campaign for fairer admissions to faith based primary schools - your views...

[hopingforbest]

... on this www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-22798206?

It's discrimination based on faith, the sooner it's illegal the better.

Lavender -- is it also discriminatory to have specialist science schools? or specialist arts schools? or specialist technology schools?

wondering - "religious" people who have faith (or who try to have faith!), "practice" it everywhere, not just at home.

It might be helpful to think about why faith-based schools are often considered to be better than non-faith schools. My observation (based on an admittedly small sample) is that many faith schools receive strong "community" support by the members of the church with which they are linked -- support in terms of adults who help with reading and other programs, support in terms of "fetes" and other fundraisers, support in terms of music development opportunities, support in terms of career "role models" to speak at assemblies, etc as well as support for religious instruction, moral discussions, etc. The support comes from many members of the church, not just those who have children who attend the school.

Perhaps if "non-religious" people (to use Wondering's phrase) tried to replicate this sense of community and community support in non-faith schools, there would not be such a gap (or perceived gap) between the quality of "faith" and "non-faith" schools.

The excellent CoE school closest to me (supported by my church and one other) has a majority of Muslim pupils. Spaces are available because many people who live near the school chose to send their children to independent schools. The Muslim parents are very happy for their children to attend a CoE school and embrace the "religious" content of the assemblies and school festivals. They participate actively in church activities (without being "members" of the church) and are very supportive of the vicar, who enjoys a close pastoral relationship with the children. Many have told me they like the moral grounding the children receive at the school, even though the underlying "faith" is different from their own.

Having been educated in a country with secular state schools, I have always been impressed by the positive contributions faith-based schools make to the UK. This country would be morally weaker without them.

Ok so where i live ALL of the schools are C of E ALL of them. Should i drive over five miles for a none faith school?

All of these schools are paid for by my council tax ( highest band) excluding the paltry ten % which are not day to day running costs.

The schools that have amazing results are in the most affluent pockets. It not the faith element that makes them better it's better gene pool, resources, interested parents.

If you go to the churches you will find a high number of pre school aged children, oddly only a couple of school aged children. Did they loose faith...no they faked it. In the three churches in our village the story is the same. This proves it's a sham. Is this the community you speak of?

Community is built around a school, not a faith, your deluded. the only thing religion does is split a community and place children into schools that do not belong. In fact religion is one of the most divisive elements of life. How many billions have died due to wars over religion?

Now just out of interest what would be your thought on means tested schools? By which i mean only parents earning over six figures. Would this be ok?
How about only white children?
Only university educated parents?
Only red hair?
Only an eight bedroom house?
Able bodied?

It's all wrong.

If you wish to practice religion do so at home, feed them whatever crap you believe, that's your perogative. School is a place for education.

Your faith excluding you from a school is a form of discrimination.

justsstartingtothink - there is a lot of hostility towards faith schools. There's been a little bit (not much) in this thread, but out in the community there's a lot, and its often concentrated in areas where there's a lot of competition for school places. People resent the fact that those able to access faith schools have more opportunities than others. They also resent the hoops that need to be jumped through to access the schools, and feel that they are being bribed to go to church just so they can access their local school.

Many religious people recognise that the exclusivity of faith schools is bad for their image and fuels hostility in their communities. If the schools open up to all who want to access them, then they will become less controversial. That is why some Church of England leaders, as well as other church leaders, teaching unions, political groups etc are calling on faith schools to be more open to their local communities.

People who jump in to the debate to air their views that all faith schools should become community schools have the right to do so, but that's not the intention of the Fair Admissions Campaign. There are other campaigns for that.

justsstartingtothink - your point about specialist science schools etc gets to the nub of the argument. Specialist science schools don't discriminate in their admissions. Anyone in their local community can go to them, including people of religious faith. Unless, of course, they are faith schools as well as specialist science schools.

Ironically, my children can't access our two nearest specialist science schools. One of them is for girls only. The other is a Catholic school.

My DH worked out that of the 49 science or engineering specialist schools in London, 21 of them were Voluntary Aided, and therefore unlikely (if they are oversubscribed) to be accessible to people who don't go to church.

Lavenderloves - your points about fair access are strong ones. Shame you had to go and spoil them by being offensive about other people's religious faith. People are much more likely to listen to you don't stick the boot in - you'll just get lots of defensive reactions and your sensible points will be missed.

Sorry you found me offensive, i said you can believe whetever you believe, feed them whatever crap you believe. That crap could be any manner of religion it could also be your beliefs, views, political ideas, racism etc etc. I should have made that clear.

One mans crap is another mans crumble pie.

I'm not sure anyone has linked to the Fair Admissions Campaign website yet so here it is.

Please note that this is not a campaign hostile to religion; it is supported by a wide range of people and organisations including religious ones. It simply wants all state-funded schools in England and Wales to be open equally to all children, without regard to religion or belief.

Can anyone really disagree with that?

Lavenderloves, whatever name you want to give it, and whatever your opinion of it, if it is taught at school (and for the forseeable future it probably will be) then it should be equally accessible to everyone in the local area who wants to have access to it.

BayJay, I thought you were heavily involved in setting up a science specialist free school for 2014? Hope all is going well with that - wont your children go there?

I agree with faith schools. I can't see how you can argue that religion should be practised at home only or are you also planning on getting rid of churches as well?
I can't see how it can be argued that you paid your taxes so don't want them to go to a faith school. I also paid my taxes and I do want then to go to a faith school, as would those parents whose children attend schools and also members of that particular faith.
We live in a country where people are free to practise their faith, this goes hand in hand with schooling. If you don't agree with the faith, you don't have to send your children to a faith school, you have that choice.

You mention 'want' and 'members'. The question of which religion you 'belong' to and how you prove that is complex - and applied differently.

One thing that strikes me is that Catholic schools always prioritise baptised Catholics over others - even over looked after children - irrespective of whether they go to church. Sometimes there is a higher priority for churchgoers, but not always. Yet more selective Church of England schools often prioritise 'practising' Christians without a category for mere 'baptised Christians'. A practising Catholic may still have priority at a CofE school over baptised children of Anglicans who are not churchgoers.

Elsewhere there are e.g. Muslim schools which prioritise members of certain mosques. Members of other mosques have the same chance of getting in as non-Muslims. It's worth looking more closely at admissions policies and comparing them as they vary so widely. It's already been mentioned on this thread that the Oratory is very selective and has few boys on FSM - so why does it prioritise a boy with one Catholic parent who does flower arranging (let's call him Antonio Clegg) over a boy with two Catholic parents who live closer but sometimes miss Mass because they work nights in a factory?

These are some of the issues that should be scrutinised first. Most appeals to the schools adjudicator are from people sympathetic to or believers in a faith who do not qualify on other grounds.

Nobody has even vaguely suggested getting rid of churches. That would be a stupid suggestion.

We pay taxes and we should be able to send our DC's to all state schools. Why exclude children for their parents religion? Nobody has suggesting stopping DCs practising their parents religion.

Maybe we should have atheist schools and ban people who are religious...

Actually, I think I might be on to something

It would be fun deciding what the entrance criteria would be.

The thing is, God, Allah, Messiah, whoever, really wouldn't mind if one of his followers went to a school and learned nothing about religion all day. He really wouldn't.

Of course that's an educated guess...

Stephen Twigg's latest speech, as reported is interesting. He said that:

'All state schools should give priority in admissions to disadvantaged children who qualify for pupil premium payments, as part of an overhaul of the admissions code for maintained schools'.

That would be a really good way of making sure faith schools are not socially selective - faith schools would either have to prioritise any child on FSM who wants a place, or have a quota of community places open to all but prioritised on distance. Either, way, it would be fairer. Church schools were originally set up for the poor - not to be some sort of alternative grammar school for the middle classes.

Yes that might work, is Steven Twigg still in government, I thought he left politics when he lost his seat, sulking? Glad he's back if he has good ideas like this.

you don't have to send your children to a faith school, you have that choice.
Not necessarily. Certainly not if you want one even vaguely local if you live in many rural areas. I have no idea how kids in my village would get to a non-faith primary school if their parents didn't have a car.

SandWitch - yes, I'm one of a group involved in setting up a new community free school with a science specialism in our local area. It's something that's developed out of discussions like this one, and will help to relieve some pressure in our local area, but certainly doesn't change any of the arguments for schools having open admissions. There will still be people on the edge of the new school's catchment area who won't be able to access a science specialism because their local school only admits children of one religion.

Maybe we should have atheist schools and ban people who are religious...
Actually, I think I might be on to something

not really, because what 'atheist' organisations exist tend to be in favour of secularism which means no privilege, no discrimination in any direction. They tend to be in favour of inclusivity and not labelling children. I would never have sent my child to an 'atheist' school!

Pointless -- "atheist" schools already exist. All non-faith schools are "atheist".

Lavender my observation about "community" is not with regard to the parents of children at the school; it's with regard to the support (some) faith schools receive from the community of the church with which the school is affiliated. Not all in fact not most of the members or attendees of the churches I know that have affiliated schools are parents or would-be parents of school children. They are individuals who have faith or wish to have faith -- and/or who enjoy the music, ritual and support found in church services. (As an aside, I do find your language unnecessarily hostile and offensive. I'm sure no one on this thread "feeds their children crap".)

My question was and still is what is it about "faith schools" (in particular CoE schools) that makes them so "good"? My hypothesis was and still is that perhaps the schools are good because they benefit from the support they receive from the local church -- church members (not parents) who devote time to help at assemblies, to read with children, to help with school fairs and celebrations, etc. Perhaps if that level of community support were replicated in non-faith schools (as it undoubtedly is in many cases!), there would not be such a divide, or perception of divide, in the quality of faith and non-faith schools. It could also be that faith-schools put a stronger emphasis on moral education and discipline, both of which are conducive to good education. It is important to think carefully about what distinguishes faith schools from non-faith schools because if you seek to eliminate them without first identifying and replicating what makes them "good", the overall quality of education in this country is likely to suffer. (The Muslim families who I mentioned above as parents of children at my local CoE school, chose the school because it is good and actively encourage and support their children's participation in the "C" aspects of the school because they appreciate the moral teachings, the discipline and, yes, the emphasis on faith).

To the broader question of whether state schools that are also "faith" schools should be required to have an open admissions policy: If faith schools were "open", would it be on the understanding that parents who send their children to the school, regardless of their own faith, are happy for the children to receive a faith-based education? Or would the movement seek effectively to terminate faith schools altogether? If the latter, then there would, of course, be cost implications for the state presumably the state would need to acquire the church-owned buildings or pay rent for them and would have to absorb the costs of the financial contributions currently made by the church (whatever that is) and somehow absorb the pastoral care roles currently provided by the church - none of which is impossible, but those who advocate the termination of faith schools should think carefully about all the implications.

Juststartingtothink: " If faith schools were "open", would it be on the understanding that parents who send their children to the school, regardless of their own faith"

Yes, as I said in an earlier post, most schools these days have Home-School agreements, which encourage parents to declare their support for the school's ethos. If people are actively choosing faith schools, for whatever reason, then of course they should support the ethos of the school. (If they have no choice, then it's a bit different, as they may not wish to sign the agreement, but that's still no excuse for not letting them in).

"what is it about "faith schools" (in particular CoE schools) that makes them so "good"?"

There are many good faith schools and many good community schools. Each one is good for a different combination of reasons - to do with the calibre of the Headteacher, staff, and support from the parent and wider community (in some cases the church community).

If something is 'good', then it should be shared. That's why many religious people are supporting the Fair Admissions Campaign.

Interesting observations, BayJay. Thank you!

"Juststartingtothink: "All non-faith schools are "atheist""

That's not true. Community schools are for the whole community, including people of faith. It's wrong to call them "non-faith schools". They are schools where people of all faiths and none are respected and encouraged to get along with each other.

BayJay -- If some schools are "faith" schools, then the others must be "non-faith", mustn't they? It doesn't mean that "non-faith" schools don't respect and encourage people of faith (just like "faith" schools should respect and encourage people who don't have faith). Perhaps the correct terms are "faith-based" and "non-faith-based" as the point of CoE and other faith schools is, I think, that their ethos-es (or "ethoi", as I've just learned is the correct plural of ethos!) are based on a particular faith. I do think it's correct to say "non-faith-based" schools are "atheist" because, by definition, they do not include faith in God in the ethos of the school. I don't mean the term pejoratively.

I think it was clear that I meant atheist schools EXCLUSIVELY for athiests. Ones where all the religeous students would be excluded. I did not mean community schools.

Yes it is a ridiculous idea but no more ridiculous, in my eyes, as religeous schools that exclude children because of their parents views.

All schools should be secular.