Faith schools must stop selecting pupils by religion

spen666

Now without wishing to debate the rights and wrongs of having faith schools,BUT surely if the faith schools are to stop selecting pupils according to their religions, they will no longer be faith schools

Aren't the reports authors being cowardly in not simply calling for the faith schools to be banned?

Faith schools must stop selecting pupils on the basis of their religious background, new research has found.
Radical reform is needed to ensure faith schools are promoting social cohesion, a report by the Runnymede Trust concludes.
Radical reform is needed to ensure faith schools are promoting social cohesion
The report, 'Right to Divide? Faith Schools and Community Cohesion', examines how faith schools operate and is based on consultations with more than 1,000 people over the last two years.
It has identified six key recommendations, which the report authors say will clarify the role of faith schools within England's education system.
It argues that these schools should end selection on the basis of faith, as they should be 'for the benefit of all in society rather than just some'.
It says: 'If faith schools are convinced of their relevance for society, that should apply equally for all children.
'With state funding comes an obligation to be relevant and open to all citizens.'
The report calls for pupils to be given a greater say in how they are educated, and claims there is little discussion about children's voices in the faith schools debate.
It says faith schools should address concerns that they educate a disproportionately small number of children from the most disadvantaged backgrounds.
And it argues that faith schools should value all young people, regardless of religion, while religion should be more highly valued in non-denominational schools.
The report also says religious education should be a part of the core national curriculum.
It concludes that faith schools 'should remain a significant and important part of our education system, offering diversity in the schooling system as a means of improving standards, offering choice to parents and developing effective responses to local, national and global challenges in education.'
Figures put forward in the report show that there are more than 4,600 Church of England primary and secondary schools in England, more than 2,000 Roman Catholic schools, 26 Methodist primary schools, 88 schools of other Christian denominations, 27 Jewish schools, seven Muslim schools, two Sikh schools, and two of other denominations.
There are more than 11,100 state schools of no religious character, and 2,756 secondary schools.
The Accord coalition, which argues faith schools should not be able to discriminate against pupils or staff on grounds of religion welcomed the report.
Accord chairman Rabbi Dr Jonathan Romain said: 'We are witnessing a major change in attitude towards faith schools: previously flavour of the month, they are now being seriously questioned - both in the way they operate and whether they serve the public good. It is a debate that is long overdue and may save much heartache later

Daily Mail, so it must be true

TheBoyBilly

Never mind all this nonsense, bring back Polytechnics. The left-wingers have completely b****red our education system as it is, let the truly talented kids get to have a real chance to show their mettle.
But I take your point, having Muslim children in Catholic schools (with all their differing needs) will only hold some promising pupils back if they have to be continually interrupted so that others can follow their "faith practices" (apologies if that sounds disrespectful - it isn't meant to be)

cakewalk

Ditch all state funded 'faith' schools. Religion is a form of mental illness.

nwallace

I've said it before and will say it again.

The more I hear about the English school system the more I wonder how the Scottish Office didn't manage to balls it up the system here in the same way.

Captain Fagor

nwallace wrote:

I've said it before and will say it again. The more I hear about the English school system the more I wonder how the Scottish Office didn't manage to balls it up the system here in the same way.

[thread hijack]
It's not without its faults is it? Catholics get their own primary and secondary schools, which are usually better equipped than the non-faith schools. They separate the kids at an early age, teach them that their way is the "right" way, and then wonder why bigotry is rife?
[/thread hijack]

Back to Spen's debate....

nwallace

No it's not without it's faults, there are faith schools allowed, and the theoretically non-denonimal ones do usually have a link to the local presbetery.

Any whisper of a suggestion to remove the faith schools has resulted in uproar from the Catholics that insist on having their own schools.

Outwith that there are only 2 types, Independent ("Public") and State Comprehensives, some are good, some are bad, all have a fair level of control over what they teach. There isn't much government meddling.

TheKrikkitWars

TheBoyBilly wrote:

But I take your point, having Muslim children in Catholic schools (with all their differing needs) will only hold some promising pupils back if they have to be continually interrupted so that others can follow their "faith practices" (apologies if that sounds disrespectful - it isn't meant to be)

Not really, I went to a catholic school, as did my best friend, who happens to be a practice ing muslim. It had no real effect on his schooling or anyone elses.
I found that Ironically, attending a failth school was by far the best way to turn people off of organised religion.

In any case, I wouldn't look for the abolishment of religious schools as the reason they succeed is the're voluantary aided status, the diocsen and the LEA share the cost fo teh school, and the school opereates independently of both the LEA and Diocsen. If either organisation is allowed to take control and meddle, then the strange phenomenon will disappear. A truely catholic school would fall as flat on its arse as a state school.

OffTheBackAdam

No longer are Catholic Schools, "Faith Schools".
There's a scramble to get children into them, because their standards of discipline and the results they produce are higher than the debased comprehensives.
This morally bankrupted Government won't admit that its policies have thoroughly destroyed the chances of the children from the families of the workless-class getting an education sufficient to get them out of the cycle of benefits' dependance they're in.
There's also the spectre of Islamic Faith Schools looming and the potential of what they may produce!

TheKrikkitWars

OffTheBackAdam wrote:

No longer are Catholic Schools, "Faith Schools".
There's a scramble to get children into them, because their standards of discipline and the results they produce are higher than the debased comprehensives.
This morally bankrupted Government won't admit that its policies have thoroughly destroyed the chances of the children from the families of the workless-class getting an education sufficient to get them out of the cycle of benefits' dependance they're in.
There's also the spectre of Islamic Faith Schools looming and the potential of what they may produce!

I take offence at your term workless class, a debasement of working class, which seems to infer that the working classes have all become dole cheats and the like.

In any case, the school I went to was in a "socially deprived" area, and went to great pains to avoid middle class families monopolising the school, despite consitently achiveing a position of <150 in the times top schools listing. Most of the middle class kids went to the local private school.

There are many myths about "faith schools" most of them are unfortunately a crock of s**t.

cee

TheKrikkitWars

I think what the previous poster was referring to is the new 'under-class'....this has been talked about many times on the news and associated programmes (from the likes of dimbleby and paxman) and articles recently...

Looking at areas where there are a large proportion of families with 2 -3 generations who have never worked, and probably never will. There has been talk of a lack of hope about getting a job, but debate has convinced me that it is not so much a hope, but a lack of aspiration. For me, the education system has not failed them.....it is there for the relative few who want it, but it seems (again from what I have seen and heard) that some sections of the community thinks they are owed a sheckle.

This is completely different to the traditionally hard work ethic of the working class (mothers scrubbing the stairs/close etc...) who in general had aspiration to acheive more for themselves and their children.

The simple fact is that the working class of the 70's and 80's have in reality become closer to a middle class....in its place IS a new underclass, but is no where near a slant on the traditional working class of which many of us are a product.

Perhaps the failing is that we as a country have had it too easy, for too long.

supersonic

*note*

Racism will not be tolerated in this thread. Now I know discussing racism is different, but any posts with racist comments will be deleted without warning. We have had one complaint already hence this message.

Thankyou!

nasahapley

supersonic wrote:

*note*

Racism will not be tolerated in this thread. Now I know discussing racism is different, but any posts with racist comments will be deleted without warning. We have had one complaint already hence this message.

Thankyou!

Surely you're not referring to WhyamIhere's post which has disappeared? I for one couldn't see anything wrong with it at all; far less likely to cause offence that the post it referred to. You do right to boot racist comments off, but please make sure that we can still have a pop at religions, because that's a different thing and totally fair game.

As for faith schools, Cakewalk's post sums up my feelings nicely.

supersonic

I didn't delete that post, and wasn't referring to any in particular. I know it is a sensitive area, and I am all for contructive discussion, but concern was raised about how posts could be interpreted so up went the generic mod message ;-)

whyamihere

nasahapley wrote:

Surely you're not referring to WhyamIhere's post which has disappeared? I for one couldn't see anything wrong with it at all; far less likely to cause offence that the post it referred to. You do right to boot racist comments off, but please make sure that we can still have a pop at religions, because that's a different thing and totally fair game.

As for faith schools, Cakewalk's post sums up my feelings nicely.

I deleted my post myself after I saw it had been reported. I had hoped that people would see that it was satire (saying that the only 'consequence' of Muslim faith schools would be educated Muslims, as opposed to the more sinister view implied by Adam). I can only assume that the person reporting it thought I was implying that Muslims were not educated now (I wasn't). As a way of not causing any more offence if I was misunderstood again, I removed it.

TheKrikkitWars

cee wrote:

TheKrikkitWars

I think what the previous poster was referring to is the new 'under-class'....this has been talked about many times on the news and associated programmes (from the likes of dimbleby and paxman) and articles recently...

I got that much, I just thought his phrasology was at best ill thought out, and at worst full on offensive.

cee wrote:

Looking at areas where there are a large proportion of families with 2 -3 generations who have never worked, and probably never will. There has been talk of a lack of hope about getting a job, but debate has convinced me that it is not so much a hope, but a lack of aspiration. For me, the education system has not failed them.....it is there for the relative few who want it, but it seems (again from what I have seen and heard) that some sections of the community thinks they are owed a sheckle.

I think I'd agree.

marusches

to be honest religion and education should be separated.eduction teaches truth not false ideals out of some fairytale.

"Religion says-believe and you will understand.Science comes to say to you ----Understand and you will believe" quotes Eliphas Levi.

8x8=64 in all religions so where's the problem ?

desweller

marusches wrote:

to be honest religion and education should be separated.eduction teaches truth not false ideals out of some fairytale.

Organised religion has, until recently (i.e. within the last century or so), been the accepted arbiter of moral issues.

The problem is that there is little or no moral guidance in science. That's not it's purpose. If a social psychology study were to conclude that, in order to best advance oneself, one should never tell the truth, not many would be willing to declare that to be the right course of action for all individuals. Sure 8x8=64 is the same everywhere, but that doesn't tell you not to nick your neighbour's car does it?

Education must therefore incorporate lessons on right and wrong. It cannot do this without applying some sort of enforcement (let's face it, if you genuinely believe in god he's probably a more scary prospect than your local cop shop) and without showing how our current accepted moral standards came to be (most of which can be traced back to both the Bible and the Qoran).

In the face of deteriorating authority of the church, how do you get people to do the right thing? Self regulation, or overwhelming levels of policing?

A little OT, sorry.

Des

nasahapley

DesWeller wrote:

Education must therefore incorporate lessons on right and wrong. It cannot do this without applying some sort of enforcement (let's face it, if you genuinely believe in god he's probably a more scary prospect than your local cop shop) and without showing how our current accepted moral standards came to be (most of which can be traced back to both the Bible and the Qoran).

Got to call out the bit in bold for the absolute cobblers that it quite obviously is. Are you saying that before the holy books you refer to were written everybody thought it was fine to steal, rob and kill at will? I'd contend that if that were so, humanity would have died out a long time prior to the Bible/Quran's penning. And as I've posted in another thread, if you're being good only because you're afraid of your god, then that's not really being good.

The answer to your final question is 'self regulation'. It has to be a precursor to a species' ability to form vaguely civilised groups that it has evolved some kind of moral framework. In other words human are, for the most part, innately good. The full-blown explanation of this involves some fairly complicated concepts that are hard to understand, and for that reason many people may choose to believe the nice n' easy explanation that god tells us what is good, so be good or else.

marusches

In the face of deteriorating authority of the church, how do you get people to do the right thing? Self regulation, or overwhelming levels of policing?

Sorry my friend the church died years ago and lets be right they never did anything right .check the history book's.invented the 7 deadly sins to scare people into church.invented the black mass to scare people into church and to also fund the holy crusade's which resulted in the end of Mesopotamia.killed a higher % of people through the witch trials than hitler did in WW2 (fact my friends).if you were caught in possesion of a tomato in 1825 you were hung as a witch.

I do not want such a money making organisation as this telling me whats right and wrong ?

pinching a car? So if you aint religious your gonna pinch a car ?

science is fact religion is just a story book .sorry but that's the way it is.if people want to put their faith in that fine by my but lets keep it to church and education to schools

Got to call out the bit in bold for the absolute cobblers that it quite obviously is. Are you saying that before the holy books you refer to were written everybody thought it was fine to steal,

genocide , matricide, incest,rape all this and more can be found in first few chapters the bible

desweller

nasahapley wrote:

Are you saying that before the holy books you refer to were written everybody thought it was fine to steal, rob and kill at will? I'd contend that if that were so, humanity would have died out a long time prior to the Bible/Quran's penning. And as I've posted in another thread, if you're being good only because you're afraid of your god, then that's not really being good.

The moral principles laid down in these documents form the basis of the standards to which modern society aims to hold itself. I certainly would suggest that, over time, we have become more civilised, i.e. better at adhering to these principles. I would however acknowledge that these documents (and others from around that time) have plenty or precedents.

Humanity would not have died out without these rules, but we would simply exist in a less numerous form. Like animals, in fact, since that's what we would become without a moral framework.

Whether an individual is being good due to conscience or due to fear is besides the point, surely? The end effect is the same, and that is the result any authority would be looking for.

marusches wrote:

Sorry my friend the church died years ago and lets be right they never did anything right .check the history book's.invented the 7 deadly sins to scare people into church.invented the black mass to scare people into church and to also fund the holy crusade's which resulted in the end of Mesopotamia.killed a higher % of people through the witch trials than hitler did in WW2 (fact my friends).if you were caught in possesion of a tomato in 1825 you were hung as a witch.

I do not want such a money making organisation as this telling me whats right and wrong ?

pinching a car? So if you aint religious your gonna pinch a car ?

science is fact religion is just a story book .sorry but that's the way it is.if people want to put their faith in that fine by my but lets keep it to church and education to schools

As you say, many atrocities have been committed by these organisations. One of the problems with organised religion is that, due to the fact that it is an organisation, it finds it needs to protect it's own interests as well as the preaching the messages it was originally put together to do. Hence churches become allied to states and change into political organisations. That is not the fault of religion; that's just humans being human.

I would maintain that a civilised society is largely kept in check by fear of the authorities. So yes, if you genuinely believe in eternal damnation (the ultimate punishment from the ultimate authority), you are less likely to steal than someone who is only worried about the cops.

That is not by any means a ringing endorsement for faith schools; I am merely trying to illustrate the origins of our moral standards and the replacement of their traditional means of enforcement by less effective ones. There is no moral aspect to scientific method beyond the rules that we have evolved from those laid down in religious documents.

Des

marusches

I would maintain that a civilised society is largely kept in check by fear of the authorities. So yes, if you genuinely believe in eternal damnation (the ultimate punishment from the ultimate authority), you are less likely to steal than someone who is only worried about the cops.

Is this not another weak argument for religion.I can live a life as bad as I like (i don't of course) and get forgiven for my sins either at church or on my death bed,obviously depending on religion.Please answer me this. i lead a good life I know right from wrong or good from evil as you would put it and basically endorse the 10 commandments not from a religious stance rather as a moral guideline which is a way any decent person should live their live's.since i dont go to church and put money on that plate or worship god will i go to heaven ?