Channel 4 tonight

MrPudding

Wicknight wrote: »

Umm, perhaps reading the report would help clarify this -

The reason for this is that Faith schools (and other schools classed as Voluntary Aided or
Foundation; see Section 0) were allowed to interview families – ostensibly to determine their
religious or other ethical convictions; however, it has long been suspected that this leads to some form of covert selection based on parental and pupil characteristics that are correlated with pupil

This study is looking at VA or Foundation schools which require some level of adherence to state standards. Independent schools don't, they are completely free to select students as they like.

My daughter is in a private school in the UK. It is not a faith school, btw. There are entrance tests and they will not take "weak" children.

MrP

PDN

Wicknight wrote: »

Umm, perhaps reading the report would help clarify this -

The reason for this is that Faith schools (and other schools classed as Voluntary Aided or
Foundation; see Section 0) were allowed to interview families – ostensibly to determine their
religious or other ethical convictions; however, it has long been suspected that this leads to some form of covert selection based on parental and pupil characteristics that are correlated with pupil

This study is looking at VA or Foundation schools which require some level of adherence to state standards. Independent schools don't, they are completely free to select students as they like.

So your link, which is about VA or Foundation schools, is irrelevant to the schools I was discussing. I think one of the major reasons why Independent religious schools (not State funded) produce better results is actually for sociological, rather than academic, reasons. Parents who are committed members of religious communities are, on average, more likely to encourage their children to do homework etc and less likely to let them roam the local estate wearing hoodies and stealing mobile phones. Protestant work ethic and all that.

Zombrex

PDN wrote: »

So your link, which is about VA or Foundation schools, is irrelevant to the schools I was discussing.

Only if the schools you are discussing do not screen students and their families based the religious affiliation, as these schools do.

do they?

PDN wrote: »

I think one of the major reasons why Independent religious schools (not State funded) produce better results is actually for sociological, rather than academic, reasons. Parents who are committed members of religious communities are, on average, more likely to encourage their children to do homework etc and less likely to let them roam the local estate wearing hoodies and stealing mobile phones.

Indeed :rolleyes:

Perhaps when you want to discuss this seriously you can get back to me ....

PDN

Wicknight wrote: »

Only if the schools you are discussing do not screen students and their families based the religious affiliation, as these schools do.

do they?

Not in my experience, I must say. It would be very rare that parents who do not share the religious beliefs of such schools would apply to send their kids there, but I know of one or two cases where this happened and the kids were accepted as a matter of course.

The only screening I know of was where some parents saw the school as an opportunity to 'fix' children with behavioural difficulties who had already been kicked out a few other schools. The first few times this happened the Christian schools happily accepted them (possibly because such schools tend to operate on a financial knife edge & even 1 or 2 extra pupils can help them achieve the critical mass necessary to break even) but couldn't cope. One destructive child in a school of 500 is a problem, but in a school of 30 they become a disaster zone. After one or two such very painful episodes the schools decided not to accept pupils who had already been expelled from other schools. That was the only screening I ever saw.

Tim Robbins

PDN wrote: »

Protestant work ethic and all that.

Jewish people are kicking your gangs' *sses in any barometer of intellectual achievement. God obviously doesn't mind that much, if they worship Jesus as their saviour!

PDN

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Jewish people are kicking your gangs' *sses in any barometer of intellectual achievement. God obviously doesn't mind that much, if they worship Jesus as their saviour!

Which would pretty well prove my point about "parents who are committed members of religious communities", wouldn't it? :rolleyes:

Zombrex

PDN wrote: »

Not in my experience, I must say.

Which is what exactly?

Tim Robbins

PDN wrote: »

Which would pretty well prove my point about "parents who are committed members of religious communities", wouldn't it? :rolleyes:

Well no. I can't think of any Evangelical Christians who have contributed uniquely to any intellectual field.

The Jewish thing appears more of a genetic thing, as most of them including the author of the book I am currently reading Jonathan Haidt, describe themselves as Jewish atheists.

PDN

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Well no. I can't think of any Evangelical Christians who have contributed uniquely to any intellectual field.

The Jewish thing appears more of a genetic thing, as most of them including the author of the book I am currently reading Jonathan Haidt, describe themselves as Jewish atheists.

We were discussing primary schools rather than what you consider to be unique intellectual contributions - but troll away there, Tim.

PDN

Wicknight wrote: »

Which is what exactly?

I was part of the pastoral staff of a church that established an independent school. I have several close friends who are principals of such schools. I have also, on a voluntary basis, taught classes in such schools.

Tim Robbins

PDN wrote: »

We were discussing primary schools rather than what you consider to be unique intellectual contributions - but troll away there, Tim.

So I prove your point and I troll away at the sametime.
If you were programming, I think you'd have got a compile error there PDN.

djpbarry

niceonetom wrote: »

what's the situation in this country? can schools legally present biblical (or quaranic) myth as real science?

Nope - it's not on the syllabus.

MrPudding wrote: »

I have that shirt. I also have the "If I have to find Jesus does that mean he is hiding?" With a pic of a beardy bloke peaking out from behind a hedge.

I can top that; "I've found Jesus - he was behind the couch."

PDN wrote: »

Parents who are committed members of religious communities are, on average, more likely to encourage their children to do homework etc and less likely to let them roam the local estate wearing hoodies and stealing mobile phones. Protestant work ethic and all that.

Just what this discussion was lacking - a nice sectarian element.

Dades

djpbarry wrote: »

Just what this discussion was lacking - a nice sectarian element.

In an over-the-top PC world, maybe...

PDN

Dades wrote: »

In an over-the-top PC world, maybe...

Or one where people are ignorant of sociology?

Tim Robbins

PDN wrote: »

Or one where people are ignorant of sociology?

Well if it's back to sociology, and not just primary schools, why is there such a low correlation between those who have achieved something intellectual and Evangelical Christians?

PDN

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Well if it's back to sociology, and not just primary schools, why is there such a low correlation between those who have achieved something intellectual and Evangelical Christians?

Somewhat off topic, but if Dades is happy to allow me I'm happy to answer.

It is an interesting question since evangelicals founded many of the most prestigious US universities. In the American context I think it may be connected with the fact that evangelicalism is strongest in the most economically depressed parts of the country. There is a direct correlation between economic prosperity and academic achievement.

Also, many modern evangelical movements grew out of fundamentalism which is pretty anti-intellectual.

There is an interesting article about it here: http://chronicle.com/free/v54/i35/35b01201.htm

In some other countries, such as India and China, evangelicals are disproportionately over-represented among intellectuals and academics.

Dades

Work away, lads.
The thread was a heads-up to documentary aired two days ago, started by TimR anyway.

Tim Robbins

PDN wrote: »

Somewhat off topic, but if Dades is happy to allow me I'm happy to answer.

That's a bit stupid, I started this thread and could argue you already took it off topic.

It is an interesting question since evangelicals founded many of the most prestigious US universities. In the American context I think it may be connected with the fact that evangelicalism is strongest in the most economically depressed parts of the country. There is a direct correlation between economic prosperity and academic achievement.

Also, many modern evangelical movements grew out of fundamentalism which is pretty anti-intellectual.

There is an interesting article about it here: http://chronicle.com/free/v54/i35/35b01201.htm

In some other countries, such as India and China, evangelicals are disproportionately over-represented among intellectuals and academics.

The poverty correlation argument is more applicable to India and China. If the government bans google searches or poverty is rife, Western connections facilitated by Evangelical Christian missionaries would definetly make someone average look bright.

The fact is, scan through major intellectuals achievements and there's about as much contribution from Evangelical Christians as there is from the Scientologists. Poverty nonsense in the US? All that money for those mega churches? Why not put some money for new books for the library?

I am reminded of Mr. Russell:
"Religion is something left over from the infancy of our intelligence, it will fade away as we adopt reason and science as our guidelines."

Amongst the intelligentsia, it certainly appears to be the case.

PDN

Tim Robbins wrote: »

That's a bit stupid, I started this thread and could argue you already took it off topic.

And there I was thinking I was giving a polite reply to a straightforward question. Ah well, what else can you expect from a stupid anti-intellectual evangelical?

If the government bans google searches or poverty is rife, Western connections facilitated by Evangelical Christian missionaries would definetly make someone average look bright.

I'm speechless.

Are you actually arguing that standards of educational and intellectual achievement in China and India are so poor that people of average intelligence look bright? Have you any idea what is happening in places like Shanghai or Bangalore?

The fact is, scan through major intellectuals achievements and there's about as much contribution from Evangelical Christians as there is from the Scientologists. Poverty nonsense in the US? All that money for those mega churches? Why not put some money for new books for the library?

'All those mega churches'? Most evangelicals belong to churches with less than 100 members.

There are certainly millions of well educated evangelicals. I think that there is scope for an interesting discussion as to why that doesn't translate into what you see as intellectuals, but I think any discussion with you, Tim, is unlikely to yield more heat than light since it inevitably gets into point scoring rather than any serious discussion.

Within the US, educational achievement and economic disparity is an undeniable factor. Evangelicals are disproportionately overrepresented among blacks and hispanics, who also happen to have a lower average income and lower rates of college graduation (hardly surprising in a country where studying for a College degree can leave you $40,000 in debt).

I am, however, intrigued by the fact that you want to make an issue out of Jewish intellectual achievements when compared to evangelical Christians ('kicking their asses' in your own words) - given that you see the Jewish thing as ethnic and are comparing that to people who hold a specific belief. Have you any other such comparisons that you find significant?

Did you know that black people produce more Olympic gold medalists than do Methodists? Or that Japanese people are better at Karate than Catholics?

Tim Robbins

PDN wrote: »

And there I was thinking I was giving a polite reply to a straightforward question. Ah well, what else can you expect from a stupid anti-intellectual evangelical?

Polite me b*ll*x. You were trying to be smart.

Are you actually arguing that standards of educational and intellectual achievement in China and India are so poor that people of average intelligence look bright? Have you any idea what is happening in places like Shanghai or Bangalore?

Not just in China, or India but anywhere.
If educational standards are low in Malawi, Kerry or a township in South Africa, someone who has access to education through missionaries will achieve more academically and intellectually than someone who doesn't?

Are you seriously trying to argue educational access makes no difference?

'All those mega churches'? Most evangelicals belong to churches with less than 100 members.

Well we need to clarify what we both mean when uses that word. You mean Evangelical churches, I mean Evangelical in their ethos i.e. those who hold literally every word of scripture as truth and believe in only a conservative interpretation of the Bible.

This would include those in the mega Churches.

PDN wrote:

There are certainly millions of well educated evangelicals.

If they are millions who are well educated? why labour this following point?

Within the US, educational achievement and economic disparity is an undeniable factor. Evangelicals are disproportionately overrepresented among blacks and hispanics, who also happen to have a lower average income and lower rates of college graduation (hardly surprising in a country where studying for a College degree can leave you $40,000 in debt).

I am, however, intrigued by the fact that you want to make an issue out of Jewish intellectual achievements when compared to evangelical Christians ('kicking their asses' in your own words) - given that you see the Jewish thing as ethnic and are comparing that to people who hold a specific belief. Have you any other such comparisons that you find significant?

Well I could elaborate into other comparisons, but you have already accused me of taking a thread (which I actually started) off point, so why invite me to do that again?

PDN

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Polite me b*ll*x. You were trying to be smart.

No I wasn't. I'm always aware that as a Christian I'm a guest on this forum and didn't want to drag it off topic, so I wanted to check it was OK with Dades as the resident mod. I'm sorry that seems to get you annoyed.

Not just in China, or India but anywhere.
If educational standards are low in Malawi, Kerry or a township in South Africa, someone who has access to education through missionaries will achieve more academically and intellectually than someone who doesn't?

Are you seriously trying to argue educational access makes no difference?

So you think that people become educated in India and China because they got education through missionaries? Do you actually know anything about India and China?

Well we need to clarify what we both mean when uses that word. You mean Evangelical churches, I mean Evangelical in their ethos i.e. those who hold literally every word of scripture as truth and believe in only a conservative interpretation of the Bible.

This would include those in the mega Churches.

Yes, and by your definition of 'evangelical' most evangelicals belong to churches with less than 100 members. The megachurches, while they monopolise the attention of those with a very superficial knowledge of the American religious scene, are far outweighed by those who attend little churches - often with only 30 or 40 members.

If they are millions who are well educated? why labour this following point?

Because I was trying to give as full an answer as possible to what I thought was an honest question. There are sociological reasons why evangelicals have tended, on average, to gain less college degrees than some other groupings. One of those is economic.

Well I could elaborate into other comparisons, but you have already accused me of taking a thread (which I actually started) off point, so why invite me to do that again?

Mentioning as an aside that something is a bit off topic is hardly an accusation. My goodness, next you'll be accusing me of attacking you.

Feel free to make any other comparisons between ethnic groups and and belief systems if you wish. I think the Han Chinese are better cooks than Scientologists - that must really piss Tom Cruise off.

Tim Robbins

PDN wrote: »

No I wasn't. I'm always aware the as a Christian I'm a guest on this forum and didn't want to drag it off topic, so I wanted to check it was OK with Dades as the resident mod. I'm sorry that seems to get you annoyed.

Rubbish, you inferred as I was troll before you went near Dades and after you actually said what was a troll proofed your point.

So you think that people become educated in India and China because they got education through missionaries?

No. Some people get their education through missionaries and Christian Churches which they never otherwise would have got.

This can happen to skews and biases their meta-physicals beliefs, especially if they live in a society where google is banned from giving search results.

It's not that complicated PDN, it really is quite simple.

Yes, and by your definition of 'evangelical' most evangelicals belong to churches with less than 100 members. The megachurches, while they monopolise the attention of those with a very superficial knowledge of the American religious scene, are far outweighed by those who attend little churches - often with only 30 or 40 members.

Because I was trying to give as full an answer as possible to what I thought was an honest question. There are sociological reasons why evangelicals have tended, on average, to gain less college degrees than some other groupings. One of those is economic.

Ok, well let's just look at the US.
Out of a population of 304 million, can you clarify?
1. How many you would describe as Evangelical?
2. What percentage of these do not socio - economic means to achieve a 3rd level education?

JimiTime

Bloomin eck tim, put the red gloves away man. :eek:

I'd like to know what you mean by intellectual achievement myself? Is your point that evangelical christianity makes you dumb? or that they are poorly educated? Or that they are not bothered with intellectual achievement? I'm not sure what your point is?

PDN

Tim Robbins wrote: »

Rubbish, you inferred as I was troll before you went near Dades and after you actually said what was a troll proofed your point.

I didn't infer you were a troll. I stated perfectly explicitly that you were trolling. However, maybe you dispute that and think that "The Jews are kicking your guys' asses when it comes to intellectuals" is, for you, an attempt at sensible debate? I can certainly see that may be a possibility, and if so I will happily apologise for calling you a troll. I did, after all, make the same mistake with estebancambias on one occasion.

No. Some people get their education through missionaries and Christian Churches which they never otherwise would have got.

This can happen to skews and biases their meta-physicals beliefs, especially if they live in a society where google is banned from giving search results.

It's not that complicated PDN, it really is quite simple.

I see. So it's quite simple that in Communist China, where no evangelical missionaries have been permitted for nearly 50 years, that many of the young intellectuals in Shanghai that are powering the IT and engineering boom there have somehow got their education through missionaries and churches. How do you think they did this? Did they dig secret tunnels under the borders and sneak in and out of the country every day to go to school? That would certainly give a new dimension to the term 'underground church'.

I like to trumpet the achievements of missionaries as much as possible, but I think that for us to claim the credit for educating China's brightest and best is going a tad too far.

Zombrex

PDN wrote: »

I'm always aware that as a Christian I'm a guest on this forum and didn't want to drag it off topic, so I wanted to check it was OK with Dades as the resident mod. I'm sorry that seems to get you annoyed.

You are not a "guest" here PDN, you are as free to post and discuss as anyone else.

Though possibly it might be a good idea not to call the original poster a troll :pac:

PDN

Wicknight wrote: »

You are not a "guest" here PDN, you are as free to post and discuss as anyone else.

Though possibly it might be a good idea not to call the original poster a troll :pac:

Well, to be fair, I have been charitable enough to allow for the possibility that, as with estebancambias, he seriously believed that his comments constitute reasonable debate. So, I withdraw my accusation about Tim being a troll and henceforth will take him as seriously as I take Esteban. There, everybody happy now? Time for a group hug.

robindch

PDN wrote: »

So you think that people become educated in India and China because they got education through missionaries?

Some certainly do. Some members of my extended family are involved with a reasonably large missionary school in southern India which caters to the orphans of locals who have died of AIDS. The school is funded in part by a series of moderately lucrative, volunteer-run, charity shops run here in Ireland. As the school operates according to a "christian ethos" -- meaning that religion dictates school policy -- the kids do not receive any sex education or indeed, any information at all about how to avoid the disease that killed their parents.

The christian administrators of the school seem to think that sending uninformed kids out into a lethal environment is a good idea.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

the sooner they get aids and die, the sooner they can go to heaven!

Tim Robbins

PDN wrote: »

I didn't infer you were a troll. I stated perfectly explicitly that you were trolling.

Now you are just playing with words.
A troll / trolling?

However, maybe you dispute that and think that "The Jews are kicking your guys' asses when it comes to intellectuals" is, for you, an attempt at sensible debate?

It's factually correct.
I asked you to produce numbers of evangelicals in the US who had a reasonable education, if you compare that to the amount of Jewish people and compare achievements, you'll see what I mean.

I see. So it's quite simple that in Communist China, where no evangelical missionaries have been permitted for nearly 50 years, that many of the young intellectuals in Shanghai that are powering the IT and engineering boom there have somehow got their education through missionaries and churches. How do you think they did this? Did they dig secret tunnels under the borders and sneak in and out of the country every day to go to school? That would certainly give a new dimension to the term 'underground church'.

Are you talking about Chinese intellectuals who are
1. Evangelical or non Evangelical
2. Have or have not at Evangelical only education.

You are muddling everything and conflating and are difficult to follow.
I haven't a clue what you are trying to say.

Could you answer my question about the US? So we could try and bring some structure to this discussion. It make more sense to discuss the US first as it is easier to get information about that country.

Out of a population of 304 million, can you clarify?
1. How many you would describe as Evangelical?
2. What percentage of these do not socio - economic means to achieve a 3rd level education?

Dades

*enforces group hug*

There's a discussion amongst all this. Let's drop the posturing and find it.
Starting with you, Tim!