Faith schools to be allowed to redact exam papers.

My apologies that it read as patronising. That was not my intent.

"When GCSE biology or physics A level is on a CV or UCAS, there will be no way of knowing whether or not the whole curriculum has been covered."

I am amazed that the Boards would allow this, and that the Universities are not protesting. Perhaps they don't know?

Meditrina - don't be so patronising - of course we know there is not uniformity - and you are comparing the provision for individuals to act on conscience against that of a complete institution.

Anyway, we could go on all day about this. Let's no de-rail.

Fundementally I do not think state funded institutions - schools - should be allowed to simply wipe out a whole area of important science from the curriculum, or interfere with the public exam boards in this way because of their religious beliefs.

I don't see that a school can be equipping pupils to enter the modern world if a they cannot learn about any of the developments and discoveries in physics, for example, that explore the Big Bang. Are they not alowed to nkow about CERN, or many aspects of particle physics?

Huge areas of education and employment will be denied them. What these schools are delivering simply cannot be considered 'education' in the C21st. And therefore should not be funded.

*If the child writing the exam is creationist and needs to answer a question on evolution, then they can write the answer

Some scientists (or most scientists) believe in evolution for these reasons....*
This answer would be wrong and would get no marks. Science is not about belief, it is about observation. Would you expect to get marks in a history exam for writing "Some historians (or most historians) believe that Nazi Germany was responsible for the extermination of millions of Jews."?

And there are scientists out there who hold a creationist viewpoint. I don't happen to agree with them, but they are there, and you can't say they are not real scientists, just because they hold a different view to you.
No, I say they are not real scientists because they do not use the scientific method. In exactly the same way as there are revisionist historians who are not real historians.

There are also many scientist who believe in God, but have no problem with evolution.
Of course there are, but there aren't ANY scientists who deny evolution, whether they believe in a god or not. As mentioned in this thread, the Roman Catholic church and the Church of England both acknowledge evolution.

I can't name any individuals, and of course the local health authority must ensure that all services are appropriately available within the region.

Doctors have always been able to opt out of providing contraception services, and since the revisions to the GP contract (in late 90s/early 00s?) according to BMA web site, the total opt outs also now include cervical screening, childhood vaccinations and immunisations, child health surveillance and maternity services. I hadn't actually realised there were so many.

I don't actually think Blu's NHS comparison is terribly relevant, though it does illustrate (like the whole treatment postcode lottery) that there is less uniformity in publicly funded services than people sometimes think.

meditrina
and there is a legal opt out on contraception and abortion services which can be exercised on religious grounds
name me the UK hospital or GP surgery that has opted out of those services?

Speaking as an Atheist, I think its really important to understand religions
but they are belief systems for which there is no evidence

Science is about facts and observation

The community in question is sexist, trying to stop its women being educated as then they might realise what a shitty deal they get.
That this is allowed in the UK with MY taxes is an outrage.

Even within the NHS, the postcode lottery means that there are services which vary between regions (and this has always been the case) and there is a legal opt out on contraception and abortion services which can be exercised on religious grounds. So the NHS comparison is an apt one, as yes it happens there and has done so for nearly 50 years).

The DofEd line quoted in article linked to OP suggests however that the a government is not minded to permit religious opt outs from the school curriculum. (Not seen anything to suggest they're going to end the religious opt-out in NHS though, nor in other party manifestos in recent years).

meditrina - but they should be able to explain, in a science paper the principles of eveolution, in scientific terms, even if they disagree with them.

I can answer a paper about creationism, explaining the ins and outs, because I have studied it. I don't happen to believe it. It is the fundamental of a good education, that you understand the principles in all viewpoints so that you can make and informed decision about your stance.

another example would be climate change, I could answer a paper giving the evidence for or against as asked, it doesn't actually matter which side I believe in, as long as my answers are justified by evidence given.

"Well, if a school decides to omit part of the curriculum (and then blank out questions from the paper) that is up to them "

Really? In a state funded school, educating British citizens using taxpayers money? What when other state services take the same liberty and your closest NHS hospital declines blood transfusions or transplants because they do not believe in them from a religious standpoint?

It is outrageous that this is allowed. But a natural consequnce of the Academies and then Free school movement.

You could put in that context in an RE or philosoph paper. That however does not mak th approach appropriate in a science one, where you woul be asked to explain the scientific principles. The linked article says they altered/removed 52 questions from science papers.

Now, as evolution, though important, isn't going to represent 52 questions worth of the papers. So I surmise that the editing went into other areas too.

reddidi -
you misread my point I think

If the child writing the exam is creationist and needs to answer a question on evolution, then they can write the answer

Some scientists (or most scientists) believe in evolution for these reasons....

This means they have learnt and understood the theory without agreeing with it themselves, which, in a free world, is their prerogative.

They should be able to present the evidence from someone else's point of view, ie from the point of view of the evolutionist.

And there are scientists out there who hold a creationist viewpoint. I don't happen to agree with them, but they are there, and you can't say they are not real scientists, just because they hold a different view to you. There are also many scientist who believe in God, but have no problem with evolution.

They should be able to answer it by either saying ''Some scientists/people believe..''

No that is not correct. NO scientist* believes that the Sun, Earth, life and human beings were created by separate acts of an intelligent being and it is wrong (and from September 2014 will be illegal in a state school) to teach otherwise.

.

• Science is the study of the world around us based on evidence and testable theories; these beliefs are incompatible with the evidence and untestable and so are not science.

Given that the packets of exam papers are not opened until the exam is about to begin, how are they going to do this?

I am really angry that they are allowed to do this, and I speak as someone who holds a religious faith very strongly.

The thing is, if my child (or friend etc) believed in creationism, not evolution, then they should be able to answer the question anyway. They should be able to answer it by either saying

''Some scientists/people believe..''

or
''I don't believe this because....''

They should be able to answer the first because they should have the general knowledge to explain another person's belief properly.
They should be able to answer with the second because they should be able to put forward a proper reasoned argument to support their own belief.

If they can't do either they they haven't been educated they have been brainwashed.

I feel very sorry for the children who are being brought up in such a climate of fear. The adults obviously fear that if children are exposed to different ideas they might start a terrible process called "free thinking" and who wants their child growing up able to critically analyse information.

reddidi we could call it "In Denial Studies"

How ridiculous. When those children get to University, will they have to leave the room when that part of the curriculum is being discussed? will they be allowed to get degrees without covering the whole syllabus? Will Unis get sued by other stuidents who did have to do the whole syllabus and therefore did less well?

These schools are in terminal denial, if they think the way to support their belief system is to say "It's not happening, it's not in the public exam syllabus, not it's not, la la, not listening".

Well, if a school decides to omit part of the curriculum (and then blank out questions from the paper) that is up to them - but they should take the hit on the results. I think that's terribly unfair on the pupils though.

And would be even more unfair should a pupil be placed there if the school was not a parental preference (for if you do not secure any of your choices, you can be allocated any state school and not being of matching religion is not a reason in itself for appeal. Not covering the whole curriculum damned well ought to be, though).

Presumably this affects very few schools though? Most faith schools are CofE or RC, and in neither of these would it be an issue.

When did Education stop being about learning and become only focused on results?
After teaching for many years, I don't see a thirst for learning- just lots of switched off kids, who've been tested forever.
Surely parents want their children to understand the world they live in, including the wide variety of beliefs that make up modern Britain?
Throw out the testing until 18, push for truly comprehensive schools and bring in a bac type exam for those who are academic. ( Not the Michael Gove poncey private school rip off type). Don't accept what politicians tell you is good for your kids!
Thank heavens my children went through the State system in the 90s.They have a wide general knowledge, friends from all types of backgrounds and despise discrimination. Their not perfect, but definitely not bigots. When they were small they came to church with me, but made their own minds up not to come anymore.
Religion is not an Education matter. Understanding religions is what matters.
Sorry to rant, but we've all been brainwashed into thinking test results matter. They only count at GCSE and A level and they're not the only thing that counts. Work experience and the ability to communicate are vital.

I was thinking last night that the only way forward on this is to create a new "science" GCSE - let's call it "Creationist Science"

That's a good idea. How about "Revisionist History" for the holocaust deniers, we could have "Racist Politics" and "Sexist Business Studies" too

Whathaveiforgottentoday - hear, hear!!

Hi Rafa

Interesting...does this imply that you think setting the faith criteria encourages the more committed parents to apply to that school? If you're right, perhaps that is what accounts for the better results. So, how to spread that to the others? I'm sure they all have some sort of homework agreement, etc, so can't help thinking there must be something else. If it's simply that you have to do something "extra" (can't think of a less emotive word, so don't flame me!) then I can't see how to make the other schools as attractive to your "motivated, driven parents with high academic expectations of their children". I'm sure they must have their share though, especially of those who have a principle excluding faith schools. Anyway, that's not really relevant to this thread, since it's about whether such schools should be allowed to tinker with the syllabus to suit themselves, so I'll drop it.

I was thinking last night that the only way forward on this is to create a new "science" GCSE - let's call it "Creationist Science" - and this paper can be the redacted one. At least then universities and employers know what the candidates knows...! Frankly, I doubt it will be that popular with either, but presumably it will be popular with parents at these schools?

The school in question is not a mainstream Jewish school. It teaches the most religious and insular end of the Jewish spectrum. Similar to the most devout end of Muslim and Christiam schools. I'm not a fan of faith schools- speaking as a Jewish parent- I'm glad that my DCs have friends from all faiths and none.