Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Education

Join the discussion on our Education forum.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

Time to change church schools?

30 replies

straggleyway · 19/05/2009 12:40

Ive noticed a lot of threads on here discussing the complexity of getting into a church school. Why do we have this problem? If people want to go to church, fine let them. But why do we have religious organisations in charge of our schools when the country has become secular? Around 10% of the country go to a church, so (therefore) around 10% of schools should be religious - the rest should be secular.

im very impressed with the ideals of the Accord campaign www.accordcoalition.org.uk/

pls take a look and get your mp to consider this.

OP posts:

zanzibarmum · 19/05/2009 14:11

the accord coalition is interesting - it campaigns for all children to be educated together.... apart from the children of some of the accord supports who must be educated separatley in private schools.

spokette · 19/05/2009 14:30

Many of the MPs educate their children privately so what is the point of getting their support when many of them support a two tier system anyway.

FAQinglovely · 19/05/2009 14:34

well 10% go "reguarly" to the CoE - those figures are very skewed as they don't take into account the non-denominational churches

throckenholt · 19/05/2009 14:48

the problem in a lot of areas (country schools often) - is there are only church schools. They tend not to be selective on religion but do tend to be more overtly Christian than many would like - but it is their local village school so no real choice.

My personal preference would be to have secular schools all round - and keep faith out of education (teach all faiths in an academic sense but not as a we believe this ...). Leave faith to out of school times - as part of the family life.

Original poster

straggleyway · 19/05/2009 17:15

Hi trockenholt - couldnt agree more, but i dont think MPs would buy into this. However its simply unworkable that religious groups have so much of a say when only 10% of the population have 'signed up'. Has to change.

OP posts:

scienceteacher · 19/05/2009 20:00

yawn

Original poster

straggleyway · 20/05/2009 17:35

Got something to add 'scienceteacher' ? Looks unlikely.

So show your cards. It seems to matter to a number of people.... or maybe your just that little bit religious and feel like patronisng others eh?!

OP posts:

Worldsworstmummy · 20/05/2009 17:52

god. not another one. Has this not been thrashed to death? Sorry straggleway, I do agree with you.

Spokette, the concept of MPs is that they are elected to represent OUR views, not just their personal ones.

But like Scienceteacher. Yawn. Maybe my threadkilling streak will actually work in my favour today.

TheFallenMadonna · 20/05/2009 18:03

I have often wondered why, if it is such a popular idea, it appeared in one of the party manifestos.

TheFallenMadonna · 20/05/2009 18:03

hasn't appeared

scienceteacher · 20/05/2009 18:36

Yawn because:

a) the topic has been done to death
b) that so many mumsnetters are so eager to abolish things that are good
c) because the schools wouldn't be there if it weren't for the church.

TheFallenMadonna · 20/05/2009 18:43

Well, in terms of state schools I think they would be there. Or at leat a school would be there.

scienceteacher · 20/05/2009 18:49

Not necessarily. The church own/owned the land - they might have built almshouses on the plot, or sold it to build a pub, or laid a tennis court for the vicar. Who knows what they might have done with that particular plot of land?

TheFallenMadonna · 20/05/2009 19:30

Well OK, but there would be a school for those children is what I meant. The state would not leave children unschooled.

scienceteacher · 20/05/2009 19:44

But not necessarily in the middle of an idyllic village. The children may have had to commute to town...

Original poster

straggleyway · 20/05/2009 23:14

Worldsworstmummy
"Has this not been thrashed to death?" well, I didnt realise that, to be honest.... but then, you dont have to read it again ;)

Sciencteacher

"b) that so many mumsnetters are so eager to abolish things that are good
c) because the schools wouldn't be there if it weren't for the church."

So, youre religious, thats fine - but a lot of people arent and their opinions count. Education should adapt as society changes. So, if around 10% of folk go to church, then around 10% of schools can be handed over to churches to run. Right now, we simply dont have enough good secular schools.

OP posts:

scienceteacher · 21/05/2009 06:45

Church schools are something that people want because the vast majority are over-subscribed. Why would you want to take away something that people want and value?

Ask yourself why church schools are in such high demand.

jcscot · 21/05/2009 10:33

"So, if around 10% of folk go to church, then around 10% of schools can be handed over to churches to run."

That figure only applies to those who go regularly to CofE churches. There are other people who regularly attend Sunday services at other denominations, so the actual percentage of the population that is 'churchgoing' is going to be higher than 10%.

BetsyBoop · 21/05/2009 10:54

If we are talking CofE schools then according to the latest figures I can find only 18.7% of primary places are at a CofE school.

As has already been said the vast majority of Church schools are heavily oversubscribed, so they must be doing something right.

It is also interesting to note the slight upward trend in the percentage of CofE primary places, presumably because
a) they are so popular
b) the closure of less popular/failing schools that are not CofE

BetsyBoop · 21/05/2009 11:09

just seen this survey on the same site

Q3. To what extent, if at all, do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
?If parents wish to choose a state-run school for their children based on religious, moral or philosophical considerations, then they should be able to do so?

Of the "I do not regard myself as a Christian" group 26% disagree or strongly disagree, 60% agree/strongly agree(remainder on the fence or don't know)

Interesting that only a quarter of non-Christians want to stop the choice when almost two thirds support the choice, another case of the very vocal minority thinking they speak for the majority when they don't.

For the same question, of the "I regard myself as a Christian" group 22% disagree or strongly disagree,63% agree/strongly agree (remainder on the fence/don't know), so there isn't actually THAT much difference between the two groups

Infact after a very quick look through the whole survey, then main area of difference is in the view on religious teaching, which is hardly a surprise is it...

zanzibarmum · 21/05/2009 11:10

straggleway... calm down; science teacher is bored - she has a right to be if she is so moved.

On your point as to why there aren't enough good "secular schools" (I would have thought most schools are secular despite the nominal requirement for a daily act of worship mainly Christian in character)why do you think this is.

My thought is that to some extent schools with a religious character are in some ways counter-cultural and perhaps are less likely to be caught up in the here and now, me, me, me celebrity culture where fame, money and the immediate is valued more highly that work, respect and the future.

What's your take on the failure of "secular schools"

happywomble · 21/05/2009 11:54

I agree with science teacher.

Church schools tend to be very popular. they also bring more money into education as the church contributes. They have more autonomy than non church schools - the governors have more control whereas non church schools are controlled by local authorities.

The only thing that should be looked at are the way entry is determined. Church schools should give a percentage of places to people living locally first (if they have chosen the school). Then I think it is right some places are allocated to people of the faith as it gives people who can't afford to buy a house next to a church school and want a christian education (if c of e school) a chance of getting in.

If no church places are allocated then it is living nearest first and that means poorer people have less chance of going to a good school...church schools are always popular and tend to have high academic standards.

Whilst a loud minority do not want their children to have a christian based assembly at school the majority of the population appear to be quite happy with school assemblies whetehr they are church going or not.

I think there should be more places for other christian denominations in c of e schools as there don't tend to be may baptist churches etc.

Most good English schools have a religious ethos and Xenia is always telling us the best English schools are world class! The government needs to invest even more money in the state system until all state schools are good schools and people don't have to go to desperate lenghts to get their children to a good school

happywomble · 21/05/2009 11:55

sorry meant to say baptist church schools above

furrycat · 21/05/2009 12:30

I haven't read the whole thread (erm, am supposed to be working) but the whole faith school system really annoys me.

There has been a whole hoo-hah round here because 2 or the local faith schools have operated a lottery system this year for parents fulfilling the criteria which means some kids who live opposite the school didn't get in. As a result they had to go to their local non faith school, meaning other kids couldn't go there and have ended up being sent 2 miles away.

If parents want their child to go to faith school, fair enough, but they shouldn't be allowed to apply for a mix of faith and community schools. If they want a faith school fine, they should complete a form putting down three faith schools. That will leave the comminity schools for everybody else.

zanzibarmum · 21/05/2009 15:38

furrycat the pros and cons of lottery based admissions systems is not unique to church schools. It clearly has the downsides you mention but are typically introduced where the school is oversubscribed with high criteria applicants. Where there is oversubscription people will always be disappointed no matter what admissions' process/criteria is used.
Your point though about people who apply to church schools should not be able to also choose community schools - I understand your point but how would you implement it; the govt code of practice on admissions wouldn't permit this - or the reverse (some Church schools insisted that all children must go to church schools but code also bans this)

Flip

1 2