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?

Right so, say a faith school does she a smaller proportion of children on fsm, what exactly is the issue with this? Surely it's a positive thing that they aren't on fsm.

These faith schools seem to get something right given that so many of no faith want their kids to get into them. What I don't understand is.....given the outrage that some people feel regarding their children getting taught about God, I'm amazed they want their kids anywhere near. Or do want these schools to become secular just to suit them.

Yes they can select their children based on faith but who's to say these children are superior academically to other local children who go to a community school, just because their parents had them baptised it does not mean they are bright neccesarily

No, but the faith criteria (not just baptism in many if not most cases) indicate parents who are relatively organised and committed.
Parental support and involvement is one of the greatest predictors of attainment, at primary at least.

As there are a lot of children locally who attend the faith schools it has actually opened up more places at the community schools for other children who aren't of any faith.

I wish that were the case here. Unfortunately many of our church school places go to children who aren't local - a significant number are out of borough. I'm sure it's only a coincidence that we're a 'nice' commuter area with very popular train links and a great station car park. So faith schools don't relieve the pressure on community school places, and they're not evenly dispersed so that the effect is uniform.

now if there aren't any local community schools on your doorstep then that is hardly the fault of parents who by chance happen to have a local faith school available to them

As I've said (repeatedly, sigh) I don't blame the parents at all. They are making the most of a system that is weighted in their favour. I can understand that. I blame (and want to change) a system that promotes the idea that discriminating against five year olds is not just ok, but somehow desirable.

"Right so, say a faith school does she a smaller proportion of children on fsm, what exactly is the issue with this? Surely it's a positive thing that they aren't on fsm."

A smaller proportion of children on FSM than the area It's not that children are miraculously lifted out of poverty by attending a faith school.

"These faith schools seem to get something right given that so many of no faith want their kids to get into them. What I don't understand is.....given the outrage that some people feel regarding their children getting taught about God, I'm amazed they want their kids anywhere near. Or do want these schools to become secular just to suit them."

1. Nobody is objecting to their children being taught about religion.

1. The point is that people of faith have a choice of 33% more tax payer funded state schools than people without faith. You can live next door to a faith school and not get a place while a child from a faith family two villages away gets a place. Which is obviously ridiculous and unfair.

1. Faith schools are only noticeably better when they are oversubscribed, do an element of selection happens. Undersubscribed faith school perform exactly the same as any other school in the same type of demographic. Which suggests that it's selection, rather than faith that makes the difference.

Right so, say a faith school does she a smaller proportion of children on fsm, what exactly is the issue with this? Surely it's a positive thing that they aren't on fsm.

The children on free school meals don't stop existing. They just don't get to go to faith schools in representative numbers.

That means, where faith admissions are practised, children from the most disadvantaged (and the most chaotic) homes are more likely to miss out, meaning those kids are found in disproportionately high numbers in other schools - increasing the challenge for those schools.

given the outrage that some people feel regarding their children getting taught about God, I'm amazed they want their kids anywhere near.

In many cases it's not that the non-faith parents want their child to attend a faith school, it's just that sometimes the faith school is the lesser 'evil' than eg having to commute to the next county just to get your child to school in the morning because there are NO school places nearby which your child qualifies for (due to religious discrimination).

And yes, of course it would be preferable for all schools to be run along secular lines, so that they are able to fairly serve the local community. Seems unlikely to happen though - due to the system being so firmly rooted in religious privilege.

Dawn, my main ask is for all kids to have an equal chance of a reasonably local state education.

I'd love it if everyone had the chance to go to the school of their choice. But given the chaotic state school system we have and seem likely to continue with, I'd like to solve the source of what seems like the source of the biggest/most problems - a piecemeal, inconsistent and discriminatory admissions system.

By the way when I say 'run along secular lines' I don't mean 'not have RE lessons', I mean no worship by default and no faith criteria on admissions.

Why would we need better eyesight than an animal that has to stalk its prey?

we don't, as explained by evolution. I was countering the notion that the eye "is hardly flawed". it's obviously flawed.

As for applying that kind of logic to other human beings to try and excuse their evil deeds.....well that's exactly what does happen.

what do you mean by that? When a human does an evil deed, we don't excuse it by saying he has higher motives impossible for us to understand. We say the deed is evil.

Yet, when god floods the planet and kills almost everything on it, or gives children cholera, we say he has higher motives. Why?

But these horrific acts of God you're talking about.....would that be the God you don't believe in?

of course this is a god I don't believe in. All of these are natural occurrences to me. But this is a god you revere. Why? he doesn't seem to be nice.

Yes they can select their children based on faith but who's to say these children are superior academically

it's been demonstrated, and repeatedly mentioned here, the selection itself makes for a better intake. Whenever a school becomes oversubscribed and there is competition to get in, you select based on parents willing to jump through hoops (distance, religion). It's selection that matters.

Of course, you will get the most academically strong schools when you directly select for ability. But the next tiers come from any kind of selection at competitive schools, because you are shifting out children whose parents CBA, and that is a big filter. That is possibly the best filter beyond actually selecting for academic ability.

These faith schools seem to get something right given that so many of no faith want their kids to get into them.

I don't think you have read the thread. Either that, or you are wilfully misunderstanding. I do not want parents to have to send their children to faith schools (even if they can get in, which many can't) in order to get a reasonably local education (like, not a 45 minute drive). I want all parents to have a reasonable chance of getting their child into a local school. Full stop. Nothing about a good school or an outstanding school or indeed a faith school, just a school that is fairly nearby with all the social benefits that brings for the children and the logistics benefits it confers on the parents. For many of us in high-density population areas, the best way of bringing this about would be to stop faith-based admissions.

BTW, I could have got my kid into a reasonably close C of E school but chose instead the community school which is fine. Not everyone has that choice. I was fortunate enough to live close to three perfectly OK schools, one of which was C of E. LOTS of parents don't have that choice. This is wrong. It's particularly wrong given the numbers of people that actually describe themselves as being Christian vs the numbers of faith schools describing themselves as Christian.

Redstrawberry you've gone to a fair bit of effort to respond to my post. We could literally argue till the cows come home, but what's the point, you say the eye is flawed, I say the design of the eye is so unbelievably intricate that it's nothing short of miraculous.
When people do evil deeds, of course they're often excused. The do gooders go out of their way to excuse the crimes. Murderers often only serve a few years.
I don't know what you mean by God flooding the planet and giving children cholera, I wasn't aware He did this, they are natural occurrences, why is God to blame. Isn't it strange when all the bad things that happen on earth are blamed on God. Who do we thank for the good things then. But you stick with your beliefs, I'll stick with mine. No point in arguing.

I have read the thread, where I live the kids mainly go to the nearest school, I've never heard of the schools only taking in the ones of that faith, apart from Catholic ones.

I have read the thread, where I live the kids mainly go to the nearest school, I've never heard of the schools only taking in the ones of that faith, apart from Catholic ones

Then you're what might be described as lucky.

One of the reasons I'm no longer a Christian is that I couldn't reconcile attributing the good in nature (the design of the eye) to a deity, but not the bad (natural disasters, cholera).

The Ebola virus, from a design point of view, is amazing and stunning. It is also horrific in its effect on humans. God, or nature? I couldn't reconcile it, so I stopped trying. (Among numerous other irreconcilable differences.)

I've never heard of the schools only taking in the ones of that faith

Then you are fortunate. This happens very very frequently where I live and it also happens very very frequently that children of no faith or a faith that isn't Christian find themselves severely limited in options despite their best efforts (unless they play the game and pretend to be Christian for a few years). Sometimes those options are literally no options and the families involved find themselves with no offer at all for a Reception place. Catchments for successful children at community schools are regularly less than 500m. This is why I think it is unfair. I honestly can't see why anyone could think this IS fair.

In addition, where I live, there are areas where parents will not get offers for their closest school, even though there are no faith criteria. Because there actually aren't enough schools for the numbers of children. Faith schools are just adding to the problem in this situation.

Yes I do credit God with creating the eye. If he created us then of course he has created the eye. If I believe in God it's natural that I believe he created us. I certainly don't blame God with all the disasters that befall the earth. I blame man. Atheists should really be able to think of a better argument for not believing in God rather than say, "what a cruel God, because we have famine, terrible illnesses, droughts, natural disasters etc. In a way by saying this it is admitting there is a God, but a cruel one.

I certainly don't blame God with all the disasters that befall the earth. I blame man

For all the floods and earth quakes and tsunamis and childhood cancers and droughts and avalanches?

by saying this it is admitting there is a God, but a cruel one.

So you think God is cruel?

If you want to believe in God that's fine, go ahead- so long as you don't impose your beliefs on me and mine. But it is absurd to pretend there's any proof, or evidence for his existence- of course there isn't. But believe away.

Atheists should really be able to think of a better argument for not believing in God rather than say, "what a cruel God, because we have famine, terrible illnesses, droughts, natural disasters etc. In a way by saying this it is admitting there is a God, but a cruel one.

Except no one's saying that.

No one actually needs a reason not to believe in a particular god, you know.

Why don't you believe in Shiva, out of interest? Why aren't you saying that atheists need a reason not to believe in Ganesha? Believing in your god isn't actually the default position, as I've mentioned previously, and religious belief isn't a 'Christianity/atheism' binary. It's quite arrogant to suggest that it is.

No, I'm saying that by atheists blaming God for the disasters it seems like they're saying there is a God, but they think him cruel. Please don't try and trip me up by twisting my words......and no I don't blame God for any of the things you've listed, do you?

Jassy atheists say exactly that, as they are doing now. It's really the only thing they do say.