Church of england schools - proposal to admit more non-cofE children.......

[Icoulddoitbetter]

here

I'm not religious, and my child is not yet of school age so it's not something I've needed to think about for mysef.

But, I know a family where the parents are athiests who attend their local church weekly, read lessons, had their daughters christened and wear crosses around thier necks, just to get their children into the local church school, and this I have a very big problem with. I have no problem with children being brought up in a faith but not when the parents teaching that belief themselves have no belief in it whatsoever, it jsut seems wrong!

So if this new proposal stops the need for such behaviour then great (and the very mean part of me is secretly hoping the children above above get bumped off the list to make room for the non-cofe children in the community, whochaven't faked Christianity for two years, sorry.....!)

There certainly is some woolly thinking here, gooseberry, but as far as I can see most of it is coming from you. You are not answering the points being made by others but rather arguing against viewpoints of your own invention.

What do you mean by the faith schools would perform below par because of the time devoted to faith activities.

I'm not making points of argument. I can't see a good argument on the grounds of fairness for maintaining faith schools. I'm just stating a few facts which people seem awfully keen to deny. And if they can't deny, they say it's not relevant.

Definitely not guilty of woolly thinking.

Giveit: just something I read. Haven't seen any statistics. It would mean in effect that if faith schools were non-selective, and the influence of parental input were removed, faith schools would perform below non faith schools.

i think the original argument is difficult to answer because school provision is so different in areas across the country. Of course in many areas if your only school is a faith school and you have no chance of getting in then that poses a problem. However regardless of how multicultural we are, this is still a christian country and people should be offered faith schools. Plenty of people want to hold onto the christian beliefs of the country and want to be educated as such. Faith schools imo very much have their place. I think the problem is lack of non-selective schools generally - its unfair to blame that on faith schools. If i didn't want a faith school i would be travelling further than the 4 miles i travel to a faith school so its swings and roundabouts in terms of distance.

In terms of standards, faith schools tend to do better because of their emphasis on christian and family values - of course these are evident in non selective schools but nowhere near the extent. I agree that standards in faith schools would slip if more non-faith children were allowed in as the whole ethos of the school would be challenged and less supported by the families they serve. I attended a catholic high school (i'm not catholic) as did many other non-faith children and so the whole ethos and emphasis on faith was seen as a joke - it didnt do half as well as the catholic high school which took mainly catholics.

"I think the problem is lack of non-selective schools generally - its unfair to blame that on faith schools."

But there's no workable way to make sure that everyone of whatever faith - or no faith - gets into a school that suits their parents' religious / non-religious preference.

It's just not economic. It would be a mad luxury in a system that can't even afford enough TAs, books etc.

So the result is that as long as we have faith schools, people will be forced into ridiculous options such as hypocritical church attendance, being discriminated against, and travelling unnecessary miles to schools they would never have chosen when there are schools on their doorstep.

"In terms of standards, faith schools tend to do better because of their emphasis on christian and family values"

I would disagree: I place it firmly on parental ambition and the discipline involved in being an active member of any faith.

in my DD school (she's only in reception) she has learnt tons about relationships with friends, families. Already their have been several community events, family days/nights out in addition to the weekly events at the church the school takes them to. Everything taught in class is somehow linked to right/wrong and children are taught early on to 'think' about their actions. I was desperate to get my child into this school because it is so highly regarded but i am not typical (not even catholic) - most mums on the playground take no interest in the quality of the school and have chosen it for local convenience as its on their doorstep so i stand by my take that its their teaching mainly.

Again i think it depends on areas- in many areas catholic schools are interspersed with non-faith schools of equal standards- it always seems to appear most mn posters are from large cities where catchments for schools differ significantly - not all towns and cities are like that so generalisations about discrimination are not clear - in lots of areas there is choice and so faith schools don't pose a problem - its were school provision is lacking that problems arise

Kitkat - I would agree that all those qualities and values you mention are important for a Reception child to be learning about. I would disagree though, that faith schools are necessarily better at imparting them. It is surely down to the quality of the teaching in general, and following the Early Years Foundation Stage goals - for example:

• Have a developing awareness of their own needs, views and feelings, and be sensitive to the needs, views and feelings of others.
• Have a developing respect for their own cultures and beliefs and those of other people.
• Form good relationships with adults and peers.
• Work as part of a group or class, taking turns and sharing fairly, understanding that there needs to be agreed values and codes of behaviour for groups of people, including adults and children, to work together harmoniously.
• Understand what is right, what is wrong and why.
• Consider the consequences of their words and actions for themselves and others.
• Understand that people have different needs, views, cultures and beliefs, that need to be treated with respect.
• Understand that they can expect others to treat their needs, views, cultures and beliefs with respect.

The extent to which any child achieves these will depend in large part on the quality of their teaching and their own home background, not whether they go to a faith school.

And yes, obviously the problem of lack of choice and discrimination is worse in some areas of the country than others, but it's such a mad, unfair and unnecessary situation, it shouldn't be happening anywhere at all.

i am not sure what the solution is though. If you widen access to state schools they will become lower in standard for sure and that will create issues with religious teaching being taught to people who don't want it and those that do, wont be getting it. Many people on here don't want faith schools teaching their kids the one sided approach many of them give and if unsupported then standards fall.

If we are talking about taking religion out of schools altogether and having all non-selecetive i think that would cause more issues than it would solve (although maybe not in London areas etc). If there were no faith schools, all kids would go to their local school which would create barriers and more division between rich and poor areas and good and bad schools. Poor schools in bad areas would be more likely to stay poor. If all schools selected on 'as the crow flies' basically, many more would complain as they may find themselves stuck in a poor school and unable to afford a good school as demand for houses there will push up prices. Faith schools allow families a choice - as do other schools of better standard- to be considered only for your local school would be a backwards step imo.

I personally feel the reason why some faith schools have higher standards is because parents are jumping through hoops to get in and those parents take an active part. I'm also convinced it's the parents who have lied and played the game to get in so the faith schools who are being the active and 'good parents' and they are the ones who are benefitting the faith schools. Shame they can't do it in their local community primary.

I'm not against faith schools - nice for people to educate their children how they want HOWEVER, we're now in a situation where this choice for some means there is almost zero choice for others due to admissions criteria.

I can accept admission to a state funded school based on higher than average academic ability at a given age (ie grammars) but admission to a state funded (in part) school based on your faith is horribly divisive within the state sector.

I've just had my df here - he suggested I get my ds baptised as a catholic (he's not) to help ds into the secondary. a) it's too late b) even he realised what an absurd position to be in to have water etc chucked over your child's head and a nice little certificate to go with it to GET INTO A SCHOOL in our local area.

I realise perfectly well that our country has a christian background - wouldn't it be nice if non christians could also get a taste of our country's heritage eh? Many of these schools are so horribly exclusive and have no intention of letting in their quota of the non believers and they often have a poor record in SEN etc. So, if I'm in a LA - why aren't these faith schools participating in local education.

The south african poster has interesting things to say imo. You reckon that south africans would applaud our recent developments in education? - hell no - they've been there for different reasons and I will continue to cite the case of Israel - lets just not go down that route - at least not with public money.

Well done Cofe of finding their mission.of course if non or other faith background kids are admitted to cofe schools you will find that some of these kids will develop a liking and respect for a religion and learn about the cultural heritage of their country. Or, keep it highly exclusive, and let those kids in the school grow up with very little knowledge of their fellow countrymen.

My dh is a roman catholic from the home of catholicism and is overly proud of his culture and heritage but even he doesn't see how these faith schools fit into the UK. Even he prefers the education that ds is getting now to a catholic primary. Just the issue of no non faith schools in our area for secondary.

I don't want my son discriminated against just because he's a world citizen.

I don't understand how this is complicated at all. If you want your child to receive education in a certain religion you do that in your own time and with your own money. Why is the tax payer expected to fund this? If my childs school doesn't offer the sport I would like, I organise it out of school at my own expense.

If, as we are led to believe, Christians are kind hearted, family orientated, loving and welcoming then they would be welcoming a much more diverse intake and actually be looking to target under priviledged children. However as we can see some from posters this isn't the case at all, they are all simply worried that be changing admissions standards will go down.

The first thing that needs to be understood is that you don't have to believe in any god to be a good, decent, caring person.

However as we can see some from posters this isn't the case at all, they are all simply worried that be changing admissions standards will go down.

It's just a fact, rainbows.

Sorry gooseberry I havent read everything in detail and of course I realise that standards will almost certainly be affected. However it is not a reason to carry it on. Basically all these Chrisitans are very happy for the tax payer is funding a nice little club for them so that their DCs can get the education they want and sod everyone else. I just don't understand how they can't see how this goes against everthing that the church is saying it is and therefore yet again makes a mockery of it.

Gooseberrybushes - if you're going to keep repeating your one point, at least consider some of the other possible effects.

If selection by the back door ceases, standards might go down in some schools, but they may go up in others. Unfairness and discrimination might decrease. Children might be able to walk to school instead of getting a bus or being driven. They might make friends with their neighbours and form local and supportive social networks. All pretty Christian stuff if you want to think about it that way.

"Basically all these Chrisitans are very happy for the tax payer is funding a nice little club for them so that their DCs can get the education they want and sod everyone else."

Yes, absolutely. And I guess the fake and born again Christians also have to stand up and be counted as part of the club. Self serving - yes, pretty much. Which is okay, if you're honest and don't dress it up as Serving The Lord.

I don't say it's a reason for the situation to continue.

"Basically all these Chrisitans are very happy for the tax payer is funding a nice little club for them so that their DCs can get the education they want and sod everyone else."

No, absolutely not. The schools are the same. What's different is the parents. They put in more effort. That's the difference. No difference in funding or provision. They get the education they want because they put in the effort.

Re your list: standards going up in other schools is not a good reason to end faith selection. The other reasons you give are all good reasons and much more likely to come about.

I am not really interested in whether standards will go up or down, I simply do not believe that we should be funding faith schools. If the catholic church, for example, want to educate in a certain way, they should fund it or the catholic parents should. Same for any other religion.

To answer you point, the schools aren't the same because they are not operating a fair entry system, they are selecting the pupils based on their religion. I also think in many cases you would find that actually the high standards are not down to the school, they are down to the parents ability to pay for tutors.