ridiculous, since teachers are allowed to teach both anyway. It's enough to make your head spin.

Hold on a second. Don't you dare ---- 🤦

Jason Ortiz5 said:Does anyone know if there's a way to check the average final grades by high school class for both religion and ethics courses? 😬

Even asking that feels kind of ridiculous, since teachers are allowed to teach both anyway. It's enough to make your head spin.

Exactly.
Based on their five-year degree programs, these teachers are fully qualified to handle the Ethics elective.
It’s a positive move—and honestly, from a school administration standpoint, it makes a lot of practical sense too.

Daniel Chase13 said:Only a small fraction of students receive Confirmation during high school—for the most part, it happens in the 8th grade. So, even with the argument that Confirmation happens later, the percentage of kids choosing religious studies over an Ethics course would still be significantly above 60%. Besides, when it comes to grades, students find it just as easy to pull an A in Ethics as they do in religious studies. It’s essentially the same deal.

The reality is quite simple: when given the choice between an elective in Ethics or religious studies, the vast majority of students consistently opt for the latter.
That’s just how it is.

Well, if you look at the entire Archdiocese of Chicago—or even the one over in Los Angeles—they’re basically all just part of that same "small fraction" of people getting confirmed. ☕

Quincy:

mariana3 As you mentioned: I was chatting with a group of kids from an average elementary school class over in Washington, D.C. the other day, and I picked up something pretty interesting—or maybe just a bit sobering. It turns out about three-quarters of them are sitting through religious education classes simply because "that’s what their parents want," even though they aren't actually interested in it themselves. One kid even told me straight up that they "don't really believe in those things." It’s a candid little snapshot of where things stand with that generation. It’s funny how these students work—they’ll spend the whole period throwing out these "awkward," challenging questions during class, only to have the teacher shut them down or cut them off mid-sentence. But despite all that questioning, they’ve already mentally checked out. They’ve accepted that this is just another credit to chase—just another subject where they need to cram a bunch of facts into their heads, pass the test, and move on. It’s just a complete waste of time for them—honestly, I don't see the point.

From chatting with a few teachers I know, I’ve seen cases where kids actually look forward to their religion class—I’m being literal here. To use the exact phrase those teachers always use: they absolutely adore their instructors.

It feels like we’re back at it again—focusing entirely on one single mistake made by one specific religion teacher. It’s funny how that works. You see teachers and professors across every other subject making the exact same kinds of errors, yet somehow, this one instance gets singled out for scrutiny.

It also really comes down to how students actually approach the questions—I mean, there’s a massive difference between genuine curiosity and just being disruptive. If they’re constantly cutting people off or throwing out random, off-topic questions just to derail the lesson, then you can't really blame a religion teacher for setting some boundaries. It’s only natural that they’d want to maintain control over the classroom environment when things start getting disrespectful or completely lose focus.

You know, I hear this all the time from students—and honestly, even from their parents—that spending so much time grinding through advanced math is just a massive waste of energy. Their argument is always the same: they’ll never actually use these complex formulas or equations in their day-to-day lives once they graduate. It’s a common sentiment, and when you look at how much time is dedicated to it, I can see why they feel that way.

For some students, the bulk of the required reading list for American literature feels like nothing more than a tedious slog—honestly, just a massive waste of time.

For some students, certain sections in their biology or history textbooks feel like absolute nonsense—just a total waste of time spent memorizing fabricated stories that don't seem to have any real-world application.

Honestly, I feel like for certain students, memorizing all those granular details about different countries and their economic structures—stuff you'd typically find in a geography textbook—is just a complete waste of time. It feels pretty unnecessary to most of them.

For some students, memorizing every single historical date feels like a complete waste of energy—honestly, it can feel pretty pointless when you're sitting there staring at a textbook.

For some students...

I don't think anyone would actually support cutting entire subjects from our school curriculum just because of a single "for certain students" argument. Honestly, that logic shouldn't apply to any subject we teach—it’s just not how a solid education system should work.

Sarah Hall53 said:Well, if you look at the entire Archdiocese of Chicago—or even the one over in Los Angeles—they’re basically all just part of that same "small fraction" of people getting confirmed. ☕

Well, yeah—it’s a small slice.

Those are just two out of the 18 dioceses in America (not counting the Chaplain Corps, of course).

2 : 16 ☕

In those two, they receive the sacrament of confirmation in high school, while the other 16 do it back in 8th grade.

Jason Ortiz5 said:Ethics isn't really a subject; it’s just a necessary evil.

If they actually tried offering something useful and high-quality—like advanced math, chemistry, physics, or French—then we'd see some real interest.

Let's not get carried away.
Why should we cram kids' schedules full when other students are praying or learning about mythology? Plus, why pay for extra classes just to keep kids entertained while others genuinely need space for religious expression?
Just let them sleep or go play outside! Honestly, I don't think everyone would be interested in extra lessons anyway.

By the way, I almost forgot—during something like a pandemic situation, religion class could easily be moved to a zero period for certain grades. Having two or maybe three religion teachers at a school could cover about 10 to 15 different classrooms.
If they can schedule extra math for 7:00 AM, why not religion? Especially since some important services (for true believers) start at 7:00 AM too.

Susan James said:Let's not get carried away.
Why should we cram kids' schedules full when other students are praying or learning about mythology? Plus, why pay for extra classes just to keep kids entertained while others genuinely need space for religious expression?
Just let them sleep or go play outside! Honestly, I don't think everyone would be interested in extra lessons anyway.

By the way, I almost forgot—during something like a pandemic situation, religion class could easily be moved to a zero period for certain grades. Having two or maybe three religion teachers at a school could cover about 10 to 15 different classrooms.
If they can schedule extra math for 7:00 AM, why not religion? Especially since some important services (for true believers) start at 7:00 AM too.

Look, my daughter used to take French back in the day, until their teacher left. She didn't find it stressful at all; she actually treated it like a fun hobby. She loved the small group setting because the teacher actually had time to explain things properly and answer questions...

But hey, my kid is a total overachiever. A straight-A student through and through. She isn't exactly the "chill" type.

Jason Ortiz5 said:Look, my daughter used to take French back in the day, until their teacher left. She didn't find it stressful at all; she actually treated it like a fun hobby. She loved the small group setting because the teacher actually had time to explain things properly and answer questions...

But hey, my kid is a total overachiever. A straight-A student through and through. She isn't exactly the "chill" type.

If we're talking about grades 1 through 4, there is honestly zero point in cramming the schedule. For instance, some parents send their kids to religious studies classes, while other kids are still struggling just to master the alphabet or feeling pressured to catch up on reading during after-school programs. It doesn't make sense to force extra languages or advanced math onto students who don't have those specific interests, especially when they might have real academic struggles they could be working on while others are in religious studies. (I remember us discussing this a few years ago—how hard it is to find a speech therapist anywhere, yet some schools have therapists seeing kids during free periods or religious study hours). Not to mention, for some kids, learning French can be incredibly overwhelming if they are already struggling with English.
We also shouldn't forget that time was taken away from math, English, art, and music just to make room for religious studies and "early" foreign language tracks.

As for the older grades, I think by that age the gap in learning speeds is already quite wide. Interests vary so much that forcing robotics or a third language on a tiny group of 3 to 9 students just seems pointless to me.
What makes more sense is keeping an elective similar to religious studies just to ensure there's enough work to keep more teachers employed.

By the way, another big reason why people pick religious studies over ethics in high school is social pressure. If you want to be a godparent for a ceremony (which often happens when you're in high school and being asked by family), people tend to ask what classes you're taking. It doesn't always happen, but I know a guy who couldn't serve as a godparent simply because he chose the ethics track instead, regardless of his actual faith.
So, even if they finish their religious requirements in 8th grade, if they want to be available for those social roles later, they basically need religious studies listed on their transcript.😬

There’s way too much coercion involved in something that should be a deeply personal choice, like faith.
But hey, that's how it goes when they're trying to protect jobs.

Susan James said:If we're talking about grades 1 through 4, there is honestly zero point in cramming the schedule. For instance, some parents send their kids to religious studies classes, while other kids are still struggling just to master the alphabet or feeling pressured to catch up on reading during after-school programs. It doesn't make sense to force extra languages or advanced math onto students who don't have those specific interests, especially when they might have real academic struggles they could be working on while others are in religious studies. (I remember us discussing this a few years ago—how hard it is to find a speech therapist anywhere, yet some schools have therapists seeing kids during free periods or religious study hours). Not to mention, for some kids, learning French can be incredibly overwhelming if they are already struggling with English.
We also shouldn't forget that time was taken away from math, English, art, and music just to make room for religious studies and "early" foreign language tracks.

As for the older grades, I think by that age the gap in learning speeds is already quite wide. Interests vary so much that forcing robotics or a third language on a tiny group of 3 to 9 students just seems pointless to me.
What makes more sense is keeping an elective similar to religious studies just to ensure there's enough work to keep more teachers employed.

By the way, another big reason why people pick religious studies over ethics in high school is social pressure. If you want to be a godparent for a ceremony (which often happens when you're in high school and being asked by family), people tend to ask what classes you're taking. It doesn't always happen, but I know a guy who couldn't serve as a godparent simply because he chose the ethics track instead, regardless of his actual faith.
So, even if they finish their religious requirements in 8th grade, if they want to be available for those social roles later, they basically need religious studies listed on their transcript.😬

There’s way too much coercion involved in something that should be a deeply personal choice, like faith.
But hey, that's how it goes when they're trying to protect jobs.

I’ll say it again—based on my conversations with several different teachers—math might still have one period too many, but honestly, the actual number of hours isn't even the biggest issue here. The real headache is how packed the curriculum is; it's just way too much material for most kids to digest properly.

Then you have principals and parents unfairly blaming the teachers, claiming they aren't "reaching" the students. I mean, how are they supposed to succeed when they're being crushed under the weight of a syllabus designed this way?

A good chunk of what kids are expected to learn in math today really should be pushed back by at least a year. Instead of this frantic race to cover everything, we ought to focus on building a rock-solid foundation for those advanced topics later on. For instance, some of the stuff taught in fifth grade really belongs in sixth grade—we should trim the volume of topics and make sure they actually stick.

As for that small group of high achievers who need more, we can always provide extra challenge problems or supplemental advanced sessions to keep them engaged.

Daniel Chase13 said:Quincy:

mariana3 As you mentioned: I was chatting with a group of kids from an average elementary school class over in Washington, D.C. the other day, and I picked up something pretty interesting—or maybe just a bit sobering. It turns out about three-quarters of them are sitting through religious education classes simply because "that’s what their parents want," even though they aren't actually interested in it themselves. One kid even told me straight up that they "don't really believe in those things." It’s a candid little snapshot of where things stand with that generation. It’s funny how these students work—they’ll spend the whole period throwing out these "awkward," challenging questions during class, only to have the teacher shut them down or cut them off mid-sentence. But despite all that questioning, they’ve already mentally checked out. They’ve accepted that this is just another credit to chase—just another subject where they need to cram a bunch of facts into their heads, pass the test, and move on. It’s just a complete waste of time for them—honestly, I don't see the point.

From chatting with a few teachers I know, I’ve seen cases where kids actually look forward to their religion class—I’m being literal here. To use the exact phrase those teachers always use: they absolutely adore their instructors.

It feels like we’re back at it again—focusing entirely on one single mistake made by one specific religion teacher. It’s funny how that works. You see teachers and professors across every other subject making the exact same kinds of errors, yet somehow, this one instance gets singled out for scrutiny.

It also really comes down to how students actually approach the questions—I mean, there’s a massive difference between genuine curiosity and just being disruptive. If they’re constantly cutting people off or throwing out random, off-topic questions just to derail the lesson, then you can't really blame a religion teacher for setting some boundaries. It’s only natural that they’d want to maintain control over the classroom environment when things start getting disrespectful or completely lose focus.

You know, I hear this all the time from students—and honestly, even from their parents—that spending so much time grinding through advanced math is just a massive waste of energy. Their argument is always the same: they’ll never actually use these complex formulas or equations in their day-to-day lives once they graduate. It’s a common sentiment, and when you look at how much time is dedicated to it, I can see why they feel that way.

For some students, the bulk of the required reading list for American literature feels like nothing more than a tedious slog—honestly, just a massive waste of time.

For some students, certain sections in their biology or history textbooks feel like absolute nonsense—just a total waste of time spent memorizing fabricated stories that don't seem to have any real-world application.

Honestly, I feel like for certain students, memorizing all those granular details about different countries and their economic structures—stuff you'd typically find in a geography textbook—is just a complete waste of time. It feels pretty unnecessary to most of them.

For some students, memorizing every single historical date feels like a complete waste of energy—honestly, it can feel pretty pointless when you're sitting there staring at a textbook.

For some students...

I don't think anyone would actually support cutting entire subjects from our school curriculum just because of a single "for certain students" argument. Honestly, that logic shouldn't apply to any subject we teach—it’s just not how a solid education system should work.

Teachers... religion class? 😬

Daniel Chase13 said:Only a small fraction of students receive Confirmation during high school—for the most part, it happens in the 8th grade. So, even with the argument that Confirmation happens later, the percentage of kids choosing religious studies over an Ethics course would still be significantly above 60%. Besides, when it comes to grades, students find it just as easy to pull an A in Ethics as they do in religious studies. It’s essentially the same deal.

The reality is quite simple: when given the choice between an elective in Ethics or religious studies, the vast majority of students consistently opt for the latter.
That’s just how it is.

Could you please provide a source for that claim?

Daniel Chase13 said:I’ll say it again—based on my conversations with several different teachers—math might still have one period too many, but honestly, the actual number of hours isn't even the biggest issue here. The real headache is how packed the curriculum is; it's just way too much material for most kids to digest properly.

Then you have principals and parents unfairly blaming the teachers, claiming they aren't "reaching" the students. I mean, how are they supposed to succeed when they're being crushed under the weight of a syllabus designed this way?

A good chunk of what kids are expected to learn in math today really should be pushed back by at least a year. Instead of this frantic race to cover everything, we ought to focus on building a rock-solid foundation for those advanced topics later on. For instance, some of the stuff taught in fifth grade really belongs in sixth grade—we should trim the volume of topics and make sure they actually stick.

As for that small group of high achievers who need more, we can always provide extra challenge problems or supplemental advanced sessions to keep them engaged.

As a math teacher, I absolutely refuse to agree with these claims you're pulling out of thin air.

Anyway, separate from those posts, in an earlier (deleted) one, you mentioned that religion should have a place in public schools. My direct question to you is this: why? Why should religion—an elective subject centered on faith—be part of a public educational institution instead of being handled by a private religious institution meant for that purpose?

A recent UNICEF study on about 1,000 K-12 students found that kids who don't take religious studies get bullied the most by their peers. Coming in second was discrimination against kids from low-income families, then national identity issues, and finally religious minorities

Not sure if I copied the link right, maybe