Parents want schools State-managed

A new survey has found that three out of four parents want primary schools to be managed by the State, with equal status and opportunity for all religions.

From RTE.ie
It has been mentioned several times on this forum and others that Irish parents want a religious education for their children, and this is usually based on how many children are baptised etc.

Is this the first survey to show that people don't want a Catholic church dominated education?

Zombrex

Deleted User wrote: »

From RTE.ie
It has been mentioned several times on this forum and others that Irish parents want a religious education for their children, and this is usually based on how many children are baptised etc.

Is this the first survey to show that people don't want a Catholic church dominated education?

It would be interesting to see what questions people were actually asked.

Judging from discussing this issue with some older friends who would be religious people are all for equality in state schools right up until the point where they all of a sudden have their little Tommy or Mary in a school with little Catholic traditional practice and surrounded by Muslims :pac:

But maybe I am just getting to cynical in my old age

Doctor DooM

Wicknight wrote: »

It would be interesting to see what questions people were actually asked.

Judging from discussing this issue with some older friends who would be religious people are all for equality in state schools right up until the point where they all of a sudden have their little Tommy or Mary in a school with little Catholic traditional practice and surrounded by Muslims :pac:

But maybe I am just getting to cynical in my old age

Indeed. Everyone knows 85.4% of statistics are made up.

In all seriousness, surveys are very, very easy to skew in a direction you desire if you so wish, even by simply using leading questions.

I remember reading one survey which indicated Catholic marriages had more chance of surviving than Atheist, and how wonderful that fact was.

no where was it mentioned or considered that it is considered against Catholicism to get divorced as a factor. A more honest survey would be perhaps be "Are you married, and if so, are you happy?"

This could be the same, but in reverse.

They were asked if they would prefer a school managed by and promoting the faith of a particular religion or a school managed by the state with equal status and opportunity for all religions.

From the Irish Independent

Dades

Wicknight wrote: »

Judging from discussing this issue with some older friends who would be religious people are all for equality in state schools right up until the point where they all of a sudden have their little Tommy or Mary in a school with little Catholic traditional practice and surrounded by Muslims :pac:

Quite possibly true - though it might be more down to a closet xenophobic thing, rather than religion thing.

I wouldn't put too much truck in surveys, either.

Nevyn

this news yesterday.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/mhgbqlgbmhmh/

Archbishop willing to relinquish control of schools

The Archbishop of Dublin has reiterated his willingness to divest some primary schools of their Catholic patronage if that is what parents want.
The Archbishop of Dublin has reiterated his willingness to divest some primary schools of their Catholic patronage if that is what parents want.
Speaking at an education conference in Dublin today, Diarmuid Martin said he believed ways could be found to extend the role of other patronage models.
He said he had no ambition to be in charge of schools against the will of parents.
The Catholic Church currently controls more than 3,000 of the State's 3,200 primary schools.
Today's conference is discussing new ways to manage primary schools in an increasingly multicultural and secular Ireland.

Meanwhile, Education Minister Batt O'Keefe has announced that a new model of patronage will begin on a pilot basis in Scoil Ghrainne Phibblestown and Scoil Choilm in Porterstown, Dublin, this September.
These national schools will take in children from all religious and non-religious backgrounds.

And this today...

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/mhgbqlididql/

Most parents want state-run schools
30/06/2008 - 07:42:11
Almost three quarters of parents would prefer their children's primary school to be run by the State rather than religious orders, according to a survey being published today.
The Red C study, commissioned by the Irish Primary Principal's Network, found 72% of parents would prefer state-run schools, with equal status afforded to all religions.
More than half of parents with children under 15 also said they would like to see some of the time currently used for religion being re-allocated to other subjects.
Just over half of parents believe religious instruction should be taught in the classroom during school hours.

It's going to be an intresting few years to follow...

Bduffman

Talk about double standards:

"They were asked if they would prefer a school managed by and promoting the faith of a particular religion or a school managed by the state with equal status and opportunity for all religions. They voted three to one in favour of the State option. "

And yet:

"In contrast with this apparent move away from religious education in schools, over half of all parents (56pc) believe that religious instruction and the preparation for Sacraments should be taught by the class teacher during school hours."

So some parents want state run schools but still retain religious instruction & preparation of sacraments?? How can that be done in a multi-denominational school? Either you have religion or you don't.

But, of course, its probably the luke-warm catholics who want their children to be raised catholics but couldn't be bothered to do it themselves

Zombrex

Bduffman wrote: »

Talk about double standards:

"They were asked if they would prefer a school managed by and promoting the faith of a particular religion or a school managed by the state with equal status and opportunity for all religions. They voted three to one in favour of the State option. "

And yet:

"In contrast with this apparent move away from religious education in schools, over half of all parents (56pc) believe that religious instruction and the preparation for Sacraments should be taught by the class teacher during school hours."

So some parents want state run schools but still retain religious instruction & preparation of sacraments?? How can that be done in a multi-denominational school? Either you have religion or you don't.

But, of course, its probably the luke-warm catholics who want their children to be raised catholics but couldn't be bothered to do it themselves

That is exactly what I was talking about.

Dave!

Anyone got some insight into how much 'control' the church actually has on schools?

"The Catholic Church currently controls more than 3,000 of the State's 3,200 primary schools."

I'm just curious as to how much influence the bishops and priests have.

* Does the church own the premises/land?
* The curriculum is set by the Dept of Education, so presumably they don't get a say in this
* Is it a requirement, or simply an inevitability, that a priest or bishop sits on the board of management? How many people is the board usually composed of? Presumably everyone gets 1 vote in decision making
* Is it the principal or the board of management that decides on admission? I know the schools are allowed to discriminate depending on the 'ethos' of the particular school, so who makes those decisions? eg. to give preference to Catholics

Cheers folks!

Dave!

It's being discussed on Newstalk now BTW

eoin5

Bduffman wrote: »

Talk about double standards:

"They were asked if they would prefer a school managed by and promoting the faith of a particular religion or a school managed by the state with equal status and opportunity for all religions. They voted three to one in favour of the State option. "

And yet:

"In contrast with this apparent move away from religious education in schools, over half of all parents (56pc) believe that religious instruction and the preparation for Sacraments should be taught by the class teacher during school hours."

So some parents want state run schools but still retain religious instruction & preparation of sacraments?? How can that be done in a multi-denominational school? Either you have religion or you don't.

But, of course, its probably the luke-warm catholics who want their children to be raised catholics but couldn't be bothered to do it themselves

I think some of the discrepancy might also be caused by the PC bells that the first question rings, as in people want to give the 'right' answer even if they dont believe it.

robindch

Dave! wrote: »

Does the church own the premises/land?

In the vast majority of cases, I believe the church owns the buildings and the land they're built on. Some property was to have been transferred to the Dept of Education in partial settlement of its small share of the cost of institutional abuse claims, but last time I heard (last year, afair), these had still not been transferred, four years after the deal was made.

Dave! wrote: »

The curriculum is set by the Dept of Education, so presumably they don't get a say in this

Whether or not they're legally able to control curriculum, they certainly seem to believe they can. Diarmuid Martin's comments were made at a bishop's conference on education and he was seeking to continue to control who was delivering religious "education". And while the church does keep its hands out of most stuff, it does make its views known in biology, in sex education.

Dave! wrote: »

Is it a requirement, or simply an inevitability, that a priest or bishop sits on the board of management? How many people is the board usually composed of? Presumably everyone gets 1 vote in decision making

I don't know the voting system that's used, but I would imagine that in the majority of the 3,000 schools mentioned above, the catholic church controls access to the board, and has given board seats only to catholics who are sympathetic to its cause. Consequently, if the majority of board members owe allegiance to the church in any serious quanity, then the decisions they make will probably reflect that.

Dave! wrote: »

Is it the principal or the board of management that decides on admission? I know the schools are allowed to discriminate depending on the 'ethos' of the particular school, so who makes those decisions?

I believe it's the principal who makes the initial decision, but cases can be referred to the board of management in the case of dispute. Judging from the Diswellstown incident, it seems that catholics are put at the front of the queue, regardless of who they're displacing, or how long the displacee has been in the queue.

Having briefly skimmed through what I think is most of the legislation on all of this, I have to say that the governance of schools seems to be very poorly defined indeed. What's needed is a Lisbon-style agreement(*) amongst all parties where each parties voting rights and the degree of democratic accountability that applies to the system are all clearly laid out

(*) hopefully, sold a bit better than the last one

pH

Dave! wrote: »

Anyone got some insight into how much 'control' the church actually has on schools?

"The Catholic Church currently controls more than 3,000 of the State's 3,200 primary schools."

I'm just curious as to how much influence the bishops and priests have.

* Does the church own the premises/land?

The vast majority of primary schools in Ireland are privately owned and supported by the different churches. The State pays the bulk of the building and running costs and a local contribution is made towards the running costs.

Primary schools are privately owned - in general by the relevant church authorities. In the case of Catholic schools, the owners are usually the diocesan trustees; the same is true for Church of Ireland schools. Other denominational schools usually have a board of trustees nominated by the church authorities. Multi-denominational schools are usually owned by a limited company or board of trustees. Gaelscoileanna may be denominational and come under the same patronage as Catholic schools but some have their own limited company.
http://www.citizensinformation.ie/categories/education/primary-and-post-primary-education/going-to-primary-school/ownership-of-primary-schools

lostexpectation

Deleted User wrote: »

From RTE.ie
It has been mentioned several times on this forum and others that Irish parents want a religious education for their children, and this is usually based on how many children are baptised etc.

Is this the first survey to show that people don't want a Catholic church dominated education?

apparently this is startling results ??

This startling finding from a new poll is likely to add further fuel to the debate about the future of primary education in Ireland.
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/parents-plump-for-mixed-religion-staterun-schools-1423218.html

but you'll remember the long thread about the iona/d.quinn where a number of us argued that his survey showed the same thing as this one,that a majority recognised that a state managed non-denominational system would suit more then any other.

Rev Hellfire

No real surprise there.
Basically most people would like to do the right thing and be accommodating in so far as it doesn't effect them. This is hardly a mass cry for a secular system, but rather a multi-denominational system in which religion still features.

lostexpectation

pity the system they envisage with that their answer to that doesn't work and isn't
financially viable.

CerebralCortex

lostexpectation wrote: »

pity the system they envisage with that their answer to that doesn't work and isn't
financially viable.

Wha?

robindch

pH wrote: »

The vast majority of primary schools in Ireland are privately owned and supported by the different churches. [...]

Thanks for that -- do you know if there's an orgchart or something similar which describes the decision-making process and the voting rights and processes within the schools' system, from the minister on downwards?

ArthurDent

robindch wrote: »

Thanks for that -- do you know if there's an orgchart or something similar which describes the decision-making process and the voting rights and processes within the schools' system, from the minister on downwards?

last education act will give you the nuts and bolts of it - but as it stand at moment

The way it works
Patron (Bishop in Catholic/COI schools/ or ET / an Foras Patrunach)

Patron appoints chairperson and one other nominee to BOM
Principal
One other teacher (voted on by teachers)
2 parents (one male/one female)
2 community reps (appointed by the other 6 on the BOM)
Decision at BOM level are by majority vote
Chair has deciding vote if tie
5 members must be present to make decsion
All staff are hired on basis of interview panel consisting of principal/chair and 1 other "independent" appointed by patron.
If patron unhappy with board they can apply to minister of education to dissolve board and put manager in place (does happen occasionaly)

Other than power to dissolve board dept have precious little say. All decisions taken in a school are responsibility of BOM not Dept of Edu - hence case at moment in high court re abuse victim - Dept saying "not our prob love - we only paid the fuggers wages, we don't hire/fire 'em" .

Inspectors sent into schools by Dept of Ed have no automatic right to talk with BOM or question them they can only look at curricular areas. Health/safety / staffing/ finance responsibility of BOM

robindch

ArthurDent wrote: »

The way it works

Cheers, thanks for that.

Tha Gopher

Seeing as church run schools teach next to no religion anyway it is amazing people care either way

Bduffman

Tha Gopher wrote: »

Seeing as church run schools teach next to no religion anyway it is amazing people care either way

How do you make that out? Is 2.5 hours per week (what that - about 8% of weekly classes?) not a significant amount of precious school time?

Dades

Tha Gopher wrote: »

Seeing as church run schools teach next to no religion anyway it is amazing people care either way

If they were teaching 2.5 hrs of Scientology a week I bet you'd care.

Personally I'm pretty apathetic about RE - I survived 12 years of it. Its getting my kids into the school that irks me.

Tha Gopher

Bduffman wrote: »

How do you make that out? Is 2.5 hours per week (what that - about 8% of weekly classes?) not a significant amount of precious school time?

2.5 hours a week of national school time?

Are you for real? We never used to do it more than once every 3 odd weeks.

Secondary school was 90 mins a week IIRC. And we spent most of those classes watching Prime Time recordings about drugs, alcohol, teen pregnancy, depression/suicide and other happy topics. More of a social responsibility class than anything.

Dades wrote: »

If they were teaching 2.5 hrs of Scientology a week I bet you'd care.

Of course I would. Scientoloogy is retarded, end of.

However as a non religious person who hasnt been to mass for a non christening/wedding/funeral since I left school, learning a few prayers and Jesus stories isnt a big thing. Get over yourselves ffs :rolleyes:

pH

Tha Gopher wrote: »

Of course I would. Scientoloogy is retarded, end of.

And the Zombie worshipping cannibalistic death-cult that is Christianity isn't?

PDN

pH wrote: »

And the Zombie worshipping cannibalistic death-cult that is Christianity isn't.

Fixed.

Nevyn

Dades wrote: »

If they were teaching 2.5 hrs of Scientology a week I bet you'd care.

Personally I'm pretty apathetic about RE - I survived 12 years of it. Its getting my kids into the school that irks me.

It's the pervasiveness into other areas of the school day, like prayers in the morning, grace before and after lunch and prayer at home time.
Religious themed home work for other subjects, prime example being English homework with was to unscramble the letters to make sentences and them reading " On saturday I will make my first Holy Communion" as fecking Enligh home work.

Delirium

Tha Gopher wrote: »

2.5 hours a week of national school time?

Sounds about right from my own experience. National school in a small village during the 1980s. Started each day in prayer and had some religious instruction most days.

In secondary school had 3x 40 minute religion classes a week during the junior cert. I think it was about the same during the leaving cert.

Dades

Tha Gopher wrote: »

Get over yourselves ffs :rolleyes:

Dammit. That rolleyes has authenticated your argument more then words ever could.

Rev Hellfire

Dades wrote: »

Dammit. That rolleyes has authenticated your argument more then words ever could.

Checkmate, qed, touché, a bird in the hand no wait that's not right.

Actually having religious studies makes sense regardless of your beliefs (or lack thereof) since religion has such a massive influence in how our society and values where formulated.
That's not to even mention the influence it current has on the world stage, an appreciation of the various faiths can only be beneficial.
Certainly it's in the states own interest to control/influence how these belief systems are taught, I'd personally like to see it taken a lot more seriously.

Bduffman

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Checkmate, qed, touché, a bird in the hand no wait that's not right.

Actually having religious studies makes sense regardless of your beliefs (or lack thereof) since religion has such a massive influence in how our society and values where formulated.
That's not to even mention the influence it current has on the world stage, an appreciation of the various faiths can only be beneficial.
Certainly it's in the states own interest to control/influence how these belief systems are taught, I'd personally like to see it taken a lot more seriously.

I agree. But that could only be done in a more secular state run school. Could you trust a catholic (or a muslim, hindu etc etc) run school to be unbiased in its teaching of world religions?

Rev Hellfire

Bduffman wrote: »

I agree. But that could only be done in a more secular state run school. Could you trust a catholic (or a muslim, hindu etc etc) run school to be unbiased in its teaching of world religions?

It can if religious education is set by the state, sure you can have it tailored to particular faiths but the education is state sanctioned. Makes perfect sense.

Dades

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

That's not to even mention the influence it current has on the world stage, an appreciation of the various faiths can only be beneficial.

I'd agree an awareness of the various faith is crucial for a child, but I think the word "appreciation" is pushing it.

However I don't see if no religion is to be given bias, why this information couldn't be relayed in, say, one full day of class. If we aren't indoctrinating the kids to be catholic/muslim/FSMs etc, then ongoing instruction is completely unnecessary.

I mean how long does it take to teach the basic tenets of the worlds big religions?

robindch

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Actually having religious studies makes sense regardless of your beliefs (or lack thereof) since religion has such a massive influence in how our society and values where formulated. That's not to even mention the influence it current has on the world stage, an appreciation of the various faiths can only be beneficial.

Yes, but as long as the religions are taught as fact, or something close to it, rather than as cultural vehicles used to transport or support political or memetic power, then religious "studies" are a really waste of time.

It's rather like trying to understand maths by studying the shapes of the digits.

Rev Hellfire

robindch wrote: »

Yes, but as long as the religions are taught as fact, or something close to it, rather than as cultural vehicles used to transport or support political or memetic power, then religious "studies" are a really waste of time.

Not quite, since we are dealing with things which can effect in a very tangible way our society and how it evolves. It therefore makes sense to control it when dealing with the basic fact that you can not remove it.

The problem I have with some atheists is that they work under the delusion that somehow if we could just gosh darn it educate people enough religion will disappear. That's not going to happen as proven by the rise of more extreme idologies.

Better to acknowledge the fact and step in to ensure you can protect impressionable young mind and mould them to societies way of thinking.
At least that way you can counteract what's taught at home.

robindch

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Not quite, since we are dealing with things which can effect in a very tangible way our society and how it evolves.

Being aware that the central christian belief is that "Jesus died for our sins" is useless when it comes to understanding why, for example, the crusades or Jim Jones happened.

In general, teaching what religion says (the current emphasis, as far as I'm aware of it), versus what religion does or causes (where I would like it to be) does not create an appreciation of the unique power of religion to render even very smart people sadly malleable.

Rev Hellfire

robindch wrote: »

Being aware that the central christian belief is that "Jesus died for our sins" is useless when it comes to understanding why, for example, the crusades or Jim Jones happened.

They get covered under history, what's more important is that the state controls and prevents the spread of teachings such as 'kill all non-believers'.
If particular faiths are actively taught then you have the opportunity to influence the spread and beliefs of said religions. Much better in my view than leaving it to parents alone and removing religion from schools.

I suspect you and I differ in that you seem to think the 'truth' of a religion is important, whereas I think it’s irrelevant, what’s important is the influence it can exert. If there's a guy waving a sword at my head in the name of some god, it doesn't matter if the god exists cos we know the sword surely does.

robindch

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

I suspect you and I differ in that you seem to think the 'truth' of a religion is important, whereas I think it’s irrelevant, what’s important is the influence it can exert.

Erm, that's what I was saying up above -- what the "message" of the religion is largely useless if you'd like to understand why, for example, an odd-looking bearded gentleman might be standing outside your door with a machine gun, as happened to 22 unfortunates in Al Khobar on the morning of the first day of my first visit to Saudi.

Rev Hellfire

robindch wrote: »

Erm, that's what I was saying up above

Excellent we're in agreement, more religion in schools so say hellfire and robindch, we'll teach 'em !

robindch

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Excellent we're in agreement, more religion in schools so say hellfire and robindch, we'll teach 'em !

<sound of towel being thrown in>!

Tha Gopher

Thaedydal wrote: »

It's the pervasiveness into other areas of the school day, like prayers in the morning, grace before and after lunch and prayer at home time.
Religious themed home work for other subjects, prime example being English homework with was to unscramble the letters to make sentences and them reading " On saturday I will make my first Holy Communion" as fecking Enligh home work.

:rolleyes:

Indeed. Communions eh? Young lads get to wear a suit and act like a grown up, girls get to wear a kids version of a wedding dress and godparents and grandparents show up waving 50 euro notes at the kid. Awful stuff.

pH wrote: »

And the Zombie worshipping cannibalistic death-cult that is Christianity isn't?

Seeing as it doesnt have as much of a grip on its average baptised Im Catholic on the census forum Irish adult as Scientology does on any fcukwit who converts to it...eh, no, it isnt.

koth wrote: »

Sounds about right from my own experience. National school in a small village during the 1980s. Started each day in prayer and had some religious instruction most days.

Back when I was in national school we looked forward to religion, it was a break from the constant cycle of nothing but maths, English and Irish. IIRC we did these 3 subjects most days and had a spare half hour per week to do either History, Geography or Religion. So yep, about a half hour every 3 weeks seems about right. It is ironic that commited athiests seem to spend more time thinking about Jesus, God and the Catholic church than most people who have little opinion either way.

pH

Tha Gopher wrote: »

Seeing as it doesnt have as much of a grip on its average baptised Im Catholic on the census forum Irish adult as Scientology does on any fcukwit who converts to it...eh, no, it isnt.

I'm sure there's coherent meaning in that sentence somewhere, however I failed to find it. Perhaps you'd like to explain in what ways Scientology is "retarded" whereas Christianity is not?

Bduffman

Tha Gopher wrote: »

:rolleyes:

It is ironic that commited athiests seem to spend more time thinking about Jesus, God and the Catholic church than most people who have little opinion either way.

I don't think its ironic at all. It is hard not to think about something that is as pervasive as religion in all our lives. And if you want to remove something like religion from your life, you have to think & talk about it a lot unfortunately - otherwise nothing would change.

Dades

Tha Gopher wrote: »

It is ironic that commited athiests seem to spend more time thinking about Jesus, God and the Catholic church than most people who have little opinion either way.

Rather than irony, I would suggest an obvious correlation between between a healthy inquiry into all things religious, and non-belief.

Galvasean

When I was in secondary school (finished it 4 or 5 years ago) we had 3 40minute classes per week (biology and business studies had 4). Depending on what teacher you had the class would vary in extremes.
Example when I was in transition year we had a pretty conservative teacher who would spend a week teaching (and perhaps more importantly discussing) a particular religion, its beliefs, ideologies, history etc. Pretty well rounded course overall.
Fifth year we had this hyper conservative (need I also ad old?) Catholic teacher who basically read out of a propaganda book each week. Chapters included 'Why abortion is morally wrong' and 'Evolution' ('discredited' from a Creationist viewpoint). Suffice to say young Galvasean got into many heated debates with her. Of course not being particularly clever she could never think of a decent rebuttal so chucked me out of the class every week, saying I was "interfering with the curriculum". Since there was no set religious education curriculum or academic grading system in the school I asked my yearhead and the deputy principal was she allowed to do this and they said no. I was grudgingly let back into the classes.
Sixth year was where the real fun began. We had various guest speakers do lectures/workshops. Everything from alcoholics and gambling addicts to full blown Mormons. Good times.This eventually gave way to 'study period' as the LC loomed closer.
1st - 3rd year generally involved drawing pictures of Jesus on the cross..

Okay, that was a bit of a rant. Just taught I'd illuminate my experience in public school in the last decade.

bus77

robindch wrote: »

Being aware that the central christian belief is that "Jesus died for our sins" is useless when it comes to understanding why, for example, the crusades or Jim Jones happened.

Couldn't agree more. It seems that people emerging from such a basic 'point of interest' class would'nt get many benefits at all.

I hear the Swedish curriculum goes into the cultural changes of religion on society which sounds better.

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

Better to acknowledge the fact and step in to ensure you can protect impressionable young mind and mould them to societies way of thinking.
At least that way you can counteract what's taught at home.

Nobody would be counteracting what I taught at home. Nobody should be seeking to either.