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: » Fee-paying schools don't cream off the high-achievers - far from it. Look at the top results in the Leaving Cert and the Young Scientists and you don't see the private schools dominating these. The only thing they dominate are the Rugby competitions.
RainyDay wrote: » So that's where the policy work needs to focus then - get Labour, Green, SF to recognise the problem and build momentum towards a solution.
JRant wrote: » That's just a downright nasty post.
expectationlost wrote: » well I should say Labour knows the problem but refuses to say it, in government whic would the sme if SF or when GP were in gov.
silverharp wrote: » in a city like Dublin you are going to have "herding" , if you look below, the top 20 schools in South Dublin shows a high % of fee paying schools if going to college is the definition of "high achievement". The next kind of herding will be into non fee paying schools like Mucross Park which is a school that there would be a lot of competition to get into so they tend to keep their own virtuous circle going As such though no school in Ireland has "secret" teaching methods that gives them the edge. most of the advantage is being surrounded by other kids who are being prepped for college.http://www.schooldays.ie/articles/about-school-league-tables#sd
RainyDay wrote: » It's more than that, actually - it is exactly the kind of attitude that propagates ongoing educational inequality across generations. It makes sure that the kind of inequality that Mary criticises is guaranteed to continue for future generations, as any kids from that environment who have a modicum of talent or ambition will be beaten down with Mary's 'they're all the same' argument. Whatever way you want to phrase it - this is where the policy work needs to be done.
Mary63 wrote: » And yet again the vast majority of adults in this country are a la carte Catholics and they don't want a secular form of education,there is no way around this obstacle and its laughable to think there are enough people demanding secular education to put any Dail seat in jeopardy. Ruairi Quinn is history,he achieved absolutely nothing for all the time he spent in Government,the Catholic Church ran rings around him.How much redress money did they actually pay or did they lose every last penny to Anglo Irish.How many church buildings have been handed over in compensation,Irish people know all about this scandal and they still baptise their children and still when asked in census forms will say they are members of the Catholic church. Where is Ruairi Quinn going to find any rich person to fund the secular education campaign,the rich want segregated education so they pay vast sums of money for this.All the private schools are run by religious orders either Church of Ireland or by Catholic Orders and all are very successful,they have to be or they wouldn't survive,parents will not pay fees to schools which don't get top results.The private schools are also light years ahead of other schools in terms of results,sports facilities,funding,they aren't hampered by the bureaucrats in Marlborough Street and there is no way on earth parents are going to allow their schools to be dumbed down to the lowest common denominator. What does herding mean,I don't understand this point.
expectationlost wrote: » Ruiari Quinn was Minister for Education he had polices it didn't work now he thinks the only way to change it is to get rich person to fund a campaign http://www.equateireland.ie/
CelticRambler wrote: » All the examples given are in an Irish context which makes a nonsense of any comparison. That's why you need to look outside Ireland to see what can/might/does happen. Strip out fee-paying "public" schools in the UK, and there are dozens of different establishments to choose from. In my area, without exception, the top performers (judged by any parameter you choose) were the religious schools. The "post-code lottery" is a serious business for parents, who will pay extra for a house in the catchment area of a Catholic or CoI school regardless of whether or not they practice the religion. In France, the religious schools are private, but families can get financial assistance if they make a good-enough case, and the whole notion of "private education" in France is completely different to how it is in Ireland (or the UK) - just as going to boarding school is perfectly normal for huge numbers of country children. So referring back to a post on page one, if those who are pro secular education constantly and repeatedly make this into a "them" and "us" argument, using distorted examples from what they themselves say is a dysfunctional system, they'll get nowhere. You can't argue for secular schools, then base your proposal entirely on being against religion. The case must be made on the grounds of educational value, nothing else. For that, you need to find examples of unambiguous excellence in secular schools in other countries, ones where Irish people have some idea of what (family) life is like.
Mary63 wrote: » And yet again the vast majority of adults in this country are a la carte Catholics and they don't want a secular form of education,there is no way around this obstacle
Mary63 wrote: » What does herding mean,I don't understand this point.
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..
RainyDay wrote: » There is a third option - take religion out of all state funded schools. If you want a religious education, you pay for it.
looksee wrote: » It would be good if you would actually read what I am saying. I am asking for the National schools system to be made secular. All the actual religious schools (the ones that were mostly originally built as fee paying schools for the parents that could afford it) remain religious. The National school system is a different set up and is only 'religious' because the church(es) took them over as patrons, not because the churches ever put any funding into them.
RainyDay wrote: » Personally, I'm not sure funding the campaign is the real limiting issue. Committed volunteers can do very effective policy work, perhaps better than paid professionals - but it is not easy.
Deleted User wrote: » You opened a debate in the hope that it would turn into an echo chamber with everyone agreeing with you. Sorry to disappoint you. It is evident that you have a fundamentalist view of this and want religion out of the school system altogether. So that means you're not in the business of persuasion, but in the business of winning and imposing your view on the system regardless of what parents of children in the system think. That being the case, you know the answer to your question. You are highly unlikely to get moderate parents to go along with your fundamentalist stance, so persuasion is pretty much not an option for you. To get your way, you have to get your money together and fund the right court case. Then if you win, you win.
Deleted User wrote: » That isn't a third option, even if you think it is.
expectationlost wrote: » which do you think the government will entertain, Ruairi Quinn has decided which.
looksee wrote: » If your basic premise was correct we might have something to discuss.
RainyDay wrote: » Ruairi is gone, or will be in a couple of months. Either way, no one individual in any party would have a monopoly of wisdom on this.
RainyDay wrote: » Any particular reason why you think this is not an option?
Deleted User wrote: » It's nothing to do with what I think. It's not an option. The fundamentalists here are an exact mirror of what they claim to detest most - religious fundis. They want to force parents to send their kids to schools of their design, whether those parents like it or not. Saying to parents that they can pay to bypass the fundamentalists is not a valid option because the overwhelming majority don't have the kind of money that would be necessary.
Mary63 wrote: » The UK model isn't a suitable model for us to copy,we are a catholic country,
Mary63 wrote: » I can see them going all the way to the European Court of Human rights to prevent this happening and they will be a lot more successful in fundraising than Athiest ireland will ever be because there is a huge level of distrust about Athiests,people associate that ideology with backwardness and veganism and they don't want their children exposed to what they perceive as cults.
The UK model isn't a suitable model for us to copy,we are a catholic country,we need to look to Spain and portugal and see how their education system works,they are catholic countries too.
Mary63 wrote: » we are a catholic country
Mary63 wrote: » They would have contacted their local TD to make sure he or she worked behind the scenes to make sure their school wasn't divested,if it was this would mean the catholic children wouldn't get first dibs on the places and this is what matters to most parents at the end of the day,the school round the corner doesn't have as good a name and they will take the atheist children to put bums on seats.
RainyDay wrote: » Your analysis is not correct.