It looks as though the British government is on to a loser with its current proposals surrounding the issue of faith schools in the public sector.
Unlike the US where separation of church and state are guaranteed in the bill of rights, although there are many who don't believe this and would like to do something about it, Britain has an official religion (Church of England), bishops sit in the House of Lords and the Queen is the official head of the church. Additionally schools operated by religious organisations make up a material portion of the government school system. The state pays 85% of capital costs and 100% of staff costs so that public funds are effectively financing religious education. These schools may not select by ability they are allowed to discriminate on the basis of religious belief (generally of the parents). As this often equates to selection by the back door their results are sometimes better other local state schools and parents have been known to go to extraordinary lengths (atheists attending church etc) to get their kids into these schools.
At the primary school level especially these schools may represent a dominant force in any particular area. The schools are predominately Christian (Church of England and Roman Catholic) but others faiths including Judaism, Islam and Sikhism are represented. The government has actually been pushing for more rather than less of these schools with the hope of expanding the base into other faiths.
Now the government seems to be trying to head in every direction with proposals that would allow these schools to discriminate in the hiring of support staff while at the same time insisting that faith schools must begin to accept a minimum proportion of their student body from other faiths.
No one seems to be happy. The government is scrambling to try and keep everyone happy.
I have the answer. End the participation of religious schools in the public sector. I can hear the protests now. "He wants to ban religious school!!" No I don't. I just wish to remove them from direct state funding.
Teaching religion is not the business of the state. It is the role of the family. Why is it that those who generally most object to government interference of any sort seem to be those who always want to inject religion into education? In my thinking, after basic skills such as literacy and numeracy, the most important thing that schools have to teach is the ability to think critically, to question and to challenge authority. This exactly what a religious school is unlikely to do.
I fear my quest is in vain, in Britain at least, as those desirous of greater religious education, although probably much less numerous, are much more committed than those who oppose it. This may change however when the Scientologists decide to get in on the act. Even when I find someone who agrees with me it is usually for the wrong reason (i.e. Christian schools are OK but Muslim schools are dangerous).
Unlike the US where separation of church and state are guaranteed in the bill of rights, although there are many who don't believe this and would like to do something about it, Britain has an official religion (Church of England), bishops sit in the House of Lords and the Queen is the official head of the church. Additionally schools operated by religious organisations make up a material portion of the government school system. The state pays 85% of capital costs and 100% of staff costs so that public funds are effectively financing religious education. These schools may not select by ability they are allowed to discriminate on the basis of religious belief (generally of the parents). As this often equates to selection by the back door their results are sometimes better other local state schools and parents have been known to go to extraordinary lengths (atheists attending church etc) to get their kids into these schools.
At the primary school level especially these schools may represent a dominant force in any particular area. The schools are predominately Christian (Church of England and Roman Catholic) but others faiths including Judaism, Islam and Sikhism are represented. The government has actually been pushing for more rather than less of these schools with the hope of expanding the base into other faiths.
Now the government seems to be trying to head in every direction with proposals that would allow these schools to discriminate in the hiring of support staff while at the same time insisting that faith schools must begin to accept a minimum proportion of their student body from other faiths.
No one seems to be happy. The government is scrambling to try and keep everyone happy.
I have the answer. End the participation of religious schools in the public sector. I can hear the protests now. "He wants to ban religious school!!" No I don't. I just wish to remove them from direct state funding.
Teaching religion is not the business of the state. It is the role of the family. Why is it that those who generally most object to government interference of any sort seem to be those who always want to inject religion into education? In my thinking, after basic skills such as literacy and numeracy, the most important thing that schools have to teach is the ability to think critically, to question and to challenge authority. This exactly what a religious school is unlikely to do.
I fear my quest is in vain, in Britain at least, as those desirous of greater religious education, although probably much less numerous, are much more committed than those who oppose it. This may change however when the Scientologists decide to get in on the act. Even when I find someone who agrees with me it is usually for the wrong reason (i.e. Christian schools are OK but Muslim schools are dangerous).
No comments:
Post a Comment