just to put it out there

Strange that considering most bigots seem to eminate from non denominational schools.

 

What is a lot of *?

I never said they were taught about them and us, i said they learn about them and us, there is a difference.......by virtue of the fact that the little mates they had pre 5, now go to a different school than them for the rest of their lives.

They learn off their mates, on the way home from school, they learn by having a different uniform etc. Its nonsense.

 

You'll no doubt be told that kids of all backgrounds are welcomed within Catholic schools, which is true.

To an extent.

If you don't have a Baptismal certificate and/or a glowing recommendation from the local Priest then you're shunted to the back of the line.

If there's any spaces left once everyone who fits that criteria is accommodated then you'll get a place. Basically, you're a 2nd class citizen.

 

My daughters best pal is going to a different school from my daughter. A different CATHOLIC school, because she lives in a different catchment area.

 

That's ironic considering the reason Catholic schools were set up in the first place.

The establishmentification of Catholics is now complete, we are no longer the second class citizens.

HUZZAH!

 

I used to refuse to go to church and would end up having to do punishment exercises or a "punny" as it was known back then.

It always baffled me and would challenge the teachers as to why I am being punished for not wanting to attend church as I am a non-religious person.

 

Well, if we're being completely honest Catholic schools were set up to ensure that Catholic children would be educated in a way that is true to the faith, Sean. It's hardly as if they were treated like black kids in the US during the 50's.

Still, yeah, religious discrimination is okay as long as it's not your religion being discriminated against, eh?

 

Yes, obviously that does happen, but in my close, half of us went to one school, and half to another......we were all in an identical catchment area.

What is so wrong with identifying what is good about schools, and trying to replicate it for them all? And to teach religion at home or in church? Why are you so resistant to that idea?

 

:smiley-laughing002: Same.
* me off because one of my friends was Muslim and got to sit it out whereas i, a non believer, had to go or get punished.

 

Personally I would get shot of all religious schools, as they do encourage a ‘them and us’ mentality. I won’t use my own early childhood as an experience as, thankfully Catholic schools have moved on from then. Schools should teach kids to the same standard. They should have a generic religious overview covering all faiths and not be seen as predominately belonging to one faith. Basically the church or any religious leader should be told to mind their own business when it comes to children’s education.
If the parents want that, then they can take their kids to chapel/church/Mosque etc and teach them themselves.
This argument that because its Catholic schools that are ‘seen’ to be outperforming other schools* somehow makes them the ones to be followed/copied is, imo, just handy for now. As following that logic what if it was Church of Scotland/Jewish/Islamic schools in this, alleged, position would that then be the way all schools should be run…funnily enough I get the feeling that wouldn’t then be so palatable.
*Not seen any credible evidence.

 

I'd always assumed anyone with even the most basic grasp of this topic understood that Catholic schools had always traditionally outperformed and over-performed. For that reason, and the fact that finding such information is easily accessible on the internet, I've always been reluctant to spoon-feed people with links. But I'll make an exception, here's a few:

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13150382.Catholic_schools_are_rated_higher_by_inspectors/
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/n...e-schools-is-a-catholic-grammar-30140937.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/educatio...pupils-outperforming-others-at-every-age.html

Of course a wide array of factors influence the performance of schooling and education- area, class, income etc. I don't think anyone has suggested otherwise. But that doesn't get away from the fact that Catholic schools have traditionally outperformed their counterparts on the whole- regardless of location or other factors.

The example you posted earlier suggested a specific Catholic school had to use an undesirable admission policy as a last resort because the school was too successful and too popular with parents of all faiths and none, who wanted to enroll their children there. The best and most logical solution to that problem isn't to "strip away" at that successful school, but to surely create other schools which follow that system in order to meet the demand of parents wanting their children to receive a Catholic education. As I mentioned earlier, I think you could be right and a review of certain schools admission policies might be worthwhile, but that doesn't mean that elements of the Catholic education system should be "stripped away" because they're guilty of being too successful and too popular. That just doesn't make sense.

 

Evidence?

 

Ibrox.

 

Again, most of the results are down to the geographic regions of these schools, otherwise we wouldn't have three Catholic schools among the ten worst Glasgow-based schools in Scotland, would we?

The performances of the schools are dictated primarily by the standard of pupils, and those pupils who come from a more affluent background tend to have an easier time of it throughout their school life.

You keep saying this despite it not being true.

If Catholic schools outperformed their counterparts regardless of location then why aren't the top 10 schools in Scotland or the UK as a whole populated with Catholic schools? Like I said, one in the top ten of Scottish schools is Catholic, and I can't see one in the top 10 UK schools.

Again, the reason that school is so popular is because it's the number one ranked school in the country most years, and the reason for that is because it is located slap bang in the middle of one of the most affluent places in Scotland.

That's why it's so popular, and it's why the authorities had to narrow down the catchment area.

The problem that I have is that within that catchment area children who have a Baptismal certificate and a recommendation from their local Priest are treated more favourably than those who don't when it comes to admission.

In other words, either get with the program, bolster those numbers on a Sunday and play the game or your child will be bumped to the back of the queue, even if you live closer to the school than others.

So, parents face the issue of having their child attend school miles away, with all the hassle that brings, if they aren't religious.

Like I said, religious discrimination.

Seriously, are you actually reading what I'm posting? I've said on more than one occasion that what needs "stripped away" is the discriminatory entry procedures that are currently in place.

That won't happen though, as these entry procedures are what keep parents coming to the Chapel on a Sunday, as a less than favourable report from the good Priest could * up their childs education and force them to have to attend school further away.

 

All the Prods in this thread pure ragin' man. :smiley-laughing002:

 

We're repeating ourselves here. Despite the fact that Catholic schools in the north of Ireland and Scotland are in the minority and tend to be located in the most deprived areas, they (on the whole) outperform their counterparts. We're not looking at a snapshot of East Refrewshire or a league table! We're looking at this issue as a whole and in general terms!

Why is it the Catholic school in that area which is the best and most popular? As opposed to the non-denominational alternatives?

And as I've said, if it's a review of admission policies at specific schools which is needed then fair enough- I probably agree. What that has to do with the success and popularity of Catholic schools in the grand scheme of things though is beyond me! As I've said right from the start, a review of admission policies is something which is worthwhile, but I've yet to see a valid argument for such schools to be abolished or "stripped away".

 

I went to a catholic primary and catholic secondary.

The types of pupils in attendance were catholic, protestant, non-religious folk, greek orthodox, a cuple of Jews i knew about, Indians, Pakistanis, a Malaysian lad, some folk from right dirty orange families and a Partick Thistle supporter.

Hardly * segregated.

 

You don't see how a selection process based on different criteria from other, non-religious schools can have a bearing on performance? Really?

Other schools simply accept the children who live in their catchment area. The only real criteria is living in the area.

Catholic schools don't use that same criteria. You have to live in the catchment area, but they favour children who come complete with Baptism certificates and who's family have a good report from the local Priest.

Do you not think that you're going to find a different type of child by using such criteria?

How many children who are unfortunate enough to come from a home where their mum and/or dad are drug addicts, alcoholics or who suffer domestic abuse are going to have their Baptismal certificates hanging on the wall and the Priest round for tea on a Tuesday afternoon?

Those are the ones who won't be jumping the queue to gain entry to the local Catholic school that performs well.

Here's the thing, the review of said policies is constantly blocked by the top men at the Catholic Church.

Like I said, these factors which are viewed as "favourable" by the local schools is what helps to keep the arses in the seats on a Sunday morning at the Chapel.

The recent surge in Baptisms for children just entering school attending age isn't a coincidence.

 

But such a selection process isn't common practice. The fact there are students at Catholic schools from a wide array of different faiths and none at all confirms that. And if it is common practice then it only reinforces the success and popularity of Catholic schools, regardless of catchment areas!

The fact that the majority of Catholic schools in the occupied counties of Ireland and in Scotland are based in the most deprived areas suggests that the idea that middle class kids are clogging up Catholic schools is pretty wide of the mark in my opinion.

It sounds to me that your biggest issue here is with admission policies of successful schools who are proving to be too popular and creating a demand which can't be met. I think we're both on the same page here. I'm probably in favour of a review of the admission policies as well. But in the grand scheme of things, and with the nature of this thread in mind, it does nothing to suggest that Catholic schools should be abolished or "stripped away". On the contrary in fact, there's clearly a demand for Catholic schools, we should therefore be encouraging more of them.

 

You'll find children of all faiths at Catholic schools where the demand for placements isn't high. As I said, they'll accept children who fit the religious criteria first, then any remaining places will go to other children from that catchment area.

In areas like Castlemilk demand for places isn't high, so there's no issues.

East Renfrewshire though? Ever so slightly different, which kind of backs up my statement that high performing schools are exactly that because of the area they draw their pupils from.

Do you agree with the recruitment system though? Are you in favour of religious discrimination? Because I could just as easily say that some of the most highly regarded schools in the country are those that command fees to attend, and that are rather picky when it comes to who they allow to enroll.

Those schools operate on a basis of social and financial discrimination rather than religious.

Yet, this "common practice" sees those schools perform successfully and remain popular among the upper classes.

Does the end justify the means in that case as well?

I never mentioned middle-class people in that point at all, I simply said that those children (from any background) who have a home situation that is settled enough to see their parents able to attain a glowing report from the Priest, attend Chapel regularly and provide a Baptismal certificate will always outperform the children who's parents couldn't give a * about the Priest and who spend their Sunday mornings nursing their hangovers.

When you give a school the ability to pick and choose their pupils, be it based on any criteria, you'll see those schools perform better than schools who don't have any personal criteria in place.

It's common sense really, isn't it?

No, my biggest issue is with discrimination. And this is a case of religious discrimination.

I don't believe that any publicly funded school should be able to choose one child over another based on anything other than the transparent, widely accepted rules and regulations that all schools of a similar stature have to use.

If a school wishes to discriminate based on social class, religion, * or any other outside factor then they should be prepared to do so without any state funding.

Simple as that really.