AIBU to think we need more ^inclusive^ education?

[LoveFoolMe]

AIBU to think we need more inclusive education? If children in a multicultural society such as the UK are educated together surely this promotes more tolerance and better mutual understanding.

So these proposals worry me:

Call to end limit on religious free schools

Considering how divisive and rigid religious attitudes can be, I think it's time to bring children from faith schools into mainstream schools and to encourage these children to mix with more diverse cultures.

Secular schools can still provide fact-based religious education in the classroom and would probably teach their students about a greater range of religions than a faith school would. Parents could, of course, provide a more personal approach to religion for their children outside of school hours if they wanted to.

Let's not further segregate our children by religion.

AIBU to think that reducing (rather than increasing) the number of faith schools in the UK would be far better for our children and far better for our society?

Specialist music schools try very hard to assess potential. The selection process for the music school my DC attended lasted more than two days, much fairer than standard applications to state schools.

But who applies? Kids who are already interested/displaying aptitude. Who are those kids more likely to be?

What admissions process are you referring to as the standard one?

The state can allocate a faith school to a child who doesn't want to go to a faith school?!!! I did not know that!! Shocking. No-one should have to go to a faith school. Really? I thought the problem was that faith schools are oversubscribed

Some are, and that's when the school can choose its intake (and that's when faith schools do better). Some aren't, and may well be failing schools. So if you don't get your schools of choice, the state can absolutely allocate you a faith school.

Thought experiment - state schools close on Wednesday afternoons. All pupils must be educated in RS at a place of their choice, which might or might not be secular. Would be complicated but then there would be no religion in any state school. Unless you continued to allow faith schools.

I think a massive problem with that is that all children aren't educated about all faiths in a neutral way, and there's a chance that some children aren't educated about any faiths apart from their own.

There's also the 'faith school by default'. If the only state primary in 25 miles is CofE, what choice do you have?

Yup, definitely a need for more state schools. The current system is a mess.

But it makes no sense to open a second school in an area that has enough places, it's just that they're CofE places.

Equally, not all religious parents have religious provision that meets their needs where they live.

If the existing cofe school didn't attract enough pupils after a second school opened it would presumably close. Wouldn't you be happy with that?

f the existing cofe school didn't attract enough pupils after a second school opened it would presumably close. Wouldn't you be happy with that?

Who pays? It's massively inefficient to have two schools where one can meet demand. What essential service gets cut?

What if it's 50% at each school?

According to you, existing cofe schools are oversubscribed.

I think you are misunderstanding. The faith schools that do well are oversubscribed. That is why they do well- selection does that. There are plenty of undersubscribed faith schools. Which do no better than any other school with the same catchment.

According to you, existing cofe schools are oversubscribed

No, that's not true. I've never said that.

I'll quote myself from earlier:

Some are, and that's when the school can choose its intake (and that's when faith schools do better). Some aren't, and may well be failing schools. So if you don't get your schools of choice, the state can absolutely allocate you a faith school

Some faith schools are oversubscribed, and can set admission rules that are discriminatory in a number of ways. Some are not, and non-faith students can be allocated those schools either directly (the council allocates you that school, you have no option to opt out) or indirectly (there is no non-faith provision nearby).

How far do you take that though Rogue? What do you think of creationism being taught in science lessons?

Sorry, my iPad hadn't loaded yesterday's comments. That was in reply to Why should your belief that religion is 'wrong' be allowed to determine what someone who is religious teaches?

I don't get your point about taking religious education out of the state sector. I don't know anyone who proposes that. It's important for kids to know about major world religions - builds understanding and tolerance. Religious instruction - 'here's the right religion, the real truth, all the others are wrong' is another thing entirely.

Exactly

It would have to be taught as a theory. And evolution taught as well - with its greater weight of evidence pointed out.

A question for you Love - do you think that the state ought to teach RS?

Part of my defence of faith schools is out of respect for the huge part faith plays in the lives of some people and a general awareness of the nanny state getting ever bossier. I'm totally up for the state doing what it can to give everyone equal opportunities and for looking at our vulnerable members. (Eg I'd never have gone to uni without a full grant - it horrified me to hear that grants to students from low-income households are being scrapped) but I sometimes wonder at the level of state interference - can you have one without the other? I don't know.... Eg, the case of the little boy who had a brain tumour; the state compelled his mother to have him undergo treatment that she didn't feel was in his best interest. I know that was a complex case, but to have to submit your child to radiotherapy on his brain with probable (possible) lifelong harmful effects when you think there's an alternative......

I think it's outrageous that state schools are required by law to have a broadly Christian-based assembly (apologies for hasty terminology). Given that school is to all intents and purposes compulsory - shouldn't it be secular. I know you can withdraw your child from assemblies.....

Hence my suggestion of compulsory RS, if their provision is thought to be a duty of the state, being provided out side of school by specialist 'providers'. Of course that would be fraught with practical difficulties too.

Otoh, so much is already required of our poor schools, PE, RE, sex-ed, IT, modern languages, business studies.......

x-posted!

I don't know anyone who has suggested my suggestion either...! Just a way of getting into your question. Your Q presupposes the need for RS - I wonder if brief and tokenistic teaching of world religions is useful. I don't know. Better than nothing?

Yes, I think it's very important. Along with psychology, ethics and philosophy. I'm sure it's a challenge trying to fit everything into the curriculum though so I'd prioritise religion and ethics.

I'd hope it would be more than 'token' but, again, it's a tricky balance fitting everything into a school timetable. What gets dropped to make more room for it?

It would have to be taught as a theory

We have to be very careful with the word 'theory'; people sometimes misunderstand the scientific meaning of 'theory' when referring to evolution - they imply a theory is more like a suggestion.

Theory definition in science:

A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not "guesses" but reliable accounts of the real world.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory

I'd love to see more secular assemblies.

so much is already required of our poor schools, PE, RE, sex-ed, IT, modern languages, business studies....

Yes, I don't envy those who have to decide what gets dropped.

the thing is we do not actually know how morally and ethically people behave without religion

I'm surprised to see that (according to a 2015 Gallup poll) Israel is the country with the lowest percentage of religious people.

I'll save Middle Eastern politics for another thread though!

would people pay their council or income tax even knowing its going to a good cause if it wasnt for that coercion or risk of prison?

True. We would be less likely to pay it. I think that's more about control than lack of ultruism. People can choose which charity to support, they don't usually get to say how their taxes are spent.

However

Gallup’s findings seem to directly contradict a 2009 study by the Israeli Democracy Institute

"80% believe in God. Are they secular or religious? If we are speaking about [halachic observance] then many are not but if you ask if they believe God [is] relevant to Israeli life and they believe in it then Israelis are a very religious kind of country.”

People are complicated aren't they!!

So even a word like 'religious' has to be put into context as here it seems to mean 'orthodox' or 'fundamentalist' rather than 'belief in God'.

This poll seems more relevant

It shows China as least religious with the UK 6th from the bottom. Not wanting to live under a totalitarian regime myself, that's given me some food for thought....