School patronage

equivariant

From today's indo

http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/education/latest-news/parents-get-vote-to-take-schools-out-of-control-of-the-church-3233287.html

This is interesting. It is hard to assess this initiative based on the information in that article. Of course, personally I would prefer a complete removal of religious influence from state funded schools. However I am not sure that I am happy about this proposed survey. I can see many parents voting not to change purely based on "the devil you know" attitude. I wonder also is potentially divisive to make communities nail their colours to the mast publicly? I suppose it will depend on the detail of the survey.

Dave!

I don't like this... For one thing, if the majority in an area say they want the Church to continue to run their schools, does the minority then continue to be disenfranchised? Or will a new school be built to accommodate them? (No...)

And I'm not sure that mob rule is the way to go either. So what if the majority in an area want Catholic schools? The principle that the State shouldn't be establishing schools that advance a particular religious (or indeed political, fiscal, etc.) view remains fair regardless of whether Maude Flanders wants to outsource her children's spiritual development.

Rev Hellfire

As long as its not shown that a change in patronage will end up costing people money via taxes and that their kids will not be disadvantaged then I suspect most will go for it.

Dades

Fantastic. Nothing says "progressive" like a good ol' bit of segregation.

And I look forward to Irish parents pulling a "census" on it again, despite having not stepped foot in a church since little Sneachta was christened.

equivariant

Dave! wrote: »

I don't like this... For one thing, if the majority in an area say they want the Church to continue to run their schools, does the minority then continue to be disenfranchised? Or will a new school be built to accommodate them? (No...)

And I'm not sure that mob rule is the way to go either. So what if the majority in an area want Catholic schools? The principle that the State shouldn't be establishing schools that advance a particular religious (or indeed political, fiscal, etc.) view remains fair regardless of whether Maude Flanders wants to outsource her children's spiritual development.

+1

1. Do you agree that all parents should have the right to send their children to a local school whose ethos matches their own?

or

2. Do you think that the the Catholic Church should relinquish all patronage of state funded schools?

I imagine that many people would answer yes to 1 and no to 2 (unfortunately). I am not saying that either of these questions would be a good one to ask, just that this topic is so complex that it will be almost impossible to obtain accurate useful information from a single survey.

Also I don't see how you can ask parents to choose between RCC patronage and some other patronage unless they have had experience of both different models. How can they be expected to make an informed decision?

mikhail

equivariant wrote: »

Also I don't see how you can ask parents to choose between RCC patronage and some other patronage unless they have had experience of both different models. How can they be expected to make an informed decision?

I'd expect them to do unto others what they'd like to see done unto themselves. Well, I would expect them to do that, only I'm not that naive.

equivariant

After a bit of googling, I believe that I have found the source for this article

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&ved=0CDQQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.education.ie%2Fen%2FPress-Events%2FConferences%2FPatronage-and-Pluralism-in-the-Primary-Sector%2FThe-Forum-on-Patronage-and-Pluralism-in-the-Primary-Sector-Report-of-the-Forum%25E2%2580%2599s-Advisory-Group.pdf&ei=M11YULSnHMnDhAfRtYGIAQ&usg=AFQjCNGMSIoVO0koIklR67DkE2Ymrn_42g&sig2=nb8AG6NTaRknntCKU3Nx5g

Its a 174 page report which seems to contain many of the recommendations as outlined in the indo article. For anyone (like me) who is facing the prospect of kids starting primary school in the next 5 years, it will make for interesting reading I think

Corkfeen

I'm still not getting why the hell parents don't send their kids to Sunday School if they so desperately want them to be Catholic.

Rev Hellfire

Corkfeen wrote: »

I'm still not getting why the hell parents don't send their kids to Sunday School if they so desperately want them to be Catholic.

Why do it yourself when you can farm the 'work' out to someone else, that's why.

Anyway most of the school system is as it is simply due to inertia, people (parents) just need to be motivated to change the system.

Galvasean

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Why do it yourself when you can farm the 'work' out to someone else, that's way.

That reminds me, didn't a recent poll say the majority of parents wanted the Catholic Church not to have patronage over primary schools, but still wanted the religious sacraments to be thought during school hours? The lazy gits!

LittleBook

Galvasean wrote: »

That reminds me, didn't a recent poll say the majority of parents wanted the Catholic Church not to have patronage over primary schools, but still wanted the religious sacraments to be thought during school hours? The lazy gits!

Majority prefers schools not run by church

Three out of four parents [surveyed] would prefer to send children to primary schools run by patron bodies other than churches, according to a poll. However, a majority of parents surveyed still wants religion taught in school.

Asked about when religious instruction and preparation for the sacraments should be taught, 67 per cent of parents with dependent children who took part in the poll said they wanted the teaching to take place during the school day

:rolleyes:

Jellicoe

Dave! wrote: »

I don't like this... For one thing, if the majority in an area say they want the Church to continue to run their schools, does the minority then continue to be disenfranchised? Or will a new school be built to accommodate them? (No...)

And I'm not sure that mob rule is the way to go either. So what if the majority in an area want Catholic schools? The principle that the State shouldn't be establishing schools that advance a particular religious (or indeed political, fiscal, etc.) view remains fair regardless of whether Maude Flanders wants to outsource her children's spiritual development.

+1.

Democracy ? - They can fck off with such talk

The bondholders did not have to put up with such nonsense.

expectationlost

well here are the surveys http://education.ie/en/Press-Events/Press-Releases/2012-Press-Releases/PR12-10-22.html

not much reaction yet

fr michael drumm and the iona institute complaining about patronage survey http://t.co/qYnEmmiY

why would parents with 0.1-5yr kids not input their school preference?

the culture of deference

Dave! wrote: »

And I'm not sure that mob rule is the way to go either. So what if the majority in an area want Catholic schools?.

All schools should be religion free. We have threads here saying some schools are wasting 5 hours a week on religious studies. It's 2012 FFS.

There is no need to go into the dangers of catholicism here, this excellent forum is jam packed with all their abuse's.

If you are a parent and you value religion then off you go to Sunday school.

PopePalpatine

Dades wrote: »

Fantastic. Nothing says "progressive" like a good ol' bit of segregation.

And I look forward to Irish parents pulling a "census" on it again, despite having not stepped foot in a church since little Sneachta was christened.

Who would be so cruel as to give their child that name? :rolleyes:

Bannasidhe

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Who would be so cruel as to give their child that name? :rolleyes:

What about 'colleen' - for feck sake, couldn't people come up with anything better than 'girl'?

Dave!

Bannasidhe wrote: »

What about 'colleen' - for feck sake, couldn't people come up with anything better than 'girl'?

My cat's name is 'Cat', which I think suits it quite well

Bannasidhe

Bannasidhe wrote: »

What about 'colleen' - for feck sake, couldn't people come up with anything better than 'girl'?

I always complain about that too

Bannasidhe

Dave! wrote: »

My cat's name is 'Cat', which I think suits it quite well

My cat's name was Duck.

Dave!

Bannasidhe wrote: »

My cat's name was Duck.

Well that's not an appropriate name at all.

Bannasidhe

Dave! wrote: »

Well that's not an appropriate name at all.

Perhaps not but it was worth it when son aged 6 drew a picture of the cat and informed his teacher it was 'Duck'. Tooks days to clear that misunderstanding up

Obliq

PopePalpatine wrote: »

Who would be so cruel as to give their child that name? :rolleyes:

Probably someone with no baggage about the Irish language? :pac::rolleyes: It's not a name for anything except snow, but it must be ok to call your child snow, if you want? I know an English couple who called their child Uisce. He has since changed his name.

Bannasidhe

Obliq wrote: »

I know an English couple who called their child Uisce. He has since changed his name.

To Beatha?


:pac:


I'll get me coat......

Delirium

Fintan O'Toole on the school patronage issue.

The Minister’s approach to primary school patronage is inimical to the idea of a republic, and will be disastrous

DON’T LAUGH, but suppose for a moment we were actually in the business of building a new republic from scratch. What’s the first thing you’d put down on the “to do” list?

Is it not this rather obvious idea: educate all your children together. A republic starts with the basic idea that citizens of all faiths and none share a common public life and civic values.

It’s hardly radical to think that these things should be learned from the moment children enter into a formal relationship with the public world – in the primary school system. Or that the most powerful way in which they learn them is by actually being together.

This is why Ruairí Quinn’s approach to the question of the patronage of primary schools is so disastrous. At one level, he deserves credit for at least acknowledging a problem that has been ignored by pusillanimous politicians for decades.

The cowardice of his predecessors has left us with a huge mismatch between, on the one hand, a population whose religious and spiritual beliefs are increasingly diverse and, on the other, a primary school system that has remained remarkably static, with 90 per cent of schools still under the patronage of the Catholic Church.

We now have nearly 15,000 primary school-age children who are atheists, agnostics or have no religion; 8,300 Muslim children in the same age group and thousands more who belong to religions that had a minimal presence in Ireland even a decade ago – Orthodox, Lutheran, Pentecostal and Apostolic Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, pantheists and Baha’i.

Because many of these faith groups are younger than the general population, the likelihood is that we will, over the next decade, have about 30,000 primary school children who are not members of the traditionally recognised churches. And this does not include those who are members of the latter but whose parents would prefer them to be educated in schools outside of church control.

It is depressing to live in a country where the mere recognition of such an obvious reality constitutes political courage, but at least Ruairí Quinn has not continued the disgraceful tradition of denial.

If we had an infinite amount of money, we could, in theory, build and staff more and more schools to cater for this diversity in a largely unchanged system. But we already have a very high number of primary schools per head of population and, of course, we don’t have money to throw at the problem.

Instead, we have an opportunity to ask ourselves a basic question: what kind of primary education system is best for a diverse 21st-century republic? But this isn’t just a question about education – schools are at the heart of their communities and the way we think about them is part of the way we think about democracy.

Ruairí Quinn, though, seems not to be thinking about democracy at all. His strategy has two parts. The first consists of doing nothing much for 1,700 schools that are the only ones in their area.

If you live in a rural area with just one primary school – tough. There will be nice talk about respect and diversity but the bottom line is that children from non-Catholic families will still have to attend schools where the Catholic ethos is pervasive and where all teachers must at least pretend to be practising Catholics.

All members of the boards of management will still be required by the deeds of trust to “manage the school in accordance with the doctrines, practices and traditions of the Roman Catholic Church” and to “make and keep themselves familiar with the ethos of the Roman Catholic Church” – active and explicit discrimination against non-Catholic parents who will still be in effect debarred from serving on boards of management. Ruairí Quinn has made it plain that for these schools “transfer of patronage is not an option”.

The assumption, apparently, is that rural parents are all happy with the existing regime. But a survey by the conservative Iona Institute found “very little difference” between rural and urban parents in this regard, with a slight majority favouring schools that teach either all religions or none over “a Catholic school”.

The second part of Ruairí Quinn’s strategy is for town folk, who are deemed fit to make a choice: surveys of parents of school-age children to determine whether they would like their schools to be denominational, interdenominational or multidenominational.

This is very timid: as the advisory group on patronage put it, if the process “resulted in one school being transferred [from church control] in each of the areas selected, this would amount to less than 50 schools, out of a total of 3,169 primary schools”.

But the long-term result of the strategy would, in any case, be a formalised apartheid, with children roughly sorted into different faith groups.

Everything about this strategy is inimical to the idea of a republic. It discriminates openly between people in rural and urban areas and envisages a future in which children are segregated from the age of four. Are these really the lessons we have learned from conflict and collapse?

Source

robindch

Bannasidhe wrote: »

My cat's name was Duck.

I kind liked the guy who named his dog "deefer":

Passerby: What's "deefer"?
Owner: "D" for "dog".

Bannasidhe

robindch wrote: »

I kind liked the guy who named his dog "deefer":

Passerby: What's "deefer"?
Owner: "D" for "dog".

Dorothy Parker named her parrot Onan. When asked why she gestured at his cage and pointed out that he spilled his seed upon the ground. This is, imho, genius and I am eaten with jealousy that I didn't think of that - I called my budgie Batman...:o

Obliq

I called my finest cockerel Dildo :eek:

Bannasidhe

Obliq wrote: »

I called my finest cockerel Dildo :eek:

I had a rubber plant called Johnnie.

Dades

I had a house plant called Robert for about 5 years.

Now, ahem, everyone back on topic!

Bannasidhe

Dades wrote: »

I had a house plant called Robert for about 5 years.

Now, ahem, everyone back on topic!

(sorry Dades)

On topic.

One of the things that concerns me is this part highlighted by Fintan

The second part of Ruairí Quinn’s strategy is for town folk, who are deemed fit to make a choice: surveys of parents of school-age children to determine whether they would like their schools to be denominational, interdenominational or multidenominational.

If I am reading this correctly - those who are currently parents of school age children get to decide the ethos of the school for future generations - reminds me of the Peace of Westphalia when the rulers of States got to decide if theirs was a Catholic State or a Lutheran State with no allowance for the beliefs of individuals.

Also reminds me of when my nephew's primary school did a survey in the parish (an affluent one) and got support for the building of a swimming school for the pupils - then asked sister for a donation of 6 k even though her son was in 6th class and would never get to dip a toe in the water of this new pool. The school couldn't understand her objection.

Given that most of these parents currently being asked to decide the future ethos of 'our' schools would have appeared to tick the 'Catholic' box on the census it is within the realms of possibility most would do likewise on this issue - even if they have not set foot inside a church bar weddings, christenings and funerals for decades.

It is, imho, a wishy washy lets not upset the apple cart bit of drivel that refuses to acknowledge that no State school should be allowed to favour one religion over another by engaging in a bit of pseudo-democratic public consultation.

expectationlost

very good article, fintan is stronger in this area then most, but the 15,000 thousands number is irrelevant, im sure there more then that who'd actually want secular schools, better not to use that number

recedite

Schools fit for a Republic! Fintan makes a valid point, but politics is "the art of the possible".
Like Michael Collins' treaty, there is always the possibility of converting what is possible now, into something more radical later.
And if not, its still an improvement on what we had.

expectationlost

recedite wrote: »

Schools fit for a Republic! Fintan makes a valid point, but politics is "the art of the possible".
Like Michael Collins' treaty, there is always the possibility of converting what is possible now, into something more radical later.
And if not, its still an improvement on what we had.

so including the schools that were already in process of opening during the life of this government so far we had maybe 2% of schools change to less religious ones.

that's not good enough

the state should developing a system for secular schools rather then concreting religion into these new community schools

expectationlost

here's one of the founder of educate together, a private school provider wants to keep schools private http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2012/1102/1224326036345.html doesn't really address the issue at all she's says slow and steady change, but as fintan argues we'll never have a fair system with the changes quinn is introducing.

most of the comments take her up on that.

recedite

expectationlost wrote: »

educate together, a private school provider wants to keep schools private

A private school is usually defined as one that charges fees.

expectationlost

recedite wrote: »

A private school is usually defined as one that charges fees.

but in reality all our schools are private

recedite

They all ask for some voluntary contribution, but they won't throw out the kid if you don't pay, and its a tiny amount compared to a fee paying school.

Here's what I would do if I were in charge;
1. Poll the parents and ask them what patronage they want. Reassign schools accordingly.
2. Reduce and then eliminate the State subventions to fee paying schools. If they want an unfair advantage, let them pay unfairly for it. Let them be completely privately funded.
3. After a while, when a model or models of secular state school has emerged, which is acceptable to everyone, and thus more economical to run where populations are dispersed, start reducing state subventions to other special interest kinds of school, such that they become more expensive to attend, in effect partially or fully privatising them.

expectationlost

im not taking about fees, all our schools are already private organisations, there is only one model of public school that would be economic to run a secular one.

what you mean after a while? this was quinn chance to introduce such a model.

recedite

We live in a democratic republic, but its more democracy than republic.
If the majority of people in a new housing estate want a religious education for their kids, they are being given a new religious school.

If Quinn introduced a new type state school, it would be competing for parental votes with ET and VEC. Splitting the vote gives the advantage to the RC lobby.

We could take a more more republican view, and just say all public schools are to be secular, like it or not; its for everyone's good.
Even then, we would have to avoid having a state monopoly (corrupt, unresponsive and inefficient) so there would still be a choice of patrons.

France is a proper republic. They take the separation of church and state seriously. There is no religious indoctrination, or even symbolism, allowed in public schools.
About 15% of the population attend private (mostly religious) schools. They may get some state subvention depending on how much they emphasise the National Curriculum, but basically they are responsible for paying their own teachers and their own fuel bills.

robindch

Bannasidhe wrote: »

expectationlost wrote: »

what the hell has single sex schools got to do with atheism, can not one thread stick to topic on here?

The evidence would suggest No.

Anyone for pizza?

BTW, Paulie's Pizza (Upper Grand Canal st, D4), does what are -- IMNSHO -- the best pizzas in Dublin. Their oven runs at around 450-480 degrees celsius and their slow-rise dough is outstanding. Needless to say, they don't even offer pineapple as an extra.

joseph brand

robindch wrote: »

Anyone for pizza?

BTW, Paulie's Pizza (Upper Grand Canal st, D4), does what are -- IMNSHO -- the best pizzas in Dublin. Their oven runs at around 450-480 degrees celsius and their slow-rise dough is outstanding. Needless to say, they don't even offer pineapple as an extra.

No pineaple? Sacreligious!

Why would you eat pineapple on pizza, just no

Would love some now but am being healthy at the moment
Though walking past those o'connell street doughnuts...

Bannasidhe

robindch wrote: »

Anyone for pizza?

BTW, Paulie's Pizza (Upper Grand Canal st, D4), does what are -- IMNSHO -- the best pizzas in Dublin. Their oven runs at around 450-480 degrees celsius and their slow-rise dough is outstanding. Needless to say, they don't even offer pineapple as an extra.

Do they deliver to Cork?

I have no kitchen at the moment and am looking for some good takeaway for tonight's dinner .

robindch

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Do they deliver to Cork?

Not to my knowledge, but do them them a call.

joseph brand

bluewolf wrote: »

Why would you eat pineapple on pizza, just no

Would love some now but am being healthy at the moment
Though walking past those o'connell street doughnuts...

Is that the little hut with the fantastic aroma, selling sugary ring doughnuts? It's impossible for me to pass it and not end up with sugar-covered lips.

Obliq

bluewolf wrote: »

Why would you eat pineapple on pizza, just no

More pineapple blasphemy Will you people never listen? Do I have to show you the consequences AGAIN?

joseph brand

joseph brand wrote: »

Is that the little hut with the fantastic aroma, selling sugary ring doughnuts? It's impossible for me to pass it and not end up with sugar-covered lips.

Yes I successfully avoided it while running out nearby at lunchtime today!

robindch wrote: »

I used to avoid doing that with snowflake -- six years old last month -- but following your advice, am currently handing out small chocolate coins for good questions or jokes, while excellent jokes and especially, questions I can't answer definitively, get a large chocolate coin. Coins which she has to share, of course

BTW, how did Romans light their fires? She suggested rubbing sticks which I recall from somewhere, but I assume they just kept a fire going somewhere in the larger places too. I don't recall that they used flint. Suggestions welcome.

They could keep a firelog going I suppose?
Bow drill friction?

Bannasidhe

robindch wrote: »

I used to avoid doing that with snowflake -- six years old last month -- but following your advice, am currently handing out small chocolate coins for good questions or jokes, while excellent jokes and especially, questions I can't answer definitively, get a large chocolate coin. Coins which she has to share, of course

BTW, how did Romans light their fires? She suggested rubbing sticks which I recall from somewhere, but I assume they just kept a fire going somewhere in the larger places too. I don't recall that they used flint. Suggestions welcome.

Short answer - they didn't. They made slaves do it.

Less short answer - apartments didn't have their own kitchens so there were designated communal cooking areas/bakeries (still happens in N. Africa) where the fires were never allowed to go out. It would have been one families job to tend these.

In large houses/Villas there would be several cooking fires burning all the time (tended by slaves) - these would be used to light oil lamps etc.


I introduced an incentive called 'The Helper Lollypop' for the grandkids (now aged 6 and 3) - they have to be exceptionally helpful and extraordinarily good (i.e no thumping each other for any reason/ no tormenting the dogs/do a few 'chores' of the push the button to turn on the washing machine when Nana gives the nod variety/tidy up their toys when asked) and it's amazing how well it works - esp. since neither of them actually seems to like lollypops and the 4 I have awarded over the years ended up in the bin after a few token licks. But they love the idea...

PopePalpatine

robindch wrote: »

Anyone for pizza?

BTW, Paulie's Pizza (Upper Grand Canal st, D4), does what are -- IMNSHO -- the best pizzas in Dublin. Their oven runs at around 450-480 degrees celsius and their slow-rise dough is outstanding. Needless to say, they don't even offer pineapple as an extra.

I dunno about that, there's a cafe in the Dunne's Stores in Blanch that does excellent pizza.

Might as well try Paulie's though.

recedite

Dades wrote: »

<can of worms>

This is likely to result in a surge in demand for national school places as a large percentage of prospective parents find the doubling of private fees financially impossible. Their kids then compete for already stretched state school resources. It's cheaper for the state to subsidize the private schools than to have half those kids now needing the complete cost of their educations funded by the taxpayer.

The notion that private schools are filled with the children of property developers and bankers is one many people still have. The reality is that most of the kids are of increasingly screwed middle class parents who save for years to send their kids to a school of their choice.

Look at it this way; if you buy a private house in a posh area, nobody gives you the price of a council house to go towards the cost.
If you buy private health insurance, you don't get your PRSI refunded.
In other words, when you want special treatment, you normally pay for it in full.
Except in the case of private schools, where you only pay the difference. This is what keeps religious schools viable.
BTW the "surge in demand" for state schools would be met by a surge in changes from private school patronages to public. In this scenario, there is no net change in the overall number of kids.

Obliq wrote: »

More pineapple blasphemy Will you people never listen? Do I have to show you the consequences AGAIN?

Interesting factoid; that's a pine cone, not a pineapple. Although in ye olden days, they were actually called pineapples, because the real pineapples grew in America and hadn't been discovered yet. The pine cone was originally a finial on the staff of Bacchus, the God of Drinking and Carousing. They used pine cones in the winemaking process.
Later it appeared as a fertility symbol, and as a bedknob in Tudor homes. To add to the confusion, in 18th C USA, carpenters started making what they thought were better, more realistic pineapple finials, with a bunch of leaves on top, to look more like the fruit. In summary, pine nuts would actually be quite nice on pizza.

robindch

recedite wrote: »

[...] a bedknob in Tudor homes. [...]

Was hitchhiking near Ballydehob in West Cork perhaps fifteen years ago when this elderly farmer stopped his Ford Cortina, or something like that, and I hopped in. We shot the breeze for a few miles, but my eye was ineluctably drawn to a brass sphere, perhaps six inches across, where most cars have the small numbered plastic thing at the top of the gearstick. The following conversation ensued and I'll have to ask you to imagine that the West Cork farmer spoke v.e.r.y s.l.o.w.l.y i.n.d.e.e.d.

Me: Uh, what's that?
West Cork farmer: Dat's a brash ball.
Me: Bet it didn't come with the car though, did it?
WCF: Noah. It came off me bedposht.
Me: And what's it doing there on the gearstick?
WCF: Well, iddn't it doing much more good dere, den it ever did on me bedposht?