Religious education in preschool

learn_more

looksee wrote: »

Could you explain your thinking on how saying (specifically RC) grace before meals encourages diversity, multiculturalism and tolerance?

No person can grow up completely shielded from religion, or religious customs.

It's simply not possible to be an athiest, and exclusively live in a solely athestic world. That's just never going to happen.

Your 4yo will , because of being aware of having to bless themselves before eating, be aware of religious customs.

It's not like that event in itself, is gonna twist someone's mind. Actually it will just educate them about religious customs. It's an utterly trivial custom. Isn't that a little bit of education?

When your 4yo grows up, they will be a more well-rounded educated experienced individual, having seen first-hand trivial religious customs.

looksee wrote: »

Is this post supposed to be witty, or edgy, or a genuine reaction?

I found the OP's post to be completely absurd. So ya, genuine reaction. You mis-quoted me by editing my post, I think that's against boards terms and conditions?

rawn

learn_more wrote:

It's not like that event in itself, is gonna twist someone's mind. Actually it will just educate them about religious customs. It's an utterly trivial custom. Isn't that a little bit of education?

Do you not see the difference between learning about a religious custom and practicing one?

Peregrinus

rawn wrote: »

Do you not see the difference between learning about a religious custom and practicing one?

Actually, at preschool age there is no such distinction. Kids of that age learn about stuff by doing it, and they learn to do it by imitating others doing it.

learn_more

rawn wrote: »

Do you not see the difference between learning about a religious custom and practicing one?

I do ya, and...

Edit : You clearly didn't digest the point I made in my previous comment.

Cabaal

learn_more wrote: »

Your 4yo will , because of being aware of having to bless themselves before eating, be aware of religious customs.

They didn't learn about it,
They were forced to practice it, there is a massive difference

Should they also be forced to practice praying 5 times a day as part of the Muslim faith? What about ensuring that the boys pray at the front of the class and the girls sit at the back...you know, after all its important they are aware of religious customs

:rolleyes:

When your 4yo grows up, they will be a more well-rounded educated experienced individual, having seen first-hand trivial religious customs.

Even more reason for catholics to be forced t practice muslims customs,

The muslim faith is the faster growing religion of the two, you don't want those catholic children to not be well rounded and ignorant to muslim customs.

Clearly the best way to learn them is to be forced to practice them such as the child has been in this thread.

You appear to be confused when it comes to learning about a custom or practice and being forced into practicing a custom, neither of which really have a place at pre-school level without parent consent which was no sought in this instance.

You mis-quoted me by editing my post, I think that's against boards terms and conditions?

Report the post if you think somebody has done something wrong, it's that simple.

Absolam

Cabaal wrote: »

They didn't learn about it, They were forced to practice it, there is a massive difference Should they also be forced to practice praying 5 times a day as part of the Muslim faith? What about ensuring that the boys pray at the front of the class and the girls sit at the back...you know, after all its important they are aware of religious customs :rolleyes:

Were they forced to practice it? I think probably a little more information than a 'mention' by a four year old is required before leaping to that sort of assertion....

Cabaal wrote: »

Even more reason for catholics to be forced t practice muslims customs, The muslim faith is the faster growing religion of the two, you don't want those catholic children to not be well rounded and ignorant to muslim customs. Clearly the best way to learn them is to be forced to practice them such as the child has been in this thread.

But if we're leaping we may as well leap tall schools in a single bound apparently! Not only are children being forced to practice, but they ought to be? If you keep going she'll be in a laundry wearing a burka in a page or so and there'll be no saving her!

Cabaal wrote: »

You appear to be confused when it comes to learning about a custom or practice and being forced into practicing a custom, neither of which really have a place at pre-school level without parent consent which was no sought in this instance.

Well, rampant imaginations seem to be the order of the day so it's not surprising that someone might get a bit confused along the way....

Samaris

Absolam wrote: »

Were they forced to practice it? I think probably a little more information than a 'mention' by a four year old is required before leaping to that sort of assertion....

What, do you think she made it up? Praying before meals is indeed practicing religion, and if the teacher tells a group of four year olds to do something, they generally will, because they're four and have been trained to mostly obey adults.

But if we're leaping we may as well leap tall schools in a single bound apparently! Not only are children being forced to practice, but they ought to be? If you keep going she'll be in a laundry wearing a burka in a page or so and there'll be no saving her!

I believe what you're referring to is known as sarcasm.

looksee

learn_more wrote: »

I found the OP's post to be completely absurd. So ya, genuine reaction. You mis-quoted me by editing my post, I think that's against boards terms and conditions?

Maybe you had better report it then?

Absolam

Samaris wrote: »

What, do you think she made it up? Praying before meals is indeed practicing religion, and if the teacher tells a group of four year olds to do something, they generally will, because they're four and have been trained to mostly obey adults.

I think she mentioned that they can't eat their lunch until they said their blessings and done the sign of the cross, and that's as much as we know about what happened since lauradryeye hasn't told us any more yet. That this was something forced on them by a teacher has not been mentioned... except by those intent on reading more into the situation than has been presented.

Samaris wrote: »

I believe what you're referring to is known as sarcasm.

Oddly enough, so was what you quoted.

The Bishop Basher

I think most of us would have a major issue if we felt that our kids were being forced to do stuff they didn't want to do in school but that's not what I got from the OP's post.

Cabal is just attempting to be emotive by using that term but all it does is take away from his point.

If it was my own kid I would certainly investigate and have a word with the teacher to find out what else was happening but I wouldn't get my knickers in a twist over kids saying grace, thanking Allah or whatever..

Classic case of parents transferring their own hang ups on to the children imo.

Cabaal

You might refer to not liking kids being indoctrination as a "hang up" and thats your viewpoint,

I've said it countless times before, religion is a very personal thing and as such it should only be left down to the parents/guardians. Nobody including pre-schools should assume the faith of a child and nobody should just take it upon themselves to start indoctrinating a child in any faith without consent from the parents/guardians.

Absolam

Cabaal wrote: »

Nobody including pre-schools should assume the faith of a child and nobody should just take it upon themselves to start indoctrinating a child in any faith without consent from the parents/guardians.

Though nobody knows that any of that has actually happened in this instance either, do they?

The Bishop Basher

Cabaal wrote: »

You might refer to not liking kids being indoctrination as a "hang up" and thats your viewpoint,

You make it sound like someone took the kid, put them in a monastery, dressed them in a habit and forced them to kneel, pray and learn scripture for 16 hours a day till they believe.. That would certainly be indoctrination..

But all I get from OP is that they're giving thanks before eating. It's not something i would ever do and it's not something i've ever done with my kids. But if someone else chose to do it with them, I wouldn't be insecure enough in my beliefs or lack of to have an issue with it. They are independent people who should be exposed to all the world has to offer before making their own choices. If i try to control what they're exposed to how can they ever make those choices for themselves ? That would be just another form of indoctrination as far as i'm concerned..

Cabaal wrote: »

I've said it countless times before, religion is a very personal thing and as such it should only be left down to the parents/guardians. Nobody including pre-schools should assume the faith of a child and nobody should just take it upon themselves to start indoctrinating a child in any faith without consent from the parents/guardians.

If you want to live completely free of religious influence you'd best go find an uninhabited island and start a community there. But here in the real world it exists and we're all exposed to it every day. I absolutely agree that no-one should take it upon themselves to indoctrinate someone else's child but I don't believe giving thanks before a meal is indoctrinating anyone. I think it could only be seen as that by those with hang ups about it tbh. The vast majority of parents would be secure enough in their views and confident enough in their children to see it for what it is and just move on.

Samaris

Swanner wrote: »

If you want to live completely free of religious influence you'd best go find an uninhabited island and start a community there. But here in the real world it exists and we're all exposed to it every day. I absolutely agree that no-one should take it upon themselves to indoctrinate someone else's child but I don't believe giving thanks before a meal is indoctrinating anyone. I think it could only be seen as that by those with hang ups about it tbh. The vast majority of parents would be secure enough in their views and confident enough in their children to see it for what it is and just move on.

I wonder, though, -why-? Two arguments here - did it happen, should it happen. For the sake of being able to discuss the should, I shall assume it did/take it as a general hypothetical and move right on to should it happen.

On its own, it is harmless, yes. And yet, my personal opinion is that if my hypothetical child's teacher taught them "this is what I do before meals" with her few words about God/Allah/HaShem or Pan, I'd be fairly okay with that, although I'd explain to sprog that people have personal views and it's okay to be respectful of them without having to believe them utterly.

But let's face it, that's not how it goes. Schools gradually introduce Catholic customs to the children over time, exerting both the authority of the teacher (as I said before, if a teacher tells a group of four year olds to do something, they generally will), and the peer pressure of everyone else doing it to make it a totally normal thing to do.

If you were living in a culture where Church and State are supposed to be separate and your child's school insisted on introducing a religion that you don't agree with - that may even believe opposing things to your own religion (or lack thereof), and teaching it as absolute fact, would you be content about that and figure it was just your own hang-ups? Maybe you would. Maybe you'd accept that other peoples rights to teach their religion trumps your right to not have your children taught it and it's just unfortunate that it happens somewhere that your child is required by law to be. But I don't think it is unreasonable that people may feel differently on this.

While it may appear to be appealing to slippery slope, it's not really the case when it's absolutely the situation where it's the introduction to the larger things of what the Catholic religion is and why it must be believed in in school.

Why is it necessary to have morning Catholic prayers? And lunchtime Catholic prayers. And home-time Catholic prayers? And the priest in to explain by his authority as a man in a black robe why his beliefs should be my hypothetical child's beliefs? Why, in a purportedly secularly run country is it okay, nay, necessary, to devote teaching blocks per day to Catholic customs and their practice to the extent that someone who wants to teach must be willing to teach them as fact? And First Confession, First Communion, Holy Confirmation rituals that, despite the secularity of the State, I must opt my child out of in a place they are mandated to be, rather than religious culture being kept separate from basic schooling of children?

Why, in short, is it perfectly normal to have to work at choosing NOT to do it than to have to work at choosing to DO it. Also, which is frankly more respectful to the religion itself, if it comes to that?
The problem is not just prayers being gradually brought in to a set of impressionable four year olds that aren't yet old enough to make an informed choice about whether or not they want to follow this path, it's that it is the introduction to all the rest of it.

The Bishop Basher

Samaris wrote: »

Why, in short, is it perfectly normal to have to work at choosing NOT to do it than to have to work at choosing to DO it.

Because whether we like it or not, it has been an integral part of our history and culture up to this point in time and while that doesn't make it right or fair, it does make it our current reality.

And while i would also be very much in favour of creating a fully secular state complete with secular education system, the reality is that as long as the majority of the population identify as RC, not a lot will change.

And while atheists may choose to protest that the majority are in fact non practicing, a la carte, etc etc that's all just bluff and bluster as people can and will decide for themselves regardless of what atheists feel about their personal beliefs and decisions.

So as I see it, we can accept the current realities, while slowly working to change them, or we can refuse to accept them and take on everything and everyone in our path.

My wise old mother always taught me to pick my battles and for me, a 4 year old kid pausing to say thanks before eating lunch in playschool is just not where i'd focus my efforts...

rawn

Swanner wrote:

So as I see it, we can accept the current realities, while slowly working to change them, or we can refuse to accept them and take on everything and everyone in our path.

I'll take door #2, please.

Samaris

While I accept your basic point, Swanner, what is at a high enough level to be okay to work on? Nothing will be done if things are dismissed as "parental hang-ups" rather than accepted as being part and parcel of the issue. With respect, your dismissiveness of a clear concern is not helpful towards that ideal of a secular schooling system.

Nothing changes if it's not challenged. If this is such a minor thing, it shouldn't be too hard to work at changing. And it could have bigger impacts. School prayers shouldn't be normalised at the earliest stages of a child's memory (four may seem old for that, but how many memories do you have of pre-four?:D I only have one or two myself). And bear in mind it rapidly ramps up. Four to eight goes from thanks to God for the lunchtime food to First Holy Communion. It's as well to be slowly, steadily setting the line for what you don't want your children to be being taught, rather than waiting for FHC and then firmly taking a stance at this much bigger religious ritual that the school prior to this may know nothing about.

Surely, it is quite as viable a position to work at changing the small, immediate things that are currently directly affecting children in schools, changing the ethos one step at a time, rather than trying a top-down approach that the vast majority of parents don't have the power to implement. The parents of one child raising a concern may lead to other parents raising the same concern and it gradually becoming less ..well, normal to have them.

looksee

Samaris wrote: »

Surely, it is quite as viable a position to work at changing the small, immediate things that are currently directly affecting children in schools, changing the ethos one step at a time, rather than trying a top-down approach that the vast majority of parents don't have the power to implement. The parents of one child raising a concern may lead to other parents raising the same concern and it gradually becoming less ..well, normal to have them.

Unfortunately there is no will on the part of the people who can make the changes - the patrons of the schools - to make those small changes, a situation which is not surprising as the only reason for being involved with schools is to get people early. Or indeed in the case of the pre-school, the ladies who take it on themselves to proselytise their own views.

So the only way is top down, and given that there appears to be a large number of people who will say - I will send my children to religious run schools because that is all there is and I am not willing to challenge the situation. And anyway it is nice for children to make their first communion, and I don't want my children to feel left out. And if the school does it it saves me the trouble. So long as these people are counted as parents who 'want' religious schools there is not much chance of changing the situation.

The Bishop Basher

Samaris wrote: »

While I accept your basic point, Swanner, what is at a high enough level to be okay to work on? Nothing will be done if things are dismissed as "parental hang-ups" rather than accepted as being part and parcel of the issue. With respect, your dismissiveness of a clear concern is not helpful towards that ideal of a secular schooling system.

I have no issue with it being challenged.. Everything should be open to challenge..

I was just responding to the giant leap that was made from what the OP posted to the suggestion that the school is forcing indoctrination on the children. I've seen nothing from the op to suggest that this is the case.

With respect to the op, they never asked what the ethos was when enrolling the child. The school could have assumed a position just as they did. The school currently has no idea that anyone has an issue. At this point in the transaction, no-one has done anything "wrong".

Remember, that the vast vast majority of parents, religious or not, just don't care about this stuff at all. And the most of the rest hold an opposing view. People in general will run away from aggressive or extreme positions. So the vitriolic attacks without supporting evidence and indeed threads such as that which had to be shut down in the parenting forum a few days ago, do far more damage to the cause of atheism then i can ever do by being dismissive.

Qs

I think its fair to call forced participation in religious ritual before eating "indoctrination". I also don't think its unreasonable for parents to think that play schools don't engage in these kinds of activities. At least I did before I read the OP. I'll certainly be checking from now on.

looksee

Swanner wrote: »

I have no issue with it being challenged.. Everything should be open to challenge..

I was just responding to the giant leap that was made from what the OP posted to the suggestion that the school is forcing indoctrination on the children. I've seen nothing from the op to suggest that this is the case.

With respect to the op, they never asked what the ethos was when enrolling the child. The school could have assumed a position just as they did. The school currently has no idea that anyone has an issue. At this point in the transaction, no-one has done anything "wrong".

Remember, that the vast vast majority of parents, religious or not, just don't care about this stuff at all. And the most of the rest hold an opposing view. People in general will run away from aggressive or extreme positions. So the vitriolic attacks without supporting evidence and indeed threads such as that which had to be shut down in the parenting forum a few days ago, do far more damage to the cause of atheism then i can ever do by being dismissive.

There are always those kind of giant leaps. I do not think that the preschool was 'forcing indoctrination' on the children. But in any argument there are always people who leap to extremes to make their point. I also don't think it is appropriate for a pre-school that apparently did not give any indication that prayers, and specifically RC prayers would be part of the school day, to introduce them.

It is jumping to extremes again to say that the OP did not make any enquiries before enrolling their child. Parents look for many things in a pre-school, but having to ask in a non-religious playschool what their approach to religion is, would not be something they would expect to have to clarify. Preschools do not normally get any more involved than maybe having a christmas nativity, and even then it is usually more a school concert than any sort of religious event.

I have no doubt that the ladies running the school most probably thought they were doing the right and moral thing in teaching the children to say grace; and to those of the same outlook as themselves, they were.

However, it cannot automatically be assumed that all parents wish their children to be introduced to religious practices at pre-school age, and their wishes should be respected too. If children have been taught at home to say a brief thanks and bless themselves before eating, they will do so individually at school. Granted, at four years of age they are likely to forget, but as they are taught at home, gradually they will remember at school.

How many of those children would have been taught to say grace at home? I would hazard a guess that it would be very few. I wonder how many would go home and say grace before eating their tea?

Even though I am an atheist, I think the custom of giving a moment's thought to our good fortune in having food whenever we need or want it is a charming and worthwhile one. Thanking a god for providing food to us that he has failed to provide for the impoverished people in the world seems a little self serving and unjust.

Hotblack Desiato

Swanner wrote: »

With respect to the op, they never asked what the ethos was when enrolling the child. The school could have assumed a position just as they did. The school currently has no idea that anyone has an issue. At this point in the transaction, no-one has done anything "wrong".

I'm beginning to wonder have you actually read the OP, or just the responses to it, and those rather selectively at that.

It's not a school. It's a pre-school. Pre-schools are not supposed to have an 'ethos'. The syllabus they are supposed to be following precludes it.

learn_more

Cabaal wrote: »

They didn't learn about it,
They were forced to practice it, there is a massive difference

Should they also be forced to practice praying 5 times a day as part of the Muslim faith? What about ensuring that the boys pray at the front of the class and the girls sit at the back...you know, after all its important they are aware of religious customs

:rolleyes:

Even more reason for catholics to be forced t practice muslims customs,

The muslim faith is the faster growing religion of the two, you don't want those catholic children to not be well rounded and ignorant to muslim customs.

Clearly the best way to learn them is to be forced to practice them such as the child has been in this thread.

You appear to be confused when it comes to learning about a custom or practice and being forced into practicing a custom, neither of which really have a place at pre-school level without parent consent which was no sought in this instance.

Report the post if you think somebody has done something wrong, it's that simple.

They didn't learn about it,
They were forced to practice it, there is a massive difference

@Absolam makes a very good point. Are they being forced to take part ?

Should they also be forced to practice praying 5 times a day as part of the Muslim faith? What about ensuring that the boys pray at the front of the class and the girls sit at the back...you know, after all its important they are aware of religious customs

:rolleyes: This is not a Muslim country and no one is being forced to pray five times a day. My opinion on this may be different if it were. But it's not. We're talking about what happens in this country, not what happens in every religious country on earth.

I made it clear in my previous post that I think that blessing oneself before a meal is utterly trivial. Actually, I eat out in restaurants all the time, and I never see people blessing themselves before eating. Looks like the indoctrination isn't going to well.

The muslim faith is the faster growing religion of the two, you don't want those catholic children to not be well rounded and ignorant to muslim customs.

:rolleyes: No, the education is about what the whole idea of what a custom is in the first place, not the teaching of the details of every single custom on earth.

You appear to be confused when it comes to learning about a custom or practice and being forced into practising a custom, neither of which really have a place at pre-school level without parent consent which was no sought in this instance.

I'm not confused about anything actually. Surely taking part in a custom is one of the best ways to learn about what a custom is.

Absolam

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

It's a pre-school. Pre-schools are not supposed to have an 'ethos'. The syllabus they are supposed to be following precludes it.

Who says they're not supposed to have an ethos? The syllabi they can choose to use certainly don't preclude it; as I've pointed out the the Dominican Montessori in Dun Laoghaire is a Catholic pre school, with a religious ethos, uses the Siolta & Aistear frameworks and has been inspected by Tusla with no issues raised about their religious perspective.
Probably much more accurate to say that some people think that multiculturalism, diversity, inclusivity and equality preclude a religious ethos, even if they obviously don't.

Peregrinus

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

I'm beginning to wonder have you actually read the OP, or just the responses to it, and those rather selectively at that.

It's not a school. It's a pre-school. Pre-schools are not supposed to have an 'ethos'. The syllabus they are supposed to be following precludes it.

No offence, Hotblack, but have you read the OP? This pre-school clearly does have an ethos, or at least claims to; "All children /staff are welcome here regardless of colour, race or religious beliefs. All aspects of cultural diversity should be encouraged and provision should be made within the curriculum to promote these cultures especially if there is a child within the group from a different cultural/religious background."

How can any pre-school have no ethos? Serious question.

Speedwell

It's ethos, not theos, Peregrinus. Fair question, though. It's enough for the guiding beliefs of a preschool to be generally teaching children how to be functioning humans, especially with regard to human society, taking into account the limits of their childish abilities.

Absolam, if I was unable to find a consistent practice of "multiculturalism, diversity, inclusivity and equality" among very earnest and sincere liberal Quakers, much less mainstream Christian denominations, it is probably not to be found in religious societies at all. But you're welcome to supply examples of such things if you know of them, and to defend them properly against my assumption that, however well-meaning, the lovely humanist ideals you mention are strictly secondary to "pleasing God" in those communities.

Absolam

Speedwell wrote: »

Absolam, if I was unable to find a consistent practice of "multiculturalism, diversity, inclusivity and equality" among very earnest and sincere liberal Quakers, much less mainstream Christian denominations, it is probably not to be found in religious societies at all.

I can't imagine your experiences of liberal Quakers are quite so extensive as to be indicative of religious societies as a whole, even without judging whether your own assessment of what the practice of "multiculturalism, diversity, inclusivity and equality" is jibes with that of TUSLA and the HSE. But we do know that Tusla has inspected religious ethos pre schools and not reported that they are non compliant in relation in areas of multiculturalism, diversity, inclusivity and equality, as Cabaal suggested they would be. So there's that...

Speedwell wrote: »

But you're welcome to supply examples of such things if you know of them, and to defend them properly against my assumption that, however well-meaning, the lovely humanist ideals you mention are strictly secondary to "pleasing God" in those communities.

Thanks, but not having made any assertions about religious societies myself, you'll understand my lack of interest in pursuing your own ideas about them

Peregrinus

Speedwell wrote: »

It's ethos, not theos, Peregrinus. Fair question, though. It's enough for the guiding beliefs of a preschool to be generally teaching children how to be functioning humans, especially with regard to human society, taking into account the limits of their childish abilities.

Well, the objective of teaching children that would be an ethos, wouldn't it? Which is my point, really.

As for your point that such an ethos is "enough", perhaps it is. On the other hand, saying so is not much of an argument for saying that no school should ever adopt or aspire to a more ambitious or focused ethos.

Speedwell

Peregrinus wrote: »

Well, the objective of teaching children that would be an ethos, wouldn't it? Which is my point, really.

As for your point that such an ethos is "enough", perhaps it is. On the other hand, saying so is not much of an argument for saying that no school should ever adopt or aspire to a more ambitious or focused ethos.

Well, don't be too forward here; preschool is the context in which we teach children to use a fork, to understand the use of their own bodies, and to not fight, steal, or walk out in front of moving cars. We don't need a God to teach us to stop pulling hair, to use our inside voices inside, to share toys, or to learn to tell time. Mostly what kids need is to feel cared for and valued as individuals.

Later, as kids develop the capacity to perceive things and think about them in increasingly sophisticated ways, we can talk about things that they are capable of understanding and evaluating. Preschool is not the place to address concepts that the young child can do no more with than accept uncritically because a big person told them so.

Peregrinus

On the contrary, we spend a lot of time getting preschoolers to behave in ways that are compatible with beliefs that they don't have yet. We do this because, when they acquire the capacity for belief, we want them to have these beliefs. Hence, we teach them to share their toys, not to settle arguments by fighting, etc. This is because we want them to conform to, to internalise and in time explicitly to adopt beliefs which we have, but they do not (yet).

I think a preschool needs to be upfront about the beliefs and values that it aims to inculcate in this way (and if the OP's preschool was upfront about it's inculcation of Christian belief, it wasn't so upfront that the OP actually noticed it when signing on). I don't, however, accept that Speedwell or Peregrinus or anyone else gets to dictate that certain beliefs are "enough" and that it is somehow wrong or objectionable for any preschool to go beyond that. This is a matter for the parents of the children concerned and for the people running the preschool.