To think secular groups should be allowed to object to faith school admissions?

[RockUnit]

The education secretary, Nicky Morgan, wants to ban organisations from objecting to faith school admission procedures, to “stop vexatious complaints against faith schools by secularist campaign groups”.

link here

According to the article linked to above, the government will carry out a public consultation on the proposed changes.

Griphook

If a school is partially funded by the public they have to allow that percentage of pupils in irrespective of faith.

Boneyback, that's not actually true though.

They have to set admissions criteria in accordance with national rules, but if all their places are filled by the time they've gone through 1) kids with a statement specifying that school and 2) kids whose parents worship at St X, then as far as the gov't is concerned, all is well and good.

Teaching religious superstition as fact in science, geography classes etc is a good idea?

whilst recognising that's not the point of this thread, what is it you think goes on in religious schools? seriously? You know that there's no 'GCSE For Religious Schools', don't you? That we all sit the same exams with similar content at the end of year 11, 12 and 13? That people who call themselves religious can actually both believe in God and teach that the world was created by a slightly more scientific process than some higher being getting a bit lonely and making people in his own image.

You are also aware that there's no obligation to declare your religious inclinations on teaching application forms so people of any religion/belief/persausion could be working in a school near you...and teaching your children all kinds of bonkers stuff. I assume it would never occur to you to question the integrity and professionalism of staff who's religious background you are unaware of in the way you do those who do declare a religious interest by...working in a religious school. Because of course, working in a religious school means nothing at all, does it? Plenty of Catholic schools out there, for example, with not one non-Catholic member of staff?

"I think that unless you live locally and might want to send your child to a school then the admissions code of st blog's school 50 miles away is none of your business."

I think it is our business. A divided, divisive society harms us all.

Get rid of faith schools. And, while we are at it, take proactive steps to desegregate all regular state schools that have highly segregated intakes--with the use of quotas and busing if necessary. Why on earth Britain tolerated the growth of highly segregated schools is a mystery to me.

I don't agree that faith schools should be "banned" or people should have the right to object to them and I'm sorry to tell you but you can object all you want they aren't going anywhere. My children attend amazing Catholic primary and secondary schools and I won't apologise for doing everything in my power to secure them a good education.

We are Catholic before anyone accuses me of feigning religion, and whilst we aren't devout Catholics attending church every week I'm happy that we have been able to get them into Catholic schools that also happen to be the best schools in the area. I obviously can't speak for everyone but in my experience the people who object to these schools are just envious, they dbant get their kids into the best schools so don't like the fact that some parents can secure places, whether that Mensa jumping through hoops or not.

If faith schools are 'banned' where will the children who currently attend them go to school?

Remember that the state does not own VA schools, so stands to loose a significant proportion of buildings, land etc. Possibly enough to make state schooling unviable in many places.

(Faith schools long preceded state education, btw, so it wasn't ever a case of growing segregation)

My two went to a catholic school and there was none of this at all

a) how do you know?

b) so because it didn't happen to yours it doesn't happen in other faith schools?

BTW I'm saying (a) because I didn't realise until years after leaving school that the history I learned was biased and parts had been left out / twisted.

I obviously can't speak for everyone but in my experience the people who object to these schools are just envious, they dbant get their kids into the best schools so don't like the fact that some parents can secure places, whether that Mensa jumping through hoops or not.

Really?

Not me, for a start I don't have kids. I am a teacher so I do object to my career being limited because I'm honest. I could easily feign believing, recite the hail Mary and cross myself.

I object to faith schools because they are publicly funded, decisive, discriminatory and teach outdated medieval beliefs.

So cannotlogin, there's is absolutely no reason to have faith schools on that basis. Why not just have after school clubs for religious instruction if people are so frantic for Christian input?

And suzz1c, your entitlement just take my breath away.

The problem with religious schools is that they are selection by stealth. And not selection by ability but by the "nice middle class"ness of the parents.

The nearest CofE secondary to us has rules about the religious places (67% of the places) that mean that a family that are genuine church goers but maybe not very clued up about schools will not get a place.

But a child with well educated, middle class parents who care very much about education, have English as a first language, firmly believe in doing homework and are vaguely CofE but are not particularly religious (ie me!) will be able interpret the very complex rules and so get a place.

Much as it will undoubtedly make the results better if you carefully exclude children with chaotic home lives, with SEN, whose parents have EAL and so can't help with homework, I'm not convinced that it is a very Christian attitude.

It's next to impossible to get a child with major special needs/ behavioural problems to church every week on a Sunday morning. The additional forms that have to be filled in makes applying more complex.

It is possible for non Catholics to get their children into catholic schools on continuing interest, but schools often do not make it easy.

Our local catholic primary will consider baptism beyond 12 months if you can explain why your child was baptised late. My daughter was baptised at three years old in a Church of England church. My logic at the time was that Samuel was presented to Eli the priest at a similar age. The local catholic priest has told that he is prepared to accept our reasons for a late baptism even if it does not fit in with Catholic teaching. His comment was at least I had put in some thought about baptism even if he thought my logic was bizarre. He gets fed up with the dishonesty of people getting their children baptised purely to get into Catholic school.

Incidentally I sent my child to a community school in the end. The Catholic school theology was not the right fit for us.

Why do people on here assume that faith schools are for the Middle classes? I realise that for a lot of C of E schools usually to be higher up the criteria there has to be a certain amount of church attendance but for the majority of Catholic schools church attendance is not factored into the criteria. As long as your child is baptised and you live within a certain distance then you will be high priority for a place, and don't tell me it's only "posh" people who baptise their children. Yes these schools chose their students and yes they prioritise children of faith first but there is no room in the criteria to select children from certain backgrounds or class.

Whilst I totally understand where you're coming from and actually fully support the right to object getting rid of faith based schools would be expensive.

we should start with the discriminatory entrance policies. We don't stand for that in employment, why in admissions?

However - are there any groups that aren't about promoting secularism, but are campaigning against unfair faith school admissions?

you don't have to be an atheist to join a secularist group. Secularists just want religion out of government. It's perfectly possible and reasonable to be a religious secularist. All that means is that you think you (nor anyone) has the right to use government to force religion onto other people.

Clearly there is a wide variety of Admissions codes as DS ha just been accepted into our local CofE secondary (joint nearest school). It has a % of places available for non faith places, and as thoroughly diverse both racially and socially due to accepting many of the local pentecostal churches as fulfilling the faith remit - and thus making it far moe mixed than the other decent local secondaries that are populated with those that are able to move within catchment - and selects on distance and ability only.

We have a severe shortage of secondary school places as it is, where on earth do you expect all the kids that are currently in faith schools to be educated if you remove faith schools? I just don't get it? It is successive Govts over the years that have relied on these schools to fill the ever increasing gap.

And, as an aside, our local academy chain has just stated that it is removing elected governing bodies from every school and is leaving the head sponsor in charge of all, that to me is far more concerning and requires a challenge . .

I obviously can't speak for everyone but in my experience the people who object to these schools are just envious, they dbant get their kids into the best schools so don't like the fact that some parents can secure places, whether that Mensa jumping through hoops or not.

First, objecting to unfair admissions makes people envious, and that's a surprise because...?

No doubt some of it is motivated by self interest, but principle is on our side. The advocates of the current system support blatant discrimination on religious grounds which is not tolerated in any other area of society, and for good reason. Basically, the "good" people who support this policy ultimate support one of the ugliest forms of discrimination which many other countries (and frankly every other sphere in this country) has banned.

We have a severe shortage of secondary school places as it is, where on earth do you expect all the kids that are currently in faith schools to be educated if you remove faith schools?

chip away at the problem. first step, ban discriminatory selection. Don't actively make the problem worse by encouraging more religious free schools.

Why not just have after school clubs for religious instruction if people are so frantic for Christian input?

or, how about sunday morning in one of those grand old buildings everyone complains are empty?

Some schools discriminate on sex, distance, others have a catchment and some use religion.

distance is not a protected characteristic. religion is. sex is.

sex is a bit of a weird one. In principle, I don't like them, but I think they can work and make admissions fair if they are appropriately spaced out and are paired with another local school of the opposite gender.

Why do people on here assume that faith schools are for the Middle classes?

The data?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith_school#Issues_about_faith_schools_in_the_UK

I won't apologise for doing everything in my power to secure them a good education.

is that something you learned by attending church? Supporting discrimination when it suits your people?

I won't apologise for doing everything in my power to secure them a good education.

No - nothing wrong with that. I will do the same. But I can also recognise the fact that, just because I have the ability and the resources to make the system work for me, doesn't mean that the system is not wrong.

Hear hear Mumoftwoyoungkids

It shouldn't be about who is best at beating the system.

It shouldn't be about who is best at beating the system.

So how would you decide which children get to go to the over subscribed schools.You could argue'why is a children living closer more entitled to a place than a child living further away.
The elephant in the room is that a school is defined by its intake.If you reduce the calibre of the families sending their kids there,, in the long term you reduce the calibre of the school (best teachers don't want to teach there, supportive parents don't send their kids there)
Removing selection (in its broadest sense) from the system would mean you would end up with all state schools being mediocre, rather than reanging from excellent to very bad as they do now.Is that a good thing? No I don't think so

So how would you decide which children get to go to the over subscribed schools.You could argue'why is a children living closer more entitled to a place than a child living further away.

why do people keep trotting this out? Distance isn't perfect, but it's a hell of a lot better than by religion, which in turn is a hell of a lot better than race.

I find it odd that people go from recognizing there is a need for some criteria to deal with oversubscription, to all criteria are equally good. They are not. Distance is better than religion which is better than race.

Removing selection (in its broadest sense) from the system would mean you would end up with all state schools being mediocre, rather than reanging from excellent to very bad as they do now.Is that a good thing? No I don't think so

should we be educating the poor at all?

I teach in a faith school. We do NOT teach 'religious superstition' as fact.
I, of course, don't know what happens in all other faith schools but I've never come across this.
pp is correct, academies is s bigger issue. Along with the fact that no local authority is able to build new schools even in areas with massive over subscription.