should not see them as inevitable
dichotomies. Rather they serve to help us to
reflect more explicitly on SMSC learning in
our schools.
Formal or Informal?
As the list above suggests, the variety of ways
in which schools might teach SMSC
development incorporates many different
pedagogies and methods. This leads us to
consider the extent to which pupils’ SMSC
development is either formal (in the sense of
being taught and structured) or informal
(in the sense of being gained through the
operation of processes and experiences);
Explicit or Implicit?
Often closely linked to the question of the
formal or informal teaching of SMSC is that
regarding whether such learning is made
explicit or implicit for pupils. In other words,
are pupils aware that they are receiving or
participating in SMSC learning? Often the
answer to this question is no – pupils are
either learning the content of a particular
subject or are engaging in activities for other
purposes, meaning that the specific focus on
SMSC development is hidden (and for many,
this may well be a positive thing). It is worth
noting that few explicit SMSC resources
exist for teachers to use in schools (for an
exception visit www.smsc.org.uk);
Faith-based or Secular?
Given the subject nature at hand, the content
of SMSC inherently involve questions of Faith
(even if that is in the sense of rejecting faith).
Over the last few years, there has been much
public and press debate about the role of
faith in contemporary British society and,
more specifically, in relation to values. Of
course, for those schools which have a faith
foundation the relationship between faith
and SMSC development may be clearer
(although there remains the question of
pupils attending who are not members of the
school’s faith). For non-faith schools the
question may be more complex – should they
relate SMSC learning to one faith, a
6
multitude of faiths or to no-faiths at all. These
questions are not easy to answer, and
depend for their answer on the given school,
its pupils and its community. The key
point is, though, that questions of faith
should not be forgotten in the development
of pupils SMSC learning;
Experiences or development?
I have left what I believe to the most
important question until last. There is no
doubt that schools provide a range of
opportunities for pupils’ SMSC learning. What
is not always clear, however, is whether such
opportunities provide a loosely connected
range of experiences that equally loosely
seek to support pupils’ SMSC learning or, on
the other hand, whether such opportunities
are aimed at pupils’ SMSC development.
Certainly, official guidance speaks in terms of
development. That it does so, however,
introduces the issue of what it means to say
that a pupil has developed in relation to
SMSC. Inherently connected to this is the
issue of progression – are teachers and
schools supporting pupils to progress in the
SMSC learning and, if so, what models of
progression exist to support this? Onc