Attending Church, purely to get to a certain school

[sleepydad3000]

They're aren't many things I feel so strongly about, but this issue is one of them. I am currently looking at schools for my daughter. I am a non religious person and my partner is a none practising Catholic, doesn't go to church at all anymore.

I personally think it's wrong on a moral level to exploit a church for 6 months or however long, just to get your child to a certain school. It's almost like, "Oh hi, yes thankyou, I've got what I needed, you'll never see me again!"

2 schools near me are both decent, 1 outstanding and 1 good (Ofsted ratings) interestingly enough, the NON Catholic school has the higher mark as of 2017.... just saying. Both schools are great in my view, religion aside. But I'd feel awful and wrong and like I was cheating or manipulating the system, just to get my girl to a certain school, and then waving bye bye to the church after, as I know for a fact, my partner and I have no intention of going to church afterwards.

It's not really about the right to property though is it? They can do what they like with their land and buildings but if they want state funds to run a school on it it comes with some strings attached.

Most C of E schools have faith as their lowest admission criteria. It's usually looked after children, siblings in catchment, catchment, siblings out of catchment, out of catchment with church attendance, out of catchment.
The schools were often built before state education started to educate the locals, and they rightly prioritise local children over out of catchment faith children.

Well that might be true where you live snowdrops but it isn't here. We don't have catchment like that. One thing that particularly struck me was the Catholic school which had Catholic, other Christian, other religions, none in descending order.

Snowdrops

Here, it's always looked after children then it's usually Parish, and if not over subscribed the next Parish.
Church attendance is expected, Christened in the Parish, parents christened in the parish etc.
There are so many though, so no problem with admissions.
Apart from the one primary and one secondary that every man and his dog try for

I don't feel bad. I'm not even catholic, (Dh's family is) but it was ME who has taken ds's both regularly to church, done holy communion etc.

Apparently, on Friday, most of my local friends, in Surrey, got the schools they wanted, including the closest outstanding catholic one.

Whereas in Twickenham and Whitton, many catholic's didn't get any of their 6 listed schools. And many non catholics didn't get any of their 6 listed schools either.

So sounds like a right balls up!!!

Snowdrops not the case where I am either. And very strict for catholic schools.

We are NW if that makes any difference.
The schools are strict ito admissions, but there are enough schools and community schools too there is no problem.
Maybe Faith schools in other areas are better schools and highly sought after, I can understand why there would be problems in this case.

We used to work in mills, go to church, the pub and this is how many of our northern towns remain, minus the mining.

CofE churches normally have all looked after children and previously looked after as their first priority. Many have some other categories such as siblings and medical/social needs ahead of faith categories. A growing number of CofE churches restrict the number of places offered on faith grounds.

RC churches tend to be more restrictive. They often admit Catholic LAC first, then have other categories for Catholics and only admit people of other faiths or no faith once all Catholics have been admitted. Catholic churches do not generally restrict the number of places offered on faith grounds. They are very much against this. Indeed, near where I live, a Catholic independent school that current admits purely on the basis of performance in the entrance exam with no priority for Catholic pupils was prevented from converting to a free school by the Catholic church because it would only have been able to award 50% of its places on faith grounds. Apparently it was better to have an independent school where no places are reserved for Catholics than a state-funded school where half the places are reserved for Catholics. I don't know how much of the Catholic churches attitude stems from the fact that Catholics were a persecuted minority until relatively recently.

They can do what they like with their land and buildings but if they want state funds to run a school on it it comes with some strings attached

Unfortunately that approach is unrealistic. If you don't allow faith schools to prioritise on faith grounds you can expect all the RC schools and possibly some schools for minority faiths (Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, etc.) to close. You would therefore have to find land and buildings to set up around 25,000 schools across England to cater for around 1 million pupils. That would cost billions of pounds. At a rough guess, you would be looking at somewhere north of £600 billion to set up the schools you would need.

I guess the real prize is to have a looked after child as they are right in there at no 1 priority. Get your child looked after ?

According to the government website about school admissions, children in care or being looked after (all schools must have this as a top priority)

Our faith schools don't have sibling priority, but there's usually another one round the corner.
At one time I remember as this was my ds2 Catholic Schools (not sure if all) had to take a percent maybe 10% of children who weren't Catholic faith.
This was my ds2, parents were fighting to get into the school it was really difficult to gain a place.
Nothing was available to him and ds1 was in the community school next door. The LA put our case forward and the Priest agreed, I had to go and meet him and sign papers

According to the government website about school admissions, children in care or being looked after (all schools must have this as a top priority)

That is true. However, faith schools are allowed to put LAC who are not of the faith after all categories for children who are of the faith. So, for a Catholic school, it is acceptable to have Catholic LAC children as top priority, then other categories for Catholic children, then the next category must be non-Catholic LAC children.

I haven't come across a CofE school that does this but a number of RC schools do.

Arnold I guess the real prize is to have a looked after child as they are right in there at no 1 priority. Get your child looked after ?

I hope that was tongue in cheek?

To become looked after a child needs to have been through a hell of a lot. You wouldn't wish it on any child, let alone your own. The advantage in schooling place does not make up for the reasons to become a LAC, only slightly mitigate.

I live near a very large (in excess of two thousand children), ofsted outstanding, very sought after, oversubscribed c of e secondary. While I’m sure they have looked after children at the top of their criteria, realistically LAC only account for a small number of admissions. The schools general admissions policy goes -

“c of e children with parents at the heart of the church, c of e children, other Christian denomination children with parents at the heart of their church, other Christian denomination children, children of other faiths, children without faith”

This is rigorous applied, every morning a string of busses from all over the wider local area come in bringing children to the school, while a child living locally who doesn’t go to church hasn’t got a hope of getting in.

From the article I linked to above:

“Under the 1841 School Sites Act, landowners were encouraged to grant land to the Church for education, with the proviso that if the usage changed, ownership would revert to their descendants.”

“...descendants of the 19th century donors of land for a school site were entitled to the proceeds when the school closed and the land was sold.”

The implication is that, if schools currently owned by the church change to an extent that their usage is compromised, the land the schools is built on will revert to the descendants of the original donors.

MariaNovella I thought that churches nowadays were all about inclusion and serving the community?

From everything you are saying it sounds as though churches are closed shops, protecting their own interests, property and whilst happy to take state funding to educate their own members they don't want to share that state funding (that all tax payers contribute to irrespective of faith) to educate children that do not belong to their ranks - unless forced to or they can't fill places with their own?

No, churches are not “all about inclusion and serving the community.” Churches are not free agents, adapting to market forces at their will! You seem to expect churches to behave as if they were some sort of state sponsored shopping centre.

Yes, Margo, you are getting mixed up.

It was Jesus who was all about inclusion and serving the community.

The Church (at least as seen by Maria) has other - albeit unspecified - priorities.

Well, I'm glad we cleared that one up MariaNovella! Great to finally understand that churches are happy to take tax payers hard earned money to pay for the education of their own but no one else!!!!!!!!!!!!

LOL DorindaLestrange - how silly of me to get the teachings of Jesus all muddled up with those of his modern day 'followers'!

You need to look beyond the PR, Dorinda . The Church of England and the Catholic Church have a very specific agenda. Add to that the agenda of different religious orders, of each Diocese etc and you will better understand what each faith school is trying to achieve. They are all different, and many of them operate at the crossroads of multiple forces.

I’m no fan of religion, but I’m no fan of the state either. I think, however, that schools largely benefit from governance that involves multiple interested parties with no financial incentives.

I'm all for good governance and having people involved with education - that's what school governors are all about. If churches have something positive to contribute and want to get involved - great. However, none of that means that a state-funded school should be able to close it's doors to those who don't share a certain faith.

Hmm. Lots of sinister (though still weirdly unspecific) insinuations about what the Church/es are REALLY up to "behind the PR" (perhaps Maria is a member of the Illuminati).

And yet, strangely, these shadowy forces should not only be allowed to select and educate children according to their secret agenda, they should be subsidised by our secular elected state for doing so.

However, none of that means that a state-funded school should be able to close it's doors to those who don't share a certain faith.

That’s your opinion, Margo. However, the assumptions underlying your opinion are incorrect. Faith schools are not owned and funded outright by the state. Governance and ownership of faith schools are made up of multiple interests that you cannot just ignore. England is not Norh Korea

Dorinda - you have a touching faith in the altruism of the state and in its agenda to operate in the best educational interests of children. Given current politics, your faith in the state is startling!