UK's strictest Headmistress taken to school over banning prayers in the playground

[cakeorwine]

Top London school taken to high court over prayer ban | London | The Guardian

I don't believe that schools should have a compulsory act of worship.
However - it seems that there has been a ban on prayer rituals on the premises.

"The prayer policy was introduced in March last year by the school’s founder, Katharine Birbalsingh – frequently described as Britain’s strictest headteacher – when the school found itself the target of abuse and harassment after pupils were seen praying in the school playground by passersby. About 30 students took part, some kneeling on their blazers as they were not permitted to bring in prayer mats, the court heard.
Before these events, the court heard that prayers were not expressly banned at Michaela, though it had no dedicated prayer room. The new policy had the “practical effect of only preventing Muslims from praying because their prayer by nature has a ritualised nature rather than being internal”, the court heard.
The pupil’s lawyer said it was in effect “a ban uniquely on Muslim prayer”, stopping pupils praying “at a time as required by Islam”. In contrast, it would not, she said, prevent a Christian child sitting quietly in the corner of the playground from praying"

I think it seems that prayer mats were banned - and I think it seems they were banned from kneeling on blazers.

If someone wants to pray in the playground voluntarily, then they should be able to. It's not an act of compulsory worship.

I can see why they wanted this kept quiet.

If there is a nasty group in the school a prayer room will not help. They will claim it as their own and either force others to pray or stop other groups using it.

I can see why she hadn't backed down. I do think there are problems in people expecting political or religious expression to be facilitated in schools to the degree that other pupils environment is being affected.

But if a room had been provided from the off then other pupils wouldn’t need to be affected. They could have quietly gone about their prayers in much the same way as other children go to their clubs at dinner time.

the issue seemingly came because the students felt the need to pray in public in order to be able to pray - and quiet probably to make a stand about the discrimination.

I take the point about the room. But that is not the issue.

This case is about what a headteacher can do in a school; that's why she didn't back down.

What is the likely end result? The court might find discrimination but it won't make actual changes to what the school does. That will be for the headteacher.

And of course the defence is that this is a matter of discipline and conduct and not about religion.

An important case; I get people saying "compromise" but you have two sides here who want anything but that.

We allow prayer and have no problems with intimidation of other Muslim students. We have some Muslim students in choir and orchestra as well. The levels of observance (as might be expected) varies.

This is exactly the issue in a nutshell.

The authority and judgement of the Head is being undermined. The suggestion is that the Head is making rules than discriminate, isolate and treat a particular group of students differently to others. When the opposite is the case. She sees all students as being part of a common community firstly and all treated equally.

That's when you use the school's discipline policy. Bullying is bullying. But...KB continues to go on and on about how well behaved her students are. Well are they or are they not!

So how come other schools can have prayer rooms and not have this behaviour?

Is the behaviour at this particular school very bad?

She believes passionately in integration of faith and does not support any breaktime activity that isolates pupils on grounds of faith, culture or race. She believes for her multicultural agenda at school to work, that every faith must compromise. For Muslims that means no praying visibly at school. The school is 50% majority Muslim so she’s integrating them with minority Hindu, Jewish, Christian pupils. Seems ok to me.

the yr9 pupil (or adults encouraging her) who brought the case to court after crowdfunding knew what they were doing when they knelt on blazer on the playground. It was intentional provocation and challenge to school rules.

I’m all for challenging authority but with Michaela I’d start with silent corridors if I was her - but then that doesn’t have the Islamic taking offence option does it.

I thought bullying was not tolerated at this school and pupils who did not follow the policy were sanctioned severely.

This is why it would be interesting to cross examine KB

There does seem to be a lot of reasons.

If it's that she believes that there should be integration and no division, then that should be the line.

So far we have had - no rooms available, can't be trusted to walk by themselves.

She should just say what she believes - and not try to add the other reasons, which can easily be argued against.

It's a secular school. There are no facilities for any faith practices, for anyone. The entire day is structured. The students knew that when they applied.

Can you explain why a Christian praying for 2 minutes before they eat, or a Muslim disappearing off to pray for about 10 minutes causes isolation?

Because in the massively controlled school setting of Michaela , the head does not consider any of the school day as free time for the pupils to do exactly as they wish. It’s all pointing in some way to her ideology. Hence pupils given topic they must talk about over lunch and rule of max 4 to a group in the playground.
if folks don’t like it, they can leave and go to a school with different ethos around breaks and prayer rooms. And silent corridors

I can’t explain it much more because it’s not my educational policy - you can read some of the many interviews the head has given on her ethos.

I just read the SEN information policy myself and noted similar to you.

From a SEND perspective I would guess that they're actually discriminatory.

"Outstanding" inspection results from Ofsted are usually only now under the new framework awarded to settings which demonstrate great (well, as great as it can be which often isn't very!) SEND provision.

I strongly suspect those with SEND who have any needs that means they would need a uniform or other reasonable adjustment, or perhaps would not be able to partake in the 'nutritious vegetarian offering' family meal (and no, before anyone says 'but everyone can eat this vegetarian food' no some absolutely can't) would be swiftly and sharply managed out of this school.

Be very interesting to see their % of EHCPs...I assume it's significantly lower than average.

4 to a group? What! So now kickabouts at lunchtime? When do the students get a chance to just 'be'.
It must be exhausting!

Is there football at playtime?
I guess that might be seen as divisive?

But hey, good results.....

The GCSS results are great. I wouldn't be so impressed with the A Level given the entry requirements (higher than most selective state sixth forms).
But no down time, no time to just be themselves? I already knew that it wasn't a school I'd want to work in, but the more I learn, the more determined I am about that.

One of the reasons for this seemingly excessive strictness and control is that many of these children come from underprivileged backgrounds and live in bad areas .
If left to run wild at another school they are at risk of getting involved in gangs and dropping out of education.She has given them a chance to prove they can go on to Uni and a career.

The school hasn’t been open long enough for any long term indicators of effectiveness but I don’t think teaching children to be robots is going to be a successful approach for many in the long term.

ds goes to a school in an area that would be classed as under privileged. They manage to educate the children AND respect them as individuals. They don’t pretend that all pupils come into school on an equal footing, or treat them like babies who can’t walk from one room to the next. The pupils are respected and as such they know they can talk to staff about problems (or even mistakes they have made!) and be supported.

High school should be a time where children can figure a bit more about themselves as individuals not be just a number expected to copy everyone else

GrammarTeacher
And if you want to see things in school likely to cause division, check out their visiting speakers which include Jordan Peterson!!!

Katharine Birbalsingh's tweets at the time suggest that Jordan Peterson visited the school and was shown around - he's not featured as a previous guest speaker here;

https://michaela.education/home/secondary-school-wembley/guest-speakers/

Ok not a guest speaker but ate with the students and spoke to them. I was sure she'd said at the time he'd spoken to them as a speaker but I'm willing to admit to being wrong.
Regardless, he's a totally inappropriate person to be in school. I would be very concerned about any of my students who expressed an interest in his ideology.
Jordan Peterson would not be welcome in my school. And rightly so. Inviting him in is in keeping with banning prayer though.

Oh

Hello. Love to see your opinion on this.

GrammarTeacher
Ok not a guest speaker but ate with the students

To be fair - eating with the students is part of a general visit as well;

You will arrive at 11.15am and your visit will consist of a tour, observing some lessons and joining our pupils for family lunch... The total visit usually lasts between 2/2.5 hours. We host over 1,000 guests per year...

https://michaela.education/home/secondary-school-wembley/visit-michaela-community-school-wembley/