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.

It seems you do not understand how teenagers work.

If this is the case why isn't this a problem elsewhere. If what KB was saying is true you deal with the perpetrators. You don't punish all Muslims. This isn't like my primary school banning marbles because they caused too many arguments!

No, someone who was a muslim teenager couldn’t possibly understand how muslim teenagers work.

Are you seriously going to mansplain teenagers to me? Religious teenagers? The competitive 'I'm more religious than you'.

So people who were teenagers as muslims aren’t allowed to have any views of growing up as a muslim teenager in your little world? Yeah, you’ve also failed to understand what mansplaining is too. Simply understanding wudu, and being a muslim teenager also isn’t competitive, one is basic wudu fact, the other is personal experience.

Given that other schools manage to provide prayer facilities without all these bullying problems, maybe Britain's strictest Headteacher should ask her colleagues for a few tips about pupil management.

IMO, religion has no place in education or in schools. All schools should be secular and any obvious outward signs of religious affiliation should be prohibited.

The parents choosing the school should have read the prospectus and understood its ethos before applying. Or choose a faith school, if that's what's wanted.

Given that other schools manage to provide prayer facilities without all these bullying problems ...

Do we actually know that's the case though? It's certainly not in a couple near me, but like so much bullying it gets brushed under the carpet - doubly so because it involves protected characteristics

The difference at Michaela is that, rightly or wrongly, the Head seems to relish challenging these things. On this particular issue I happen to think she's largely correct, but then I'm another who'd prefer ALL religion kept well away from schools

There are also a lot of schools which don’t allow prayer rituals for any faith and thy don’t seem to be subject to legal action let alone legal action funded by legal aid.

The vast majority of schools DO allow prayer and have a space for Muslims students to do so. Michaela really is an outlier here. It isn't a big deal and should never have become such a huge issue.

The vast majority of schools DO allow prayer and have a space for Muslims students to do so.

How do you know this? Are there any statistics available? I would be interested to see them.

You just saved me typing that, kesstrel ...

Looking on gov.uk it's confirmed that "Schools have no duty to provide a space for prayer and reflection for their pupils", which perhaps explains why I'm finding it hard to source any stats myself, but hopefully the PP's found something?

Every school in my area does. Every school that my teacher networks are involved provides a space. Outside of faith schools this doesn't tend to be a room that is just for that. But generally schools are happy to make simple accommodations such as this.
If it has caused such a problem for Michaela it implies that the culture isn't as brilliant as KB states and that the school physically isn't fit for purpose as a school. The final point has always been true.
I don't believe the data on whether schools provide a space has been collected in a formal way has been collected. It should be. I can certainly suggest it as a question to TeacherTapp

As has already been pointed out, in the London area people don't necessarily have a free choice of schools. Quite often it's the case that if you don't put the nearest school down as first choice you end up getting a place in a failing school some distance away.

I think the point is that unless the claimant can say it's discriminatory only to Muslims and point to a positive obligation to make accommodation then the claim is likely to fail.

Yes the case is arguable. But that does not mean that there looks to be a positive case legally to change what Michaela does.

Accommodations is therefore within the discretion of the school. And whatever the quality of the education available, failing or outstanding, this claimant is not going to win on a argument of "I want to go to an outstanding school but only if I can have my religion accommodated". Because there are probably many other schools who are making accommodations to that extent but... it's within the discretion of the headteacher. To win, this claimant has to get that what KB has done is out with discretion and is positively unlawful. And in terms of the confrontation, it was the claimant who brought the case. If she loses then what then?

Would be very interested to see the statistics that support the stance that the majority of schools in the UK make provision for public prayer rituals during school hours.

And yet schools have a duty to provide an act of collective daily worship of a mainly Christian nature....

Which contrasts with the other statements.

An ac of Daily collective worship?
Of course many secondary schools may not do that of course.

Teachers on here have stated that they do provide a space for pupils to pray in a prayer room. So it's something that happens

Yes it’s something that happens but I do not believe the majority of schools in the UK allow public prayer rituals. Obviously nothing can or should be done to prevent an individual praying silently.

Yes the prayer ban is relatively new but Michaela was set up to be specifically secular. The process for getting in to London secondary schools is difficult but Michaela is heavily oversubscribed so it’s very hard to understand how a pupil who didn’t want to go there would end up there.

The claim against Michaela is a demand to hold collective worship on someone else’s property and against their specific wishes. I for one hope it doesn’t succeed. I far prefer the model in countries such as the USA and France (and historically Turkey) with a complete separation of church and state.

According to the paper they are getting 100,000 pounds in legal aid to fight the case. I would imagine that a school would also get legal aid so rather an expensive carry on.

No, it simply isn't a viable argument to say "We won't make reasonable adjustments but you can go to another school that will". The duty to make reasonable adjustments is certainly a positive one. Remember this is something that was allowed until last year, so it's not as if you can say that most of the families chose the school knowing this will be the case, or that it's reasonable to expect pupils to leave the school they are settled in.

No, it wasn't set up to be specifically secular. As has been pointed out, there is no such thing as a secular state school. Free schools can request secular status from the Secretary of State, but Michaela has not done so.

It is quite possible for a pupil to end up in Michaela whose parents have no particular wish for it. People may put it down simply because it is the nearest school or the one their child's friends are going to; in some areas school places are so oversubscribed that, if you don't put your nearest school down as first preference and don't get the school you actually prefer, you may end up with the sink school 5 miles away.

Legal aid lawyers currently gasping over their cornflakes at the notion they would get £100K for a judicial review case. In their dreams ...

This sums it up well;

conservativehome.com/2024/01/21/michaela-islam-and-the-future-of-faith-in-schools/

There is no duty to make reasonable adjustments for the protected characteristic of religion or belief, or for any other protected characteristic except for disability.

The school cannot discriminate against students because of their religion and this includes indirect discrimination - i.e. having the same rule for everyone that disproportionately adversely affects those of a certain religion. However indirect discrimination is lawful if it's a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.

These will be the questions the judge considers:

Does the prayer ban disproportionately affect Muslim students?
Does Michaela have a legitimate aim in banning prayer?
Is the ban a proportionate means of meeting that aim?

Nothing to do with reasonable adjustments.