Why do faith schools dominate the league tables?

[benetint]

I looked at the league tables for primary schools in my area (nottingham) and I was surprised to see the top few were not schools in affluent areas bur were all catholic schools. Many of them are actually in quite deprived areas. So what is it catholic schools are doing to get such excellent results? Is it that they can be more selective about who they take? Are they just exam factories? Ate they stricter with their kids? Or are they just better in general than secular states?

Indeed, Mondas.

B&B the laws of this country state otherwise. We are a secular country, as is America unbeknownst to many of its inhabitants... the founding fathers over there were atheist and agnostic, and wanted separation of church and state.

Back here, Christmas was a pagan festival and Christianity stole it, it's a tradition and is celebrated as a tradition by most, not as a religious festival. Santa is more the highlight of Christmas than Jesus is. The head of state is pretty much just ceremonial, again traditions.

The Magna Carta is considered a secular document.

If we weren't secular then religion would be allowed to influence new laws, not just old ones that have been in place back when we were a more religious nation, many of which have been getting changed or getting near to change. For example, the impending gay marriage law changes would not be happening if we were not a secular country.

b&b

You're argument on taxation is hogwash. Imagine I organise a trip to the theatre for 100 work colleagues. Everyone pays the same. When we get there I say 'right the atheists can sit anywhere they like, and the believers can take which ever seats are left (probably in the gods..ho..ho). When the believers complain I explain that each seat cost the same, each person paid the same, thus the seating arrangment is fair.

As an aside, your understanding of French education is also hogwash.

Bollocks - we have bishops in the House of Lords!

I don't mind that - and I'm no more Christian than you are - but it is just nonsense to claim that the UK is not Christian. Sunday trading laws exist because Sunday is the Christian sabbath - we don't have Wednesday trading laws, do we?

etc etc etc.

Get over it.

Or move to France - or indeed America, which as you said correctly (well done Steve!) is indeed a secular country.

That was @ Steve.

"There are no rules prohibiting atheists for setting up free schools - don't be ridiculous! Try and having a bit more gumption,and spend less time moaning and more time gathering your supporters/funds together to set up your own preferred school/s. I will support you all the way."

That's like saying to someone who is discriminated against for a job (due to sex, race, religion etc) - if you don't like it, you can always go and set up your own company and work there. Not really the point, is it?

breadandbutterfly - do you think it would be right if people were refused admission to their local NHS GP surgery or hospital due to not being a regular enough churchgoer?

Should the heathens just go and train as a doctors and treat themselves?

JoTheHot - in your imaginary theatre scenario, the atheists are one cohesive group. In the real-life school scenario, people who attend faith schools are not.

So I do NOT have the option of all faith schools, any more than you do. I have the option of a tiny number of faith schools, spread out across the country, which I have to move to be near. Or i have the option of a non-denominational school which fails to meet my needs.

So your over-simplification is somewhat meaningless. What you would like is closer to going to a restaurant where everyone pays the same but there is only one menu. When the vegetarians, those who eat kosher, halal, etc complain, they are told that it's quite fair, technically they can eat it and it's not going to poison them, just not quite to their tastes. So they should smile and eat what's on the menu that the person who booked the meal (a humanist of course) chose for them, in his Great Wisdom.

Not surprisingly, the vegetarians, those who eat kosher, halal, etc are not exactly thrilled. As they have paid their tenner or whatever too - they'd just like a little choice on the menu. Not to force everyone else to eat what they eat, but to be allowed to eat what is appropriate for them.

B&B, you say this but then I only see yourself who is resorting to insult and capitalization. With regards to moving you say "Do the same", apparently ignoring completely all of the reasons given by myself and others as to why that's not always possible.

Yes I know precisely the meaning of a straw man argument, hence my pointing it out: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man#Reasoning

Now that really is a straw man, WavingLeaves.

I'll answer that point about GPs if you can explain in what way medical treatment is affected by or based on your religion.

I am unaware of anyone who feels the need for medical treatment based on religion (if you excuse a few jehovahs Witnesses is it, who refuse certain medical treatments themselves? But do not limit them for anyone else, I believe?)

Steve - I said:

"In fact, I suspect that nearly all these schools were set up originally by members of the faiths for their own children - and paid for originally by them too. So what seeker really wants is religious people to subsidise her child's school - by building it and funding it - and then she would like to deny them the right to practice their religion there!! "

This is NOT a straw man. The schools WERE set up in this manner and seeker WOULD like them to stop serving the purpose for which they were set up.

For crying out loud. I don't wish to insult, but it is hard when you seem to lack the ability to read what has been written and answer logically. You have no idea how I am biting my tongue here, some of the crap you're coming out with.

And how many shops are open on a Sunday?

Bishops in the House of Lords yes, but again due to tradition only... because it started in the past and still remains doesn't mean anything. You agreed that the US was secular but religious leaders are in positions of power over there which could be described as the nearest possible equivalent to the House of Lords. So either that argument counts or it doesn't, you can't have it both ways.

breadandbutterfly - I really don't see how a school which a) doesn't discriminate on admissions on the basis of religion and b) doesn't impose any kind of worship on children somehow equals an 'atheist school'.

They wouldn't 'teach' atheism, they would just accept people for who they are for the six hours that they are there, and leave them to worship with their parents outside of school if that is what the family wants to do.

That is surely far more appropriate in a multicultural and multi-religious society?

^Cecily P - you said that :

"people of faith - well certainly Christianity - have a choice of almost 100% of our country's schools. "

Surely it is not beyond you to see that even Christians, let alone those of other faiths, are not a single homognous group??^

Strangely enough, it is not beyond me. But I do know and have known Christians, both Catholic and other, who have chosen non-faith schools when there were faith schools that were readily available. Of course, those who have minority religions (for the UK) are not so well served. I doubt if absolutely everyone's particular needs could be fully catered for. I think non-faith schools are a bit like blood group O-, in that whilst not perfect for everyone, they will do for anyone.

^If atheists care so much about it, do what people of faith do,and MOVE.

Or stop bloody moaning.^

It doesn't really effect me as I have said upthread, but I hope I can still empathise with those who have experienced problems where they live.

I didn't say all himanists lack logic, by the way - and that IS a straw man.

I said YOU do.

I have met plenty of atheists/humanists and unlike you, most are quite capable of rational argument, mercifully. However, you have chosen to come on a website proclaiming yourself as A Humanist, representative of humanists everywhere.

I don't think you'll be raising their membership numbers any time soon.

@ Steve - it's like arguing with a small child.

And how many shops are open on a Sunday? - many of them, but with restricted hours. Clearly very different to any other day of the week.

Bishops in the House of Lords yes, but again due to tradition only... because it started in the past and still remains doesn't mean anything. You agreed that the US was secular but religious leaders are in positions of power over there which could be described as the nearest possible equivalent to the House of Lords. So either that argument counts or it doesn't, you can't have it both ways. - do you not understand the significance of their fixed position within the state - entirely different from some individuals, who may happen to be reigious but have no constitutional position, rising to positions of political importance within a secular system.

merrymouse, I agree that every child has the right to learn maths...just not necessarily on their doorstep. I had to move to get my preferred school and those children who live in an area surrounded by faith schools will still get offered a school somewhere - but it may be a commute away. if they don't fancy the commute, then they should have chosen to live somewhere near appropriate schools before they had kids.

Actually, I think most people in the UK do think they should be able to take their primary school child to a school that isn't a commute away, generally because a primary school child can't get to school under their own steam and parents have to go out to work.

Sorry to point out the obvious, but these are the reasons that a faith school is different to an SN school.

1. An SN child at an SN school probably wouldn't be given a place at a mainstream school.
2. An SN child at an SN school needs to access a special education in order to access education at all, never mind accessing an education of a particular relgious flavour.

I think there is a fundamental difference of opinion that underpins much of the argument about this. Some people argue that there should be diversity in education, so there should be choice (hence Free Schools).

Others argue that choice in education is a myth, school places aren't like a product on a supermarket shelf where you can expand and contract production according to market fluctuations. Schools need to provide a good standard of education that is suitable for everybody. I think it would be nice if the first argument were true, but the second argument is more in touch with reality.

Re: Free Schools, there aren't that many of them, and bearing in mind the shortage of state school places, it's arguable that they are just a political whim of the present government and they won't last very long as we can't afford them.

"So what seeker really wants is religious people to subsidise her child's school - by building it and funding it - and then she would like to deny them the right to practice their religion there!!"

CecilyP - agree absolutely with your post. I do sympathise - because I had to move to get a suitable school, and it was NOT easy.

But I'm not sure what the solution is, other than making it easy for parents in that situation to set up new local schools to meet their needs. Which as I have said, I do 100% support.

"I'll answer that point about GPs if you can explain in what way medical treatment is affected by or based on your religion."

Well I'm not really qualified to do that (I'm sure there are probably some examples), but my point is that for publicly funded services such as health and education, it is equally absurd to try and split up access to them according to religion.

A child does NOT need religious worship as part of their school day in order to receive a good and fully rounded education. You might prefer that this was the case, but you as their parent can easily include worship as part of their day at home and outside of school.

As with the NHS, there is only so much money available for setting up schools in each area, and it is selfish and impractical for people to expect the state to cater for their own particular religion to the exclusion of others.

I suspect that nearly all these schools were set up originally by members of the faiths for their own children

Not true of many (most?) C of E schools.

Before the education acts, they were set up by philanthropic Victorians who wanted to educate heathens and keep them off the streets.

But the fact is, that whether NIMBYs such as seeker admit it or not, faith schools DO cater for a very real demand (hence why they are so over-subscribed).

Some are some aren't. The oversubscribed ones not only expect people to be members of the faith but also to jump through hoops to prove it. The undersubscribed ones take people of all faiths or none.

In fact, I suspect that nearly all these schools were set up originally by members of the faiths for their own children - and paid for originally by them too.

Not really, I am pretty sure the hierarchy of the Church of England, while supporting their parochial schools, would have generally sent their own children to private schools.

Read again, I didn't say you said all Humanists "do" lack basic logic, I said:

"An odd notion that "all humanists" could be lacking in basic logic"... which is after you said: "Are all humanists that lacking in basic logic?"

^^Pretty clear, copy/paste.

Yes again, lots of shops are open on a Sunday, lots aren't... but most of those that aren't is not because of observing the bible, it used to be sure... but now it is just the norm, tradition, cultural, etc... and people like having their Sundays off.

Steve - you said:

"The argument is against single faith schools and them discriminating. Lots of different faiths can practice whatever they want but nobody should be excluded,"

There is no school currently, faith or otherwise, which discriminates on grounds of religion. Jewish schools were banned a few years' back from discriminating on grounds of ethnicity. No-one is going to search inside your head. If you want to send your child to a Catholic or Jewish or whatever school (though not clear why you would wish to given your apparent dislike of religion), you have to do some things,like attend church, synagogue etc just as all the other prospective parents do - but you need not believe a word of it or do anything at home.

But your child is not banned or excluded from these schools. Just they are not to your taste.

Steve - I refer you to

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetorical_question