to think that you shouldn't fake religion to get a school place?

[Carrierpenguin]

A friend of mine became catholic when she married her husband, then they split up. She hadnt been religious beforehand, but now she's chosen to go to church every week for the last year in order to get her ds into the local catholic school. She's told me that she doesn't believe in all that 'mumbo jumbo' but the church school gets the best results locally. I understand that everyone wants the best for their children, but this seems a bit disingenuous.

I suppose it's open to all - if you're willing to fake religion you can get into the best school, I suspect that the good results are due to parental influence as you have to be very keen to commit to two years of Sundays at church, presumably this filters out parents who don't care about education, whereas the secular schools cater to all.

I'm not against faith schools or the system, if it gets great results then why not I suppose? Aibu to think faking religion is not ethical though?

My sisters children attend a church school, with a religious access policy. She actually cried at admissions time because she felt she was more religious than some with church letters. [hmmm] She is a Christian pushy mum sadly the school turns out to not be that great. (She may need to switch faith.)

One of our local secondary schools is a religoous school. Not for any particular faith, but a requirement for entrance is you must have a faith/regularly attend religious services. Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Sikh, whatever. That's just plain outright discrimination, isn't it? Pisses me right off.

Imagine if that was anyone except Jews

This is my take on it - my personal opinion only.

The system is wrong. It shouldn't be the case that to get into certain schools you have to be of a certain Faith, of a certain sex, or rich enough to live close by. All three of these things are discriminatory and wrong.

I am Catholic. I attend church every Sunday. Every now and again I move away from the church, but I always come back. I love my parish priest (he's liberal, so am I).

We know that there are people who attend all of a sudden to get their children into the Catholic schools. I welcome them. I'm glad to see them there. Yes, even the ones who are reading books in the hymn books and consider it all to be mumbo-jumbo. The church belongs to these people as much as it belongs to me, and they belong to the church as much as I do. Their faith or lack of it makes not a jot of difference to my faith. I'm not in competition for God's favour.

It's God's house (in my eyes). He doesn't need me to play gatekeeper for him. He's strong enough (in my eyes) to cope with a bit of disagreement. It's not up to me to say who is and isn't allowed to sit in the pews in his house. I think, or I choose to believe, that he welcomes everyone.

**Looking, what a lovely post.

Most CofE schools don't use religion as a main criteria to get in though these days do they, it comes much further down the list?

To be fair, I would not be particualrly bothered if faith schools were abolished because i agree that having parents of a particular religion should give you a better education, but I just think that the school system would still be really unfair due to all the other factors which contribute to a 'good' school.

We moved house (not because of schools) so it's moot for us now, but had we stayed in our old house ds would have gone to the local catholic school because our nearest school was crap. If faith schools didn't exist, then we would have moved house to the catchment of a good school, because we are lucky enough to have that luxury. Lots of people don't have that luxury, and that is unfair, but as parents we would do what was within our power to get our children the best education.

There are also a number of parents who don't care about their kids education so aren't bothered if their school performs well or not, nor will they contribute to their child's education or school life. Therefore 'bad' school tend to be self perpetuating.

As I said, I wouldn't care if faith schools were abolished, and it would help individuals in certain areas. But overall I don't think it would make the system all that much fairer, because the problems are bigger than just faith schools.

Sorry that should say 'i agree that having parents of a certain religion shouldn't give you a better education'

I spent a long time feeling very angry with the unfairness of the system. Now I just look at it for what it is and have decided to play it.

I was brought up Catholic (baptism / first holy communion / confirmation) but never believed in God. I stopped going to Church as soon as I was old enough to make my own decisions. I never thought I would return.

Then I had my DS. This was a game changer.

I now attend mass most Sundays. I actually quite enjoy it. I still don't believe in God, and I still don't agree with the system, but I am doing my best for my child, and unexpectedly quite like it. He will be attending (hopefully) the same school I went to. I see familiar faces in my Church every week, and its really quite nice.

But it is so unfair that if my mother hadn't been Catholic, I wouldn't even have this choice.

As I said. Selection favours those with a "devil take the hindmost" attitude. Fine if that's a world view you're happy with...........

Of course its not a world view I am happy with

Its intrinsically wrong. But I am making the most of what has been laid out before me.

Hak
You did not HAVE to put your kids through the 11+
Parents do not HAVE to jump through church hoops
I do not HAVE to drive across an LEA boundary to so school run

but as parents who give a toss we do

they system needs a kick up the arse but so long as politicians use private schools
and other politicians are scared of religious bigots
we are stuck with it

time to change the politicians

What irritates me is that if someone of a religious faith prefers the community school (because it's 'better' for whatever reason) then they get to go there if they live near enough over someone who can't access the religious schools. A system which allows some schools to prioritise those of faith would only be fair if community schools were allowed to prioritise those of no faith. But can you imagine the hoopla if that were the case.

As to this business about needing to improve the 'bad schools', it's very difficult to do when so many get creamed off. Sacred Heart in London has 1% of low attainers on entry, Oratory 0% - either religious people are inherently 'cleverer' or the admissions requirements are very efficiently filtering out the low attainers.

I have no objection to my children being educated with the statistically harder to teach - the recent immigrants, the travelling community, the chaotic families, LAC. However, I do object to having a disproportionate number of them due to other schools having absolutely none (and really how is the recent immigrant with no English going to prove they've been going to mass for five years). I am faced with this dilemma with regard to secondary schools and it's making me seethe.

Once we remove the discrimination there are things we could do to improve the schools.

At the moment a good teacher will be attracted to a school with a good record and that attracts parents who can get their kids in there (whether by pretending faith or moving house) so that school prospers at the expense of others.

Suppose all teachers/HMs were rotated (every few years) around the local schools?

That would also expose long term problems such as the recent trojan horse scandals.

It gets the family in church, it gets bums in seats and it means the children get a traditional Christian education with an emphasis on the good stuff. Perhaps even some converts later in life.

Probably a good thing in my opinion.

Agree with Farewell, what annoys me is parents banging on about how important it is to give little Tessie a Catholic education and then moving them to a secular private school when they decide even the local faith school is insufficient. It has nothing to do with faith in 95 per cent of cases and all to do with the "best" local school and who's able to access it.

Why not just make joining your church a legal requirement to have any education at all?

We could also say that only church members can use the NHS.

What irritates me is that if someone of a religious faith prefers the community school (because it's 'better' for whatever reason) then they get to go there if they live near enough over someone who can't access the religious schools. A system which allows some schools to prioritise those of faith would only be fair if community schools were allowed to prioritise those of no faith. But can you imagine the hoopla if that were the case.

I agree. it is totally unfair. I think if you put a faith school down as your first choice, you should have lower priority at a community school (so, they first take the non-religious, then any left over spaces go to those who have chosen a religious school). As it stands, I have 1/3 less choice then a member of the C of E.

As to the OP, I think it is unethical to fake religion. keep in mind that if entrance to the school is competitive, then any misrepresentation that favours your child potentially takes away a spot from a legitimate applicant. however, from my first paragraph, that may even the totally unfair system a bit.

The system is what's primarily at fault.

Bookbag40

Do you really think kids should be taught success is more important than ethical behaviour? Seems pretty twisted to me.

There's nothing wrong with going to church as a non-religious or non-Christian person for any reason, IMHO, and it would be a pretty rubbish church that made you feel there was. As Looking said in her excellent post above, it's not our place to judge who is and isn't 'worthy' of attending, regardless of personal opinion on whether they're being hypocritical, rude, setting a bad example to their children etc.

Maybe it's unfair that 'pretend' religious people can get places ahead of believers that specifically want their children to go to a faith school, but it's one of the inevitable flaws in the current system - it's no more unfair than richer parents being able to have their children tutored ahead of poorer but brighter children to get into grammar schools, or being able to pay for private education, or to move into a catchment area for a better school. Similarly I don't think selecting by faith is any less fair than by ability or gender, though I can't decide whether I think either of those are ok either.

dudurama
it means the children get a traditional Christian education with an emphasis on the good stuff
Not in a Muslim or Sikh or Jewish or Hindu or Brethren or Scientologist school

and where is the "good stuff" in the narrow minded sexist bigotry of some religious schools

Late to the party but must respond to comments like this one, on the idea that faith schools are inherently ‘better’ than non-faith schools due to their religious character:

I think it's very wrong but that shows that perhaps all the other schools could learn a thing or two from the religious schools. All that mambo jumbo is probably worth something after all?

This is nonsense. What is shows that schools that are able to covertly select by class/parental commitment do better. When you look at the demographic makeup of church schools relative to their surrounding communities, there is a signficant mismatch. This then has a knock on effect on the non-religiously-selective schools.

The good school/bad school issue has little to do with faith and much more to do with selecting 'children like ours' who have parents who are able to get them to church on Sundays twice a month, committed enough to do so for the required period prior to admissions, have school communities used to fundraising and volunteering and community activity, and who are

It's a system that discriminates against children from chaotic families, from single-parent families where the resident parent works irregular shifts (making Sunday worship difficult - particularly hard where religious participation is measured by attendance at a particular service), from immigrant families where the religion is not a 'match'.

It's a system in which both the main churches actively collude. I know several vicars who are quite happy with the two year cycle of parents who are attending to get their children into school. Their philosophy is - 1, bums on seats, money in the collection, volunteers for the wider church community; and 2, they might convert some people along the way or at least get them into the habit of regular churchgoing.

In my borough, there is a shortage of 200 reception places next year. There are no new schools being built. That's more than 2 big schools' worth of kids who aren't going to a local school.

For parents who are denied a place at any local school because most of the intake is chuch kids and church kids' siblings, often travelling quite a distance, I don't blame them one bit for doing what they feel they have to do to get their kid into a local school.J

There's nothing wrong with going to church as a non-religious or non-Christian person for any reason, IMHO, and it would be a pretty rubbish church that made you feel there was. As Looking said in her excellent post above, it's not our place to judge who is and isn't 'worthy' of attending, regardless of personal opinion on whether they're being hypocritical, rude, setting a bad example to their children etc.

why isn't our place to judge? As far as I know, we are the only judges.

There are non-religious who go to church because they are curious, which of course is fine. But that's not what we are talking about here. We are talking about people going with the primary intention of deceiving people that they are "proper" church goers so they can get in a particular school. so, it seems ok only if you think deception is ok.

Similarly I don't think selecting by faith is any less fair than by ability or gender, though I can't decide whether I think either of those are ok either.

judging by the standards of the rest of society, selecting by faith is far less acceptable then selecting by ability. We constantly select by ability in all sorts of areas (school teams, jobs, entrance to university etc etc etc). however, only religious schools have the privilege of selecting by faith, which is essentially illegal in every other aspect of British life (employers, universities, school teams, etc etc etc cannot select by faith).

Selection by faith is so obviously unfair that I can only assume that people who say they don't think it is are being deliberately obtuse because it currently works to their advantage........

Selection by gonads and academic testing are at least segregating based on the child themselves
segregation by the religious beliefs of the parent - how many of us atheists were brought up in church going homes - is just random

but the London Churches would be empty if it were not for the hypocrites