Labour Humanists condemn Government’s Faith in the System report

reposted from: http://humanistsforlabour.typepad.com/the_labour_humanist_group/2007/09/labour-humani-1.html

September 19, 2007

Labour Humanists today maintained their firm opposition to ‘faith’ schools with a clear condemnation of the Government’s recent statement lauding the contribution such schools supposedly make to ‘community cohesion and integration’.

Chair Anthony Burn denounced the document as: “a clear example of the Government’s continuing folly in this area."

“The Government claims such schools will promote community cohesion - yet it stills fails to point to ways in which this will genuinely occur. Requiring ‘faith’ school pupils to have occasional contact with pupils from other schools will hardly equip our children with the skills to get on with those holding different beliefs - or indeed no religious beliefs.

“This is without again highlighting the squeeze on the rights of non-religious parents, caught in a system that assumes all Britons must belong to one religion or another.”

Labour Humanists also highlighted research released this week from the LSE showing ‘faith’ schools take in a far smaller proportion of children from low-income families than do their community school counterparts.

“Snaffling in the most teachable pupils under the guise of religion is wrong in any circumstance. But this creates only a redoubled division within communities – by both alleged religion and by income.

“As Labour people and humanists we can only fear for the shape of our communities in the future. How will out children truly learn to live together unless they first study, grow and become adults together?”

NSS newsline 14th September 2007

reposted from: NSS newsline 14th September 2007

National Secular Society (NSS) - Newsline,
''The primary meaning of Islam in Arabic is not 'peace,' but 'submission,' submission to the ideas and the values of Arab tribes living in the 7th century,''
(Ehsan Jami, leader of new Council of Dutch Ex-Muslims)

Government hands over school system to clerics
Schools Secretary Ed Balls has opened the way for the creation of hundreds of new sectarian schools at taxpayers' expense and has promised funds to take more than 100 private Islamic schools into the state sector.

But there were immediate warnings that setting up new "faith schools" could backfire by increasing religious tensions. The National Secular Society said the proposals would increase segregation and called them "plain madness". And a Muslim leader admitted the biggest obstacle to the opening of new Islamic state schools was public fears that they would "produce fundamentalists".

Mr Balls said the schools could be a "force for improving community relations" and warned that minority religions currently did not have enough free sectarian school places. The schools do not have to admit pupils of other religions if they are over-subscribed, and even if they are not, it is difficult to imagine more than a token attendance by those of other religions and none. They can follow their own curriculum for RE lessons.

The Government argues that bringing private minority faith schools into the state system would give Ministers greater control over establishments that currently operate with little supervision. A third of England's 21,000 state schools are already sectarian in nature, but the vast majority are Anglican or Catholic. There are 37 Jewish, seven Muslim, two Sikh, one Greek Orthodox and one Seventh Day Adventist. A Hindu school is due to open next year. Nearly 15,000 Muslim pupils and 11,000 Jewish ones are currently taught in private religious schools.

Concerns have been raised that some private Islamic schools are failing to prepare pupils for life in modern Britain. David Bell, when he was head of Ofsted, the schools inspection organisation, suggested some "faith schools" posed a threat to social cohesion. An Ofsted report on an independent Muslim school in Dewsbury found pupils were "not allowed to read newspapers or listen to radio or television programmes". Two Muslim schools in Scotland have been closed down because of inadequate standards.

And in April the Commission for Racial Equality said the UK was in danger of becoming a "mini America", with schools separated along religious and ethnic lines. It said Britain's segregated schools were a "ticking time-bomb waiting to explode".

Ministers have placed a duty on all state schools – including religious schools – to explicitly promote harmonious community relations, but that 'duty' is only voluntary. And they are encouraging faith groups to form alliances with other religions and run state schools together. They also say that new academy schools sponsored by faith groups should set aside half of places for pupils of different denominations or none.

Mr Balls' plan to make it easier for faith groups to set up state schools is outlined in a document published this week and it is, unsurprisingly, backed by those with most to gain – the leaders of the main religious sects (indeed, no-one else – particularly the non-religious – were consulted during the compiling of the report). It says the Government will "remove unnecessary barriers to the creation of new faith schools" of any denomination. Private faith schools would be offered cash to modernise and expand under the Government's £45billion school rebuilding programme. Mr Balls said the programme would allow communities to take a "long term view".

"There are 115 or 116 independent Muslim schools and seven maintained Muslim schools. All of those seven have transferred into the maintained sector from the independent sector," he said. "It should only happen if in the broadest sense the local community wants it. Where that is what the local community wants, it will provide the capital to make that possible."

Read the report

Editorial by Terry Sanderson
The abomination of sectarian schooling
Secularism in Britain took a mighty blow this week when the Government announced that it had been conniving behind closed doors with leaders of the "faith communities" to hand over hundreds more of Britain's schools to the clerical establishment. It will use taxpayers' money to achieve this multi-billion pound own-goal.

Ed Balls, the minister for education, published the results of his cosy chats with the bishops and imams, in the form of a report "Faith in the System". It was launched on Monday with the usual claims that more sectarian religious schools will somehow make community relations better and that private Muslim schools need to be brought into the state so that an eye can be kept on them.

He might as well have thrown in the claim that black is white and up is down.

How on earth can anybody argue that separating children on the basis of their parents' religion helps them understand each other? All the evidence shows that if you want to break down the destructive and dangerous barriers of race and religion, children from different cultures have to be educated together – on a daily basis – from a very early age. Unless this is done, as well as being inculcated with their parents' "faith", they are more likely also to inherit their parents' prejudices and sectarian tendencies.

And along comes Mr Balls (or more likely Lord Adonis, whose pious fingerprints are all over this document) to encourage that – using public money to do it. What on earth can they be thinking of? Votes, perhaps? For surely it is Labour who has most to lose if the Muslim community were to turn against it? It is in Labour constituencies that the concentrations of Muslims are most likely to be able to swing an election result.

And another pipe dream is the idea that currently the almost unsupervised private Muslim schools sector can be tamed if it is brought into the state sector. The imams must be rubbing their hands with glee at this development – no-one is more anxious than they to control the education of "their" communities, because they know that they can hammer home Islam in schools like nowhere else. If the state thinks it will change the direction of Muslim schools by bringing them into the state sector, it should think again. It is Muslim schools that will change the direction of the National Curriculum.

I will predict right now that as soon as these Islamic schools are brought into the state sector they will begin to demand exemptions (on grounds of "faith", of course) from the need to observe the National Curriculum. How long before their demands for no mixed sex classes, no swimming lessons, no music, no dancing, no science that contradicts the Koran, different lessons for girls and so on are acceded to?

Soon, Islamic education in the state sector will become exactly the same as it is in the private sector (it will have to be, or the parents who opted out of the state sector in the first place so that their children could have a strictly Islamic education will simply take their children back into the private sector, where madrassa-style 'education' can re-commence).

Regular readers of Newsline will know that enough evidence has now accumulated to show that religious schools are not all they are cracked up to be by the people with the greatest vested interest in their continuance.

Yes, they perform well in the league tables. But so do most selective schools. If you can pick and choose your intake, of course your academic achievement will be high. The performance of "faith schools" has been shown to be entirely connected to the selection criteria and has nothing whatever to do with "faith". And, of course, community schools are already victims of this cherry picking – they are the ones who have to take the problem kids and the unsupported kids who, unfortunately, don't qualify for "faith schools". Indeed, new evidence published this week contradicts claims by "faith-school" leaders that they are serving all sections of society. Rebecca Allen, of London University's Institute of Education, and Anne West, of the London School of Economics, said religious secondaries in London do not serve the most disadvantaged pupils. "Overall, religious schools educate a much smaller proportion of pupils eligible for free school meals and their intakes are significantly more affluent than the neighbourhood they are located in," they said. "Some London religious schools may have undergone a distortion of mission as happened with elite public schools, which were set up to educate the poor but then shifted their focus and catered predominantly for the wealthy."

Other injustices spring from these schools. The government has granted them shocking privileges in the way they select and employ staff. They are permitted to practise blatant religious discrimination in their employment policies, which is surely an affront to every human rights charter ever written. They force parents to lie and cheat in order to get their children in. They practically coerce people into attending church, sometimes against their conscience, in order to win places for their children which they have already paid for through their taxes. They force local authorities to make spiteful and petty decisions about who can ride on the school bus (see here and here).

They claim popular support, even though two polls within the past week (John Humphrys in the Times and the Readers Digest both commissioned YouGov polls) which both indicated that 52% of people think "faith schools" are a bad idea and should be stopped.

Parents clamour for places at "faith schools" because the system forces them to. If they want a place in a good school, they have to feign interest in the church and jump through humiliating hoops, in order to get the all-important vicar's letter. How has it come to this, that priests decide who can and cannot attend a state-funded school?

Keith Porteous Wood took part in a debate on Premier Christian radio with Jan Ainsworth, the Church of England's chief education officer this week. Ms Ainsworth insisted that no new church schools would be opened without the approval and consent of the local community. Where have we heard that before? I'll tell you – it was last time the government agreed to a large-scale expansion of "faith schools" five years ago. In actuality, such consultations with the local community are often over before anyone even knows they are happening. Or if parents do manage to find out about them before it's too late, their objections are dismissed out of hand.

An example of this was described this week in the Guardian, when it was revealed that the Marches Secularist Group had been told that it wasn't welcome to participate in a consultation on a new Church of England Academy because it was too closely associated with the National Secular Society. (Read the full story.)

Sectarian schools are an abomination, and they will benefit no-one but the clerics who want to use them to revive their dying religions. Ed Balls, Lord Adonis and Gordon Brown have done a massive disservice to this country with this pact with the churches. But then, they won't be around to pick up the pieces of the resulting conflict in generations to come.

Thomas Sutcliffe, Independent: "Faith in the System doesn't actually include a single piece of hard evidence that faith schools will 'promote community cohesion'. Nor does it seriously address any of the important issues about conflicts between religious teaching and the National Curriculum, or between employment rights and doctrinal prejudice. It simply offers a number of anecdotal examples of faith schools which attempt to redress their own cultural homogeneity with exchange visits, comparative religion studies and outreach programmes."
Dr Evan Harris MP: "If we have to have tax-funded faith schools then they should not be allowed to set religious tests for admissions and they must have religion-blind employment policies. Faith schools make existing racial segregation worse and when you adjust for social class their results are no better than community schools."
John Dunford, general secretary of headmasters' union ASCL: "The inherent danger of increasing the number of faith schools is that more schools will become monocultural and less able to promote inter-cultural understanding."
Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Westminster: "I welcome the public recognition of the contribution made by faith schools to the harmony of our society. An ongoing partnership between the Catholic Church and the Government based on the right of Catholic parents – under the Human Rights Act – to choose a Catholic education for their children is a proven way of forming youngsters as good British citizens."
Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury: "Church schools offer not a programme of indoctrination, but the possibility of developing a greater level of community cohesion through the understanding of how faith shapes common life. This matters for the lives of individuals, whether they are believers or not – because the failure to understand how faith operates leaves us at sea in engaging with our neighbours at local and global level."
Mary Bousted, general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers: "We question whether faith schools, particularly those where staff and children are chosen on a faith basis, provide an environment for 'interaction between different faiths and communities'. And we question why schools, in which the majority of funding comes from the state, should, as the Government proposes, nurture young people in a particular faith. Surely, the job of schools is to nurture children and young people as individuals and as responsible and compassionate global citizens, and the promotion of a particular religious viewpoint should remain the province of religious groups. Our members believe that we need schools which embrace the diversity within our community, not a diversity of schools dividing pupils and staff on religious grounds."
AC Grayling, The Guardian: "The secular majority in this country should bitterly oppose the use of their tax money for this misconceived policy. Religion, the bane of the modern world in so many respects, has got to be relegated to the private sphere and kept there."
See also: Ghettoes of superstition
The unbelievable privilege of faith
New school course on Islamophobia


52 per cent say "no" to faith schools and religious symbols
Muslim headscarves, crucifixes and Sikh bangles should be banned at schools unless they can be incorporated into the dress code, most parents polled in a survey by Reader's Digest said. Eighty-three per cent feel such religious symbols are unacceptable, while more than half (52 per cent) of parents also disapprove of faith schools, according to the poll by Reader's Digest
2nd Leader by Terry Sanderson
Religious education is not essential
Forgive my cynicism, but news that a new study into the "aims and effects of Religious Education in our schools" is to be carried out by a team of UK academics led by the University of Glasgow leaves me pretty queazy. Is this yet another way to slip more religion into our schools? Is the result of this "study" already decided? Is it just another excuse for the Government to turn our schools into centres of theology, rather than academic learning?

The £365,326 three-year project – led by Professor Jim Conroy, Dean of the Faculty of Education in the University of Glasgow and jointly funded by the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) and the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) – aims to create "the single most comprehensive study to date of the state of RE across the UK."

Dr Paul Gilfillan, lead ethnographer on the study said: "This programme is a timely recognition of the importance research councils, academics and governments attach to religion and questions of culture, identity and meaning today in the quest for more cohesive communities. The findings of study will help inform the substantial public conversation on whether the inclusion of religious education as a compulsory subject in the curriculum contributes to social cohesion and diversity or is constitutive of social division."

Well, let's open that "public conversation" right now with this opinion: religious education in schools is not necessary and should be chucked out.

The argument from the proponents of more and more religion in schools is that – to paraphrase – "religion has become such an important topic these days that we cannot ignore it. Children need to know about the world's religions in order to function properly."

Poppycock. Far from needing more religion, they need less – far less. And what the enthusiasts for religious education really mean is that they want the freedom to proselytise in schools under the guise of "essential education."

The kind of religious education that happens in Britain's schools is patchy, but it is still under the control of the religious establishment. In state community schools, the content of religious education lessons is decided by local groups called SACREs (Standing Advisory Committees on Religious Education). Some of these try hard to make the lessons objective and informative, while some of them simply use them as a jumping off block for evangelising ("Let's find out how lovely Jesus is, boys and girls"). All SACREs are completely dominated by religious personages. Occasionally a humanist will be given a place, but they are not allowed to vote on anything and their presence can be counterproductive, in that it is used to justify decisions made by the vicars and priests on the committee who can then say: "Well, we've consulted everyone in the community, even the non-believers, and they're all happy with it." It makes opposition very difficult.

Is the gaining of a few minutes' acknowledgement of humanism in RE lessons worth the hundreds of hours of covert evangelising that will then be handed to the religious in schools, with the claim that RE is "all-inclusive?"

In voluntary-aided schools with a religious character, religious education is decided within the school, and that's when the religious establishment can really go to town. Nobody can stop them slanting their lessons in the direction of their particular religious viewpoint, and they all do.

The only solution is to dump the concept of religious education altogether. Get clerics out of the picture, and bring proper educationists in. If we're going to tell children about religion in schools, let's do it objectively. Let them hear the full story, in all its violent, corrupt glory, rather than the sugar-coated version they are fed at present. Incorporate discussion of religion into history and geography and literature lessons, where – as well as pointing out its moments of glory – it can be shown in its other, destructive mode.

Religion is important as a political and ideological phenomenon. That isn't what the proponents of religious education want to tell children about. They want to fill their heads with the idiotic fairy tales about miracles and gentle Jesus that are hard to shake off once they've taken hold in vulnerable young minds.

The poll reported below shows that 72% of 16–19 year olds say that religion is "not relevant to them". Why should it be? And why should schools be used to try to persuade them that it should be? No child will be in the least bit disadvantaged if they leave school not having studied the dubious lives of the Prophet or the Messiah or the Buddha. They can learn all that in their own time if they want to in church (there's one on every street corner), temple or synagogue.

However, they (and the rest of us) will be distinctly disadvantaged if they leave school imagining that religion is inevitably a force for good, and must be free from critical examination, whatever it does.


Half of teenagers are atheists
Nearly half of teenagers in Britain are atheists, according to a new Mori poll commissioned by the British Library.

43% of 16–19 year olds say they have no faith. In those over 20 it is 20%, and that goes down to 8% in the 65+ age group. Overall, 21% of the 2,030 people questioned say they have no faith. Of those who do not follow a religion, around one third say they used to be Christian (32%), while three in five have never followed a religion in the past (58%).

"Does this mean people tend to find faith or become more religious as they get older – or, alternatively, does it mean that the younger generation are increasingly less likely to follow a religion or have any belief?" said a British Library spokesperson. Keith Porteous Wood of the National Secular Society, responded: "This British Library spokesperson clearly hasn't been paying attention, or they would know that academics have resoundingly concluded that it is the latter. An exhaustive study of Scottish census data confirmed this."

Among those with a religion, around half "try to practise it a great deal or a fair amount in everyday life" (49%), although a similar proportion say they "do not practise religion very much, if at all" (50%).

Those aged 20 or over are more likely than those aged 16–19 to practise religion (50%, vs. 35%); women are also more likely to practise religion (54%, vs. 44% of men), as are those in higher socio-economic groups – 57% of ABs say this, compared to fewer than half of C2DEs (45%).

Looking at the different religions, Muslims are twice as likely to say that they try to practise religion "a great deal" or "a fair amount" in their day to day lives than Christians (92% vs. 46%).

Similarly, Muslims are much more likely to see religion as "relevant to their life" than Christians (95% vs. 54%), with fewer than half of the people polled saying this overall (43%). The 16–19 year olds are most likely to describe religion as "not relevant" (72% vs. 54% of those aged 20+). Nearly a quarter of those polled say that religion is relevant at all times in their lives (23%); this increases to a third among those aged 65+ (33%) , but falls to 14% among 16–19 year olds . Around a quarter of all people asked say that religion is never relevant (23%).

The event most likely to make religion more pertinent to people's lives is the death of a family member (45%). A further third cite weddings as important (31%), with a quarter mentioning the birth of a child (24%).


NSS Speaks Out
The Government's plans for more faith schools brought many opportunities for the NSS to comment: the BBC; The Press Association; the Times; the Sun; the London Evening Standard; the Daily Mail; the Daily Mirror Politics.co.uk and Ekklesia as well as the Birmingham Mail the Daily Star and the Church of England Newspaper.

Scottish representative Alistair McBay had a letter in the Times on Wednesday.

Keith was quoted in this story in the Daily Telegraph about the Sexual Orientation Regulations.

The NSS was quoted in a story in the Dorset Echo.

Keith debated with Anne Widdecombe about whether morality is collapsing in this country on BBC Radio Kent. He was also on Radio Norfolk.

Terry Sanderson took part in a debate on BBC Asian Network about religious symbols in schools on Friday.

Honorary Associate Dr Evan Harris MP spoke on the new ethics programme The Big Questions on BBC1 on Sunday morning.


Annual Reunion of Kindred Organisations at which the NSS, RPA, GALHA, BHA and other secularist organisations get together to socialise and tell each other about their activities and developments during the year. Keynote Speaker: Maryam Namazie, who is an NSS honorary associate and 2005 Secularist of the Year. Her topic: Apostates, ex-Muslims and the challenge to political Islam. Refreshments will be available. Ethical Society, Conway Hall, 25 Red Lion Square, Lonon WC1R 4RL. Sunday 30 September, 2.30pm.

Should We Have Any Faith in the System? The Case for Having More and Less

reposted from:http://www.socialcohesion.co.uk

Should We Have Any Faith in the System? The Case for Having More and Less

No society can flourish in the absence of its enjoying a considerable degree of cohesion among its members.

In determining how much cohesion a society enjoys, few factors play a more decisive role than do the policies it adopts towards two decisive matters. These are immigration and education.

In the case of both, we may lay down two very general principles of great relevance to how much each may be said in any given instance to promote or undermine social cohesion.

Principle One: Ceteris paribus, the more ethnically and religiously diverse a society becomes, the less cohesive it will be.

Principle Two: Ceteris paribus, the more deeply rooted the members of a society are in its traditions and culture, the more cohesive it will be.

There can be little doubt that post-war immigration policy in the UK has put a great strain on social cohesion on both counts. It has encouraged the admission of large numbers of immigrants whose native traditions have been markedly dissimilar from those of the indigenous population.

Quite apart from this large wave of immigration, the UK has placed a great strain on its social cohesion since the war, and especially since the sixties, through having adopted a whole range of social, economic, and educational policies and measures that have steadily attenuated the hold which the country’s native traditions and culture have upon its members.

In no area has this trend been more conspicuous or pronounced than in the realm of religious observance. And, in this process of progressive deracination, the role that state schooling has played has been decisive.

Even had there been little or no post war immigration to Britain, the country today would have still have enjoyed far less social cohesion than it did in 1945 or 1950 had the same progressive abandonment of tradition occurred, particularly in the realm of religious education.

What motivated the retreat from religion in schools in the early decades after the war had little to do with accommodating the increasing diversity within classrooms. It had much more to do with the progressive culture of the swinging sixties. This combined great faith in the ability of the human intellect to order society so as to optimise social and economic well-being, with contempt for all traditions and customs that could not justified before the bar of an equally rationalistically-minded outlook. This outlooked viewed with contempt or in bemusement on all that could not be scientifically demonstrated or verified. (Think: logical positivism, scientific socialism, and all the other assorted forms of rationalism in politics and culture).

The combination of mass immigration by those of very different outlook and tradition from those of the indigenous population, plus the post-war deracination encouraged by its rationalism in politics and culture, has proved a particularly destructive force so far as social cohesion is concerned. It would be a vast exaggeration to say that, as a society, Britain has ceased to exist. Yet, it undoubtedly remains true that today its members share far less in common with each other and with earlier generations of members than they did before the war and in the early decades after it.

Anyway, to cut a long story short and come to the point, yesterday saw the publication of a paper by the newly named Department for Children, Schools and Families. (Notice, incidentally, how any reference to ‘education’ has vanished from the title of this department of state. Schools have now assumed in its eyes a far more important and pressing role, as being a panacea for all social ills.) The full title of this paper is Faith in the system: the place of schools with a religious character in English education.

Basically, what this paper amounts to is a volte face by the present government in terms of its attitude towards faith schools. Whereas until recently they were seen by it as potential sources of social disunity, it now wants to claim that, especially when brought under state regulation, they can and will be sources of greater social cohesion.

Whether that is so remains to be seen. Personally, having read the document, I remain profoundly worried on two counts.

First, the paper chooses to call faith schools ‘schools with a religious character’ and contrasts them with non-denominational schools which it calls ‘schools without a religious character’.
It does so despite its stating that, according to current law, irrespective of whether they are faith schools or not, ‘all maintained schools and Academies, whether or not they have a religious character, are supposed to have daily acts of collective worship and teach religious education as part of their curriculum’.

How schools are expected to provide for their pupils a daily act of collective worship in the absence of having any religious character is something the paper leaves totally unclear. It is a testament to the poverty of thinking that has beset post-war educational policy as successive governments, especially Labour ones, have moved further and further away from the manifest intentions of those who drafted and passed the 1944 Education Act which laid the requirement down.

Actually, despite the law, state schools which are not faith schools routinely get round the law by claiming not to have the requisite facilities for a daily act of collective worship or else, where they go in for such assemblies, by making them so anoydne as for them to cease to involve worship in any meaningful sense. That allows the form of religious education that they are also obliged to provide to turn into comparative religion, learning about religion rather than children being initiated into any form of religious belief without which worship is impossible.

The point is that, given the unwillingness of the present government to face up to the fact that you cannot have worship without religion, nor religion without some form of religious belief, you can be sure that a great opportunity for the promotion of social cohesion will continue to be lost.

My second misgiving about the paper relates specifically to what it says about Muslim schools. These faith schools are ones of which the paper goes to great pains to point out there is a massive shortage within the maintained sector, relative to that proportion of the overall number of school-age children which Muslim children make up.

The paper argues, on grounds of fairness as well as by appeal to considerations of alleged greater social cohesion, for a considerable expansion of their number. Left in the independent sector, it argues, Muslim schools would not be obliged to follow the national curriculum and thereby have to concern themselves with citizenship and social cohesion, as maintained schools all now are. Hence, it claims, social cohesion will be helped by expanding their number, rather than allow their number to grow outside the maintained sector.

My worry with this second aspect of the report is that the Muslim organisation named as co-author of it, along with government and organisations representing other faith groups, is the Association of Muslim Schools. This organisation was set up and originally chaired by Ibrahim Hewitt who remains its development officer.

Ibrahim Hewitt is head of a Muslim primary school in Leicester, but also is chair of the trustees of Interpal, a Muslim organisation that provides aid to Palestinians and which is currently investigation by the Charities Commission following allegations that it has helped extremist groups in Palestine that support and engage in acts of terror. See the entry on Interpal in the Centre for Social Cohesion's 'A to Z of Muslim Organisations.

Mr Hewitt is also a member of one of the committees of the Muslim Council of Britain, and like its spokemen, has expressed opposition to Holocaust Memorial Day, as somehow privileging Jews.

I just wonder whether, if there is a massive expansion of the number of Muslim faith schools, particularly in the present climate, it might not just be a matter of time before the call goes out for special branches of Ofsted catering exclusively for specific different faiths. Then, the idea that the state would have greater control over what goes on in such schools than were they independent would be undermined.

By having funded such schools, instead of greater social cohesion, all we would have is yet more ‘hate on the state’.

Faith Schools: Ghettoes of superstition by AC Grayling

reposted from:http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk

Ghettoes of superstition

Far from aiding social cohesion, faith schools only cause further divisions. Religious worship must be relegated to the private sphere and kept there.

AC Grayling

Articles

• Latest
• Show all

Profile

So the schools secretary, Ed Balls, and faith group leaders have formed a partnership endorsing faith schools as a force to improve social cohesion in England. This gasp-inducing statement is on a par with "let us build and run more nuclear power stations Chernobyl fashion - oh, and let's put them in city centres". In the face of the failure of multiculturalism, with the awful example of faith-divided schooling in Northern Ireland over decades, with news of Deobandi control of half of British mosques where hostility to the host community is preached,

the government is choosing to continue to fly in the face of all reason and experience, and to design and pay for - with our tax money - greater future divisiveness and trouble. It is staggering.

On the news we hear: "At a conference in London, Mr Balls presented a joint policy statement with Church of England, Roman Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Greek Orthodox and Sikh representatives." That is,

representatives of an active constituency of weekly worshippers of 8% of the British population, all of them votaries of ancient superstitions, all of them with grubby hands rummaging in the pot of public funds, and some of them doing it with the useful background threat of violence and civil unrest unless the rummaging pays off. The spectacle is appalling.

The question is not solely one of public policy, or the fact that the government's otherwise admirable desire for social cohesion is going to be negated, not enhanced,

by paying to keep children apart from one another in competing ghettoes of superstition.

There is the point also that if parents wish to bring up their children in their own traditional superstitions, they should do it on their own time and at their own expense. The secular majority in this country should bitterly oppose the use of their tax money for this misconceived policy.

Religion, the bane of the modern world in so many respects, has got to be relegated to the private sphere and kept there.

And religious worship (not of course historical and sociological comparative study of the subject) should be removed from publicly funded schooling, as being divisive there too - among many other deficits.

This argument has in fact been won, and won repeatedly. Those pressing for more faith-based schooling use a variety of contradictory claims to support their case, from standards (the contradiction here is the ever-improving, ever-mounting GCSE and A-level results across the education sector) to the grail of social cohesion. It is this latter where absurdity most appears.

"We desire all British people to live together in peace, harmony and mutual understanding, so let us divide our children into a multiplicity of schooling apartheids where they can be taught that all the other children in their separate ghettoes worship false gods."

Good thinking, Mr Ed Balls. Let us, in your honour, officially baptise the policy "A Continuing Balls-Up".

Selected Comments

notsureofmyname Comment No. 805839

I think it can be argued that faith schools also have a negative effect on standards. I've seen a few studies that have attempted to prove the assertion that religious schools provide a better education. Once the effects of socio-economic background are controlled for, there is no effect.

space in an already crowded school week is given to transmitting folk tales, rather than something useful.why do we privilege one type of ideology over another? If a group of committed Marxists were to establish a school, using public money but only for the children of Marxists, and were to teach Marxism as the truth, there would - rightly - be uproar. Why is this not so when it comes to religion?

CaressOfSteel

Comment No. 805861

This is a very apt time to raise this subject - I'm sure Mohammad Atta and his friends were all the products of "Faith" Schools.

Teaching small children that lies and myths are true is an abuse of power and should be illegal - not endorsed by a democratic government.

Paracelsus

Comment No. 805855

Around one third of all state-funded schools are faith schools and they completely control their own admissions policy despite contributing very little to the school budget and nothing towards the training of teachers. If religious leaders want their own schools, they should pay for them.

In any case, they are surely failing on their own terms. despite having disproportionate access to schoolchildren along with the proseletyzing opportunities, only around 5% of the adult population regularly attends any kind of church service, some presumably only do so to get their children into the nice middle class faith school.

Church of England schools have a lower proportion of children receiving free school meals, so they're systematically excluding the poor. How very uncharitable.

That this is all funded from general revenue is an affront to democracy.

tommyjimmy

Comment No. 805858

September 11 11:32

GBR

"- Finally, why do we privilege one type of ideology over another? If a group of committed Marxists were to establish a school, using public money but only for the children of Marxists, and were to teach Marxism as the truth, there would - rightly - be uproar. Why is this not so when it comes to religion?"

Gareth100

Comment No. 805867

September 11 11:35

GBR

Hear hear, keep religion out of schools and no public funding for those who choose to use schools for the indoctrination of children. notsureofmyname, it's a common problem, you could always do what so many others do and lie about your strict religious observance, the hypocrisy though is difficult to deal with.

nickpheas

Comment No. 805910

September 11 11:49

GBR

realtheologik
"GBR Which faith schools in England have been shown to be divisive/dangerous? "

Ulster. Where almost all education was divided along religious lines and the different tribes hated each others uts. They seem to have stopped blowing each other (and us) up, let's hope it lasts, but neither the IRA nor the Orange Order seems to be something we want to adopt in the mainland UK.

BrigadierBarking

Comment No. 805935

September 11 11:56

ESP

I have no problem (unlike Mr. Grayling) of anyone believing in "ancient superstitions". If they want to then fine. They can believe that pixies live under toadstools for all I care. Where I do concur with him is that religion is a private matter of concience for the individual and nothing whatsoever to do with the state. Schools should not be in the business of teaching religion and governments should not be paying for it with our money. A subject called "Religious Studies" for example where one is taught a little about the tenets of all the major religions for information's sake would be fine. But catechism should be confined to the home and the religious building of your choice.

R1cardo

Comment No. 805958

September 11 12:04

GBR

We're taking a big step backwards as a society if 'faith schools' (an oxymoron in my opinion) are increasing in numbers and influence.

It's rather a catch-22. If people are sufficiently educated in the areas of Biology, physics and philosophy, they are unlikely to believe in an omnipotent ghost in the sky. But they're not, they breed, and then they indoctrinate their own hapless children, with financial assistance from the state. Wonderful state of affairs.

I suppose it could be worse - we're not quite stoning rape victims in the town square, but this is cause for discomfort.

I am a firm advocate in stopping all funding of 'faith schools' and instead introducing philosophy as a compulsory GCSE subject. Knowing how to challenge systems of thought is a vital skill, and it makes me very sad that instead of being taught how to evaluate belief systems, children are more and more being told that faith is a virtue and 'doubt' is something to be overcome by prayer.

BusinessPages

Comment No. 805971

September 11 12:11

SAU

I repeat:

Blimey - why does religion get all this attention? I know we like to have a gossip but honestly.

Action plan:

1. Ban all non-secular institutions from teaching our children.
2. Remove charitable status from all religious activity.
3. When religious activists are not attempting to blow us up, then the best course of action is to ignore them.

Result:
Inter religious tensions will cool.
Religious based terrorism will vanish.

farfetched

Comment No. 805985

September 11 12:16

GBR

Excellent article that makes eminent sense.

The religious continue to expect their fantasies to be propped up by public money, each belief system hoping to out-do the others.

It's an utter disgrace that in a predominantly secular society the majority are still expected to tip-toe round the religious and dole out the cash for fear of being blown up or causing 'offence' to an outdated minority.

Bathmat

Comment No. 805999

September 11 12:23

GBR

Given the hallowed "choice" of a good non denominational and a good faith school to which to send my children I would opt for the former. But in many places there is no such choice. By the characteristic English fiddle of not asserting our atheism and splashing out a bit more on the mortgage we can get our children into the church school where there is more money, less poverty, fewer problem kids and fewer glottal stops. Let's be honest, if anonymously.

Apart from a couple of yummy mummies who have nothing better to do on a Sunday morning, nobody I know there really cares about the church. None of the kids are brainwashed by the lukewarm CofE shtick (thank God!). It's a middle class thing. Embarrassing to admit it but we can't actually afford private schooling for our kids, so we say let's keep the faith schools because they will actually help our kids get to uni for free.

Daz13

Comment No. 806159

September 11 13:19

GBR

Totally agree with everything the author writes. The Government's education policy is a complete shambles. I'm fully in favour of the French approach where education and religion are kept well apart.

funwithwhips

Comment No. 806186

September 11 13:28

GBR

Its absolutely disgusting that this can happen in 21st century britain, and to use tax payers money for it as well!!! Religion has NO PLACE in schools. Infact if I was in the same position as notsureofmyname and had a kid, I Would rather do a 20 mile round trip to drop the kids off than have them brought up as stupid mindless bigots, which is what faith schools do. IF faith schools are to be expanded, then employers should be able to disciminate on faith; therefore when I interview people, I should be able to say "dont believe in evolution? sorry, you dont have a hope in hell of working here!"

Personally, if it was upto me, I would ban the teaching of religion to anyone under 18.

sydk

Comment No. 806432

September 11 14:43

GBR

I have read (in this and the other blogs on the subject) a great deal of intolerance from people who claim to oppose the bigotry and intolerance of religious fundamentalism.

For the record, I am as agnostic as Richard Dawkins and have a doctorate in science. However I am Jewish and I consider it our democratic right to bring up our child educated in Jewish culture,traditions and mores.

The(primary) school that my son attends is part of the state sector but parents are asked for voluntary contributions of over £1000 per year to cover the cost of Jewish studies (which are not funded by tax payers money). The pupils get a very good secular education as evinced by the exceptionally good exam results and by the time they eventually leave school most pupils go on to play a productive role in society and very few exhibit anti-social behaviour.

There is a wide range of 'faith' schools. Some are very insular others not so, some fail their children in terms of providing a good secular education many provide an excellent education. We would not send our son to the school he goes to if we were not confident he would get a very good secular education. Many of the contributors post as if they believed every faith 'school' produced religious fundamentalists. I am the product of a 'Jewish education' and I am very well integrated.

I do wish people would stop dictating as to how other people should bring up their children (assuming no abuse). We believe we are enriching our child by giving him an understanding of the culture of his forebears - if you believe you can do better for your children fine do as you wish, but don't lecture us on how to bring up ours.

Lionel

Comment No. 806485

September 11 15:06

ESP

"There is the point also that if parents wish to bring up their children in their own traditional superstitions, they should do it on their own time and at their own expense."

Certainly there is no coherent ethical basis for the public funding of faith schools, but I would myself go further and say it should be illegal in the first place to inculcate superstition into the mind of a child. What objection could a reasonable person have to such a proscription?

farfetched

Comment No. 806556

September 11 15:35

GBR

Mr Bump - the final sentence of your third point against faith schools is the most important point in this thread so far:

"It is also likely to reduce the chances that children will be open to adopting other faiths."

Religion is all about self-preservation and the instinctive desire for safety in numbers. They will do anything to preserve and promote their own superstitions, faith schools being possibly the most effective way of doing so.

Humanzee

Comment No. 806680

September 11 16:17

GBR

Grayling is again vilified by the faith community for stating the obvious:
Faith schools are divisive. This is true, though, of all faith teaching. If only it could be taught even-handedly.

The truth is this is not possible. All teaching of faith is biased by the view of the teacher. They will always, inevitably, be unable to speak about other beliefs with the same plausibility as their own. Just as any contributor here would be unable to teach that red and yellow mixed makes green -and treat that view the same as the idea that they mix to be orange.

The most even handed solution, then, is not to teach religion at all (and certainly not to practice it at school). Let parents who want their children exposed to faith take them to church/mosque/temple/other.

If it is your own children's faith you care about, there is no problem with schools being faith free, because you have your churches to take them to. The only reason for wanting to teach religion or preach religion in schools is to get to all those children whose parents are not exposing them to faith. This is why churches are quite happy to conspire with non-religious parents to get their kids into their faith schools.

Saltycdogg

Comment No. 807061

September 11 18:50

GBR

Can those of us who oppose faith schools and the lack of separation between church and state not unite in some way and have some kind of voice. There must be far more of us than the members of some faiths, whose point of view seems far better represented

Saltycdogg Comment No. 807061" Can those of us who oppose faith schools and the lack of separation between church and state not unite in some way and have some kind of voice. There must be far more of us than the members of some faiths, whose point of view seems far better represented"

I suggest you join the "National Secular Society" (NSS) and the "British Humanist Association" (BHA). Both groups actively campaign against faith schools and argue for separation of church and state. However with only 6,000 members their voices are too often ignored by politicans.

Both Richard Dawkins and AC Grayling are Vice Presidents of BHA and Honourary Associates of NSS.

Saltycdogg Comment No. 807061 "Can those of us who oppose faith schools and the lack of separation between church and state not unite in some way and have some kind of voice. There must be far more of us than the members of some faiths, whose point of view seems far better represented"

I suggest you join the "National Secular Society" (NSS) and the "British Humanist Association" (BHA). Both groups actively campaign against faith schools and argue for separation of church and state. However with only 6,000 members each their voices are too often ignored by politicans.

Both Richard Dawkins and AC Grayling are Vice Presidents of BHA and Honourary Associates of NSS.

If you want to be proactive against faith schools, join the NSS and BHA.

WASPofScience

Comment No. 807416

September 11 22:26

GBR

Saltycdogg Comment No. 807061 "Can those of us who oppose faith schools and the lack of separation between church and state not unite in some way and have some kind of voice. There must be far more of us than the members of some faiths, whose point of view seems far better represented"

I suggest you join the "National Secular Society" (NSS) and the "British Humanist Association" (BHA). Both groups actively campaign against faith schools and argue for separation of church and state. However with only 6,000 members each their voices are too often ignored by politicans.

Both Richard Dawkins and AC Grayling are Vice Presidents of BHA and Honourary Associates of NSS.

If you want to be proactive against faith schools, join the NSS and BHA.

Faith in the system (pdf)

reposted from: http://www.dcsf.gov.uk (pdf)

British Humanist Association: Government’s Faith in the System ‘a disgrace’.

reposted from:brights

September 10th, 2007

The British government today released a “joint statement” (PDF) with a number of religious groups, essentially touting the view that “faith schools” are a social good and heralding yet further expansion of their presence in state-funded schooling.

This is despite a two-thirds public majority who think that no religiously-affiliated schools should receive any state funding (BBC), and despite last year’s DfES-commissioned report — “Faith Primary Schools: Better Schools or Better Pupils?” (LSE) — which concluded that there was “clear positive selection of pupils into faith schools on the basis of observable characteristics that are favourable to education”. These “observable characteristics” account for the results disparity which the government still continues to use as an excuse for furthering the faith school agenda, even though their own DfES-commissioned report shows that these successes are down to nothing but social selection, so effectively the better results of faith schools are just a measure of how much the local population is skewed in its favour by covert selection and so-called “pushy” parents.

The British Humanist Association condemned today’s report as a “disgrace” (press release).

The British Humanist Association has condemned the Governments ‘joint statement’ with religious groups released today, joining teacher representatives and some religious groups such as the Hindu Council UK in objecting to increased support for ‘faith’ schools.

Andrew Copson, BHA Education officer said, ‘To expand state-funded faith schools is to increase discrimination in school admissions against pupils and their parents and to increase employment discrimination against teachers. It means more pupils will be segregated by religion and ethnicity and denied the right to a fully balanced education or to school with children from different backgrounds and learn with and from them.’

‘Again and again opinion polls have shown clear majorities opposed to faith schools and their expansion but the Government is dismissing these serious and widespread concerns as mere ‘misunderstandings’. The Government has behaved disgracefully, both in its general policies and in the way it has conducted itself in this present announcement, stitching up a statement with religious vested interests behind closed doors.’

The BHA also urge anyone who objects to state-funded “faith” schools to do something about it. Via supporter email:

It is vitally important that we let the Government know how misguided this statement is, and how divisive an increase in the number of state-funded faith schools will be. We are urging all members to write to their MPs to make them aware of their thoughts and positions on this document, and to ask what action their MP intends to take on this issue.

reposted from: guardian

The unbelievable privilege of faith

The government seems to think funding faith schools will foster community cohesion. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Francis Beckett

Articles

• Latest
• Show all

Profile

All Francis Beckett articles
About Webfeeds

September 10, 2007 5:30 PM | Printable version

Faith schools, we're told in the document released today, Faith in the System, have "a long and noble tradition", and predate state education. There's a subtext here. Churches were once the gatekeepers for education, and the state had little involvement. Having made a compact with the state in 1944, they are now trying to claw back that power - but using public money, not their own.

The Catholic Education Service is on record as believing that it has given too much power to the state. Last year, it successfully lobbied Tony Blair to spike proposals that would force its schools to take quotas of non-Catholics. And it fought a little-reported court battle in Scotland to keep the power to vet bits teachers' beliefs.

David McNab, an atheist maths teacher, was told by the headmaster that his application for a pastoral care post at St Pauls Roman Catholic High School in Glasgow had been blocked, because the job was reserved for Catholics. The employment tribunal ruled that this decision breached the European convention on human rights.

But here's the sting. McNab's victory was based on the fact that the post was not one of those the church had designated as "reserved". It can designate any post it likes as "reserved", only to be filled by candidates it has vetted and approved. The "reserved" list includes headteachers, deputy heads, religious education teachers and "principal guidance teachers", who are expected to toe the Catholic line on issues like contraception. Since Catholicism is supposed to run across the curriculum, this could cover all posts. Now the Scottish Catholic Education Service is making more reserved posts, so as to bar non-Catholics from more jobs.

If anyone doubts that churches, panicked about falling attendances, run schools in order to "get 'em young"

, they should read this month's pastoral letter from Cardinal Cormac Murphy O'Connor. Catholic schools, he says, are "based on the truth revealed by God about ourselves, our life together in community and our ultimate destiny with God. This gives rise to an educational endeavour centred on the person of Jesus Christ, who is our Way, Truth and Life."

This summer, the Scottish Cardinal Keith O'Brien had the brass nerve to say that sex education in schools was akin to "state-sponsored sexual abuse" of children. And the Catholic Church knows a thing or two about sexual abuse of children; have a look at the dreadful story of Graham Wilmer.

Anil Bhanot prefers multi-faith schooling, but finds single-faith schools a necessary accommodation - even though all experience suggests that what he calls "exclusivist-indoctrination" is an irresistible impulse of faith education. This power to indoctrinate children is to be used ruthlessly. A petition to Downing Street, led by Muslims but signed by people of other faiths, says: "Evolution and other scientific theories should not be taught as fact, but instead alongside other 'faith' views of origins." Downing Street's mealy-mouthed reply is:

"Religious Education (RE) encourages respect for those holding different beliefs and helps promote pupils' moral, cultural and mental development. There is scope for pupils to discuss the origins of the Earth and living things in religious education lessons, including different traditional faith views of how the world began ... Evolution is a scientific theory. As part of the science curriculum, pupils learn about scientific theories as established bodies of scientific knowledge with extensive supporting evidence, and how evidence can form the basis for experimentation to test hypotheses."

Why could the prime minister not have told the simple truth - that we should teach evolution in the same way just as we teach that the earth is round and moves in the heavens (even though the Christian church once tortured people for saying it)?

But the strongest case against church schools is not that they are narrow and Stalinist, but that they are divisive. My daughter's excellent local comprehensive school, in a multicultural part of north London, has pupils of all religions - except one. There are no religious Jews, even though there is a strong Jewish community here. They all go to the faith school 100 yards away, to avoid being contaminated by contact with those not of the faith. There, they learn racist playground jokes about Arabs.

What about that "long and noble tradition"? It's certainly long. It predates my sixties' education at a Jesuit school, where I was required each day to learn by heart three questions and answers from the catechism (the Catholic statement of faith). Failure to get it word-perfect resulted in a beating, presumably to teach us the love of God. (More on this on my blog.)

But noble? The noble thing to do would be to stop taking public money for the purpose of indoctrinating our children.

Faith schools set for expansion

reposted from: BBC via New Humanist
Faith schools set for expansion

Ed Balls says "faith schools are popular with many parents"

The government has pledged its support for the principle of faith schools - with the prospect of many more Muslim schools within the state sector.

Schools Secretary Ed Balls and faith group leaders have formed a partnership - endorsing faith schools as a force to improve social cohesion in England.

Mr Balls says faith groups could raise standards in poorer areas, which may be through multi-faith academies.

But a teachers' union warns that faith schools can separate communities.

At a conference in London, Mr Balls presented a joint policy statement with Church of England, Roman Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Greek Orthodox and Sikh representatives.

Show of unity

Mr Balls committed the government to opening more faith schools where there was parental demand and the faith groups pledged their support for social cohesion and the principle of fair admissions.

FAITH SCHOOLS 6,850 out of a total of 21,000 schools, large majority either Church of England or Roman Catholic 37 Jewish, 7 Muslim, 2 Sikh, 1 Greek Orthodox, 1 Seventh Day Adventist 1.7 million pupils 21% of faith school secondary pupils from ethnic minorities - 17% in non faith schools

The schools secretary rejected claims that this show of unity was an attempt to repair the damage from a short-lived attempt by the government to require faith schools to admit a quota of pupils from outside this faith group.

Instead he said it was a reflection of the importance of working in partnership with such a large, successful part of the school system.

"I fully recognise that faith schools are popular with many parents," he said.

"One thing we've learnt as a government is that having a distinct ethos, strong leadership, a commitment to promoting opportunity for all, those are the kind of schools where parents want to send their children.

"And there are many faith schools which pass that test with flying colours," said Mr Balls.

He told the conference that faith schools were a longstanding partner in the drive to raise standards, particularly in more deprived areas.

"Faith schools take very seriously their historic mission to reach out to support children from lower income or disadvantaged backgrounds," said Mr Balls.

As an example, he said that in Oldham there were plans for a joint Church of England and Muslim academy.

There could be new faith academies - in addition to those replacing existing schools - in which half of the places would be for children from faith groups and the remainder from the wider community.

Backdoor selection

Mr Balls also stressed that faith schools must not use any form of covert selection - such as expensive uniforms, complicated admissions forms or expensive school trips.

HAVE YOUR SAY All schools should be based on the model of a faith school! Gavin T, Edinburgh Send us your comments

In support of the Faith in the System joint statement, the Archbishop of Birmingham, Vincent Nichols, said it was a myth that faith schools had fewer children from ethnic minorities or from less well off backgrounds.

The schools secretary said any expansion in the faith school sector would depend on demand from the local community - but that the school building programme could help to meet the demand for more Muslim schools.

While there were 376,000 Muslim children aged between five and 15 at the last census, there are only 1,770 pupils in the seven state-funded Muslim schools in England.

However Dr Mohamed Mukadam of the Association of Muslim Schools said that public suspicion about extremism remained a barrier to the setting up of more Muslim schools.

There are over 100 independent Muslim schools which could transfer into the state sector.

Division

Shadow schools minister Nick Gibb said that faith schools played an admirable role in providing choice for parents within the state education system.

"Their position needs to be strengthened and modernised in our increasingly multicultural society."

But the support was challenged by the Association of Teachers and Lecturers.

General secretary Mary Bousted asked "why schools, in which the majority of funding comes from the state, should, as the government proposes, nurture young people in a particular faith?"

Keith Porteous Wood of the National Secular Society said it was "a sure-fire recipe for separation, and future conflict to encourage children to think of themselves primarily as being of a particular religion, rather than encouraging them to concentrate on what we all have in common".

From New Humanist:

The British Humanist Association's Education Officer, Andrew Copson has condemned the statement, saying ‘To expand state-funded faith schools is to increase discrimination in school admissions against pupils and their parents and to increase employment discrimination against teachers. It means more pupils will be segregated by religion and ethnicity and denied the right to a fully balanced education or to school with children from different backgrounds and learn with and from them.'

Faith school backing challenged

reposted from BBC

Faith school backing challenged

The government is launching a joint statement with faith groups

The government is lining up with religious groups to assert that faith schools make a positive contribution to community cohesion in England.

In a joint statement, called Faith in the System, they will say religious schools are "valuable, engaged partners" in education and beyond.

The faith groups and government will say they want to dispel misunderstandings about faith schools.

But a teachers' union has voiced doubt about the government's stance.

The Association of Teachers and Lecturers questioned whether faith schools do provide for "interaction between different faiths and communities"

.

The joint statement is being launched at an event on Monday in London, being addressed by the schools secretary, Ed Balls.

'Noble tradition'

Representatives will be there from the five faiths in the state sector - Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Sikh and Hindu, along with children from five of their schools.

They will hear that faith organisations have "a long and noble tradition" in education - pre-dating state schools - from medieval times, through the Reformation, to the present day.

These days about a third of all maintained schools in England are faith schools - about 6,850 out of some 21,000.

Of the 47 new academies that have opened so far, 16 have a faith designation.

The government and faith school providers say they believe all schools - whether religious or not - play a key role in providing a safe environment for interaction between different faiths and communities.

In this way they foster understanding, integration and cohesion, the joint vision statement argues.

But the Association of Teachers and Lecturers general secretary Mary Bousted said:

"We question whether faith schools, particularly those where staff and children are chosen on a faith basis, provide an environment for 'interaction between different faiths and communities'.

"And we question why schools, in which the majority of funding comes from the state, should, as the government proposes, nurture young people in a particular faith."

Admissions policies

The job of schools was to nurture young people as individuals and as responsible and compassionate global citizens, rather than promoting a particular religious viewpoint,

says the union leader.

She added:

"Our members believe that we need schools which embrace the diversity within our community, not a diversity of schools dividing pupils and staff on religious grounds."

The union also criticised the "restrictive admissions, employment and curriculum practices operated in many of this country's faith schools".

These were possible "due to preferential legislation which does little to promote equality of provision across the school sector".