We haven't had a state vs private debate for a while! What did you think of the Fiona Millar programme on schools?

[WideWebWitch]

Well?

Missed the programme and have only skimmed this so sorry if I've missed something. I too think the assumption that middle class parents are the only ones who can make a difference is extraordinarily patronising. From the various local playgroups I attend, I can detect no difference in the passion, commitment and hopes of parents for their children by class or for that matter, race.

Aside from this, don't private schools account for only 5 - 7 % of schoolchildren?. In areas such as where I live (one of Britain's most deprived boroughs), I would be surprised if private education accounted for as much as 1% of schoolchildren.

I also firmly believe that buying into a particular school catchment area is in moral terms, the same as paying for an education in the private system. You are still using money to access an education which is better than that available to others.

So why is it then that RC schools are considered "better" when they only select on religious grounds?

Agree wholeheartedly Bells2!

gosh bossykate- I'm on the floor It is a pleasure isn't it?

I would have no problem with political schools, PROVIDING there was a choice- and a real choice. That is the situation with faith schools down here. If I desperately wanted my son to go to to a non-faith school he could have gone to our local school (which in fact is harder to get into, is more sought after and is oversunscribed, but selects on catchment and then birthdate, so if your child is born in August you're stuffed in a busy year).

The reason the church school's funding is absolutely no issue for me is that I have a choice here. I can choose church school, or I can choose state. The problem with your area Aloha is that you have no choice. If you had proper choice then I doubt it would be an issue for you either. The problem is lack of decent schools. In fact if the church wasn't funding 15% of the church schools down here then the LEA would have to find that money. And I know exactly where they would take it from (bye bye SN budget) - so I'm more than happy for ds1's school to recieve money from the church.

I put this point in slightly different terms below, but think it's worth reiterating. Should state schools be able to discriminate on parents' wealth? Before everyone answers 'No', bear in mind that in my local area that is precisely what happens. The best schools command the highest house prices. If you can't afford to buy a house in the extreme locality, you can't go to the school. End of story. So the richest parents (after the ones who are paying to go private) get their kids into the best schools by effectively buying their education. In effect, the only way of getting into the best schools is to buy a more expensive house. You might as well pay school fees.

Jimjams - are you serious? They discriminate by BIRTH DATE? What, are August babies not supposed to go that school? For what reason? I'm astounded!

The faith schools debate is such a thorny one. I am worried here that religion is being seen as a bit of a lifestyle choice, especially through the politics analogy.

I am an Anlglican and a labour supporter. I am a labour supporter because (usually) I can intellectually understand and agree with the priorities of left of centre political views. I am an Anglican because I believe in, love and trust in God. I try to lead my life through Christian principles, especially through my interactions with others, and in the way that I bring up my son. I know I'm not explaining this very well (Miranda2 - help please!) ...

I'm really not sure where I sit on the faith schools being supported by the state argument. All I'm saying is I can understand why someone's religion is a very important factor in chosing their child's education. (and yes, it makes me sick when people "fake" religion to get their child into a school)

agree about the wealth thing musica- I prefer selection on faith (or ideology) than wealth.

Yep- straight from the head's mouth. I had a meeting with her and the senco to discuss whether they would have ds1 (totally unsuitable premises - big school- full of STAIRS- eek no good at all). And she said at the end. "When's his birthday? May? ahh yes I'm fairly certain we're OK with may babies this year. On busy years we have to offer places according to birth dates- but I'm not expecting the numbers this year to be too bad, so don't tell anyone but we will be able to offer him a place".

The huge moral difference between 'selection' by catchment areas and sectarian schools is that in the former case it is the parents who are 'immoral' (I don't actually mean that, but you know what I mean) - the parents are using their money to buy advantage. The schools are NOT selecting by wealth - you may say the effect is the same but the schools are not the ones setting up a divisive and discriminatory policy. In the latter case the schools are very deliberately saying to children, 'You are not welcome here because of what your parents believe/don't believe'. That is not only quite different, but what kind of message is that? What kind of society do we want? Suppose businesses only employed Catholic staff or actively rejected Catholic staff - surely we'd all agree that was wrong, morally (as well as legally btw). Or would that be Ok provided there was a similar busines that only employed Protestant staff or Muslim or Hindu etc etc etc. WHY is it not OK to discriminate against adults on the grounds of religion/race but OK to do the same with little kids?
Jimjams, actually, it's the reverse. I don't live near a sectarian school so this for me is very much a matter of what is fair and morally right, not a selfish argument based on what I want for my son.
Fisil, I cannot see it your way. You see as far as I am concerned (and I know this will sound offensive, but it's not meant to be that way) all religion is a false belief so what would be morally to me wrong about 'faking' something that I believe is 'fake' to begin with? I do realise that other people strongly believe in religion so denying it would be immoral to them, but to me it's as immoral as pretending to believe in father Christmas for ds's sake. Not that I would, but that's because I don't want my son to have a religious education.

I've checked - and in Scotland the only "faith" school option is for the Catholic schools. So for state schools it's either an "ordinary" school, which is required to be "broadly Christian in nature" or a Catholic school. I'm not sure, but I get the impression that the Catholic schools are 100% state funded - there is no such thing as "voluntary/grant aided" up here any more.

There is a big debate going on about whether the separate schools contribute to the sectarianism we suffer from, at least in the West of Scotland.

I mean, I do pretend the father Christmas bit, but I wouldn't pretend to be religious in order to get into a sectarian school.

I know none of this will happen and we won't have an egalitarian, non-sectarian, secular education system any time soon, but it doesn't stop it being my ideal.

I have been following this thread and don't really have anything profound to add. I just wanted to say that I totally disagree with segregation and think it completely and utterly ignites sectarianism amongst people here. Janz - I totally agree with you on this, especially with the problems in the Glasgow area.

My DH's family are Catholic and in order for DH's sister to get her sons into the Catholic school they have to go to church, be baptised and also go through holy communion. I hate the retentiousness of it all.

I went to a mixed school. I am protestant by birth and as Janz pointed out it's Catholic or Mixed here. The religion thing was never an issue and really didn't know whether my friends were Catholic or not until we were much older. But the kids from the Catholic school down the road were always being targeted and there were many "fights" between each school. So in this particular area the segregation has caused a lot of problems and not a lot of good! It seems to me to be highly unecessary.

should read "Pretentiousness"!

Picking up on Aloha and M2T's points about discrimination - apparently in the West of Scotland, such discrimination DOES still occur - not legally of course. To find out what religion you are, you will be asked what school you went to. If the name of the secondary school is not immediately "obvious", then you will be asked what primary school (and the catholic ones are always St. something or other).

When I moved back to Scotland 10 years ago, I didn't believe my (now) dh when he told me that this sort of thing went on. But I now realise that it does - less than before, but it does still exist.

I'd been brought up by my parents to be "blind" to any of this sort of thing. Coming from South Africa, they knew the extremes of discrimination - and the ugliness that that could lead to. I was 29 before I realised that you could tell if someone was (likely to be) Jewish by their name and/or looks!

I'd like my ds to be similarly "blind" - which is partly why I am wary of him going to a Catholic primary school, as he might then suffer from some of that discrimination himself.

I agree M2T that it encourages sectanariasm (Sorry SP!!). There use to be fights between the local catholic school and the other secondary school and that wasn't even in Scotland...
But surely there will be always rivalry between schools not dependent on religion - eg local private and local state school?. Don't seem to hear of fights between schools now where I come from but maybe that's to do with kids not walking home form school but going by car - another thread I feel

marialuisa, know exactly what you mean about "guardianistas". i routinely read remarks about catholicism there which would not be considered acceptable if directly against other faiths.

Marialuisa - No, I think I do mean pretentious.

Sonnet - That is true, there will always be rivalry between schools, but in our area it was the 4 'normal' schools against the one RC school. It has never been that important to me whether people are RC or any other religion, but when I was at school there was kind of an hatred for those attending St.... High School! The segregration encouraged it entirely.

But waht is pretentious about it M2T? It's not an exclusive club, anyone can join if they want to. If you found it ridiculous or felt they were faking their beliefs then I could understand those descriptions, but why pretentious?

MArialuisa - DH's sister is 'pretending' to be a practicing catholic and 'pretending' that her children are being brought up as practicing Catholics to get them into that school..... they are carrying on the pretence that they are a religious family when they are clearly not, putting on a show to please the Catholic body that decides who is 'allowed' to attend the school . I think that is prententious.....
Why are you so het up about my wording? I do know what pretentious means despite the fact I missed the P off of the word the 1st time I typed it.