velvetpage (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
velvetpage) wrote2006-08-17 02:55 pm
velvetpage) wrote2006-08-17 02:55 pm
PaAC: I've had an idea.
I was discussing the homeschooling debate with my dad just now, over steeped tea and donuts at Timmy's, and he pointed out that Canadians who want a religious education have an alternative to secular public schools, in the form of the Catholic school board. (At least, they do in most provinces.) We discussed alternative schools within the boards of education, and I had an idea.
It is quite common now for school boards to offer alternative or magnet programs within the public school framework. That is, a school will be geared towards high-level athletes, or towards the arts, or towards science. These schools are generally opt-in; that is, there is no real catchment area other than living within the confines of the school board itself, so no one is forced to attend these schools because of what street they live on.
Why not offer a magnet school for mainstream Protestant education? That is, an opt-in school, under the public umbrella, that gives kids the religious education they would otherwise be homeschooling or charter schooling to obtain. It would be staffed by teachers within the school board who followed the same creed, and those teachers would have all the same employment standards as their counterparts in the rest of the public board. The one and only difference would be the Christian focus.
In some areas, particularly the Bible Belt, you'd probably end up with two separate systems under one umbrella. That would be fine, as long as the public, secular schools continued to operate and were reasonably located to service the population who attended them. It would give parents and students a choice within the public system, so it would no longer be necessary to go outside the public system to get a religious education. The key here is that it has to be opt-in. So long as students and parents have a choice, it doesn't violate any rights. It's only when that choice is denied that there is a violation.
Thoughts?
It is quite common now for school boards to offer alternative or magnet programs within the public school framework. That is, a school will be geared towards high-level athletes, or towards the arts, or towards science. These schools are generally opt-in; that is, there is no real catchment area other than living within the confines of the school board itself, so no one is forced to attend these schools because of what street they live on.
Why not offer a magnet school for mainstream Protestant education? That is, an opt-in school, under the public umbrella, that gives kids the religious education they would otherwise be homeschooling or charter schooling to obtain. It would be staffed by teachers within the school board who followed the same creed, and those teachers would have all the same employment standards as their counterparts in the rest of the public board. The one and only difference would be the Christian focus.
In some areas, particularly the Bible Belt, you'd probably end up with two separate systems under one umbrella. That would be fine, as long as the public, secular schools continued to operate and were reasonably located to service the population who attended them. It would give parents and students a choice within the public system, so it would no longer be necessary to go outside the public system to get a religious education. The key here is that it has to be opt-in. So long as students and parents have a choice, it doesn't violate any rights. It's only when that choice is denied that there is a violation.
Thoughts?
the Quebec experience
Actually, Quebec no longer does. The religious school boards (Protestant and Catholic) were abolished a few years ago in favour of linguistic ones. The old Protestant ones became English ones; the Catholic ones became French, and a lot of property changed hands (the English Catholic schools and the French Protestant schools).
The individual schools were able to choose whether they would retain their religious status or not. Most seem to have dropped it.
But what is still present is Moral and Religious Education. Officially, all schools provide Moral Education, Catholic Religious Education, and Protestant Religious Education, and it's the student's parents who choose between the three.
In practice, the PRE (which I opted for) is more of an examination of several faiths -- more or less those represented in the classroom. For example, when my children were in primary school the entire class got to learn about Christian and Jewish religious holidays as well as secular events like Halloween. I think the idea is to promote awareness that other people are different, and promote tolerance. There's a big difference between teaching about religion and teaching religion.
By the way, once they were old enough to understand the issue, I let my them choose which of the three they wanted.
When they started in High School, they went into the so-called International Program, which is a rather intense enrichment program (about 50% more real content, including an extra language). Enrollment is limited, there's an entrance exam for it, there was only one class in each grade, and the school bluntly told us that whichever of the three we chose, we'd get Moral Education. Apparently the others were still available to non-International students. I had no problem with that.
Re: the Quebec experience
Re: the Quebec experience