Separating Church & State , Why does it Matter ?

lazygal

The ET model is flawed, as flawed as the patronage system under which it works. I've heard mixed feedback from parents about how those without any faith are accomodated. There's an acceptance that 'all faiths are equal' but there's little or no critical evaluation of any faith. In fact, they walk a fine line between education about religions and then marking significant religious events. I'd prefer a secular approach, where parents aren't invited in to schools to give a totally positive presentation of their faith, but instead keep their faith as a private matter not relevant to the school.
That said, our children will probably attend one, but I don't see it as a perfect model of schooling at all. The Irish education system and the patronage system don't really work.

Absolam

silverharp wrote: »

my son is in 5th class and they were dissecting a fish this year, junior said one of the girls was excused from participating. What the teacher didn't do was to say the class cant go ahead because of a particular individual.
And it fairness what you judge to be of educational value is neither here nor there, its what the teacher deems to be of educational value is what is important.

So what you're saying is, the teacher didn't simply tell the girl it was 'part of the lesson'? Sounds like a far more sensible teacher. Now, whilst the dissecting of the fish actually does seem to have a purpose in the context of the lesson, whereas showing the cartoon around the classroom didn't, had the teacher in Limerick had the presence of mind to excuse the children who would be offended before showing it around they could have avoided the problem.

And I'm not aware that the teacher has claimed it had educational value, though both the teacher and the chairman apologised for it, so I'd be dubious. So I'm happy enough to stack what I judge to be of educational value against what you judge to be of educational value

eviltwin

One eyed Jack wrote: »

This forum is packed to the metaphorical rafters with parents complaining that their children are being influenced in school to conclude that their parents are absurd.

The thing with the ET model though, is that it's own ethos claims that it to respect the spiritual background of each child and so on, and that's why I said the ET model is a whole mix of conflicting ideologies.

Will trigger warnings become a thing in school? I would say it's far more likely to happen in an ET school than a school which has no shame in it's ability to discriminate against parents under certain conditions.

What experience do you have of the ET model? My son attends an ET, I am involved with the school and with the wider ET community and I don't see any conflict. Yes there are a mix of religious views that attend, that is also the case in any faith school. Rather than ignore it the children are encouraged to talk about it and explain their religious customs to their peers. That's all it is. And as for trigger warnings, what reason could there possibly be for that? From my experience the mix of students integrate well. I think children care far less about this sort of thing than we do.

Cabaal

I imagine this is how One eyed Jack views ET schools when it comes to conflict, student pitted against student :pac:

Absolam

lazygal wrote: »

The Irish education system and the patronage system don't really work.

Though the Irish education system is ranked 9th best in the world.
Or 20th according to the OECD.
Either way not bad; 'don't really work' might be a relative concept.

silverharp

Absolam wrote: »

So what you're saying is, the teacher didn't simply tell the girl it was 'part of the lesson'? Sounds like a far more sensible teacher. Now, whilst the dissecting of the fish actually does seem to have a purpose in the context of the lesson, whereas showing the cartoon around the classroom didn't, had the teacher in Limerick had the presence of mind to excuse the children who would be offended before showing it around they could have avoided the problem.

the picture wasn't offensive to everyone else, the "fish" comparison would have been to pass it around, the 2 Muslim students could be allowed not to view it. I don't believe the 2 kids can complain about other kids looking the image of the "so called" prophet? anymore than the girl in my son's class could have been offended that they had their lesson or even if she was it is of no relevance.

Absolam wrote: »

And I'm not aware that the teacher has claimed it had educational value, though both the teacher and the chairman apologised for it, so I'd be dubious. So I'm happy enough to stack what I judge to be of educational value against what you judge to be of educational value

we live in politically correct times so it was inevitable that apologies yada yada would be made, teachers are presumed to be presenting information that is of education value. hiding relevant information or historical facts wouldn't strike me as an educational plus. if she cant show the magazine cover because of where she works then the school's policy is arguably flawed.

One eyed Jack

Cabaal wrote: »

I imagine this is how One eyed Jack views ET schools when it comes to conflict, student pitted against student :pac:

Nah, that's more akin to the CBS I attended myself, never underestimate the power of a good wedgie in conflict resolution


Seriously though -

eviltwin wrote: »

What experience do you have of the ET model? My son attends an ET, I am involved with the school and with the wider ET community and I don't see any conflict. Yes there are a mix of religious views that attend, that is also the case in any faith school. Rather than ignore it the children are encouraged to talk about it and explain their religious customs to their peers. That's all it is. And as for trigger warnings, what reason could there possibly be for that? From my experience the mix of students integrate well. I think children care far less about this sort of thing than we do.

I have years of experience of the ET model, it's one of the reasons I decided not to send my child to an ET school at the time. In fairness I said it was a mix of conflicting ideologies, not that I was expecting children to be scrapping in the schoolyard. I'd expect that in any school.

There's only one ideology is promoted throughout the day in a faith school, and it's an ideology which aligns with my own faith. I'm not going to complain about the fact that other children aren't encouraged to talk about their own faith or lack thereof, I had enough experience in school myself with a JW child who sat beside me in math class and wore the ears off me until I agreed to attend a bible study.

From my experience, the mix of students integrate well too, and the children from the ET school who are RC make their communion and so on with the children from my child's school. It hasn't been my experience that children care far less about these things than adults do though, I had to pull up a child on it one morning when I heard him sneer at another child - "You're an aaaatheist!". Knowing the school, and the child's parents, I don't think it was something he picked up off either.

The reason I suggested that trigger warnings were more likely in an ET school is because they are far more socially progressive than a traditional faith school. It's also the reason why I said earlier in the thread that there's nothing fundamentally wrong with any of the various models, but what they offer parents is more choice, and that's why I agreed with lazygal that the ET model has it's flaws, like any model you can think of, and there is always room for improvement.

One improvement would be the introduction of a completely secular educational model, that would exclude the expression of faith and philosophy completely from the school environment so that there would be no proselytising, indoctrination, or sneering and mocking of those people who don't share the same faith or philosophy.

eviltwin

Even if schools are totally secular it's going to be obvious who is what and there is potential for conflict. I would rather have my child educated about the different beliefs of his peers and I'd like that to happen early before bigotry and stereotypes can take hold. We expect, rightly, people who come here to integrate and learn about and respect our way of life. That goes both ways.

wokingvoter

Absolam wrote: »

Though the Irish education system is ranked 9th best in the world.
Or 20th according to the OECD.
Either way not bad; 'don't really work' might be a relative concept.

Doesn't really work for "some " I would imagine is closer to the correct wording here

Cabaal

Absolam wrote: »

Though the Irish education system is ranked 9th best in the world.
Or 20th according to the OECD.
Either way not bad; 'don't really work' might be a relative concept.

I'm sure the school districts in the good old USA could also claim they provided great education, while at the same time continuing to discriminate against black students.
:rolleyes:

Your post does nothing to address the discrimination that occurs due to the current system,

Try harder next time

One eyed Jack

eviltwin wrote: »

Even if schools are totally secular it's going to be obvious who is what and there is potential for conflict. I would rather have my child educated about the different beliefs of his peers and I'd like that to happen early before bigotry and stereotypes can take hold. We expect, rightly, people who come here to integrate and learn about and respect our way of life. That goes both ways.

I know where you're coming from and I'm all for multiculturalism and learning about other cultures and mixing among other cultures and so on, but, while I respect the fact that it is your choice to enrol your child in a school where they spend quite an amount of time on educating children about different religions and so on, I would rather personally, for my own child, that he be educated in the beliefs of other cultures outside of the school environment. He does, and I educate him in some other religions and cultures myself, and he also picks up and experiences other cultures and beliefs from his friends outside school.

I think we're probably both on the same page, just that we have a different approach is all.

Absolam

silverharp wrote: »

the picture wasn't offensive to everyone else, the "fish" comparison would have been to pass it around, the 2 Muslim students could be allowed not to view it. I don't believe the 2 kids can complain about other kids looking the image of the "so called" prophet? anymore than the girl in my son's class could have been offended that they had their lesson or even if she was it is of no relevance..

And the fish wasn't a problem for everyone else, but the girl was excused. Did the 2 kids complain about other kids looking the image of the "so called" prophet (way to flash your credentials by the way!)? According to the mother of the child in question "Each child was told to read it and look at a picture that depicted the Prophet Mohammed,". She went on to say “My son is not the only child within the class that is Muslim and when he explained to the teacher that this such picture was offensive to him and his religion the teacher told him that ‘it was part of his lesson’,” so it would seem fairly apparent that he was more concerned with the offence it caused him rather than everyone else. But you seem to be avoiding the idea I presented, that had the teacher in Limerick had the presence of mind to excuse the children who would be offended before showing it around they could have avoided the problem. I wonder why.

silverharp wrote: »

we live in politically correct times so it was inevitable that apologies yada yada would be made, teachers are presumed to be presenting information that is of education value. hiding relevant information or historical facts wouldn't strike me as an educational plus. if she cant show the magazine cover because of where she works then the school's policy is arguably flawed.

Well.. you are presuming teachers are presenting information that is of education value, and that the cartoon itself had educational value. I'd rather go by facts than your presumptions

Absolam

Cabaal wrote: »

I'm sure the school districts in the good old USA could also claim they provided great education, while at the same time continuing to discriminate against black students.
:rolleyes:

Your post does nothing to address the discrimination that occurs due to the current system,

Try harder next time

I'm sure they could too, though they'd have to admit at 13th and 36th they rank lower than Irish schools, despite their vaunted secular establishment.:rolleyes:
Nor was my post directed at perceived discrimination in the system, only at how well our schools perform compared to others. Which is pretty well, so I don't think I need to try all that much harder

silverharp

Absolam wrote: »

And the fish wasn't a problem for everyone else, but the girl was excused. Did the 2 kids complain about other kids looking the image of the "so called" prophet (way to flash your credentials by the way!)? According to the mother of the child in question "Each child was told to read it and look at a picture that depicted the Prophet Mohammed,". She went on to say “My son is not the only child within the class that is Muslim and when he explained to the teacher that this such picture was offensive to him and his religion the teacher told him that ‘it was part of his lesson’,” so it would seem fairly apparent that he was more concerned with the offence it caused him rather than everyone else. But you seem to be avoiding the idea I presented, that had the teacher in Limerick had the presence of mind to excuse the children who would be offended before showing it around they could have avoided the problem. I wonder why.

I had assumed the teacher held up the cover or showed it on an overhead, if something is being passed around sure it wouldn't be sensible to force a particular kid to look at it and the kid should be free to not handle it or what not. My main concern here is that teachers will become too cautious for fear of a backlash when presenting information. in a decade or 2 this period will become part of the history class and it should be presented as its to be presented.
Look at it this way , why should the teacher have to understand the particular beliefs of each student in their class? everyone believes different things so I don't think a teacher needs to concern themselves with what might potentially offend someone. if a student gets wind of something that is going to offend them then they should talk to the teacher, if it seems reasonable then the kid should be accommodated in any practical way that doesn't impact everyone else. if they refuse to carry out a task or answer questions incorrectly that they are being graded on they should fail that part, this could be anything, evolution, cooking a pork dish in a home economics class, dissecting a fish in a science practical
In this particular case though if the teacher made them look at the cover after they had given a reason of why they didn't want too then the teacher overstepped the mark. As a parent theoretically I'd like my kids to have the right of veto for themselves but to understand they might drop a grade and so be it.

Absolam wrote: »

Well.. you are presuming teachers are presenting information that is of education value, and that the cartoon itself had educational value. I'd rather go by facts than your presumptions

what fact? in a discussion about free speech , showing a cover of a magazine that got people killed is relevant

Cabaal

Absolam wrote: »

I'm sure they could too, though they'd have to admit at 13th and 36th they rank lower than Irish schools, despite their vaunted secular establishment.:rolleyes:
Nor was my post directed at perceived discrimination in the system, only at how well our schools perform compared to others. Which is pretty well, so I don't think I need to try all that much harder

You know that the majority of country's ahead of Ireland don't have the same system when it comes to religious ethos right?

You posted Ireland's ranking to try and claim there was nothing wrong, but country's ahead of Ireland provide better education with no religious ethos pushed on children in state funded schools.

You seriously need to try harder here, as you undermine yourself with the link you posted.

One eyed Jack

silverharp wrote: »

I had assumed the teacher held up the cover or showed it on an overhead, if something is being passed around sure it wouldn't be sensible to force a particular kid to look at it and the kid should be free to not handle it or what not. My main concern here is that teachers will become too cautious for fear of a backlash when presenting information. in a decade or 2 this period will become part of the history class and it should be presented as its to be presented.
Look at it this way , why should the teacher have to understand the particular beliefs of each student in their class? everyone believes different things so I don't think a teacher needs to concern themselves with what might potentially offend someone. if a student gets wind of something that is going to offend them then they should talk to the teacher, if it seems reasonable then the kid should be accommodated in any practical way that doesn't impact everyone else. if they refuse to carry out a task or answer questions incorrectly that they are being graded on they should fail that part, this could be anything, evolution, cooking a pork dish in a home economics class, dissecting a fish in a science practical
In this particular case though if the teacher made them look at the cover after they had given a reason of why they didn't want too then the teacher overstepped the mark. As a parent theoretically I'd like my kids to have the right of veto for themselves but to understand they might drop a grade and so be it.

Would that same reasoning apply to children who are not Roman Catholic in an RC ethos school? That the teacher shouldn't have to understand the particular beliefs or philosophy of each student in their class and that the student should be marked down for their lack of participation and so on.

I mean, if we're to go by the whole "they should be taught about integrating into our way of life" and it going both ways and so on, shouldn't we then also be accommodating their way of life, which includes respect for their culture and beliefs and so on?

Why would an atheist treat a Muslim any differently to the way they would want themselves to be treated? Particularly if they're both in a minority in an RC ethos school for example.

what fact? in a discussion about free speech , showing a cover of a magazine that got people killed is relevant

Well, it is, but if it contravenes the ethos of the school, which the teacher should know, and shouldn't be afraid to impart to their students, then it's probably for the best to avoid the discussion straying into territory that could be interpreted as targeting a specific minority group. Particularly if some of the members of that minority group are sitting right in front of you.

If parents who are atheist are complaining about the treatment of their children in a religious ethos school, then why would they expect that religious parents in a school that claims to respect their beliefs, would not complain when that doesn't seem to be happening?

Seems very "one rule for us and another for you" sort of thing going on there, and the respect only seems to be going one way. It's always a strange one when people use that "respect is not given, it's earned", but they never seem to apply it to themselves.

silverharp

Cabaal wrote: »

You know that the majority of country's ahead of Ireland don't have the same system when it comes to religious ethos right?

You posted Ireland's ranking to try and claim there was nothing wrong, but country's ahead of Ireland provide better education with no religious ethos pushed on children in state funded schools.

You seriously need to try harder here, as you undermine yourself with the link you posted.

there is a saying in the US about the Jewish mother and the Italian mother. The Italian mother made sure her kid didn't forget their lunchbox going to school and the Jewish mother made sure her did didn't forget their school books. And it ended with something like the Italian kid got fat and the Jewish kid became a lawyer. In the Irish case at least in the past education was pushed more in the home which is one of the more important metrics for success.

iguana

eviltwin wrote: »

Even if schools are totally secular it's going to be obvious who is what and there is potential for conflict. I would rather have my child educated about the different beliefs of his peers and I'd like that to happen early before bigotry and stereotypes can take hold. We expect, rightly, people who come here to integrate and learn about and respect our way of life. That goes both ways.

They aren't really educated about it though are they. Hearing about various religious faiths from proponents of those faiths is only the tip of the ice-berg when it comes to learning about religion. Especially considering the point that in general, people, especially children tend to have very little real education about their own faiths.

silverharp

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Would that same reasoning apply to children who are not Roman Catholic in an RC ethos school? That the teacher shouldn't have to understand the particular beliefs or philosophy of each student in their class and that the student should be marked down for their lack of participation and so on.

I mean, if we're to go by the whole "they should be taught about integrating into our way of life" and it going both ways and so on, shouldn't we then also be accommodating their way of life, which includes respect for their culture and beliefs and so on?

Why would an atheist treat a Muslim any differently to the way they would want themselves to be treated? Particularly if they're both in a minority in an RC ethos school for example.

I'd see a difference between teaching religion to kids and teaching an educational syllabus. take the teaching of evolution, I don't believe the teacher should have to take notice of who is in the class. from the school's perspective theoretically they wouldn't want their reputation sullied as being know to turn out kids who never learned about evolution. So there is a principle there that might create minor tensions from time to time, if its over knowledge then the school should defend teaching that knowledge , if its "doctrinal" in nature there is a stronger case for the kid to be accommodated.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Well, it is, but if it contravenes the ethos of the school, which the teacher should know, and shouldn't be afraid to impart to their students, then it's probably for the best to avoid the discussion straying into territory that could be interpreted as targeting a specific minority group. Particularly if some of the members of that minority group are sitting right in front of you.

If parents who are atheist are complaining about the treatment of their children in a religious ethos school, then why would they expect that religious parents in a school that claims to respect their beliefs, would not complain when that doesn't seem to be happening?

Seems very "one rule for us and another for you" sort of thing going on there, and the respect only seems to be going one way. It's always a strange one when people use that "respect is not given, it's earned", but they never seem to apply it to themselves.

if you sign up to a school , you should understand the ethos of the school. leaving aside the peculiar demand supply dynamic in Ireland but to take a silly extreme it wouldnt be right to send your kids to Gael school and object that your kids are learning everything in Irish or send them to the French school in Dublin and object to them learning French.
Its up to parents to judge the ET model, pick it or not and live with the compromise or try to change in a democratic way.

One eyed Jack

iguana wrote: »

They aren't really educated about it though are they. Hearing about various religious faiths from proponents of those faiths is only the tip of the ice-berg when it comes to learning about religion. Especially considering the point that in general, people, especially children tend to have very little real education about their own faiths.

Well it's true that it's only the tip of the iceberg of a particular religion, but one thing I do like about the ET model is that it allows for and encourages children to explore other cultures and religions in a positive environment, and allows children to understand that what they are exposed to in the media isn't really an accurate representation of whatever particular religion either.

Part of the reason why children have very little education about their own faiths is because adults either give them the fundamentalist version, or they give them none, and expect the school to do their jobs for them. There's very little balance in either method.

eviltwin

iguana wrote: »

They aren't really educated about it though are they. Hearing about various religious faiths from proponents of those faiths is only the tip of the ice-berg when it comes to learning about religion. Especially considering the point that in general, people, especially children tend to have very little real education about their own faiths.

It's a start for a four year old, it's more than the same four year old would get in a Catholic school. A school can only do so much too. It's really the responsibility of the parents to do this. I know it's not ideal and religion shouldn't be in schools at all but as Jack says leave it entirely up to parents and we have issues with bigotry, misinformation and plain lack of knowledge.

silverharp

eviltwin wrote: »

It's a start for a four year old, it's more than the same four year old would get in a Catholic school. A school can only do so much too. It's really the responsibility of the parents to do this. I know it's not ideal and religion shouldn't be in schools at all but as Jack says leave it entirely up to parents and we have issues with bigotry, misinformation and plain lack of knowledge.

here is a question though , as someone who doesn't think all religions are the same, where religions are presented , are they done so in a very fluffy and friendly way ie in "marketing terms" or can anyone see state schools in the UK for example giving a warts and all presentation of different religions?

eviltwin

silverharp wrote: »

here is a question though , as someone who doesn't think all religions are the same, where religions are presented , are they done so in a very fluffy and friendly way ie in "marketing terms" or can anyone see state schools in the UK for example giving a warts and all presentation of different religions?

I don't know. My youngest is only in senior infants. I'm not sure what it's like as they get older but I'd imagine its sugar coated as it is in a Catholic school. They've toned down how Catholicism is taught over the years. I can't imagine an ET is going to be any different.

One eyed Jack

silverharp wrote: »

I'd see a difference between teaching religion to kids and teaching an educational syllabus. take the teaching of evolution, I don't believe the teacher should have to take notice of who is in the class. from the school's perspective theoretically they wouldn't want their reputation sullied as being know to turn out kids who never learned about evolution. So there is a principle there that might create minor tensions from time to time, if its over knowledge then the school should defend teaching that knowledge , if its "doctrinal" in nature there is a stronger case for the kid to be accommodated.

But if you sign up to the ethos of a school?

I understand where you're coming from and absolutely I'd be more interested in the child being educated with more focus on knowledge and facts rather than ideology (it just happens to be convenient for me in that respect that the ideology espoused in most Irish schools isn't an issue for me), but at the same time, I am concerned with the new ERB curriculum that's being talked about being introduced in schools because of the fact that they spend far too much time on ideology as it is, without introducing more ideology into the curriculum. There are only so many hours in a school day, and if most of that is taken up with imparting the various ideologies, it doesn't leave much room to impart what I would see as the more important parts of the curriculum, such as reading, writing, mathematics, and that's before we even touch on any science! I don't send my child to school to be indoctrinated in political science either.

if you sign up to a school , you should understand the ethos of the school. leaving aside the peculiar demand supply dynamic in Ireland but to take a silly extreme it wouldnt be right to send your kids to Gael school and object that your kids are learning everything in Irish or send them to the French school in Dublin and object to them learning French.
Its up to parents to judge the ET model, pick it or not and live with the compromise or try to change in a democratic way.

Yeah I'd agree with all of that alright. I think though that the problem is that most people don't actually care about the issue until they are actually impacted by the issue, when the time to be caring about the issue and trying to change it in a democratic way was as soon as they had the ability to do so for themselves, so that the next generation would benefit from their efforts. It's too late by the time they go looking for a school and then they have to settle and make compromises and so on for their children's education.

lazygal

eviltwin wrote: »

I don't know. My youngest is only in senior infants. I'm not sure what it's like as they get older but I'd imagine its sugar coated as it is in a Catholic school. They've toned down how Catholicism is taught over the years. I can't imagine an ET is going to be any different.

The new Grow In Love programme is a lot more full on for catholics nowadays. It replaced a more fuzzy programme.

iguana

eviltwin wrote: »

It's a start for a four year old, it's more than the same four year old would get in a Catholic school. A school can only do so much too. It's really the responsibility of the parents to do this. I know it's not ideal and religion shouldn't be in schools at all but as Jack says leave it entirely up to parents and we have issues with bigotry, misinformation and plain lack of knowledge.

I agree that it's fine for a 4 year old and in the next year or so that's probably the level of religious education I'd be happy to introduce to my son. (Right now his only thoughts on religion is that lent is 'too bad' when I explained it to him when he asked if there would be an Easter advent.) The problem is that children are in primary school until they are 12-13 and by that stage they really should have a more indepth understanding of religion, but the ethos of ET schools prevents any true examination. That leaves children with a falsely positive impression of religion. With regard to something like showing the class a cartoon drawing of Mohammed, I don't think it would be positive to offer children the option to not participate in that lesson/discussion. As the ET ethos makes a point of not segregating children based on religion. So suggesting the Muslim kids can skip a potentially offensive part of a class, goes against that ethos.

Tbh, the more I have learned about the ET ethos regarding religion, the less comfortable with it I am. It just feels like the lesser of two evils, rather than a great alternative.

lazygal

iguana wrote: »

I agree that it's fine for a 4 year old and in the next year or so that's probably the level of religious education I'd be happy to introduce to my son. (Right now his only thoughts on religion is that lent is 'too bad' when I explained it to him when he asked if there would be an Easter advent.) The problem is that children are in primary school until they are 12-13 and by that stage they really should have a more indepth understanding of religion, but the ethos of ET schools prevents any true examination. That leaves children with a falsely positive impression of religion. With regard to something like showing the class a cartoon drawing of Mohammed, I don't think it would be positive to offer children the option to not participate in that lesson/discussion. As the ET ethos makes a point of not segregating children based on religion. So suggesting the Muslim kids can skip a potentially offensive part of a class, goes against that ethos.

Tbh, the more I have learned about the ET ethos regarding religion, the less comfortable with it I am. It just feels like the lesser of two evils, rather than a great alternative.

It is the least worst option for us. I feel children have a great capacity for seeing the positive and negative sides of things, including religion, and ET only does this sugar coated Learn Together programme because of the very religious nature of Irish education.

eta
link to programme
https://www.educatetogether.ie/about/learn-together
The phrase 'spiritual development' annoys me. My children don't have spirits that need development.

looksee

There is a lot of talk in the UK at the moment about schools being privatised and being sponsored by commercial entities. So you would end up with a close equivalent to an Irish school patron being influential in a school. Like McDonalds or CocaCola. 'Now children, let us all stand and say thank you to Coca Cola for their support of our school'.

silverharp

One eyed Jack wrote: »

But if you sign up to the ethos of a school?

I understand where you're coming from and absolutely I'd be more interested in the child being educated with more focus on knowledge and facts rather than ideology (it just happens to be convenient for me in that respect that the ideology espoused in most Irish schools isn't an issue for me), but at the same time, I am concerned with the new ERB curriculum that's being talked about being introduced in schools because of the fact that they spend far too much time on ideology as it is, without introducing more ideology into the curriculum. There are only so many hours in a school day, and if most of that is taken up with imparting the various ideologies, it doesn't leave much room to impart what I would see as the more important parts of the curriculum, such as reading, writing, mathematics, and that's before we even touch on any science! I don't send my child to school to be indoctrinated in political science either.

I had to google ERB so I don't know enough about it one way or the other but some headings gave me a spock eyebrow. currently my kids have one 40 minute class a week that covers all this "guff". if its contained timewise I'm not too bothered but as you say if it expands and is used as a vehicle for the PC gang then its just replicating what catholic schools did in the 1930's. Chances are my kids will make it out of secondary before I have anything to complain about in particular

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Yeah I'd agree with all of that alright. I think though that the problem is that most people don't actually care about the issue until they are actually impacted by the issue, when the time to be caring about the issue and trying to change it in a democratic way was as soon as they had the ability to do so for themselves, so that the next generation would benefit from their efforts. It's too late by the time they go looking for a school and then they have to settle and make compromises and so on for their children's education.

yeah. I'd tend to be stoical and try point out to my kids where the system is wrong. Luckily we have a school that suits us, if we had to knuckle under and take the soup in some rural part of the country I'd have made sure my kids could stand up for themselves and defend their beliefs or lack of beliefs and challenge the teachers if they were being told beliefs as facts or ideology as facts.
the nightmare scenario is that in 20 years kids will be forced to take intersectional feminist classes and gender studies, a truly awful vista :pac:

One eyed Jack

looksee wrote: »

There is a lot of talk in the UK at the moment about schools being privatised and being sponsored by commercial entities. So you would end up with a close equivalent to an Irish school patron being influential in a school. Like McDonalds or CocaCola. 'Now children, let us all stand and say thank you to Coca Cola for their support of our school'.

It's a concept that I was mulling over setting up with a few friends a couple of years back, similar to the way charter schools work in the US. It can work very well, but it would be far more specifically targeted at a particular sector in the employment market than a public school.

Companies like Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Apple, Intel, business leaders and so on, would jump at the chance to get in on it. But the only problem as you point out would be that they as the patrons and sponsors would want to be getting something in return. It reminds me of the Tesco vouchers for schools program - the Principal in my child's school said the school wouldn't be participating as it encourages commercialism!