To ask for your opinion on faith schools?

[Syrinx89]

That's it, really. In this day and age, it seems strange to me.

It isn’t comparable to racism because there is a right to educate your child according to your religious faith, whereas there isn’t a right to educate your child along people of the colour(s) of your choosing.

You do not have the right to have the state pay for your child to be educated in the faith of your choosing.

We have an unequal patchwork of mostly Christian schools based on history rather than demographics. And in many areas the idea of ‘choice’ is a total myth.

Discriminating against five year olds based on their parents’ beliefs and segregating children by faith is morally dubious at best. The state actively encouraging it and funding it is despicable.

That would be fine if the church were bearing all the costs of running the school. As they aren't, it is inherently wrong that people get priority simply by turning up at that church on Sundays for a few years.

I always say I’d be perfectly happy for the churches to be able to get priority for school places based on the proportion of funds - admin and capital, to be totally fair - they put in.

So what, one kid a year, at best?

I can't imagine hating other people's choices so much that I'd try to it away from them.

Yet it's OK to take choices away from parents just because they haven't clocked up enough ticks on the church attendance register?

Historically it would be impossible to 'take' faith schools into the system and make them non-denominational. As a PP pointed out, the government often doesn't own the land or buildings.

Not directly, perhaps, but it would be quite possible simply to take away the funding. I suspect that, when it comes down to it, the churches would discover that they could be much more flexible when faced with that risk. We aren't forever bound by historical precedent because ultimately Parliament is supreme.

You do not have the right to have the state pay for your child to be educated in the faith of your choosing.

I agree. But the settlement that resulted in this being the case was passed by the Government, not by me. What I do have, is the right for my choice to educate in the faith of my choosing not to be interfered with. Forcing faith schools into a position where they were state-funded, then withdrawing that funding so the school had to close, would constitute undue interference.

My dd is at a faith school as it was in the catchment and much smaller and homely compared to the next modern large option. I felt it suited my dd better, although we are not religious in anyway. I don't find it strange that they exist although when I visit it does weird me out with crosses littering the place and statues of mary in various places, but that is down to me and my views on religion or lack of them. Other than that the school has a great community vibe and they aren't indoctrinating my child despite the daily prayers and frequent church visits.

My DC go to a Catholic school because DH is Catholic. It's a great school and gets good results.

However they have lots of EAL children who arrive mid year with no English and they do have children with SEN and behaviour issues. So it's not the case they only accept middle class children who are destined to be brilliant.

I don't think they use the tax payers money any differently from other school. They don't spend tax payers money on "Catholic things" So I don't know why people are saying they ought to be private!?

Perhaps if other schools took on board some of the things they do then they may be more successful? They are expected to sit through things like mass/assembly from day one. Both mine were able to sit through an hour long mass from babyhood & so when people on here say that toddlers can't be expected to sit still - I suggest going by a Catholic Church! I think it's part of the reason for their success - more strict. You don't have to be religious to get your children to sit still.

Educating your child in line with your faith is a fundamental right

No, it really isn't.

No issue with faith schools, I tend to agree that people should be able to educate their DCs in a faith if they wish.

I do, however have a huge issue with these schools being taxpayer funded and then excluding a large number of DC's whose parents actually fund the school. Surely nobody can think thats ok?

Faith schools should be wholly fee paying.

Oulu

Well, if I’m wrong, I’m wrong. 🤷🏻‍♀️ I believe it is and currently the school I am intending to send my child to agrees.

I’m in Ireland where most schools are catholic schools...my daughter goes to one of the nearest village catholic school, however my daughter is not baptised....yet!

mantarays

The HRA brings the European Convention on HR into English law rather than being a separate set of rights.

The European Convention does not guarantee state funded religious education otherwise France would be in breach.

I don't think there should be any religion in schools at all. Fine for faith schools to exist providing there is an equal opportunity for children to attend a secular school. There are some areas where the only options are faith schools.

If I had children then I would withdraw them from any acts of worship. I would be happy for them to attend RE if they do teach properly about other faiths. I am pagan but any children of mine get to make their own choice when they are old enough to do so. My family has a very bad history with the church. My own mother said she wouldn't have attended my wedding if it had been in one. There should be a clear separation of church and state. I remember the church coming to my state school and we had to attend and were told to accept the bibles they were giving out. When I refused, I was given a week of detention, the first I had ever had. This was in the 90s

I don't think there should be state funded faith schools. I worked in one years ago and was pretty shocked by the children regularly being told in assembly about how many babies had been murdered that year (i.e. in abortions).
'My child came out of faith school as a non-believer' is not an argument in favour of faith schools. People are free to practise their religion and to bring their children up in their faith. Schools should be secular.

I went to Catholic schools. I've taught in faith and non faith schools . My daughter goes to a catholic school. Most inclusive schools have been the Catholic ones.

The European Convention does not guarantee state funded religious education otherwise France would be in breach.

It doesn’t, and I didn’t say it did. The Government is not obligated to open a Catholic school near my house, and nor could it do so. However, it is obligated not to interfere so as to prevent me educating my child within my faith. It can’t close Catholic schools down. You could argue it could withdraw funding but a) that would cost money so it won’t and b) the Government brought these schools under their funding to start with, from their previously non-state maintained condition. By withdrawing funding now, I believe they would be interfering with my child’s right to an education within her faith.

But the settlement that resulted in this being the case was passed by the Government, not by me.

@mantarays I don't think anyone is blaming you for the current schools system.

What you are guilty of, IMHO, is having an incredibly "I'm alright Jack" attitude.

BadCatDirtyCat

I don’t have that attitude at all. I am not willing to compromise my child’s Catholic education so that you can make a point. That isn’t the same thing.

Or it could demand that they change their admissions systems..

I don't want to "make a point" I want my children to go to the best school possible.

Forcing faith schools into a position where they were state-funded, then withdrawing that funding so the school had to close, would constitute undue interference.

‘Undue’ would be the key, and transitions and support towards different funding models would be important. The churches who currently have the stranglehold on state education themselves are also quite wealthy. It would be interesting to see how they jumped - funding their own schools themselves, or a hybrid model with parents, or closure.

But the number of people who actually attend church for more than the minimum required period isn’t that large, and the investment in integration and religious cohesion would be worth it in my view.

I would also be in favour of a model that draws on the Australian system of school funding where all pupils receive government funding towards their education, but those in state schools receive more. This ensures a public stake, involvement and curriculum integration between the state and private systems.

‘We fucked up in the past’ is a very poor reason for continuing with bad policies or systems.

I don't understand the argument about "educating your child in your faith" surely that's something you do at home and jn your place of worship. I really do not understand why it has anything to do with their academic life

The Government can simply make a direct link between the financial contribution by the faith community and the proportion of places that can be segregated for faith.

Pay 50% of the capital and running costs and you can have 50% of the places.

BadCatDirtyCat

You have the right to send your child to the best school for which you are eligible. You are eligible for your child to be educated in a school founded and owned by Catholics unless you are one. Nothing the Government can do will change that. So this is dog in the manger.

*not

Pay 50% of the capital and running costs and you can have 50% of the places.

It can’t. It doesn’t own or run the place.