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.

So scrap entrance criteria apart from distance.

But this is daft, then if you live in a shit area with a shit school you can never get any better than that???

BTW, faith schools attended mostly by white middle classes??? Utter nonsense. UTTER utter nonsense. My local Catholic school in a fairly underprivileged area of East London would be at least 50% black I estimate. And at the church attached to it, white people are definitely in the minority.

As long as their is not a surplus of places, or universally excellent standards school admissions will never be 'fair'.

If you get into a better school over another through completely transparent and sensible policies correctly applied, you will still be depriving someone else of that place. This is not 'fair'.

Even if you do all this, then all that will happen is that religious criteria will be replaced throughout by "parent's ability to be able to buy/rent a house in the right area" which is even worse IMO, at least religion is "free"

I wholeheartedly agree - this is an outrage - children from the estate where our school is go on to a really good catholic high school which has great outcomes... do these kids not deserve a chance too?

You don't need to scrap church schools. Just scrap the religious entry criteria.

My DH is always quick to point out that most people are neither here nor there with religion, they don't actively practice but they don't actively disbelieve either.

The assumption that the people who want to scrap religious entry requirements are not religious or are athiests is wrong.

A child has no choice over it's religion, not until it is significantly older than reception age anyway.

I don't understand any child should be denied a place at a school funded by the taxpayer because of it's parents' beliefs.

I don't have any issue with my DS learning about religion and beliefs, of any faith, but I will not stand up in a church and tell lies. So because I'm a non-believer and honest, my DS should be discriminated against?

Should a child really be denied a place at a local school, with all of his friends and neighbours, because his mother won't lie to a man of God?

Absolute shite.

Two4One - this is my experience too although in Hampshire - there is amazing diversity in the pupils backgrounds

tarty you are cherrypicking from my post.

I said:

"So scrap entrance criteria apart from distance.
Raise standards in schools across the board.
Stop publishing league tables - they cause far more harm than good. "

Thus children would not go to shit schools because there wouldn't be any.

Obviously none of this is ever going to happen, but in my ideal world that is how it would be.

This is really an argument about the fact sonme schools are crap and there aren't enough places to go around in some areas.

If there were enough places in community schools, and those schools were all good, we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

But wubbly why, oh why, do you want your child to go to a school that preaches a faith you don't believe in?

I agree that Catholic schools tend not to be exclusively middle class, and have a more diverse ethnic mix than C of E schools, I still don't see that your religion should form a part in deciding whether you are or are not accepted at a school other than your local one. And is most certainly SHOULD NOT entitle you to free travel when you, like thousands of other people, have chosen to reject your nearest state school. Neither should you be able to use the fact that your local school is not a church school as grounds to reject it, and win an appeal to attend another over-subscribed one. I would not be listened to if I insisted my son was chauffeured to an out of area specialist sports college, just because his Dad was a great cricket player and I was secretary of the tennis club!

Two4one, the enormous difference is that your children are not excluded from those non-faith schools on the grounds of your faith.

If I have my child baptised and take her to the local church every week, we will have the choice of all the state primaries in the area.

If for what ever reason - cultural, religious, philosophical or practical - I cannot do this, she is effectively excluded from two out of the five schools within reach.

It's really not that hard to understand.

Overall, faith schools will have a larger percentage of motivated parents, and therefore better performing children, as the parents who are prepared to sit in a church on sunday morning despite not beleiving on god are by definition more motivated than those who don't.

This won't be true of all schools, but across the lot of them it will be a significant factor.

So it's selection for ability by stealth. Well it it wasn't so obvious it would be stealth.

Absolutely agree with ImSoNotTelling's post of 13:45

There will always be shite schools - schools are shite for many many reasons, the chief of them being where they are located and the social demographic of those who attend. Making location based criteria alone useless.

I think I am basing my assertions on the fact that there will always be schools that underachieve - believe me if you saw the area in which my girls school is you would wonder why i had moved them from a small village school to this but educationally and pastorally it is a better experience for them. Part of that (for me anyway) is that they maintain a very strong and strict catholic ethos in their teaching and care for the children.

Like I have said took me ages to get them in and was a third choice out of three and only achieved through mid term jiggery pokery becuase I knew some children were leaving in their year. I do go to church and so do my kids, even that did not guarantee us a place.

But you're not explaining to me why this is a problem for you. Why do you need your pick of 5 schools?

"A child has no choice over it's religion, not until it is significantly older than reception age anyway.

I don't understand any child should be denied a place at a school funded by the taxpayer because of it's parents' beliefs"

A child has no choice over where he/she lives, not until he/she is out of the school system anyway.

I don't understand why any child should be denied a place at a school funded by the taxpayer based soley on it's parents' ability (or lack of) to afford a house in the right area

Until there are sufficient surplus places in "good" schools for all children to have a place in a "good" school, then there will always be children who are on the "wrong" side of the line whatever criteria you use.

People who are fervent about faith schools are never able to take a step back and see how illogical they are being, much like the characters in that Escher painting where everyone is going forward in their own dimensions but can't see they are upside-down.

If you were setting up a school system from scratch these days, the religion/superstition of the parent would be one of the LAST things you'd consider. (As indeed should the size of the parent's wallet.)

You don't need to have a recognised religion/superstition to teach a moral code. In fact, it helps if you don't. Much better to make children understand that we don't hurt, lie and steal because civilised human beings don't do these things, rather than saying not to do it because some sky-deity is watching.

Because Two4one, I don't necessarily expect my child to be an identikit version of me.

I am leaving his choice with regards to his religion up to him.

I have no problem with religion, I simply don't believe myself.

I have no problem with church, they do lots of good things and I agree with many good christian principles.

I do have a problem with lying and find it odd that some people think it's okay to lie to get what you want.

Well done unquietdad for turning this into a "religion is stupid" debate.

It always ends up this way.

Unquietdad - great post.

UnquietDad - yes of course that is true but we are not starting from scratch are we. the point is given what we have, we have to do the best we can. And if for me, as a catholic, i feel my children would be better suited to a catholic school then surely it is good to have this option. For people who do practise their religions, this stuff is really important becuase it provides common ground in those schools which may not be found another way. Also religious criteria which i and others have mentioned brings in a really diverse crowd to a school, which can only be a good thing.

Your last point is good and absolutely true and trust me my girls know the difference between right and wrong and how to treat people - this is not exclusive to catholic parents. Catholicism is cultural as well as religious (like being Jewish or Islamic) and if parents feel happier with their children sharing that common experience then so be it.

In faith schools it tends to be a bit more than assemblies relating to that faith - there will be a lot of bringing in elements in subjects and behaviour management too. We sent our children to the local CoE school because it was our catchment and we didn't feel that strongly enough NOT to go, and some non-catchment families went to church because they thought that would give them a leg up, but it didn't. Admissions were decided by County. I don't see why the CoE should have had any say in the running of the school (4 places on the Board of Govs reserved for members of the church) when they didn't put a penny into it. On the other hand, admission wasn't on faith grounds, but distance to school, so it was ok for County to fund it. YANBU, admissions are a mess, mainly because of the different quality of schools around. There's just not enough quality schools to go round, and if there were, there wouldn't be any problem on admissions.

BestyBoop, I agree that there is not always enough good schools in any given area, it's not an easy problem to solve.

One step would be to stop faith schools denying the admission of children within the catchment area based simply upon the child's parents religion or their ability to lie convincingly.