Mary63 wrote: » ulysses,I think I can take it you have no school going children yet.
Mary63 wrote: » Parents for the most part do not want to take on accountability for their local school,they will pay the voluntary donation gladly because it provides extras for their children but to get parents to talk on voluntary roles in relation to their childs school is very difficult.Very few even turn up at the AGM and the few that do don't put themselves forward for roles because its impossible to hand over to someone else when the time comes.Most parents are very busy,both work long hours and after work there is another full time job to be done at home and everyday is the same.
Mary63 wrote: » They don't want to take over the religious instruction themselves,they are all agreed on that,let teacher do this job,he or she is paid for it whether they like doing it or not.If they have a real problem with it there are thousands of unemployed teachers who will teach black is white to get a permanent and pensionable position.
Mary63 wrote: » Anyone seeking change should put some of their people forward for election....
Samaris wrote: » I'm not backtracking, tbh, I believe that the State should take responsibility for teaching its children and not be leaving it to a foreign organisation.
[Deleted User] wrote: » How do your Catholic or Protestant friends with kids respond when you say that to them? Most of my friends, neighbours and workmates are Catholic. None of them have baptised their kids for any reason other than that they want them to be Catholic as well. And however little you may like it, that's their choice.
JRant wrote: » A lot of my friends were quite open with me for their reasons in baptising their children. I would never judge anyone for making the decision to christen their children. It's a personal choice for them.
JRant wrote: » I'm always respectful to other people's beliefs and would never bring it up myself.
JRant wrote: » .....it's great to hear from someone who has been involved in different setups.
JRant wrote: » I'm hoping to get involved with ET in my area but it is still at a very early stage and was wondering if you might have some insight into how best to assist.
[Deleted User] wrote: » You'd judge them here, though. That's not exactly friendly, is it? Is that in real life, as opposed to the lack of respect you show in internetland? I haven't been involved in different setups, nor did I say I have. Where's the nearest Educate Together school to you? If you have a child, you'll already have him or her enrolled there, won't you? Just ask the Principal or the chairperson of the management board for more advice about how to get active, and they'll advise you much better than I can. If you don't have a school near you, then contact ET's HQ and ask them for advice about the nearest group of parents seeking to set a school up.https://www.educatetogether.ie/about/contact
JRant wrote: » Where have I been disrespectful or judged anyone for baptising their children on this thread exactly?
JRant wrote: » Suggesting some people do this to help gain access to schools is hardly breaking news and certainly not disrespectful.
JRant wrote: » To be honest I was just asking a friendly question.
JRant wrote: » Did you not say you were involved with ET years ago and with geal scoils as well or am I getting you mixed up with someone else?
JRant wrote: » There is one being formed in our area but it is still at a bery early stage. I've already contacted them expressing support.
[Deleted User] wrote: » You've said they only do it for reasons that are not to do with their faith. When that's not true, you're being disrespectful. That's why I asked the question that I did. It is disrespectful when it is not true, and whether you like it or not the reason why the overwhelming majority of Christians baptise their children is so that their children will be baptised into the same Christian faith system that they have. No more and no less. No one ever thinks they are being unreasonable, but IMO you have been unreasonable and unfair. I am an atheist and I'm not compromising that for anyone. But I also have learned a genuine respect for people who do believe, something that is regrettably lacking from some contributors to this forum. I've never been involved with ET, although I was a "client" of my local ET school, and for some reason connected with that I paid ET a membership fee for a few years. I haven't been inside the school since my son left it several years ago. I also know quite a few parents (past and present) of my local C of I school (which is doing well), not to mention many parents whose kids are attending or have been to Catholic schools. And because of my interest in the Irish language, I also know a fair few people whose kids go to Gaelscoileanna. Stay in touch with them. That's really all I can advise. Apart from that, is it really too far to the nearest ET school? When we wanted a non-religious school, there were only 8 or 9 ET schools in the whole country, and nearly all of those were in Dublin. So our choices were to try to find a place in our local Catholic schools, to put up with a long commute to the school of our choice, or to move. There was no real contest. We moved.
expectationlost wrote: » HAI,AI,EE and EQ are and have all been doing that.
Mary63 wrote: » There will be no interference with the patronage system because both the Catholic and Protestant clergy are united on this one and what they have they hold.The clergy are very popular for the most part in their communities and parishioners are happy that they are involved in the schools,the majority are anyway and there is no real angst about this issue.
Mary63 wrote: » Anyone seeking change should put some of their people forward for election and canvass on this issue,this will cost a lot of money though and the successful business people are products of education with a religious ethos and they want the same for their children.The powerful won't support any change because they don't want interference with their private schools which they are bankrolling.If the Government decides all schools are to be patron free this means all schools and it is questionable whether private schools can be allowed to buy their way out of avoiding legal requirements.
RainyDay wrote: » Without being critical, they haven't been very effective. There should have found it fairly easy to find common group with Labour, SF maybe Green parties - yet no party has a clear policy for secular education.
JRant wrote: » Perhaps I could/should have worded my sentiments better as I meant no disrespect to anyone.
JRant wrote: » I am in Dublin myself so lucky to have other options available to us. The proposed school is the immediate vacinity but there are other ET schools options open to us.
expectationlost wrote: » rubbish, its called the permanent state
looksee wrote: » All that is sought is the removal of religious affiliation from national school admissions policies, and classroom teaching to move away from the dogma of any particular faith and the time spent instructing children in the ritual of the Catholic church. That is church business, not the business of the state schools.
RainyDay wrote: » I don't understand this - could you expand please?
Pherekydes wrote: » Wealth=brains=wealth. Why am I not surprised?
One eyed Jack wrote: » Perhaps because you understand that parents who are well educated also take an interest in their children's education, and send their children to schools where they will receive the education their parents want for them. That's why offering more opportunities is a good thing, as opposed to restricting parent's choices to the local schools which may not be able to provide the education the parents want for their children. Even in the leaflet you provided earlier on in the thread, it said that no one particular policy had better outcomes than another, and that both sides were divided more by their political ideologies, and both sides could produce evidence to support their own views.
Deleted User wrote: » Why will handing everything over to the State (as suggested by Samaris) help? What will we end up with then? Some lowest common denominator Irish form of communism in which the schools are crap and run for the benefit of the staff, but at least we can pat ourselves on the back because they are "equal"?
Pherekydes wrote: » Parents, in the main, send their kids where they can afford to send them.
I went to a fairly religious primary school which was the closest, but was also located in a relatively poor area of Dublin (at the time). None of my family went to college from school. It was simply not affordable.
Mary63 wrote: » Brains are genetic popepalatine and if your socio economic background is poor its because your parents haven't much brain cells,you therefore won't have much brain cells either and it doesn't matter how much money we throw at DEIS schools,it won't make a whit if difference.You only have to look at the horribly obese four year olds eating crisps on their way to school to know what sort of a home they grow up in,most wouldn't even know what a book was.They probably don't even go to school most Mondays because no one will get up out of bed to take them. These children because they cant learn then prevent everyone else around them learning and they drive teachers to a nervous breakdown,no point in even calling the parents,they are even worse.Why wouldn't any half decent parent want to make sure their child is in a different school and who wouldn't camp out to make sure their girl didn't get into a lore to school with other ambitious girls like herself,the alternative is pushing a buggy at fifteen years of age. its no wonder parents are so attached to the school with the religious ethos,most would be thrilled if there was some way of weeding out those who don't want to be in any school at all,none of us look at the bigger picture really,we want to focus on our own child and do the best we can for them.
looksee wrote: » While I have no issue with building new ET schools, and it is feasible in urban areas, suggesting that increasing the number of these schools is the solution is just papering over the cracks in the system. The school buildings, teachers and structures are already there scattered evenly, if thinly, throughout the rural areas. These are the areas of real 'no choice' that need to be addressed.
Mary63 wrote: » Brains are genetic popepalatine and if your socio economic background is poor its because your parents haven't much brain cells,you therefore won't have much brain cells either and it doesn't matter how much money ....................
expectationlost wrote: » policy can only be done after they recognise the problem, Labour doesn't recognise the problem they keep saying that the constituency would be breach if they did major changes they don't recognise that the constitution is currently being breached.
Mary63 wrote: » State schools are definitely inferior or maybe the schools with religious ethos are superior look see. You only have to look at the league tables and the progression onto third level level eight courses to see that. The best and brightest in every primary school go onto schools with a religious ethos where there is a choice,the demand for the loreto schools and the Christian Brothers schools is phenomenal,some parents take to camping out overnight to get their child a place.There definitely wouldn't be the same pool of highly academic children in the community schools unless this is the only choice of school available.Parents will put their thinking caps on and go for the best school available and they won't care what patron is in place,they couldn't care less. Parents will look at the results from the community schools in their area and if faced with losing their school or dumbing down to this level in order to achieve a secular education which they don't want anyway,they will revolt.The politicians know this and that is why every promise made to change the system is diluted.There is no demand whatsoever for secular education in this country,never has been and never will there be.The ET schools will fill places because they are trendy and parents like the idea of getting inside the classroom and calling teachers by their first names.The vast majority of the parents though put their children forward for baptism,communion and confirmation and if the ET school doesn't work out for whatever reason they will happily move to the catholic school down the road.
Mary63 wrote: » I am really tired of that socio economic argument,it doesn't take too much brain power to know that if you have too many children and too little money the outcome for your family won't be ideal. We are spending vast sums of money on DEIS schools,we are even providing breakfast for these children.The social welfare payments in this country are generous and I don't believe anyone can't afford a packet of porridge to cook a healthy breakfast for a primary school aged child. I bet if you went into these so called disadvantaged socio economic households you would see vast quantities of alcohol and cigarettes on display,it would be interesting to see the local shops takings on these products over the last two week period.You can bet too the children have the latest tablets,the latest xboxes and every house has a sky package.
CelticRambler wrote: » There you have the single biggest challenge to any organisation setting up non-denominational schools. First, you have to convince people that they'll be better than the devil they know ; and second, you have to prove it. Unfortunately, the example of our two nearest neighbours tends to indicate that the opposite is the case. My children were/are educated first in the UK and in France. The former has plenty of non-denominational schools, the latter has an aggressive policy of excluding religion from education. What's the outcome? The "religious" schools are invariably over-subscribed and come out top in just about every evaluation of social and academic performance. So you'll still have parents getting their children Christened to be further up the selection ladder, and inevitably, the religious schools will cream off the higher achievers, leaving the non-denominational schools needing to invest in additional resources just to remain "average". The playing field is not in the least bit level, and no amount of lobbying government to introduce "equality" will change what parents will do to make sure their children come out on top. Which then raises the question: why are "religious" schools/parents consistently more productive than their secular counterparts, even when the latter have had over 100 years to close the gap (e.g. in France)?
Shrap wrote: » Jaysus wept, you're lovely. I know who I'd prefer to spend time with, between yourself and the families you describe so charitably and with such deeply nuanced opinion :rolleyes: It would all be so simple if you were in charge, eh Mary?
Deleted User wrote: » I disagree with you, so up with my opinions you'll have to put. The best way to make progress is to improve the situation for everyone, not to improve it just for your own belief system. You wish to make all schools secular. I wish to extend the presence of non-religious schools. They are philosophically quite different standpoints, they lead to different solutions for tackling the problems, and one is as valid as the other.
RainyDay wrote: » It's hard to know where to start on this. There are actually nuggets of truth here, but you seem to be very confused on cause and effect - and a few facts.
[Deleted User] wrote: » Cheers. I'm not meaning to have a go at you either, so apologies if I'm coming across that way. Best of luck with your choice, whatever it turns out to be, but make sure to get your child(ren) on the list ASAP, because all ET schools operate a first come first served policy. Your point about location is significant. Part of the problem is a lack of non-religious schools, but the bigger part (IMO) is that the availability of non-religious schools very much depends on where you find yourself. That's why my preference is to find ways of increasing choice all around the country, rather than insisting that every school has to go non-religious. Have a look at this link, which lists ET schools (I don't know if the list is 100% up to date). There are a good few around Dublin, but aside from that they are thin on the ground, and there are none at all in several counties. Also, unless you live in certain parts of Dublin, Cebridge or Drogheda, there are no non-religious secondary schools.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educate_Together#List_of_Primary_Schools I would say that in the short term, the emphasis should be on getting non-religious primary schools (whether under ET operation or run by someone else) into those towns and counties that don't have them or that have very few of them. Others may disagree with this view, but primary schools are much more important than secondary schools. If you get a youngster to 12 years old with a solid foundation in atheism, a secondary school won't change that. So that means that (in the short term at least) the important thing for secondary schools is to make sure that they can't discriminate in selection on religious grounds. Having said that, I should point out that none of the kids I've known from the local ET school and from around my estate have ever had any difficulty getting a secondary school place, and that's on the south side of Dublin. Mind you, as the link also shows the number of ET secondary schools is about to increase significantly.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w9.vanillicon.com/v2/975d229199ef1950ddf5036fc947d0f4.svg)
