"Funded by the church" is just a joke it's only the tax breaks they get that enable them to fund anything...
Load of shite.
What I mean to say is that going to a state school instead of a church school doesn't mean that kids don't get any kind of religious education. RE is a compulsory subject in state funded schools, though parents have a right to withdraw their kids. So I wouldn't say my statement was plain wrong.
What I mean to say is that going to a state school instead of a church school doesn't mean that kids don't get any kind of religious education. RE is a compulsory subject in state funded schools, though parents have a right to withdraw their kids. So I wouldn't say my statement was plain wrong.
That's education *about* religion, not education *in* religion. I had education *in* religion at Sunday School, where they taught me about the bible and stuff like that, how to be a christian etc. I had education *about* religion in RE, and not just Christianity, we learnt about the teachings of various religions.
What is wrong about church schools is that essentially they are selecting a particular group of people, and saying 'the state should fund schools just for these people'. So for those people, they have a choice of a larger number of schools than people who don't subscribe to that belief.
Even ignoring the religious discrimination, which at least they are legally supposed to be allowed to do, they also blatantly do select pupils based on social factors (which is supposed not to happen) - by doing things like interviewing parents of pupils - if you look at the statistics for normal state schools vs religious schools, it is incredibly stark how much they socially exclude people - they let in far fewer poor people - if you look at free school meals (the most common indicator used to define 'poor' children, in normal schools 20% of pupils are getting them vs about 10% for most religious schools.
The other interesting thing is that once you take into account the relative affluence and social standing of their intake, religious state schools don't actually get better results than non-religious ones, it is just that they exclude poor people who are less likely to get better results. The weird thing about that statistic being that even given their selective nature and exclusion of poor people, the richer people let in don't actually perform better than they would at any other school, meaning that sending your kid to a religious school in search of good grades is less of an advantage than some would think.
indeed teaching religion and teaching about religion are two very different things
The other interesting thing is that once you take into account the relative affluence and social standing of their intake, religious state schools don't actually get better results than non-religious ones, it is just that they exclude poor people who are less likely to get better results
Indeed which is why Goves new Baccaluureate has been bought in, because the schools with poor kids were getting too high up the league tables, same as why the CVA inst used much either, then the Grammar and selective schools would be exposed for thr frauds they are!
I'd still like to know ..
Why are you trying to get them into this school anyway? You don't like its policy and practices. So why do you want your kid to go there?
Does a primary school child understand the difference? I wouldn't have thought so myself. And once they've been taught about religion, then have daily "collective worship" in school, doesn't it all add up to pretty much the same thing?
, then have daily "collective worship"
doesnt happen in my school
I've worked in a Church of England Voluntary Aided school in the South West and I have no religious interests what-so-ever. Intake is 50% CofE, 25% other religions inc other christian variations, 25% open intake. It does well in the league tables and is a generally nice place to work - and I have worked in the complete opposite school in the tables.
The pupils do have to attend a set number of religious services per week but I'll be honest they aren't that different from normal assemblies except they have a prayer at the end. What's more the resident vicar is fully aware that whilst the pupils may come from a religious background they are still in the process of making up their own minds. This leads to an atmosphere where religion and belief can be openly discussed. I have even had a conversation with pupils about having to go to church to get into the school and then they stop once in!
What I'm trying to say is that IME religious schools are not about indoctrination that takes place in the home!
Posted 6 hours ago # Report-PostGW - Member
[naive]Don't forget, all schools have to teach religion in some form, so sending them to one school or another makes no difference in that respect.[/naive]
You honestly think a Catholic School teaches religion exactly the same as a non denomination/religious School? or a teacher with firm religious beliefs the same as an athiest/agnostic Teacher?Posted 6 hours ago # woody2000 - Member
GW - care to expand on that? It's certainly true, so what's the problem?
of course not 😕Posted 6 hours ago # Report-Postmarcus - Member
GW - Are you Muslim
yep, for example mine when in P1 (4yr old) had serious issues with a teacher teaching christianity as FACT and I had to go in and sort it out. (and this is in a non-religious state schoolwoody2000 - Member
Does a primary school child understand the difference?
of course not 😕I wouldn't have thought so myself. And once they've been taught about religion, then have daily "collective worship" in school, doesn't it all add up to pretty much the same thing?
I'd rather my son was told the truth about religion.
i would not let my daughter get within a hundred yards of a priest.
have you been to the scotland recently and seen what religios segregation/bigitory is doing here ......its totally f.....d up
it's sons you need to worry about 😉
Italspark; is that post for real?
Some 'interesting' views. If they are based on heresay or actual experience is difficult to tell in some cases.
Charlie - Our eldest wont be going to school for the next 3 years. We have alot more thinking to do yet before we final our preferred choice, but wnat to keep as many doors open as usual. WHilst you are right about disagreeing with the religious element of the schools policy & practice, IF the standard of education is substantially better, it MAY be worth 'tolerating' part of the policy providing it does not dictate every hour of the school day. After all, I dont agree with all the policies of the alternative school. - The major 1 being a very relaxed uniform code.
Thanks marcus, that's a bit clearer. However, it seems to me that the reason the standard of education is as high as it is, is because of the policies and practice, so the idea of objecting to them but tolerating them seems a little contradictory, to me.
uniform is a major concern but religion isn't?
WTF? 😯
italspark - Member
...have you been to the scotland recently and seen what religios segregation/bigitory is doing here ......its totally f.....d up
That's fitba...
Come on man, kids are cleverer than people on here think. It's made out on here that everyone who goes to a faith school will end up a Bishop or Cardinal.
Has anyone actually been to a faith school who's commenting on this? All my RE lessons consisted of were kids taking the piss and asking questions such as:
"Sir, how come Jesus never got married? Was he gay?"
"Was Moses high when the Red Sea parted?"
"If Jesus made all those loaves and fishes, why didn't he magic himself a motorbike?"
And this was a Catholic school. Do you think everyone comes out of education indoctrinated zombies? No one does. If anything, it gives you a good perspective on other faiths and beliefs.
when you were 4 aye? 🙄
All the way from 4 to 18. I never once thought God was actually in the room, or that the communion hosts were actually the body of Christ.
By the way GW, have you read the Da Vinci Code?
😳
nah, but my 4yr old has 😉
Even ignoring the religious discrimination, which at least they are legally supposed to be allowed to do, they also blatantly do select pupils based on social factors (which is supposed not to happen) - by doing things like interviewing parents of pupils - if you look at the statistics for normal state schools vs religious schools, it is incredibly stark how much they socially exclude people - they let in far fewer poor people - if you look at free school meals (the most common indicator used to define 'poor' children, in normal schools 20% of pupils are getting them vs about 10% for most religious schools.
Sorry,but not in my experience of teaching in a Catholic secondary school.This thread was done a couple of years ago on the old forum.My view was,as now that if you object to what they push,don't send your kids.The reason that there are so many church schools is because they were in at the start of compulsory education,as they were with most welfare reforms up to the pension in 1906.I would imagine that there are enough CoE etc schools in England to make it impossible to pick up the shortfall if they were forced to close(I would guess the various religions would object to the government asking to borrow their building for a new secular school)]FWIW My experience with a Catholic secondary was that the kids sussed it all out pretty quickly.
I'm with elfin on this one, however if one was moved to send their child to such a school, couldn't you just lie?
"[i]baptism? Aye we had him done before we moved here" "what church? It was eeeerm it was the big one with the pointy roof, can't remember the name, but yeah wee Abdul is totally baptised and stuff"[/i]
Duckman has a point
I'm not religious and I don't have.kids. I also agree with Fred which really makes me wonder why I'm on this thread. I'm just curious as to why these schools do well in league tables and are desirable in the local community. Does it have anything to do with their religious subtext?
My view was,as now that if you object to what they push,don't send your kids.
Or complain loudly to all concerned that you thinks its wrong and vote for those who listen. I would not work at one of the places either.
The reason that there are so many church schools is because they were in at the start of compulsory education,as they were with most welfare reforms up to the pension in 1906.
God botherers love nothing more than getting more people to bother their particular god, if you think that is not the main reason for them being involved so heavily in education you are naive at best.
My view was,as now that if you object to what they push,don't send your kids.
That is my view too, can't see why you would "tow the line" or pretend to be religious just to get your kid into a school that you probably wouldnt agree with.
I agree with some of the other stuff mentioned, seems fair enough to me that a faith school can have "faith" as a primary factor in determining it's intake though it does allow cherry picking which skews the stats.
I think alot of it is how you help your kids learn anyway, it's not like you wash your hands of their learning when they start school. I will ensure my daughter gets any extra help she needs regardless of how good the school she attends is.
We have been told that the best school for our son is a catholic school. I disagree and disagree with religious schools so will not be playing along with their games.
I wouldn't want him to be taught homosexuality is sinful, women are not equal to men, people go to heaven when they die or certain thing are evil. All of these things were included in everyday teaching when I went to a CE school.
Also I do not belive education is only down to the school. As parents my wife and I will be topping up or adding to my son's education.
Those of you who has said, just go along with it, kids are smarter anyway, would you send your child to a Muslim or Scientology school, just because they get better grades?
Strong coffee this morning AA?
God botherers love nothing more than getting more people to bother their particular god, if you think that is not the main reason for them being involved so heavily in education you are naive at best.
Or well read on the subject and not blinkered by a dislike(or like) of Christianity as you would seem to be,based on your above remark.The schools system was set up at a time when religious observance was a given,certainly in rural areas, rather than the exception.Churches were already teaching children to read and write,for the obvious reason that the bible is a book,but [b]also[/b] because of the 18/19th century idea of "Self-help" When the 1880 Elementary Education Act came out,the Government at the time (Liberal)used the fact that they had a ready made system in place,saving money.
I certainly see a not too disimilar.
idea now,sending your kids to the church school to get the skills in life to get ahead.
Charlie - You are probably right about the contradictory bit. If there was no contradiction, the decision as to which would be our school of choice would be clear cut. Its our thoughts and comments above from people who have taught and attended church schools that the religious element is perhaps worth tolerating if the standard of education and other practices and policies are more to our preference.
GW - I feel uniform is important in schools, but there are other factors including better sports facilities and reported education standards, etc at the church school. It seems daft not to take advantage of these, if as people have said kids suss out the 'religious element' pretty quickly.
"GW - Member
nah, but my 4yr old has"
Could your 4 year old also teach you to use punctuation?
Your brilliant education obviously worked wonders.
😉
it is incredibly stark how much they socially exclude people - they let in far fewer poor people - if you look at free school meals (the most common indicator used to define 'poor' children, in normal schools 20% of pupils are getting them vs about 10% for most religious schools.
this is more the "pushy parent" effect where particular school catchments push house prices, hence why some areas don't use distance as a primary criterea for entrance. Opportunistic parishes will use church attendance as a selection criterea where they can influence it. It helps push the number of young families attending church up when in reality the parents would rather have a lie in or go for a ride.
I've been round 4 primaries locally as my first is off to school next year.
one (very small) school had close ties to the church but wasn't over subscribed last year. VActive PTA
the local CofE school had weak ties to the adjacent church due to a change in vicar (over subscribed)PTA in flux
local community primary no direct ties but some classes teaching RE during the visit (over subscribed)VActive PTA
less local community school in top 20 nationally on results, not very impressive, teaching about non christian festivals during visit (over subscribed) VActive PTA
as a parent if you object to a religious connection a school has you can chose a community one. If it's pants then join the PTA, get on the governors and help turn it around rather than moaning about having to betray your personal beliefs to get a percieved "better" education for your kids. What lesson does faking it give your kids?
I'm curious,can a PTA actually stop,say a CoE church doing its thing?
Do it. Why should any school be allowed to discriminate on the grounds of religion anyway? About time this practice was outlawed if you ask me. School is for education, not indoctrination. I have no problem with anyone who chooses to follow a path that feel happy with, but if you want to bring your child up a Christian, Muslim, Jew or Zoroastian, then do it at home. Children should be educated in schools to have an open mind, and be able to make their own choices when they are ready to themselves, not have ideology thrust upon them.
I pretty much agree with Fred. For that reason I am out!!!
I would disagree slightly that children should not be indoctrinated at home either as I would liken it to encouraging your children to smoke until they are old enough to choose not to. IMO it should be the other way around.
My children 14 and 11 have not been christened and its caused them or us no issues with school choice.
The whole funding issue is a disgrace however.
activity level of the PTA is a fairly good indicator that the parents care about the schooling and therefore influences the results of the school. Sums of £10k p.a. were average for fund raising
Do it. Why should any school be allowed to discriminate on the grounds of religion anyway? About time this practice was outlawed if you ask me. School is for education, not indoctrination. I have no problem with anyone who chooses to follow a path that feel happy with, but if you want to bring your child up a Christian, Muslim, Jew or Zoroastian, then do it at home. Children should be educated in schools to have an open mind, and be able to make their own choices when they are ready to themselves, not have ideology thrust upon them.
If you believe this then surely you shouldn't do it in order to prevent your children being indoctrinated?
as a parent if you object to a religious connection a school has you can chose a community one.
Try living rurally. You don't get a choice, unless your choice is to drive 8 miles every morning and afternoon. A choice of sorts I suppose.
I haven't signed up for bothering though it was part of the local selection criteria as a) I live about 500 yards from the school, and suspect I would have a pretty strong case were there any issues and b) not being a hypocrite is part of my personal creed.
Bear in mind once your first is in, most selection criteria give weight to additional siblings too, despite the odd horror story you hear.
I attended a faith school (many years ago).
My eldest now attends the same school. The rules have tightened up a lot since my time there.
It is based on (ascending importance of selection criteria)
- at least one parent being an active church member.
Regular church attendance required. Church attendance inevitably goes up around Jan/Feb. A minimum of two-years attendance.
- sibling already in attendance at the school
- distance
We have two schools available. One faith, the other comprehensive. Both have good Ofsted reports and very good results. The faith school has better facilities but requires a bus journey. The comprehensive is walking distance.
We applied for the faith school. I admit it's been a bit of a game. Probably played better by middle-class.
We played it. We lost and were offered our second choice.
We immediately put our eldest onto the school waiting list. We were offered a place a couple of weeks later.
We were happy.
When considering the faith school - if you're prepared to "play the game" - I don't see it being *religious discrimination*. Which many have been saying - afterall, anybody who wants to better their application chances is free to do it within the guidelines given.
We did consider baptizing our daughter and my wife becoming a full member of the church. But iirc this has no bearing on the process of determining active attendance.
I wouldn't berate any parent(s) for wanting the best for their children. It's life.
I agree with charliemungus' and what he has written.
Hi Marcus - which schools in our area will only accept christened children? I thought most within easy reach of us were standard local authority controlled schools?
(assuming you're not a different Marcus from the one I know!!)
Dawkins did an excellent documentary on this which shows how damaging faith schools can be:
[url= http://www.channel4.com/programmes/faith-school-menace/4od ]Faith School Menace?[/url]
The sections where he interviews science teachers in a Catholic school and science pupils in a Muslim school are quite scary.
Not nearly as scary as [url= http://www.ministryoftruth.me.uk/2009/07/10/fairies-at-the-bottom-of-the-schoolyard/ ]Steiner Schools[/url] though.
But if schools follow Steiner’s views on science, education will suffer. Steiner believed that materialism was insufficient for the understanding of nature. He believed that science needs to “go beyond” the empirical and consider vitalistic, unobservable forces, a perspective also common in 20th century New Age healing approaches. Anthroposophical medicine, similar to homeopathy but even less scientific, claims that disease is caused only secondarily by malfunctions of chemistry and biology, and primarily by a disturbance of the “vital essence.” Anatomy and physiology a la Steiner are unrecognizable by modern scientists: the heart does not pump blood; there are 12 senses (“touch, life, movement, equilibrium, warmth, smell,” etc.) corresponding to signs of the zodiac; there is a “rhythmic” system that mediates between the “nerve-sense” and “metabolic-muscular” systems. Physics and chemistry are just as bad: the “elements” are earth, air, fire, and water. The four “kingdoms of nature” are mineral, plant, animal and man. Color is said to be the result of the conflict of light and darkness. Typical geological stages are Post-Atlantis, Atlantis, Mid-Lemuria, and Lemuria.
Hi Tim,
Hope you are well. We're in Belper now.
Choice is St Elizabeths or Long Row. Looking at St ELizabeths policy there does appear to be an admissions 'pecking order' From memory:
Roman Catholic with sibling
Roman Catholic
Other denomination with sibling
other demonination
Others
My wife's catholic and I'm a heathen...she would want any kids to go to the same catholic school she went to but I doubt they would let them in because of me.
Apparently I'll need to start going to church on a regular basis and pretend to be a catholic.
What makes it worse is I haven't been christened or baptised so i'm not even a Christian, I'll have to go through all that nonsense.
If you ask me faith schools should be welcoming non-christians and people from other faiths...or do they have enough believers and the churches are already full? Seems moronic if you ask me - [i]"you can't come to our school unless you believe in god already...and when you get here we'll teach you why you should believe in god, oh wait a minute..."[/i].
I would have thought their response should be [i]"I know you aren't a Christian, but come to our school anyway...we'll teach your son/daughter all about god and why they should be catholic/christian/muslim".[/i]
The other interesting thing is that once you take into account the relative affluence and social standing of their intake, religious state schools don't actually get better results than non-religious ones, it is just that they exclude poor people who are less likely to get better results.
This seems contrary to most of the evidence I have seen. I am interested, can you point at some evidence? I'd also like to know why exclusion on religious would result in indirect exclusion by class. The implication is that poor people are generally less religious, or maybe less concerned about the nature of their children's education.
CharlieMungus - Member"The other interesting thing is that once you take into account the relative affluence and social standing of their intake, religious state schools don't actually get better results than non-religious ones, it is just that they exclude poor people who are less likely to get better results."
This seems contrary to most of the evidence I have seen. I am interested, can you point at some evidence? I'd also like to know why exclusion on religious would result in indirect exclusion by class. The implication is that poor people are generally less religious, or maybe less concerned about the nature of their children's education.
[url= http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/13781 ]Faith schools - selection by the back door[/url]
The chair of the Accord Coalition for inclusive schooling, Rabbi Dr Jonathan Romain, commented: "The strong performance from faith schools is entirely predictable given that all recent research - including the government's own findings - show that religious entry requirements lead to covert social selection.""This is done either deliberately, for example by getting prospective pupils to write statements about their religious beliefs and therefore gaining insights as to their levels of articulation, spelling, punctuation and sentence structure; or indirectly, because insisting on regular church attendance means automatically privileging higher socio-economic groups, as families from those groups are more likely to regularly attend church," said Dr Romain. "Thatin turn skews faith schools' social and ability profile and boosts their results."
He added: "This is why the former Department of Children, Schools and Families 2008 report on the effectiveness of the School Admissions Code found that faith schools were the schools most likely not to comply with the schools admissions code by engaging in practices that were favourable to those with greater social capital and higher socio-economic status."