To be sick of people slating Faith schools

[Jenga123]

Don't get me wrong I understand why some people may be against them but the negativity I've come across recently is, quite frankly ridiculous. I've been told by friends of friends, family etc that they pay for my dd's to attend their catholic primary and secondary schools and that tax payers that are paying towards these schools should not have to do so if their children can't attend these schools. Well let me just say the average amount of income tax each individual pays, that actually goes towards the upkeep of schools is minuscule, so they aren't in fact paying for them. Myself and the other parents of my dd's schools pay a considerable sum each year to the upkeep of the school and the school contributes 10% towards the costs of running their school and repairs etc.

I also come across animosity at the fact my children are getting a good education and people putting that down to them simply being baptised. But my point is if they feel that their own children are missing out by going to a less desirable school then I'm sure they could have them baptised therefor giving them a higher chance of securing a place at a faith school, and whilst I'm not advocating people pretending to be of the faith, I'm simply saying there are options.

As for my dd's schools like I said they are Catholic and are obviously places were parents of the same faith opt to send their children as they want them to be educated within that faith, and I can't see any problem with this to be honest so why am I hearing nothing but negativity from people?

I agree too about selectiveness - it's a nice idea to have state secondaries specialising in particular things so that talented kids can flourish, but in practice it means most of those kids will have to travel further (because the chances of your nearest secondary specialising in the thing you happen to be good at is fairly small). It also risks excluding local kids who then have to travel further to a school they can actually get into.

Are there any state schools that select more than 10% on musical aptitude?

1- an individual child's talents and interests being nurtured in a specialist environment

But to get in the school to be nurtured you have to have done several years music lessons.

I'm Catholic, as are my family. We go to church. We're also sporty. My kids have done sport since they were able because that's what our family does. Sport on saturday, church on sunday. Because they've been doing sport form an early age, they're ahead of peers who only picked it up when they were old enough to express an interest, or join a school club.

Similarly with music. We're not a musical family. I wouldn't know where to start, or the best age to start. By the time mine got to Yr 4, and we realised about the musical selection, and they were old enough to start saying, hey mum, friend x plays the clarinet, can I try?, friend x had already had 2-3 years of lessons, had family at home to help practice, and her own musical instrument. Whatever my childs natural ability, chances are we couldn't have afforded instrument hire or the lessons anyway, even if someone had picked up on that ability.

It's as much about your family background as it is about ability. Dc's peers have had music lessons and SATS tutoring from an early age, specifically with the intention of a music specialist or grammar school.

Personally I don't think you'll ever get truly non selective schools. Rich people will simply buy houses next to the good school, and those not well off will get what's left. I just think faith is as good an arbitrary reason as any, and at least the church financially contributes. Selection on faith and/or ability at least gives poorer people a chance.

As several posters have said, church schools these days are inclusive, don't indoctrinate, and follow national curriculum with regard to RE. Most faith schools take children not of that faith, or any faith.

Selection on faith and/or ability at least gives poorer people a chance.

If that were true in the main, I think I might be slightly more open to faith admissions - but it isn't. Both ability and faith admissions screw poor kids, overall.

But for me - we don't discriminate based on religion anywhere else. It's illegal, and rightly so. We of course discriminate based on ability in the workplace. For me, that's why abolishing faith admissions is a higher priority than ability admissions, though both are a problem.

Again, I like catchment based lotteries with FSM quotas, and priority for children who've missed out on their first X preferences.

"Most faith schools take children not of that faith, or any faith."

Is this true? What % of faith schools do not have a faith criterion in their admissions policies?

I'm a rich sexist and I've decided to set up a university. The government has agreed to fund running costs if I will put in for 10% of the building and maintenance. They've said I can set admission criteria so I'm saying men get priority. But don't worry, because once we've accepted all the men who want places women can go for what's leftover.

What's that you say, it sounds very sexist? I don't know why you say that! Men pay taxes too, you know - do you hear them complaining about how much of their tax supports women having babies or problems with their lady bits? And listen, at my university men will learn all about women! Sometimes we will go and look at some, or have them in for a visit. And all while benefitting from the lovely moral framework of masculinity.

It's not unfair because women can choose to set up their own university. Plus it's not unfair because lots of parents really, really want their sons to study without women around being distracting. Plus it's not unfair because you're always going to select on something so it might as well be this. Plus it's not unfair because women can always pretend to be men or, you know, actually become men. Plus it's not unfair because life is unfair.

"Then of course people will argue that any religous education/instruction should be abolished as their dc don't believe in it and its not fair that they have to sit out and feel 'othered' etc etc etc..."

Would you like me to link to a definition of "Straw Man"?

Bertrand - numbers from the FAC.

• 19% of secondary schools are faith-based. 16% religiously select to some degree, with 72% of all places at faith secondaries – equivalent to 13% of places at all secondaries – being subject to religious admissions criteria. We estimate that 17% of places at primaries are similarly religiously selected, or 1.2 million primary and secondary places across England.
  This means that 16% of children at state schools are subject to religious selection criteria. This compares with 5% of secondary-age children in grammar schools, 5% in single-sex schools and 7% in independent schools.

• 99.8% of places at Catholic secondaries are subject to religious selection in admissions criteria. For Church of England schools the figure is 49.7% but for those CofE schools fully in control of their own admissions policies with no legal or regulatory limitations it is 68%.
  Anglican dioceses vary widely in how religiously selective their secondaries are. The most selective is Liverpool (84%) and the least is Leicester (3%). The Diocese of London, despite its recent commitments to inclusivity, has 68% of places subject to religious selection – well above average and therefore still with some way to go.

Love your post Devora !

Personally I don't think you'll ever get truly non selective schools. Rich people will simply buy houses next to the good school, and those not well off will get what's left.

This is true but can be dealt with by more resources going towards schools that are not doing well or are situated in deprived areas. The aim should be that ALL schools are able to offer the same opportunities to all students. There simply shouldn't be 'bad' schools. Education is too important.

I'm against any form of segregation in schools (although I can see it's unrealistic to want to ban private schools). Barring children from a school because of their parents education is ridiculous and in our increasingly diverse population untenable.

Religious segregation may have worked in years gone by because the UK was largely CofE or Catholic. That time has gone. People are getting less and less religious and the UKs religious mix is changing.

It's time to move on and have secular schools for everyone. There is no reason that provision could not be made for students religious beliefs within a secular school either during RE or after school classes.

Plus it's not unfair because life is unfair.

My guess is also there are lots of Poles and indians at your school, and is more diverse than the non-selective school down the street.

Devora- fantastic post and lots to think about.

However, as ludicrous as it sounds in your post, it already happens. Lots of single sex schools about. Faith, state, voluntary aided, and others. Maybe not anymore at university level, but schools can and do exclude on the basis of sex- not just given priority, excluded entirely.

Outwith, do you really think it's possible not to have "bad" schools? I'm not sure it is. People aren't selfless enough just to let their child go to the nearest school, they'll move, go private...

the thing with single sex schools is that they don't actually disadvantage any particular family. Of course locally they do (if your local school is the wrong single sex).

While it's not great, it isn't as bad as faith schools.

Single sex schools provided by the state really annoy me, actually, unless there is near-identical provision within close proximity of each other.

For example, near us is an excellent girls' secondary with a strong academic focus, and a relatively nearby boys' secondary with a much more vocational focus. A faith girls' school we might just get into on distance if I had girls, but the boys' equivalent is a couple of miles further away - and there are probably girls missing out in that area.

I could just about support single sex secondaries if boys and girls provision was located next door to each other, offering the same curriculum. You'd think it would be more efficient in terms of specialist staff and resources, too.

I think it's a pretty serious problem, actually.

If you want to see how it plays out practically, look at my case.

DS is due to enter into reception in September. We are non Christians. We're in London so we get to list 6 choices on the school application form. We would like him to be schooled locally for obvious reasons.

The nearest state primary school (200m) is Catholic and there's no point even entering it as a choice as they won't even take Looked After Children. (they are 6th on the priority list in a school that never takes children below the 4th criteria)

Of the 6 nearest state schools after the Catholic one, 3 are CofE, selecting on faith and three are non-denominational, selecting on distance.

Of the three CofE, two place non-Christans bottom of the selection criteria, so we'll get a place if they can't fill up with any Christian denomination. The third does have 25% non-CofE admissions - 8 places - but if they are not taken up by siblings, we're likely to fail on distance as it's further away than the other two.

Of the three non-denominational, we've fallen outside the catchment area of one of them for the last two years and 2016 is a bulge year so a place there is unlikely.

So we'll be scrapping for a place at 2 schools with every atheist, Jew, Muslim, Hindu, Jain, Buddhist, etc in our Inner London area (ie most people) while Christians get absolute priority at 4 local schools, and an equal chance if they apply for the 3 non-denominational ones.

Any Christian parents like to tell me how that's equitable?

BreakWindAndFire

That's an awful situation to be in. I'm fuming on your behalf. It's literally indefensible that that situation exists in this day and age.

Break, that's worse than our (outer London) area. Everything crossed for you.

Single sex schools provided by the state really annoy me

oh sure. But they aren't nearly as numerous as faith schools, and while there may not be equivalent provision nearby, my guess is that there are approximately the same numbers for each gender. So, if you happen to live near the wrong gender school, you can really feel like it's just bad luck, unlike the faith school issue where the numbers are really stacked against non-christians.

But they certainly aren't so numerous and so dense that they cause the problems break has. So, I agree they are annoying. Just not as annoying.

Red, totally agree on all counts.

Giving priority within the state-funded education system to Christians is a way of promoting Christianity.

"Go to Church and get a better school for your DC".

You can see why the Church likes faith schools...

How many families would have their DC christened/baptised and attend Church if there wasn't the carrot of school?

No objection to faith schools, just their admissions policy. I can't wait for Jesus to come back down and visit one, "So basically you ignore the poor and needy and select the middle class children who attend church weekly, sit in the front pew and smile sweetly at the vicar?". Hmmm weren't they called Pharisees?

It's the governors, not the church, who set the admissions criteria for church schools.