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.

@Clavinova yes, and any school who lets Jordan Peterson do that should really have been taken to task by OFSTED. Schools have been failed on Behaviour and Culture for much much less!

So I am guessing she will be doing a media tour about this whole prayer issue?

She already is. An exclusive interview on unHerd.

And putting it on the school website media section.

It's all about her. Not the pupils

As a teacher (and senior leader just to prove not all SLT are dicks!) there are some absolutely shocking examples of "leadership" in our schools!!!

I doubt that it's as weak as you suggest, simply because it is difficult to get legal aid and you generally have to satisfy a test showing you have at least a 50% chance of succeeding.

If the school is not allocating any space for religious worship, I wonder how it is dealing with the legal requirement for regular acts of collective worship?

But what if your religious belief is that you must pray during school hours, albeit at break times so that education is not interrupted?

If that happens the school is absolutely within its rights to use its disciplinary process to ensure there is no repetition. This is a school that prides itself on its wonderful discipline, so surely that wouldn't be a problem?

There are plenty of of schools of schools where high expectations for kids like this, and support them with good teachers and help with mastering work, mean the kids do really well.

But that does not mean they don't give the kids time for things like their personal religious observances, when these are not clearly disruptive. There is no evidence that's necessary. And I'd venture a guess that for a child from a difficult background, putting down roots in a religious practice could help support their academic work and even their home life.

From the Times

“All my teachers and I are trying to do is run a successful school and make the world a better place.”
Ms Birbalsingh said the ban was necessary to fulfil her school’s mission to promote integration between pupils of different ethnic backgrounds and religions.
“If a school is secular, it ought to be allowed to be secular,” she said.
Ms Birbalsingh told the paper the school will “definitely appeal if we lose”, adding: “I will not divide children according to race and religion; it will not happen under my watch.”
The pupil, who cannot be named for legal reasons, alleges the school’s stance on prayer – one of the five pillars of Islam – was “the kind of discrimination which makes religious minorities feel alienated from society”, a judge was told.
Her lawyers said she is making a “modest” request to be allowed to pray for around five minutes at lunch time, on dates when faith rules required it, but not during lessons."

In the context of the school community, the pupil bringing the case is in a significant majority which complicates a defence of social alienation inside the school gates.

Her stance is very weird. She's not being asked to divide children according to race or religion; she's simply being asked to allow those who want to practise their religion some very basic facilities to do so . It's like claiming that giving football playing facilities to those who want to play football is dividing them from their peers.

She's basically saying she wants to be able to enforce secularity and actively prevent people from praying. On a personal level, I don't believe in prayer at all, but I don't see why as a society we should make praying an offence in any context, including prayer during school time.

"It's like claiming that giving football playing facilities to those who want to play football is dividing them from their peers."

Does anyone know if they are allowed to play football at lunchtime?
Are they allowed to burn off energy?

Unsurprisingly, the Mail is reporting solely from the defence document and is ignoring the claimant's arguments. None of this explains why the school's famed excellent discipline was inadequate to deal with pupils using intimidation, or why the problems from outside the school couldn't have been remedied by allowing indoor prayer space. I'm also very sceptical that banning prayer sorted out these alleged problems in any event - surely if anything it would tend to attract more attention from those supposedly making threats?

Unsurprisingly, the Mail is reporting solely from the defence document and is ignoring the claimant's arguments.

It provides important additional information not provided by the Guardian. The national secular society was happy to quote this.

None of this explains why the school's famed excellent discipline was inadequate to deal with pupils using intimidation

Intimidation in this case would be an ongoing, neverending process, and often under the radar. The school quite rightly has better things to do with its staff's time.

, or why the problems from outside the school couldn't have been remedied by allowing indoor prayer space.

Giving in to the bullies, while acting contrary to the secular ethos of the school. The reasons against this have been repeatedly stated. There is no reason why in a secular society we should not be able to have some secular schools.

I'm also very sceptical that banning prayer sorted out these alleged problems in any event - surely if anything it would tend to attract more attention from those supposedly making threats?

No one is making that claim. Presumably, things quieted down iin anticipation of the court case, since even bullies would see that continuing such a campaign would be detrimental to their case.

I think it's an interesting argument as to whether you can run a free school on a secular ethos and it not be discriminatory.

What would the expectations of the parents have been when they enrolled their children in the school?

Why is it that what sounds like the actions of one pupil have become extended into a matter of religious freedom for a much wider group in the school (notably this claim is one person).

What actual duty in law is there for the school to make separate provision for Muslim children (because they've effectively said it's only those children who need separate provision in the claim).

I am not an actual fan of KB but it does seem problematic that if the law permits free schools, that discipline in this school is particularly strict and the ethos is secular (ie any religion is subordinate to the school's policy on entry) then this is a kind of fundamental challenge to the whole idea of her school.

I assume what this also is a legal challenge before said pupil was asked to leave; KB says she will appeal the decision if she loses so you wonder at what the effect will be on the actual claimant's education. Presumably now she has to comply with the ban or is not in school?

I think we are a bit foolish if we take a newspaper article as gospel, but that doesn't mean it is untrue.

However what does it say for British society in general and the school, in particular, if the only solution to these problems is to ban children from praying.

No. They are only allowed to congregate in groups of up to 4, and conversation has to be about the talking points they have been given for the day.

I initially responded to this thread due to the prayer issue but now see that it is a symptom of much bigger problems.

Puncheur

No. They are only allowed to congregate in groups of up to 4, and conversation has to be about the talking points they have been given for the day.

This is incorrect. According to what I havew read, they have a topic to discuss at lunch, as a way of learning/practising courteous discussion. But this does not extend into the subsequent break time.

I know they have to talk about certain topics at lunch but surely not when in the playground?

How is that supervised?

It would be sad if you couldn't join a group because there were 4 people there already

Can they make up their own topics?
Or is it prescribed...

Sounds so so controlled.

Coyoacan · Today 12:49
However what does it say for British society in general and the school, in particular, if the only solution to these problems is to ban children from praying.

It is not the "only" solution, it is the solution appropriate for the particular ethos of the school. It has now also come out that the girl instigating all this allegedly threatened to stab another pupil, after telling her that she planned to hurt the school. You get troublemakers in every secondary school, and those who are outside of the situation will often have difficulty appreciating what is actually going on.

From the Michaela website:

"Teachers eat with the pupils. They play a special role in helping pupils develop the art of conversation at the dinner table. Teachers encourage children to speak in full sentences and they ask them about what they have been learning in lessons that morning. We also discuss the lunch topic of the day, which might be talking about your favourite film or which country you might like to visit in the future."

None of the many visitors to the school (who normally take part in the lunch) seem to have reported that these sessions feel especially "controlled", at least not the ones I have read.

That is very controlled.