Forum menu
Quite simply organised religion has no place in education.
I agree but while they offered the better education in the area I did what it took to get my children the best education that I could afford at the time. Including multiple appeals to the LEA panel. I was also upfront with the children when later questioned as to why we did what we did.
Yup. In many ways its a test of parental engagement. If the parents are willing to give up their Sundays for a year or so before chances are they will be willing to get involved throughout the kids school life.
Perhaps, but that's not the reason for the admission criteria.
Presumably parents who showed equal levels of engagement by constructing a tissue of lies about their beliefs or complaining vociferously and repeatedly to the LEA would not gain the same level of credit.
It must be funny as a member of a congregation in one of these places to see the building get a lot emptier around the time that school places are confirmed each year.
Quite simply organised religion has no place in education. If you want it for your kids then give up your Sundays for them to have the religious component.
Ironic, considering where my monthly paycheque comes from, but I agree with this statement wholeheartedly.
Not sure about the 50% cap mentioned above. My daughter goes to a Catholic school, in order to apply for admission you need a form signed by the local priest to say you were regular church goers. The school is well over subscribed within the parish. Preference is given to those with sibling currently at school followed by straight line distance you live from the school
I wonder what would happen with the reverse of this. A school that won’t take in children from religious families. I bet there would be an uproar. How many parents would fake being Agnostic or Aethiest just to get their kids in? You could have school staff hanging around churches, synagogues and mosques to spot them.
Quite simply organised religion has no place in education.
Did you know its a legal requirement for all pupils in UK state schools to have an act of worship everyday?
Did you know its a legal requirement for all pupils in UK state schools to have an act of worship everyday?
I did, and I think it's bizarre. In Canada, I grew up with 'Opening Exercises', which included the national anthem. No hand-over-hearth stuff. Just standing for a moment in respect.
While I agree with that idea, that should be the limit of what children experience beyond a good, strong curriculum.
No I didn't but I have just seen the guidance. Time which could be spent on many things beneficial and improving the moral character of pupils without any reference to any kind of religion.
Entirely happy that people study religion in the same way as history and geography but mass participation isn't something schools should be providing especially in a multicultural society. It's up there as one of the reasons people should be marking Athiest/Agnostic on census forms rather than C or E etc because it's a default.
Entirely happy that people study religion in the same way as history and geography
I don't even think this. I mean, a field trip to a church and/or mosque and/or synagogue and/or gurdwara if relevant to a specific geographical or historical question? Sure. Religion as a feature of peoples' cultures worldwide? Sure. Anything more should be left to the home, or voluntary study.
I completely agree with SR on this. I do think kids should visit different faith establishments at some point. If only to see what’s involved and in some cases for the architecture and art.
Sure. Religion as a feature of peoples’ cultures worldwide? Sure. Anything more should be left to the home, or voluntary study.
Given how dominant and misunderstood a lot of things are it's a relevant area of study, would help with the daily mail/alt right myths really. It's a topic worthy of study for all kids highlighting the good and the bad of these things
It’s a topic worthy of study for all kids highlighting the good and the bad of these things
It's just that religion is primarily about practice as opposed to lists of facts about.
So, for example, my first undergraduate degree was in history and religious studies. I primarily focused on monotheistic faiths. For all that I could talk intelligibly about the 5 pillars of Islam, and times of prayer, and the Q'uran, I never once in 3 years stepped into a mosque.
Since then, however, I have done a lot of work here in Cardiff with the Muslim Council of Wales, and have consequently spoken at, and spent a fair amount of time in, one of the local mosques. This has been eye-opening. There is a big difference in knowing a 'fact' about Islam, and getting to know Islam. Same with Christianity. Some on here joke about Easter as being some sort of springtime zombie festival, and no wonder. If Christianity is encountered solely as a religion that believes in someone coming back from the dead once, and celebrating that once a year, then it is bound to be cast the way it is. If, however, children visited a church and saw some sort of observable manifestation of what that belief means, then they can at least come away with a sense of the people involved and how their belief affects them.
So I would still say: either that, or leave it out entirely. But both yours and my suggestions have got to be better than the current forced nonsense kids are still subject to!
I did, and I think it’s bizarre
So do schools, never seen it done and I've worked in 4.
<p>Did you know its a legal requirement for all pupils in UK state schools to have an act of worship everyday?</p>
<p>Not in Scotland it isn't, 6 times a year up here and optional.</p><p> https://www.gov.scot/Publications/2005/03/20778/53820</p><p></p><p>You English have one weird school system. Mind you our West Coast shennanigans probably look odd from outside as well so I wont dwell too much on it.</p>
This whole issue baffles me.
If a school that was secular chose to refuse entry to an child based in their religious beliefs (of whatever faith) there would be hell to pay.
Agreed with other comments that if faith is used to select/reject children, then no state funding. Some of our taxes go to funding education, and there's no option to choose where your money goes based on religious orientation.
Perhaps that could be a thing? On your tax return you could choose to apportion your tax to certain areas:
Education, NHS, Defence, policing, local services, infrastructure, bailing out failing industries/lining pockets of the already rich and chums of the MP's.
<div>SaxonRider
<div>
<div>Subscriber</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>Quite simply organised religion has no place in education. If you want it for your kids then give up your Sundays for them to have the religious component.
Ironic, considering where my monthly paycheque comes from, but I agree with this statement wholeheartedly.
</div>
Will you stop with this reasonableness and mucking up of stereotypes! 😉
I wonder how many people who say they wouldn't pretend to be religious in order to get their children into a particular (and presumably better, otherwise what's the point) school, happily told their children there was a Father Christmas or an Easter Bunny?
I wonder how many people who say they wouldn’t pretend to be religious in order to get their children into a particular (and presumably better, otherwise what’s the point) school, happily told their children there was a Father Christmas or an Easter Bunny?
Don't forget the tooth fairy. I'm such a monster.
Neither father crhristmas or the easterbunny are "christian" symbols
Fair point. To counter, we didn't tell them they <span style="text-decoration: underline;">didn't</span> exist either, just as we haven't told them that God doesn't exist. I can't prove it either way and I'm happy for them to make up their minds.
While I do have a problem with there being church funded schools with specific selection criteria and people lying to meet those criteria, I think we also need to uncouple that issue with the thought that these schools are hotbeds of indoctrination. From my experience of both primary and now secondary - yes there is a Christian element to the school and the day, but there is no obligation to take part and if you are from another faith or no faith at all, you won't be treated any differently.
If there are cases where that isn't true, (some say teaching chances being more limited, for example) then that is a problem with the school and its governance rather than the system itself. IMHO.
(Oh, and BTW Father Christmas does exist and if you don't know that, I feel sad for you. But it's only October, I'll show my working when this discussion inevitably comes up later on in the year)
But not telling the truth about something is not telling the truth about something. Regardless of what it is your not telling the truth about . . . .
You can't pick and choose when to have "integrity".
#of course you can. We all do it every day. 🙂
But not telling the truth about something is not telling the truth about something. Regardless of what it is your not telling the truth about . . .
I suppose we have to judge for ourselves whether some fun make-believe for very young children is a bad thing or not.
If, however, children visited a church and saw some sort of observable manifestation of what that belief means, then they can at least come away with a sense of the people involved and how their belief affects them.
I've seen the effects of the beliefs. Frightening opiate for the masses. No one trusts a junky!
[i]I suppose we have to judge for ourselves whether some fun make-believe for very young children is a bad thing or not.[/i]
Exactly.
And at some point the target audience generally work out for themselves that it was just a sweet fairy tale that didn't mean any harm. Also useful as a means to making them behave themselves.
🙂
And at some point the target audience generally work out for themselves that it was just a sweet fairy tale that didn’t mean any harm.
Sure. And at that point I tell them the truth. Which is very different to teachers peddling tales of sky fairies to teenagers, in a formal education setting.
Point is that in most cases they aren't. It's there to provide it to people that want it, but if you don't then you can still participate in the education without the religion. Or bring your own religion, the school makes space available for muslim pupils to observe their daytime prayers.
If a school is indoctrinating kids that is the fault of the school, not of the system.
Point is that in most cases they aren’t.
Which brings us back to how you get into the school in the first place.
1/ by being genuine christian churchgoers (I'm not but i don't have the same hatred of religions as some do - YMMV)
2/ by pretending to be christian churchgoers (I have more of a problem with this tbh)
3/ by living close enough to the school to get in on distance
Only 50% of places are going to the true and fake christians. The rest are the same as any other.
Their ball, their rules. Don't like it? Go somewhere else. Of course quiet possibly the funding won't be as good and all the little things might not happen either.
Oh yeah, if discrimination is wrong why do those who preach against it discriminate against those who do?
Their ball, their rules. Don’t like it? Go somewhere else. Of course quiet possibly the funding won’t be as good and all the little things might not happen either.
What take the state funding away from them? If they were private schools then that is a fine attitude but these are paid for by tax payers.
Oh yeah, if discrimination is wrong why do those who preach against it discriminate against those who do?
You might need to explain that one? As far as we can see the religious schools are discriminating against people of no faith or those who don't want to jump through a series of pointless hoops to get in.
Don't get outraged or ow't, but I'd doubt you'd be able to send your kids to another 'mainly religious' funded school.
Our Catholic school is part funded by the church. It just happens to be one of the best in the area, but me and my missus whole family had been there before all this mumbo jumbo came in. For us, as we'd been there, our kids had a place, and at secondary. The secondary accepts all religions but is mainly RC, priority goes to the local RC primary's first. The other two secondary schools near by are also very good, as are the primary's.
Unfortunately, when one schools is performing better than others, they have to give priority - I'm sure this might happen with other 'faith' schools. We rarely go to church now, but have lived locally for years. These schools do have to stop the 'best school' shoppers and with a small intake, what do they do ? We just chose the school because we went there. In my son's case, he would have been better off at another local primary as some of his nursery friends were there, and ended up being bullied in the catholic primary.
Limited intakes do mean they can chose - I'm sure if we chose the local CofE or Muslim school because it was best, we'd be on the back foot. Limited places.
Weather it's fair is questionable. People do 'shop' about for the best state school, despite never having gone their themselves, or 'moved' to get in catchment areas.
I know a few people that moved, then got themselves 'christened' and shoot, to get into our local school. Some really got into the church (very false - going out on trips with the priest...). Us, just so happened to live here all our lives and went to the school, and don't arse lick to either the church or school.
Only 50% of places are going to the true and fake christians. The rest are the same as any other.
No problem then.
What take the state funding away from them?
They are only partly funded, and for the third time of asking they educate 'at least' 50% non-churchgoing christians (on the basis that 50% of places go to churchgoing families and a proportion of these are temporary to get the vicar to tick the box on their form, so <50% are really churchgoers.
If they were fully funded, then they can set the rules exactly as they like.
Even if partly state funded this is wrong morally. ~the state should have no stake in supporting religion of any sort. state schools should not be involved in the indoctrination of children into religion. Private schools should have to follow a curriculum set by the state. some religious schools the religious element is small. some its huge.
Quite simply organised religion has no place in education. If you want it for your kids then give up your Sundays for them to have the religious component.
I'm not sure as I agree, it's a context issue.
I think there's a value in teaching religion from an objectively academic point of view. "Christianity believes this, however Islam believes that." It's when a given religion is taught as fact alongside things like Maths that it's problematic for me.
I wonder how many people who say they wouldn’t pretend to be religious in order to get their children into a particular (and presumably better, otherwise what’s the point) school, happily told their children there was a Father Christmas or an Easter Bunny?
I think if I were a parent I wouldn't spin those things as anything other than a bit of fun. If only because, it's one of the first lessons a child learns that their parents have been lying to them for years.
Their ball, their rules. Don’t like it? Go somewhere else.
I have a pub. I don't want black people in it. Don't like it, go somewhere else. My ball, my rules.
if discrimination is wrong why do those who preach against it discriminate against those who do?
... because as you just said, it's wrong? Logic not your strong point?
Not sure about the 50% rule. The policy at our local one is 220 specified religion, 40 other religion, 10 other.
Why is it that church schools are better. This thread comes up a lot so it clearly isnt just one or two. Is it just that they are the only schools available or is it that given a choice the 'church' schools are often the better ones
Why is it that church schools are better.
They keep the riff raff out.
Why is it that church schools are better.
The Mitty is strong in this one.
They are only partly funded, and for the third time of asking they educate ‘at least’ 50% non-churchgoing christians
That's alright then.
As an aside.
I went to a secular school. It was shit. I spent 4 out of the 6 years hating most of it - despite having good friends and a minority of teachers who were truly excellent. It seemed to be about survival - not education.
My wife went to an RC girls school. It was good. She enjoyed it, thinks of it fondly and has no negative memories of it at all. They were encouraged to believe in themselves and to do their best.
I’d take the religious education if it meant I could have had enjoyed my school days properly...
I don’t believe in discriminatory admissions policies though!
They were encouraged to believe in themselves and to do their best.
Thanks was mostly the case at my secular comp. And my Catholic sixth form...
I’d take the religious education if it meant I could have had enjoyed my school days properly…
Or maybe we could just get education right. The research question would be how did religion make one better than the other, would your secular school have been better if it had more funding and better teachers