Religion in junior infants

realdanbreen

harr wrote: »

Hi
Not looking to start a religious debate ,but..

That didn't exactly go to plan (or maybe it did!):D

pwurple

purplecow1977 wrote: »

That's a completely separate issue, and nothing to do with your gender
It has to do with demand and teacher allocation

I wanted to do Music for my leaving cert but only 6 of us were interested and they needed 12 I think to run the class, so it didn't happen

It was the same in my school. More than half of the subjects I took to leaving cert, I took outside school. Music, Chemistry, Physics, Applied maths and higher maths were not done in my school at the time I went there. They do them now... because the school has trebled in size.

What may be relevant here, is that there is now a religion subject at leaving cert, which was never there in my time either. I think it was over 50,000 students took it last year? More than art, home ec or and music. must be seen as a right cushy points one or something?

ash23

tehbaggins wrote: »

Wait, what? You're telling me that essential classes that are required for certain university courses are elective classes that all schools aren't required to offer? Or that university requirements aren't mandatory?

Learn something new every day...

It's common enough. When I did my LC, I did Biology and Physics but there were only a couple of us wanting to do Chemistry so it was a non runner. Same for Leaving Cert Geography, History and Music.

Alf Veedersane

SpaceTime wrote: »

Because in any other country they'd have a scale of secondary school that offered all subjects.

I've lived in France and the U.S. and quite honestly, this kind of thing shocks me.

That simply wouldn't have been an issue in the French lycée system because you'd have an excellent level of resourcing because the school is seen as a regional facility.

Most of them are more like mini-universities with facilities comparable to a smaller Irish IT in the senior cycle range of ages.

Why? Because they operate them mostly as large facilities serving a wider area and they don't have 20 sponsors competing for limited resources.

They even usually combine the local schools into a single area where they can share facilities with the commune like : library, amazing sports facilities (often including a small stadium, track and field facilities and a swimming pool (often with diving pools and an Olympic pool).

So you've a huge big sports centre available to the schools and the community at large too.

It's not necessarily because they spend more money it's because they spend their money sensibly on a far better facility that isn't about scattering resources to the four winds and 20
Religious orders and others.

This thing they have called "planning" and "not flushing the resources down the toilet"

Ireland has a lot to learn really. It's still not quite a modern country in areas like this. Aspects of it operate like little fiefdoms.

It wasn't a big town. There weren't the resources.

France and the US operate on entirely different levels of scale.

purplecow1977

tehbaggins wrote: »

Wait, what? You're telling me that essential classes that are required for certain university courses are elective classes that all schools aren't required to offer? Or that university requirements aren't mandatory?

Learn something new every day...

WHAT?!

Every secondary school does not offer every single subject.

I'm well aware of university requirements.

If a school doesn't offer a particular subject, the student studies it separately.

I don't know why you're jumping to incorrect conclusions.

purplecow1977

ash23 wrote: »

It's common enough. When I did my LC, I did Biology and Physics but there were only a couple of us wanting to do Chemistry so it was a non runner. Same for Leaving Cert Geography, History and Music.

Yes in my school there weren't enough who wanted to study Physics and Chemistry separately so they merged them to a Phys/Chem class.

Gerry T

frostyjacks wrote: »

The atheists will be loathe to admit it, but Catholic schools are the best. So instead of sending their kids to the ET school down the road, they're looking for a power grab. Don't want the hassle of spending time and money building their own schools, so just take them off the Church instead. And they were surprised when the Church refused to hand over the deeds?

How did the church build these schools they own, and the churches etc... with govt money (you and me) with church donations (you and me). So if people want for arguments sake, out of the church schools (about 90% of all schools in Ireland) 60% catholic and 40% to non demoniation, then why wouldn't the church release the buildings. Its the peoples money that built the school, bought the land.

LegacyUser

realdanbreen wrote: »

That didn't exactly go to plan (or maybe it did!):D

You got there before me!

I don't think rational debate exists on this subject.

OP - for what it's worth at this stage - speak to the teacher, see if any other kids are sitting out the religion class. And if they're not, maybe have a bit of faith that not all teachers read verbatim out of the religion book (And I'm saying this independently, not based on other comments that have been posted here). Also - following the posts here - Junior infants around the country are for the most part, not actually coming home reciting every prayer in the Bible and telling their parents they'll burn in hell for not being married or something....teachers actually do have a bit more cop on than that......

Have a think about what you might want to do around communion time. Otherwise, the best thing you could do is not be totally hung up about whether or not your child has to participate in religion, because you'll make it a bigger issue than it needs to be for him then too.

hairycakes

I went to a mixed school and there were subjects not available to students who required them. In LC we had two science choices, Biology and Phys/Chem. One guy wanted to become a vet but needed Chemistry as a stand alone subject and he had to get classes outside of the school for that. A girl had to get Music classes outside of the school and another had to get German classes outside of the school. I don't think it is a single sex school issue, it's a resource issue.

As for religion in Junior Infants, my daughter is about to go into Senior Infants this year in the local school and I would describe the religion taught to her last year as minimal which is fine by me. I would prefer religion class in primary and secondary school to be more a conversation about all religions and non-religious options as well as ethics and morality. A conversation rather than instruction. I think it would create many more tolerant adults in the future.

frostyjacks

Gerry T wrote: »

How did the church build these schools they own, and the churches etc... with govt money (you and me) with church donations (you and me). So if people want for arguments sake, out of the church schools (about 90% of all schools in Ireland) 60% catholic and 40% to non demoniation, then why wouldn't the church release the buildings. Its the peoples money that built the school, bought the land.

Paying tax doesn't give you the rights of ownership to whatever that money is spent on. There's nothing at all stopping parents from starting up their own schools, where they can teach whatever they like in whatever manner they see fit (they seem to be experts at it).

Not a NSA agent

frostyjacks wrote: »

Paying tax doesn't give you the rights of ownership to whatever that money is spent on. There's nothing at all stopping parents from starting up their own schools, where they can teach whatever they like in whatever manner they see fit (they seem to be experts at it).

Maybe you should look up the requirements for setting up a school. Suppose we could increase class sizes or cut a few more SNAs to support the cost of segregation. I suppose some people just value keeping other children away from theres more than the quality of the school.

lazygal

frostyjacks wrote: »

Paying tax doesn't give you the rights of ownership to whatever that money is spent on. There's nothing at all stopping parents from starting up their own schools, where they can teach whatever they like in whatever manner they see fit (they seem to be experts at it).

How many primary schools should we have in Ireland? Should parents who only want white children attending a school be allowed to set up such schools if that's what they want?

byhookorbycrook

Gerry T wrote: »

96% under religious orders. 90% by catholic orders.

https://www.education.ie/en/Schools-Colleges/Information/Diversity-of-Patronage/Diversity-of-Patronage-Survey-of-Parents.html

No,of the 90% they may be run under a Catholic ethos, but not by a Catholic order.

One eyed Jack

frostyjacks wrote: »

Paying tax doesn't give you the rights of ownership to whatever that money is spent on. There's nothing at all stopping parents from starting up their own schools, where they can teach whatever they like in whatever manner they see fit (they seem to be experts at it).

Not to mention the administrative clusterfcuk if people only started paying tax that went towards specific purposes only when they met the criteria for those services. I'm sure people with no children would be only too delighted to be told they no longer have to pay to educate, feed, clothe nor cover medical expenses for other people's children. Only when they have children themselves will they be hit with a massive wedge deducted from their salaries meet the criteria to pay those particular taxes for those purposes.

It's a farcical suggestion that shows a very poor understanding of socioeconomics.

One eyed Jack

lazygal wrote: »

How many primary schools should we have in Ireland? Should parents who only want white children attending a school be allowed to set up such schools if that's what they want?

Why do you think they couldn't? They wouldn't qualify for funding from the State, but there isn't anything stopping them. I would say the lack of demand for such a school would mean it wouldn't be able to operate on a long term basis... or maybe it could, gaelscoils seem to be quite popular for Fiachra and Fuinneog these days, not so much for Lawrence and Tito...

I wonder what that's about?

(Rhetorical question, seriously, I have a fair idea what it's about already :pac:)

inocybe

purplecow1977 wrote: »

Someone else mentioned sex education. We had a pair of women in to give such a talk to my students this year and I was impressed. The point they stressed was to wait for sex until they are in a loving and respectful relationship like marriage. I think this is pretty sensible. They didn't mention religion thankfully.

We had a similar talk in my sons school by someone from a catholic agency, only they pushed that 'ideally sex should be within marriage'. What is that saying to a child of a single parent - that our family is less than ideal? I told him I would be horrified if he waited until marriage to have sex. There was also no mention of homosexuality, pretend it doesn't exist and it might go away?

purplecow1977

inocybe wrote: »

We had a similar talk in my sons school by someone from a catholic agency, only they pushed that 'ideally sex should be within marriage'. What is that saying to a child of a single parent - that our family is less than ideal? I told him I would be horrified if he waited until marriage to have sex. There was also no mention of homosexuality, pretend it doesn't exist and it might go away?

Parents can have an input too and may be in a better position to explain any questions their son/daughter may have.

My own mother encouraged me to wait, and she wasn't religious at all so go figure!

frostyjacks

lazygal wrote: »

How many primary schools should we have in Ireland? Should parents who only want white children attending a school be allowed to set up such schools if that's what they want?

Well, if such a school was set up, I wouldn't expect black people to send their kids there and then complain about feeling uncomfortable about it.

Jonti

harr wrote: »

The book is grow in love,I don't want to single him out by making him sit it out,I don't mind them talking about God and love and stuff like that just the basics .
He is a smart little lad and always asking questions about how clouds are made and how trees grow and hundreds of questions a day and I always explain the best I can for him to understand ,but all this book teaches him is that God makes the clouds,grass,animals,trees and everything else,which to be honest is not my way of thinking....

Let it go, whether you believe or not, let him eventually make his own mind up about religion. Do not impose your religious values on him.
I'm a protestant and my girls are being schooled in a catholic school. We have no problems.

inocybe

purplecow1977 wrote: »

Parents can have an input too and may be in a better position to explain any questions their son/daughter may have.

My own mother encouraged me to wait, and she wasn't religious at all so go figure!

Yes and my input had to be directing contradicting most of theirs. Again it's not great to have to undo teaching of authority figures all the time.

purplecow1977

Jonti wrote: »

Let it go, whether you believe or not, let him eventually make his own mind up about religion. Do not impose your religious values on him.
I'm a protestant and my girls are being schooled in a catholic school. We have no problems.

I think this is important too.

Many of the strongly opposed to Catholicism posters here are so because of the strong Catholic influence they had in their own lives.

It's almost like a teenager rebelling against certain rules - if you're told to do one thing, you automatically want to do another!

As a youngster, I was 'made' go to Mass when I was younger. I rarely go at all now. I've made my own choices about religion since I was about 13!

zeffabelli

inocybe wrote: »

We had a similar talk in my sons school by someone from a catholic agency, only they pushed that 'ideally sex should be within marriage'. What is that saying to a child of a single parent - that our family is less than ideal? I told him I would be horrified if he waited until marriage to have sex. There was also no mention of homosexuality, pretend it doesn't exist and it might go away?

Well, yeah, I parent a lone and it is far from ideal. Not what I' want for my child when grown.

purplecow1977

inocybe wrote: »

Yes and my input had to be directing contradicting most of theirs. Again it's not great to have to undo teaching of authority figures all the time.

Again, my mother was of similar opinion and she isn't and wasn't religious.

Wanting someone to wait until they are in a loving and respectful relationship isn't wrong. It doesn't mean they actually will, but it was certainly at the back of my mind so in a way discouraged me from having sex when I was younger.

One eyed Jack

inocybe wrote: »

Yes and my input had to be directing contradicting most of theirs. Again it's not great to have to undo teaching of authority figures all the time.

Tbh I'd be more worried if someone didn't have questions for me, especially my child. It means they're either not listening in class, not thinking about what they're being told, or they simply don't give a flying fcuk.

None of those three are desirable outcomes IMO.

purplecow1977

zeffabelli wrote: »

Well, yeah, I parent a lone and it is far from ideal. Not what I' want for my child when grown.

Exactly. Given a choice, I think any parent would prefer their son/daughter to be pregnant as part of a loving relationship, rather than a single parent. It doesn't mean that the single parent does any less of a job, but it is twice as hard. Given a choice, we'd all choose the 'ideal' in such a situation.

tehbaggins

purplecow1977 wrote: »

WHAT?!

Every secondary school does not offer every single subject.

I'm well aware of university requirements.

If a school doesn't offer a particular subject, the student studies it separately.

I don't know why you're jumping to incorrect conclusions.

Surely a requirement from a university should be offered at all the schools, no? That's the way it works in Norway where I went through education at least. As long as you passed your exams after 12 years of school, you would get into any university study you wanted, depending on your grades. All secondary/high schools in the country are obliged to offer all the courses and if you're on the general education path, those classes are by and large mandatory.

The other option in the Norwegian system is the trades, where you're going into apprenticeships after 11 years and where the classes in years 10 and 11 are geared towards your chosen trade.

And in what way am I jumping to a conclusion here? I merely posed a question.

zeffabelli

purplecow1977 wrote: »

Exactly. Given a choice, I think any parent would prefer their son/daughter to be pregnant as part of a loving relationship, rather than a single parent. It doesn't mean that the single parent does any less of a job, but it is twice as hard. Given a choice, we'd all choose the 'ideal' in such a situation.

Its completely a different very tough life and there are compromises left right and centre an there is no way this is what I would want for the next generation...struggle, poverty.... stress.

Seriously, they need to get into the failure rates of birth control (the official rates are only where there is compliance, they are much higher when considering non compliance), the weakness of human nature....

So when you take those risks, its much more preferable to take them with someone who gives a serious **** about you.

inocybe

purplecow1977 wrote: »

Again, my mother was of similar opinion and she isn't and wasn't religious.

Wanting someone to wait until they are in a loving and respectful relationship isn't wrong. It doesn't mean they actually will, but it was certainly at the back of my mind so in a way discouraged me from having sex when I was younger.

Marriage, not loving relationship. To me that is horrifying, and someone posing Catholic morality as sex education is also horrifying to me.

Gerry T

frostyjacks wrote: »

Paying tax doesn't give you the rights of ownership to whatever that money is spent on. There's nothing at all stopping parents from starting up their own schools, where they can teach whatever they like in whatever manner they see fit (they seem to be experts at it).

Its more about the moral issue, yes the church is great in ring fencing liability, just look at how they got their lawyers to limit liability for rape cases, the laundry scandals. Protecting their property, they are experts in those regards.
The church is supposed to be the guardians of moral practices. It is the right thing to do, place a percentage of schools to those children that want a non secular education system. But they won't, even though Dermot Martin back in 2013 said the church was slow to implement the divestment, something the church agrees should be done, he thinks the church should, but they wont. Too many little minds to influence.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/slow-progress-in-divesting-of-catholic-schools-1.1517725

purplecow1977

tehbaggins wrote: »

Surely a requirement from a university should be offered at all the schools, no? That's the way it works in Norway where I went through education at least. As long as you passed your exams after 12 years of school, you would get into any university study you wanted, depending on your grades. All secondary/high schools in the country are obliged to offer all the courses and if you're on the general education path, those classes are by and large mandatory.

The other option in the Norwegian system is the trades, where you're going into apprenticeships after 11 years and where the classes in years 10 and 11 are geared towards your chosen trade.

And in what way am I jumping to a conclusion here? I merely posed a question.

We are not in Norway.

All subjects are not offered/available in all secondary schools in Ireland because sufficient teachers are not sanctioned by the DES

There are several posters that have stated certain subjects had to be studied outside of the school they attended.