Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

School patronage

Options
1…9192949697…194

Comments

  • Options
    #2792
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 34,387 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    recedite wrote: »
    It was quite far sighted for 1831. In 2015, I kinda hoped we could do better.
    Is the founder a bearded guy who drives a De Lorean? Cos it seems like we're almost back to the future... or something.

    Exactly. We shouldn't be looking to 1831 for our education policy, even if it was a very enlightened education policy by 1831 standards.

    It seems they're after the deeply flawed ETB model, all children will still have to be indoctrinated into 'something' even those from non-religious families, and children are segregated during part of the school day/week purely because of religion, and all kids lose out on learning time due to RC sacramental preparation (can't have the non-RC kids learning useful stuff while the RC kids are doing extended god classes) I fail to see how it's any better than RC patronage, really, apart from a non-discriminatory admissions policy.

    Fingal County Council are certainly not competent to be making decisions about the most important piece of infrastructure on the island. They need to stick to badly designed cycle lanes and deciding on whether Mrs Murphy can have her kitchen extension.



  • Options
    #2793
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 34,387 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    http://atheist.ie/2015/10/right-kind-of-catholic/

    Discusses the admission policy of an RC patronage NS.

    But they found the original lease from 1940 and it conflicts with it.
    To recap, just in case you can’t take this in. In Ireland we have a publicly funded National School, that was established at no cost, to educate all children in the community. The original land and building were provided by a local Protestant Landlord. The current Lease for the school (still in place), signed by the Catholic Church, agrees that this National School will be open to all religions, that there will be combined literary and moral, and Separate Religious Instruction for all children.

    In 2015 in this Republic of ours, we now have a publicly funded National school, where the agent of a foreign state (the Archbishop of Dublin), gets to decide which local children will gain admission to the school. The school evangelises all children into the Catholic faith and combines religious and secular subjects contrary to the National school Lease that they signed. If your child is not a Catholic, or even the right kind of Catholic, then your child is classed as a “category two boy”.

    (emphasis mine)

    Fingal County Council are certainly not competent to be making decisions about the most important piece of infrastructure on the island. They need to stick to badly designed cycle lanes and deciding on whether Mrs Murphy can have her kitchen extension.



  • Options
    #2794
    Absolam
    Registered Users Posts: 6,913 ✭✭✭Absolam


    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    http://atheist.ie/2015/10/right-kind-of-catholic/
    Discusses the admission policy of an RC patronage NS.
    But they found the original lease from 1940 and it conflicts with it.
    (emphasis mine)
    Is their admissions policy being (deliberately?) misinterpreted somewhat?
    The admission policy states "In the event of any dispute the Archbishop of Dublin shall be the person who decides whether a boy is a member of a Church which is in full communion with the Church of Rome or otherwise Roman Catholic as defined in this clause” (the full sentence already adds some perspective to the line). That doesn't seem very odd though; some Christian Churches are in full communion with the Catholic Church, some aren't. You'd expect the Archbishop to be fairly well informed on which is the case, wouldn't you? And whether a boy is or isn't a Catholic is relevant to their enrolment criteria when applications exceed availability.

    There also seems to be some 'iffy' reporting here. The article states
    "The school was established for all children in the local community of all religious denominations, and was to have separate religious and secular instruction. Over the years the Catholic Church has gained control over admissions and the teaching of religion in the school. "
    Fair enough, the school was established under the rules for schools, like all current schools are, which require separate religious and secular instruction. Nothing odd there. The lease, according to the article, was signed by the Archbishop of Dublin. So from the outset, the Catholic Church had control over admissions and the teaching of religion in the school, it didn't 'gain control over the years'.

    It goes on to say "The school now refuses local children because they are not from Catholic families, and also refuses children from Catholic families because they are not the right type of Catholic."
    A bit on the iffy side? The school doesn't actually say it refuses anyone (other than girls).
    It certainly has an enrolment policy which kicks in if applications exceed availability, which is an entirely different thing; all schools prioritise applications on one basis or another when applications exceed places, and it's well known Catholic ethos schools prioritise Catholic pupils. There's nothing to say the school ever didn't prioritise Catholic pupils when oversubscribed.
    Belgrove is actually remarkable in that it prioritises non-Catholic applicants resident in the local parishes over Catholic applicants resident outside their catchment.

    A little more 'iffyness' needed to get that click bait going?
    Try "The Lease states that the school will be open to “all religious denominations” and that there will be:- “combined literary and moral, and Separate Religious Instruction, to Children of all persuasions, as far as possible in the same school, upon the fundamental principle that no attempt shall be made to interfere with the peculiar religious tenets of any description of Christian pupils”."
    It's a poor reproduction of the text of the lease in fairness, we might be inclined to take the author at their word. But you can make it out if you look carefully, and when you do it's interesting to note the quote is taken midway through a sentence, and stops more than a little short of the end. The lease doesn't actually say there will be combined literary and moral, and Separate Religious Instruction, to Children of all persuasions, as far as possible in the same school. The preface 'there will be' is outside the quote, and entirely the invention of the author.
    The lease says "Whereas the object of the system of National Education is to afford combined literary and moral, and separate religious instruction to Children of all persuasions, as far as possible in the same school, upon the fundamental principle that no attempt shall be made to interfere with the peculiar religious tenets of any description of Christian pupils, and whereas it is agreed that a National School, to be called Clontarf Boys and Girls National School should be established on the principles aforesaid, that a suitable building and premises for the same be built and erected etc etc.
    That puts a rather different complexion on what was put forward, not withstanding the fact that there is no reason to think that the school doesn't afford combined literary and moral, and separate religious, instruction to children of all persuasions (other than the female one, members of whom have been educated in a separate school since the 50s), upon the fundamental principle that no attempt shall be made to interfere with the peculiar religious tenets of any description of Christian pupils.
    All in all, an absolutely dreadful article, written to try and provoke outrage by playing hard and fast with the facts. Hardly surprising the author didn't put their name to it. Quite simply, there's no conflict between the lease and the schools enrolment policy even before you get to the fact that the school in question is not the school on the lease.


  • Options
    #2795
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users Posts: 26,264 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    I think, if we're honest, the problem is that the approach suggested in 1831 is simply untenable today, given modern understanding of education, child development, child psychology, etc.

    If you view education as simply the imparting of information then, yes, you can arrange matters so that from 9:00 to 9:45 we impart information about maths, from 9:45 to 10:30 we impart information about history, etc. If that's the way we do things, then we can impart information about religion at a set time, and segregate children for that time only.

    The fact is, though, that it has been at least 50 years, and probably more than a hundred years, since anybody anywhere in the developed world tried to run a school this way, or thought it was a remotely realistic way to even think about running a school. A Catholic education, or for that matter a secular education, is not about finding 45 minutes in the day during which to impart the principles of Catholicism or the principles of secularity. It's about expressing a set of values holistically in the way the school community operates and expresses itself.

    If you think your child can go to a Catholic school and not get a Catholic education simply by absenting himself from religion class, think again. He may avoid instruction in Catholicism by doing this, but he won't avoid Catholic education, to which he will be exposed every minute of the day.

    This probably explains why the Stanley Letter principles don't have much traction and haven't had for a long time. It's entirely possible that, even in 1831, at least some people saw them as a bit of a fig leaf which would enable state funding for Catholic schools at a time when much of the political establishment would have been violently opposed to the idea. (It was, after all, only 2 years since Catholics had been emancipated in the UK, and now you want to give them public money to indoctrinate children in their popish superstitions?). OK, that's a wild speculation on my part. But it's certainly the case that, for at least the past 50 years and probably for much longer, nobody has imagined that observing the Stanley Principles is a realistic way of providing religion-free education, or is even practically feasible, given the integrated curriculum.


  • Options
    #2796
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    IMO the principles enshrined in the lease are the same as the original 1831 Stanley principles; to educate kids in a general Christian ethos, while dividing them up for separate and more specific faith formation outside of the general education hours.
    The main objective was to get both protestants and catholics into the same classroom, but avoid trying to convert one to the other.

    That was entirely practical and still is. However it did not foresee the possibility of non-Christians being present, whether atheist, agnostic or any non-Christian religion. Or if it did, it made no real provision for them.

    In the specific cases of school patrons that are violating the lease of the school they are managing, they should be made to comply fully or else turfed out. This would be up to the Minister for Education to enforce, I suppose. I presume any member of the public could file a complaint to her, but it would be more effective coming from somebody who was directly involved in the school, or who was refused a place.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2797
    expectationlost
    Registered Users Posts: 11,778 ✭✭✭✭expectationlost


    Commissioners of National Education in Ireland: twenty-third report, 1856, with appendices http://www.dippam.ac.uk/eppi/documents/13782/page/166829

    which has this as first rule
    “combined literary and moral, and Separate Religious Instruction, to Children of all persuasions, as far as possible in the same school, upon the fundamental principle that no attempt shall be made to interfere with the peculiar religious tenets of any description of Christian pupils”

    further detail on next page


    referenced in the patronage report from page 19 https://www.education.ie/en/Press-Events/Conferences/Patronage-and-Pluralism-in-the-Primary-Sector/The-Forum-on-Patronage-and-Pluralism-in-the-Primary-Sector-Report-of-the-Forums-Advisory-Group.pdf

    Review of the Controversy on National Education in Ireland: 1844 https://books.google.ie/books?id=xZsOAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA20&lpg=PA20&dq=excluded+directly+or+indirectly+from+the+other+advantages+that+the+schools+affords&source=bl&ots=0XtuPMX9N4&sig=doSm9TUgs9CZPn2Yq6TOfLnMRrM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CB8Q6AEwAGoVChMI_a-grfvlyAIVgukmCh1lXAOS#v=onepage&q=excluded%20directly%20or%20indirectly%20from%20the%20other%20advantages%20that%20the%20schools%20affords&f=false


  • Options
    #2798
    expectationlost
    Registered Users Posts: 11,778 ✭✭✭✭expectationlost


    recedite wrote: »
    IMO the principles enshrined in the lease are the same as the original 1831 Stanley principles; to educate kids in a general Christian ethos, while dividing them up for separate and more specific faith formation outside of the general education hours.
    The main objective was to get both protestants and catholics into the same classroom, but avoid trying to convert one to the other.

    That was entirely practical and still is. However it did not foresee the possibility of non-Christians being present, whether atheist, agnostic or any non-Christian religion. Or if it did, it made no real provision for them.

    .
    Nonconformists existed then

    The multi-denominational experience
    Áine Hyland
    http://www.esatclear.ie/~dejames/CRGHyland.htm
    From Irish Educational Studies, 8, 1:1

    the mid-nineteenth century on, the Roman
    Catholic hierarchy made a number of efforts to convince the Government to recognise that the majority of national schools were denominational and to change the national school rules to take account of this reality. Examples of such efforts included representations to the Powis Commission in 1870 - this Commission recommended to the Government that amendments be made to the rules in regard to denominational schools in areas where there was more than one school.(8) Gladstone, who was prime minister at the time, initially considered accepting this recommendation, but he was prevailed upon by his advisers not to do so.(9) In the 1890s, after the introduction of legislation relating to compulsory education, the Catholic hierarchy again made strong representations to the Government to change the rules to take account of the de facto denominational situation. Initially, the Government seemed willing to introduce some changes, (10) and the rules were redrafted by the Office of National Education; but when the revised rules were submitted to Chief Secretary Morley, he felt that they had gone too far in giving recognition to the denominational character of national schools and he refused to sanction the revised rules.(11) One of the main difficulties faced by the Government advisers at that time was that of devising a formula which would give de jure recognition to denominational schools, while at the same time ensuring the children who did not belong to one of the main Christian churches would not be discriminated against. During both periods, the Nonconformists were particularly vocal in objecting to any change in the national school rules.(12)


  • Options
    #2799
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    "Non-conformist" in the parlance of the time referred to other protestant Christians; mainly presbyterians, quakers and methodists. These probably feared they would be subsumed into the CoI population, because if forced to choose between a CoI or a RC denominational school, they would most likely choose the former.
    Looking around today, that is pretty much what did happen, at least in the area that became the Republic.

    Gladstone may have been more aware of Jews, as his big rival Disraeli was "sort of" one, although more agnostic than anything IMO. Disraeli was also baptised as a Christian, and as per the rules at the time he had to swear a Christian oath in order to be an MP.

    I think the rules at the time in Irish national schools were more concerned that "no attempt shall be made to interfere with the peculiar religious tenets of any description of Christian pupils" than with the protection of non-Christians from being exposed to a general Christian ethos.

    Having said that, as you point out, the rules drew strict demarcation lines between secular and moral education on the one hand, and the separate religious education on the other hand. Which demarcation was not violated until 1966 by the Dept of Education, during the reign of Archbishop McQuaid.


  • Options
    #2800
    expectationlost
    Registered Users Posts: 11,778 ✭✭✭✭expectationlost


    Catholic teachers feel ‘intimidated’ in faith schools https://shar.es/15mbK0 no examples of intimidation in article.


  • Options
    #2801
    TheChizler
    Registered Users Posts: 9,442 ✭✭✭TheChizler


    expectationlost wrote: »
    Catholic teachers feel ‘intimidated’ in faith schools https://shar.es/15mbK0 no examples of intimidation in article.
    Parts of that article wouldn't be out of place in a Waterford Whispers piece.
    He said that with regard teaching religion, some teachers have a very “flippant” attitude.

    “It’s almost [taught] to get it done, get it out of the way and leave more time for maths or English”.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2802
    Daith
    Registered Users Posts: 4,946 ✭✭✭Daith


    I wonder if these were the same "young teachers" looking glum with John Murray for the Teachers for No campaign against same sex marriage.


  • Options
    #2803
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,404 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    expectationlost wrote: »
    [...] no examples of intimidation in article.
    Perhaps, like the catholic deity, it exists in name only.


  • Options
    #2804
    Bristolscale7
    Registered Users Posts: 541 ✭✭✭Bristolscale7


    expectationlost wrote: »
    Catholic teachers feel ‘intimidated’ in faith schools https://shar.es/15mbK0 no examples of intimidation in article.

    A sign that a crack down is coming.


  • Options
    #2805
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 34,387 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    expectationlost wrote: »
    Catholic teachers feel ‘intimidated’ in faith schools https://shar.es/15mbK0 no examples of intimidation in article.

    ** Caution - Link goes to irishcatholic.ie. Viewer discretion is advised **

    You have to laugh - persecution complex much??
    One teacher, in a school in north Co. Dublin, said the atmosphere in the staff room has left her disheartened.

    “I became a teacher in a Catholic school so that I didn’t have to hide my faith, that I could talk about it openly and be who I am”.

    It must be hard for her, having only 90% of primary schools to choose from, and all.

    It's the equivalent of coming out as straight :pac:
    Yet another teacher described the attitude towards faith from many teachers in Catholic schools as “indifferent”.

    The question they should be asking is does that attitude reflect those of the (nominally) catholic parents - almost certainly it does - so how long can this pretence of the norm being a catholic education for a catholic people be maintained?

    Fingal County Council are certainly not competent to be making decisions about the most important piece of infrastructure on the island. They need to stick to badly designed cycle lanes and deciding on whether Mrs Murphy can have her kitchen extension.



  • Options
    #2806
    expectationlost
    Registered Users Posts: 11,778 ✭✭✭✭expectationlost


    for your amusement "OPINION: Quinn’s bizarre anti- Catholic sentiments" http://www.southernstar.ie/news/roundup/articles/2015/11/02/4108432-opinion-quinns-bizarre-anti-catholic-sentiments/
    And, while the general public and Keaveney at first welcomed Quinn’s promise of reform, attitudes shifted as the penny dropped that the ideology underpinning his education crusade was driven by a personal whim and by groups espousing a far-out secular fundamentalism.

    It announced that children from the tender age of four would receive instruction in atheism, agnosticism and humanism in their schools.

    The impact on the public was that of utter astonishment; indeed a sense of shock greeted the news that a form of globalised atheism – conspicuous for its pro-capitalist preferences and attachment to mercenary values – should be used to brainwash small children.

    one of these regional newspaper where they'll let you can write any old crap


  • Options
    #2807
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,869 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    Fancy that, they wouldn't put their name to it. It's like one of catallus's ****posts.


  • Options
    #2808
    expectationlost
    Registered Users Posts: 11,778 ✭✭✭✭expectationlost


    Jan O'Sullivan on Ray Darcy Radio https://soundcloud.com/rte-radio-1/minister-jan-osullivan

    Despite Darcy having strong opinions on this he didn't do much research before Quinn interview, didn't know about admissions bill, Minister love going on these soft interviews


    Min for Ed Jan O'Sullivan says issue of baptism and school choice wasn't as much a topic in 2011 (during creation of government) as it is now !

    Min for Ed Jan O'Sullivan thinks "not many" parents are getting children baptised just to get into schools !?

    again the Minister forgets what was in the programme for government, a texter raises the issue of non-faith teachers and she just mumbles and says again "I think that's one the needs to come into the equality legislation" at 19minutes it was in the programme for government http://www.per.gov.ie/wp-content/uploads/ProgrammeforGovernmentFinal.pdf

    http://atheist.ie/2015/07/labour-party-forgets-pledge/

    asked about D6/6w Educate Together, she doesnt' anything new


  • Options
    #2809
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    expectationlost wrote: »
    ..they'll let you can write any old crap.
    "Minister Ho Chi Quinn" is named as the advocate of "globalised atheism – conspicuous for its pro-capitalist preferences". The anonymous author of the article can't seem to decide whether its the commies or the capitalists that are behind this global atheism plot. Perhaps both are in league together :pac:


  • Options
    #2810
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 17,856 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    smug git is on the claire show

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Options
    #2811
    expectationlost
    Registered Users Posts: 11,778 ✭✭✭✭expectationlost


    silverharp wrote: »
    smug git is on the claire show
    was there any gov representative? http://analysis.rte.ie/news-blog/2015/10/30/schools-a-uniform-solution/

    http://www.rte.ie/player/ie/show/claire-byrne-live-30003252/10487276/


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2812
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users Posts: 11,869 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    There's something in the water supply in Kevin McKevitt's dingy basement: "child-centred education is bad", writes Gerard Murphy. A quick Google search says he was a FG TD from 2002-7 in Cork.


  • Options
    #2813
    expectationlost
    Registered Users Posts: 11,778 ✭✭✭✭expectationlost


    the consultation on the new course on religion and ethics etc is starting today but there nothing on the education.ie website about it .. found it here http://ncca.ie/en/Curriculum_and_Assessment/Early_Childhood_and_Primary_Education/Primary-Education/Primary_Developments/ERB-and-E/Developments/Consultation/Consultation.html

    Primary schools to have to teach religion under new curriculum

    Plans may prove controversial as teachers worried about ‘curriculum overload


    http://www.irishtimes.com/news/education/primary-schools-to-have-to-teach-religion-under-new-curriculum-1.2415385


  • Options
    #2814
    donspeekinglesh
    Registered Users Posts: 1,863 ✭✭✭donspeekinglesh


    http://www.ncca.ie/en/Curriculum_and_Assessment/Early_Childhood_and_Primary_Education/Primary-Education/Primary_Developments/ERB-and-E/Developments/Consultation/Consultation.html


  • Options
    #2815
    expectationlost
    Registered Users Posts: 11,778 ✭✭✭✭expectationlost


    CBLive on equal access http://www.rte.ie/player/ie/show/claire-byrne-live-30003252/10487276/

    not much discussion of the governments policy, no gov rep (minister in filmed piece says she not going to do anything about it), whats the point of RTE? what the point of discussion without a gov rep?
    the government is refusing to build more schools unless there is general population demand, (or in new build estates etc)

    this is the point everyone is arguing over.

    that teacher doesn't recognise it could be better to do communion at some other times instead of class time


  • Options
    #2816
    expectationlost
    Registered Users Posts: 11,778 ✭✭✭✭expectationlost


    'Religion time' in Catholic schools could be cut for first ever curriculum on beliefs and ethics http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/education/religion-time-in-catholic-schools-could-be-cut-for-first-ever-curriculum-on-beliefs-and-ethics-34165559.html
    The time allowed in Catholic schools to teach children about their own religion could be cut to make way for the first ever State curriculum on beliefs and ethics.
    In a sign of the robust debate ahead on the issue Professor Eamonn Conway of the Mary Immaculate primary teacher training college recently questioned why “a faith-based school would be required to offer what is essentially a secularist understanding of religious faith”.
    He said its introduction would “undoubtedly adversely affect religious instruction and a faith-based school’s characteristic ethos.”
    The Catholic Church recently announced a new religious education programme in its schools that would introduce pupils to other faith and belief systems. However, research carried out for the NCCA concluded that teaching about religions and beliefs through the lens of a particular faith was not a recommended approach.

    how lucky that the Church got their new plan out first


  • Options
    #2817
    Absolam
    Registered Users Posts: 6,913 ✭✭✭Absolam


    expectationlost wrote: »
    'Religion time' in Catholic schools could be cut for first ever curriculum on beliefs and ethics.
    how lucky that the Church got their new plan out first
    I think the idea of replacing a religious education curriculum which is entirely up to the patron to determine with a beliefs and ethics curriculum determined by the State is a good one. If that takes up the curriculum time slots currently allocated to religious education, schools would have to shuffle times in order to accomodate parentally desired religious instruction outside of normal curriculum hours, which would go a long way towards satisfying objections to religious ethos schools, to my mind.


  • Options
    #2818
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Absolam wrote: »
    If that takes up the curriculum time slots currently allocated to religious education, schools would have to shuffle times in order to accomodate parentally desired religious instruction outside of normal curriculum hours..
    However its not clear that this is the case. It may be intended to allow separate religion classes specific to the school in addition to the national ethics curriculum. Presumably these would be optional though.


  • Options
    #2819
    Absolam
    Registered Users Posts: 6,913 ✭✭✭Absolam


    recedite wrote: »
    However its not clear that this is the case. It may be intended to allow separate religion classes specific to the school in addition to the national ethics curriculum. Presumably these would be optional though.
    It seemed reasonably clear that it wouldn't be the case; I just thought it would be a good idea.


  • Options
    #2820
    Akrasia
    Registered Users Posts: 22,352 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    If this is an addition to the Curriculum then it's a waste of an opportunity to move into the 21st century.

    'Faith formation' has no part in compulsory primary education. It should be completely replaced with something that teaches about different religions (and none) and separates ethics from religion.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2821
    Absolam
    Registered Users Posts: 6,913 ✭✭✭Absolam


    Akrasia wrote: »
    If this is an addition to the Curriculum then it's a waste of an opportunity to move into the 21st century.
    'Faith formation' has no part in compulsory primary education. It should be completely replaced with something that teaches about different religions (and none) and separates ethics from religion.
    One can only imagine that those who believe faith formation is a fundamental part of primary education think differently :)


Advertisement