Faith schools to become MORE selective ...

[jailhouserock]

See the original thread in the In the News section for details, but the Gvt is planning to remove the 50% faith admissions cap on new faith academies.

jailhouserock that's a very good explanation, thank you.

Iv e said strawman because its quite obvious that that's what it was. Repeatedly putting up increasingly ridiculous strawman arguments is just very tiresome.

So the name of thus school you were incapable of writing on the application form you managed to write a different school on is?

I applied to my son's local schools. The top 3 local schools are all CoE. We are non practising Hindus. We didn't stand a chance of getting in.
i think it is disgraceful that in this day and age, I cannot send my son to the best local school because of the god he does (or does not) worship.

He got into a terrible school several miles away. So we went private. And there is a thread running about how all private school children should be banned from grammar schools. Wonderful. Let's have blatant religious discrimination at primary level, and then ban kids whose parents are spending money to try and secure the best education they can (we are fortunate we can afford it, but it is a stretch) because he was discriminated against because of his religion.

How can the UK have state sanctioned and state funded institutionalised religious discrimination in 2016?!

Also, we live in London because I WORK in London. My husband works in London. Where would you like us to live?!

Do you think your constant badgering is adding anything to this thread t4nut?

Yes I think so. Comments here have ranged from the I'll informed to the ludicrous (ie incapability to write a school name on a form).

Its not discrimination, its not unfair, its the usual mumsnet parade of self entitlement.

Don't get me started on raising kids in London - tantamount to child abuse.

" Its not discrimination, "

obviously it is discrimination if a state school sets exclusive admission rules.

No. A faith school is permitted to set admissions in line with the code. The code is a legally enforceable document.

Faith based schools do not set admissions preventing or denying places. They prioritise those of the faith.

There are those who lack the intellectual capacity to grasp this, and squeal unfair because they didn't get what they wanted.

There is no need to be nasty t4nut now is there?
Any school that prioritises those of one faith is , ergo, being discriminatory.
Surely you can understand this?

I do not 'lack intellectual capacity' thank you, nor do I 'squeal'. there is no need to address other people in this way.

Incorrect, and its been explained over and over. Does a girls single sex school discriminate against boys? Does a school admitting a sibling discriminate against only children?

Its nonsense. Faith schools do not prevent anyone from applying, or being admitted in line with the admissions code.

And by your logic all schools that have admission criteria that prioritise one over another are discriminating ergo all schools are discriminating.

Need a little more intellectual rigour in your argument

incapability to write a school name on a form

No, she resisted your badgering to name the school. The fact you don't believe her is irrelevant.

And it's "inability", btw.

"Its nonsense. Faith schools do not prevent anyone from applying, or being admitted in line with the admissions code"

People of faith have a choice of a third more state funded schools than other people. A child can live next door to a school and not get a place because a child from a family of faith living 5 miles away has taken it.
Is that fair?

" Faith schools do not prevent anyone from applying, or being admitted in line with the admissions code."

oh do be brief, you know very well that when a non Catholic child applies to a Catholic school there is more or less zero chance of them getting a place. Why should a child be offered a better education than others just because a man in a frock has splashed water on their head?

by the way t4nut there is nothing wrong with my intellect.
your personality on the other hand could probably use some work.

oh do be brief

Anonrandomuserofmanynumbers.

Its your assumption its better. And its your assumption noone gets in. As I said above my local catholic school is about 50% faith admissions - and that includes Sikh etc.

My statement stands.

no its not an assumption. Some people in my family have attended Catholic schools. In my opinion they are just wrong. I am entitled to an opinion t4nut, thank you.

Badgering, definitely.

You may not believe her story, but calling someone a liar with no evidence is pretty low.

A child can live next door to a school and not get a place because a child from a family of faith living 5 miles away has taken it. Is that fair?

You could put in that sentence any admission criteria. The child living next door to the school can lose out to LAC, siblings, etc. I would say it is no more unfair than that. You could use this argument for any admission criteria of which you disapprove.

As I said above my local catholic school is about 50% faith admissions

As t4nut indicates, faith schools vary. Some, usually in areas where there is a shortage of places at good schools, tend to fill up with faith applicants unless they reserve some places for non-faith applicants (which is unheard of for Catholic schools but happens at quite a lot of CofE schools). Others regularly admit quite a high proportion of non-faith applicants.

calling someone a liar with no evidence is pretty low

I would not call her a liar but she is at the very least mistaken. In the normal admissions round you apply to faith schools through the LA in the same way you apply to any other school. She could apply to her local faith school and it would have been considered. That doesn't mean she would have got a place, of course.

Having been blatantly lied to by an admissions officer for a local faith school who said "we set the admissions, the LA has no input, so you need to fill in this form right now at Open Evening to get a place" I can see how some schools may do their best to give the impression that their individual forms are the only way to apply.
I knew she was lying, I questioned her politely about it but she stuck to that line. It's broadly true, I suppose, in that the Governing Body set the admissions criteria, but the spin she put on it was that applications from children of that faith had steadily risen over recent years and we'd better get in quick (as a non practising family of a different faith).

You could put in that sentence any admission criteria. The child living next door to the school can lose out to LAC, siblings, etc. I would say it is no more unfair than that. You could use this argument for any admission criteria of which you disapprove

Really? So being a Christian is a disadvantage that need to be redressed by preferential treatment- like being in Local Authority care?

I think most applicants to religious schools would accept the logic of losing out on a place to a child who is in LA care.

Less hard to accept would be a child in LA care who is not religious losing out to a child in LA care who is religious. You'd think a Christian school would not discriminate when it came to children who are unable to live with their birth families.

Really? So being a Christian is a disadvantage that need to be redressed by preferential treatment- like being in Local Authority care

No, having a faith is not a disadvantage but neither are several other things that are used to give priority in admission arrangements. You could equally argue that having a sibling is not a disadvantage and therefore siblings should not be given priority. Your argument essentially is that you don't like selection on faith grounds. If you want to make an objective case that selection on faith grounds is bad you need to come up with an argument that could not be used against other admission criteria.

I am not particularly disagreeing with you. I don't feel strongly about it but would be happier if there was no prioritisation on faith grounds, although I recognise this is unlikely to happen due to the cost to the taxpayer. However, if you want to persuade people you need a stronger case than the one you are putting forward. Right now your case is little more than your personal dislike for prioritisation on faith grounds. You have yet to put forward an argument that shows prioritisation on faith grounds is any worse than other forms of prioritisation used in admission criteria.