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?!

YANBU. I went to CofE First and Middle schools, and I want that for my DS.

My DH went to Catholic schools and we’re both active churchgoers (when lockdown isn’t on...)

It annoys me that we may struggle to get DS in to a Christian school when non-Christians can get places by lying. There are plenty of community schools around - atheists should send their children to those.

[quote CayrolBaaaskin]@Wondermule I looked it up as I was curious and there are state funded schools of many religions including Muslim, Hindu, Sikh and Jewish.

www.gov.uk/government/publications/maintained-faith-schools/maintained-faith-schools[/quote]
Didn’t know that. I’m fine with it.

I think faith schools are a good idea (DS went to an RC primary school). There is definitely an element of selection as you only get in if your parents are organised enough to get the kid baptised and off to church every Sunday.

However it was quite diverse in terms of wealth, ethnicity and SEN which I liked and did better on those measures than other over subscribed schools.

My view is though that a lot of non religious parents wouldn't like the discipline. I thought it was great that they couldn't blaspheme or (heaven forbid) swear but lots of people I knew thought it was far too strict.

@VestaTilley

YANBU. I went to CofE First and Middle schools, and I want that for my DS.

My DH went to Catholic schools and we’re both active churchgoers (when lockdown isn’t on...)

It annoys me that we may struggle to get DS in to a Christian school when non-Christians can get places by lying. There are plenty of community schools around - atheists should send their children to those.

I think it boils down to atheists not feeling guilt at cheating because they don’t understand what faith means to people. They feel entitled to ride over it roughshod. If they knew they would feel bad for depriving a genuine applicant from their place at a faith school.

Although one poster just suggested randomized lottery which I think could be an excellent idea
So do you do that on a nationwide basis, so people might be forced to move across the country to send their kids to school, or do you do it regionally (so you're immediately back in 'postcode lottery' territory)?

Because otherwise it would be segregated by class and wealth aka postcode

Maybe there's a good argument in that for more social housing so more low income and high income people live in the same postcodes

@Zevia

Although one poster just suggested randomized lottery which I think could be an excellent idea So do you do that on a nationwide basis, so people might be forced to move across the country to send their kids to school, or do you do it regionally (so you're immediately back in 'postcode lottery' territory)?

I would’ve thought you would need an acceptable travel boundary, wouldn’t you? Such as 5 miles. But then it would result in somebody not being able to go to the school next door, but someone 3 miles away can. Hmmm

@Zevia - there is a huge difference within a religious groups in terms of wealth and class. Sorry but I don’t agree that religion is a marker of either.

@Becles - it depends on the school but religious schools in the Scotland and England can select on the basis of religion and so some will only admit pupils of one religion (especially if the school is in demand).

The reason those schools do well is because really committed parents will make the effort to go to church every other Sunday for three years in order to get their kids in. When you have families like that in the schools you know they are going to get the most out of their education. Whilst I do understand it might be cheating anyone can do it - plenty of single parents do and the child still has two parents most of the time even if divorced - only one of you has to go. I know people who have weekend jobs. Shift work etc but they still manage it. I know that's not the point of the OP but it is true

@AnneElliott

I think faith schools are a good idea (DS went to an RC primary school). There is definitely an element of selection as you only get in if your parents are organised enough to get the kid baptised and off to church every Sunday.

However it was quite diverse in terms of wealth, ethnicity and SEN which I liked and did better on those measures than other over subscribed schools.

My view is though that a lot of non religious parents wouldn't like the discipline. I thought it was great that they couldn't blaspheme or (heaven forbid) swear but lots of people I knew thought it was far too strict.

That’s my thinking - it would preserve diversity and equality of opportunity. And for parents who dislike religion there would be atheist schools. This way, wouldn’t every parent end up with a school that fits their ethos but is diverse and equal?

Becles, is that not the norm? At my children's school and IIRC all the others we considered, sibling in catchment and sibling out of catchment are separate categories. So a chikd who lives j the catchment area and has a sibling in school will have priority over a catchment child with no sibling, who will be above outside catchment with sibling, who tops non catchment, no sibling. Distance is a tie breaker within each category - though in practice distance doesn't become an issue til you get into non catchment no sibling as our area has strange demographics and over 50% of the pupils are non catchment.
I think it is largely fair.

We will be applying for a Lottery entry school this Autumn. Its separate to the rest of the schools fixed catchment areas, but you do have to live in the long list of postcodes. There are only 50 places, so lottery is the only fair way really.

@Zevia - there is a huge difference within a religious groups in terms of wealth and class. Sorry but I don’t agree that religion is a marker of either.

You could say the same about race. Yes there are rich white people and poor white people in the UK, but on average white people are wealthier than BAME people in the UK.

It's exactly the same with religion. The average Christian family is several times richer than the average Muslim family in the UK, for example. Christians are also on average wealthier than non-religious people.

If the Catholic Church withdrew the free land and buildings it supplies to be used as schools, the education system would lose tens of millions it can’t afford.

Make that 100s of millions. Without faith aided schools the government would see a gigantic gap between the cost of education and what they currently pay.

OP, I don't think you've thought this through. Generally speaking, there are certain religions that make it more likely to have parents who aren't divorced, which we know makes a big difference to childhood attainment. If we truly restricted by religion we'd end up with a load of fake Catholics/Jewish people/Muslims etc. Parents will always want their DC to go to the best possible school, and plenty will be immoral enough to pretend religious sentiments to get a place, it already happens.

It's wrong to segregate children on the basis of their parents' religion.
To some extent I see your point about allocating places on the basis of proximity leading to posh schools in posh areas. However I still think it's preferable to segregate by area than by religion. Even a better off area is likely to have a mix of types of people. And there can be excellent schools in poor areas. I used to volunteer in a city centre primary whose pupils were 50% deprived locals and 50% recent immigrants, including many Somalis and Syrians - lots of Primary aged girls covering their hair etc. It was actually a Catholic school but didn't discriminate. I don't see how either group of pupils would have benefited from being segregated by religion. Middle class parents from richer areas would not have sent their children to that school just because it was Catholic.

[quote Zevia]**@Zevia - there is a huge difference within a religious groups in terms of wealth and class. Sorry but I don’t agree that religion is a marker of either.

You could say the same about race. Yes there are rich white people and poor white people in the UK, but on average white people are wealthier than BAME people in the UK.

It's exactly the same with religion. The average Christian family is several times richer than the average Muslim family in the UK, for example. Christians are also on average wealthier than non-religious people.[/quote]
But religion doesn’t denote nationality or race. Many parishioners at my church have a Philippino or West African background. It would be good for diversity.

@Wondermule But it is not a "random marker" as previously posters have explained. Usually admission to a catholic school requires over a year of attendance at local catholic church. Far easier for the middle class - possibly non-catholic - to secure than the child of catholic parents who work every weekend. The child of catholic parents who moved into the area recently won't be able to meet the criteria.

@HavelockVetinari

If the Catholic Church withdrew the free land and buildings it supplies to be used as schools, the education system would lose tens of millions it can’t afford.

Make that 100s of millions. Without faith aided schools the government would see a gigantic gap between the cost of education and what they currently pay.

OP, I don't think you've thought this through. Generally speaking, there are certain religions that make it more likely to have parents who aren't divorced, which we know makes a big difference to childhood attainment. If we truly restricted by religion we'd end up with a load of fake Catholics/Jewish people/Muslims etc. Parents will always want their DC to go to the best possible school, and plenty will be immoral enough to pretend religious sentiments to get a place, it already happens.

But my post was an ‘IF people stopped cheating the system it would work’.

[quote Nowfeeltheneedtopost]@Wondermule But it is not a "random marker" as previously posters have explained. Usually admission to a catholic school requires over a year of attendance at local catholic church. Far easier for the middle class - possibly non-catholic - to secure than the child of catholic parents who work every weekend. The child of catholic parents who moved into the area recently won't be able to meet the criteria.[/quote]
Catholics are generally working class.

It's a ridiculous idea on so many grounds it's hard to knows where to start. What about rural areas, where you may only have a couple of families of some religious faiths within a sensible catchment? Do they just go to the 'atheist' school? Or do they have to move so they live near others 'of their own kind'? What about families like ours, who don't define as religious or atheist? What happens to those children who find a different faith from their parents', or whose parents practise different faiths from each other?

It really is simple. Make all the schools good. We could totally do that if successive DfE line-ups would stop fucking around with arbitrary accountability measures and market economy ideology, and focus on raising the status of the teaching profession instead.

I am a fan of faith schools. My dc go to one. I don't mind if people pretend to be more Catholic to get in as it's still good for the kids to get a faith based education.

Everyone bitterly complaining about state funding religious education are rather missing the point that religion are funding state education and the quid pro quo is we get to practice our religion at school. If you dont like it send your kids elsewhere. Or complain to your mp about lack if community schools. In my area you get faith and community schools so there are options for all.

People on MN who complain that the faith schools are better as if that's the states doing, rather than the church's doing. I don't think faith schools would necessarily be generally acknowledged as better if the church weren't doing something right.

Many people are happy enough with a Christian upbringing. If its indoctrination its not working very well as religion has been on the wane since the 50s.

Many faith schools are highly multicultural (or ours are in big city). Whereas the selection by area so allowing wealthy to buy their way in to catchment are not multicultural. I like our way. It's much more down to earth and Christian values are good regardless of whether you believe.

I dont know where people get the idea of Christians being bigoted and intolerant. I get that vocal minorities say off colour things but that in itself is unchristian. Jesus would not approve!

Nope, religious schools are a bad idea.
Comparative religious studies in schools, great idea.
Former supports intolerance, latter understanding.

But religion doesn’t denote nationality or race. Many parishioners at my church have a Philippino or West African background. It would be good for diversity.
I'm sorry, but if you think there is no correlation between faith and race, you're barking. Segregating on religion will lead to greater racial segregation.

Distance makes sense from a practical perspective, I wouldn’t travel for over an hour to get my 5year old into a “better” school anyhow.
Maybe I’m too London, rich and poor live side my side so primary schools are quite mixed on distance criteria

We’re not Catholic but DD goes to a Catholic school for three reasons:

1. it is our closest school and most children in the village go there.

2. There isn’t a CofE school in range for catchment and we wanted her to have a Christian education.

3. The other school she could have gotten into is on special measures because of a massive safeguarding failure.

I was very clear and upfront with the school about all these reasons. She got in because there just aren’t enough Catholic children in the local area. Lots of the smaller Catholic primaries would shut if they had to only take Catholic kids.