Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)
Tuesday, September 2, 2008 | Reason : Children and Religion | print version Print | Comments |

Document Faith schools may be Blair's most damaging legacy

by Polly Toynbee, Guardian

Reposted from:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/sep/02/education.labour

Labour's new rules mean that anyone who works in these institutions may have to get down on their knees to keep their jobs

Children start their new schools this week for the 12th year under Labour. Who could have predicted that more pupils than ever will be going to religious schools this term, as the churches boasted gleefully? Pews empty but faith schools multiply.

There are about 14,000 non-religious schools, and nearly 7,000 faith schools. This year the figure has risen again as new academies open: a third are faith-run - and religions have taken over some community schools. Next year 13 more new faith schools open, mostly Christian with three Muslim. This risks being among the most indelibly damaging of Tony Blair's social legacies, his permanent bequest to his own beliefs.

Yesterday a new campaign was launched to oppose segregating children by faith. The Accord coalition brings together surprisingly disparate interests, with some teaching unions, the British Humanist Association (of which I am president) and Ekklesia, the Christian theological thinktank. No sooner was the new group made public than its chair, Rabbi Jonathan Romain, minister of Maidenhead synagogue, paid for his outspoken bravery with a savage personal assault from the Jewish Chronicle. Ekklesia can expect similar fury from Christian denominations. Meanwhile secularists are suffering a backlash from the faiths, as if books by Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens and AC Grayling were any match for the mysterious bully power that religions hold over government.

Accord wants faith schools to abide by the same admissions criteria as other state schools, with no selection by belief. Teachers should be employed for their skills, not for their faith. It opposes Labour's new rules for faith schools, which came into law yesterday, allowing them to keep all jobs for the faithful. Teaching assistants, dinner ladies and caretakers may need to get on their knees to keep their jobs from now on.

Official policy says it's up to local communities to decide the kind of schools they want. In practice, the academy programme encourages widespread faith takeovers, though in future they must offer half their places to outsiders. Years of Labour handwringing over community cohesion hardly squares with dividing children by religion. Ask why and here's the doublethink answer: religious academies now have a "duty to promote community cohesion".

Look no further than evidence from Northern Ireland to see how much worse divisions grow when 95% of children meet no one from outside their sectarian schools. There, a majority tell pollsters they would prefer mixed schools, but politicians ignore it. A Guardian/ICM poll showed 64% across Britain oppose religious schools - which is also ignored. Odd that Christian and Muslim schools are on the increase just as we are warned that faith wars are now so much more threatening than either the cold war or IRA bombs that habeas corpus must be suspended for 42 days.

David Blunkett once said he wanted to "bottle the magic" of Christian schools, but their mystery is often their social class. Anxious parents who get on their knees to get a church school place are not to blame. If prayer is what the government demands to win a place in its more selective state schools, that's what parents must do. These schools would be near empty if they admitted only genuine believers.

Research from the London School of Economics tells the story. In the capital, where admissions are most fraught, faith school pupils are "significantly more affluent" than average for their area. Only 17% of faith pupils are eligible for free school meals, compared with 25% in non-religious schools. Faith schools take fewer than a fifth of lowest ability children, compared with a third across London - and they take many more high achievers. Only 1% of Pakistani or Bangladeshi children are in faith schools, though they often need most help. In Muslim schools, the numbers go into equally damaging social reverse: 34% are on free school meals.

Yesterday the schools adjudicator, Philip Hunter, handed in his report on admissions: soon we shall see if faith schools breach the admissions code. A furore followed Ed Balls' revelation that in three sample areas, faith schools illegally interviewed parents, demanded extra fees and asked questions about social background. Just a little screening can make a big difference to a school's "ethos" if it deposits difficult families in next-door schools. This matters because the OECD finds the countries with schools that segregate least according to class and ability do best overall: Britain lags behind partly because of its many forms of segregation.

Brighton this year has shown what can be done. Appeals by parents over admissions rose this year nationally but the proportion fell in Brighton, due to its first year of a lottery for oversubscribed schools. It was devised by the previous Labour council and supported by the present Conservatives. Eight secondaries were grouped together and where there was oversubscription names were picked from a hat. The result was that free-school-meals children are becoming more evenly spread. Knowing that abilities and social classes are a bit more fairly mixed than before has benefited everyone. Sadly however, the one Catholic school could not be included.

Class, ethnic and faith segregation are the most damaging reasons why the Accord coalition needs to prevail. But consider too the craziness of creationism now taught in many more schools than before. Homophobic bullying is worse in faith schools - hardly surprising since most sects preach that gay sex is sin, in Islam one punishable by death. Stonewall found 23% fewer gay pupils able to tell anyone about their sexuality, and least sex education in faith schools. All religions were founded on women's inferiority. In Islam what women wear is a battle-flag of identity, in Catholicism governing women's fertility is the die-in-the-ditch issue. The state can't protect children from pernicious views and doctrines at home - but it has a duty to protect them in state schools.

More religious schools open this week, more still next year, all covertly. Labour MPs were never told a third of academies would be faith-run. Yet again, we who were deceived by those who said Gordon Brown would do things differently, were wrong. He may not have Blair's God in his ear, but on every issue his impulse is to pay any price to avoid a fight with any powerful interest group. Result? Loss of respect from just about everyone.

polly.toynbee@guardian.co.uk

Comments 1 - 46 of 46 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #241615 by mordacious1 on September 2, 2008 at 10:03 pm

 avatarI'm sure ol' Tony is proud of this legacy. What a &^%&(^%.

Other Comments by mordacious1

2. Comment #241617 by Cowcakes on September 2, 2008 at 10:09 pm

 avatarYet another attack on freedom of thought and a victory for the repressive forces masquerading as, or more truthfully, that is religion.

Mind you I can see the benefits for a government that wants to maintain and increase its control over the populace. Kill training for individual thought and you have to deal with and control fewer groups. And those groups are full of people with no idea how to think for themselves.

Other Comments by Cowcakes

3. Comment #241619 by beanson on September 2, 2008 at 10:27 pm

 avatarPolly hits the nail on the head again, the rise of faith schools is obviously a serious concern for those who percieve that the indoctrination of the young is the most effective way to ensure long term dogmatism in the masses

By the way are Satanists allowed to run schools now?

Other Comments by beanson

4. Comment #241621 by The-bleeding-obvious on September 2, 2008 at 10:38 pm

A fine example of our governments negative IQ! Another couple of generations and we will be fighting a new crusade...in our own land.

Other Comments by The-bleeding-obvious

5. Comment #241622 by Verylee on September 2, 2008 at 10:38 pm

 avatarSuffer the little children..

Other Comments by Verylee

6. Comment #241623 by sby on September 2, 2008 at 10:45 pm

I know of a respected state catholic school in London where 25% of the teaching staff are gay. Which is fine with me, but somehow I doubt whether they are all sincere catholics.

Other Comments by sby

7. Comment #241625 by mordacious1 on September 2, 2008 at 10:52 pm

 avatarEverytime I think the U.S. is screwed up with religion, I only have to look to the UK to feel better.

Other Comments by mordacious1

8. Comment #241626 by EvidenceOnly on September 2, 2008 at 10:54 pm

Schools are for education.
Education is learning.
Learning is critical thinking.

Faith requires turning your critical thinking off.

Faith schools are therefore an oxymoron.

Faith and Religion should not be in the business of education.

Let religions start the good old Sunday schools were they can indoctrinate anyone into their nonsense but keep weekdays for REAL LEARNING.

Other Comments by EvidenceOnly

9. Comment #241627 by Broshiesq on September 2, 2008 at 10:59 pm

 avatarYeah, right? The framers in America 220 years ago were smarter about religion and government than the British pols of today. Too bad the general population in the US today is so fucked, though. Good thing it's not easy to change the constitution.

Other Comments by Broshiesq

10. Comment #241628 by mdowe on September 2, 2008 at 11:04 pm

 avatarI don't get it. Tony Blair is out, why continue to follow his most brain-dead, insane, and self-destructive policies? It isn't like the UK currently has a disproportionate number of religious nuts controlling every vote. Yet, even though they are only a marginal percentage of the population, these religious groups are going to be setting the education-agenda for a huge number of UK children. In the long run, this is just handing even more power to the various religious institutions, and begging for more sectarian strife than the UK has seen in centuries. Like I said, I don't get it.

Other Comments by mdowe

11. Comment #241629 by Beachbum on September 2, 2008 at 11:05 pm

 avatarWhat, you thought they would give up without a fight. Religion is the best Con since we came out of the trees. Where else can one find a gimmick that pays good money for talking bull, and if your lucky, will get you tight with the headman's daughter, then if she gets pregnant - burn her at the stake before anyone finds out, or welcome to the family if that is your ambition.

Ok, maybe I am being a bit harsh, but this is the base motivation that is being propagated and the reason for any problem with rationality.

Religious education is an oxymoron, but the words are hiding the truth - religious De-education. This is why the Dark Ages were so dark...

Other Comments by Beachbum

12. Comment #241630 by Serdan on September 2, 2008 at 11:06 pm

 avatarbeanson,
"By the way are Satanists allowed to run schools now?"

They already do. It's called home schooling. No Satanist would expose his/her own child to this lunacy.

Also, where's V when you need him?

Other Comments by Serdan

13. Comment #241631 by somersetsimon on September 2, 2008 at 11:10 pm

 avatarI've just written a blog post about faith schools

http://www.hancockfamily.org.uk/

I think I need a follow-up now...
A while ago I'm sure I saw a stat that explained that after you factor out social class, there is no difference between faith schools and secular schools. Did anyone else see this?

Simon

Other Comments by somersetsimon

14. Comment #241634 by TalkyMeat on September 2, 2008 at 11:41 pm

 avatarDamn. If I do ever return to the UK, I wanna send my daughter to a Satanist school.

Seriously though, WTF? What exactly is the British government trying to achieve here? Are they trying to emulate just how fucked the US is over religion, are are we skipping that and going straight to the Balkans?

Beachbum and EvidenceOnly are right, faith-based education makes about as much sense as meat-based vegetarianism or fucking-based celibacy.

Other Comments by TalkyMeat

15. Comment #241637 by Lev-CapeTown on September 3, 2008 at 12:02 am

 avatar
Teaching assistants, dinner ladies and caretakers may need to get on their knees to keep their jobs from now on.


I like the author's humour.

Other Comments by Lev-CapeTown

16. Comment #241645 by nalfeshnee on September 3, 2008 at 12:20 am

 avatarMan am I glad I left the UK before I had children.

Other Comments by nalfeshnee

17. Comment #241682 by somersetsimon on September 3, 2008 at 1:27 am

 avatar
Faith schools are therefore an oxymoron.


It is often stated that faith-based schools get better results than secular schools. I haven't seen these figures myself, but they may well be correct. If they are correct, then surely someone shoulf investigate WHY they are better. My suspicsion (and something that Polly Toynbee alludes to) is that faith schools, by definition, are allowed to select their pupils and they are using this to make sure they only take bright kids from nice, middle-class affluent backgrounds and so the school gets good exam results.

Another factor that is often mentioned is the religious 'ethos' of the school that somehow leads to higher standards of behaviour and morality in the school. Again, this is probably due to the selection process. However, I haven't ever seen anyone explain exactly what they mean by this 'ethos'. Are they implying that there are some rules of behaviour that can only be enforced in a religious context? Is it like a game of 'Simon Says' where the teacher saying 'no bullying in the playground' has no effect, but "Jesus says 'no bullying in the playground' " gets the kids to behave?

Other Comments by somersetsimon

18. Comment #241687 by oasis-al-reason on September 3, 2008 at 1:30 am

 avatarOn RD's scale I'm a full blown atheist - Level 7. If God (take your pick - jehovah, krishna, baal, thor et al) were to appear before me and said here I am, boy, I'd probably say get-the-£$"*&-outa-here. BUT...

Ok, so call me a hypocrite, but as the saying goes, when it comes down to your own kids, particularly their education, I too would have been prepared to get down on my knees (while trying to keep a straight face) if this had managed to get them into a faithhead school (except a muslim school that would have been a kneel too far!). So I starved, skimped, saved and payed through the nose for private schooling.

It's a simple case of 'means to an end', Polly.

Other Comments by oasis-al-reason

19. Comment #241688 by V'Ger on September 3, 2008 at 1:30 am

 avatarA pretty typical move from Labour.

Tell us all on one hand that we have to integrate with one-another, and get back to that community spirit... and then promote the separation of different sections of society based on faith.

What a truly aweful message to send to young children... don't mix with those kids - they follow the wrong God!

Other Comments by V'Ger

20. Comment #241713 by Animavore on September 3, 2008 at 1:56 am

 avatarMan this is the type of stuff Ireland is turning away from with the Catholic church gradually being pushed out of schools (calls to make religion class an optional subject to be done after school, communions being taken up by third parties etc...) but I'm worried that Ireland might get ideas and start following Englands lead like they have for years. Or it's possible that Ireland may surpass England if a recession hits them worse than us which is quite likely (going by current trends but we all know how fast things can change).

Other Comments by Animavore

21. Comment #241733 by PJG on September 3, 2008 at 2:36 am

 avatarI seem to be saying "Jeeezzus Christ" and "God help us all" more and more these days - does this mean I am finding religion - or am I just finding religion increasingly scary?

Other Comments by PJG

22. Comment #241742 by Corylus on September 3, 2008 at 2:56 am

 avatar
No sooner was the new group made public than its chair, Rabbi Jonathan Romain, minister of Maidenhead synagogue, paid for his outspoken bravery with a savage personal assault from the Jewish Chronicle.
I tracked down this article here.

Other Comments by Corylus

23. Comment #241769 by gcdavis on September 3, 2008 at 3:39 am

 avatarOk Polly lets start an new political party!

You are right our pathetic government is busy encouraging and funding faith schools, including islamic ones, whilst large numbers of young islamists are baying for the blood of any who oppose their disgusting beliefs, take a look at the Pat Condell link http://www.patcondell.net/page4/page4.html
In countless other places conflict in the name of religion continues, in much of Africa, India, Pakistan, Iraq and many more besides.

To engage with any potential electorate we have to be for something, not just against. Atheism is the only intelligent choice but it is doesn't on its own satisfy the universal desire for belonging. Religions are so embedded in the community and culture that surrounds them that this aspect exerts as strong force as the faith. To prise people away from their security blanket we have to offer a replacement.

What we have to offer is a humanist philosophy, which is, to quote Polly, she is also President of the BHA, a view of life that is "progressive and optimistic, in awe of human potential, living without fear of judgement and death, finding enough purpose and meaning in life, love and leaving a good legacy." That has to be translated into something tangible, we don't have churches where people can congregate, we don't have traditions or customs that provide that sense of continuity and community. We need to start building them from the ground up.

To effect change on the scale that is needed we should create an international organisation with political ambitions. It would, be in part, a single issue party, like the Greens, opposing belief in the supernatural but with a broader humanist agenda and set of values. Ok there are various existing coalitions of humanist/secular/atheist groups but the all seem to be umbrella groups, what is needed is a single political entity that will contest local and national elections here in the UK and across the globe. Sounds ambitious? You bet, but we have one fantastic advantage to those who have tried to create mass movements in the past; the internet.

Other Comments by gcdavis

24. Comment #241796 by The Schuermannator on September 3, 2008 at 4:51 am

 avatarEkklesia ought to be recognized as a theological faithtank. Or a theological non-thinktank.

Other Comments by The Schuermannator

25. Comment #241809 by mark65 on September 3, 2008 at 5:20 am

about these comments
http://www.patcondell.net/page4/page4.html

i'm going to bet my mortgage that most of those come from the fine upstanding members of the "religion of peace"

Other Comments by mark65

26. Comment #241866 by Cartomancer on September 3, 2008 at 6:58 am

 avatarOnce again the test to apply to see if something like "faith schools" is a legitimate idea is whether we would be happy with it were the special element a non-religious ideology or group identity.

Would anyone be happy with special segregated schools for Marxist or Fascist parents? BNP schools sound like an outrageous idea, but we already allow another bigoted, homophobic, patriarchal institution with links to paramilitary organisations to control schools in this country. What about schools specifically for people whose parents work in the medical profession, or the insurance industry, or the building trade? What would schools for the teaching profession look like I wonder? Schools for black people and schools for asians or orientals (which is what muslim faith schools often end up turning into)? Schools for gay parents? Sixth-form colleges for gay pupils? Schools for people who like cheese? Schools for people who watch Dr. Who? Would anyone even contemplate trying to set up an atheist school which only admitted professed atheists as teachers and refused to teach religious education?

When you put the question in those terms, it seems like needless and nefarious segregation to no good end. When religion comes into play however - a phenomenon which actually has centuries of evidence for how divisive segregation of schooling can be, somehow large numbers of people think it's all right.

Other Comments by Cartomancer

27. Comment #241867 by Beusfalus on September 3, 2008 at 7:02 am

 avatarTeaching assistants, dinner ladies and caretakers may need to get on their knees to keep their jobs from now on
I'm sure the laws against religious discrimanation may have something to say about this!!!

Quite worrying this article. I spent my first years of religious indoctrination being raised in the staunchly protestant enclave of the Shankill Road, Belfast. There we were taught to hate all things catholic with a passion....even without having met one. I just couldn't get my head round it and at an early age I realised what bollocks it all was, I mean, had I been born half a mile to the west, I'd have been an indoctinated Catholic from the staunch Falls Road, Belast, learning to despise all things protestant. Couldn't wait to get the fuck out and at the age of 17 joined the army. No longer was I away than I was back and taking the vile hatred from both sides. Irony.

Anyway, lost my train of thought there.

I promised myself if I ever had children it wouldn't be the case for them. I did have a couple and they both attended integrated schools and better human beings they are for it too. Of course there was no religion about the house as they grew up so I don't know if that had a helping hand also.

Other Comments by Beusfalus

28. Comment #241894 by GodMyArse on September 3, 2008 at 7:29 am

I'm a member of a small secular organisation actively campaigning in a very small way in my own area where two schools are going to be merged into one and, as one is already a church school, the enlarged campus will be a church school. We are trying simply to raise people's awareness of this issue and get them asking questions about their own kids' educations but the apathy in this country is depressing. Also our county council has basically said we are not allowed to make representations to the public consultation meetings! Can the Yanks please invade and install a democracy, please?

Other Comments by GodMyArse

29. Comment #241968 by amalthea on September 3, 2008 at 9:03 am

 avatarLet's be honest, in the UK, faith schools are a class thing, parents get their kids in by any means possible, they'll have the stamp of 'accepted by the establishment' when they leave. When the only faith schools were Catholic and protestant (Church of England), no problem. But now that other faiths want to have government funding it brings the issue to the fore. Why should I pay taxes to a govt. that funds schools whose faith is antithetical to mine? (Sorry, thet's my Devil's Advocate Daily Mail Reader stance)

Surely, the real truth is that faith schools (class-based) are heavily funded by their respected churches, parents are more affluent, children have less distractions (are we having FOOD for dinner tonight Mommy?) and perform marginally better. The faith schools (in the UK) are a way of insulating their little bundles of joy from the real world of working classes, black people, other religions and atheism. But mostly poor people. (Though most people would say "giving their kids the best chance")

My default stance is 'keep it at home, or in your church, don't teach your bullshit to my kids in their school', but I have no kids. Maybe I shouldn't be allowed to vote on the subject (wouldn't surprise me if that's the next rule for school governers in the UK)

Just as an aside to the US, our Queen, thanks to her 'can't keep it in his pants' predecessor Henry the 8th, is not only head of State, but also Head of Church. And, no, we don't have a written constitution either.

A

Other Comments by amalthea

30. Comment #241970 by RichardofYork on September 3, 2008 at 9:04 am

We are a monarchy not a democracy. Apathy may come from a feeling of powerlessness , the powers that be say what we have to do and we go along with it, for the most part .1984 , 24 years late?

Other Comments by RichardofYork

31. Comment #241989 by Malenfant on September 3, 2008 at 9:30 am

#26 Cartomancer -

Sign me up for one of those Atheist schools!

Seriously, I have sleepless nights about the unhealthy ways of thinking that my kids' teachers seem happy to promote. I just hope they grow up with critical minds and are able to come to their own conclusions.

Other Comments by Malenfant

32. Comment #242012 by Stuart Paul Wood on September 3, 2008 at 10:07 am

I've been saying it for ages - Labour and their glorious faith schools have us sleep walking into a social and educational disaster.

Social cohesion? - allow separation of children on a faith basis

Produce the next world-beating crop of young scientists? - allow nonsense to be taught in classrooms

I'm sure the damage that faith schools are doing now will be felt for generations. Labour twats. I'm still pissed off that they cost us all 2.7 billion through the 10p tax fuck up - one of the stupidest ideas they've ever had and amongst some bloody stiff opposition too.

Other Comments by Stuart Paul Wood

33. Comment #242027 by flying goose on September 3, 2008 at 10:27 am

 avatarJust found this on the Accord website.

www.accordcoalition.org.uk

Declaration of aims
In a pluralist, multi-cultural society, the state should promote tolerance and recognition of different values and beliefs. Given the dangers of segregation and the importance of community cohesion we need schools that welcome all and are committed to non-discrimination. Schools should promote a culture of questioning, of knowledge, of respect and of exploration of values, where students develop their own identities and sense of place in the world. We believe all state-funded schools should:

1. Operate admissions policies that take no account of pupils' â€" or their parents' â€" religion or beliefs.

2. Operate recruitment and employment policies that do not discriminate on the grounds of religion or belief.

3. Follow an objective, fair and balanced syllabus for education about religious and non-religious beliefs â€" whether determined by their local authority or by any future national syllabus or curriculum for RE.

4. Be made accountable under a single inspection regime for RE, Personal, Social & Health Education (PSHE) and Citizenship.

5. Provide their pupils with inclusive, inspiring and stimulating assemblies in place of compulsory acts of worship.

And we commit to work with each other locally and nationally to turn public support for inclusive education into a campaign for reform that the government cannot ignore.

Can't disagree with any of this.

Although I must say it is a largly urban issue, I cant' think of our local c of e school turning any one away on grounds of faith, it would not have many pupils.

Other Comments by flying goose

34. Comment #242086 by blakjack on September 3, 2008 at 11:22 am

 avatarMy four children went to a CofE sponsored school, simply because there was no choice (other than driving many miles each day). One of the four is seriously handicapped as a result of a road traffic accident as a baby. Poor girl (now in her twenties) still believes in all sort of fairy tales so it's hard to be critical that she is officially a Christian. The other three - despite the faith school input between the ages of 5 and 11 - are all atheists.

Faith Schools certainly go against the grain as a matter of principle but they probably do absolutely nothing to produce the next generation of believers. Indeed, the promotion of "belief" is schools is probably the best way there possibly could be to turn people off religion

As a footnote, some 60 plus years ago, my parents (not themselves Catholic) sent me to a Convent School. I look back at that experience and realise that it was one of the defining factors that turned me into the Atheist I am today.

Jack

Other Comments by blakjack

35. Comment #242102 by Nova on September 3, 2008 at 11:41 am

mordacious1:
Everytime I think the U.S. is screwed up with religion, I only have to look to the UK to feel better.
LOL then perhaps you need to sort out your priorities. UK has silly laws and governments which make religion tricky but the central culture at large isn't religious, compare this to the US where every other person is a religious nut. I'm actually amazed, considering everything, that a rational person could consider the religious situation here in the UK worse than it is in the US.

It is telling that these faith school are being initiated hush-hush whereas in your country faith charges into policy (and through the wall between church and state). Did you see how Tony was splashed with cold water the moment he babbled about God? Compare that to what your politicians have to do to get elected to important posts. You do know the polls show a truly monumental gap between out two countries in religious belief? I'm glad your happy with your 16% non-religious slice but I'll stay here where it's more like 50%. Sorry about the rant it's just more than once when I read of the a poor religious situation here in the UK an American patriot atheist comes along and gloats like this because they're sore about the state of their own country. America has been great in many areas - freedom of speech stands out, but despite early secular successes now religion is a weak spot and some people seem to find that a hard concept to grasp.

Other Comments by Nova

36. Comment #242260 by Border Collie on September 3, 2008 at 1:59 pm

 avatarI think the faith school issue here in the US is within a step or two of you guys in the UK. We're probably running neck and neck. Like maybe with some of your schools, it's actually more of a race or class issue at times, than a religious issue. The faith schools pander to the race and class fears of the parents.

Other Comments by Border Collie

37. Comment #242261 by JAMCAM87 on September 3, 2008 at 1:59 pm

 avatarThere is one simple thing we can do to abolish faith schools.

COMPLAIN!

I've been writing to the government about it. Hope everyone else can too. Life's short and a well worded letter can be enormously effective!

:)

Other Comments by JAMCAM87

38. Comment #242556 by mixmastergaz on September 4, 2008 at 4:06 am

 avatarSerdan: V is here.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7237862.stm

Other Comments by mixmastergaz

39. Comment #242590 by hungarianelephant on September 4, 2008 at 6:12 am

 avatar
Official policy says it's up to local communities to decide the kind of schools they want.

Well, up to a point. "Official policy" also says that you can't have academic selection, even if the local community wants it (as many do). So on the one hand, it's all up to you, but on the other, whoah! steady on there, we have to have some controls, you know.

This is NuLab doublethink at its finest, and the result is a mess. The parents who are desperate to get their children out of the standard state education, a quarter of whose products leave school unable to read, are left with little choice other than the faith schools.

Polly Toynbee clearly thinks the solution is effectively to the faith schools by banning everything that makes them faith schools. Increased state control has not been a roaring success for some time. Might it not be better to cut off the faith schools at the pass, by allowing parents a genuine choice of the type of school they want?

Other Comments by hungarianelephant

40. Comment #242792 by D'Arcy on September 4, 2008 at 1:14 pm

 avatarPolly Toynbee was one of the influential journalists, who helped to sway public opinion in getting Labour elected, in 1997. Now she rails against what they have done. Her faith in "New Labour" has been discredited, at least in this field. Like so many others, she is well meaning and wants capitalism without its problems. Unfortunately capitalism doesn't work that way. Religion is one, of many, tools our leaders use to keep our minds away from the goal of emancipation.

Other Comments by D'Arcy

41. Comment #242823 by popecorkyxxiv on September 4, 2008 at 1:58 pm

 avatarDay by day I hear more about how the Hegemonic Plutocratic Oligarchies that pretends to be democratic govenments around the world screw things up more and more. I know it's a little extreme, and perhaps a little fascist but I'm really starting to thing the organization Technocracy Inc. may have a really good point. This sociological experiment of representative democracy has failed because the representatives are all members of the socio-economic elite causing the system to degenerate into an Oligarchy. Perhaps we should have a system where people are put in charge not because they are wealthy and able to play the political game well enough to be popular, but rather they are chosen based upon the fact they are the best person to actually do the job. Something like the guy in charge of medicine is one of the best medical administrators, the guy in charge of education worked in education, the one in charge of finances is one of the best financiers, etc. etc. Rather than having the people in charge of everything having no knowledge or experience about what they are in charge of, but are experts in the fields of shifty deals and smooth talking.

Other Comments by popecorkyxxiv

42. Comment #242834 by Dinah on September 4, 2008 at 2:13 pm

The present government in the UK has consistently ignored the opinions of the population over the last ten plus years. Most of us don't want religious schools, 'faith' based welfare, mass immigration, the concreting over of the countryside to build horrible sub-standard houses, the plundering of pension schemes, the dumbing down of qualifications, the raising of the school leaving age to 17, the closures of local hospitals and Post Offices to mention just a few, but do any of our esteemed and beloved leaders take the slightest notice? Like heck they do. And then they wonder why people can't be bothered to vote. Trouble is, even when this lot are eventually kicked out, I doubt whether the next lot will have either the will or the means to repair the damage.

Other Comments by Dinah

43. Comment #242848 by ThoughtsonCommonToad on September 4, 2008 at 2:33 pm

 avatarFaith Schools. Racist Schools. Marmite loving schools.

Other Comments by ThoughtsonCommonToad

44. Comment #243054 by Telic on September 5, 2008 at 3:25 am

 avatarThis is one of the few things that makes me embarrassed to be British. Its probably the single most worrying trend in the country today (giving rise to a lot more worrying trends...), and Blair should be ashamed of himself.

Britain isn't often jealous of France, but in this instance we should be.

Other Comments by Telic

45. Comment #243320 by j.mills on September 5, 2008 at 12:31 pm

 avatarJust this week I finished my job. The secondary school I worked at has just closed and immediately reopened as an academy. I think the entire academies scheme is lunacy for a hundred reasons, and in this case the 'sponsor' (which has actually contributed not one penny) is United Learning Trust - an arm of the C of E.

Fortunately I applied for and was given a severance package. A few other people left too. But these establishments just roll along, entirely state-funded but with far less scrutiny than state schools. ULT already have a dozen academies, more than most local authorities, and this is all taking place nationwide with virtually zero public discussion. (The 'consultation' for this particular academy was laughable.)

All staff are required to uphold 'Christian values'. These include tolerance, respect, compassion and hard work, though how those ended up being monopolised by Christianity is not explained. Religious Education lessons will be 'mainly Christian'. It's very depressing.

Other Comments by j.mills

46. Comment #243970 by BigC on September 8, 2008 at 4:08 am

 avatarCheck out this guys verbal diahorrea:

http://www.churchtimes.co.uk/content.asp?id=62739

Lenin is said to have had a name for Western liberals who supported Russian Communism in its early days. He called them "useful idiots", because they were helpful to him, but harming themselves by, in effect, braiding the rope that would hang their capitalist system. The epithet came to mind when I was wondering what to make of the handful of religious figures who have joined the new anti-faith schools coalition, Accord, this week.

There is a high-minded tone to their pro­nounce­ments. After all, as they put it, who could be against Accord's call for non-discrimination in admissions and employment, a balanced curricu­lum, a common inspection regime, and assemblies that reflect the whole community in our 7000 faith schools?

Who could be against this? Anyone who thought through the political reality behind these lofty words, in a world where religious practice is under constant siege from the secularist drum-bangers who constitute the backbone of the Accord coalition. Look at its signatories, and you see Philip Pullman, Polly Toynbee, Steve Jones, Claire Rayner, and all the usual suspects of the British Humanist Association. You see a teachers' union out to secure more jobs. And you see the self-publicists of the think-tank Ekklesia, a couple of rabbis, and a sprinkling of Hindus, who had their first state school announced only this week.

The coalition is not against faith schools, Accord insists: it just wants them to change. The trouble is, as anyone with any direct experience inside a church school knows, the changes it wants will be the first step along the road to a dilution that will erode the very things that make faith schools distinctive.

It will lead us further down the path of the vicar I know who was asked recently by the head of a Church of England school not to wear his clerical collar in school, for fear of giving out a triumphalist message to non-Christian pupils. We will have secularist parents asking for crucifixes to be taken down, as they might be psychologically disturbing. Public prayer will be branded divisive. Humanists will complain about collections for Christian Aid. Religious identity will be whittled away incrementally.

Supporters of Accord trot out all the usual hoary myths. "Faith schools are about indoctrina­tion by priests." In fact, they teach the national curriculum, are inspected by Ofsted, and have religious syllabuses that are more genuinely respectful of other faiths than the lip-service paid in many state schools. "They exclude non-faith teachers." In reality, most church schools have staff from varied backgrounds, and insist that only the head and senior teachers are Anglicans or Roman Catholics.

"They force-feed doctrine." In fact, gospel values are not most distinctively taught, but practised, in children's care for one another, staff, their families, and the wider community. "They are divisive." In fact, they inculcate a sense of social responsibility, affirm minority communities, and are often more ethnically diverse than state schools near by.

Why, critics ask, should taxpayers fund religion? Because the parents of the pupils there are taxpayers, too, who happily fund the two-thirds of British schools that are not faith-based. Because taxpayers get a good deal, as Churches pay 15 per cent of capital costs in such schools. Because they are perhaps the most successful sector of the nation's schools, as Ofsted reports and admissions applications suggest.

Faith schools outperform comparable schools because of the faith that underpins them. Deplete that, and you level down, when what the nation's schools need is levelling up.

Paul Vallely is associate editor of The Independent.

Other Comments by BigC
Reload Comments | Back to Top

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password:

This article is reposted from a website that accepts comments.
Why not share your comment on the article there as well? CLICK HERE