the contradictions of religiosity in school
![[Deleted User]](/uploads/userpics/281/n8T53N6UZ5BS8.png)
[Deleted User]
Posts: 0
in Purgatory
This is a tough topic to frame without being boring.
However as background, in the British state education system there are a range of local types of school. A large percentage are religious (primarily Roman Catholic and Anglican but also a few others including some Muslim, I believe). Of the rest, most seem to take no strong religious position. One that is in the news at the moment is specifically billed as a secular school, as far as I'm aware the only one which takes a strong line against all religions.
Anyway, the story is that a Muslim girl at the school, which has a largely Muslim population, started prayers in the playground on her blazer because prayermats had been banned. She was subsequently excluded from the school and the case ended up in court where the judgement was recently given that this wasn't discrimination against her religious expression.
Here's a news link: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-68731366
So far so boring. But one strange aspect of this story is that it appears the judgement was based on the fact that the prayer practices were not necessary for Muslims and therefore preventing them was not a problem.
Which is weird to me. First, there are various different types of Islamic belief, how is a judge deciding what is or isn't necessary? Second, it feels like a strange precedent to set. Maybe there are religions where certain practices are seen as essential, would the judgement mean that those couldn't then be prevented? Third there seemed to be a sense that parents chose this school for their children and thus "it sucks to be you". Which also seems strange in a way I can't properly articulate.
Here's a blog by a lawyer going into great detail about it: https://lawandreligionuk.com/2024/04/19/say-a-prayer-for-article-9-r-on-the-application-of-ttt-v-michaela-school-and-the-question-of-interference/
I'm going to stop there, I'd be interested in your thoughts.
However as background, in the British state education system there are a range of local types of school. A large percentage are religious (primarily Roman Catholic and Anglican but also a few others including some Muslim, I believe). Of the rest, most seem to take no strong religious position. One that is in the news at the moment is specifically billed as a secular school, as far as I'm aware the only one which takes a strong line against all religions.
Anyway, the story is that a Muslim girl at the school, which has a largely Muslim population, started prayers in the playground on her blazer because prayermats had been banned. She was subsequently excluded from the school and the case ended up in court where the judgement was recently given that this wasn't discrimination against her religious expression.
Here's a news link: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-68731366
So far so boring. But one strange aspect of this story is that it appears the judgement was based on the fact that the prayer practices were not necessary for Muslims and therefore preventing them was not a problem.
Which is weird to me. First, there are various different types of Islamic belief, how is a judge deciding what is or isn't necessary? Second, it feels like a strange precedent to set. Maybe there are religions where certain practices are seen as essential, would the judgement mean that those couldn't then be prevented? Third there seemed to be a sense that parents chose this school for their children and thus "it sucks to be you". Which also seems strange in a way I can't properly articulate.
Here's a blog by a lawyer going into great detail about it: https://lawandreligionuk.com/2024/04/19/say-a-prayer-for-article-9-r-on-the-application-of-ttt-v-michaela-school-and-the-question-of-interference/
I'm going to stop there, I'd be interested in your thoughts.
Comments
(I don't much like the sound of this academy on other grounds. Children may not gather in groups of more than four?)
You've not come across Burbalsingh before? She's an - interesting - character. There does seem to be a general ethos that the school should run much like Stalag Luft I.
My take home is she's found a model which works academically for enough students for league tables to favour the school.
I imagine it could be absolute hell for some ND students. And to be fair, work really well for some others.
It just seems odd to me, that regular personal prayers would be something she thinks undermines discipline.
I don't think so. But I will check.
From Wiki
Section 70 of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998 stipulates that pupils of community, foundation or voluntary schools in England and Wales must take part in a daily act of Collective Worship,[1] unless they have been explicitly withdrawn by their parents.[2] The same requirement is applied to academy schools via their funding agreements,[3] so it is true to say that all maintained schools in England and Wales are subject to the same rules.
Assemblies are no longer inspected by OFSTED.
Which should be treated as a form of bullying. It rather suggests Burbalsingh's behaviour policies are incredibly brittle and only capable of enforcing narrow, rigid, compliance rather than actually addressing behaviour. But then I suspect most of us knew that already.
@KoF I have to correct your OP slightly: you are talking about the English state system, which pertaineth not in this realm of Scotland. Here we have "denominational" Catholic schools, "non-denominational" (which traditionally meant Protestant but now mostly means secular) schools, and a tiny handful of others (3 Episcopalian, if memory serves). All are run by local authorities (except Jordanhill, because middle-class elbows) and follow the Scottish Curriculum for Excellence (which has a variant RME section for Catholic schools).
@JLB I think that might have been the reason for excluding the child, however this aspect was apparently criticised by the judge.
AFAIK there is no religious requirement for this however, as those who miss a prayer slot are able to catch up at the next one, which is what the pupils were doing before they started the playground prayers.
The problems so it seems were twofold: firstly that fellow Muslims may have been feeling coerced to join in, even if not actually bullied to do so, and secondly that non-Muslims both in the playground and outside of the school gates couldn’t avoid seeing and hearing the prayers.
Both therefore impacted on the free will choices of fellow pupils, something which was apparently causing disruption within the school - which is back to normal now the prayers have been stopped.
There are exceptions where the activity is loud or attention grabbing enough as to interfere with other people's ability to attend to their normal business, but I don't think Muslim prayers fall into that category. I doubt they're louder and more attention grabbing than normal playground games (although maybe this school doesn't allow normal playground games).
Secondly, I don't think there should be a presumption that bullying or coercion is happening; and if it is actually happening the problem is the bullying not the religion.
The "daily act of collective worship" has traditionally implied a degree of participation (prayers, hymns etc) or at least quiet attention which goes beyond simply being in a space where some people are engaged in an activity.
If some children are praying in the opposite corner that doesn't make everyone in the playground part of the prayers.
Much in the same way as you don't have a musical school just because, in the confines of a few classrooms, music lessons take place. Certainly not if those activities are purely voluntary; even if they are mandatory, however, if there is no other evidence of musicality, then the school is not itself musical.
When relying on a highly selective input and a restricted set of subjects.
Is this a reference to something?
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-68170336
And a mosque is claiming it was misquoted in a court filing
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2024/apr/18/london-mosque-denies-it-advised-school-all-prayers-could-be-deferred-michaela
which is likely fairly important since the court decision depended in part that the prayer could be delayed until after school had ended (the mosque claims yes they can be so delayed during summer longer daylight hours but not in winter when daylight hours are shorter).
There are conflicting reports about whether the school has a "daily act of collective worship". The headmistress says the school is purely secular while also saying they sing "God Save the King" and "Jerusalem" (and apparently a third patriotic hymn).
Humanists UK (before the decision) opposes the collective worship but supports allowing students to pray.
https://humanists.uk/2024/01/23/optional-prayer-compulsory-prayer-and-the-need-for-wider-reform/
and also post decision
https://humanists.uk/2024/04/16/humanists-uk-respond-to-michaela-school-prayer-ban-ruling/
I was head of year in an "RC" high school. Very few practising Catholics among the kids or staff. More practising Moslems and Hindus than Christians - they liked to send their kids to schools that would respect the fact that they were religious. I had to do assemblies every week - with a Christian component as per the law. They were a combination of house-keeping messages, an aspirational story and always ending with the Our Father. Its a prayer that shouldn't offend any religious folk, and for the non-religious .... well at least they will know what to mumble if they ever go to a church wedding or funeral.