to believe Faith schools should be privately funded ?

[Peetle]

I should explain my interest. The nearest primary school to my house is about 250 yards away and involves crossing two not very busy roads. It is a faith school. The next nearest is about 300 yards away, across a major road and in the middle of a council estate. It's ofsted report full of phrases like "higher than average English as a second language", "higher than average free school meals", etc, etc. Other local schools are over a mile away and we're likely to be out of their catchment area.

To get into the faith school families have to attend our local place of worship regularly for two years, know the officials and prove regular financial donations to the establishment. Of course, once these families have got their first child into the school they stop attending and donating. I also know of families of different and even contradictory faiths attending purely to get their children into the school. And I frequently see people picking up their children in cars, suggesting they live considerably further from it than we do.

We have no hope of getting into this school, not being hypocrites and not wishing to give our children the idea that it's alright to be dishonest about something if you want it badly enough.

My point is that I don't mind people wanting to give their children an education in their chosen faith, but I object to my taxes funding a school I can't use and which encourages parents to profess a religious belief they don't hold purely for the purposes of entry.

Mme Blueberry teaches in an independent school. It is privately funded.

In answer to the poster a couple of pages back, I would have no problem with any of my children going to any kind of faith school - Christian or other world faith - or state school. They have attended both kinds.

Mmeblueberry - given your description of your school, how would it be different without the faith element?

Oh ok, I see TFM. Missed that bit! She said she had a 40% Asian intake and I was assuming it was a state school, hence my comments.

But then her school isn't part of the debate is it? I have no problem with what kind of faith/ethos people want to pay for themselves. (and my DCs are privately educated also.)

Fellatio - the high number of families from socially conservative religious ethnic minorities, is because catholicism is perceived as a socially conservative religion.

I suspect.

Yes, but also Asian British families are VERY big on education so they will fall over themselves to get into good local independents. We have a disproportionate number at ours, and the real OTT Grammar Crammer indy school round the corner is even more highly geared to the Asian side - so much so that they have a vegetarian lunch menu!

"You just don't know everything, Fellatio" No, MmmBlueberry - the only one who has made any claims to omniscience is you - you are very confident in your assessments of other posters innermost thoughts and motives!

How interesting.

Do you know, I'd love to have this debate with the Minister for Education. Especially one of the last labour ones. I want to know how they think it fits in with general stance on discrimination and political correctness in this day and age. I'd discuss grammar schools for the same reason while I was at it.

I left the debate yesterday because the whole debate seems to have turned into pistols at dawn!! Sorry, but it seems to be personal attack more than usable discussion!

To respond to a comment a few pages earlier, sorry not sure who it was:
I think it is very true that the church of today does not reach out to its community as much as 1)it should and 2)it used to in the past. However, I do believe that there are churches who reach out to their communities. Some churches are involved in:
-Street Pastors - helping drunk people in towns across the country at the weekend.
-clothe prostitutes.
-offer debt advice and help
-hand out food parcels to people struggling
-run soup runs or hand out food vouchers to homeless
-talk to homeless making then feel they have not been ignored by society
-running parent and toddler groups
-praying for people
-sitting with people in hospitals
-listening to people who are contemplating or just had an abortion.

That is a only a small list of things that immediately spring to mind from my personal experience. All of the things I have mentioned are specifically to reach out to the community, although are available to church goers if the need arose!

I think while it is true that faith schools in the past have been very pushy, forcing children to pray, sing to God, follow and learn about only one faith, take communion etc. I'm not entirely convinced the same is true now. The school still has a responsibility to fulfill the national curriculum which means learning about other religions!

I'm not sure in the grand scheme of things how much it would matter if schools were required to have the same entry requirements, however to say that they had to change their ethos as well I think is pushing a bit too far. The schools may not contribute a huge amount to schools any more, however they did build the school and do own the grounds which is a big contribution in itself. I think that due to failing government funding it is likely that many faith schools cough up the money for repairs themselves.

It is perhaps a little unfair that some people have no choice but go to a faith school. However, when people move to a particular area schools are invariably top of the things they look for and how their OFSTED reports look. If people are that bothered by it being a faith school or not they could choose a slightly different area! But then I have to point out that when people move for the school, it always easier for the more wealthy to get into the schools they want, while poorer people have to put up with where they can afford! This is not a problem that can be easily rectified no matter how you cut it! Poor people will always miss out in this respect! And it was the poor people the faith school were built to accommodate, they were built to allow people who could not afford tuition to be able to get some education. Although circumstances have changed somewhat since then, they are still performing the function of teaching those who come through their doors as best they can.

I agree with you kistigger: many churches do a great deal of good work in the community and the church schools were indeed set up with the noble aim of educating the poor. Which only makes the selective admissions procedures operated by many VA schools all the more grotesque.

I agree with all that too.

phew.

allow me to summarise - some of you believe

1. faith schools are better because of their 'faith ethos'

2. faith schools do not unfairly discriminate on admissions

3. faith schools offer a choice for prents that should be availble

4. the financial sub from the church justifies the afiliation of the school

I would counter

1. the faith ethos has nothing to do with it, as coalitions link shows, like for like, pupils don't actually do better at faith schools

2. faith schools do discriminate unfairly on admissions, as religious discrimination in state education is unfair. especially as it is on the basis of the parents churchgoing habits, in a country where churchgoers are a wealthy minority (and yes, churchgoing attracts the wealthy - for various reasons - perhaps some of the poorest parents are single Mums who may not feel too welcome in church?)

3. this 'choice' as presented will usually be no choice at all - as most people do not live in an area peppered with schools, but may only have one close.

4. the financial sub is paltry and should be done without. It dos not justify entry criteria favouring churchgoers.

Edgarallinpink -

1. not sure if faith schools being better because of their ethos has anything to do with getting better results.
2. yes they discriminate but so do so far too many things in life, we unfairly discriminate in certain jobs to allow certain groups to ensure they get get a job eg certain groups are targeted by the police because the force is lacking a certain cultural group. 3)yes the choice should be available but as you say in some areas there is no choice, mostly because the government takes it for granted that there is a school there already so they don't need to build one etc!!
3. the government will not scoff at any financial contributions made to the school system, it's less out of their pocket!

I would also like to point out our church has single mums, families on low incomes, etc, not all church members count in that wealthier category, although it may be true in some churches.

Not read all of this thread but am going to post anyway (sorry for any repitition). My nearest school is CofE, it is also a very good school. There is another very good school that isn't a faith school but it is too far to walk everyday and I can't drive. There is a far less good school within walking distance. There is also a private school very close.

So my basic position is that my children can be disciminated against on religious grounds, because I can't drive or because I don't have a lot of money

The admissions policy for the Cof E school gives priority to children of parents who attend church, there is a requirement to attend twice a month on average, there is no requirement to believe in god or anything similar.

I hate myself for it in many ways but I attend the church so my kids can go to the school. It is an easy thing to do, it costs no money and anyone could do it. Yes my kids will have a christian schooling but I am not threatened by that. I went to a shit school and did well, my brother went to the same school and still can't really read or write properly if I can give my kids a small advantage by putting principals aside i will do it. I shouldn't have to, but I will. Also I am not being deceitful and I am lying to no one, I am merely sitting at the back of a rather pretty church twice a month, enjoying a bit of peace and quiet.

ijustwant8hours - You might find that your exepcted to get a bit more involved than that...

I hope your children were baptized before the age of 1, Ijustwant8hours, or you may find yourself stymied.

Huh?

There are plenty of CofE adherants who do not believe in paedobaptism and go for credobaptism.

Myth myth myth.

At least it is semi-entertaining.

I think you'll find that the requirements for admission to many faith schools include infant baptism. I could name you 3 within a 10 mile radius of my house.

But of course you know best on this, as in many things, so I assume that I am wrong about this.

Mmeblueberry - I don't think that's the issue. If the school is oversubscribed and there are many parents pretending to faith, then early baptism can be seen as evidence of pre-existing faith, which may help with gaining approval from the vicar if that is what is required.

I think everyone understands the difference between a 'family' and 'tourist' infant baptism.

But baptism is a requirement, and the sudden baptism of a 4 year old would be seen as very suspicious.

So not myth,myth,myth.

How?

Infant baptism is not a pre-requisite for joining the church, or even supported by many in the church, but may be a requirement for school admission. Every one agree with that?