to think that schools admissions aren't fair

[picklepud]

This is different from saying that I wouldn't go through the system if my child's local school had religious criteria, but I am feeling a bit sad and up in arms for a friend today. Same old story, her local school (primary) is c of E VA. She's not, and chose not to get baptised or go to church twice monthly. So now she will have to drive to her allocated school. So incidentally will many of the people who got in on religious grounds from way away. I really really would go to church for my dd to get into my local school, so I'm not criticising those who do, but I just don't think it should be necessary. Or that religious commitment should give you priority in a state school. And particularly that the vicar should not pretend for a minute that he (as he said in a newspapaper article) say that this is a school in the heart of the community serving all the children of the community.
I know, I know, some people might genuinely change through exposure to the church but I don't think it's the way for a church to expand its membership. sorry. and sorry it's so long.

upandrunning, nobody has accused faith schools of causing The Social Divide. But those schools that operate their own admissions policies on faith grounds do very often have a divisive effect in their local communities. You can see the effect quite clearly by comparing things like the number of pupils eligible for free school meals in VA faith schools and their neighbouring community schools in densely populated areas.

Grenadine - I think it has been established several times on this thread that it is the admissions policies of VA schools that are in question, and lingle seems quite clear on this to me.

upandrunning - unpopular schools will never improve until they are more socially representative, because they are usually crap because they are inherently stressfull places to work - which in part stems from them being full of difficult children. It's not just about bad management.

As long as you allow some schools to 'cream off' disproportionate numbers of socially advantaged and educationally able children by dint of selective admissions policies, we will have this unfair situation. You can take a failing school and put in new management, new teachers, new buildings etc, but until those schools begin to attract a different type of child/family, the school will struggle to do well.

The best thing for ordinary children in this country would be to be educated alongside their more privileged peers. And to do that we need to abolish ALL kinds of selection as far as we can.

my diocese have published a paper on the theological basis for admissions, not saying I agree with it, just posting it if anyone is interested.

I still think the issue is one of
a) not enough "good" schools
b) not enough school places full stop in some areas
c) in a few areas no choice of a non-faith school within a reasonable distance
and that abolishing faith schools would only solve the last one of these three.

in terms of primary age pupils the stats for England in 2008 (latest I could find) are

school of no religion character 70.61%
CofE 18.69%
RC 9.93%
tiny remainder = other religious base (methodist, jew, muslim etc)

of the CofE schools approx 50% are voluntary controlled (therefore no religious admissions criteria), so in total less than 20% of "faith" places (in reality lower than this as some faith schools are undersubscribed or only just about meet their numbers so there will be "non-faith" places there too)

That's not true, stand: there are dreadful failing schools in awful areas turned around by new "management" (heads) and fresh approaches to learning and discipline. By "their more privileged peers" do you mean wealthier, or brighter, or with more motivated parents?

I guarantee, and I know you will agree! that wealthier children are not necessarily brighter: so where is the benefit there? I also know that a school wholly populated by the children of middle class professionals, who presumably are above average academically, is NOT a guarantee of a good education and that it can let down very badly children who are not the brightest, do not have parental support or may have SEN. The benefit is questionable there too.

What counts is the quality of the school and teachers, and the quality of its curriculum and ethos: and where those are lacking, the motivation of the parents.

When I've been helping in schools I've been so sad to see how children can so quickly slide without parental support. It's abandoning a whole (and growing) section of society.

But attacking the principle of faith schools is like tilting at a windmill: it's the wrong problem.

Zephrine: I must admit, I got the feeling from many posters that they felt that faith schools were responsible for social division.

Betsy: thanks for the link. Oh dear. The leaders of the CofE mean well (within their own parameters) but in practice, the admissions policies of schools we encounter in real life just aren't living up to their ideals.

"I still think the issue is one of

a) not enough "good" schools
b) not enough school places full stop in some areas
c) in a few areas no choice of a non-faith school within a reasonable distance

and that abolishing faith schools would only solve the last one of these three."

Betsy: I agree with this assessment. Very concise.

Upandrunning, I do think that faith schools cause social division. You may have noticed that the BNP go on a lot about Muslims now. Their scaremongering isn't just on the old grounds of race, it's about religion as well. Islamophobia is likely to be a big issue in the coming years.

If our children grow up segregated by faith (as this system encourages) it will cause greater divide as the majority white Christian population grows up not knowing any real life Muslims and believing that they are all fundamentalists that threaten our way of life. It really isn't something I think our society should encourage.

That's a good point, and really the only good reason to question faith schools. I don't think CE schools encourage Islamophobia though : do you have experience of this?

I was talking about the wealth/poverty social divide.

ITA, Happy. Haven't we learned a thing from Northern Ireland what a bad thing relgious segregation is?

I'm not saying that CofE schools actively go around preaching hate, just that if you grow up never meeting people that are "different" to you, either in terms of race or religion, you are much more likely to believe the Daily Mail's BNP's scaremongering.

So.. when people say they're cross about faith schools it's not because they can't get in -- it's because they encourage the religious divide? Not entirely sure that's true. Most complain about them because they can't get in due to lack of church attendance. They want to go there.

I agree with Happy's point, but it seems a useful peg for some to hang their anger on about not getting a place.

Yes but CE schools ime aren't really like that. I don't do head counts but at ours we had Muslims, Hindus and various nationalities and colours, since that's been brought up. They never read the Bible and the Christmas performance was a Russian thing not a nativity. I think that's quite representative, although I understand that RC and madrassas are different and more attuned to their particular ethos.

Upandrunning - certainly I believe that faith schools that select by parental religion do exacerbate social division. My point was that nobody had said that they were the sole or root cause of the social divide, as I thought your earlier post suggested.

Would it be helpful to start a new thread debating faith schools per se?

upandrunning, I'm not in a position to speak for other people, but it is the discrimination/segregation issue that I personally feel strongly about.

My DH and I are of different faiths and I would like my children raised in both (from a cultural point of view) but neither (in a religious point of view) if you get what I mean. Culture and faith are linked IMO and I'd like my children to have exposure to both but don't want to force worship on them, as I do think you have to make your own mind up. I'm lucky in that I can bypass all of this if I can't get a place at a decent secular school (by paying my way out) so I have no vested interest, I just don't like to live in a society structured this way.

Upandrunning, generally people are cross for both reasons, ie that it is unfair and divisive.

Your school sounds thoroughly inclusive. I have no issue with a school like this, which clearly does not select by parental religion.

I think people have been doing that. I was a bit told off for addressing the situation as a "given" so I've got with the program!

It did though, there were the same criteria. Not all Christians are horrible and intolerant.

Happy, that's fair enough. Most people dislike them because they can't get in.

Your point about CE schools not being like that UAR only serves to reinforce why religious attendance should not be a high priority criterion. If the majority of the education provided is not particularly different from a community school, how could it be more relevant for a regular worshipper than one of no faith? Although there may be some difference between primary and secondary and also between VA and VC schools.

Upandrunning: I can't speak for anyone else except myself and DH. I was somewhat sorry that DD couldn't go to the local primary school, but we're happy she went to a much better one even though we had to drive (and pay). We didn't seriously consider the faith secondaries - the CofE looked quite good until you realised it did more dumbed down subjects versus the local comp, and it had virtually no SN kids. If we'd not had any other options we'd have been extremely unhappy at sending DD to a religious school.

So no, we didn't want her to go to one.

We neverthereless still find it appalling to see our friends either having to jump through hoops or be denied choice; we find it appalling when we see clear evidence of racial and religious division caused - even if unintentionally - by faith schools.

Christians don't have monopoly on 'righteous indignation' you know. Being a rationalist doesn't make you cynical and uncaring about the rest of society.

sorry, didn't mean to sound pushy there, UAR and others.

I don't know: apart from the Vicar coming once a week, I really don't know where the CE part came in. Perhaps in being tolerant and inclusive

But lots of CE schools are equally inclusive, plus of course the curriculum requires children to be taught about different faiths. Who doesn't bring a Diwali candle back these days? From what I gather, it's the RC schools and madrassas which are much tougher.

Most people dislike them because they can't get in.

In your opinion - unless you have any statistics to support that? Zephs 'generally people are cross for both reasons, ie that it is unfair and divisive.' rings truer to me.

Grimma: can I ask you something, about secular humanism. Feel free not to reply. I have actually been thinking and wondering about this today.

Is it true that you don't believe in an absolute Good? Is it a largely Utilitarian moral code?