Newsline 13 June 2014

Newsline 13 June 2014

Newsline is a weekly round-up of news and opinion from the NSS website. If you're not already a member, becoming one is the most tangible way of supporting our work. Our campaigning is wholly supported by our members, people like you who share our belief that secularism is an essential element in promoting equality between all citizens. Please join today.

News, Blogs & Opinion

Role of religion in schools under scrutiny as Ofsted reveal extent of fundamentalism in Birmingham schools

News | Mon, 9th Jun 2014

The role of religion in schools has come under scrutiny following Ofsted's finding that "a culture of fear and intimidation has developed" in those Birmingham schools caught up in the "Trojan Horse" controversy.

Summarising Ofsted's reports of the 21 schools recently inspected following concerns over extremism and inadequate curricula, Ofsted's chief, Mr Wilshaw, said that some of the findings are "deeply worrying and, in some ways, quite shocking". The schools, all officially non-faith schools, were all inspected under Section 8 of the Education Act 2005.

Findings included segregation of pupils on the grounds of gender in religious education and personal development lessons, unequal treatment of boys and girls, removing music from curriculum against children's wishes, faith segregated singing clubs and a known extremist speaker, Shady al-Suleiman, being invited to address an assembly. Some in the schools testified that they have been treated unfairly because of their gender or religious belief.

In his supporting advice note, Mr Wilshaw, noted a number of the schools are not encouraging their pupils to develop tolerant attitudes towards all faiths and all cultures, by a failure to implement a curriculum that would equip pupils to live and work in a multi-cultural, multi-faith and democratic Britain.

The statutory responsibilities of non-faith schools to provide a balanced curriculum were not being met in many of the schools; instead religious education was being taught in a way that isolated the pupils from a fuller understanding of different religious and cultural traditions. In one school, Ofsted found that pupils had limited knowledge of religions other than Islam. Subjects like art were excluded.

Mr Wilshaw observed that: "In culturally homogeneous communities, schools are often the only places where children can learn about other faiths, other cultures and other styles of living. All maintained schools and academies, including faith and non-faith schools, must promote the values of wider British society".

At one of the schools, terms such as "white prostitute" were used in Friday assembly by Muslim staff and trips to Saudi Arabia for Muslim pupils were arranged. At another, the call to prayer was broadcast over the school's speakers in the playgrounds, pupils were taught that evolution was not what they believed, and an extremist speaker visited.

Some governors were found to have been trying to impose and promote a narrow faith-based ideology, doing so by narrowing the curriculum, manipulating staff appointments, or using school funds inappropriately.

Often governors were found to be intervening against the wishes of the headteacher. In one primary school, governors opposed the head teacher's commitment to mixed-gender swimming lessons. The chair of governors in another school, introduced a madrasa programme of study into the personal, health and social education curriculum. In Nansen Primary School, a Park View Academy school, governors intervened to vet the nativity play script and insisted that a doll shouldn't be used to represent baby Jesus.

According to Sky News, some female pupils attending Park View School said that the school deserved to be put into special measures by Ofsted. They said: "Our school is too extreme but not in a terrorist way. They are strict with us and they use religion as an excuse […] Basically they don't let boys and girls mix and stuff". They said that pupils were afraid to speak out about what had been happening at the school. Two male students at the school disagreed with this analysis however, saying that, they believed everyone has open choice and that they were taught about other religions: "Everyone is treated equally. No one is forced to pray. No one is forced to do anything. It's an open school".

As a result of the inspections, the five schools named in the "Trojan Horse plot" - including three academies from the Park View Educational Trust - are being placed in special measures. A sixth school is also labelled inadequate for its poor educational standards.

12 of the schools inspected were told to make improvements, and three have emerged as "outstanding".

In response to Ofsted's findings, Michael Gove said keeping children safe was his key mission, and that the allegations made in Birmingham suggested children were not kept safe. The conclusions of these reports are clear, he said: "Things happened that should not have happened. Children were exposed to things they should not have been exposed to".

He stated that the findings require a robust, but considered response. They should not lead to an attack on Islam, "a great faith that inspires countless acts of generosity".

Mr Gove announced that the government will require all 20,000 primary and secondary schools to promote what he describes as "British values". These values will include the primacy of British civil and criminal law, religious tolerance and opposition to gender segregation.

Mr Gove also said that it was right that we have a "debate about the place of faith in education".

Tristan Hunt, Labour's Shadow Minister for Education, agreed that there was a "broader debate to be had about education and faith, underperformance among minority ethnic groups and the limits of communalism in multicultural Britain".

"In an age of multiple religions, identities and cultures", said Mr Hunt, "we need to be clearer about what a state education means for children of all faiths and no faiths."

Debating Ofsted's finding in the House of Lords, Lib Dem peer Baroness Hussein-Ece said: "As somebody from a Muslim background who was brought up with a secular education and is a believer in that, I do not believe in faith schools. We should not be rolling out far more faith schools but promoting children growing up by learning about all faiths and none—and sitting side by side".

Conservative peer Lord Baker of Dorking suggested a "moratorium on the approval of any new single-faith schools".

He said: "The object we are trying to achieve is that students in British schools, irrespective of their race, colour, creed or faith, will sit next to each other, play with each other, eat with each other, go home in the buses with each other and respect each other. If we do not achieve that, our society will be divided by faith and that would be disastrous for our country."

Stephen Evans, campaigns manager at the National Secular society, commented: "Schools are not legitimate places to impose religious dogma or seek to instil particular religious beliefs in children, and there should be no place in our education system for the sort of unacceptable practices revealed in Ofsted's investigation.

"Unfortunately, Christian control of publicly funded schools in Britain is common and it is somewhat inevitable that parents of minority religions now want to control 'their' schools. The lack of separation between religion and education has the potential to seriously undermine social cohesion and the time has come to question whether an education system delineated by religion is in children's or society's best interest."

Ofsted guidance on inspecting faith schools reveals “disturbing capitulation to religious demands”

News | Thu, 12th Jun 2014

The National Secular Society has accused Ofsted of "capitulating to oppressive religious demands" after the schools regulator told inspectors that gender segregation in faith schools should not be taken as a sign of inequality.

In recently updated guidance on inspecting publicly funded "faith schools", inspectors are advised that in Muslim faith schools: "boys and girls may well be taught or seated separately according to the specific context, particularly during collective acts of worship. This should not be taken as a sign of inequality between different genders."

The guidance also cautions inspectors to be mindful to not misinterpret the wearing of the 'hijab' or headscarf as a sign of repression but instead to "understand that Muslim females see this as a part of their identity and a commitment to their beliefs within Islam".

The guidance says most schools have a uniform for boys and girls which represents the "Islamic principle of modesty".

Inspectors are advised that art and music lessons in Muslim schools can be "restricted", that health and sex education will be taught within Islamic studies and that daily prayers will often "dictate the shape of the school day".

In a section on "etiquette", female inspectors are advised to "wear a trouser suit or longer skirt and jacket to cover their arms". Female inspectors are also recommended to "carry a scarf in case they enter the prayer room".

According to the guidance "Muslim men do not usually shake hands with women, and Muslim women do not shake hands with men". Ofsted advise the "best policy is not to offer to shake hands unless someone offers their hand to you".

It says inspectors also need to be aware that they may find themselves providing feedback from a lesson to a teacher that may be wearing a full 'niqaab' (face and head cover). In some schools male inspectors are told they will need another female present in order to give feedback to a female teacher.

The guidelines lay down that when inspecting single-sex religious schools, the inspection team should "reflect the gender of the school".

In mixed sex Jewish schools, inspectors are told that boys and girls are "in reality" taught separately – sometimes on two different sites some distance from one another.

When inspecting Jewish schools female inspectors are advised to wear a skirt rather than trousers and a blouse, but that any blouse worn should cover the collar bone. When inspecting strictly ultra-orthodox schools, inspectors are warned to "avoid wearing bright colours, and red in particular".

The guidance appears to be at odds with Department for Education policy. A spokesperson for the DfE, said: "We are clear that segregation in the classroom is wrong. The Equalities Act applies to all types of school and it is unlawful for schools to discriminate against a pupil by treating them less favourably because of their sex."

The National Secular Society called on Ofsted to review its guidance.

Keith Porteous Wood, NSS executive director, said: "These guidelines reveal a disturbing capitulation to oppressive religious demands in publicly funded schools. It also highlights the extent to which religious identities are being foisted on young people whilst at school.

"The guidance serves to normalise practices inconsistent with values such as personal liberty and gender equality, which should be promoted in schools, not eroded.

"The apparent willingness to sacrifice the National Curriculum and sex and relationships education in order to accommodate religious dogma betrays children's rights and poorly equips pupils for life outside the school gates."

Yes, “faith schools” really are the problem

Opinion | Wed, 11th Jun 2014

Politicians are in denial over the problems caused by "faith schools" and religious influence in education, argues Terry Sanderson.

The National Secular Society has been saying it for years – "faith schools" are a bad idea. And despite the events of the past few months in Birmingham, the simple message still hasn't got through to the politicians who are responsible for the education system: religious schools are the problem, not the answer. The Church of England is about to launch another great tranche of schools that they'll run but the taxpayer will pay for.

Under the Gove regime, with its promotion of academies and free schools, which give religious proselytisers virtual carte blanche to promote all kinds of questionable religious ideologies, the situation has worsened.

With a host of religious proselytisers out there desperate to get access to those pesky children who obdurately will not attend their churches and mosques, the free schools and academies are – in their terms – a God-send.

We reported last year on the seemingly endless parade of conservative Christian organisations that are given free access to schools to evangelise. We have exposed the Church of England's own "Trojan Horse" –style plan to up the religious input in its schools.

And since then there we have received a steady flow of emails from parents who are astonished and alarmed about what religious messages their children are being exposed to in schools.

When you give religious schools freedom to teach what they like, as Mr Gove has done, there will always be the temptation among some to abuse it. They will teach creationism, they will invite in hate preachers, they will begin to run the schools as if they were churches or mosques or madrassas.

After protests from secularists, Mr Gove said that he would forbid the teaching of creationism in science classes, which seems like progress. Of course, he has not been able to entirely police that and depends on whistle-blowers to bring cases to his attention. How can he possibly know what's going on in all the tens of thousands of schools doing as they please with only his blinkered oversight from his desk in Whitehall?

The problem is that Mr Gove, like all Education Secretaries before him, thinks that "faith schools" are marvellous. They all looked at the results and said: "If the rest of the education system could perform like this it would solve all our problems."

Ergo, let's have more faith schools.

The problem is that research has shown more than once that "faith schools" don't achieve what they do because of their "religious ethos", they do so because of their ability to select and discriminate. Parents don't really care about the "religious ethos", they just want a good education for their children. If that means they have to feign religious belief and go to church and tell lies to the vicar, then they'll do it.

Ah, you say – but the schools in Birmingham at the centre of the so-called Trojan Horse fiasco were not faith schools. They were community schools.

Yes, that's true. And it seems that some of the parents at these schools want their children to have a hard-line, separatist, Islamic education. They don't see it in those terms, of course. To them it seems perfectly reasonable to raise pious, conservative children who are contemptuous of the immoral culture in which they find themselves and so avoid engaging with it. There was a good analysis of how this came about in the Telegraph.

Some of these ultra-traditionalist parents, determined to have what they see as a pure and unsullied view of Islam foisted on to their children, as it was foisted on to them, have become governors at the schools. They have gone about ensuring that they get the kind of "ethos" that they want. In some schools that means no art, no dancing, no music. Girls are required to wear head dresses and to sit separately (often at the back of the class) from boys.

Some young people were brave enough to say to a Sky News reporter that they thought their lives were restricted by the school.

But the very existence of "faith schools" of any description means that the place of religion in schools is going to be guaranteed.

If our school system were to be secular, it would be easier to control the input of extremists anxious to inculcate their ideas into young minds.

If education about religion is to be truly objective and inclusive it cannot be taught in a single-faith ambience. If no school had a particular "religious ethos" and a strictly neutral education about religion, which had been nationally agreed, then there would be less opportunity for abuse by religious zealots.

As it stands, "faith schools" open the door for all kinds of undesirable and inappropriate behaviour.

Apologists for "faith schools" have made the case for years that not only are they harmless, they are desirable and superior.

Their emollient words have worked for them in the past and have convinced enough. But now the tide of public opinion is beginning to become a bit more questioning.

The Church of England has felt rather pleased with its relationship with this Education Secretary. They have encouraged his enthusiasm for ever more "faith schools".

But even they are beginning to see the tide turning. They are gradually dropping references to "faith school" from their own institutions and are now increasingly referring to them again as "church schools". This, they hope, will help distance them from what has happened in Birmingham.

Now they have announced that the next large tranche of 'church schools' won't operate the same religious selection as previous Church of England schools have.

It could be regarded as a finger-in-the-dyke exercise, an effort to fend off criticism about the outrageous privileges that it has in education. But it is too late.

The fundamental question is now being asked: why are we allowing churches, mosques and temples to run our schools? What possible purpose could it have other than to use our education system as a recruiting ground?

The argument that if we returned "faith schools" to community status the education system would go down the pan is fallacious. The fantastic teachers and headteachers who are the true miracle workers in these schools would not suddenly disappear from the system. The excellence could continue without the presence of vicars and bishops and evangelising groups who see schools as a happy hunting ground.

We've said it a hundred times before, and now the message is getting through to more and more people. Religion in schools really is a problem, and faith schools really aren't the answer.

New Anglican schools to operate ‘open admissions’ policies

News | Wed, 11th Jun 2014

The Church of England's chief education officer has indicated that new CofE schools will adopt 'open admissions' policy but will still be "rooted in Christian heritage".

Rev Nigel Genders told the Telegraph that by not reserving places for Christians, new CofE schools would serve local communities because they would help ease an anticipated shortage of primary school places.

The Local Government Association has warned two-thirds of England's school districts are expected to have more primary pupils than places within three years.

With 80 sponsored and 277 converter academies, the Church of England is the biggest academy sponsor in England. The Church has signalled its intention to "reinforce and enhance" its influence throughout the education system, and is well placed to sponsor new schools.

Unlike other church schools, free schools (new academies) can only base 50% of admissions on faith and the remaining 50% are supposed to be 'open' admissions. Rev Genders said he expected many new CofE schools to go further and operate completely open admissions policies.

Last year, the Archbishop of Canterbury also suggested the Church could move away from religious selection, but swiftly backtracked, issuing a statement saying he fully supported the current policy for schools to set their own admissions criteria, including the criterion of faith.

Stephen Evans, National Secular Society campaigns manager, said: "It should go without saying that no publicly funded school should be allowed to discriminate on the grounds of religion or belief. Unfortunately, both the Church of England and the Catholic Church demand exemptions from equality law which allows then to do so".

However, even with open admissions, Mr Evans said there were "big questions" about whether faith based schools were an appropriate way to serve diverse communities.

"With its pews emptying at an alarming rate, the Church of England has spotted an opportunity to church the unchurched and increase its influence throughout the education system", he said.

"But in relying on the Church to provide state education, the Government is undermining young people's religious freedom and compromising parents' rights to raise their children in accordance with their own beliefs.

"In a pluralistic and diverse society there is a clear need for a secular education system to ensure all schools are appropriate for all pupils, regardless of their religious background."

Solicitors Regulation Authority criticised over endorsement of Law Society’s sharia wills guidance

News | Fri, 6th Jun 2014

The regulatory body for solicitors in England and Wales has been criticised by the Lawyers Secular Society for endorsing the Law Society's controversial guidance on sharia wills.

In its recently published 'ethics guidance' on the drafting and preparation of wills, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) states "If you are acting for clients for whom sharia succession rules may be relevant you will find the Law Society's practice note on the subject helpful."

In the practice note, solicitors are advised that under sharia "male heirs in most cases receive double the amount inherited by a female heir of the same class" and that "non-Muslims may not inherit at all".

The SRA is a public authority for the purposes of the Equality Act 2010 and is fully bound by the public sector equality duty (PSED).

The PSED requires public bodies such as the SRA to have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination, advance equality of opportunity and foster good relations between different people when carrying out their activities.

In an open letter to SRA, the Lawyers Secular Society (LSS) has called on the regulator to explain how, in endorsing the Law Society's guidance on sharia succession rules, it has discharged its PSED.

In the letter to SRA chief executive Paul Philip, LSS secretary Charlie Klendjian argued that it is no more appropriate for the SRA to endorse guidance to solicitors on how to draft wills which give effect to a set of rules which discriminate on the grounds of gender and religion, as it would be for it endorse guidance on writing racist wills, or homophobic wills.

The SRA was formed in 2007 by the Legal Services Act to act as the independent regulatory arm of the Law Society. It aims to "provide authoritative guidance and rules to solicitors on ethical issues" and "give the public full confidence in the solicitors' profession".

Stephen Evans, campaigns manager at the National Secular Society, called on the SRA to delete the reference. "It's deeply regrettable that the body charged with setting standards for solicitors has deemed it appropriate to in effect unreservedly endorse a deeply discriminatory form of inheritance rules", said Mr Evans.

"The Solicitors Regulation Authority should play no part in legitimising religious codes as if they were law, or recommending guidance that encourages discrimination. This 'ethics guidance' does both."

BBC poll shows that religious people give more to charity than non-religious. Maybe...

Opinion | Sun, 8th Jun 2014

Here we go again – the BBC has commissioned a survey that apparently shows that religious people are more likely to give to charity than non-religious people.

If you look at the results, you see that the difference in charitable giving between believers and non-believers is not that big. The headline results state:

"Three quarters of people in living in England who practise a religion (77%) have given to charity in the past month. This compares to only two thirds of English people who do not practise a religion (67%)."

What the poll does not tell us is what the religious people donated their money to.

This is important because a similar poll in America ran with the headline that the Southern States of the USA (the ones shown to be most religious) gave significantly more to charity than the Northern States (least religious). But when you took out the donations given directly to churches rather than to humanitarian charities, the figures reversed. The Southern States were donating vast amounts to their churches, most of which was spent directly on church activities such as building maintenance, salaries and proselytising. The Northern States were donating to real charity that directly helped people in need.

In this country, every donation made to a church counts as charity and is presumably included in these latest figures and will benefit from tax relief that will be provided by us all, believer and non-believer alike.

However, I suspect that this poll will be grabbed by some as implicit proof that religion makes people "better" or more compassionate. Non-religious people, some religious leaders will rush to explain, have no reason to be sympathetic to the plight of others. Nor are they compelled by the religious injunctions that guide believers. Which, in turn, leads to the conclusion that atheists have no real moral compass.

The only trouble with this reasoning is that it isn't true.

I'm really sorry to have to even make this argument – it shouldn't matter who gives what to charity or what their motives are - but given that the BBC has decided to make an issue of it, here we go:

Every year, Forbes magazine lists the fifty most generous charitable givers in theUnited States (and therefore, the world). The first three on the list are all self-declared atheists.

Warren Buffet has donated $40.7 billion to charities working in "health, education and humanitarian causes".

Bill Gates donated $27.6 billion to "global health and development and education".

George Soros has donated $10 billion to humanitarian causes of various kinds.

The previous possessor of the record for charitable giving before these three came along was Scottish-born Andrew Carnegie, a steel industry mogul, once the second richest man in the world, who also gave billions to aid the poor and the uneducated – and who was also a self-defined non-believer.

Personally I find these polls aimed at boosting the image of religion and implicitly criticising the non-religious to be rather sad. They indicate a kind of inferiority complex among some Christians, a constant need to be reassured that they are morally superior.

I am not in any way trying to belittle the charitable efforts that religious people engage in. All help for the disadvantaged and suffering is useful, but the divisive message of this poll and others like it ("religious people are happier", "religious people are healthier" etc) does nothing to unite us in a common cause.

When there is a big appeal on TV, for instance, such as Children in Need or as when the tsunami struck South East Asia, vast amounts of money are donated by the British people. These hundreds of millions cannot all be generated by the generosity of religious believers.

Not when you take into account another, far more interesting finding from the survey (a finding which, for some reason, the BBC chose not to highlight).

When asked the question: "Do you practise a religion? By practising we mean that you pray, read a holy book weekly or attend religious services of gatherings at least once a week."

Only 23% said they did, but a massive 73% said that they didn't.

Given what statisticians are always telling us, about people overstating their religious observance in polls, it is likely that this disinterest in practising religion is even more dramatic than the present figures indicate.

It is a sorry thing for the BBC to have produced this poll and then spun it in the way it has. It adds fuel to a religious fire that need not be burning.

NSS Speaks Out

Terry Sanderson was on BBC Radio Kent and BBC Radio Wales to talk about, religion in schools and "faith schools" following Ofsted's reports into the so called "Trojan Horse" schools. Keith Porteous Wood was on BBC Radio 5 Live to clear up Ann Widdecombe's confusion between the decline in her religious privilege and persecution. Scottish spokesperson Alistair McBay had a letter in the Independent, also on the problems with faith schools and religion in schools.

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/64331