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?

Janz - I agree with you - surely the best place to teach tolerance and understanding of other poeple is in our schools. And however inclusive the faith school is in terms of covering other religions it does not get away from the fact that 'other' religions are being practiced by 'other' people in 'other' separate schools rather than the person at the next desk.

I think catholic schools are slightly different- they are stricter on admission., But I think they are also more openly religious and I can't imagine why anyone would want to send their child there is they weren't catholic. Same as I wouldn't imagine anyone wanting their child to get 10 A*s at CGSE would want to send thier child to a Steiner school.

However all the bog standard Cof E schools just do not fit your description. And where they do become selective the problem is a lack of decent schools and lack of spaces in school- not that the schools are so immoral. I still think it is fairer that they select on religion than just income. That to me is the most unjust way of selection (and lets face it your average high acheiving school in a posh area isn't exactly fighting to widen their intake. The postcode lottery suits them very nicely.

Sonnett - afraid I'll go back to my point about selection! Plus your very useful point on school being part of the community - which was one of the points from Fiona Millar's original programme!
Aloha - I couldn't agree with you more. I think religion has no place in education. (she ducks and runs for cover).

But they don't select on income. How can a school control what the parents pay for houses nearby? My concern is with the ethical policies of the schools and the message this gives out that sectarianism and discrimination is a good thing - and worse, they do this at the general taxpayer's expense.

Come on someone - why is it Ok for kids but not Ok for adults in the workplace or in hospital?

sonnet - sorry, hadn't read your earlier post about funding of RC schools.

Not sure about this though
"RC schools do take non-RC children Katierocket and the education that child receives is partly funded by the catholic church"

When I originally started all this earlier in the thread the reason was that our local RC primary has a stated policy that you have to be baptised RC. (Obviously not being catholic I wouldn't want to send DS there but it's the principle of the fact that I part fund a school that my son can't go to.) Does it vary from school to school then as to whether they take non RC children? (and same question applies to other faith schools)

No Aloha I wouldn't think it OK.
But my children can't go to the local Jewish school and I'm not calling "discrimination".

my local state funded primary school is open to children who live in a designated area - any places left afterwards are filled by children form other postal areas dependent on a first come first served basis.
My local VA catholic primary school is open to all catholic children from 2 parishes. Once those places have been filled it is open to any children based on a first come first served basis not dependent on religion. BUT they have just told me that siblings get a priority.

I don't see the difference.
I accept your arguement Aloha about state funding of religion but not the abolition of faith schools. That will not give a better education for all as when the faith schools loose their doctrine that underpins their whole ethos then the "perceived" sucess of these schools will be diluted and eventually lost.

education is a service from school to the pupil, employnment is a two way agreement between an empolyer and employee, so I don't think you can draw a clear parallel.

Bk - really agreed with your posts.

Hi Katierocket - think it's to do with level of funding.
My local RC primary HAS TO take a minimum of 10% - it currently takes 24% (phoned to ask there procedure earlier so I didn't misquote).
My Mum works in a v.small RC primary school in a rural area at the oposite end of the country to where I live - they take 47% non RC - BUT is is very small with dwindling Rc numbers and as it has such a good reputation is inundated with request for places from non RC children - and believe it or not it is the LEA who have stated that they cannot take more than 45%...
so I suppose it depends on where you live - I am very surprised to read that your local school doen't take any non RC children - from what I have read and been told I beleived this to be different. Don't agree with it either by the way !!

but some workplaces do select on religion or ideology. christian charities employ christians. Steiner schools employ people who are commited to the steiner philosophy. Naval hospitals treat people in the navy and thier families (I had my nose cauterised at the age of 5 in a naval hospital and certainly didn't wait anywhere near as long as I would have in the NHS. Similarly at 14 when I broke my arm I went to the naval hospital and didn't have to sit in casualty for 6 hours). I don't think that c of e schools (or other religious schools) drive a huge wedge into society especially when outside overcrowded areas the selection doesn't occur (theres one spare place in my son's year- anyone here could choose to take that place if they wanted to).

Have only skimmed through this thread and haven't seen any of the programmes of articles referred to, so possibly just repeating others comments but ....

I believe that schools which receive state funding should be non-denominational, or at least to the level of funding ? 100% funding, 100% non-denominational. However, if they receive funding from a church/temple/mosque etc then they have the right to use religion-based criteria for entry, on the same percentage basis.

Our local school is NOT supposed to be church based yet I have had countless ?discussions? with the head regarding the fact that 99.9% of RE lessons are Christian biased, as are holidays and fun activities (Easter is a real sore point with me at the moment). I am Pagan, and would rather my children choose their beliefs for themselves, not be indoctrinated with a belief in ?God? in the Christian sense. Yet I seem to have no choice in the matter, as this so called non-religious school is anything but.

Ah THIS is where you all are!

sonnet, i think you explained very well in your 12.59 post. it gets my goat when people have such huge misconceptions about the catholic community in england.

i'm sorry Aloha I just don;t think it is diversive - or only if you let it be. If I was in northern Ireland or even Scotland would have a different view of course.
BUT - my religion is impt to me on a personal level - but I don't care what others believe or don't believe - it just dosn't matter to me. my children can't go to Jewish or muslim schools - so what?. My daughters best friend is a hindu so what. My daughters attend a C of E sunday school every week - so what?.

I belieive the current postcode lottery where the best schools get better and the worse schools get worse produces a far more diverse society.

As an aside, how do you know that in the workplace religion is not a discriminator. My CV clearly leads one to believe I'm a catholic due to the names of the schools I've attended - admittidly no one has ever told me to my face that my application was unsucessful due to me being a left footer - but it could have gone on.

Maybe religion it is a factor in job applications, but my point is it SHOULDN'T be and that it is immoral and illegal to discriminate on sectarian lines - yet we accept it for children.
It is clearly wrong to me that a church only funds 10% of the running costs of a school yet demands to control at the very least 75% of intake. How can this be fair or non-discriminatory.
Personally, I don't care what anyone else believes. I have friends of various religions and none. This isn't even part of my argument. I just do not believe that the Church should be able to run schools using state funds (our money) and be able to exclude children purely on the basis on their parents' beliefs.
If you think it is wrong that someone would be turned down for a job in the Civil Service or NHS solely on the grounds of their religion or lack of it, then you must surely understand that it is wrong to turn children away from schools on the same grounds. You surely cannot morally or logically disagree with the former yet approve of the latter.

Can you even begin to imagine the outcry if a document was discovered outlining official policy that, say, Catholics were not allowed into certain parts of the civil service!!

there is no outcry that catholics are not allowed to inherit the throne, or that members of the royal family are disinherited if they marry a catholic...

BK, I disagree strongly with that stupid, bigoted and ancient law and think it should be repealed immediately. Also I think that that church and state should be separate, that the head of state should not be head of the church and that all public institutions should be secular.

Marialuisa, whether it's 10% or 15% I still don't think that gives a religious organisation the right to determine the intake of a school on religious grounds.

But hey, ho, if anyone suspects they will benefit from a system they are unlikely to see it as unfair or unreasonable.

And in today's guardian society section there's a job on page 45 where the applicant has to be "from a black or ethnic minority group". I'm sure there are perfectly good reasons for this.

And as marialuisa has said (and as I've said) many many faith schools do not discriminate on the basis of religion.

Good points from bossykate as well.

My point of view Aloha is that "religion is a choice". If you "cannot" believe, as you have indicated, then that choice is made for you. That for me ios the difference: How can shout discrimination for something I've chosen not to believe in/do.

I have said many times that I accept your point of state funding.

Hey BK - we can't be Freemasons either!!