Faith Schools

[Joe]

Tring school is in no way, shape, or form a faith school. The 'faith' you speak of (its C of E affiliation) does not have any influence over the curriculum taught. It is misrepresentation to label it as such.

I don't think so. It is, by its C of E affiliation, a faith school. The curriculum does not have to be influenced in any way by the faith status, only the funding of the school. For example, I believe Tring's admissions policy is favourable to those who can show they attend church:

Incidentally, although I may be wrong, I do think the school's curriculum is influenced by it's CofE status. In particular, I don't recall the issue of homosexual relationships being addressed in Sex and Relationships education.

[Rob]

Incidentally, although I may be wrong, I do think the school's curriculum is influenced by it's CofE status. In particular, I don't recall the issue of homosexual relationships being addressed in Sex and Relationships education.

My memory of PSHE is certainly not my strongest point, but I believe you are correct. Of course, a quarter of the governors of the school are Church-appointed, and the governors certainly have a say in the teaching at the school (although the school isn't exactly forthcoming with the minutes on their website).

[Maff]

PSHE is a somewhat skewered example. Its subject matter has been a political football for years and I strongly suspect the governors & busybodies have had a greater say in it than many others. Their duty is to protect the interests of the school and that must partly overlap with ensuring the school is on the right political wavelength - And the present political position is to not offend anyone at all costs. Homosexuality unfortunately offends religious people. And we all know what a big deal that is. Hence, very little discussion in schools, even in an increasingly liberal society like the UK.

It's what happens when politicians interfere in institutions which should be subject to no outside agendas.

For example, I believe Tring's admissions policy is favourable to those who can show they attend church

It is. 10 people a year when I applied. Since I was out-of-county my application was through the Church (I live in Bucks but Tring is in Herts).

10 out of a year of 250 is not significant, but it is hardly insignificant.

I recall signing condolence books for the two students who died during my tenure. In particular the book for Josh Brand, who was probably more atheistic than I am! It was notable just how many people wrote something religious or spiritual regarding heaven or the afterlife. The high proportion of such messages did lead me to re-assess the impact of the selection process, both formal (school stipulation and informal (parental choice) Maybe that's just my bullshit detector skewing my views, I dunno. Or maybe atheists just don't sign condolence books as much as religious people?

Like I said, after attending 2 faith schools for my whole childhood, I have come out a radical atheist It depends on the extent to which the faith influences the teaching and selection processes. I think, for once, the Lib Dems have the right idea: Link state funding to the number of non-religious students and allow students to opt-out of any religious assemblies and activities. Remove the right to stipulate religious belief among all staff except those teaching RE. Scrap the bloated national curriculum and replace it with a much more basic, simplified outline of what was expected. Slash infant class sizes to around 10-15 kids throughout primary schools as far as practically possible.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by linking state funding to non religious students. And also; no student should ever be given the option to 'opt-out' of anything!! Always turn it on it's head!! Make religious activities 'voluntary', not all-inclusive.

I don't know much about the plans for re-structuring the National Curriculum - but, largely after watching QI, I do wish we were taught the subject properly the first time around!! Why do some elements of science & history in particular need to be dumbed down to the point of falsehood for the majority of Key Stage learning?

My proposal is that more school hours be devoted to watching David Attenborough & QI. Which party supports that?

[Joe]

[...] the present political position is to not offend anyone at all costs. [...]

Except for those of us who believe in freedom of speech.

Homosexuality unfortunately offends religious people. And we all know what a big deal that is. Hence, very little discussion in schools, even in an increasingly liberal society like the UK.

And, surely, not talking about homosexuality would offend homosexuals? My view is that the desire to "not cause offence" and be "politically correct" is ultimately pathetic. Even when I talk to people who claim to agree with me on this, I still become alienated if I say something which may offend people (which I do do a lot of), so I remain sceptical of people who claim that they haven't been at least semi-brainwashed as such.

I don't know much about the plans for re-structuring the National Curriculum - but, largely after watching QI, I do wish we were taught the subject properly the first time around!! Why do some elements of science & history in particular need to be dumbed down to the point of falsehood for the majority of Key Stage learning?

Hear, Hear!

[Maff]

Except for those of us who believe in freedom of speech.

Indeed.

And, surely, not talking about homosexuality would offend homosexuals? My view is that the desire to "not cause offence" and be "politically correct" is ultimately pathetic. Even when I talk to people who claim to agree with me on this, I still become alienated if I say something which may offend people (which I do do a lot of), so I remain sceptical of people who claim that they haven't been at least semi-brainwashed as such.

Pathetic is the WORD.

I never understood this whole deal with offence. So what if you're offended? Nothing happens!

The way I see it, claiming offense is now the default option instead of actually standing up and justifying your position. Handy for all the religious fascists with their hands in politicians pockets

[spike1790]

Homosexuality is now taught as part of the PSHE curriculum (one half hour video then a brief discussion). It doesnt go into much detail, but it is there.

Secondly, the tring school prayer has been put all around the school, it is said in every assembly, and (parts of it) is written above every door. Someone tried to take them down and replace them with more scientific phrases, and he was put in detention (or possibly suspended) for going against the school's christianity campaign, which it seems to be forcing down our throats.

[Joe]

Homosexuality is now taught as part of the PSHE curriculum (one half hour video then a brief discussion). It doesnt go into much detail, but it is there.

Although it's there, the reason it's limited is presumably a result of being a faith school, is it not?

Secondly, the tring school prayer has been put all around the school, it is said in every assembly, and (parts of it) is written above every door. Someone tried to take them down and replace them with more scientific phrases, and he was put in detention (or possibly suspended) for going against the school's christianity campaign, which it seems to be forcing down our throats.

Which is further evidence that the nature of the faith extends beyond the name-badge.

Is whether or not Tring is a faith school still debatable, or do we adequately conclude that that is the case?

[Maff]

Given homosexuality's widely misunderstood nature and the bigotry of those against it, I'd have thought that is just cause to go into detail. Not simply about the why's and wherefores, but the politics of it. Somewhere, I think we've lost sight of what education should be about. It should strive to overcome ignorance and shine light upon new perspectives. Rather than give homosexuality 'air-time' in class proportional to the liklihood of there being anyone ga¥ present, would it not be wiser to teach it from a perspective of the prejudice that still exists? Based on the void of knowledge?

I'd hasten to agree with you Joe, I think Rachel's little expose says quite a lot. Was it always like this, or is this due to Wynd or someone else's influence within the governors?

And while I think of it, why is the separation of church and state strictly enforced, sometimes to the point of madness, in some state institutions like the NHS, local councils etc - yet not in state schools??? We've kicked the christian tradition from everywhere else that receives taxpayer money, why are state-run schools the exception?

and who's responsible for having the forum automatically change the word G A Y to 'Fudge' once submitted?

Bad Word Bad Word Bad Word
Try it.

[spike1790]

yeah, sorry about that... its because its on the school computers and they got the language filters on, so we had to change words that would/might mean the forums were blocked at school. :S

nice that it actually works tho