Do and think.
I don't think you can presume what individual people actually think, regardless of whether they are religious or not. So you can cover what religious people do (in other words practice and customs etc) and what the religions teach as a matter of belief.
I am looking at this in the light of Dawkinsidea that we should not see kids as catholic, Muslim, Sikh etc.but here in your classification they are mainly secularist.
Another thing is that we give kids a background into life choices they might want to make.
But why then restrict to merely religious value systems. Surely then we should de-emphasise religion (the choice of a minority, with a tiny minority choosing to actively practice religion) and re-focus towards non religious ethical approaches - which are the choice of the vast majority. That isn't to say that religion should be removed, but placed in proper proportion to its adherents. Currently, of course, RE tends to focus on religions alone, with non religious ethical approaches largely absent from school curricular.
But why merely focus on religion to support 'life choices'. It is likely that 90%+ of kids in schools today will choose not to be actively religious as adults, so for most the notion that RE should provide a choice of religions to choose from is non-sensical as they will choose none. However the vast majority will choose to study later in life, will choose to work, will choose to live somewhere - so why not (in your 'life choices' agenda) provide as much (or actually far more) emphasis on getting kids to understand what it is like to work as an accountant, or lawyer, or brick-layer, or nurse. Or for country kids, what it is like to work in the city, and vice versa. For kids from the north, what life is like in the south etc.
All of this is very laudable and indeed is done to an extent. But the school day is limited and there is already insufficient time to cover the basics. So in this reality I think it is important for children to have a curriculum which includes a focus on ethical perspectives, and as part of that religions (and their practices etc and ethical standpoints) can be discussed.
But you also have to recognise that despite RE being compulsory and focussed on religions, a vanishingly small proportion of kids choose to change religion - nearly all either retain the religion they were brought up in or choose to be non religious (if brought up religious). Those brought up non religious hardly ever become religious as adults. So this notion of 'life choices' is effectively theoretical and not actually borne out in reality as if it were a box of chocolates, in which each kids chooses one.
But actually the best 'resource' for kids is other kids. Rather than teach in a sterile, theoretical manner that muslims celebrate Eid, they can be inquisitive and ask their friend who is a muslim, what that is all about.
I'm sure one of your complaints was that education did not prepare people for coming out as gay.
Is your intent now to have an education system confirming familial belief and practice as secular humanists and apatheists?
Of course not, quite the opposite. And this is one of my principled arguments against faith schools - that they reinforce a view that a child should simply adhere to familial belief. I think it better that kids recognise that people come from all faiths and (mostly) none, and be able to see this not just in theory but in practice in the kids they rub shoulders with in the playground.