Clegg jnr to go to state-funded comp

[LondonMother]

Just an ordinary state school, after all the talk - he's going to the London Oratory.

Are they still doing their dodgy interviewing, which Ruth Kelly waved through for them when she was Sec of State for Education?

(italics didn't work for me: in between the is a quote from further upthread)

Course the real problem is that all schools aren't as good as each other, and there are insufficient places (in London anyway.)

If any government could seriousl iron out both of these problems then the debate would go away - he'd probably then choose the nearest Catholic school and be done with it.

And since Clegg's in Government, what's he trying to do about the inequalities......?

Banoffee I am against exclusive faith schools but I am not against Catholic Schools, because I understand that some parents are either devoutly Catholic and want their children to be educated in the context of their faith, or culturally Catholic and find the ethos one they want for their children, I have no idea whether Miriam is one or the other, but I respect her right to seek that type of education, and Nick Clegg to be comfortable with it . However it is more about values than indoctrination, I don't know any parents from either category who are naive enough to think that their DCs are going to swallow hook line and sinker the whole dogma, more likely the more you try to force feed the more it will be questioned. I know DSs who went to OS, some very well and if any parents think that by getting them into OS their DSs are not going to party, get drunk, take drugs etc. push at the boundaries , question, along with all the other pupils in West London schools they are also very wrong but I do think there is a underlying thoughtfulness about how they relate to others that sometimes you do not encounter in pupils in non faith schools whose parents, shall we say, have not communicated those values to them.

However limit the extent of faith selection so children are not excluded on the basis of parental faith and ability to fulfil the faith criteria, and introduce banding to ensure a mix of abilities and OS would be an "ordinary state school", albeit a Catholic one, and we could get rid of all the hypocrisy and unfairness.

What Super8 said.... Ya need sharp elbows in my parish to even get on the cleaning/polishing the silver rota? never mind the flower arranging rota?.i think you need a phd or similar to be allowed to take part in anything more ?intellectual? such as liturgy?and you need to be very confident to push yourself into these sometimes unwelcoming groups ?ya gotta be the right kinda catholic. YY Super as I think her obs are SPOT-ON... & both a true and damning inditement of a lot of churches (whether RC or CE) and 'Faith' schools.

As, whereTF is the humanity or Christianity in any of THAT? (Or am I missing something????) Ditto, upthread, the point made re DCs in those estates and DCs with less stability etc - would LOVE to know what the Oratory does in terms of outreach programmes to help enable and thus include THOSE kids? THAT might make it all seem a bit less than a virtually private school largely filled with DCs of non-poor, middle class strategic parenting/'choice' of where live, sharp-elbowed, parents the elite (& seemingly preserved as such by the Head) school it it.

Some of my experiences of people who loudly claim how 'of faith' they are, are some of the least 'Christian' bods have ever met.. Super8's 'sometimes unwelcoming' groups (from those IN Church?) being a pretty good example. I personally am with the posters who have explained why they don't like Faith schools, but think I'd feel a TAD more comfortable with it if they at least ACTED in ways that ARE a bit more Christian - i.e. Oratory reaching out to those who DON'T have the same opps as maybe other DC's do?

'School it IS' - obv. Not 'school it it' ...

I just don't get this thing about Catholic parents needing to educate their children in a school with that ethos. I notice that this desperate need seems to be abandoned where there are non-catholic grammars or the nearest outstanding school is non-faith. They don't reject Oxbridge in favour of some sort of seminary.
Was Clegg looking at a Catholic private school as his alternative? I doubt it, because the best privates in London aren't faith schools. (By my own experience at a convent school, I'd say the very worst privates are Catholic).
If he'd opted for Westminster school as mooted, how would they have coped without this oh-so important Catholic ethos?

"Good schools" or the "School that is best for his DS" is of course a euphemism for "a school with people like us".

That is why this provokes this reaction. He may or may not want catholicism, but it is hard to see why the nearer RC school is not "good" other than it has a greater social mix (which of course often - not always - goes hand in hand with lower results - position in league tables also being a proxy for how MC a school is).

Ditto, upthread, the point made re DCs in those estates and DCs with less stability etc - would LOVE to know what the Oratory does in terms of outreach programmes to help enable and thus include THOSE kids?

E.g. what sort of outreach is The Oratory doing for Traveller children, who are just as likely to be practising Catholics, will have been baptised at the 'right' time, made their first Communion etc.

This post sickens me and reeks of sour grapes. The Clegg boy attends a Catholic primary and has a right to the school. Each of us chooses what is right for our children and hope that they fit the criteria to gain a place. His wife is Catholic, she wanted a Catholic education for their child, there is nothing wrong with that decision. One poster railed against his not looking at ARK Academy - you vultures would have pounced on that one if he got in too. As his wife is a Catholic she probably follows the baptismal rules and church attendance rules required. This is not elitist, it is set out in Vatican II (children should be baptised with in 6 months of birth). Volunteering at the church, is something active parishioners do at all churches, regardless of the faith. The LOS is not elitist, it just cheery picks the most devout Catholics. My son did not get in, despite being a good Catholic we were ranked 314, that is the breaks, I accept that others ranked higher.

To the poster that knocked them for having Spanish names, shame on you. You can criticise Clegg for his politics but not what he names his children.

Would you all have been happy had he gone private? Let's not forget his tax dollars (which are higher than many of us pay) fund the state school system. His family has just as much right to it as anyone. If they meet the criteria so be it.

eh. Parents of other children care, but I'm sure the Church doesn't care one whit about whether or not the parents of the children they accept are truly devotedly Catholic. The Church is happy to get a new generation of devotees and tithers, and the parents get their children the education they want.

Yes, this is the sound of someone who went to Catholic school. My mother was actually very religious, and Catholic up until the point in the 80's when the Church declared that her friends had deserved to die of AIDS because of their own actions. She converted, but I stayed at Catholic school.

The difference is, where I grew up, if you want to attend a religious school, you need to pay fees for it. It is essentially a private school. If you are a member of that religion, you have reduced fees, but it's often still quite expensive. I'm not sure I agree with the system here. Not that it makes any difference what I think. :)

I'd personally like for DS to attend Catholic school, as it's the system I know, if that makes sense. I also like the idea of him learning the religious things I was taught at school (getting that in there before someone tells me to teach him at home- I wouldn't have learnt any of it at home if it were left to that). If it weren't physically awkward to get him to the local Catholic school, I'd do it. And that's not a class thing; our local primary is the one everyone wants their children to attend.

As far as I read the thread, few people are objecting to his sending his son to a Catholic school. The two questions that most of us have raised - why isn't his local Catholic school considered good enough, and how is the one he has chosen open to Catholics who are not wealthy and not 'the right sort'?

You say majurormi that it cherry picks the most devoted Catholics, but they have very few children on FSM. Are the wealthy really more devoted than the poor?

No Majourim, the point is politicians to the left like to talk the talk about how state schools are wonderful and we should all support them, blah, blah, yet when it comes down to it, they do everything they can to elbow their way to get their children to the most exclusive state schools they can and sod the rest of us.

I'm afraid I know plenty of Labour/Lib Deb councillors etc who have done exactly the same. Suddenly, they forget they were atheists, or they forget how much they liked that area: suddenly when the kid is 3 yrs old, they move somewhere with what they perceive to be 'better' schools.

They are hypocrites.

I don't think it is sour grapes.

The state system works on the basis that every child in the UK should be able to attend a school from 4-18 that will enable them to reach their full potential.

Teachers/parents/children in state schools have raft after raft of government policies imposed on them by government that are supposed to be the magic bullet that will enable all schools to do this. (I am thinking of Gove rather than Clegg at this point).

However, we are all supposed to happily believe that class size makes no difference to teaching, and substandard buildings and facilities have no affect on learning. (Here I am thinking of the shortage of primary school places in London and other parts of the country). Teachers are supposed to be able to solve all social problems/teach a class where there isn't a common shared mother tongue/advise on nutrition/gangs/sex ed etc. etc. with no more resources than they had back in the day when all you had to know about discipline was which implement to use, and those who weren't good with letters could work with their hands.

If the education system works, why do politicians always cherry pick their children's school?

I can understand why Nick Clegg sent his child to the Oratory, and I don't see why he should have to send his child to a failing secondary while spending all his time being a governor/raising funds for the PTA/tutoring his children. He has a job.

However, I don't see why anybody else should have to do that either.

N.B Truly SWEAR this really IS what a Vicar (the Vicar who was conducting my Mums' funeral) did yesterday... So on note of oft observed 'less-than-Christian' behaviour, & I don't think that observation is off topic, as suspect is lot of 'un'-Christian behaviour by those who manipulate way into these schools, and then even WITHIN some Churches who feed into those schools (as per Super8 'unwelcoming groups'); here's what this proclaimed Christian did yesterday, half an hour before my beautiful Mumma's funeral?

She had a shit-fit (no other way describe it) at DS1 when he got to church hour before 2.30 service with his (tiny/v discreet but essential) amp for song he was singing/playing his guitar for his beloved Nanny. Family friend already at church rang me to help/speak to vicar. Was now 2pm and I was due to leave with other DS's. Spoke vicar, reminded her she had KNOWN this was happening?; that - funnily enough - & as politely as I could under circs, this REALLY wasn't a great time for issues suddenly appear/me being tied up on phone etc. as: i) had crying child downstairs (DS3/11); ii) had just lost my Mum(??!); iii) I/we HAD to leave NOW for MY MUM'S FUNERAL? (Still cannot quite believe this actually happened - was nuts).

The astounding woman of Christianity Vicar proceeded, like she was on some pre-menstrual roll or something, to THEN rant about "Oh, & ANOTHER thing....", & kept me on phone as she bitched about the Orders of Service; the fact that my BFF was 'performing' (he is well-known/famous, think she overlooked fact he was there simply as best mate/loves our family, & was just singing for/to Mum?); & just on & on & ON until 2.20pm, IE 10 minutes before my Mum's FUNERAL started? And a good 15min. drive away? She, v. literally, made me/us late (& beyond distraught/stressed) for Mumma's funeral - & did so knowingly as I KEPT saying "Please, I HAVE to get off the phone now/we are X miles away?" So, we WERE late for Mumma's funeral (kinda last thing you'd want huh?) & SOLELY due to her? Not remotely 'Christian' as I understand the word?

DS1 did do as planned, and it was beautiful (do please listen, it is just the most beautiful farewell to his beloved Nanny) - soundcloud.com/my-mummas-daughter/shiver-me-timbers - but HIS humanity (& many others) way outstripped the not so lovely Christian Vicar's humanity/'Christian' behaviour.

"Let's not forget his tax dollars (which are higher than many of us pay fund the state school system. His family has just as much right to it as anyone."

The tax dollars of the non-catholic family living right next door to the school also fund church schools, but they are descriminated against when it comes to applying.

And anyway - why is this about the beliefs and values of the parents? It's the child who will be attending the school, not the parents. How is it fair for the non-catholic child who may live right next door to the school, who has NO CHOICE as to their faith or the church going (or otherwise) habits of their parents? All they want is the right to a tax payer funded state education, which is what church schools provide.

There is a Catholic boys' secondary school in the town near me. It's funny how people will come over all religious to get their dds into the girls' Catholic school, which has a good academic reputation, but otoh don't care in the slightest when it comes to their sons, as the boys' school is not considered good.

Anyway, I'm sure Clegg will be out of parliament and into a cushy number elsewhere come 2015 so he has figured that he doesn't need to give a damn whether voters think he's a hypocrite.

well cleggy tested the water and bowed to public opinion

The problem (if you think there is one) is not with the Cleggs deciding to take a perfectly legitimate route open to them to get a place in a selective state school. They meet the criteria, many highly motivated aspirational parents apply to schools with various selective admissions processes.

The problem (if there is one) is with faith schools admissions within the system as a whole, and the London Oratory's own admissions process within that. I find it quite outrageous that admission to any state funded school should rely so heavily on the applicants activities outside the education system. And especially outrageous that admission should rely so heavily on the parents leisure time activities!

This is the basis of the 'back door' selection. Given that once the piety points are added up admission is by random ballot I don't know how else they have a FSM % so much lower than most London schools in areas of mixed demography, or how the % of cohort labelled 'high achievers' is so high compared with other mixed ability schools. It must be the parents with the time and determination and ability to be able to carry out all this flower arranging and silver polishing.
On the other hand, it does give an equal chance to a kid from a devout family living on a council estate in Hackney an equal opportunity to get into a socially / religiously selective school. I wonder how the FSM % of pupils compares with the FSM% of applicants overall ? Are the economically disadvantaged put off applying? I am assuming that catholics are not as a group of higher academic ability and higher earning power than the population as a whole?

Maybe that's the answer!

Anyway, good luck to Clegg Jnr, starting secondary is a big jump for all kids, and most don't have MN poring over the choices of named and identified children.

*People pay lip service to a religion which frankly is a load of medieval superstition and which has presided over the most horrendous mistreatment particularly of women and children - look at the magdelene sisters, the child abuse cover ups, the nonsense spouted about homosexuality.

Yet these parents pay lip service to it so they can get their child into a certain selective school to learn about these values which are obviously so dear to them.

Faith schools are divisive to a community and i don't think they should exist, and I particularly don't think exclusive schools such as the Oratory should exist.*

I agree. The sooner state funded schools based on superstition and magic are banned, the better.

I would be happy to see the State take over all the faith schools but it would be expensive quite honestly. The money isn't there to do it so we have no option but to accept it....unless people want yet another thing to come out if their taxes.

The Bible is based on ancient books and writings....loads for debate there so not all myth and magic.

True. But based on fact, it ain't.

I'm surprised at Miriam being a Cafflic. I was always under the impression she was a feminist.

Woah - Majurormi, you have just utterly proved the point I was making above....

• 'despite being a good Catholic we were ranked...' So as a 'good Catholic', I'm guessing that does/would imply you have certain standards of humanity; tolerance; a deep faith (with all that usually carries...) - right?

• 'This post sickens me and reeks of sour grapes.' Eh? Other people's valid opinions 'sicken' you? And you 'judge' that fact? And worse, 'label' as 'sour grapes'?

• 'The LOS is not elitist, it just cheery [sic] picks the most devout Catholics.' Really? REALLY? Then I'm baffled as to how the Blair boys got in, as they were nowhere near as devout as Ms Clegg is, or indeed as 'devout' as you do genuinely sound and as vile as you unfortunately sound towards others.

• 'One poster railed against his not looking at ARK Academy - you vultures would have pounced on that one if he got in too' ' You VULTURES??? Nice, Majurormi, nice. Only problem with that is I haven't seen any 'vultures' here? Ditto, is a faintly staggering - and presumptive - judgement on others. Yep, uber full of 'faith' and humanity not.

• 'Let's not forget his tax dollars (which are higher than many of us pay) fund the state school system.' Err, as do ALL of ours (and conversely, just as his might be higher than some; others may well be higher than his) 'fund the state school system'. Even people like me who ended up with NO choice but to send my 2 youngest DS's to a private school but de facto STILL 'fund the state school system'. Whatever taxes any of us do or do not pay, that still has NO bearing on the simple fact that ALL of our children should have a right to, and access to, a good education in the state school system?

A system which is broken; fails a vast number of our children; and has been battered by politicians for own political (& VERY non child-centric reasons) for years. And THAT is why people are, legitimately, affronted by those who play the system and get THEIR DCs the education & safety denied to so many other - equally of worth - children. And now worsened by the fact that Clegg reneged on manifesto re Uni tuition fees, which by definition WILL affect the poorest in our soceity hardest, and WILL (and already has) stopped many DCs from going to Uni. Hardly an act of helping social mobility (but NOT one that will in any way affect the Cleggs as they WILL be able to help THEIR DC's); and suspect that too is why people may be affronted at his self-serving behaviour - again a view that any of us IS ENTITLED TO, and just as you are to yours. Although ideally without the judgements; the insults; etc etc ETC.

TBH, the only 'sour grapes' I can detect from your post are your own. Ditto, how a 'devout' Catholic or any normal decent human being believes they can insult - and JUDGE (cast not stones etc.?) - others for voicing their own very valid opinions is just beyond me.

Some is fact based and can be verified to certain times but others such as Genesis certainly not. ...although some have suggested I have no proof it ain't . My feeling is Genesis was written at the time of Exodus when people were writing down their history and legends and myths passed down were written as fact.

Generally though the message I follow is of the New Testament which was about love and compassion for others......and Jesus did not discriminate and say "only love Catholics" etc. this is why I believe there needs to be a healthy mix in schools and they should be state run. Religion should not be a part of the equation.

My DS is in a Catholic school because it was the only school with a place when we moved here...he wasn't Catholic at the time but loves all the smells and bells of the church and is right in there as an altar server. I am thankful to the local Catholic Church who have accepted my DS just as he is (he is autistic) and welcomed him as an altar server. This was his choice and not mine......lots of children in his class are not Catholic and even the Catholic children rarely attend Mass. DS loves it.....but only on a Sunday. Midweek is a bit too much even for him.

The value added scores at LOS are not terrific, anyway.

Jake - the state does pay for the education at faith schools. Though there would be an issue with many of the buildings.

JakeBullet - that's really good to hear and what the Church should be about.