Want kids "communed"? Have to go to mass yourself so

recedite

Peregrinus wrote: »

Suppose 10% of school places are in non-religious schools and 90% in religious schools. Suppose also that 20% of parents would prefer a place in a non-religious school. Obviously, the chance of getting the place they want is 1 in 2. (Slightly less, in fact, since some places in non-religious schools are already taken up by people who want a place in a religious school, but can’t get one, but let’s ignore that for simplicity).

Now suppose that I transfer schools representing another 10% of places from religious to non-religious schools, by changing the management/patronage of the schools.

We now have 20% of places in non-religious schools. But the number seeking such places is now 30% - the 20% who sought them before, plus the 10% who used to find places in Catholic schools, but now no longer can. (There’s a slight overlap between those two figures, but let’s ignore that too.)

At the risk of being pedantic , I think you are making this more complicated than it needs to be.
See the numbers in bold there^^ when the 10% of irreligious kids move out of the religious school, there is no need for any of the religious kids to transfer at all. Its not just a slight overlap; you are counting the same kids twice (the ones who moved)
Once when they were "seeking a place" in the ET school, and then again as people who "used to find a place in Catholic schools"after they have transferred across to ET.
Yes, there is a slight complication in real life due people choosing whichever school is nearest, but even allowing for that, the situation still improves for those who want a place in a non-indoctrinatingl school. And probably also for the parents of the "religious" kids, because they get less questioning of their right to impose their own ethos.

Peregrinus

At the same risk, I’m assuming that the way in which places are switched from religious to non-religious is by changing the patronage/management of schools.

Thus, the 10% who move out of religious places into non-religious places are not people who made that choice; they are people in schools where that choice is made for them.

Obviously, in a real-world situation, this would happen in areas where demand for non-religious education was highest, so the number of people in school who actually want a non-religious place is likely to be higher than the 20% average used in my model. But even if you find schools where demand for non-religious education is twice the average, you still have 60% of the pupils whose parents want a religious place. If you find schools where demand for non-religious education is three times the average, you still have a large minority (40%) who want a religious place.

The only way you can avoid this is if you only switch those schools where the parent community is virtually unanimous in their desire for a non-religious school. And, if you adopt that as the criteria, you’re just not going to find 10% of schools to switch.

Besides, I wasn’t thinking so much of the pupils already in the school as of the pupils entering for the first time. Last year 90% of applicants ended up with places in religious schools; this year only 80% will. That’s 10% extra who will have to be accommodated in the non-religious sector. Yes, the non-religious sector has the extra places, but it would be a freakish coincidence if the 10% that get them are the 10% that want them but haven’t until now, been able to get them.

If the 20% of non-religious places is evenly spread nationally, a person seeking a non-religious place has a one-in-five chance of having a non-religious school as their nearest school. And the chance that a non-religious school will be either their nearest school or their next nearest school is 36% (20% + [80% x 20%]). The chance that there is a non-religious school in the nearest three is 49.8%.

So whether they can go to a non-religious school depends on (a) how far they are willing to travel, and (b) how near the three nearest schools actually are, and how feasible it is to travel to them (as well, of course, on other factors like how competitive entry is, what the entry criteria are, etc). But it’s fairly obvious that a largish chunk of the 20% who want a non-religious place won’t have practical access to one. The situation will be better than it is at present, certainly, but it won’t be perfect.

If we take that, on average, people are willing to pass up to two schools on the way to the school they want, and if we also take it that all those people meet the entry criteria for their chosen schools, then the average parent who wants a non-religious place for their child in a school that is acceptably near has a 49.8% chance of getting it. Since, in my model, the total number of non-religious places offered is equal to the total demand for non religious places, this means that 49.8% of the non-religious places are taken by people who want them. The remaining places in the non-religious schools will be taken by parents who don’t have a non-religious place as their first preference, but choose the school because it is the nearest, or because it is the nearest they can get into, or because it has other characteristics that attract them.

This is a crude model. Obviously in urban areas, where the school network is denser, people are more willing to go to a school which is not the nearest, or the second-nearest, or even the third nearest. Also, it’s very unlikely that demand for non-religious places is evenly spread; it will be stronger in some areas than in others and if the planners are any good at their job the non-religious schools will not be evenly distributed, but will be concentrated where the demand for them is greatest. So the proportion of kids in non-religious schools whose parents want to be there will be considerably higher than 49.8%. But it won’t be anything like 100%.

recedite

Peregrinus wrote: »

So the proportion of kids in non-religious schools whose parents want to be there will be considerably higher than 49.8%. But it won’t be anything like 100%.

Lets agree on that then
There is one other aspect to this; IMO the situation for a minority of religious pupils in an irreligious school is vastly preferable than if the situation is reversed. Because they can still get their various indoctrinations outside of school hours. Nobody is wasting the pupils time trying to convert them to some religion they don't agree with.

Morag

Tombo2001 wrote: »

is that multi-denominational in ethos or in its student population.....either way its depressing to hear that.

Many secondary schools are said to be multi denominational but what that in truth means it caters to all sorts of christian denominations.

Peregrinus

recedite wrote: »

Lets agree on that then .

Deal!