Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

School patronage

Options
1181182184186187194

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 28,986 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    smacl wrote: »
    Most likely another generation will change it. Whatever about tradition, I think the percentage of younger people in this country that actually believe in god is tiny. Catholicism in this country is just about hanging on by its teeth through dint of control of the national school system but given that most young teachers aren't religiously inclined and pretty much no clerical involvement, that isn't the ace it used to be either.

    yeah i would agree with that tbh.
    unfortunately it doesn't help those who want more non-denominational education now though, but unless the cc divest of their own accord then i don't really have an answer as to what should happen that could be implemented cost effectively, apart from slow drip removal of religious aspects and slow drip schools voting for divestment themselves.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Registered Users Posts: 28,411 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko


    The best gift I was given in school was my recognition of the existence of God and why it is important to put God first in life, instead of a mass produced mainstream media that is ultimately controlled by evil at the very top in this fallen world.

    I got a nice Parker pen once. Beat ya.


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,938 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Parents ‘delighted’ with religious ceremonies ruling

    Atheist Ireland says WRC finding ‘important win for right to freedom of belief’


    The atheist parents of a boy who was found to have been discriminated against by a Catholic primary school have expressed their “absolute delight” with a Workplace Relations Commission ruling.

    The commission found that Yellow Furze primary school in Co Meath discriminated against the boy by assigning him homework and rewarding his classmates who attended a First Communion choir ceremony with "homework passes".

    The finding is like to have implications for Catholic schools who reward students for attending religious ceremonies. About 90 per cent of all primary schools are controlled by the Catholic Church.

    The boy’s mother, who declined to be named on the basis that it would identify her child, said the family was delighted with the ruling.

    “We never doubted that our position was correct but we do feel vindicated as it became apparent at the hearing that there were teachers in the school and families in our community that felt our position was wrong,” she said.

    She told the commission that her son was deeply upset after being “penalised” with homework for not attending the choir ceremony in May last year.

    The mother also argued that he did not have the option to take part in the ceremony as the family are atheist.

    The school, which did not respond to requests for comment, told the commission during the hearing that the complaint of discrimination was “wholly unfounded” and said all children were able to participate in the ceremony.

    As a Catholic school it said it enjoyed a proud tradition of participating in religious ceremonies and that music was an integral part of this.

    However, the commission found there was clear evidence of discriminatory treatment under the Equal Status Acts towards the boy on religious grounds.

    It also found that the parents were deeply hurt and upset by the treatment of the school to the point they have removed their boy from school. It awarded them €5,000.

    Under both the Constitution and the Education Act (1998), parents have a right to have their children opt out of religion classes if they wish.

    In practice, many parents say they find it difficult to exert their right to opt their children out of religion classes.

    Atheist Ireland said the commission’s ruling was “an important win for the right to freedom of belief”.

    “You have a constitutional right to attend any school without attending religious classes or ceremonies. This ruling shows that schools cannot get around that right by punishing children who don’t take part in religion,” said Jane Donnelly, human rights officer with Atheist Ireland.

    “For years, schools just directly forced children into religious classes and ceremonies. When parents complained to Atheist Ireland about this, we have always succeeded in getting the schools to back down.

    “Now schools are trying to make it harder to exercise your right to opt out of religion. They tell you to go to another school, or sit at the back of the religion class, or use rewards and punishments like this. That’s not what homework is for, and it’s not what religion is for.”

    However, groups such as the Catholic Schools Partnership have pointed out that there are clear guidelines on the inclusion of non-religious pupils in Catholic schools.

    These include recommendations that schools provide students who are opting out with alternative activities during religious instruction or ceremonies.

    It has also pointed to research by the Economic and Social Research Institute and Department of Education inspectors’ reports which have found an “overwhelming majority of parents and students find their schools to be well-managed and welcoming”.

    The family of the boy, meanwhile, said they plan to give the sum of money they were awarded to charity.

    Delighted for them

    Disgraceful that the school doubled down on this and went in to the WRC all guns blazing. Sounds like some parents as well as teachers were being complete wánkers about this, to the extent they felt they had to move the child out of the school. Real valley of the squinting windows stuff there.

    Life ain't always empty.



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    Parents ‘delighted’ with religious ceremonies ruling




    Delighted for them

    Disgraceful that the school doubled down on this and went in to the WRC all guns blazing. Sounds like some parents as well as teachers were being complete wánkers about this, to the extent they felt they had to move the child out of the school. Real valley of the squinting windows stuff there.
    Religious schools cannot be inclusive. Their sole purpose is to evangelise.


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,938 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Their idea of 'inclusivity' is that everyone gets catholic religious indoctrination!

    Life ain't always empty.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 7,771 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Wasn't the suggestion that non-theist kids be allowed study or do homework while sitting out of religious classes rebuffed by religious schools? As doing so would give the non-theist kids some educational advantage over the religious kids?
    Does that mean this Yellow Furze school giving theistic kids homework passes for religious attendance really mean that they don't care about education if it means more religious indoctrination?
    Or is it an admittance that homework is not an education advantage, but a punishment?


  • Registered Users Posts: 26,054 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Wasn't the suggestion that non-theist kids be allowed study or do homework while sitting out of religious classes rebuffed by religious schools? As doing so would give the non-theist kids some educational advantage over the religious kids?
    I don't think so, for two reasons. (But I'm open to being corrected on either.)

    First, I've heard of this position being taken by individual schools, but not as a systematic position taken by the religious sector as a whole.

    Secondly, and more substantially, I think the justification usually offered is not that allowing the non-religious students to study or do homework during what would otherwise be religion class confers an educational advantage, but that it offers an incentive. If I get 45 mins during the school day a day to do my maths ecker or whatever, that's 45 minutes more free time I have in the evenings that the non-religious students don't have. Who wouldn't like that?
    And religious schools don't in general want to incentivise withdrawing from religion class.
    Does that mean this Yellow Furze school giving theistic kids homework passes for religious attendance really mean that they don't care about education if it means more religious indoctrination?
    Or is it an admittance that homework is not an education advantage, but a punishment?
    Fair question. I'm guessing that where this is coming from is that in the Yellow Furze case the "choir ceremony" (whatever that is) was being held out of school hours. And students not unreasonably argued that they couldn't spend Wednesday evening (or whenever) both doing their homework and singing their hearts out in the church or concert hall. So those who participated in the choir ceremony were excused that day's homework.

    It doesn't necessarily follow that homework has no educational benefit. You could argue, if so minded, that it does, but that participating in the choir ceremony also does. (And there is some truth in this; why else would schools put on plays or performances of any kind?) So both groups of kids got an educational advantage.

    Worth noting that, if anybody is "admitting" that homework is a punishment and not an educational advantage, it's not the religious school; it's the Workplace Relations Commission and (it seems) the parents who brought the case, arguing that their child was being penalised. We're not told what argument the school advanced, but I think we can safely assume that they argued that homework was not a penalty.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,716 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    Peregrinus wrote: »
    Secondly, and more substantially, I think the justification usually offered is not that allowing the non-religious students to study or do homework during what would otherwise be religion class confers an educational advantage, but that it offers an incentive. If I get 45 mins during the school day a day to do my maths ecker or whatever, that's 45 minutes more free time I have in the evenings that the non-religious students don't have. Who wouldn't like that?
    And religious schools don't in general want to incentivise withdrawing from religion class.

    I think that is very weak justification. In the school my daughter went to for example, they were still teaching religion through the senior cycle with no alternatives and yet they failed to finish the honours maths syllabus prior to the leaving cert. It wasn't free time gained by doing maths homework in class so much as having to get expensive and time consuming grinds to do what should have been covered in class. For those who already have an academically busy schedule and no interest in religion, forcing them to waste time on religion seems entirely unreasonable. I disagree that there is no resentment that those who skip religion could gain academic advantage as I've seen it expressed first hand.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,644 ✭✭✭✭lazygal


    smacl wrote: »
    I think that is very weak justification. In the school my daughter went to for example, they were still teaching religion through the senior cycle with no alternatives and yet they failed to finish the honours maths syllabus prior to the leaving cert. It wasn't free time gained by doing maths homework in class so much as having to get expensive and time consuming grinds to do what should have been covered in class. For those who already have an academically busy schedule and no interest in religion, forcing them to waste time on religion seems entirely unreasonable. I disagree that there is no resentment that those who skip religion could gain academic advantage as I've seen it expressed first hand.

    Easy way to fix this. Timetable religion as a subject like all others and let those who want to study advanced woo do so and those who don't do something else. Then no one misses out on anything.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 19,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    lazygal wrote: »
    Easy way to fix this. Timetable religion as a subject like all others and let those who want to study advanced woo do so and those who don't do something else. Then no one misses out on anything.

    Crazy idea but it could even be an exam subject in it's own right.
    Might increase the number of people who actually understand what it is they say they believe.

    I'll even write the paper for them...I'll correct it too if the want.

    Q 1. Explain transubstantiation.
    Q 2. With reference to Biblical passages outline how Roman Catholicism differs from one other Christian religion in it's interpretation of the means to achieve Salvation.
    Q 3. Discuss Constantine's relationship with the early Church.
    Q. 4. Examine the doctrine of Clerical celibacy in its historical context.
    Q 5. With reference to Scripture outline the case against women priests.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,716 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    Bannasidhe wrote: »
    Crazy idea but it could even be an exam subject in it's own right.

    Already is, see https://www.studyclix.ie/subjects/leaving-certificate/higher/religious-education

    Why you'd want to take it is something else again, guessing it could be an easy way to get points.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 19,219 Mod ✭✭✭✭Bannasidhe


    smacl wrote: »
    Already is, see https://www.studyclix.ie/subjects/leaving-certificate/higher/religious-education

    Why you'd want to take it is something else again, guessing it could be an easy way to get points.

    Feck sake... I would have aced that. :mad:


  • Registered Users Posts: 26,054 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    smacl wrote: »
    I think that is very weak justification. In the school my daughter went to for example, they were still teaching religion through the senior cycle with no alternatives and yet they failed to finish the honours maths syllabus prior to the leaving cert. It wasn't free time gained by doing maths homework in class so much as having to get expensive and time consuming grinds to do what should have been covered in class. For those who already have an academically busy schedule and no interest in religion, forcing them to waste time on religion seems entirely unreasonable. I disagree that there is no resentment that those who skip religion could gain academic advantage as I've seen it expressed first hand.
    I defer to your experience, obviously. It's a big problem if they're not covering the maths syllabus in maths class, but I gotta say that I'd be sceptical that the failure to cover it was in any way related to the fact the religion classes were also offered. Unless the amount of time devoted to maths classes was seriously below what is usual in other schools, I'd be looking at the quality of the teaching in that class, not the time devoted to it, to account for the failure to complete the syllabus.

    Having said that, yeah, if I'm in the maths class that isn't covering the syllabus fully and I also have a free period during what would otherwise be religion, a refusal to let me spend my free period doing additional maths study is indefensible.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,771 ✭✭✭Mark Hamill


    Peregrinus wrote: »
    I don't think so, for two reasons. (But I'm open to being corrected on either.)

    First, I've heard of this position being taken by individual schools, but not as a systematic position taken by the religious sector as a whole.

    It was argued by Catholic Bishops to the Department of Education:
    Documents obtained by The Irish Times last year show Catholic bishops warned the department that students who would receive tuition in an exam subject instead of religion would receive an unfair advantage.
    Peregrinus wrote: »
    Fair question. I'm guessing that where this is coming from is that in the Yellow Furze case the "choir ceremony" (whatever that is) was being held out of school hours. And students not unreasonably argued that they couldn't spend Wednesday evening (or whenever) both doing their homework and singing their hearts out in the church or concert hall. So those who participated in the choir ceremony were excused that day's homework.

    That applies to any kids doing any extra-curricular activity. I don't know of anyone who got homework passes for such activities (I never got homework passes for doing rugby or Applied Maths after school, none of my friends who worked on the school plays did either).
    Peregrinus wrote: »
    It doesn't necessarily follow that homework has no educational benefit. You could argue, if so minded, that it does, but that participating in the choir ceremony also does. (And there is some truth in this; why else would schools put on plays or performances of any kind?) So both groups of kids got an educational advantage.

    Except kids in plays and other school performances do not generally get homework passes.
    Peregrinus wrote: »
    Worth noting that, if anybody is "admitting" that homework is a punishment and not an educational advantage, it's not the religious school; it's the Workplace Relations Commission and (it seems) the parents who brought the case, arguing that their child was being penalised. We're not told what argument the school advanced, but I think we can safely assume that they argued that homework was not a penalty.

    The school used homework passes for kids as an incentive to attend the religious choir ceremony. That is an admittance that the homework they would otherwise have done was academically unnecessary and arduous and therefore a punishment.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,716 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    Peregrinus wrote: »
    I defer to your experience, obviously. It's a big problem if they're not covering the maths syllabus in maths class, but I gotta say that I'd be sceptical that the failure to cover it was in any way related to the fact the religion classes were also offered.

    To be fair, the maths teacher was pretty appalling too and the school to my mind encouraged far too many kids to take honours maths without the ability to teach it to them. That said, the school also failed to cover the syllabus on some other honours subjects so in that context I'd question the decision to cover any non-exam subjects such as religion on anything other than a voluntary basis.

    Offering religion classes wasn't the issue, it was making them a mandatory part of the timetable that I objected to.


  • Registered Users Posts: 26,054 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    smacl wrote: »
    To be fair, the maths teacher was pretty appalling too and the school to my mind encouraged far too many kids to take honours maths without the ability to teach it to them. That said, the school also failed to cover the syllabus on some other honours subjects so in that context I'd question the decision to cover any non-exam subjects such as religion on anything other than a voluntary basis.

    Offering religion classes wasn't the issue, it was making them a mandatory part of the timetable that I objected to.
    To be honest, in the situation you describe making religion classes mandatory looks to me like the least of the problems that need tackling in that school.


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,938 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    FFS :rolleyes:

    https://kclr96fm.com/unwise-and-ill-advised-say-asti-of-carlow-school-assembly/
    There are questions over a school assembly in Carlow yesterday where 152 students gathered one metre apart.

    The first year students at St Leo’s College congregated for the prayer assembly which the Department of Education has raised no objection to.

    However the ASTI says the congregation was ‘unwise’ and ‘ill advised’.

    Thousands of students are returning to school this week and next.

    https://www.rte.ie/news/2020/0825/1161089-school-workers-unions/
    The principal of St Leo's College said she does not believe the secondary school has been in contravention of Government guidelines by gathering 152 students in a hall this morning on their first day back.

    Welcoming the students to the school, principal Niamh Broderick told them: "We are all in this together".

    "We have followed all of the Department guidelines. We did everything properly and safely," Ms Broderick told RTÉ News. "They were very well spaced out and sanitised on the way in and on the way out".

    "It was very important to bring them together as a year group and all receive the same message, to celebrate with them, as a Catholic school, to emphasise that message to them."



    This is completely unnecessary and pretty clueless tbh.

    Life ain't always empty.



  • Registered Users Posts: 11,843 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    As if school assemblies weren't unbearable enough. :o


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,716 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    This is completely unnecessary and pretty clueless tbh.

    For an educational establishment it is more the pig-headed cluelessness that would worry me. From my understanding, the risk of cross-infection is largely a function of the total number of individuals in an enclosed space in addition to the minimum distance between them and having their mouths covered. 152 students in the same room, one metre apart, saying prayers fails on all three counts and to my mind constitutes a clear dereliction of duty of care by the school to their student body, while also placing additional risk of infection on the families of all those students.

    One would think those involved in educating our children would know better. FWIW it is not the prayer that bothers me so much as doing it collectively in an enclosed space. Anyone with an iota of imagination could come up with an alternative that mitigated the unnecessary risks.


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,938 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    It's a good illustration of how fecked up our education system is though.

    It's normal for a principal's mind to be so warped by religion that public health guidelines go out the window for an aul' pray.

    Life ain't always empty.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 11,754 ✭✭✭✭expectationlost




  • Registered Users Posts: 4,557 ✭✭✭Treppen


    It's ok, they left room for the holy spirit


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,938 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    In autumn 1978, my classmates and I, being male, moved from the convent school (the nuns were utter psycho bitches by the way) to the "Christian Brothers" school across the road.

    Second class, my teacher was a Brother Hickey - he was totally sound and never shouted at never mind hit anyone. Weirdo :) I hope for his sake he escaped and went on to lead a normal life.

    All of my relatives were very curious as to how I was getting on.

    I told them I liked the school and my teacher, and they nodded and wished me well.

    It was many years later when I realised why they were asking these questions, and why they were surprised at the answers. Because for them, violence was the norm, and the so-called "Christian" "Brothers" were at the forefront of beating kids.

    There was plenty of violence all right, in the schoolyard, but monkey see monkey do. In my 3rd, 4th, 5th classes the leather was brandished daily - by lay teachers.

    6th class we had a "lady teacher" - no violence but we weren't used to that. I can honestly say none of us learned a single thing that year apart from "communion class",

    Life ain't always empty.



  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,399 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Very similar to me - switched, around 1975, from a Loreto with weird, but mostly placid, nuns to the Christian Brothers a few hundred yards away. The CB headmaster was a dab hand with the leather, though one of the teachers didn't use it, preferring instead to use a plastic ruler - a few clouts with the wide side of the ruler on the palm for minor offences, but with the thin side of the ruler on the knuckles for major offences. I remember one boy urinating in his seat as he was too scared to ask the teacher to go to the toilet after he'd been beaten by the teacher. Memory suggests that the leather in both of those schools was around 45 cm in length, maybe 4 cm wide and 1 cm thick - no doubt these are collectors' items for pedophile/bondage fanatics these days - suffused as they no doubt are with the commingled sweat, blood and tears of teachers and children alike.

    Fifth + sixth classes were in a different co-ed school, but the leather and threat of violence continued - one teacher, I recall with a peculiar clarity, threw at one of the girls in my sixth class, one of those large set-square things made from heavy white plastic which teachers use(d?) on the blackboard. Thankfully, she managed to dodge it and it shattered against the wall behind her in what I suppose must have been a million pieces - it was heavy and pointy enough to have done her serious injury had it connected.


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,938 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    In the convent school the Perri ruler was the weapon of choice - I suspect that is the thing you recall Robin?

    Thick clear perspex ruler with prominent PERRI branding.

    If the pupils munched their way through enough unhealthy snack foods, their teacher got a free instrument of violence. Weird marketing strategy. They must have known what these rulers were only ever used for.

    As a result no kid would voluntarily buy Perri crisps outside of the school monopoly! They weren't nearly as nice as Tayto anyway.

    Life ain't always empty.



  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,399 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    In the convent school the Perri ruler was the weapon of choice - I suspect that is the thing you recall Robin?
    Don't recall Perri crisps or rulers. Main weapon of choice for teachers in the south-west seemed to be the Helix, and latterly, the mildly rubbery, blue-tinted Helix "Shatter Resistant" - no doubt made shatter-proof after complaints from teachers about the amount of time wasted picking shards of plastic from students' eyes after another dose of shatter-inclined ruler-based discipline.

    524919.jpg

    524920.jpg


  • Registered Users Posts: 33,938 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    Way too much flexibility in those yokes, but no whip-like effect of the leather, either.

    The Perri ruler was 3-4mm thick perspex, more mass, more rigidity, more pain!

    Life ain't always empty.



  • Registered Users Posts: 26,054 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    Did nobody else have bamboo canes?


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,987 ✭✭✭Odhinn


    Peregrinus wrote: »
    Did nobody else have bamboo canes?




    Bamboo canes (they were a few kept in the principals office), the narrow ones being the worst. There were one or two leather strops - essentially like a leather black jack but without lead inserts. The factors influencing the kind of damage you could expect were your offence, and what state of mind the chronic alcoholic principal - a priest -was in.



    Every now and again the corpo bin truck would come in to collect the bins and a few lads would take a scute on the truck on its way out. One day a lad hopped on, not knowing that principal had decided this was the greatest threat facing western civilisation. He caught yer man on the truck, and removed him by dint of whipping the legs off the young fella (who was wearing shorts) so as to make him fall off. The sight of the lad on the ground seemed to trigger him to an even greater rage, and he whipped the legs off him, leaving deep marks and breaking the skin. At this stage the victim was blubbering and begging the principle to stop. Phase two saw the victim being hauled up by the ear and pushed forward ahead of the principle, who used the two to three paces space to give almighty whips to the backs of his legs. He fell again, was beaten and hauled up and dragged/pushed towards the principles office.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 16,114 ✭✭✭✭Pherekydes


    I had two teachers in primary: a lovely young woman who never hit anyone, and after she left to get married, a cantankerous old brute who slapped us for every little transgression. A sum or spelling wrong? Slap. He had a cane that was about the length and width of a ruler, but was made of plywood, probably 7 ply, but maybe 9, which made it fairly impervious to damage, especially from our soft palms. More serious transgressions usually involved him grabbing you by the wrist and absolutely laying into you with considerable force. Five or ten of the best! As I said, a brute!

    But at least I can spell. :pac:


Advertisement