Education reforms: would you prefer a pluralist or secular school system?

Dionysus

I see Ruairí Quinn, the new Minister for Education, has decided that he is going to overhaul the entire school patronage system. He is opting to reform the existing pluralist system whereby each religious grouping will maintain schools which are funded by the state.

Minister announces forum on school patronage

A secular system, in contrast, would replace all these schools with one single non-denominational state school system. This would take some time and money as the state would have to buy out or build schools for such a system. In a secular education system, religious teaching would be the responsibility of parents in their own homes, not in state-financed (usually privately-owned) schools as is the current situation.

I think Irish schools should be part of a secular education system rather than merely be reformed within the existing pluralist system. Having said that I can see the dangers in a state having too much control in education and the need to balance that power. I think this can be done within a secular system, however.

Would you prefer to reform the existing pluralist system or to create a new secular education system in Ireland?

Shenshen

Other (state in post)

Secular.
Religious instructions can take place after school on a voluntary basis, or be provided by parents. It's not the job of schools.

Saila

Secular, they can go to the big building with a steepal on it if they want religion.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Secular school patronage system

Have to agree. No problem with religious based schools, but they should not be funded by the state.

The other option is that all schools should be funded to an equal proportion of the state regardless of what ethos they follow. This includes non-religious and educate together schools.

Duckworth_Luas

Dionysus wrote: »

Would you prefer to reform the existing pluralist system or to create a new secular education system in Ireland?

To be quite honest I'm more worried that children are leaving our education system unable to read and write than if they get 45 minutes of religious guidance each week.

gcgirl

Other (state in post)

Personally I think it's up to parents to teach their kids religion if the want, how many people have no faith and get their kids to make their communion/confirmation just for the day that's in it, it makes it so cheap to Look at it, I don't have any respect for people who have that outlook, I'm an atheist and my kids can make their own mind up when their adults and until then I would prefer them not to be indoctrinated in to some fairy tale religion.

Tim Robbins

Other (state in post)

Secular. I see telling kids what to believe in on matters we don't know that much about as the very opposite to education.

docmol

Other (state in post)

Duckworth_Luas wrote: »

To be quite honest I'm more worried that children are leaving our education system unable to read and write than if they get 45 minutes of religious guidance each week.

It's not 45 minutes per week, it's 30 minutes per day.

Dionysus

Other (state in post)

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Secular. I see telling kids what to believe in on matters we don't know that much about as the very opposite to education.

I think a large part of the problem with teaching religion now is not even with the course; at least in terms of its content it teaches kids about all religions and faith systems. It's catholic in the universal sense rather than the Catholic Church sense.

However, the problem is when a kid asks the teacher about things like heaven, Adam & Eve, purgatory and so many other questions that the teacher in very many (most?) cases does not believe and is well aware that much (most?) of the stuff was invented by the various churches over time.

Dionysus

Other (state in post)

docmol wrote: »

It's not 45 minutes per week, it's 30 minutes per day.

120 minutes per week (3 classes).

dark crystal

Other (state in post)

gcgirl wrote: »

Personally I think it's up to parents to teach their kids religion if the want, how many people have no faith and get their kids to make their communion/confirmation just for the day that's in it, it makes it so cheap to Look at it, I don't have any respect for people who have that outlook, I'm an atheist and my kids can make their own mind up when their adults and until then I would prefer them not to be indoctrinated in to some fairy tale religion.

That's my view too. However, when I had to enroll my daughter in a shool, I had no choice but to enroll her into a RC school, as there were no secular schools in my area. We didn't baptise her and said we would leave the choice up to her whether she wanted to make her commuinion whe the time came.
Of course, every other child in her class was doing so and she didn't want to feel like the black sheep, so we had to baptise her in order to join in with the pack. It wouldn't be my choice, bu I'm not going to ram my beliefs down her throat, simply to make a personal point.

Luckily, an Educate together school opened here in the last few years, so I have enrolled my son there - thank goodness he won't have to feel like an outsider there.

gcgirl

Other (state in post)

I'm sending the youngest 2 to an ET school the eldest is kind of for the min ok where she is as in a yr or 2 she will be going to a specialised school to meet her needs.

Duckworth_Luas

docmol wrote: »

It's not 45 minutes per week, it's 30 minutes per day.

:eek: What kind of school did you go to? I went to a CBS, 45 minutes of RE a week, doss class, happy days! In fact the class usually consisted of 30 teenage boys debating how ridiculous religion was with a teacher who wished they were somewhere else.

philologos

Secular school patronage system

Shenshen wrote: »

Secular.
Religious instructions can take place after school on a voluntary basis, or be provided by parents. It's not the job of schools.

It's quite ironic that the people who were claiming there wasn't an adequate choice in the school system are so eager to deny others this choice. Interesting to say the least.

The only schools that are coming under state patronage are RCC schools and even then changing patronage does not necessarily mean that all will be losing their ethos. There are still other faith schools (other Christian, Muslim and Jewish) operating outside of this remit.

Also if they did secularise all schools there would be constitutional issues methinks.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Secular school patronage system

There was a pic posted on the you laugh you lose thread a short while ago:

Religion is a lot like a penis

Nice to have, nice to be proud of, but don't whip it out on public or force it down childrens' throats.

Dionysus

Other (state in post)

dark crystal wrote: »

That's my view too. However, when I had to enroll my daughter in a shool, I had no choice but to enroll her into a RC school, as there were no secular schools in my area. We didn't baptise her and said we would leave the choice up to her whether she wanted to make her commuinion whe the time came.
Of course, every other child in her class was doing so and she didn't want to feel like the black sheep, so we had to baptise her in order to join in with the pack. It wouldn't be my choice, bu I'm not going to ram my beliefs down her throat, simply to make a personal point.

Luckily, an Educate together school opened here in the last few years, so I have enrolled my son there - thank goodness he won't have to feel like an outsider there.

That is a problem, and one which Quinn is trying to address by weakening the CC's hold on schools. In fairness to the CC in Dublin at any rate, Diarmuid Martin has been at the forefront in calling for the state to take over many of the CC schools. However, Quinn's solution is in essence to reduce the CC's power within the pluralist system and in doing so to consolidate the same pluralist school patronage system. I think we should be making a break from that past and setting the foundation stone of a secular education system.

gcgirl

Other (state in post)

Jackass I beleive if you have any convition in your religion you praticed a hundred percent and not just 10 or 20%, the church of Ireland have Sunday school maybe the catholic church should have something simlier where as pratising Catholics can sent their kids

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Secular school patronage system

gcgirl wrote: »

Jackass I beleive if you have any convition in your religion you praticed a hundred percent and not just 10 or 20%, the church of Ireland have Sunday school maybe the catholic church should have something simlier where as pratising Catholics can sent their kids

It would probably be more practical than mass.

gcgirl

Other (state in post)

I'm not an expert on Sunday school but it's a lot more pratical than mass, it's actually takes place in the community hall and they do their religious class which in a catholic setting is a school.

Sanjuro

Other (state in post)

Secular. School is about education, not religion. Religious education should be administered by parents and not taking time from subjects that would be more beneficial for education.

KeithAFC

Sanjuro wrote: »

Secular. School is about education, not religion. Religious education should be administered by parents and not taking time from subjects that would be more beneficial for education.

Learning about religion in many forms is education. Even if you don't agree with it. Same with learning about Hitler or the PIRA, still education to learn about it.

Never going to get secular schools as the majority.

Sanjuro

Other (state in post)

KeithAFC wrote: »

Learning about religion in many forms is education. Even if you don't agree with it. Same with learning about Hitler or the PIRA, still education to learn about it.

Never going to get secular schools as the majority.

Yeah, I understand that argument. But if that is going to be taught, it should be labelled something different. Maybe 'History of Cultures' or something similar. The question was asked about the teaching of religion, and I take it the OP means religious education like we had in Catholic schools.

Shenshen

Other (state in post)

Duckworth_Luas wrote: »

To be quite honest I'm more worried that children are leaving our education system unable to read and write than if they get 45 minutes of religious guidance each week.

Considering the amount of time actually dedicated to religious instructions, maybe if those were cut out there would be enough time to teach children to read and write?

Mark Hamill

Other (state in post)

Jakkass wrote: »

It's quite ironic that the people who were claiming there wasn't an adequate choice in the school system are so eager to deny others this choice. Interesting to say the least.

I fail to see why schools should offer this kind of choice. We wouldn't offer a choice for people who dont want their kids taught any maths. People can still make the personal choice and teach about whatever religion they believe in to their kids outside of school time, where it belongs.

Shenshen

Other (state in post)

Jakkass wrote: »

It's quite ironic that the people who were claiming there wasn't an adequate choice in the school system are so eager to deny others this choice. Interesting to say the least.

That is a little like accusing a vegetarian of not offering meat to non-vegetarian dinner guests.
Pointless and puerile.

Shenshen

Other (state in post)

KeithAFC wrote: »

Learning about religion in many forms is education. Even if you don't agree with it. Same with learning about Hitler or the PIRA, still education to learn about it.

Never going to get secular schools as the majority.

There's a difference between learning about religions and getting instructed in in religious belief.

philologos

Secular school patronage system

gcgirl wrote: »

Jackass I beleive if you have any convition in your religion you praticed a hundred percent and not just 10 or 20%, the church of Ireland have Sunday school maybe the catholic church should have something simlier where as pratising Catholics can sent their kids

I went to Church of Ireland schools (primary and secondary), yes they exist. Admittedly the latter wasn't public.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Secular school patronage system

KeithAFC wrote: »

Learning about religion in many forms is education. Even if you don't agree with it. Same with learning about Hitler or the PIRA, still education to learn about it.

Never going to get secular schools as the majority.

As long as all faiths are taught on an equal basis and done so to promote knowledge and tolerance of other cultures.

It doesn't really address the issue of funding though, which is the main concern for a lot of people, especially non catholic parents.

philologos

Secular school patronage system

Mark Hamill wrote: »

I fail to see why schools should offer this kind of choice. We wouldn't offer a choice for people who dont want their kids taught any maths. People can still make the personal choice and teach about whatever religion they believe in to their kids outside of school time, where it belongs.

Indeed, as an atheist you would. Fortunately society is comprised of numerous groups and as such it would seem best to allow people to decide how best to educate their children?

By the by, a Roman Catholic could have argued the same thing (we don't give an option on maths) to you as an atheist in the past.

Personally, I respect parents better judgement in this issue as the State does constitutionally.

sollar

Other (state in post)

I favour 100% secular no mention of religion at all.

Shenshen

Other (state in post)

Jakkass wrote: »

Indeed, as an atheist you would. Fortunately society is comprised of numerous groups and as such it would seem best to allow people to decide how best to educate their children?

By the by, a Roman Catholic could have argued the same thing to you as an atheist in the past.

Personally, I respect parents better judgement in this issue as the State does constitutionally.

Nobody is denying them the right to educate their children as they see fit.
What I don't agree with is them demanding school educate their children for them, but only as they see fit.

The problem I have with the "different patronages" thing is, this is a very, very small country. And although people in Dublin will be spoilt for choice when it comes to schools for their offspring, people in rural areas where the number of children around is smaller will still be in the same situation : Expose your child to religious instructions you don't agree with, or drive them to school a few dozen miles away every day.


This whole "choice" argument is pretty much the same that was brought up some years back when Jamie Oliver did the school dinners thing... parents demanded that their children be able to choose between healthy food and chips.
You can feed them all the chips you like at home, just don't demand the school provide them.

philologos

Secular school patronage system

Shenshen wrote: »

Nobody is denying them the right to educate their children as they see fit.
What I don't agree with is them demanding school educate their children for them, but only as they see fit.

Em. The schools already exist. Indeed, as I've already mentioned that this only involves RCC faith schools.

Shenshen wrote: »

You can feed them all the chips you like at home, just don't demand the school provide them.

An insinuation that going to a faith school is "harmful". Hm?

I'm still on the pluralist side of the argument. The problem is a lack of secular schools, we can rectify that while still allowing parents to choose in respect to faith or secular schools pretty much as they do in the UK. Indeed if you take a search on the Guardian website you'll find many cases of parents who are atheists choosing to bring their children to faith schools.

dvpower

Other (state in post)

A secular system with religion as part of the curriculum i.e. teaching about religions, not indoctrination in any particular religion.

School facilities could be made available out of hours to the religious organisations for kids whose parents want them indoctrinated.

Everyone is catered for.

Mark Hamill

Other (state in post)

Jakkass wrote: »

Indeed, as an atheist you would. Fortunately society is comprised of numerous groups and as such it would seem best to allow people to decide how best to educate their children?

By the by, a Roman Catholic could have argued the same thing (we don't give an option on maths) to you as an atheist in the past.

Personally, I respect parents better judgement in this issue as the State does constitutionally.

Actually its nothing to do with my atheism, its not exactly a secularist position either. Imo, schools should be teaching kids the skills they need to get jobs and to be productive members of society, this is also why I think that Irish should be, at the very least, optional. If parents want a kid holding a specific opinion, then the parent should teach the kid about it, its not the schools job to teach kids to be football supporters or to believe that reality tv is a good thing, so I fail to see why schools should teach kids religion.

Shenshen

Other (state in post)

Jakkass wrote: »

An insinuation that going to a faith school is "harmful". Hm?

I'm still on the pluralist side of the argument. The problem is a lack of secular schools, we can rectify that while still allowing parents to choose in respect to faith or secular schools pretty much as they do in the UK. Indeed if you take a search on the Guardian website you'll find many cases of parents who are atheists choosing to bring their children to faith schools.

In a village of 40 children, you really think there's going to be a secular school, and a catholic school, and a protestant school and a muslim school? Really?

Yes. my mother "chose" to send me to a religious school as well. Because that was the only school actually teaching foreign languages other than Latin in my home town.
I agree with giving parents choices, but they have to be viable. A choice between going to a religious school or be educationally disadvantaged is not a viable choice.

wurzlitzer

Other (state in post)

Secular

Instead of religion give them civic studies or some sort of world view/ world culture studies

philologos

Secular school patronage system

It has everything to do with your atheism. You think that faith schools aren't useful because you don't believe in a god or gods. Pretty much.

I think my viewpoint comes from a fairer perspective saying that yes faith schools should continue to exist and not only should they exist for my particular denomination, but that they should exist for a wide variety of communities even if I think their religious beliefs or lack thereof are nonsense.

Where one says it has to be between secular or faith schools I argue both.

philologos

Secular school patronage system

Shenshen wrote: »

In a village of 40 children, you really think there's going to be a secular school, and a catholic school, and a protestant school and a muslim school? Really?

Obviously not. Schools must fit a certain demand. If there is a sufficient demand such schools will be built or made available. That's simple logic.

By the by in a large amount of cases children in villages go to school in larger towns.

Mark Hamill

Other (state in post)

Jakkass wrote: »

It has everything to do with your atheism. You think that faith schools aren't useful because you don't believe in a god or gods. Pretty much.

No not at all, but thanks for ignoring my point about Irish, supporting football and tv, I'm sure that makes it easier to strawman me. A school is supposed to give a child an education so that they can go and get a job, anything i superfluous and should be left to the parents.

Jakkass wrote: »

I think my viewpoint comes from a fairer perspective saying that yes faith schools should continue to exist and not only should they exist for my particular denomination, but that they should exist for a wide variety of communities even if I think their religious beliefs or lack thereof are nonsense.

How is it fair for kids to be sent to a schools teaching them beliefs that their parents then say are nonsense? the only fair way is if kids are all sent to the same type of school, one which leaves matters of opinions to the parents and teaches kids the necessary skills to function in life and get a job.

Jakkass wrote: »

Where one says it has to be between secular or faith schools I argue both.

And that would be a ridiculous waste of money.

Shenshen

Other (state in post)

Jakkass wrote: »

It has everything to do with your atheism. You think that faith schools aren't useful because you don't believe in a god or gods. Pretty much.

I think my viewpoint comes from a fairer perspective saying that yes faith schools should continue to exist and not only should they exist for my particular denomination, but that they should exist for a wide variety of communities even if I think their religious beliefs or lack thereof are nonsense.

Where one says it has to be between secular or faith schools I argue both.

Put it this way:
I've no problem with different denominations setting up schools to serve their communities, provided they

1) Make sure to teach the full curriculum and
2) Are not funded by the tax payer, but by the members

I do have a serious problem with making tax money available to teach any religion to anybody.

Also, despite the existence of such faith schools, the state need to be obliged to provide secular schools for each and every child, within a reasonable distance to their home.

Everything else is simply discriminatory.

Incidentally, that is one of the problems British parents have these days. On paper, they have plenty of schools to choose from, so the state is actually closing down some schools. In reality, that leaves parents with the choice to send the child to a Catholic or a Muslim school, with the next secular school being located in the next town.

gcgirl

Other (state in post)

Leave it to their parents to teach them
That is all

E.T.

Dionysus wrote: »

120 minutes per week (3 classes).

150 mins a week in primary schools (5x30 mins). Then add on all the extra time classes spend preparing for sacraments, it's a lot of time taken from the educational curriculum. Religion as a subject is separate to the other 11 subjects, there's no choice of programme, there's only one religion book available, which teachers have to follow.

What I'd be in favour of is either a religions class once or twice a week, where children are educated (not indoctrinated) about different religions, or else that there would be time after school where the priest/rabbi/whatever would come and take the children of that faith for lessons.

Whatever happens, I definitely believe too much time is spent on religion in schools. I barely have time to get around to all of the kids in my class for the basics (English, Irish, Maths), let alone fit in the other 8 educational subjects, and then give half an hour to religion!

philologos

Secular school patronage system

Mark Hamill wrote: »

And that would be a ridiculous waste of money.

Not at all. If it was done strictly by the amount of demand that exists for any one given school there wouldn't be much issue.

The simple test to your hypothesis that faith schools are effectively useless would be to see if in a pluralist system that the demand for them would simply die out / change hands bringing about a purely secular school system. Personally I think its best that theists have a proper say in how best their children should be educated. If there is sufficient demand for faith schools I personally don't see any issue. Unless there is more to it Mark?

Again this is largely influenced by your atheism.

Shenshen

Other (state in post)

Jakkass wrote: »

Obviously not. Schools must fit a certain demand. If there is a sufficient demand such schools will be built or made available. That's simple logic.

By the by in a large amount of cases children in villages go to school in larger towns.

So where there already is a religious school, there is consequently no demand for a secular one. And parents not wishing their child being taught religious dogma can either drive them to school for an hour each morning, or move.

I live in a town with 4 religious schools. The nearest non-religious one is 45 minutes drive away, no direct public transport link.
But I can't demand that schools become secular, because parents have the right to have their children instructed in Catholic faith by the school?

Religion should be opt-in, not opt-out-if-you-can.

Mark Hamill

Other (state in post)

Jakkass wrote: »

Not at all. If it was done strictly by the amount of demand that exists for any one given school there wouldn't be much issue.

And what happens in small towns, with 30 or 40 kids, 90% of which have parents wanting them in a faith schools? They would get one faith schools right? How exactly is that fair to the other 10% of kids, who either have to go a faith school or a secular possibly in the next town (if they are lucky)?

Jakkass wrote: »

The simple test to your hypothesis that faith schools are effectively useless would be to see if in a pluralist system that the demand for them would simply die out / change hands bringing about a purely secular school system.

Which would be a massive waste of money, as you would need to have equal amounts of faith and secular schools in close proximity to each other to make sure parents choose only in terms of the schools ethos.

Jakkass wrote: »

Again this is largely influenced by your atheism.

Like I said before, nothing to do with atheism, its to do with recognising what schools actually are meant to do. I dont support compulsory irish for similar reasons and I wouldn't support schools who wanted to teach kids to only appreciate a certain sport of type of tv - all schools are meant to do is prepare children to get a job and survive in the real world. Dont strawman me again.

philologos

Secular school patronage system

Shenshen wrote: »

I live in a town with 4 religious schools. The nearest non-religious one is 45 minutes drive away, no direct public transport link.
But I can't demand that schools become secular, because parents have the right to have their children instructed in Catholic faith by the school?

This is a result of mismanagement which is largely what Quinn is going to regulate. The idea of secularising all schools from what I've read doesn't seem to be the point of this forum on patronage. I'm saying lets fix the education system, but lets keep our prejudices about religion out of it.

Shenshen wrote: »

Religion should be opt-in, not opt-out-if-you-can.

Absolutely, which is why there should be faith schools for parents to opt in to if they want to. And secular schools for parents to opt in to if they want to.

The balance has to be struck. I don't see why your demand that all schools should be secular should be above and beyond the reasonable demand of parents to be able to bring their children to faith schools?

I'm not suggesting that all schools should be teaching my particular brand of Christianity. I think it is a disgrace that this has happened in the case of one denomination. We need to restructure the education system and I think the British model is what would suit Ireland best really.

Shenshen

Other (state in post)

Jakkass wrote: »

Not at all. If it was done strictly by the amount of demand that exists for any one given school there wouldn't be much issue.

The simple test to your hypothesis that faith schools are effectively useless would be to see if in a pluralist system that the demand for them would simply die out / change hands bringing about a purely secular school system. Personally I think its best that theists have a proper say in how best their children should be educated. If there is sufficient demand for faith schools I personally don't see any issue. Unless there is more to it Mark?

Again this is largely influenced by your atheism.

As I was already pointing out, nobody is asking to stop theists from educating their children as they see fit.
But they shouldn't expect schools to do it for them. Schools should provide the same education for all children. Whatever parents want to add on top of that is their choice, but not the duty of the school.

If parents want to finance a faith school, by all means, let them. But do not use this to deny secular parents the choice not to have their children instructed in any religion.

philologos

Secular school patronage system

Shenshen wrote: »

If parents want to finance a faith school, by all means, let them. But do not use this to deny secular parents the choice not to have their children instructed in any religion.

Tripe. All people in Irish society pay taxes irrespective of their beliefs.

I have no interest in denying secular parents any cholce. You are interested in denying people of faith choice. That's what I find so ridiculously hypocritical about your argument.

Shenshen

Other (state in post)

Jakkass wrote: »

Absolutely, which is why there should be faith schools for parents to opt in to if they want to. And secular schools for parents to opt in to if they want to.

The balance has to be struck. I don't see why your demand that all schools should be secular should be above and beyond the reasonable demand of parents to be able to bring their children to faith schools?

I'm not suggesting that all schools should be teaching my particular brand of Christianity. I think it is a disgrace that this has happened in the case of one denomination. We need to restructure the education system and I think the British model is what would suit Ireland best really.

Can I ask you if you would be in favour of the HSE setting up purely homeopathic and alternative-medicine hospitals, for those who want to opt out of school medicine?

Religion is a parent's choice. Education isn't, and shouldn't be.

I personally favour the French system, with secular schools and optional religious instructions on one afternoon a week, which is free time for children not wanting these lessons.
Splitting the system into more and more options is not going to work in a country with a small population spread across a wide are, simply because you will not have enough children in most places to offer any choice at all.
It's different in Britain which is bigger and much more densely populated. In a town of a few millions with a decent public transport system, such choices are of course great. In rural Kerry or West Cork, they are not going to work in the same way.
It's a lovely thought, but it will not happen in reality

Shenshen

Other (state in post)

Jakkass wrote: »

Tripe. All people in Irish society pay taxes irrespective of their beliefs.

I have no interest in denying secular parents any cholce. You are interested in denying people of faith choice. That's what I find so ridiculously hypocritical about your argument.

Why should that money be used to fund the choices of one particular group? Can you please answer me this?
I'm not going to deny anybody any choice, the parents are still free to send their child to whatever religious lessons the churches want to offer. How is that denying them any choices???

philologos

Secular school patronage system

Shenshen wrote: »

Why should that money be used to fund the choices of one particular group? Can you please answer me this?
I'm not going to deny anybody any choice, the parents are still free to send their child to whatever religious lessons the churches want to offer. How is that denying them any choices???

I think it should be used to fund the choices of everyone in respect to the educational system.

Secular schools and faith schools both have a place in Irish society as far as I see it. Hence why I'm advocating pluralism. I couldn't be said to do this if I just advocated the choices of a single group.

It is you who wants to deny choice to one particular group because of your own personal beliefs, not me.