Principal refuses religion opt-out; second level

katydid

Just listening to Morning Ireland and an article about Castletroy College in Limerick, an ETB school, where the principal has refused a first year student the right to opt out of religion class. The argument seems to be that it is taught has a subject rather than faith formation; but unless things have changed drastically in recent years, it is centred around Christianity and Roman Catholicism in particular.

Apparently up to now, when parents have requested that their children opt out, the principal has persuaded them to allow the children to continue. Now, a parent is standing his ground.

It'll be interesting to see the outcome.

Mrs OBumble

Should parents be allowed to their children opt out of taught classes about evolution, because evolution doesn't fit with their beliefs?

Or algebra, because they don't like manipulation?

CruelCoin

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Should parents be allowed to their children opt out of taught classes about evolution, because evolution doesn't fit with their beliefs?

Or algebra, because they don't like manipulation?

Manipulation? What?

Evolution is a proven concept, unless you believe a god put those fossils there to <snip> with your head.

Theology and science are very different.

lazygal

Section 30 (2) -(e) of the Education Act 1998 permits you to opt your child out of any subject that is contrary to the conscience of the parent of the student or in the case of a student who has reached the age of 18 years, the student. This section of the Education Act 1998 does not refer to religion classes in particular so you can opt your child out of any subject that is against your conscience and in any publicly funded school. Schools are not obliged to deliver the state curriculum in a neutral and objective manner, in practice this means that it is impossible to opt your children out of the elements of religion that are integrated into the state curriculum and that are part of the school day.
From http://www.teachdontpreach.ie/school-religion-primary-secondary-opting-out/

I posted in A&A too. Parents can opt children out of any subjects.

katydid

lazygal wrote: »

Section 30 (2) -(e) of the Education Act 1998 permits you to opt your child out of any subject that is contrary to the conscience of the parent of the student or in the case of a student who has reached the age of 18 years, the student. This section of the Education Act 1998 does not refer to religion classes in particular so you can opt your child out of any subject that is against your conscience and in any publicly funded school. Schools are not obliged to deliver the state curriculum in a neutral and objective manner, in practice this means that it is impossible to opt your children out of the elements of religion that are integrated into the state curriculum and that are part of the school day.
From http://www.teachdontpreach.ie/school-religion-primary-secondary-opting-out/

I posted in A&A too. Parents can opt children out of any subjects.

I know. So what is the principal trying to do? He knows he can't stop the parent pulling the child out. It seems that up to now he's managed to persuade parents to keep the kids in, and he underestimated this parent.

katydid

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Should parents be allowed to their children opt out of taught classes about evolution, because evolution doesn't fit with their beliefs?

Or algebra, because they don't like manipulation?

You can put all those questions, but the bottom line is that they have a constitutional right to opt of of religion, and this is being denied.

lazygal

katydid wrote: »

I know. So what is the principal trying to do? He knows he can't stop the parent pulling the child out. It seems that up to now he's managed to persuade parents to keep the kids in, and he underestimated this parent.

I'd say he's worried that this will become increasingly common. Amazing that ALL other parents who wanted to opt out decided against it.......

uck51js9zml2yt

CruelCoin wrote: »

Manipulation? What?

Evolution is a proven concept,

As far as I knew it was still only seen as a theory. Don't think scientists have been able to prove that a a microbial soup can develop into a monkey!

Saipanne

Rebecca Fresh Farm wrote: »

As far as I knew it was still only seen as a theory. Don't think scientists have been able to prove that a a microbial soup can develop into a monkey!

You're right. I hope people who deny evolution pull their children out of biology class. Of course, to avoid being hypocrites they must also deny their children the antibiotic medicine that would be impossible without the theory of evolution. Because clearly that medicine cannot work.

Mrs OBumble

CruelCoin wrote: »

Manipulation? What?

Algebra = manipulation of equations.


:rolleyes:

mickoneill31

Rebecca Fresh Farm wrote: »

As far as I knew it was still only seen as a theory. Don't think scientists have been able to prove that a a microbial soup can develop into a monkey!

"Only" a theory?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory

uck51js9zml2yt

Saipanne wrote: »

You're right. I hope people who deny evolution pull their children out of biology class. Of course, to avoid being hypocrites they must also deny their children the antibiotic medicine that would be impossible without the theory of evolution. Because clearly that medicine cannot work.

Why would I pull them out of biology class or think antibiotics can't work. Its been proven that antibiotic properties exist in certain forms and they can and do work;) blue mould on a cheese doesn't evolve into a capsule yet though maybe your fridge is different

katydid

lazygal wrote: »

I'd say he's worried that this will become increasingly common. Amazing that ALL other parents who wanted to opt out decided against it.......

The old floodgates argument. If more parents want to opt out, so be it. Religion should not be part of an ETB school anyway, they are the nearest thing we have to real state schools, event though most of them favour Roman Catholicism in a shocking way, with school prayers, masses, retreats etc.

eviltwin

What does ETB stand for?

Saipanne

Rebecca Fresh Farm wrote: »

Why would I pull them out of biology class or think antibiotics can't work. Its been proven that antibiotic properties exist in certain forms and they can and do work;) blue mould on a cheese doesn't evolve into a capsule yet though maybe your fridge is different

Someone was clearly pulled out of biology...

Mountainsandh

eviltwin wrote: »

What does ETB stand for?

Education and training board.

mahamageehad

In my secondary school religion was an exam subject. That's about 10 years ago as well if not more. It was a required subject along with maths, history and science. Think there was 7 in total. Then for LC it's optional. It wasn't Jesus religion either, it's a focus on knowing an overview of the beliefs of all religions so I don't see how parents could object really? It's all very much common sense, be a good person. No scripture. An easy A. An I'm an atheist!!

katydid

mahamageehad wrote: »

In my secondary school religion was an exam subject. That's about 10 years ago as well if not more. It was a required subject along with maths, history and science. Think there was 7 in total. Then for LC it's optional. It wasn't Jesus religion either, it's a focus on knowing an overview of the beliefs of all religions so I don't see how parents could object really? It's all very much common sense, be a good person. No scripture. An easy A. An I'm an atheist!!

The course may be covering all religions, but it's focused on Christianity, which shows an obvious bias. It may be changed now, but when my daughter was in school ten years ago, the textbook for JC was disgraceful; it was totally centred around the Roman Catholic denomination, and had phrases such as "what do we believe happens at the Eucharist". My daughter and friends objected and when I questioned it, I was told they were the only books available.

In any case, it's up to the parents, or the young person themselves, to object, not for the school to question why. What one person can tolerate, another might find offensive.

katydid

Mountainsandh wrote: »

Education and training board.

Used to be VEC

uck51js9zml2yt

I heard the Minister on the RTE News @ 6 confirming that its the parents legal right to pull their child from the religion class.

/thread!

J C

Rebecca Fresh Farm wrote: »

As far as I knew it was still only seen as a theory. Don't think scientists have been able to prove that a a microbial soup can develop into a monkey!

I'm saying nothing !!!

Please swing by the Creation mega-thread to discuss !!!:)

Pedro K

Rebecca Fresh Farm wrote: »

As far as I knew it was still only seen as a theory. Don't think scientists have been able to prove that a a microbial soup can develop into a monkey!

You obviously don't know what a scientific theory is, or didn't know at the time of posting this.

CruelCoin

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Algebra = manipulation of equations.

Well duh einstein.

I didn't understand this part:

"Or algebra, because they don't like manipulation?"

Are you trying to infer that algebra is immoral, because of a word used out of context?

Peregrinus

lazygal wrote: »

Section 30 (2) -(e) of the Education Act 1998 permits you to opt your child out of any subject that is contrary to the conscience of the parent of the student or in the case of a student who has reached the age of 18 years, the student. This section of the Education Act 1998 does not refer to religion classes in particular so you can opt your child out of any subject that is against your conscience and in any publicly funded school Schools are not obliged to deliver the state curriculum in a neutral and objective manner, in practice this means that it is impossible to opt your children out of the elements of religion that are integrated into the state curriculum and that are part of the school day.

Couple of points:

SFAIK "integrated curriculum" is more of a primary school thing. Castletroy is a secondary school where different subjects are normally taught at discrete times (and by different teachers and, often, in different classrooms). So there's generally a much greater practical possiblity of opting out of a specific subject.

Education Act 1998 s.30 only applies to "recognised schools". I'm petty sure that Castletroy College would be a recognised school but, if I'm wrong about that, or if this issue arose in another school, s.30 wouldn't be relevant.

But, assuming s.30 is relevant, what it mainly does is give the Minister power to "prescribe the curriculum for recognised schools" - the subjects to be offered, the syllabus for each subject, the amount of time to be allotted to each, etc. S. 30(2) goes on to say that "the Minister . . . shall not require any student to attend instruction in any subject which is contrary to the conscience of the parent" (or the student, if over 18). What this means is that attending religion (or any other subject) contrary to conscience can't be a curriculum requirement, or a requirement imposed by the Minister.

It doesn't necessarily follow that the school can't require a pupil to attend instruction in a particular subject. Schools are free to impose requirements which are not curriculum requirements, and they routinely do. I don't think the statement that the Minister can't require a pupil to do something is the same as a statement that the pupil has an absolute right, enforceable against everybody, not to do it.

Leaving s. 30 aside, there's also the constitutional issue. Under Article 44.4, "legislation providing State aid for schools shall not . . . affect prejudicially the right of any child to attend a school receiving public money without attending religious instruction at that school".

Again, this wording is curious. Instead of stating directly that every child has a right to attend a State-aided school without attending religious instruction, Art 44 just says that legislation providing State aid is not to "affect prejudicially" that right. This is striking, because most of the other rights recognised by the Constition are stated directly ("All citizens shall, as human persons, be held equal before the law."). The negative wording of Art 44.4 leaves open the possibility that something else could affect that right - such as the policies of the school management/principal. As long as the legislation doesn't required attendance at religious instruction, there's no breach of Art 44.

This will make an interesting court case, if it comes to it.

JustAThought

Perhaps it more to do with the insurance & operational costs &chaos it will cause if teachers or admin have to be available for every class of the day to supervise kids in the school who choose not to go to class because they, or their parents, want them to opt out. Will the parent be willing to stump up the salary & full pension contribution himself and ensure also a free classroom with adequate seat allocation is available for the exact number of students who may wish to be supervised at any given time or day?

Peregrinus

JustAThought wrote: »

Perhaps it more to do with the insurance & operational costs &chaos it will cause if teachers or admin have to be available for every class of the day to supervise kids in the school who choose not to go to class because they, or their parents, want them to opt out. Will the parent be willing to stump up the salary & full pension contribution himself and ensure also a free classroom with adequate seat allocation is available for the exact number of students who may wish to be supervised at any given time or day?

If pupils have a right to absent themselves from particular classes, then the school must be resourced adequately for the exercise of that right. If it isn't, that's a problem, but it's not a problem to which the appropriate response is refusal of the right, or making an extra charge on those who exercise it.

uck51js9zml2yt

Saipanne wrote: »

Someone was clearly pulled out of biology...

I actually did honours leaving cert in biology and agricultural science

Delirium

katydid wrote: »

Just listening to Morning Ireland and an article about Castletroy College in Limerick, an ETB school, where the principal has refused a first year student the right to opt out of religion class. The argument seems to be that it is taught has a subject rather than faith formation; but unless things have changed drastically in recent years, it is centred around Christianity and Roman Catholicism in particular.

Apparently up to now, when parents have requested that their children opt out, the principal has persuaded them to allow the children to continue. Now, a parent is standing his ground.

It'll be interesting to see the outcome.

Secondary schools did certainly allow for students (with consent from parents) to be exempt from attending religion class when I was in secondary school.

It was a Christian Brothers run secondary school, and there were a couple of Protestants and a Muslim in my year. All were allowed to study in the canteen instead of having to sit through the religion class.

Peregrinus

Delirium wrote: »

Secondary schools did certainly allow for students (with consent from parents) to be exempt from attending religion class when I was in secondary school.

It was a Christian Brothers run secondary school, and there were a couple of Protestants and a Muslim in my year. All were allowed to study in the canteen instead of having to sit through the religion class.

Most schools in Ireland do this, at any rate where the student concerned is a member of another denomination.

It would be interesting to know if Protestants, etc, at Castletroy have ever been allowed to opt out. Does everyone get "encouraged" to attend, or it is only those lazy, wishy-washy, slack unbelievers?

MightyMunster

When I was in secondary school late 90s, I opted out of religion after Jc. It was a convent school. Jc religion was OK but had a nun in 5th year which was <snip>. I went to the hall where free classes etc had to go so was supervised and got my homework done 3days a week during religion time!

I didn't attend religion in my local rural Catholic primary school in the 80s. Atheists, protestants and the Jewish kid were sent to the library (unsupervised) for 30mins everyday. There were 6of us in total.

Peregrinus

MightyMunster wrote: »

I didn't attend religion in my local rural Catholic primary school in the 80s. Atheists, protestants and the Jewish kid were sent to the library (unsupervised) for 30mins everyday. There were 6of us in total.

Your primary school had a library? In the 1980s?

[I feel a Monty Python "Four Yorkshiremen" sketch coming on.]

katydid

Peregrinus wrote: »

Your primary school had a library? In the 1980s?

[I feel a Monty Python "Four Yorkshiremen" sketch coming on.]

It was probably a corner of the cloakroom with a few shelves of books...

katydid

JustAThought wrote: »

Perhaps it more to do with the insurance & operational costs &chaos it will cause if teachers or admin have to be available for every class of the day to supervise kids in the school who choose not to go to class because they, or their parents, want them to opt out. Will the parent be willing to stump up the salary & full pension contribution himself and ensure also a free classroom with adequate seat allocation is available for the exact number of students who may wish to be supervised at any given time or day?

That's not really the problem of the parents or young person concerned. They have a right to opt out; the implications of that to the school in terms of staffing is the school's problem.

Peregrinus

katydid wrote: »

It was probably a corner of the cloakroom with a few shelves of books...

Books! What I wouldn't have given for a book! We had to make do with a piece of the brown paper that the tripe came wrapped in . . .

katydid

Peregrinus wrote: »

Books! What I wouldn't have given for a book! We had to make do with a piece of the brown paper that the tripe came wrapped in . . .

You had tripe?

Peregrinus

Well, I say tripe. It was more excrement, really. And we didn't have it. We were allowed to look at it. Sometimes.

lameusername

Rebecca Fresh Farm wrote: »

CruelCoin wrote: »

Manipulation? What?

As far as I knew it was still only seen as a theory.

So's gravity. Or the idea disease is spread by germs.

Mrs OBumble

Peregrinus wrote: »

If pupils have a right to absent themselves from particular classes, then the school must be resourced adequately for the exercise of that right. If it isn't, that's a problem, but it's not a problem to which the appropriate response is refusal of the right, or making an extra charge on those who exercise it.

I recall absenting myself from 6th form history - because I hated the teacher's style, but they wouldn't let me drop out.

I did so by sitting in the same classroom (right under the teacher's nose, no less), and doing my physics homework. Didn't listen to the teacher (if it'd been ten years later I would have headphones in, they weren't so common then).

Don't see any reason why kids who want to opt out couldn't be supervised in the same way today, and work on independent learning projects.

eviltwin

My daughter opted out of religion with no issues. The school allowed her to go to the study hall to do homework. I actually had no problem with the secondary text book but it was other aspects of the class we had concerns with. The religion class was often used to facilitate dvds and talks by questionable groups and in our school you were either out for the entire class or you stayed, you couldn't pick and choose which days you went in.

La Fenetre

eviltwin wrote: »

My daughter opted out of religion with no issues. The school allowed her to go to the study hall to do homework. I actually had no problem with the secondary text book but it was other aspects of the class we had concerns with. The religion class was often used to facilitate dvds and talks by questionable groups and in our school you were either out for the entire class or you stayed, you couldn't pick and choose which days you went in.

Shhhhhhh this story doesn't fit in with the evil albino monk narrative . . .

I wish I could have opted out of Irish class when I was at school.

The people who made a fortune forcing us to learn that utter warped minded Peig have a lot to answer for.

La Fenetre

eviltwin wrote: »

My daughter opted out of religion with no issues. The school allowed her to go to the study hall to do homework. I actually had no problem with the secondary text book but it was other aspects of the class we had concerns with. The religion class was often used to facilitate dvds and talks by questionable groups and in our school you were either out for the entire class or you stayed, you couldn't pick and choose which days you went in.

Shhhhhhh, this story doesn't fit in with the RTE narrative . . .

I wish I could have opted out of Irish class when I was at school.

The people who made a fortune forcing Irish young people to buy and learn that utterly warped and twisted book Peig genuinely have a lot to answer for.

Peregrinus

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

I recall absenting myself from 6th form history - because I hated the teacher's style, but they wouldn't let me drop out.

I did so by sitting in the same classroom (right under the teacher's nose, no less), and doing my physics homework. Didn't listen to the teacher (if it'd been ten years later I would have headphones in, they weren't so common then).

Don't see any reason why kids who want to opt out couldn't be supervised in the same way today, and work on independent learning projects.

She is being supervised in the same way, is the decision that the school has finally arrived at.

This kid's in first year, not sixth year, and in the nature of things first years on a free period require rather more intensive supervision than sixth years do. Plus, they're not so crash-hot at the old independent learning projects.

But none of this really matters. If the kid has a right to opt out (and I think she does, and should) then the school has to accommodate that as best it can, given its resource constraints and other the demands made on them. In this case she's opting out within the classroom, as it were - pretty much as you did, in fact, except with the acknowledgement of the school.

It's not ideal, but it does acknowledge her right to opt out. And now that it has been established as possible perhaps a greater number of kids will opt out. And if there are enough of them, the pressure will be on to make some better arrangement for them.

mickoneill31

The principal in this case has totally achieved the opposite result that he was aiming for.
1: The girl is now opting out of religion.
2: Anybody who listens to the news now knows, if they didn't before, that they can opt their kids out of religion if they wish in secondary schools. I'm sure it's not going to be a floodgate but there'll be a few more opting out now.

katydid

Peregrinus wrote: »

In this case she's opting out within the classroom, as it were - pretty much as you did, in fact, except with the acknowledgement of the school.

It's not ideal, but it does acknowledge her right to opt out. .

Will she be allowed wear headphones so she doesn't have to listen to what is going on in the class? And if so, how will she be able to concentrate on whatever it is she is supposed to be studying?

We all know that kids like to listen to music while they study, but up to now, most schools don't allow this in study periods or after school study. If they allow this girl to sit and study using headphones, that's another can of worms they are opening up.

No, the only way is for her to be supervised. If the college has a library, she can be accommodated there, if not, they will have to build that time into their S&S rota.

Peregrinus

katydid wrote: »

Will she be allowed wear headphones so she doesn't have to listen to what is going on in the class? And if so, how will she be able to concentrate on whatever it is she is supposed to be studying?

We all know that kids like to listen to music while they study, but up to now, most schools don't allow this in study periods or after school study. If they allow this girl to sit and study using headphones, that's another can of worms they are opening up.

No, the only way is for her to be supervised. If the college has a library, she can be accommodated there, if not, they will have to build that time into their S&S rota.

I wouldn't think, actually, that this is a problem unique to religion class. Pupils - especially in the senior years - can opt out of subjects for a variety of reasons, mostly uncontroversial, and the question of supervising students who have a period for which they have no assigned class must come up with reasonable regularity. I opted out of Art, for example, and had a study period in "the study". (Well, I say study, it was more of a disused urinal behind the bikeshed . . .)

Obviously, there's no such arrangement in place in Castletroy College or, if there is, then for some doubtless practical reason it's not available at the particular time that this pupil's religion class is scheduled. But I'm thinking that this is, or should be, exceptional; most secondary schools will have some arrangements for supervising the study of individual students, or small groups of students, who have free periods, surely?

Peregrinus

mickoneill31 wrote: »

The principal in this case has totally achieved the opposite result that he was aiming for.
1: The girl is now opting out of religion.
2: Anybody who listens to the news now knows, if they didn't before, that they can opt their kids out of religion if they wish in secondary schools . . .

In this secondary school. Not necessarily in others.

Of course, as far as the Principal at Castletroy is concerned, it's the fact that people know they can opt out of religion at Castletroy that matters to him.

mickoneill31

Peregrinus wrote: »

In this secondary school. Not necessarily in others.

Of course, as far as the Principal at Castletroy is concerned, it's the fact that people know they can opt out of religion at Castletroy that matters to him.

I didn't know that parents could opt their kids out of religion in all secondary schools in Ireland before this week.

OU812

katydid wrote: »

they have a constitutional right to opt of of religion

Would you happen to know where I can find this in print?

mickoneill31

OU812 wrote: »

Would you happen to know where I can find this in print?

It's article 44.2.4 of the constitution.


http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/attached_files/Pdf%20files/Constitution%20of%20IrelandNov2004.pdf

Peregrinus

mickoneill31 wrote: »

I didn't know that parents could opt their kids out of religion in all secondary schools in Ireland before this week.

I don't think they can, necessarily.

mickoneill31 wrote: »

It's article 44.2.4 of the constitution.

Art 44.2.4 only says that . . .

" Legislation providing State aid for schools shall not . . . . be such as to affect prejudicially the right of any child to attend a school receiving public money without attending religious instruction at that school."

That only means that the laws dealing with education funding can't deprive pupils of the right to opt out of religion. It doesn't follow that nothing can deprive them of that right.

To take a straightforward example, if you have an entirely private school which receives no state funding or other state aid at all, Art 44.2.4 plainly doesn't stop the school authorities adopting and enforcing a rule that every pupil must attend religious instruction.

But, if you think about it, even if you have a school which does receive state funding, as long as the conditions attached to the funding don't require all pupils to attend religious instruction then there's no breach of Art 44.2.4. I don't see anything in Art 44.2.4 to stop the school themselves imposing such a requirement. (There might be other laws applying to the school which prevent this, but Art 44.2.4 doesn't appear to.)

mickoneill31

Ah I'm not qualified to argue about the constitution

The minister of education has said they have the right to opt out. That's good enough for me until somebody challenges it in court.

I'm not saying she's qualified either. But youd hope she'd have gotten legal advice.