I've just been looking at a major report which focused on how faith schools operate. The researchers examined religious schools in their full historical, cultural, political and educational context and consulted with over 1000 stakeholders (teachers, parents, students, educationalists, governors etc). It makes interesting reading, most people you speak to on this subject agree that faith schools seem to do better than non-faith schools academically, but few look at the downsides. This report focuses on some of the disadvantages from societies point of view, including things like divisiveness, unfair selection and elitism etc.
I have reproduced the (summary) findings below:
1. End selection on the basis of faith
Faith schools should be for the benefit of all in society rather than just some. If faith schools are convinced of their relevance for society, then that should apply equally for all children. With state funding comes an obligation to be relevant and open to all citizens.
2. Children should have a greater say in how they are educated
Children’s rights are as important as parents’ rights. While the debate about faith schools is characterized by discussions of parental choice of education, there is little discussion about children’s voice.
3. RE should be part of the core national curriculum
Provision for learning about religion is too often poor in schools without a religious character. Provision for learning about religions beyond that of the sponsoring faith in faith schools is also inadequate.
4. Faith schools should also serve the most disadvantaged
Despite histories based on challenging poverty and inequality, and high-level pronouncements that suggest a mission to serve the most disadvantaged in society, faith schools educate a disproportionately small number of young people at the lowest end of the socio-economic scale.
5. Faith schools must value all young people
People cherish facets of their identities beyond their faith, and these also need to be the focus of learning in faith schools – and valued within them. Similarly, religious identities should be more highly valued within schools that don’t have a religious character.
By all means children should be free to believe whatever they like outside of the classroom, but ultimately I would much prefer an American style of education system, i.e. that schools should be secular organisations focused on teaching universal subjects rather than favouring any particular cult or religious dogma, anything else just looks like censorship and indoctrination to me.
2 comments:
I went to a catholic school in the US for high school (so from ages 13-17), and we all had obligatory religion study, although of course they were trying hard to sell us on the jesus idea, so they tried to make it cool and interesting for teenagers.
Some of the students were religious, others weren't. It was very highly academic and competitive, with nearly everyone going on to university, and a good percentage going on to the ivy league. I managed to take five years worth of science classes in four years (and most of our science teachers had doctorate degrees), so there wasn't any tension with the study of religion and science, thankfully. We did waste that time in religion and the various masses we had to attend, but it was an overall positive experience.
I think out of all of them the Catholic ones seem to be the most balanced (purely from anecdotal evidence)
I must admit I don't object to religious education, I think it's quite important from a cultural point of view but what really irks me is that my children spend 2 hours a week doing RE + Chapel and only 1 hour a week doing ICT, the balance is all wrong and can only be justified from the point of view of wanting to indoctrinate, even though they swear blind that is not the case of course.
Post a Comment