Faith schools (again...)

[fourcorneredcircle]

Oratory School

So, If you follow this board you've probably noticed I'm a teacher and in the interests of not being caused of of pushing an agenda I will say now that while I'm not vehemently against any schools (except probably free schools) I have always been uncomfortable with the way that Faith schools define religious observance and the effect this has on families who observe but can't fit arbitrary rules on quantity or quality of observance.

I have always said that the 'rules' often benefited white middle class parents above all other groups - I'm glad that such a well known school has been caught out for this.

Am I being overly optimistic to hope that this might be the kick up the backside up faith selective education needs?!

*accused

Agree completely.

My local faith school is in a deprived area and there are large number of working class immigrant family.

It's difficult not to agree with you. However, as a Christian and a Church member, I know that most families who come to church regularly will be involved in activities to do with the church, its upkeep, social activities, help in the community (food bank, night shelter, visits to the elderly, etc) and yes, I know it's taboo nowadays, but will give money to the church. Our church is linked to a primary school and some families just come to church once a month and to hope and get their child in the school, and do not participate in church life at all. But the school is so oversubscribed (over 150 applicants for 30 places) that only families who come more often will get in (except looked after children). Then it's in order of catchment.

And yes, the church is working very hard to have many services, one on Saturday evening, two on Sunday morning, most with nursery church and Sunday school, and twice during weekdays, to try and accommodate working parents, those working shifts etc.

And yes it is mostly middle class, but our local area is middle class.

And no, it's not overwhelmingly white, I think it's 26% either mixed race or of other ethnic groups. Most have English as a first language but that's also representative of our local community.

I think that the article is superficial, and doesn't give enough details. THe example of flower arranging is petty. They could have mentioned any other work in the community.

This ruling will not affect the vast majority of faith schools that simply require regular attendance at worship. The London Oratory has been prevented from using factors such as singing in the choir, altar serving, flower arranging, visiting the sick, etc. as part of their admission criteria. Very few faith schools have ever used such criteria.

Prh is right that most faith school admissions policies aren't as extreme as the Oratory's (which is based on strict compliance with Canon Law), but I think the publicity around this judgement is all part of a general wake-up call on faith school admissions, and their impact on socio-economic and racial segregation.

The issues have been discussed at length in this other thread.

I think the publicity around this judgement is all part of a general wake-up call on faith school admissions, and their impact on socio-economic and racial segregation.

we can hope anyway... thanks for directing me to the other board. Interesting reading.

I take chillysundays' comments on board that faith schools can indeed be in deprived areas and that they do perhaps represent the local community but I'm afraid I cannot agree with you rocketjam that the things you list as being the best way to decide a child's educational future. Flower arranging may well be petty but it's still there plain as day - is it ok to let one child in over another because one of their parents has time to arrange flowers? Really? If by work in the community you mean the food bank, night shelter, visits to the elderly, etc. why is that not admissible for a non faith child?

I just don't feel that in the twenty-first century you should be able to buy your way in to a certain education by following one religion over another or by presenting yourself as the most worthy follower above a list of other supposedly equally believing candidates by virtue of singing in a choir, flower arranging or helping at a food bank.

If I owned a shop which said it was only for one religion and that to prove it you had to jump to arbitrary hoops I'd be breaking the law, wouldn't I?!

Faith schools and religious organisations have specific exemptions from parts of the Equality Act (as do various other bodies).

No, you can't get priority for a school by singing in a choir, etc. However, faith schools are allowed to prioritise on faith grounds. This is usually based on regular attendance at worship.

I suppose I just don't feel they (nor any other organisation) should have exemptions.

The oratory school was using criteria such as flower arranging for the church (although choir singing isn't mentioned) as a way of demonstrating spiritual suitability - which is why they've had their wrists slapped. I know it's supposed to be based on regular attendance.

I think faith is a private matter and impossible to measure (I'm of no faith myself so that's pretty easy to judge…)

If you must have faith admissions then you cannot have such a complicated scale of faith such as the one the Oratory uses. It must be baptism and then distance. It's a crazy situation when only 8 boys from Fulham & Hammersmith got into the school. I've a friend who describes her children's primary in flaming Twickenham (i.e. miles away) as a feeder for the Oratory and it sends more than the whole borough in which it's situated. Are they really more religious in Twickenham? They're certainly posher.

It's been said before that wherever you have selection you get what 'a drift to posh'. That's because where you have complicated admissions you're not going to get, for example, the chaotic, the children of substance abusers, recent immigrants, travellers etc.

I know the Birmingham schools weren't faith schools, but I do hope that the scandal will weaken the whole commitment to religious segregation that we have in this country.

I'm genuinely optimistic that faith schools will eventually have to be open, or at least 50% open in their admissions. I really think it will happen and this is a good thing.

Any new academy or free school designated as a faith school must allocate at least 50% of its places without reference to faith. Some existing faith schools already allocate a percentage of their places without reference to faith. CofE schools generally seem receptive to this idea (although I'm sure there are exceptions). Unfortunately the Roman Catholic church is dead against it. There are a small number of schools attached to other faiths. I've no idea what their attitude is to restricting the percentage of places allocated on faith grounds.

fourcorneredcircle, I understand your point, however if you are part of a church you do make time. And yes, that does include cleaning the church, make it look special for important occasions, looking after the garden and church grounds, as well as the many community services that many church members are involved with. It's a question of priority. Believe it or not, some people go to church and are involved in church life because they actually feel it's part of their faith, not just to get their children in a specific school.

rocket, yes, some people do. But should that give them higher priority in school admissions? Many people who belong to the church feel uncomfortable about that.

I've two questions, Rocket.

If people do such things (cleaning etc) as its own reward rather than as a way of gaining priority in admissions, then presumably they'd be happy to give up that privilege.

Secondly, is there anything in Jesus' teachings to suggest that someone with the free time to do such things is actually more godly than, say, the single parent working all hours to support their family. The bible seems pretty down on rich people and yet the oratory admissions have conspired to give it an intake substantially wealthier than surrounding schools.

rocket I'm not doubting people want to make that time - that's their choice but as others have said that extra time shouldn't count towards their child's admission to whichever school - some parents just don't have the time to give. It's so unfair.

I think that just as many people feel uncomfortable with families who attend church just to get children in the school - people who may - or may not - sit at the back and fiddle with their mobile phones throughout the service, speak to nobody, don't get involved in anything, don't participate in any aspects of church life and most of all, seem to have very little respect for people around them who have some level of faith and for whom a church service is important.

Playfortoday - I don't get the point of your first question. So people who are actually involved in church life and have been involved in church life for years, and who would prefer for their child to receive an education with an ethos in line with their belief, should not apply to the faith school in question? Why would they do that?

As for your second question, I think that yes, statistical data shows that people who send their children to faith schools have a higher income. And this is a very serious issue, I think that faith schools should look at this and try to find where they go wrong.

But your first question is nonsense.

The point is with the example in question, that the school admission rules have proven to be wrong and illegal.

I'm not saying you shouldn't apply to a faith school, I'm saying that those who clean shouldn't expect special admissions treatment because of it. You yourself said you don't do it to get your children into a school, you do because of wholly separate motivations. In which case, then there's no issue with separating such duties from admissions.

Which I think you agree with anyway from your last sentence, that you recognise the validity if the censure the Oratory received.

I my 2 eldest have both been provided education when we have been in most difficault times. I was at my lowest and poorest living in a womans refugue and came from a working class family anyway. they gave my children a brilliant education with morals and ambition to excell.
since being in that situation i have remarried into middle class and my youngest has been to private school however her school has gone into liquidation and i am again seeking refuge for her at a catholic school(which will be a first) for me i feel the schools are normally a good standard and offer good morals and life lessons for children. its not hard to get into a church school you just have to have faith. i believe having faith is what makes these schools so good. you may crisisise i really dont care .. this is just of my oppinion... which everyone is intitled too..

good morals

So do you think that non-faith schools teach bad morals or are they just immoral?

Are all atheists immoral and catholics moral - I think you might find a few newspaper articles to the contrary...

Yes, everyone is entitled to an opinion but not all opinions are very well formed and could do with a little harsh daylight shone on them.

mummabears: "its not hard to get into a church school you just have to have faith"

That's not true. You don't have to have faith, because faith isn't measurable. Instead, you have to meet various faith criteria, such as regular mass attendance. People can, and do, meet those criteria whether they have faith or not.

The process is coercive - it encourages people to increase their church attendance in order to gain an advantage in the school system. That is wrong. Many people of faith recognise that. Many people whose children attend faith schools also recognise that. However, it is the system that is wrong, not the parents who try to make the best of it.

Good luck to the parent who tries to get their child into the Oratory on faith alone. It's exactly people like you, mummabears, when you were at your lowest, who are excluded by the complicated admissions procedures.

My old childminder was originally refused a place at the local faith school for her youngest child despite her older child being at the school because they missed Sunday mass once a month when she was doing respite care for an autistic child and her husband was working shifts

There are a small number of schools attached to other faiths. I've no idea what their attitude is to restricting the percentage of places allocated on faith grounds. (prh47bridge)

Well, Tauheedul Girls Muslims school has an admissions policy that is very similar to an RC school prioritising Muslim girls (from particular mosques in the town) over all others. Like RC schools, even looked after children are segregated into Muslim and non-Muslim, and siblings of former pupils are prioritised too. The boys' free school they have opened does not have a single non-Muslim pupil so the 50% cap is tokenistic. But this school does also prioritise the same particular mosques and it has something like 90% of Indian origin (the mosques are associated with a Gujerati-speakng Indian community) despite the fact that the majority of Blackburn Muslims are of Pakistani heritage.

Before a <a class="break-all" href="http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110218204125/www.schoolsadjudicator.gov.uk/upload/ADA001395%20Tauheedul.doc" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">schools adjudicator ruling the girls school also stipulated that parents had to be 'members' of the mosques, but only men can be members so that would have discriminated against widows. I don't know how members are accepted but I believe they are expected to donate 10% of their income so it could be that these are relatively middle class families too.

fourcorneredcircle - I suppose I just don't feel they (nor any other organisation) should have exemptions.

Do you include Grammar Schools/Super selectives in this?

Mumtryingherbest, even grammar schools don't have exemptions from the Equality Act.

However many people are against grammar schools' selective admissions policies too. That's a separate debate, well covered on other threads.