In Ofsted reports of all primary schools between 2003 and 2005, 60% of Catholic primary schools were judged to have an excellent or very good ethos, compared to
45% of other schools, while 49% of Catholic secondary schools were judged to have an excellent or very good ethos, compared to 32% of other schools.
They were a great vehicle for social mobility and helped many young people to escape the relative poverty of their parents. It is for that reason that I support faith schools for other communities, such as Sikhs, Jews and Muslims, and provided the right safeguards are in place to guard against extremists and ensure a balanced curriculum, I favour their expansion where there is genuine parental demand. But it is not for government to create this demand - which is why Ed Balls was right to answer as he did at the Select Committee (whose chairman is not a fan of faith schools) - but is for government to respond to that demand where it can reasonably be met. A Labour government should be proud that it created the first state schools for faiths other than Christians and Jews. It should not be unwilling to continue to do so.
We (Netherlands) have known a 20th century dominated by what is called a 'pillaring' of society into faith-based groups. The consequence has been social division (except at the top level) but also a politisation of education which has had quite unwelcome side-effects.
ReplyDeleteIt is also very difficult to safeguard against sectarianism (and hence radicalisation and extremism) when that is what faith-based schools are about: segregating people on the basis of one common character.
I am not necessarily arguing against giving religion a place in education, mind you, but you might want to look at the role that faith-based schools have played in other countries - because once you let the cat out of the bag, it's bloody difficult getting him in again.