Primary school college course and atheism

Galvasean

oceanclub wrote: »

Personally as a proponent of free speech I disagree with this tactic. While I don't think a college should be teaching anti-religious bigotry as objective fact and being approved to do so by the Dept of Education, I also don't think that anti-hatred legislation should be use unless the writer is directly inciting violence, which in this case, they aren't.

P.

I agree. We should make an appeal to common sense and reason.
I know, I know, "In Ireland??!!?", but I don't like the idea of reaching for the anti-hatred registration every time we come across something we don't like. It seems childish and shrill. There are probably more legitimate and mature grounds to bring up the issue in relation to.

oceanclub

Can anyone tell me what negative questions the course does about Islam? Does it get a free ride? If not, those on the Islam forum might be interested.

P.

darealtulip

oceanclub wrote: »

Personally as a proponent of free speech I disagree with this tactic. While I don't think a college should be teaching anti-religious bigotry as objective fact and being approved to do so by the Dept of Education, I also don't think that anti-hatred legislation should be use unless the writer is directly inciting violence, which in this case, they aren't.

P.

I disagree, it does not need to incite violence to incite hatred.

They are teaching people to hate non-religious people.

darealtulip

Galvasean wrote: »

I agree. We should make an appeal to common sense and reason.
I know, I know, "In Ireland??!!?", but I don't like the idea of reaching for the anti-hatred registration every time we come across something we don't like. It seems childish and shrill. There are probably more legitimate and mature grounds to bring up the issue in relation to.

It is childish to make them adhere to the law?

Is this a childish law then?

And every time? I have only recently heard of one case.

Which legitimate and mature grounds do you propose?

I am appalled that this gets taught to the teachers of my children and I want it to stop now!

I am so angry about this that I want to fight this from every angle possible. Never felt so enraged about anything before.

Galvasean

darealtulip wrote: »

I am appalled that this gets taught to the teachers of my children and I want it to stop now!

I am so angry about this that I want to fight this from every angle possible. Never felt so enraged about anything before.

I agree with you wholeheartedly but I feel the 'incitement to hatred' route could be easily dismissed. They are certainly inciting ignorance, mistrust and perhaps fear, but i don't think hatred could be easily proven.

darealtulip wrote: »

Which legitimate and mature grounds do you propose?

Sadly, I am not particularly well read on such laws and cannot personally offer a viable alternative. Hence why I said 'probably' in my previous post. I think there is probably a better way to engage this that has not been highlighted yet.
You and I want the same thing. I just want to weigh up all of our available options first so that our approach will be air tight and stand the greatest chance of success.

darealtulip

Fair point. I got a reply from the college:

Dear darealtulip,

Thank you for your email message earlier today. I would like to assure you that I am discussing the issues which are of concern with Senior Management at the College.
I will respond fully in due course.

Regards,
Siobhán

Dr. Siobhán Cahillane-McGovern
Director, Higher Diploma in Arts (Primary Ed.)

Hibernia College
2 Clare Street
Dublin 2
Ireland

Galvasean

Good stuff. Hopefully something can come of this.

Beruthiel

darealtulip wrote: »

Thank you for your email message earlier today. I would like to assure you that I am discussing the issues which are of concern with Senior Management at the College.
I will respond fully in due course.

Regards,
Siobhán

Dr. Siobhán Cahillane-McGovern
Director, Higher Diploma in Arts (Primary Ed.)

I have just received the exact same e-mail.
Hopefully something is done about it.

Amtmann

I got it too, and also a response from the minister's office, which will reply to me in detail in due course.

Galvasean

Hopefully it's not an auto response

iguana

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Religion is taught in every primary school in Ireland,has to be under our current system. There are NO non-denominational primary schools in Ireland. Educate together and some Gaelscoileanna are multi-denominational,where no one religion is favoured over another.

Alive-O is the Catholic religion syllabus for primary, Learn together is the Educate together syllabus.

There are, they are just completely private and receive no state funding. Drumnigh Montessori Primary, for example, is non-denom.

http://drumnighmontessori.ie/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5&Itemid=9

darealtulip

removed because question was answered by webpage

darealtulip

Amtmann wrote: »

I got it too, and also a response from the minister's office, which will reply to me in detail in due course.

I didn't get one from the minister yet.

#15

Really, like-minded stakeholders need to come together and demand some action on this. Parents, teachers and would-be patrons should form some sort of alliance or lobby group to rid the system of this nonsense.

Minowaman

I just did a week of teacher observation in my old primary school. The religion classes are disgusting. It should be illegal to teach that Alive-o sh!t alongside history, maths, etc.
Also, the class were reading about horses in English class and how they evolved, and the teacher told them that "evolution is just a theory... it might be right or it might be wrong." Admittedly he probably just knew nothing about science. It's a CBS and they get some kind of funding from the Bishop so I suppose that's the main problem.

iguana

Minowaman wrote: »

Also, the class were reading about horses in English class and how they evolved, and the teacher told them that "evolution is just a theory... it might be right or it might be wrong." Admittedly he probably just knew nothing about science. It's a CBS and they get some kind of funding from the Bishop so I suppose that's the main problem.

He doesn't seem to know too much about his own religion either as for the most part the Catholic church accepts that evolution is most likely factual but that it happened how it did because that's how God wanted it to.

darealtulip

Minowaman wrote: »

I just did a week of teacher observation in my old primary school. The religion classes are disgusting. It should be illegal to teach that Alive-o sh!t alongside history, maths, etc.
Also, the class were reading about horses in English class and how they evolved, and the teacher told them that "evolution is just a theory... it might be right or it might be wrong." Admittedly he probably just knew nothing about science. It's a CBS and they get some kind of funding from the Bishop so I suppose that's the main problem.

I read the Alive-O teachers book, it is nothing short from a manual in how to indoctrinate children. It was the main reason to sent my son to an ET school.

#15

Amtmann wrote: »

I have long suspected that many primary school teachers tend to be cut from a very similar attitudinal cloth. It's unlikely that many atheist or agnostic young people would want to do a job in which it's a norm to prepare children for two or three religious rituals each year.

I would say your suspicion may not be wholly warranted.

There are many atheist teachers who cannot ''come out'' as Boards of Management can legally discriminate against teachers who undermine the ethos of the school.

A teacher who prepares students for the sacraments may be going through the motions. I know a few who work in catholic schools but resent the situation they find themselves in.


An interesting case came before the Equality Tribunal last year, and the teacher actually won.

The Equality Tribunal has awarded more than €12,000 to a primary school teacher who was discriminated against because she was not a Catholic.

The tribunal found that Knocktemple National School in Virginia, Co Cavan, discriminated against the female teacher when she applied for a job at the school in 2007.

Michelle McKeever is a member of the Church of Ireland.

She applied for a permanent job at Knocktemple National School, which is Catholic, in May 2007.

Shortly after, she was contacted by the school principal and the chairperson of the school and offered a permanent post.

But after a phone call in which Ms McKeever was questioned about holding the Catholic Religion Certificate, that offer was withdrawn.

The Equality Tribunal has dismissed two explanations given by the school as to why this happened. The explanations were based on breaches of formal procedures.

Michelle McKeever contended that her religion had become a factor in the appointment procedure.

The Equality Tribunal has agreed with her, finding that not only was Ms McKeever's religion discussed, but that it also influenced the school's board of management in withdrawing the offer that had been made.

The primary teachers' union, the INTO, has welcomed the result.

It is the first time the union has taken a case of this kind on behalf of a member on the grounds of religion.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/1116/mckeeverm.html

However, the actual legislation is typically vague and seems to allow discrimination. The Equality Tribunal cannot force the legislation to be changed, however.

It would be great if someone was to take a case to the European courts and force the hand of the government.

Amtmann

Minowaman wrote: »

Also, the class were reading about horses in English class and how they evolved, and the teacher told them that "evolution is just a theory... it might be right or it might be wrong."

After witnessing the academic and educational standard of over twenty burgeoning primary teachers in the past four years, this does not surprise me in the least.

#15 wrote: »

I would say your suspicion may not be wholly warranted.

There are many atheist teachers who cannot ''come out'' as Boards of Management can legally discriminate against teachers who undermine the ethos of the school.

Right, but it would not surprise me if there were many more atheist people who would like to be primary teachers, but who feel forced to do something else because they cannot bear the thought of 'going through the motions'.

Any of the young teachers I know (and I know lots) generally would prefer if religion were kept out of the classroom; but at the end of the day, they don't see very much wrong with indoctrinating young minds with Christian mythology. I can only speak from experience though, and I accept that what I've written is anecdotal.

#15

Recent surveys

INTO:

A recent survey carried out by INTO, shows that 67 percent of employed teachers teach religion willingly while 24 percent were uncomfortable with teaching it. Furthermore, the survey saw 34 percent of teachers agreed with a State takeover of schools and another 47 percent said the Catholic Church should renounce its control over a number of its schools.

This is kind of interesting, as it shows that even among those who willingly teach religion, there is a desire for the RCC to remove itself from the situation.

It would also be interesting to see the attitudes of different age cohorts.

I'm not sure if this is a representative sample or not, though.

IPPN:

7 out of 10 parents (72%) want primary schools to be managed by the state, with equal opportunity afforded to all religions, according to a RedC poll commissioned by the Irish Primary Principals' Network.

This independent survey further reveals that 6 out 10 parents (57%) would prefer some of the 2½ hours per week currently spent on religion, to be given to other subject areas, in particular, to physical and health education.

Parents and principals hold some common views but differ in their opinions on other matters:
"Both Principals (2 out of 3) and Parents (7 out of 10) want schools to be under the authority of the state with all religions given equal opportunity" said Sean Cottrell, National Director of IPPN.
Parents want the school and the class teacher to be responsible for the teaching of religion and faith formation within the school day; however Principals say that there is an overall decline in the level of interest and meaningful support coming from both parents and clergy in relation to preparation for religious ceremonies and events, with many parents just turning up on the day. Also, Principals report that there is a decline in the willingness and enthusiasm amongst teachers to undertake this work of preparing children for sacraments and other religious ceremonies.



Summary of Main findings:

Over 750 Principals responded representing 23% of all primary schools
88% of schools who responded are under Catholic patronage with the remaining participants from Church of Ireland, Educate Together, An Foras Pátrúnachta, Multidenominational and others.
76% say that preparation for sacraments is currently done almost entirely by the school with parents attending on the day
Nearly one-quarter (23%) say that the enthusiasm, willingness, competency and suitability of teachers to undertake faith formation and religious instruction is decreasing.
Half (50%) say that the involvement of parents is decreasing
40% say the involvement of clergy is decreasing.
Almost 9 out of 10 (87%) say that the preparation for sacraments and other religious ceremonies takes some or a lot more additional time from other curriculum areas. (note: This refers mainly to 2nd and 6th classes and seasonally throughout the year in other classes)
Principals are evenly divided in their views as to where and when religious instruction and faith formation should take place. Some see it as an integral part of the school day as at present and others say it should be separate from the primary school completely or offered as an option at the end of the school day.
The proposed new VEC model of multi-faith schools where the school is responsible for religious instruction and faith formation for each faith group is considered difficult or impossible to implement by 80%

The current set-up is a farce.

A significant number of teachers seem to be in favour of a state takeover of education.
A majority of parents and principals express similar sentiments.

Also, the decline in Mass attendance and the reported decreasing involvement by parents in sacramental prep means that the problem is becoming self-perpetuating.

Parents are less involved, but seem to go along with the whole charade because it is the ''done thing''.
Teachers report on its intrusion into curriculum time, but go along with it because they think parents expect it.
Principals work with the BoM, and have to uphold the ethos of the school, even if they prefer otherwise.

It really seems like all three groups are just waiting for someone to grasp the nettle and sort out the issue once and for all.

Everyone wins IMO:

- Teachers and parents can drop the charade of being upstanding catholics.
- Principals can get on with running modern, inclusive schools.
- Hardcore catholics can have their own private schools where their rituals and beliefs are not treated shabbily by disinterested parents, students and teachers.

Who loses here?
I'm not even sure the RCC loses in this instance; they might even have a smaller but more dedicated community of believers.
I guess it depends on the perspective of the church - they seem to value quantity of believers at this point.

Sarky

I doubt they've ever valued quality in that regard. Numbers is what brings money and power.

#15

Amtmann wrote: »

Right, but it would not surprise me if there were many more atheist people who would like to be primary teachers, but who feel forced to do something else because they cannot bear the thought of 'going through the motions'.

True. That is probably a big factor in some people's minds.

Another benefit of reforming teacher education and the school system is that it would discourage some people from becoming teachers, i.e. those teachers who you referenced earlier.

Any of the young teachers I know (and I know lots) generally would prefer if religion were kept out of the classroom; but at the end of the day, they don't see very much wrong with indoctrinating young minds with Christian mythology. I can only speak from experience though, and I accept that what I've written is anecdotal.

Yeah, my own experience is anecdotal too. It's been quite mixed - I know staunch atheists and staunch catholics within the profession.

Like I said, reform of teacher ed. would hopefully introduce some balance into the population.

darealtulip

The more I think about it the more I think court action should be taken if possible. This is taught as fact while it is inaccurate historically and factually. Therefore it is made up solely to make people without religion look bad.

This is beyond doubt the promotion of hatred upon the non religious. And when you read the law it is up to them to prove it is not.

I can see it no other way. This is not just ignorance or even uneducated this is pure lying to portrait the non religious as murders and holocaust causers in a very organised manner.

They ensure that next generation carry this hatred and prejudged views by teaching teachers.

I therefore come to the conclusion that it is not immature, childish or over the top. This is exactly what this law is made for.

I am appalled, disappointed and angry that in Ireland in 2012 a state qualification can hold such a contents.

expectationlost

At present all the teacher-training colleges apart from the online Hibernia College are organised along religious lines.

http://www.gotocollege.ie/Is_there_a_place_for_God_in_the_Irish_classroom.html

recedite

darealtulip wrote: »

The more I think about it the more I think court action should be taken if possible.

Lets look at how feasible that might be. So, taking a specific alleged statement from the notes....

What bothers very few of its latter-day exponents is the fact that atheist humanism produced the worst horrors history has ever witnessed, namely Nazism, Fascism and Marxism, the latter alone responsible for some 100 million lives ..

First off, the statement is obviously incorrect. What these regimes had in common was totalitarianism, not religion. Fascists were usually associated with the RCC. Humanists have generally been the pacifists in times of conflict. Stalin may have been atheist as well as communist, but no credible historian would associate any of these regimes with "atheist humanism" or claim that any of them stemmed from it.

Secondly, they are linking "latter-day exponents" of atheist humanism with the atrocities by saying "it doesn't bother them". This is most certainly going to incite any young trainee teachers who are not completely au fait with the history and politics of these events to a dislike of "latter-day exponents" of atheist humanism, perhaps a hatred and a belief that they are "bad" or "evil" people. Later they will pass this bias or dislike on to their pupils in the classroom.

One possible defence that Hibernia could use would be that they are referring to events of the past only, but that seems untenable given they specifically mention "latter-day exponents". The other defence that they are only "stating the facts" can be easily disproved.

Now, suppose I read the Old Testament and saw the part about the Israelites killing the entire civilian population of Sodom. And the bit in the New Testament where the Jewish authorities want Jesus killed. So I decide to put the statement "What bothers very few of its latter-day exponents is the fact that Judaism produced some of the worst horrors history has ever witnessed" into a contemporary teacher training manual. That would seem unnecessary for teacher training and simply an incitement to hatred.

Galvasean

"At present all the teacher-training colleges apart from the online Hibernia College are organised along religious lines. "

It's NOT?

byhookorbycrook

As I already said, I found Mary I. over 20 years ago more forward thinking than the stuff Hibernia seem to be doing.

Older teachers may also be glad to see religion taken from schools, it's not just the preserve of the young ones!

darealtulip

recedite wrote: »

Lets look at how feasible that might be. So, taking a specific alleged statement from the notes....

First off, the statement is obviously incorrect. What these regimes had in common was totalitarianism, not religion. Fascists were usually associated with the RCC. Humanists have generally been the pacifists in times of conflict. Stalin may have been atheist as well as communist, but no credible historian would associate any of these regimes with "atheist humanism" or claim that any of them stemmed from it.

Secondly, they are linking "latter-day exponents" of atheist humanism with the atrocities by saying "it doesn't bother them". This is most certainly going to incite any young trainee teachers who are not completely au fait with the history and politics of these events to a dislike of "latter-day exponents" of atheist humanism, perhaps a hatred and a belief that they are "bad" or "evil" people. Later they will pass this bias or dislike on to their pupils in the classroom.

One possible defence that Hibernia could use would be that they are referring to events of the past only, but that seems untenable given they specifically mention "latter-day exponents". The other defence that they are only "stating the facts" can be easily disproved.

Now, suppose I read the Old Testament and saw the part about the Israelites killing the entire civilian population of Sodom. And the bit in the New Testament where the Jewish authorities want Jesus killed. So I decide to put the statement "What bothers very few of its latter-day exponents is the fact that Judaism produced some of the worst horrors history has ever witnessed" into a contemporary teacher training manual. That would seem unnecessary for teacher training and simply an incitement to hatred.

Exactly, is there anyone with a law degree here?

number10a

So, the exam is done and dusted. I'm very happy with my result (well, as happy as one can be for such an exam, but it does count to the final overall result, so every mark counts). But I have a niggling feeling some last minute cutting and tailoring was done to the exam since the reaction to it from Boards over the previous days.

The exam is designed in such a way that every student gets a random combination of 40 questions from a large pool of questions. I didn't get anything that could be described as any way controversial at all. Nothing worth taking a screen grab of in the slightest.

The exam was crazy, yes (to be expected regardless). But controversial, no. Now, this could be complete coincidence and another student could have gotten the golden haul of hateful, bile-ridden questions, but I have a feeling that people's reactions on here are having some effect within the upper echelons of the college. We shall have to wait and see.

quietriot

Just dispatched the following email.

To: minister@education.gov.ie; tes@education.gov.ie; academicaffairs@hiberniacollege.net
Cc: hnews@independent.ie; newsdesk@irishtimes.com; news@examiner.ie news@thejournal.ie; tcmtext@tcm.ie

Title: Higher Diploma in Arts (Primary Ed.) Teaching Religious Hatred and Intolerance.

Minister Quinn, Hibernia College Dublin Management,
I am writing today due to my concern over an article and the supporting evidence that I read on Boards.ie and Broadsheet.ie recently. An issue arose whereby a student of Hibernia College Dublin in the Higher Diploma in Arts (Primary Ed. ) course told of the questions facing them and their fellow students in an upcoming "religion" exam, as part of the aforementioned higher diploma course.

As part of a "mock" exam for this "religion" module, the students were faced with the following questions:

Question 12 of 12
Moral Theology
'Atheist humanism produced the worst horrors history has ever witnessed'. The answers given were 'True' and 'False'. The supporting documentation provided indicated that the student is expected to answer 'True' to said question.

Question 13 of 20
Moral Theology
What statement is false?
'Hinduism is a positive force for change in society.'
'Atheism has had, historically speaking, a negative effect on society.'
'Islam is based on the identity of religion and society.'
The student had to choose one of the above three.

The supporting documentation was quoted by another student, the relevant excerpt follows.
"Atheism seems to be fashionable in Ireland at present. It is seen as rational, progressive and compassionate. But above all, it is "in", not to mention convenient. What bothers very few of its latter-day exponents is the fact that atheist humanism produced the worst horrors history has ever witnessed, namely Nazism, Fascism and Marxism, the latter alone responsible for some 100 million lives, according to The Black Book written by French ex-Marxists. Atheism is not a benign force in history"

I would appreciate an explanation as to how the college in question feel it appropriate to force such grotesque, hatred filled lies onto the curriculum and consequently down the throats and into the minds of those who go on to teach the country's children. This "information" is factually incorrect and contains a clear religious bias from an institution claiming to have none. It is utterly abhorrent that this is what these teachers-to-be are being told to teach our children.

The "information" has been discussed (with the inclusion of students of the course in questions) and debunked on Boards.ie and Broadsheet.ie at the following web links:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056553324
http://www.broadsheet.ie/2012/02/20/literally-unbelievable/
http://www.broadsheet.ie/2012/02/22/ash-wednesday/

I am writing for an explanation as to how this material in question is in current circulation and indeed, on curriculum, along with official assurances that the complaint will be dealt with and actions taken appropriately. It is absolutely unacceptable that such utter hatred and intolerance of another's religious preferences be taught to our children or those who teach our children, be it Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Atheism or any other.

Regards,

Thoughts?