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.

"Do you think it is fair that people of faith have a choice of 30% more tax payer funded state schools than people without faith?"

You make it sound as if that is somehow a uniform truth, when of course even the briefest look at the schools, their geographical distribution, their criteria and their actual pupil body show that it is nothing like that.

I would cost very little to change admissions criteria

You miss the point. It would tear up the agreement under which the Church relinquished control of the curriculum and allowed the state to step in.

But the Church could still do it if it wanted to.

Dodging the question, eh, meditrina?

Oh well, better than "get over it" I suppose.

"I notice you don't answer the question"

I do step away from the keyboard from time to time, and this post appeared whilst I was typing my previous one.

As a 22 minute interval between a post appearing, a poster spotting it and then typing their reply really isn't unacceptably tardy.

Warning - I am always coming and going from the keyboard. Absences of replies are no indicator of anything else.

I'm not dodging the question. I'm pointing out that it's the wrong question because it has been over-simplified to the point of meaningless.

OK. Do you think it's fair that people of faith have access to more tax payer funded state schools than people without faith?

Yabu , I read a ridiculous article from the British Humanists the other day who were delighted that actively serving in a church gave more points for school admissions. There argument was that this was discriminatory to children from poorer back grounds. What they chose to ignore was children from deprived backgrounds will not have parents who can pay for private education. Neither will their parents be able to " buy" an excellent state education by purchasing a house in an expensive catchment area.
A parent of children in low socio economic groups can arrive at church early on a Sunday to help out in someway.
A child from a deprived background who has a faith can have a chance of a excellent education that would otherwise never have been offered to them.

""I notice you don't answer the question"

Sorry, meditrina- that was directed to another poster who responded to some of my post to you but not that bit. Complicated cross posting.

Religion is currently a way for people to give their DC a head start in life without incurring the startling costs of independent education.

Gosh- oversubscribed do better academically than other state schools that don't select but suggesting they give the same "head start" as a good independent school is a bit of a stretch!

Bertrand - look at it another way. The state rewards those who worship regularly by giving them a greater choice of schools for their DC.

"oversubscribed faith schools"

I didn't say they gave an equivalent head start. Just a head start.

"Yabu , I read a ridiculous article from the British Humanists the other day who were delighted that actively serving in a church gave more points for school admissions."

That sort of criteria is disallowed under the Admissions Code, and is a major breach.

Most of the breaches they found were minor ones (the kind of detail of wording LEAs get wrong too).

It is Jewish schools which seem to have the highest rate of major breaches. I say 'seem' because in the absence of a body that will inspect all admissions authorities to ensure compliance with the code, then it is of course impossible to ascribe numbers and rates with certainty.

"Bertrand - look at it another way. The state rewards those who worship regularly by giving them a greater choice of schools for their DC."
Sorry- that's far too ridiculous to comment on.

There should be a ban on faith schools, France is way ahead of us .

No it's not. It's a different system. Our schools were originated by the Church of England - we are built around religion. France is a secular society. In France girls are banned from wearing the hijab in school. Do you think that is "way ahead of us" ?

It's not ridiculous - it is de facto the case.

There is no ban on faith schools in France. 23% of the Parisian school age population attends a Catholic school.

Bertrand to an extent the church want to have its cake and eat it.

A few years ago the head of the Oxford Diocesan Board of Education made a big pronouncement about church schools getting 'back to their roots' in serving the local communities. He suggested that they should change admission policites in order to admit local disadvantaged children rather that the 'pray or pay' middle classes who fill the pews on a Sunday as a way of avoiding the local comp.

It's a great idea. Sadly, it's a bit like my champagne socialist friend who goes on and on about how she only believes in state school education after spending an extra £50k on a house in order to get her child into the 'naicest' primary (with the lowest levels of FSM in the borogun).

Unfortunately, admission criteria for VA and academy faith schools are set by the governing board of the school. These boards are made up, in no small part, by local clergy, who have their own 'targets' set by the Diocese of how much 'collection' (for want of a better word) money they need to return each year.

When someone once remarked to our vicar that the church was very full of young families - bucking national trands - she remarked along the lines that it's amazing what effect having an oversubscribed outstanding local church school can have.

Removing faith admissions criteria will cause church attendance to drop - particularly in areas where the church schools significantly outperform other local schools. While the church may make lofty and noble statements about serving local communities, they have little financial desire to change the status quo.

I don't have the answer - I'm not clever enough for that. I wish that general state education was better for all.

I very much agree with your post Zedwoman.

I agree with zedwoman too. I'm not saying it's right, but the state simply can't just take what it wants and not pay market value for it. It would be too expensive. Perhaps when building new school buildings the state should, instead of building on church school land, put the money in to a new state school. On the other hand, some new schools have really struggled.

Zed woman attending church is often the only way a child from a deprived background can attend a good school. See my post above.
Church is free from anyone.

I always find it interesting that people are happy with schools discriminating against other faiths/no faith. Imagine being turned away from an NHS funded "Catholics only" hospital or being somewhere where the only supermarket in the area only lets Anglicans in. I suspect people would be far less accepting of the discrimination then.

It's not discrimination though anyone can attend church, there are no conditions and no charge.