To think faith schools are great and it’s only the admission cheats that make them unfair?

[Wondermule]

My second controversial post in a few days. I don’t need a hard hat at this point, I need a bunker and full ghillie suit. But here goes.

Inspired by a thread, where a poster happily shared that they lied about going to church to get their kids into a Catholic school, before denouncing the admission system as deeply unfair...

I would like to put to the good people of mumsnet that actually, admission by religion is a really good idea. And it is only the people that cheat the admission system that keep it unfair for others.

Religion is a great criteria for school admissions. It doesn’t indicate intelligence; it isn’t an indicator of wealth; it would keep sibling groups together; and the ethos and PSHE would be generally in keeping with the parents’ beliefs.

The reason why faith schools are ‘better’ are because of non-religious people with intelligent kids cheating the system to get their kids a place. This then perpetuates the cycle - the kids perform well, the school becomes more desirable, so more people cheat to get their kids in.

So aside from depriving genuine applicants of school places, they are contributing to a system that they denounce as unfair. Whereas if they stopped playing the system, schools would actually be more mixed in terms of demographics, more equal, and there wouldn’t a stampede for just a few of them.

Phew! Thoughts please?!

But seeing people merrily fake their way in was unpleasant

This is horrendous. But surely it's not the Church's fault if there are people who are prepared to lie to gain a school place

@JessyRadlett
Yes, they do give preference to Catholics. That includes generations of local traveller families, EAL Eastern European immigrants and first generation Caribbean and African immigrants . The places are not filled by Catholic applicants and many Muslim families also choose to use the schools. I can think of 3 such schools in this city that regularly make the top 200 annual best schools in the country ( in The Time’s annual rankings ). That is just this city.
Even if it was due to selection it still does not explain the dominance of faith schools in league tables. There are plenty of secular schools in leafy areas.
@Thisisworsethananticpated
It does not dominate towards white and middle class. Catholic schools are more ethnically diverse than secular schools.

Some quotes to support Blackberry's views in relation to Catholic schools

the Church has always viewed education as vital to the formation and development of the whole person

Catholic parents from underprivileged backgrounds were nevertheless able to send their children to school

Service to those who are among the most disadvantaged in our society has also always been central to the mission of Catholic education

Catholic schools continuing to receive the disadvantaged from the new immigrant populations from across the world

www.cbcew.org.uk/home/our-work/catholic-education/

And more to the OP's point, I think the success of Catholic schools has a lot to do with a conscious focus by the authorities on the quality of education rather than pushy parents who cheat

@JassyRadlett

It is not Catholic schools with ‘ selective intake’ that perform better.

They have a long history of education in inner city areas and perform well in this context.

Great! I mean, I was talking about faith schools in general, but great if you can share the details on performance of Catholic schools who don’t use religious selection vs the performance of their notional community intake? These are Catholic schools who don’t give preference to Catholics, yes?

Selection by religious attendance skews the demographics (and performance) intakes just as selection by house prices does.

Anecdotally, one of the CofE places I worked changed to religious selection first rather than catchment a few years ago. They didn't realise that religion covered all classes, not just naice children from naice homes and naice families. Of course, everybody applied, as it was an Outstanding School and who wouldn't want that for their kid?

The demographic changed overnight one September from white, middleclass kids from a wider area to ones with a far larger SEN/FSM/BAME/PPG/other measures of disadvantage or deprivation. Well below average of all of those markers to well above national average. It was rarer to find a kid not falling into at least one (and often more) of those categories than it was to find a child that didn't.

When they combined the disadvantaged children with parents of the older children going elsewhere for the younger siblings, taking ones that slipped through the net because they hadn't realised out and going elsewhere, falling numbers, declining (plummeting) results, applications went from 3x oversubscribed to not even one class of kids/zero first preferences - with the inherent need to take every managed move available to bring the numbers up for the income required to keep going - they went from that permanently outstanding rating to Inadequate within four years. And closed shortly after.

The alternative places the parents chose? Ones a bus ride away that operated the grammar system, academies and private schooling, both secular and religious of any type. All of them in the most affluent areas, as they'd apply and go on waiting lists, apply and pay up or move and apply for the younger ones.

Now, it backfired on that school completely - but not because religion was elitist, but because religion was a leveller in terms of applications; people who lived in far poorer areas were now able to apply for places that had previously only been available to kids in an area where most houses were in the £600K plus bracket and many were far in excess of that.

Inadequate leadership did the rest, as they were unable to adapt to the changes - but it was making opportunity available to a wider section of society precisely by using religion as the marker that led to the utter clusterfuck that was that school in its death throes.

When the school closed, the RC schools offered to take the kids at almost zero notice. Not the secular schools, unless forced to by the local authority/parents refused places at RC establishments (all the academies said No Room) - the RC schools were the ones who made space, ordered temporary classrooms, hired extra staff and provided them with an education. There wasn't a huge drop in the RC schools' results. Because they were used to teaching children of all ability and circumstances, what with religion being something that is not measured in pounds and Rightmove values.

Blackberry, I’ll only

Can you share that data on Catholic schools as a class, rather than individual data points that may or may not be representative?

All I’ve seen is faith schools as a whole tend to have lower rates of FSM than their surrounding communities, and are lower for other (obviously imperfect) measures of deprivation. In addition to those on the performance of these schools only showing a trend to perform better (absent outliers) when they are able to discriminate in who goes to their school (and by association, who doesn’t.)

Both CofE and Catholic congregations tend to be more affluent than their surrounding communities. It’s much more pronounced in CofE congregations than Catholic but the gap is still there.

This schools data is all published on faith schools every 2-3 years in the HoC Library. The other is from the BAS and other regular surveys.

If you’re accusing me of misinformation, I’d like to see the information, please.

You need to deal with reality. Saying religion would be the best criteria if people acted differently than how the current system incentivises them to do so doesn’t mean much.

Someone is in an area where the good school is a catholic school and the other school is terrible will naturally and understandable want the best for their child so they do what they can to get in the good school. And this makes them immoral as they should respect the religion and just send their child to a rubbish school?

No, it’s the natural outcome from inserting religion into something it shouldn’t be. If I needed healthcare and the only hospital I could get to was a catholic I might say I was catholic to get treatment, instead of suffering longer. That doesn’t make me immoral. I’m just a tax payer like everyone else who wants to have access to services my money is paying for.

There wasn't a huge drop in the RC schools' results. Because they were used to teaching children of all ability and circumstances, what with religion being something that is not measured in pounds and Rightmove values

So I understand that your account supports the OP's view.

Very refreshing to read your experience

No, it’s the natural outcome from inserting religion into something it shouldn’t be

What would have happened if Catholic schools had never been founded in the UK? Those who founded the schools should have a say in the entry criteria.

Why should they be penalised for daring to exist and provide a good level of education?

@NeverDropYourMoonCup
That is my own experience and interesting to hear. I have been in both systems and the ethos and expectations were much higher in the Catholic schools.
@Jessy Radlett
FSM lower in Catholic schools.
Ethnic mix higher
That data is freely available.
I am not going to name individual schools but it is easy to check the league tables. The inner city schools may have slightly different data than neighbouring schools but they are still outstripping schools in wealthy suburbs.

@NeverDropYourMoonCup

That’s really, really interesting. And I guess the sort of scenario I was referring to in my OP.

I find that Mumsnet users like the ‘idea’ of diversity and equality, but not so much when it impacts their own lives 🙄 they all want schools to be a great leveller by taking kids from all backgrounds - but will only send their own children to the ‘naice’ oversubscribed ones, cheating their way in while they’re at it. They want to live somewhere with great culture, a good buzz, a diverse and friendly neighbourhood... but not this or THAT area of the city, it’s an absolute dump as well as the most diverse.

It’s all just lip service isn’t it?

@Wondermule you can't keep telling people that disagree with religion in schools that that isn't what's being discussed, because the two things are intrinsically linked. Faith schools don't use faith to admit children, and then not teach them the beliefs of that faith; they are not using religion as a way of getting a cross-section of society, as you suggest, they are trying to keep the numbers of believers up.

What would have happened if Catholic schools had never been founded in the UK?

I don’t know. Less opportunities for paedophilies? What a question. You think if catholics didn’t start schools no one would have.

*Those who founded the schools should have a say in the entry criteria.

Why should they be penalised for daring to exist and provide a good level of education?*

Taxpayers should get a say on how their money is spent. If you take public funds you should accept certain conditions. The bigger question is why should people be penalised for not being of a certain religion and have to accept lower education results?

If you want to start a school and have complete say then be private.

[quote DietrichandDiMaggio]@Wondermule you can't keep telling people that disagree with religion in schools that that isn't what's being discussed, because the two things are intrinsically linked. Faith schools don't use faith to admit children, and then not teach them the beliefs of that faith; they are not using religion as a way of getting a cross-section of society, as you suggest, they are trying to keep the numbers of believers up.[/quote]
No they’re not.

I’m talking about it in isolation. Would using religion make schools more equal than, say, location?

Got nothing to do with the teaching in school itself and whether that is right or wrong

You need to separate them

FSM lower in Catholic schools.
Ethnic mix higher
That data is freely available.
I am not going to name individual schools but it is easy to check the league tables. The inner city schools may have slightly different data than neighbouring schools but they are still outstripping schools in wealthy suburbs.

Catholic schools are less privileged and more diverse than CofE schools, agreed. But more so than the than the local community average, though, right?

I haven’t once asked you to name individual schools, as my issue isn’t about individual schools, it’s about the overall impact of faith schools in the state sector. One or two outliers don’t change that picture.

From the Education Policy Institute (2016):
Our analysis in this report finds that, compared to non-faith schools:
 Faith schools educate a lower proportion of disadvantaged children (12.1 per cent eligible for free school meals at Key Stage 2 versus 18.0 per cent; 12.6 per cent at Key Stage 4 versus 14.1 per cent)
5

• Faith schools also educate a lower proportion of pupils with special educational needs (SEN) (16.8 per cent at Key Stage 2 versus 19.7 per cent; 14.4 per cent at Key Stage 4 versus 16.6 per cent); and

• Faith schools enrol a larger proportion of high attaining pupils (28.4 per cent at Key Stage 2 versus 23.7 per cent; 27.4 per cent at Key Stage 4 versus 24.5 per cent).

The report shows that faith schools are on average more socially selective than non-faith schools, with for example only around 1 in 10 faith secondary schools having a disproportionately high number of pupils that are eligible for free school meals.

The Sutton Trust has also done a number of reports on this.

Given that a third of faith schools in England are Catholic, the evidence doesn’t support the idea that as a class they are not socially selective.

However as I’ve repeatedly said, the arguments I made were about faith schools as a class. They are socially selective as well as promoting religious segregation. And where they are able to be socially selective, they perform no better on average than other schools.

Glad to have that accusation of misinformation withdrawn, thanks.

Parents of children in faith schools are taxpayers too.
‘Why should people be penalised for not being of a certain religion and have to accept lower educational standards’ No words.....

@JessyRadlett.
No not withdrawn
The couple of percentage points in FSM and SEN is not sufficient to account for the difference in outcomes. FSM is not a accurate measure of deprivation.
KS2 and KS4 data will generally be from children already within the system.

I’m talking about it in isolation. Would using religion make schools more equal than, say, location?

That would only work if everyone belonged to a religion though, and even if they did and all children attended schools with others of the same religion, you'd still have some schools that people considered better than others.

I think maybe people need to accept that faith schools are in fact outperforming secular schools, in which case it is time to learn from them.
If they are not, why are some getting so worked up about exclusion from said schools( having to accept lower educational standards.. ).

Parents of children in faith schools are taxpayers too.

Well if you are going to argue that, you could argue for any sort of school based on the parents paying taxes. One of the things that the OP wants to avoid is there being 'better' schools in posh areas, but chances are those parents living in expensive houses are paying a lot of tax, so you could argue their taxes should entitle them to a nice school for their children.

It was a reply to a Taxpayers should get a say in how their money is spent. There is an impression here of only certain taxpayers’ opinions being valid.

So open to postcode cheating and awful social mobility because better schools will always be in the posh areas?

This is not true in the city I live in. The "posh" apply to the good schools on the opposite side of the river and take up all the spaces despite having a school on their doorstep. The people from the poor area get lumbered with the school the posh have rejected on the other side of the city which takes them about 45-60min to get to. If people were allocated their closest school (and not as the crow flies which doesn't take into account river crossings), pollution would decrease and there would be more of a community atmosphere.

Religion does not belong in a tax funded school at all.

Any school that has an additional priority criteria that involves a supplementary form will penalise some children, probably the least advantaged.

To get into the school, a child has to be fortunate enough to have parents who consider which is the best school in enough time to make the changes to play the system, have to have been interested enough to know there is a form, have to be able to fill out the form. And it self perpetuates as children of such invested parents will do better, the school gets better results and the levels of investment (cheating) are raised, leaving the child whose parents dont know or gone care in the not so good schools.

It's interesting what people have said about parents having other commitments such as work on a Sunday. I'd not thought of that.

In our case, I'm CofE and attend Church weekly. DH is a lapsed Catholic. Our favoured primary was a CofE school but I attend the wrong church. I could have changed which one I attend but the problem is I believe in God and He would know I was playing the system. DH could attend the right Church instead, but he too wouldnt play the system in front of God.

Ironically, you have to not be a believer to play the system to get into a religious school!

@Wondermule - you still haven't provided any evidence that it's the cheats that cause faith schools to have a different intake to other schools. Sure, anecdotally there are parents who attend church every week for a year to get their kids a place. But you'd need to demonstrate that a significant proportion of them are not of that faith to evidence your argument. And I don't think being of the faith, but not a regular attendee of services makes anyone a cheat.

Honestly, there really is no point in using @ if the username isn’t correct. Save yourself the keystrokes.

You don’t like the Sutton Trust or the EPI. You don’t like the suggestion - or the data that supports it - that faith schools only outperform where it aligns with social selection.

In Church of England schools, pupils achieve one-twentieth of a grade higher in each of 8 GCSEs; in Catholic schools they achieve one-sixth of a grade higher in each of 8 GCSEs. However in faith secondaries, pupils are only two-thirds as likely to be eligible for free school meals (which I agree is a fairly crude proxy, but the most consistent we have - and the EPI report also looks at other measures.)

We’re also looking at only ‘a few percentage points higher’ for KS2 measures (fewer percentage points than for FSM).

The proportion of children with SEN is also troubling to me - when a school has a lower proportion of children with SEN, it is unsurprising that it gets better academic results.

So - can you share your evidence, please, that faith schools aren’t socially selective and that they outperform on an objective like for like basis? Since you’re calling me a liar and all.

I’m afraid I’m not finding your assertions massively convincing, and I’m happy to be corrected if I can see some objective evidence for it, across all faith schools (given that’s what you accused me of misinformation about).

@Walkingtheplank

Any school that has an additional priority criteria that involves a supplementary form will penalise some children, probably the least advantaged.

To get into the school, a child has to be fortunate enough to have parents who consider which is the best school in enough time to make the changes to play the system, have to have been interested enough to know there is a form, have to be able to fill out the form. And it self perpetuates as children of such invested parents will do better, the school gets better results and the levels of investment (cheating) are raised, leaving the child whose parents dont know or gone care in the not so good schools.

It's interesting what people have said about parents having other commitments such as work on a Sunday. I'd not thought of that.

In our case, I'm CofE and attend Church weekly. DH is a lapsed Catholic. Our favoured primary was a CofE school but I attend the wrong church. I could have changed which one I attend but the problem is I believe in God and He would know I was playing the system. DH could attend the right Church instead, but he too wouldnt play the system in front of God.

Ironically, you have to not be a believer to play the system to get into a religious school!

One of the reasons that church schools can be socially selective is that even a "Christian" school can put in an order of preference of the "right type" of Christian or the specific church attended.

There are significant racial differences in terms of which Christian denomination is followed. So a CofE school may well discriminate against children who attend a Pentecostal church - resulting in indirect race discrimination.