How much of one faith in a non-faith school is okay?

[thehorseandhisboy]

I don't want to start a discussion about religion, but I just want to gauge whether my gut feelings are shared by others.

My children have all attended the same primary school, youngest now in Y6, so I know we haven't got long left and not trying to crate problems.

The school is a very typical, multi-cultural, multi-faith, multi-ethnic non-denominational school in London. Children from lots of different backgrounds, about 1/3 of the school Muslim. Fab - love this about the school.

Previously, the school has recognised and celebrated Eid, Divali, Chinese New Year, Hannuka and civic events like Black History Month etc. Christmas and Easter have been acknowledged in quite low key ways eg end of year performance singing mainly secular Christmas songs, a few carols, chocolate nests at Easter. Fab - no problem.

A new head started earlier this year who is a practicing Christian. My children have had Christian, Muslim, Hindu and aetheist teachers who have been open about their faith/beliefs and interested in and tolerant of others. Fab - living alongside people of faith and being able to ask questions/reflect a huge privilege imvho.

Since the new head started, there has been no acknowledgement of important days for faiths other than Christians, and important events in the civic calendar like Black History month have been ignored. A priest from the local denominational church now leads a Christian assembly once a week. There is much talk about God and Jesus as facts. Representatives from the local church have been invited to events like the Winter Fair (renamed the Christmas fair, of course) to ask for 'contributions'.

The end of term has been something else. Five separate nativities and a Christingle Service (in school) as end of year events. The newsletter has been full of 'Christmas is coming' since November although Divali hadn't even had a mention.

I could go on, but you get the drift...

Some parents spoke and then wrote to the head to express their discomfort with the dominance that Christianity is now taking in the school, and the head's response was to cite the Education Act and suggest that they remove their child from these events.

For a school that has always taken a stance of including all children, this doesn't sit well with me. If you don't want your child to be involved in a nativity or Christingle, they might as well not be at school for the last two weeks of the autumn term, as there have been endless rehearsals etc. Some children are removed from these events, so excluded from end of year shows and events that they used to take part in.

My stance isn't anti-Christian at all; I would feel the same about any faith being imposed so suddenly and extensively and also if an atheist head started and failed to acknowledge faith at all and focused on the solstice etc.

Is this within 'normal range' for a non-denominational school in a very mixed community?

Views please. TIA.

Justajot I'm not sure that that's true, nor an experiment that parents really want to involve their children in tbh.

How many would be 'enough'? A number of parents have voiced their concerns since the summer term, some have asked for their children to be withdrawn from these assemblies/Christmas events and the head has continued to take a 'my way or the highway' approach and indeed increased the Christianity in the school.

That's why I wrote directly to the Chair of Governors - the head has no interest in anyone else's opinion or point of view and a bit of an empathy by-pass.

And in all honestly, I suppose that I feel after years of having children who are part of this lovely, diverse community, why should the community change to accommodate her religious beliefs? Why should children have to be withdrawn from events that they've participated in for years? Why can't she just contain her faith beliefs to her home, rather than bring them into work?

Anyway, thanks for all the responses. I'm relieved that my gut instinct was right, but actually really sad that this is creating divisions and tension in the school community and has the potential to create much more.

how awful that sounds OP. One of the great joys of teaching in London primary Schools was the inclusivity of religion and culture that most schools strived for and shared. Does your LA have an interfaith RE commitee who have worked out an RE curriculum for all schools in the borough to follow. I know ours did, though whether it is still in existence I couldn't say, it's harder now because LA s have done away with advisory teacher roles to a greater extent, but I wonder if Re being such a sensitive subject it still has advisory people.

Your HT sounds very narrow minded, what is her problem with Black History Month for goodness sake hardly a bone of religious contention I should think.

Is it her first headship, it sounds like the sort of "stamping my authority " thing that insecure inexperienced heads do, or was she previously in a mono cultural church school and is finding a multi faith multi cultural school threatening (hard to believe, I would have thought that sort of ignorance disappeared in the eighties, in London anyway)

Legally he is correct although lots of heads ignore it or apply a context based approach.

Thanks for all the responses - an update.

I received a reply from the Chair of Governors who said that he'd speak to the Head. The Governors went into the school two days after I sent the letter and there was a meeting with the teaching staff.

viques yes there is a borough wide RE syllabus which it transpires she stopped the teaching of in September, taking the view that the necessary elements were covered in assembly.

RE is now back in the curriculum, Monday's assembly was about Hannukah. The Head was puce with outrage when she spoke to me last week.

Not a first headship, no. She lives outside London and has what another parent called a missionary approach to civilising us heathens.

The Muslim community weren't aware of the Priest going on (which makes me concerned re safeguarding etc that their children didn't tell their parents because they know that they'd disapprove) but now are and many are very shocked and upset that this has happened before their eyes in a school where their children were always included and their faith respected.

So, definitely worthwhile raising concerns about, and I think they'll be much closer scrutiny of the curriculum/newsletters/twitter feed by the governing body.

Well done you for raising it. It makes me very angry to realise that after a lifetime of pushing for equality and the recognition of minority children in schools someone could come in and behave in such a discriminatory and negative way.

Reminds me of when I started a new job in the 90s and did a book audit of the library and classroom books. There were 10books in the whole school , then a two form entry primary, that featured (in a very desultory way) children whose skins were not white. I pointed this out to the head and deputy who told me that it didn't matter because the children on the school who were from ethnic minorities were either middle class and so had their own books at home or came from outside the catchment area so quote " weren't technically OUR children".

It is reasonable to assume any regular visitor to the school is checked re safeguarding. It would be a serious issue if an adult visiting and being with children wasn’t checked. Governors have to be. It’s not really a safeguarding issue if the school is following procedures. Do you have evidence that they are not getting checks done? If so, whistle blow. If not, you assume they are following procedures.

It’s important that the school teaches the agreed RE curriculum. They have no choice and RE isn’t optional or one belief only. Only the daily act of worship is broadly Christian.

Regarding the appointment of the Head: the Governors absolutely should have asked about, and expected evidence of, how this head would work in a multi cultural school. The school community and parents are definitely asked about at interview (by competent governors). They want their vision and strategy implemented - don’t they?

It’s also not acceptable for the governors to say they don’t know what’s going on. It’s their job to know the agreed curriculum is being taught. They should have an overview of all subjects in the curriculum for the school and a Head is expected to deliver the agreed curriculum, not an alternative one.

At GB meetings (teaching and learning committee) the Head should give details of the curriculum and governors can ask questions and raise issues. They should also visit the school and do learning walks to see what’s going on. They cannot know their school unless they do. They clearly are not doing this and that’s remiss of them.

I’m glad they are stepping up now and remember, they set the ethos and vision for the school. It is their job to know if it’s been changed to exclude children. It could be difficult to reinstate everything. Black history month might not be suitable for all year groups for example so choose your battles.

BubblesBuddy my point about safeguarding wasn't visitors to the school not being DBS checked (I'm sure that they are), but a more general one that good safeguarding is founded on children feeling that they belong, are included, that their voice matters and that adults understand and respect them.

To me, excluding children from being part of their school community eg every end of year production, any assembly where God is mentioned, not having their religion discussed and celebrated undermines this foundation.

What's not suitable about Black History Month for everyone? My children certainly covered Rosa Parks, basics of civil rights movement and more during EYFS and KS1. Martin Luther King, Jesse Owens etc... Fiola Benjamin came into the school and spoke about Windrush etc.

If Black History isn't suitable for all year groups, white history certainly isn't!

As someone involved in non faith academies and also faith maintained schools.

Both do black history month, diversity, Diwali and other celebrations.
Both cover everyone is the same yet different, respect for all faiths, equality and have speakers and input from other faiths. Some are Sanctuary schools and some are not.

There is little difference between the requirements of either except expecting children to know how a biblical text is applied.

In both types of school the driving focus is that they are a school first.

The difference in HT interviews is a faith element and questions around this but this is not a faith school.

I think you have a rogue Head Teacher who has their own agenda or is misguided about what her job is?

I have a faith and I would still raise an issue if I had chosen a non faith school for my child and it changed without discussion.

Very much rogue Head Teacher with her own agenda and very authoritarian leadership style.

I think the governing body will keep a closer eye on what's happening in school, and a number of other parents now feel more empowered to voice their concerns, so I hope that things will improve.

Could you contact a few faith leaders of other religions in your neighbourhood that could then contact the school? Have your DC and other pupils put in a request? It's never to early to be an activist.

BTW, what does Black History Month have to do with any religion, CofE or other?

The national secular society have some really good advice on this.

Recently they have put a pod cast on their site from a couple in almost the exact same position. New head and the school became an academy as part of a Christian academy chain. link here www.secularism.org.uk/podcast.html

They can quote the education act all they want, you can quote the equality act back at them.

Yes you can remove your child, but from what I remember the family then had to fight for their children to be given alternative work to do.

I imagine most of the teachers are not happy, for a certain kind of Christian this is a war, one they intend to win.

www.secularism.org.uk/

BTW, what does Black History Month have to do with any religion, CofE or other?

Some, and I stress some, evangelical Christians believe in separation of the races and that slavery was white people offering a home and work to the inferior group.

Celebrating the achievements of black people does not fit this agenda.

Thanks Blair for bringing your faith agenda into all schools - that's going well

I think that's a complete misunderstanding of what happened. Previously schools had to have an act of Christian worship (every day, I think). The amended guidance is so wooly it allows schools to ignore the religious element or use another faith.

Back to the point: YANBU if it's as you describe. As PPs have said, the only people who could change this are govenors.

I think there is a risk of too many vague complaints looking like you just don't like the head. Focus on the reduction of diversity and the dropping of non-christian events.

Arguably the HT is applying the guidance quite correctly so you need to be razor sharp about what the unarguable, specific negatives have been and how to address them.

Some, and I stress some, evangelical Christians believe in separation of the races and that slavery was white people offering a home and work to the inferior group. Celebrating the achievements of black people does not fit this agenda.

Not many of those nutters in the UK. I think OP feels this head has reduced diversity of offer across a range of cultural/religious events rather than some great malice.

for a certain kind of Christian this is a war, one they intend to win.

Engaging with the school in those terms is just counter productive.

Jossina Black History month is an important event in the civic calendar. We live in an area with a huge black and other ethnic minority population; it has always been celebrated at the school before.

donquixote as I've already said, I wrote to the governors being very clear about what has been added to the school calendar and what has been taken out. The governors went into the school two days after I sent my letter, met with the teachers and the curriculum suddenly included Divali and Hannukah for the first time this term.

Blair was a vocal advocate of faith schools and the increasing of faith-based education, although he acknowledged in recent years that this didn't contribute to community cohesion and left some children very vulnerable to fundamentalist teaching.

My letter was indeed razor sharp; I pointed out that the school had clearly been meeting the requirements of the Education Act previously, so the changes weren't to address deficits in previous practice.

I didn't say or imply anything negative about Christianity. The issue is the excessive focus on one faith, with no acknowledgement of others, atheism and ignoring key dates in the civic calendar.

I hope that the governors will continue to keep a closer eye on the school calendar and the teaching of religion.

@thehorseandhisboy I get that, but what I was wondering why your new super Christian head decided to bin celebrating it. That says that they are more in the lane of hate than Christianity.

I don't think she's motivated by hate. Ego, arrogance and ignorance yes, but not hate.

She doesn't live in this area, and my guess is that has no understanding of or interest in the lives and histories of people who do, and what is important to us.

What’s of interest to you isn’t necessarily what’s taught in school. It’s the agreed curriculum that’s taught. So add ons like black history month are not mandatory. They might be desirable. You cannot tell the school not to teach “white” history if that is the curriculum. An agreed syllabus will be taught and you should expect it to cover suitable topics. However it’s not your choice of staying white or black history is to be covered or not covered. You have no role in this.

If the governors have approved the curriculum, they have approved what is taught. It should be available on the school web site. If the head has changed it, the Governors should be checking and following that up. They appear to have done this after your complaint.

FYI - it isn’t desirable to teach about an ethnic history (whose ethnicity?) or way of life just because parents (just the vocal ones?) in a locality demand it. Just because someone isn’t from the neighbourhood doesn’t mean they cannot be a good head. Not defending the head but it comes across that the head “isn’t one of us” so must be useless. A community shouldn’t say they only want someone like them to teach what they want - if this can be defined of course.

Safeguarding has a specific meaning in schools. It’s not what you describe. It’s what I described. Wellbeing or community cohesion would be a better term for what you describe.

Teaching children of the achievements of people "like them" is generally seen as a good thing. I trained to teach in a diverse area of the UK (not London) and there was a lot of emphasis on this and showing children that my subject was for people of all races/religions/backgrounds, not just white people/white men.

I think it's pretty accepted that diverse schools acknowledge Black History Month in some way and this is seen as a good thing. The actual content of the primary history curriculum is very woolly, and there are many places Black History could fit in.

The primary history curriculum also specifically says that children should be taught about at least one Non-European civilization. I'd be interested to know where this head fits this into the curriculum.

Anyway, OP, I agree that this doesn't sound like a great direction for the school to be going in, and I am glad the governors are now looking into it.

What about Chinese history? Or Japanese history? Vietnamese history or Sri Lankan history? Why is it some "histories" are more important than others? This is why lots of schools choose their non European civilisation to the Maya, for example. However, what is taught in history is down to the school within the national curriculum. It should not be down to noisy groups of parents and demands for "their" history.

Bubbles the point about Black History is that it has been celebrated by many civic institutions in the UK during October since 1987 when it was initiated by the then GLC.

Our school is in an area very well known for its Black activist history and is in one of the most ethnically diverse postcodes in the UK. BHM has always been celebrated in the school (and every other local school as well as other civic institutions). It being ignored, in the context of also ignoring important days and events for faiths other than Christianity was quite a dramatic gesture.

One of the characteristics - and strengths - of the school is the diversity of its families. As SansaSnark says, acknowledging this in the day to day running of the school and its calendar is generally seen as a good thing.

And is it absolutely about safeguarding. Safeguarding starts with children feeling like they belong, they are accepted for who they are, that they can trust the adults around them and that their voice matters. Not covering their faiths in RE or assemblies (the Head had stopped the teaching of RE, which as I said up thread the governors reinstated immediately) doesn't do this, quite the opposite.

Once I had decided to raise my concerns (which as you say were taken very seriously suggesting that parents do indeed have a role), I spoke to a couple of Muslim parents. Their children hadn't told them about the Priest-led assemblies because they knew that they'd disapprove. This action had put the children in the position of 'keeping secrets' which is the very antithesis of effective safeguarding. The focus on Christianity and the exclusion of other faiths has undermined parents' trust in the school - again, this is the antithesis of safeguarding.

My point about the Head being from outside London is what another parent described as her 'missionary' approach to imposing her own values and faith, whilst ignoring the value of whatever has been established and created over many years.

I don't care where the Head lives, but I do care about the tensions and divisions that she has created in the school community.

BTW, Black History is only 'my' history in as much as it's everyone else's.

Your version of safeguarding isn’t what is understood by most people. You are attaching it to your own views. You still don’t seem to understand that schools cannot celebrate everyone’s point of view and religion and history. You are vocal about yours but others don’t necessarily own it. Personally I think focusing on a few events and ignoring others is wrong and choices have to be made. Im not entirely sure black activism is what I would want my DC to celebrate in primary school. I’m way more interested in the achievements of all children.

I didn’t say you had no role but you have chosen to have a vocal role. What about everyone else? That’s the problem with parent power. It’s selective. Perhaps the Muslim Parents don’t ask their DC about school very much. Your sample is very small and the link to safeguarding is extreme to say the least.

The school has previously done a very good job of celebrating all world faiths and important civic and historical events, as do most schools in London.

No-one has asked the school to do anything that is hasn't been doing very well for years.

As I said up thread, saying that Black history isn't important or appropriate is a bizarre view to take, incredibly narrow minded, ignorant and regressive. If you can't understand why from the comments on this thread, I honestly can't be bothered to explain it to you any further.

A number of parents from all sorts of backgrounds have expressed concerns to the school. Many are in the early stages of learning English, so less confident but their viewpoints no less valid.

Expecting a school not to put children in the position of keeping secrets isn't an extreme view of safeguarding - it's key to upholding its principles.

Thankfully, your views aren't shared by the governing body who responded very quickly and assertively to my concerns.

Our school (non religious) has to teach the county agreed RE syllabus which is very Christian heavy - 4 out of 6 terms - and bible based. We have no choice.

Our school has a the same RE syllabus as the rest of the borough which is neither Christian heavy or bible-based.