Would you start attending church to get your child into a C of E secondary?

Catholic here so no.

There are many reasons why low income families find church attendance harder.
Churches often have midweek services, but Sunday schools are almost always on Sunday mornings. That means if you do shift work or eg retail (ie not a nice 9-5 middle class office job) you can't get your child there every Sunday.
If you don't own your own home or live in insecure housing, you're likely to move house or even towns more frequently. That makes it harder to attend church regularly for the three years you need near me.
If English is your second language or you have learning disabilities, you may not be aware of the requirements until too late.
If you have physical or mental health problems, you're more likely to live in poverty, and no, church schools do not accept this as a reason for low attendance.
Yes, of course there are many low income families who attend church regularly. But as a group, middle class families find this hoop easier to jump through.

Religious schools also effectively racially segregate. My kids currently go to a school with Muslim, Christian, atheist, Jewish kids. They learn about halal and kosher from choosing sweets to go into their party bags and Eid from talking to their friends. They understand that 'Muslim' means Mohammed from school not a bogeyman.
Next year, when my eldest goes to secondary, the Catholic kids will go to one school, the Anglicans another, the Jewish kids to a third and the Muslims and atheists wherever they can get into. They'll all be poorer as a result.

No. We are Christians and involved with church but we avoided the outstanding faith school for our local ‘requires improvement’ school as we believe education should be secular. Half of the primary school class did the same, others played the system for the faith school or did manoeuvres for the other high schools in the town. I’m happy with the education my kids received and happier still with their overall school experience. The school they went to was much more diverse, smaller, my kids were lucky to be educated with immigrant children who were a fantastic influence as they invariably valued education and they set a fantastic example.

Have you read the Sutton Trust report I linked?

I attended a church to get Dc into primary school. At the time there was a dearth of local places at decent schools. We did attend church but not the local one and not regularly enough. I would do it again for secondary for a good school. I don’t particularly like selection by church attendance but you have to work within the system you are in - complaining it isn’t right won’t change where your kid can get in.

The parents at the primary school were largely in two categories - the ones for whom Christianity was core to their families, and the vaguely Christian ones who were sufficiently organised to forward plan years out, committed and dedicated to their kids being at this school that they were willing to spend their Sundays in church for the two years before admissions deadlines. I found this selected socially but not economically as much - some were from low earner families but with a laser like focus on education.

You can argue that a great many taxpayers are losing out by others having preferential access to a third of state funded schools.

100% of operating costs and at least 90% of capital (including maintenance) costs are met by the state. Parental contributions make up some of the last 10% of capital contributions because very often the church declines to pay and it has to come out of school funds.

I don't want any state-funded religious discrimination or segregation. I definitely don't want it in the education system.

@BunfightBetty they are church schools FUNDED BY EVERYONE'S TAXES FFS!!

Would you accept a hospital that prioritises patients of a certain faith because a church lets it use its land? Even if the hospital is paid for by everyone's taxes?

Yes or no? Be honest! This is an abomination which would be rightly unconstitutional in many parts of the world.

Discriminate on faith with YOUR money, not with mine. Shame on you.

Catholic school localish to me 2025-26 Admissions Policy incl amendment July 2025_1752414675.pdf

What are the admissions criteria? Would starting going to church now fit the bill? Very popular church schools want life long church going and extras like being part of the choir, whilst others have a number of non denominational places based on a 'usual' admissions criteria and don't require church going at all. I have taught in lots of primary church schools and a large proportion of the children do not go to church regularly, so do not be concerned about hypocracy. But there is no point starting going to church if anything less than life-long dedication to the church doesn't get you a place.

I’ve not seen that locally at all, either for primary or secondary (been through both).

I that CofE or Catholic?

Not all do, and they aren't required to.
Faith schools are permitted to do:
LAC/Adopted of faith
Others of faith
LAC/Adopted not of faith
Others not of faith.

I think that’s a real shame, but it’s not an argument for getting rid of church schools. It could be an argument for more outreach efforts from churches, so that people of all economic backgrounds feel comfortable to attend. Some are better than others in this regard.

I don’t know of any church school that doesn’t prioritise LAC and other vulnerable groups over and above churchgoers. Certainly all the church schools in my area do this.

This doesn’t make sense at all. If the kids educated in the church school were educated in a non-state school, the costs would be the same. The taxpayer isn’t losing out. In fact, some church schools are funded by the church, and those that aren’t have at least part of their maintenance costs covered by the church and/or voluntary parental contributions. So for those schools it costs the taxpayer less.

It seems like you just don’t want kids at church schools because you think they have an advantage. Dog in the manger stuff. But nothing’s stopping any other person from taking that opportunity for their kids.

It depends doesn't it.
Church schools pay a percentage of the cost (not sure what).
But the state pays a much greater percentage.

In some places there are only CofE schools within easy reach, eg in a village. They should I think prioritise local children above children of faith.

In other places there is more variety of schools so prioritising faith seems more reasonable.
Though I would argue at a minimum that any CofE schools that doesn't prioritise all LAC/Adopted children above faith isn't being very Christian, even though the rules permit it.

It's a fact that any school that applies faith selection criteria has a disproportionately better-off intake than is typical for the surrounding community.

It's important to remember that these are schools that have all of their running costs and most to all of their capital costs funded by the state. I've always said I'd be very happy for them to reserve places for children of their faith proportionate to their financial contribution.

It happens far more than you think. Parents that need encouragement to apply for FSM because of the shame factor. Assumptions that they will be looked down upon by others when going to church, not really surprising when you read some of the posts on places like this on social media. People on low incomes are judged for everything, much like parents are blamed for everything in parts of the press.

Ok, there may be a small proportion of children that this applies to.

But at the end of the day, these are church schools, offering places to children of that faith, who go to church. If there’s no link between church attendance and attending the school, it’s no longer a church school, is it? It’s fair enough that a proportion of places at the church school are allocated to children who actually attend the church.

Yes

I think that’s sad if true, as these are just perceptions, rather than holding much truth. If it’s something you feel is important for your children, edging out of your comfort zone is a small price to pay.

@BunfightBetty You asked whether being low income means poor organisation skills.

Well not per se. But I would expect some correlation between learning difficulties and lower income (on average) and organisational skills are part of certain difficulties.

So I would expect it to be a reason why some low income people fail to attend church 18months in advance of their child starting school.

The more hoops, the more it favours the middle class.

Add to that, fear of being judged by the congregation (or at least, not made welcome) and less likely to do something that they don’t believe in. Also, going to church is not something they might do that often and may feel it is out of their comfort zone. Also, if they're expected to give money for the collection, they may feel awkward about that if they don’t have much/anything to give. They may not have the money to get to church, buy smartish clothes to wear, and so forth. People with health challenge on top may find it difficult to get to church for a specific time.

Does being on a low income mean you have poor organisation skills?

There’s a church in every parish, usually walkable unless you live super-rurally. It doesn’t usual require transport and there’s free tea, coffee and often cake at the end.

Time and energy may be a factor for some, but this can also be the case for middle and higher earners.

It’s well-known that entry to check schools requires church attendance. They’re intended to have a religious foundation to provide education for those of that faith, so they set aside a proportion of places to serve the children in local congregations.

Time
Energy
Organisation skills
Being aware of the requirements early enough
Travel costs

What do you think is stopping parents on lower incomes from attending church?