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?

seeker ignores the fact that she and all the other 15.5% of the population who do not wish to attend faith schools have a whopping choice of 2/3 of the country's schools.

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

What we have currently is a system that caters to a variety of people with a variety of different needs and desires. What seeker and others like her would like is a system with no choice at all and where superior beings (ie seeker and those like her) dictate what kind of education all our children should have.

I am sure it works fine in most places; but some people, like Sofia, have experienced where it absolutely did not work for her family, and I feel it is a bit too glib to say she should have thought about it before she found her home, and that she could always have moved.

seeker, sometimes I fear for your intelligence - do you really not grasp that you are attempting to dictate precisely what my child may be taught, not just at one school or at a few schools BUT AT ALL SCHOOLS??

I on the other hand, am not dictating anything at all - you are free to send your child to any one of the 2/3 of UK schools that suit your needs.

Why must that figure be 100% to satisfy you? Why must all our children be educated as you - rather than their parents - see fit?????

Cecily- there are no secular schools in England. They are all nominally Christian and are obliged by law to have collective worship of "a broadly nature".

Yes, you know what I mean, seeker. Still it's win/win all round for Christians then.

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??

Catholics and C of E-ers, Jews, Muslims, etc are all members of DIFFERENT faiths. Their schools are no more suitable (or less suitable) for each other than they are for atheists. That is why we have a system with a range of different schools. So that people with a range of different needs and desires can be catered for.

So we can CHOOSE a suitable school.

Yes, we may have to move house to do it (far, far more likely for someone wanting a faith school to have to do this, as there are far fewer faith schools than there are non-denominational schools) but if the faith of a school matters to us, then we are prepared to do that.

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

Or stop bloody moaning.

And could some on here please remember that it is not only atheists who pay taxes, thank you. Religious people do too. You want to move to a secular country, move to France.

Breadandbutterfly.

Because there a no secular schools in this country- so I cannot send my child to a school that suits my needs.

Because a significant chunk of tax payer are paying for schools that they can't get into, even if they live next door, because they are not of the right faith.

Yes, 2/3 of the schools are non-demoniational - is that not secular enough for you?

This being a free country, you are of course free to set up a free school (as many of those who want faith schools for their kids but were unable to find ones have done) that is secular.

The taxpayer argument is hollow - those with kids at faith schools also pay taxes, thank you. One child can only go to one school,whatever faith they are (or none). So all parents effectively pay for their own children's education.

How on earth does your weird logic cope with the fact that the childless, and those who pay privately for their children's education, both pay taxes. Yet reap NONE of the benefit.

Most people are happy paying taxes for many things they don't need and are never likely to need - do you also object to paying for disabled schools as your children are not disabled? And therefore 'excluded'?

The reality is the state pays for a variety of things not all of which we can possibly need personally. That is because, seeker, strangely enough the state does not revolve around YOU.

OK Breadandbutterfly, let's change the admissions system then. Faith schools can prioritise those of faith as they do now, but perhaps community schools can prioritise those without faith. I'm agnostic, but my children would get low priority for the community schools because my parents christened me a Catholic. Not very fair, but still no less fair than what the faith schools do.
Those grammar schools that everyone makes such a fuss about wanting to go to? If they're non-religious then they too should have an eleven plus as well as a list of criteria that asks for proof that you've never been to church, not even for weddings and funerals.
And all these people desperate for a religious education for their children should probably give Oxford and Cambridge a miss in favour of some sort of seminary somewhere.
It would be absurd. Obviously.

Breadandbutterfly, I have no choice but to send my child to a Christian school. Because all state schools are. Many are, as you say, non denominational. But they are all Christian.

Would it be possible for you to address this point without being rude?

Would you like me to explain the difference between non-denominational and secular? You might understand my position better if you know that...

BreadandButterfly, I will acknowledge that C of E and non-church affiliated main stream schools have been discriminatory to those who aren't C of E in the past, and for all I know some still are.

However, you must be able to see that in many areas 50-100% of primary schools have the right to exclude children who do not go to the local church. I don't understand how you can compare a C of E child being forced to attend a non-church school, to a child of non-church goers being told that there is no local primary school for them. I have lived in boroughs where this mean children hanging around in June waiting to find out whether they would have a reception place that Autumn.

Saying that somebody should move (and presumably pay thousands in stamp duty, legal fees, and perhaps change jobs too), is frankly a little odd. In this country we have a state school system that is supposed to provide an education for everybody. I can see that religion is central to the lives of many people, and I support their right to practice it without persecution. However, I think the right of every child to learn maths supersedes the right of every child to attend a school that what? Has more religious assemblies than average?

seeker, non-denominational schools do not force Christianity down your throat. I attended one at secondary level and I'm not Christian but had no problem with it. If someone from a different religion can put up with it, then why can't someone of no religion. It is so vague and anodyne that you'd have to really HATE religion in general and Christianity in particular to object to it.

As I said, maybe you'd be happier off in France? Or starting your own free school? As England is a Christian country, you know...

Wow it's active in here, difficult to keep up. B&B, which link would you like me to post? Sorry I've lost track.

Also, we are supposed to be a secular country, and that you suggest people move area or country in order to live in a secular way should surely demonstrate to you just how absurd the situation is for secularists.

Finally, yes religious people do pay taxes, but non-faith schools do not exclude them based on their faith... whilst the same cannot be said for the vice-versa.

"As England is a Christian country, you know..."

Here you go B&B, yougov.co.uk/news/2012/02/17/britain-christian-country/

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.

It's not like those who complain their only local school is a sink school - because it is not reasonable for ANY schools to be sink schools, because poor schools cater for no child's needs.

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). The fact that they don't happen to cater for seeker's demand is neither here nor there - they have to exist somewhere or that demand will not be met. These schools need to be located somewhere in real towns, cities and villages - I daresay seeker would like them all to be located far, far away from her, so they don't clutter up her town and mess up her child's chances of getting into the good school - but the reality is that religious people don't all live far, far away and also pay taxes.

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!!

No, if there are towns with lots of faith schools and lots of aggrieved parents with no suitable secular schools to send their atheist children to, I heartily recommend they set up a new school pronto. As a taxpayer, I can assure you, seeker, that I am more than happy to contribute towards the funding of that school - just as I am to contribute towards the funding of countless Christian schools that I will never want to use either.

It is impossible to take part fully in the life of a state school in England without being at least a nominal Christian. This is more honoured in the breach than the observance in most secondary schools, I agree. But in primary schools, prayer and Christian worship are commonplace. And if I don't want that? As I said, people of faith have the other 18 hours of the day - what do they think is going to happen to their child if they spend 6 hours without active Christian input.

Iamsteve - what on earth gave you the idea that England is a secular country?

It never has been. The Queen is officially the head of the C of E - had you not noticed? The whole country stops at Christmas. Bank holidays at Easter, etc etc.

Of course the UK is not a secular republic.

You do sound like you would be much happier in France.

Iamsteve - your yougov link makes it clear that Britain IS a Christian country - not sure why you posted it as it makes my point nicely.

Re your Telegraph link, one bishop does not make a summer. Esp when bemoaning the rise of multiculturalism in the Telegraph.

"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!!"

Iamsteve- I didn't respond to those points because they are so obviously not what I am saying.......!

Yes I posted it because it's a real poll, knowing full well that you'd draw on it. Now please tell me, do you not see what's wrong with this:

"76% Britons say they are 'not religious', but 56% say Britain is Christian, & 61% agree it should be"

76% are not religious... yet 56% say we're a Christian country. Seriously... and you take from that, that we are in fact a Christian country? I take from that, that we're very much not, but people are tribal in nature, in need of identity and are afraid of change and multiculturalism. How can we be a Christian country when 76% are non-religious?? I mean actually a Christian country.

seeker, yes I knew that... just can't resist calling out straw men when they're used.

No,Steve,it is not a straw man argument - my school and my child's school and virtually every faith school in the UK, I would imagine, was built and funded by members of that faith for their own children. Do you understand the meaning of a 'straw man' argument, 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. :)

I am far from rich but moved as I prioritised faith in my children's education - it was worth the massive inconvenience for me. If it matters to you, do the same or STOP MOANING.

You are not a great publicist for humanists, Steve. Are all humanists that lacking in basic logic?

Steve - interested in why - as you obviously care about this issue - you are not out there getting signatures, fundraising etc as all those involved in setting up new schools generally do.

Could it be because you have hardly any supporters out there?

I would not remotely describe myself as religious. Nor would any of the practising catholics in my family or that I know from going to church every week. Religious people go to church every day and are, basically, nuns or priests. Or the little old ladies who do the flowers. Very few catholics would describe themselves as 'religious' (not least because the term 'religious' actually means someone with an official role in the church e.g. deacon, priest, cardinal, nun).

But you can prove anything you want with a craftily worded poll.