Church schools should stop discriminating against teachers and pupils, say church leaders

[edam]

This news story is interesting. New group of church leaders and 'secular figures' campaigning to stop religious schools discriminating against non-religious families and staff, or those from the 'wrong' denomination.

(I have looked to see if there's a thread on this already but couldn't find one.)

The laduy who just got made dep head at our school was rejected by lea, governors, parents (lea stated they 'washed their hands f her appt') because of her failre tp perform when acting d/h, and also the spectacular mess she made of being senco. why did she get the job? because as a church school the church administrator gets the final say. he is her godfather. i am fuming, she has foght every sn provsion anyone ever required.

we were also without a head for aeons as applicants needed not to be teachers, but must be practising anglicans

that sounds like discrimination to me. no? apparentl the other applicants for d/h were great, one an it specialist which we don't have atm

AN - I have no objection to your religious choices, or anyone elses. I believe all should have the freedom of choice, and I respect their choices. However- it is up to you as a family, and your church (or other religious body) to educate your DC in that religion- there is no place for it in a state-funded school.

Donnie that was slightly tongue-in-cheek, obviously... but there is absolutely NO WAY my DC will EVER go to a faith school.

I am not poorly informed about these choices btw. I was raised in a household of 2 completely different religions. I was educated by my parents in the doctrines of both faiths, and those of other faiths in fact, and have made my own decision about which religion I follow- None.

You can send your children to any kind of religious school you like Athene. I just don't think you should expect me to pay for it if my child is excluded. Seems fair to me.

I do take them to church. Most of the kids at church go to the school. If she went somewhere else, then she would feel an outsider on Sundays.

I can't understand why walking to school would be more important to anyone that the quality of the education the kids get. Weird order of priorities there. When they grow up, are you going to expect them to limit their career choices to the ones within walking distance?

Actually, spice, I can send my kids to a religeous school and I can expect the state to pay for it, just like anyone else can ecpect the state to fund their kids' nation curriculum education. That's how it works. And, it's not likel to change, is it?

Church schools are full of children of dedicated parents (dedicaetd to the concept of church school) who can't afford to pay for private. Now, do you think they are going to let you close them down?

Agree with eachpeach- consider myself fairly well informed (degree in world reigions) but have made my own choices- Christianit for me. However, as I insist on my right to do so, then i must respect that right in others: to me, that requires them to have full access to local amenities- incuding schools. Under no circumstances can it be right for a family to have to travel miles to school, passing a local one, simply because a local one admits a single faith. Not only would it be a pita for family, it breaks down communities.

I also think re should be taught as world religions. I believe this so strongly that I am applyng to do a pgce in re next month.

A cohesive, tolerant community can only be achieved through knowledge- a lot of which is experiential. Attending a mixed background school won't rob a child of faith if t s taught at home, but might just teach them tolerance.

good point AN- but I would personally choose the school that best meets my DC's needs than the closest.

FWIW- I think every child in this country should be able to access excellent appropriate schooling, unfortunately many are not in the position to do so.

ok, listen..i accept that the system seems a little unfair, maybe a compromise would be a good thing (part state funded) but if you went down the route of having to pay full fees (or even half fees) to go to a faith school, they would probably dissappear.

go ahead if thats what you think should happen, but i wouldn't want that on my conscience...very un-christian,... we can't join so lets shut them down..ummm?

'
I can't understand why walking to school would be more important to anyone that the quality of the education the kids get.'

because you have a disability yourself? you have another sn child? you have kids at schools in the opposite direction? you have a job to get to? only one school offers childcare? etc etc etc

The notion of attending alternative schools relies heavily on the dea that there is more than one locally; many c of e schols are village schools, the next one being a fair heft away.

Apols for terrible typing btw- gorgeous ds4 snoozing on my lap lol

You can expect it Athene but it's still discrimination. Discrimination on religious grounds is rightly illegal in any other part of our lives and it's despicable that it should still fester on in our education system.

"If she went somewhere else, then she would feel an outsider on Sundays."

Doesn't sound like a church that follows the teachings of Jesus does it.

"I can't understand why walking to school would be more important to anyone that the quality of the education the kids get."

Not every family has two cars. In a family which has one car the breadwinner often has to drive to work. Not everyone can drive as well.

Still I would not expect AtheneNoctua to understand minor problems like that.

daftpunk " if you went down the route of having to pay full fees (or even half fees) to go to a faith school, they would probably dissappear."

so why are we keeping them if people don't want them then?

Only read op. I think they've got it the wrong way about. Instead of recruiting from all staff, church schools should be fee paying only and families wishing a church school for their children should pay accordingly.

And if the school does not want/is not able to become private, then it becomes non-denominational and inclusive.

eachpeachpearmum;

it's not a question of not wanting them,
it's a question of affordability. alot of parents simply couldn't afford to pay (aswell as funding your childs school through their taxes.)

People might want faith schools but they can't always get what they want on the state. Many wants cost.

The objection to faith schools is not so much their existance but their obnoxious practices.

Why should a faith school (state or private) be above employement law?

daftpunk you are funding schools that anyone can go to through your taxes as well as faith schools
faith schools should be open to all who pay for them and they are not so explain to me why I should fund a school that my children may not be able to attend

This is really making me cross now!

Everyone pays taxes for stuff they don't get - strike that out as an argument. No one should have to pay for a State education (apart from their taxes of course)

There are local schools in most areas. Depending on where you live there might be one school or 20.

Everyone should have the right to send their child to the nearest school. Why should someone have to travel (sometimes many miles) because the school next door excludes them because they don't meet "certain criteria" I do not care if the criteria is religion, or money, or colour, or politics or whatever. It is just wrong.

Education should be separate from religion. State schools should teach about ALL religions. That is the only way we can move forward without ignorance and build social cohesion. If you want your children to grow up within religion, you do it yourself with help from your church/mosque etc. If you insist on sending your child to a "faith" school - you pay!

Really tired, what did you mean by "Still I would not expect AtheneNoctua to understand minor problems like that. "?

Hadn't thought of the disability issues. Yes, obviously good points. But lots of people harp on about their local school when there's another one six blocks the other way which is just as good.

'Everyone pays taxes for stuff they don't get - strike that out as an argument' - I'm not sure that I agree with this.

There are state benefits (such as unemployment benefit) that not everyone receives, but we are all eligible for them. I don't think there are many (any?) parallels of the faith school position, in which I as a taxpayer am paying for something that I am forever excluded from benefiting from.

I'm thinking/typing out loud though so maybe there are really obvious examples that haven't occurred to me?

The problem with over subscribed schools is that its often not good enough for a family to be Christian, but it becomes a competition of how commited christian a child's parents are. (Ie. how much arse kissing they do the local vicar)

Should it make any difference whether a family goes to church once a month of once a week. Should a child be punished for having one parent who is C of E and one who is Catholic? Should baptism over the age of two be ignored?

A lot of normal christian families who sincerely believe in Jesus are unable to jump the ridicolous hurdles to get their kids into a C of E school.

Its worth asking why so many members of ACCORD are senior christian/ jewish figures. Its not a bunch of militant atheists trying to destroy faith schools.

I'm pleased to see the tide turning against religious discrimination. As we became more civilised we put an end to "For whites only" and one day I hope to see an end to "Catholics only" (or CofE/muslim/jewish) too.

Thank you, policywonk, for making the point about eligibility so clearly.

And I agree with ReallyTired that it's often a competition about how apparently devout a family is, not merely whether they are Christians or not. And I find all that 'we are such an exclusive club' stuff rather unchristian, tbh. More Pharisee than Good Samaritan.