In the United Kingdom, the credibility of some Muslim independent schools has rightly been called into question by several reports of problems with how they're operated and deficiencies in their curriculum. Not so much is heard about Christian independent schools, however. There's a story in
The Independent which shows that some of those schools are also rather problematic, in particular a number of them that follow a pattern developed by Baptists in southern states of the US.
"Christian fundamentalist schools teaching girls they must obey men" |
The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/accelerated-christian-education-christian-fundamentalist-schools-are-teaching-girls-they-must-obey-a7066751.html)
Quote[A] number of serious concerns have been raised about the schools, including allegations that children are given no formal educational qualifications beyond "Christian certificates", thereby failing to equip them for opportunities and employment beyond the Church.
Former pupils claim a key aspect of the schools' ethos comes from a belief in individualistic self-salvation, whereby people must actively accept God's salvation to enter heaven.
By extension, it is believed that children must teach themselves in order to get closer to God. Children are therefore expected to spend the first half of each school day teaching themselves by reading textbooks in silence, while facing the classroom walls in specially designed booths, which mean they cannot see children around them or interact with them. In the second half of the school day, children are taught in groups.
[Continues . . . (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/accelerated-christian-education-christian-fundamentalist-schools-are-teaching-girls-they-must-obey-a7066751.html)]
As long as you are not gay or a woman or like... Social. Yes, yes I see how that could work.
On the positive side, not interacting with one's peers ought to limit bullying. On the negative side... Well, the rest, really. You know how when people say "there ought to be a law" and there really ought NOT to be? Well, in this case, a law sounds like a fine idea to me.
...Fucking child abusers. >:(
The only sensible sentence was about the government having a duty of care, but it was obvious from the rest of it that nothing will be done for these poor, powerless youngsters in spite of Ofsted's final sentence about more stringent testing. How can this be allowed?
The problem is that they're independent. The government has very little power to do anything. The same thing happens in Academies too, the first school I worked in got turned into an Academy run by evangelical Christians, very dodgy things happened there!
Indeed and I can see a problem with interfering with the way that parents want to bring up their children but it's wicked to treat them like this.
Quote from: Essie Mae on June 08, 2016, 12:24:36 AM
...I can see a problem with interfering with the way that parents want to bring up their children...
To be completely politically-incorrectly honest, I don't. Not at all.
Quote from: Asmodean on June 08, 2016, 07:09:12 AM
Quote from: Essie Mae on June 08, 2016, 12:24:36 AM
...I can see a problem with interfering with the way that parents want to bring up their children...
To be completely politically-incorrectly honest, I don't. Not at all.
This surprises me from the Asmo. I was under the impression from previous discussions on here that you were against state interference in people's lives.
It is an interesting debate. What degree of responsibility should be on the parents to get their children educated and what should be on the state?
In the case of the private school mentioned in the article, the parents have made a decision to pay (probably not cheap either) and send their child to this particular school. I am assuming beforehand they looked at the prospectus, visited the school etc so will know about the methods they use. So at what point can outsiders turn to them and tell them they shouldn't be making that decision?
The Academy I mentioned is a slightly different and more disturbing story. The school started as a regular state school that students in the local catchment area attended and the local education authority controlled. Then academisation happened (basically outside businesses, groups and charities were brought in to run schools instead of the LEA but the school remained the only one in the catchment area that was free for those students) and the school drastically changed. Changes were bible study every morning, isolation rooms like the ones mentioned in the article, assemblies on how it was a woman's fault if she got raped, mass preaching assemblies, creationism in science lessons etc. The parents here had little choice as the other state schools in the area were full and many couldn't have have afforded to send their children to a private school.
Quote from: Claireliontamer on June 08, 2016, 10:04:08 AM
This surprises me from the Asmo. I was under the impression from previous discussions on here that you were against state interference in people's lives.
Ambivalent. It depends entirely on the circumstances. I
don't want the government's help in ruining
my own damned life, thank you, but I want them to at least try and stop me from ruining someone else's... Like my non-existent kids through "freedom of parenting", for example. To a degree, yes, but there it is.
I'm interested in picking up the debate later in your post. I'll try to remember it for when I get off work.
Having children Wallow in ignorance is a criminal activity. I am ashamed to say that there are more than a few schools in this country that are culpable. That the disease has spread from here to other countries is more reason for shame. The perpetrators actually believe that what they practice is the will of God.
and if we say that the govt should prevent children from being taught in these sorts of schools, how else might it start sticking its oar in?