INFORMATION

This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used. For further information, see our Privacy Policy.

The future of education (if any)

For discussions related to education and educational institutions.
Message
Author
User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22737
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of education (if any)

#741 Postby Alan H » October 2nd, 2016, 2:40 pm

Latest post of the previous page:

coffee wrote:It is said that humanism is currently out of date, what will the BHA ganna do now? What will humanists gonna do now?

https://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2016/09/2 ... more-31581
The thesis is wrong:
Humanism is based on the notion of individuality and the fundamental tenet that each and everybody’s feelings and experiences are of equal value, by virtue of being human.
At least, the author is using a different meaning to that used by, say, the BHA or possibly most members of this forum.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22737
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of education (if any)

#742 Postby Alan H » October 7th, 2016, 4:37 pm

Government ignoring inclusive religious views due to religious illiteracy
The Government has been accused of ignoring moderate and inclusive religious views in its approach to faith schools policy due to a shallow and media driven understanding of religion that considers hard-line religious views as more authentic. The analysis has been put forward in a new online article for the London School of Economics by national Sociology of Religion expert, Professor Linda Woodhead.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22737
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of education (if any)

#743 Postby Alan H » October 8th, 2016, 10:47 am

The Tory Government's consultation of grammar schools, getting independent schools involved in running State schools and expanding religious schools: Schools that Work for Everyone

The consultation questions are, of course, designed to give the answers they need, but they forgot to say how any of this will actually work for everyone.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22737
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of education (if any)

#744 Postby Alan H » October 11th, 2016, 5:22 pm

ACADEMY SCHOOLS IN £25M OF DEBT — EVEN AS FUNDS ARE ‘SIPHONED OFF TO FOUNDERS’ COMPANY’
It’s not just NHS trusts that are in the red. The BBC reports that 113 academy school trusts are in debt to the tune of £25m. Eye watering tales of financial mismanagement include at least one trust paying large sums to outside companies owned by the … errrr … trust founders.


Trevor Averre-Beeson and his wife Jane Fielding are the co-founders of the Lilac Sky Schools Academy Trust. The trust is not only in £665,000 of debt — the founders employed two of their children and siphoned off more than £800,000 in payments for services to ‘outside companies’ that had been set up by Averre-Beeson and Fielding.

Luckily the Education Funding Agency has now ordered the ‘services’ payments from Lilac Sky be stopped and the trust is to hand over the nine schools it runs to a new sponsor.

One parent put it bluntly to the beeb:

“As far as I’m concerned this was all about business and making money and little to do with educating children.”
Lilac Sky is by no means the only disaster in the edu-business sector, where horror stories include one academy “where the headteacher had spent £50,000 on a one-day training course run by their friend”.

Even the executive head of Perry Beeches — an academy lauded by both Gove and Cameron — was forced to quit in May when it emerged the trust had accumulated a whopping £2.1m deficit.

The financial fun may not be over, however, with reports in July that Averre-Beeson is involved in a bid to open a Free School in Barnet next year.

No doubt it’ll be a model of prudence and care when it comes to taxpayer funds.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22737
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of education (if any)

#745 Postby Alan H » October 12th, 2016, 4:49 pm

'Relaxing faith schools admissions rules risks the divisive ghettoisation of education'
In an increasingly divided nation, the last thing we should be doing is exacerbating that by dividing our children, says a former schools minister
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22737
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of education (if any)

#746 Postby Alan H » October 13th, 2016, 3:34 pm

Former Schools Minister reveals Church pressure to prevent inclusive admissions
Former Minister of State for Schools, Lord Knight of Weymouth, has revealed in a comment piece in the Times Educational Supplement this week how coordinated pressure by the Catholic Church scuppered Government plans 10 years ago to require all state funded faith schools to reserve a proportion of their places for pupils from outside of each school’s faith. Lord Knight also warned that ‘Relaxing faith schools admissions rules risks the divisive ghettoisation of education’.


I doubt the Tory Government will be swayed by such things...
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22737
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of education (if any)

#747 Postby Alan H » October 13th, 2016, 3:37 pm

Although undoubtedly a complete waste of time, you can at least have some pleasure in telling the Tory Government what you think of their proposals for religious schools, grammar schools, etc. It only takes a few minutes to complete.

Schools that Work for Everyone – short version of consultation
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22737
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of education (if any)

#748 Postby Alan H » October 14th, 2016, 10:12 am

On the decision to drop A-level Art History: Securing the long term future of art history education in the UK
The announcement from AQA of the loss of the GCE A and AS level in History of Art is therefore of significant concern, both as an organisation that represent teachers of the subject, and more broadly as a champion for art history and visual culture, within and beyond education.

The decision to discontinue History of Art at Key Stage 5 will mark a significant loss to young people’s access to - and understanding of - a range of different cultures, artefacts and ideas. Signposting educational opportunities, such as an A level in art history to students who may never have considered this an opportunity, has also formed a significant part of our campaign work with partners across West Yorkshire, Bristol, Brighton and Sussex.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22737
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of education (if any)

#749 Postby Alan H » October 18th, 2016, 11:47 pm

Why the Higher Education and Research Bill must be amended
Buried in the 113 subsections and 12 schedules of the 2016 Higher Education and Research Bill that is currently before parliament are massive constitutional changes that will undermine the autonomy and vigour of Britain’s universities and its research base. The issues are complex, and involve perturbations of the difficult balance of power, democracy, expertise, and academic freedom that will seem intangible to many. But institutions and processes that have been of demonstrable value to this country for decades and, in some cases, centuries, will be significantly eroded if this bill passes through parliament unamended.

As it stands the bill envisages far-reaching changes to the organisation of universities and research. It establishes the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF), an assessment exercise based heavily on a variety of simple metrics with questionable relationships to teaching quality; it lowers the threshold that private providers must meet to become degree-awarding universities; and it will create a super-research council – UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) – led by a powerful chair and chief executive to oversee the near-totality of publicly funded research in the UK. Never before in the history of British science have so few individuals been been responsible for so much spending
Let me take the universities first. The Higher Education and Research Bill creates a powerful new body, the Office for Students (OfS) with the power to override university Royal Charters, and remove the right of institutions to award degrees or even to call themselves universities. All of this the OfS will be able to do without parliamentary scrutiny. The change is motivated by the government’s desire to enable new providers to enter the market – which the bill makes easier than at present by lowering the threshold requirements – and to be able to regulate that market by excluding providers that don’t perform to the required standard.
There is sense in having this degree of flexibility – and existing institutions should welcome high-quality competition. But this bill is a blunt and dangerous instrument for enacting that policy because alongside the power granted to the OfS to control the very existence of universities, it confers unprecedented powers on the Secretary of State to give instruction on what courses universities may teach. To quote the bill directly, Part 1, Section 2 states that “the OfS must have regard to guidance given by the Secretary of State”, guidance that “may be framed by reference to particular courses of study.”

While there are some safeguards in the bill to protect the freedom of universities to determine course content and methods of assessment, we should make no mistake: this is a new level of interference in university autonomy. It will have a chilling effect when combined with the power of the OfS to determine whether universities have the right to exist. The bill places undue power in the hands of government and erodes institutional autonomy and academic freedom.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22737
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of education (if any)

#750 Postby Alan H » October 28th, 2016, 11:10 pm

Catholic Education Service highlights contradiction at heart of Government’s approach to integration
The Director of the Catholic Education Service, Paul Barber, has described the consequence of faith Free Schools more readily becoming religiously homogenous environments if they no longer face limits on the number of pupils they can select by faith as ‘dreadful’. However, he has simultaneously reaffirmed his support for the Government’s current plan to do away with any restrictions limiting the extent to which faith schools can religiously prioritise the pupils they admit.

Mr Barber offered his comments in an interview with the Times Educational Supplement published today. He was responding to the announcement last month by the Prime Minister that the Government intends to scrap the current cap introduced in 2010 which limits faith Free Schools from not selecting more than half of their pupils on religious grounds. Among the justifications provided by Theresa May were that the 50% cap was ‘failing in its objective to promote integration.’

Chair of the Accord Coalition for Inclusive Education, Rabbi Dr Jonathan Romain, said ‘The comments highlight the contradiction of both the Catholic Education Service and Government wanting to facilitate and prevent religious segregation. They should reconcile this through recognising that religious mixing in schools is not a threat to our beliefs or identities but, by boosting the growth of trust and mutual understanding, helps create the conditions where diversity and difference is better accepted in society.

‘If the 50% religious selection cap has not been as effective as envisaged in promoting mixing then the response should be to take further action, not to remove the existing tools for improved integration. We urge the Government to reconsider its divisive plan to scrap the 50% cap, which risks giving a green light to more ghettoisation.’

Some faith Free Schools have been found to admit a highly homogenous intake. This is because they receive few applications from families who hold different beliefs. However, as research provided last month by Accord Coalition member group the British Humanist Association revealed, the 50% cap is having a positive effect, and especially in helping non-white families gain access to Christian schools. 99% of the state funded faith schools in England and Wales are Christian.


Catholic education chief expresses doubt over religious selection proposals
The Director of the Catholic Education Service (CES) Paul Barber has concededthat ‘the move back to schools of 100 per cent one faith is dreadful’, following the Government’s proposals to drop the 50% cap on religious selection in school admissions.

The CES has long been the main voice calling for the 50% cap to be removed. In the time that the cap has been in place – it was first introduced under Labour in 2007, then extended in 2010 as part of the coalition agreement – the CES has chosen not to open any new schools, misleadingly claiming that opening schools under the cap would ‘contravene canon law’. This is despite the fact that the majority of Catholic private schools in England do not select all of their places on the basis of religion, and in most other countries state schools are not even allowed to religiously select at all.

Contrary to claims made by the Government, the 50% cap has been hugely successful in improving integration in religious free schools. Analysis conducted by the British Humanist Association (BHA) earlier this month using official figures found that ‘faith’ schools opened under the cap were significantly more diverse than ‘faith’ schools that select 100% of their places on the basis of religion.

Responding to the comments, BHA Chief Executive Andrew Copson said, ‘It is frankly astounding that the Catholic Education Service has the nerve to claim that you can be on the side of integration and yet support schools in dividing up children from an incredibly early age on the basis of their parents’ religious or non-religious beliefs. This is clearly nonsense.

‘Religious selection in school admissions is the very definition of segregation, and if Paul Barber is genuinely uncomfortable with that, as he now claims to be, he will reverse the position of his organisation immediately and call on the Government to drop its plans to remove the 50% cap at once.

‘The cap has been hugely effective at boosting integration in religious free schools and improving the extent to which local schools are open to local parents. The move back to closed-off, single-faith schools really is dreadful and we hope the Government will move to amend its proposals accordingly.’
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Tetenterre
Posts: 3227
Joined: March 13th, 2011, 11:36 am

Re: The future of education (if any)

#751 Postby Tetenterre » October 31st, 2016, 5:34 pm

Alan H wrote:Although undoubtedly a complete waste of time, you can at least have some pleasure in telling the Tory Government what you think of their proposals for religious schools, grammar schools, etc. It only takes a few minutes to complete.

Schools that Work for Everyone – short version of consultation
Done. Bloody hell, they have developed "begging the question" to a new level...
Steve

Quantum Theory: The branch of science with which people who know absolutely sod all about quantum theory can explain anything.

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22737
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of education (if any)

#752 Postby Alan H » November 2nd, 2016, 4:31 pm

At least some have some bloody sense: London Assembly vote pits them against Number 10 plans for more religious selection in state schools
November 2nd, 2016

The London Assembly has voted to oppose the Government’s plans for 100% religious selection in new state-funded religious schools in England.

The vote comes on the same day as a new poll from Populus has shown that 72% of the public are opposed to any religious selection in schools, including including 63% of all Catholics and 82% of Muslims.

The motion, which was proposed by Tom Copley AM, asks for the Deputy Mayor to investigate the effects of the new proposals on the diversity of London’s schools, citing the serious evidence which shows religious selection in schools to damage community cohesion in terms of religion, ethnicity, and social class.

In the motion, the London Assembly voted to recognise that ‘The Government’s own data show that religious schools which are 100% selective by faith are less diverse in terms of both race and social class than religious schools where the 50% cap is in place.’

BHA Chief Executive Andrew Copson commented, ‘London is the most diverse part of England. Here, more than anywhere else, politicians and the public are aware of the desperate need for our schools to bring people together and not divide them. It’s very welcome news to see the London Assembly standing up the Government’s divisive plans, which all evidence shows will alienate children from each other and fracture our society.’
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22737
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of education (if any)

#753 Postby Alan H » November 2nd, 2016, 4:35 pm

Is segregation on the increase in the UK?
Segregation has been linked to prejudice and intolerance of the ‘other’ due to the lack of contact and interaction across social and cultural boundaries. With this in mind, present patterns suggest that policies may be needed to encourage White British residents to remain in diverse areas; to choose, rather than avoid, diverse areas when they do re-locate, encouraging similar choices with respect to placing pupils in diverse schools; and to reduce barriers to minority settlement in areas with a relatively high white population. At the same time, the promotion of community cohesion to develop cross-cultural acceptance will be another policy avenue to pursue where segregation means that everyday interaction is limited.

Segregation has also been seen as a product of an unequal society, or the result of discrimination, and this will necessarily require some form of intervention. However, this should not imply that an even spread of communities is possible and some degree of clustering has helped to develop support mechanisms for all distinct communities. The key issue is whether mixed communities and a shared society become recognised as a desirable objective supported by a strategy and policy framework. The Casey Review was set up on this basis —it remains to be seen if it will deliver.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22737
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of education (if any)

#754 Postby Alan H » November 7th, 2016, 7:29 pm

The madness continues: New Hindu faith schools proposed, despite warnings of worsening ethnic segregation
The latest wave of free school applications includes proposals for seven new Hindu schools.

Details of applicants proposing to open a free school in the 11th round of applications include several with a faith ethos, with Hindu, Christian and an Islamic school among the proposals.

The seven Hindu schools, if approved, would be built in Barnet, Birmingham, Brent, Hertsmere, Hounslow, Leicester and Redbridge.

The proposal comes from Avanti Schools Trust, which already runs five Hindu schools.

The Trust claims that "students with or without a faith background are always welcome at all Avanti Schools."

But one Avanti primary school says it puts the "development of spiritual insight" at "the heart of the curriculum" and draws "on the teachings of Krishna Chaitanya".

The school's website says that "spiritual insight will be achieved" through "singing of the names of the divine, with special but not exclusive focus on Krishna."

NSS campaigns director Stephen Evans said: "It is hard to imagine how these schools will have any broad appeal beyond the Hindu community.

"We regularly have cases of parents being assigned to faith schools against their wishes and if these schools do end up being undersubscribed then that is a risk.

"Just last week Professor Ted Cantle was warning about worsening ethnic segregation in communities across the country and the exodus of white Britons from many areas, drastically reducing contact between ethnic and religious groups.

"Schools with such a religious focus will accelerate this phenomenon. As Professor Cantle said, we need diverse schools, not schools that primarily cater to one religious and, de facto, one ethnic group."

Other schools seeking approval include over twenty Christian schools and one Islamic faith schools for girls.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22737
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of education (if any)

#755 Postby Alan H » November 15th, 2016, 5:46 pm

Government cancels rule forcing academics to show research two days before publication
The government has rowed back on a controversial new rule demanding academics give civil servants two days to look over research they plan to publish from the national pupil database – or be banned from accessing the data.
But Professor Stephen Gorard (pictured right), from the school of education at Durham University, said: “For me this is less of a U-turn and more an attempted clarification that does not work.”

He said the proposed changes do not address his concerns that, as an academic, he does not always know exactly when a paper or chapter will be published.

“I have started the practice of simply sending Department for Education (DfE) all pieces of writing involving NPD as soon as they are written (which may be up to two years before publication). Not sure how helpful this is and have never had any response or acknowledgement.”

The department originally said it was introducing the two-day rule to ensure policy officials and press officers were not “caught off guard” when data is published.

It followed publications by organisations like Education Datalab and the Education Policy Institute, quickly turned around after the government announced its intention to remove grammar schools.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22737
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of education (if any)

#756 Postby Alan H » November 18th, 2016, 2:03 pm

Religious academy trust moves to shut its only non-church school
‘This is a religious organisation taking control of a school with no religious character and then, a few months later, moving to close the school and effectively force children to attend a “faith” school instead,’ said BHA Faith Schools Campaigner Jay Harman.

‘It illustrates how inappropriate it is for religious academy trusts to gain control over schools without a religious character. This is a point we made to the House of Commons Education Committee earlier this year as part of their inquiry into multi-academy trusts, and we will certainly be bringing this additional example to their attention’.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22737
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of education (if any)

#757 Postby Alan H » November 19th, 2016, 12:12 pm

It will take decades to undo the societal damage the Tory Government is permitting and encouraging: Rise of faith schools will deeply divide our society
In opening the floodgates on a new wave of religious education, ministers ignore the fact that we live in an increasingly secular nation, writes one campaigner
In recent weeks both the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, and the director of the Catholic Education Service, Paul Barber, have set out their plans in TES to extend their organisations’ reach in education.

It seems somewhat incongruous that in one of the world’s most secularised countries, these Churches still oversee the education of almost 2 million children.

The Church of England plans to run a quarter of the 500 free schools that the government aims to open before 2020, while the Catholic Education Service has successfully lobbied the government to lift the 50 per cent faith-based admissions cap, and plans to open 30 to 40 new 100 per cent religiously selective schools.

The Church of England is already the biggest sponsor of academies in England, posing a number of questions; not least about the wisdom of handing over vast swathes of publicly funded education to a religious institution seemingly in terminal decline.

Anglican church attendance has halved over the past 35 years, and one has to wonder just how sustainable the Church’s plans are, particularly when all of the evidence suggests that the reduction in Christian affiliation and increase in non-belief is set to continue.

To what extent should the state bankroll the church in its mission?
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22737
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of education (if any)

#758 Postby Alan H » November 21st, 2016, 11:12 am

School admissions watchdog rejects ‘Catholic certificate’
The certificate of Catholic practice was introduced by dioceses this academic year to provide a more consistent way of judging a pupil’s religious faith, replacing other methods such as attendance at mass.

But the initiative, backed by the Catholic Education Service (CES), has received a major blow after the Office of the Schools Adjudicator (OSA) upheld several complaints that the form – signed off by a priest – breaks the admissions code.

The OSA upheld objections from two councils and at least one parent on cases spanning five schools, ruling the certificate did not meet requirements for “reasonable, clear, objective and procedurally fair” admissions practices.

It also ruled that the certificate breached rules that “parents can easily understand how any faith-based criteria will be reasonably satisfied”.
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22737
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of education (if any)

#759 Postby Alan H » November 23rd, 2016, 11:28 am

Catholic Education Service battle to defend ‘unfair and arbitrary’ religious discrimination in school admissions
November 23rd, 2016

The official body responsible for running Catholic schools in England and Wales will seek to legally challenge a decision by the school admissions watchdog which found that the religious selection test used by Catholic schools is ‘unfair and arbitrary’.

Earlier this month, the admission arrangements of a number of Catholic schools were referred to the Office of the Schools Adjudicator (OSA) over their use of the new Certificate of Catholic Practice. The Certificate, which was introduced this year by the Catholic Education Service (CES), is used by schools to verify whether or not a pupil is from a ‘practising’ Catholic family, and to subsequently give such pupils priority in admissions.

However, the certificate simply requires the approval and signature of a priest, and does not record more objective measures such as attendance at mass or proof of baptism. This was judged to be too arbitrary by the OSA and in contravention of the requirement for ‘reasonable, clear, objective, and procedurally fair’ admissions arrangements set out in the School Admissions Code which all schools must follow.

The CES together with the Diocese of Westminster have stated that ‘the legality of this determination is now being challenged in the high court’.

This is not the first time that the admission arrangements of religiously selective schools have been deemed unlawful by the OSA. Last year a report published by the British Humanist Association (BHA) on behalf of the Fair Admissions Campaign (FAC) detailed the rulings of the Adjudicator in a representative sample of religiously selective state secondary schools in England, finding widespread violations of the Code in almost every case.

‘The CES are essentially appealing to the court for the right to religiously discriminate against children on whatever grounds they please,’ said BHA Faith Schools Campaigner Jay Harman. ‘The vast majority of people acknowledged that it’s bad enough for state-funded schools to discriminate against and divide children on the basis of their parents’ religious or non-religious beliefs. To do so in such an arbitrary and unaccountable way is even more unacceptable. We will certainly be following these legal proceedings very closely indeed.’

‘Given that these schools can clearly not be trusted to be fair, open, and inclusive in their admission arrangements, the Government should think very carefully before it goes ahead with plans to drop the existing 50% cap on religious selection,’ he added. ‘Doing so now, at the behest of the Catholic Education Service no less, effectively represents a move to reward unlawful behaviour rather than punish it, and will only pave the way for far more manipulation of this kind in the future.’
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22737
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of education (if any)

#760 Postby Alan H » November 23rd, 2016, 11:42 pm

Well, that's extraordinary: International Catholic education body condemns move for more religious discrimination in school admissions
November 23rd, 2016

The Catholic International Education Office responsible for overseeing Catholic schools globally has called for all its schools to be ‘non-discriminatory’ and ‘open to all’, contradicting the position of the Catholic Education Service for England and Wales, lobbying for more powers to religiously discriminate in their school admissions.

In an official paper circulated at the Council of Europe recently, the Catholic International Education Office (OIEC) – the umbrella body for over 100 national catholic education organisations, including the CES – stated that a ‘Catholic school is an inclusive school, founded in intercultural and inter-religious dialogue, a non-discriminatory school, open to all, especially the poorest’.

The paper goes on to conclude that a ‘Catholic school is anything but a communitarian school. It is open to all. In many European, American, Arab, African or Asian countries, the Catholic school welcomes mainly, or even exclusively, Muslim pupils, Buddhists, animists, or pupils of other religions, even those without religion. It must constantly promote intercultural and inter-religious dialogue’.

In September, the UK Government announced that it will no longer require religious free schools in England to leave at least half of their places open to local children regardless of religion or belief, proposing instead to allow all new and existing religious free schools to select 100% of their places with reference to religion.

The move was largely provoked by claims from the CES, subsequently echoed by the Prime Minister, that the so-called 50% cap on religious selection contravenes ‘canon law’. In protest to the cap, the CES has not supported the opening of free schools since it was introduced.

However, the OIEC has now, effectively, condemned this approach. Its remarks add further weight to the growing recognition that the CES’s position is not only at odds with the views of most Catholics in England and around the world, but also represents a political tactic rather than a genuine religious objection.

Earlier this month, a poll conducted by Populus found that 63% of Catholics are opposed to any religious selection in state school admissions, and a survey carried out by the BHA in September found that the vast majority of Catholic private schools in England do not select all of their places on religious grounds, with many saying they do not religiously select at all. Around the world, a recent OECD survey identified Ireland, Israel, and Estonia as allowing their state schools to religiously select, while many schools in Scotland have open admissions.

‘It is becoming increasingly unclear what the motivation of the Catholic Education Service is in lobbying for more freedom to discriminate against and segregate children on the basis of religion,’ said BHA Education Campaigner Jay Harman.

‘Its position is not supported by the majority of Catholics, it is evidently not supported by canon law, and now we see that it is not supported by its parent organisation either. In fact, even the director of the CES has expressed concern over the consequences of moving back to single-faith schools.

‘It’s time for the Government to recognise that bowing to a disingenuous and self-interested religious lobby at the expense of the better interests of children is no way to make policy, so we will continue to encourage both the Prime Minister and the Education Secretary to urgently reconsider its plans to remove the 50% cap.’
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?

User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 22737
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The future of education (if any)

#761 Postby Alan H » December 1st, 2016, 6:41 pm

Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?


Return to “Education”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest