velvetpage | PaAC: I've had an idea.

Entry tags:

education,
poac

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?

Threaded | Flat

There's a Canadian Bible Belt?

I know that BC does not have a provincially-run Catholic School Board. To be honest, I thought the only places in Canada to still have that were Quebec, Ontario and Manitoba. The public education system here is completely secular. There is partial funding for independent schools, though... be they exclusive private schools or local religious schools. However, those schools do not have to hire BC Certified teachers... although the teachers do have to be liscenced through the independant/charter schools system. The independent schools are monitored by the Provincial Government to ensure they comply with B.C. educational standards, but this does give significant lee-way. And some question the level of observation, since Bountiful (an extremist mormon community in Creston) has gotten away with some pretty heinous levels of high-school completion, espeically for girls.

I disagree with the government fully funding religious-based education. While it would be opt in, does that mean we will also provide opt-in education for Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Mormon, Jewish, Pasgan, etc., education? Where/when do we start drawing the line? Where/when does that start becoming discriminatory to minorities who might not have the numbers in an area to allow for a school directed towards their education? As far as I'm concerned, religious education is what catechism, Sunday School, Church and parental involvement are for.

It would still be a public institution, paid for by the public though? I have no interest in being taxed for the privilage of having my own faith ignored and locked out of the public sector. This is a particularly bitter point given the Bush Administration's faith-based initiatives.

Have you looked at Newfoundland's system? I know that they do (or at least did for a long time) have not only a Catholic school system but also seperate school systems for at least two or three other Protestant faiths as well (including, I think, for the Salvation Army).

I don't think it would ever fly here, and I'd be completely against it if someone tried to make it fly. I have a couple reasons I can think of right off hand.
A) Separation of Church and State means the Church doesn't get involved in the State and the State doesn't get involved in the Church. I believe it's important for people to worship and believe how they want to, without the State mandating it in any way. If there was some kind of Religious Public Education then, yes, the State would be involved in deciding what is and is not taught. All Protestants do *not* believe the same things, and interpretations of the Bible are varied from one pastor to another, much less one denomination. The government getting involved and saying, "This is what we teach the children about Communion" and "This is what we teach the children about the virgin birth" and "This is how we explain what happened on the day of Pentacost." No no no. None of that flies with me, and I don't think it should fly with any Christian, or anyone who believes in the separation of Church and State.

B) The point above about then having a Jewish School System, and a Muslim School System, etc is valid. I know your reply was "if there are enough students and teachers" but, if there are not, then ... what? Majority rules, sucks to be them? The Christians get to send their kids off for a Christian education simply because there are *more* of them? That's hugely discriminatory and we'd be up to our eyeballs in lawsuits over it before the whole system collapsed.

Hmmm. Gotta say that while that sounds good in theory, I generally agree with

paka and

stress_kitten on this one. I wouldn't mind protestant-based education for my child...but then again, even that is a broad brush and who's to say what flavor of protestantism it is? Down here in the Bible Belt, I can guarantee it wouldn't be MY brand of liberal protestantism. And then of course, there's the great head of "separation of church and state" to contend with. Magnet schools for arts or sciences are marginally tolerated here (I think they're a good idea, but I'm sure there are some who find them unfair) because they're seen as promoting important skills. Religion, on the other hand, even in its broadest sense, is only taught at a handful of US public schools (and we're talking comparative religion/philosophy, not specific doctrine), so there would definitely be a cry about the idea of advocating religion in the public schools-- opt-in or not.

Furthermore,say people agree. Only people who opt-in are in this new school. The old school continues. All are happy. Then the religious school starts to do REALLY well. Kids are getting great grades, the school is raised up as a beacon of good education, etc. Someone is now going to cry foul because suddenly the education at schools x and y is no longer equal.

You get the general idea. In the US, the proposed solution to this problem is to provide vouchers to parents which would subsidize school choice--even for religious schools. It's one of those campaign platforms that come and go. I myself am not sure about the idea, because I tend to see school choice as a difficult issue. I think that we should try to improve ALL schools, not just flee the bad ones like a rat from a sinking ship. However, at least vouchers help parents who can't afford private schools to have a few more options for their children.

Ok, I've blathered enough. ;)

I just don't understand why these people can't send their kids to their churches for religous education. Having public schools stand down on religous education does not mean that parents are prohibited from providing their kids with religous instruction through their own churches. This is called parenting.

One reason why people like myself and

paka are so deadset against public funding going to any religous education is the fact that protestant christianity in this country has a history of agressive proslytesizng and ignoring laws. Furthermore, terms like Protestant Republic have a dark and sinister history, having been used as rallying point first for Nativist Parties and then by the Ku Klux Klan as a way to appeal to wider audience. Maybe churches in Canada have a live and let live policy towards other faiths, but things here in the US have never been so civilized despite our strong constitutional protections. Mainline churches are not the problem, but much of the modern evangelical movment regards democracy as toilet paper; use it once and throw it away. So I don't want any of my money going to religion.

The practical problem with having protestant magnet schools is the trends towards Christian Nationalism or Protestant Separation might be a better term. Any accredited school would have to follow a state approved curriculum on secular subjects. The problem is that many of the religous sepratists would flat out refuse to teach scientific ideas they disagree with like Evolution, some kinds of set theory, geology and anyting that else goes against their narrow(and very flawed) interpretation of genesis. Now if they want to screw their kids out of a proper education for religous reasons, that's fine. Just don't expect my money to fund their substandard education.

I think the overarching problem in the US is that without a Soviet Union or other polorar opposite to define ourselves against, we simply aren't a nation. We can't agree on even the most fundamental notion what constitutes a proper education.

I don't like tax money being available for certain religious universities now. Why would I want to subsidize any part of any religious agenda? I didn't even answer religious questions as a child care provider. Belief systems are personal and are the responsibility of the home - not the school.

Are you asking because you want a consistent moral environment? I'd want a consistent moral environment, one that is free of Christian influence! Or ANY religious influence. I know a school is made of people, and some of those people will have faiths. You are a good person because you are kind, empathetic, and constructive - not because you are Christian. Being Christian gives you a framework to be yourself but I know too many ass hole Christians and sweetheart agnostics to think having faith equals being good.

I don't have much to contribute to this debate but I have noticed something locally that you might find interesting.

Across the street from my office is a Catholic high school. I've noticed lately that there have been an increasing number of Muslim kids attending the school (if the number of hijab-wearing girls is any indication). Have you noticed this trend at all?

I find it interesting that Muslims would prefer to put their kids in an explicitly Christian school rather than a public school. I know that there is actually a Muslim grade school here in town, though I'm told that it's not at all exclusive. It's probably not allowed to be, I suppose, though I can't see a lot of non-Muslims lining up to attend.

I will say, though, from personal experiences I've had with Muslims, I've found them to be much more tolerant of any religious beliefs than no religious beliefs. Some of my Muslim friends still refuse to believe that I am an atheist, which I find a bit frustrating.

Anyway, just an interesting aside...

Now, I did see alot of province names come up, one I didn't see was Saskatchewan.

Cough cough, climb on soap box.

In saskatchewan they DO have a provincial wide catholic school system, along with a public school system, along with an independant French board AND an independant Native school system.

In some elementary schools it is MANDATORY to take a native language corse, and no french is offerend.

In EVERY school system (including Catholic) You can OPT OUT of the religion and take a course called "life studies" instead, which is a course that deals with interactions with other people, so social studies.

So, the class will divide itself into two groups and some go to religion, others go to social studies. it works very well, and I don't see any difference with what you are proposing. Given a choice, I don't see what or who could have a problem with it. Oh, and Religion is offered in the public school board too, don't know why though...or in what capacity since the french schools were all catholic including the french school board.

I'm not really sure what I think, but I found this post and the various replies fascinating, and just wanted to let you know.

Lots to think about.

It should be no surprise that I think that's probably a bad idea, not worse than the Catholic School board, but no better either.

I think "comparitative religion" is the only religious study that belongs in a publically funded school system. To me, the primary benefit of these "religion streamed" schools seems to be the midguided attempt to "protect" the children from "other views", this should be on of the major strengths of the public school system.

Furthermore, I think this system would be incredibly vulnerable to abuse, what happens if too many people opt their children out of the public system? Do you continue to run an underfunded system that supplies a substandard education to the left overs?

What happens when the majority decides it's cheaper and more effective to simply shut down the public schools and force the remaining parents to choose a "religious" school for their children to attend?

I think a system could work, however, it would be dangerously susceptible to the machinations of adults with an agenda to push. In the states, it would never work. There'd be 10 groups working to subvert the idea before it even got off the ground, even if it wasn't prohibited by the constitution. You'd be handing the Southern Baptists exactly what they want, a way to deliberate punish any school that dares to teach evolution, and a way to censor the world for their children so that only approved ideas are taught at the school. How? They'd organize a mass transfer of children from any school that taught any unapproved ideas.

Personally, I think a public school system that accepts all students regardless of race, religion, or creed is the only way to go. Anything else reeks of manipulative parents trying to ensure that their children believe what they tell them to believe and only what they tell them to believe.

On the other side, I also recognize that the current catholic school system is actually one of the major producers of athiests. I suspect that many of the more intelligent children who come up out of the school easily recognize that the teachers use "God" as a tool to control the students, and it predisposes them to see that behaviour in religion at large.

So in summary, not a good idea, too much room for abuse. It's a first step away from a secular religiously-tolerant country and a first step towards majority-controlled theocracy. Prohibitions about the establishment of religion are there for a reason, to prevent the majority forcing their beliefs on everyone else simply by weight of numbers.

Threaded | Flat

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

Your comments about majority hackle me

no subject

zoink, I confess, I am not going to read all the replys to this :)

no subject

A little late...