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?!

If their was genuinely selection by religion, then their is no benefit to our country, so what is the point? We dont need more religious people.

If it is random selection then also what is the benefit to our country?

Selection by (coaching/tutoring/intelligence) does a least provide us with intelligent people. So at least there would be a benefit of selection by aptitude tests.

Religion is the worst option to elect by.

We don't need more religious people

That's just your opinion, some will disagree with this

Inner London faith schools are just full of middle class whites kids

Again, you are assuming that poor children cannot be religious. This is not true either

@turquoisewaters

We don't need more religious people

That's just your opinion, some will disagree with this

You have so many replies like this because you are clearly coming from the perspective of a religious person. But you haven't given a satisfying answer to a) why it is necessary or appropriate for religion to be taught in schools and b) why it is appropriate for religious people and people willing to pretend to be religious to have exclusive access to as high a percentage of the nations schools as they do.

@Lockandtees

But they don’t help poor kids climb the ladder *@Hellebored*. Just read the post below. Inner London faith schools are just full of middle class whites kids.

[laughs in 47 languages]

I actually think religious primary schools are great.kids need a framework that I think religious schools manage better than secular schools. In fact I’d like to see more religion in schools.It’s important for British people to understand Christianity (and to a lesser extent Judaism) to a fair degree to understand our own history and culture, our arts and institutions. I’m not a believer in the established Christian doctrines but recognise the importance of a good knowledge on the subject.

Our one Christian school got taken over by an academy and gives automatic entry to a top secondary school. The humanist society stuck their noses in -no more christian school. The majority of the pupils are now Muslim and Hindu

@Ihatefish

I actually think religious primary schools are great.kids need a framework that I think religious schools manage better than secular schools. In fact I’d like to see more religion in schools.It’s important for British people to understand Christianity (and to a lesser extent Judaism) to a fair degree to understand our own history and culture, our arts and institutions. I’m not a believer in the established Christian doctrines but recognise the importance of a good knowledge on the subject.

Our one Christian school got taken over by an academy and gives automatic entry to a top secondary school. The humanist society stuck their noses in -no more christian school. The majority of the pupils are now Muslim and Hindu

There's a difference between teaching kids about Christianity and teaching them that Christianity is true.

@gvdlyfoib the trouble though with a non religious schools approach to RE is very much looking at every religion equally and leaves v little time for getting in-depth on one. I think there’s a great value in learning about one religion on a deep level rather than lots of different ones. The good thing about religious schools is that this is possible.

You have so many replies like this because you are clearly coming from the perspective of a religious person

I was trying to point out that saying We don't need more religious people is like saying We don't need more vegetarians

It's just an opinion (many will disagree), and it will be highly offensive to religious people

@Ihatefish

I actually think religious primary schools are great.kids need a framework that I think religious schools manage better than secular schools. In fact I’d like to see more religion in schools.It’s important for British people to understand Christianity (and to a lesser extent Judaism) to a fair degree to understand our own history and culture, our arts and institutions. I’m not a believer in the established Christian doctrines but recognise the importance of a good knowledge on the subject.

Our one Christian school got taken over by an academy and gives automatic entry to a top secondary school. The humanist society stuck their noses in -no more christian school. The majority of the pupils are now Muslim and Hindu

You learn an awful lot about Christianity in the context of our cultural history purely by studying history itself. People that don't study history or have an interest in it are generally quite clueless in that regard anyway, learning extensively about Christianity would barely scratch the surface in any meaningful way. In fact it would probably be quite misleading, when it comes to explaining Christianity's impact on our social history.

[quote Ihatefish]@gvdlyfoib the trouble though with a non religious schools approach to RE is very much looking at every religion equally and leaves v little time for getting in-depth on one. I think there’s a great value in learning about one religion on a deep level rather than lots of different ones. The good thing about religious schools is that this is possible.[/quote]
Would you say the same if it were one of the other religions being taught as though it were true?

@aSofaNearYou
I agree with you about the study of history. An in depth knowledge of Christianity ( and Judaism as one informs the other) will just enrich though. A study of historical events is not the same as an in depth understanding of cultural references. It won’t help in understanding many references made in paintings and literature. I value that even though many don’t.
I think there is a lot of misunderstanding of what is actually taught in faith schools. If it was indoctrination, I would not have been comfortable with it, I wouldn’t have wanted it for my children and I’m sure the Muslim families I taught would not have been comfortable either

@aSofaNearYou I think having an in-depth knowledge of Christianity really helps understand the last 1500 years of the U.K. it helps interpret art, it helps helps understand the state, it’s an underlying theme because Christianity was what formed a major building block of society it is therefore necessary to understand the types of Christianity which underpinned all these things as a fundamental principle rather than an add on.

@aSofaNearYou well I went through a Catholic convent education (I wasn’t Catholic). I’ve ended up as any Christian element in me being somewhat Gnostic, I value the concepts of Neoplatonism, I resonate a lot with Kabbalah and some Sufi concepts. I find some great inspiration from the Rosicrucian manefestos and love psychology and quantum physics. So what is taught as true in school probably has very little bearing on who you become faith wise.

I pick Christianity as the one religion to concentrate on as it has the greatest bearing on our culture, if I lived in Israel I suspect it would be Judaism if I lived in Dubai it would be Islam in that context and for the cultural references I would yea be very happy in any of those circumstances as all religions largely offer the same message just with different stories and rituals.

DD's Catholic school is supportive of girls exploring their sexuality, has LGBTI+ and Black History Month etc etc gives info on contraception and refers to a secular youth counselling and social work service. Their pastoral care is amazing. Not all are bigots.

[quote Lockandtees]@Ihatefish but it’s nothing just an in depth study of one religion is it? It’s teaching that one religion as fact. And it is just one of many religions all of which claim to be the right religion.

And how does an in-depth knowledge of Christianity help with the understanding of any stem subject? How does it help with maths, biology, physics, computer science etc etc? I would argue that it does nothing at all to further our understanding of those critical subjects.[/quote]
Well what does religion have to do with science or maths? Now there’s a question! How long have you got??

I would, in the first instance point you towards pythagoras. Well the man didn’t just tell you how long your ladder needed to be! Have a look at the Pythagoreans.

And where would we without good old 666 in Revelations -the simple code of gematria -mathematical representation of words -where would Bletchley park have been without these basics?

Most of our scientific method was developed by people trying to understand the universe, look up Roger Bacon (a monk) Francis Bacon (the great Elizabethan Polymath who many argue invented the modern scientific method). Try understanding Newton (I mean the apple falling off the tree -come on!).

Most of all try understanding psychology without understanding Jung try understanding Jung without understanding Gnosticism and the outflow from the kabbalistic Christianity of the 15th-17th century.

Religion has played into many of these areas. You’re living under a myth of disenchantment I’m afraid.

Where would science be without alchemy-learn enough about Christianity and you’ll see Christ was the Alchemist, a walking philosophers stone, maybe read something about Newton, guess you’re happy enough with his theory of gravity probably less steady on where he spent the energies of much of his life - was he the last of the alchemists or the first modern scientist or are they the same?

I think it’s strange how you seem to value science over art. The two are inseparable. Urizen is nothing without Los.

Unfortunately for people such as yourself God is not a falsifiable hypothesis-that in itself is a huge learning point for science.

If you’re interested in seeing the connection I can recommend some amazing books.

[quote Ihatefish]@aSofaNearYou I think having an in-depth knowledge of Christianity really helps understand the last 1500 years of the U.K. it helps interpret art, it helps helps understand the state, it’s an underlying theme because Christianity was what formed a major building block of society it is therefore necessary to understand the types of Christianity which underpinned all these things as a fundamental principle rather than an add on.[/quote]
But again, that's nothing that cannot be taught through a comprehensive study of history. You naturally learn about the religion itself as you go. I would argue that twice as much study of history, allowing for better coverage than the current curriculum, would be more valuable than studying RE at all.

Building a school's ethos around a religion, and incorporating it into non learning times such as prayers etc is entirely different to teaching about religion's impact on culture and society, which is the part of it that is useful and necessary knowledge rather than religious indoctrination. The appropriate knowledge to impart on children about religion is purely an understanding of how it has impacted social and political history.

[quote Ihatefish]@gvdlyfoib the trouble though with a non religious schools approach to RE is very much looking at every religion equally and leaves v little time for getting in-depth on one. I think there’s a great value in learning about one religion on a deep level rather than lots of different ones. The good thing about religious schools is that this is possible.[/quote]
But couldn’t you go to a church/temple/synagogue/mosque if you needed detailed instruction? Why is this the job of a school?

Schools don’t teach you how to be a plumber, an electrician or a builder; all of which are arguably a damn sight more useful than organised religion. If you can learn about these things through dedicated training courses or apprenticeships, why do you need your school to teach you about the specifics of Sikhism or Judaism?

Our one Christian school got taken over by an academy and gives automatic entry to a top secondary school. The humanist society stuck their noses in -no more christian school. The majority of the pupils are now Muslim and Hindu

Oh NO!! Not Muslims and Hindus!!! What will we doooooo?!?!

It’s not either or.
It’s not as if all curriculum subjects are not being taught, and taught well.
An in depth knowledge of a religion is a good thing though, as all knowledge is a good thing.