The Department of Education’s Call for Evidence on the Review of the RE Core Syllabus…

The Department of Education has opened a Call for Evidence as part of its Review of Religious Education in Northern Ireland, with a closing date of 20 March 2026. The review is not a routine piece of curriculum housekeeping. It follows directly from the UK Supreme Court’s judgment in Re JR87 and DE [2025] UKSC 40, in which the Court found that RE as delivered in a Northern Ireland’s Controlled sector was not conveyed in an objective, critical, and pluralistic manner, in breach of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Department’s response was to commission a root-and-branch review of the Core Syllabus, which has not been substantially revised since 2007.

The drafting group has been given five Review Principles to work with. Four of them are broadly progressive in character: treating RE as an academic discipline, developing critical and analytical skills, being pluralist and inclusive, and preparing pupils for citizenship in a diverse society. The fifth — retaining Christianity as the “central focus” of the revised syllabus — sits in considerable tension with both the other four and the legal standard the Supreme Court has now established. How the drafting group navigates that tension will be central to whether the revised syllabus can satisfy the legal standard articulated in Re JR87.

Two datasets bear on who is actually sitting in these classrooms. The 2021 Census recorded that 17.4 per cent of adult respondents in Northern Ireland identified as having no religion, with that proportion markedly higher among young people. The Department’s own school census data for 2024/25 puts a sharper point on it: across Controlled schools — the sector at the centre of Re JR87 — 19.7 per cent of pupils, or just over 25,000 children, identify as having no religion. In Controlled primary schools specifically, the figure rises to 22.2 per cent. The drafting group is therefore designing a revised syllabus for a sector in which more than one in five primary-age pupils has no religious affiliation. A syllabus premised on the assumption that those pupils are peripheral, rather than full participants in a common curriculum, will be educationally inadequate and likely to invite further legal challenge before it is implemented.

The consultation is open to all, and responses can be submitted at: consultations.nidirect.gov.uk

The substantive questions are reproduced below to allow for advance preparation, as some of them — particularly Question 4 — might require a comprehensive response.

RE Specific Questions

The Terms of Reference set out the following five Review Principles, which the new RE syllabus should:

(a) Treat RE as an academic discipline — structured in an objective manner to promote intellectual engagement and respect for diverse perspectives.

(b) Develop critical and analytical skills — fostering analytical and critical thinking by engaging pupils in interpreting texts, evaluating arguments and understanding historical and cultural contexts.

(c) Retain Christianity as the central focus — recognising the historical, cultural and legal context of Northern Ireland and the enduring role of Christianity as the predominant religious belief in shaping education and society in Northern Ireland.

(d) Be Pluralist and Inclusive — ensuring pupils explore a range of religious and non-religious worldviews and encourage engagement with questions of belief, ethics, identity and meaning, reflecting the diversity of contemporary society.

(e) Prepare children and young people for Future Learning and Citizenship by promoting respect, tolerance and understanding of different beliefs and cultures.

Question 4. In your view, how should a revised Religious Education syllabus be designed and developed in order to meet the RE Review Principles set out above?

Question 5. Are there examples of RE syllabi from other countries that the drafting group should consider to inform its work? If so, please provide details, explaining the particular features and strengths of any such syllabi.

Question 6. Are there papers or research evidence relating to this matter that the drafting group should review to inform its work? (Please append and/or include references/links.)

Question 7. Are there any other comments you wish to make?