Memorandum submitted by the British Humanist
Association (BHA)
The BHA has many decades of experience in education,
working for inclusive and accommodating community schools, for
fair, balanced and objective beliefs and values education and
for a broad and genuinely educational curriculum. We consider
that all of these aspirations are jeopardised by the dismantling
of our state education system which the proliferation of Academies
and Trust Schools represents.
We know that the Committee will have access
to many documents which make objections to the broader Academies
agenda, and so we concentrate in this memorandum on the areas
in which we have the greatest expertise and most detailed experience
since 2001the proliferation of state-funded Academies and
schools controlled by religious organisations. A great number
of Academies fall into this categoryup to a third so far.
As one commentator has put it, "The academies programme is
without doubt a means of spreading the influence of faith schools
in the education system."[2]
We agree.
The BHA was in the forefront, in early 2002,
of bringing the teaching of creationism in Academies to public
attention. We have continued to have serious concerns about the
extreme religious agenda of some religious organisations in control
of state-funded Academies, and the lower level discrimination
operated by the less extreme religious organisations, such as
the Oasis Trust, or the United Learning Trust.
Some of the discriminatory and counter-educational
practices permitted to state-funded religious Academies are also
permitted to state-funded religious schoolsdiscrimination
in admissions and employment, for example, or the ability to teach
a curriculum of RE different from that taught in schools without
a religious character. But all this is exacerbated by the fact
that theylike all Academiesstand outside of education
law as it has developed in England over the last 60 years. And
when a religious Academy is accused of using its money to assist
its sponsor's private endeavours, the justified opprobrium that
would attach to a secular sponsor doing so is augmented by the
fact that in this case, public money is being used for the promotion
of religion. For example, "The Grace Academy in Solihull...
has paid £53,000 in the past two years to Christian Vision,
a charity founded by Mr Edmiston, an evangelical Christian, to
promote the religion around the world".[3]
In three specific areas, the growth of religious
Academies presents long term problems for the future of our education
system: in admissions, in employment, and in the curriculum.
1. DISCRIMINATION
IN ADMISSIONS
State-funded religious Academies are not as
likely to discriminate in their admissions policies as religious
schools but some do:
In London the Grieg City Academy
discriminates in favour of Christians and other religions and
the St Paul's Academy in favour of Christians.
The St Francis of Assisi Academy
in Liverpool discriminates in favour of Anglicans and Catholics.
The Salford Academy discriminates
in favour of Christians.[4]
Such selection is divisive and inequitable and
research report after research report has demonstrated that it
benefits those from higher socio-economic backgrounds.[5]
2. IMPACT ON
TEACHERS
Academies with a religious character are able
to discriminate in employment by requiring that certain staff
have a commitment to the religion of the organisation in control
of the Academy. This has negative consequences for the employment
or promotion prospects of teachers who are not of the religion
of the organisationthis is particularly inequitable when
they may have previously been employed at the community school
supplanted by the Academy, and had no intention of ever having
to work in a religious school.
Further, it is not in the best interests of
pupils and parentsEducation Data Surveys' 22nd Annual Survey
of Senior Staff Appointments in maintained schools in England
and Wales (2007) showed that over 50% of Catholic schools seeking
head teachers could not find one and that Church of England schools
also found it more difficult than community schools to find new
heads. Academies that discriminate on religious grounds are similarly
depriving themselves of potentially effective staff.
The Oasis Trust has stated its intention to
discriminate in the employment policies of its Academies, and
the employment policies of other Academies controlled by religious
organisations have also come in for criticism.
Dr Simon Valentine reported a very unsettling
experience when applying for a teaching post at King's Academy,
controlled by the Emmanuel Schools Foundation:
...instead of being asked about teaching style
he was quizzed on his views on birth control and whether he believed
in Noah's Ark. "They were asking for a missionary, not a
teacher," said Dr Valentine, himself a Methodist lay preacher...
"...they were basically sussing out my views on birth control
and the Roman Catholic Church... I was cut short by a sarcastic
and disturbing comment"What is the point of sending
young people out into the world with 20 GCSEs when they're going
to go to Hell?"[6]
3. DISTORTION
OF THE
CURRICULUM AND
CREATION OF
AN EXCLUSIVE
"ETHOS"
Academies controlled by religious organisations
are allowed to attempt to impose a religious ethos, which may
be marginalising and oppressive for many pupils, staff and parents.
A former pupil of an Emmanuel Foundation sponsored
academy has voiced his concerns... "I actually attempted
to take the option not to attend the assemblies and bible reading
sessions," he said. "However, each time I made this
request I was told to `consider my actions'...".[7]
Such a blatant abuse of the human right to freedom
of conscience and religion is a disgrace to our education system,
but it is a constant concern where Academies are controlled by
religious organisations: "[one academy] has been given permission
to teach the entire curriculum in a Christian context",[8]
reported one journalist last year, and the problem with Academies
controlled by the Emmanuel Schools Foundation is made vivid when
one reads the material produced by its staffon science
teaching, for example:
we must acknowledge within our grand geophysical
paradigm the historicity of a world-wide flood as outlined in
Gen 6-10. If the Biblical narrative is secure and the listed genealogies
(eg Gen 5; 1 Chro 1; Matt 1 & Lu 3) are substantially full,
we must reckon that this global catastrophe took place in the
relatively recent past. Its effects are everywhere abundantly
apparent.[9]
or on sex education:
the Biblical position of God's warnings, advice
and heartfelt desire that heterosexual sex is something to be
enjoyed fully in its right context within marriage is a perspective
that should be positively transmitted and encouraged.[10]
Concerns over the teaching of creationism in
state-funded religious Academies have been well reported for some
years, but the influence of religious agendas on the wider curriculum
can be just as pernicious and requires further study.
4. CONCLUSION
It is hard to build a complete picture of the
practices of state-funded religious Academies. Because they are
so autonomous, and their admissions, employment, RE curricula
and worship requirements are built into their funding agreements
with the Secretary of State, it would require some work to build
a full picture. We strongly urge the Committee to discover:
How many and which Academies discriminate
in their employment policies on religious grounds;
How many and which Academies discriminate
in their admissions policies on religious grounds; and
How many and which Academies do not
follow the locally agreed syllabus for RE.
These objectionable practices are not the limit
of the damaging effects of religiously-controlled state-funded
Academies. Just as grievous can be the imposition of an "ethos"
distinctive of a particular religion on a school population which
is comprised of many religions as well as of non-religious people.
Nothing could resolve this concern apart from a change in the
law to prevent Academies from having a religious character and
requiring them to be fully inclusive and accommodating institutions,
and this to we urge the Committee to recommend.
March 2008
2 Richard Garner, The Independent (18 April
2006) Expand specialist schools and forget academies. Back
3
Rob Evans, Richard Cookson, Matthew Taylor, The Guardian
(5 March 2007) Alarm over Academy deals linked to sponsor. Back
4
Source for admissions information is Times Educational Supplement
(10 February 2006) Academy Facts and Figures. Back
5
See http://www.humanism.org.uk/site/cms/contentViewArticle.asp?article=1915
for facts and statistics from the last seven years. Back
6
Will Sutton, Evening Gazette (9 March 2007) Academy
denies claim from job candidate. Back
7
Blyth and Wansbeck Today (3 August 2006) Academy sponsorship
`taking power from parents'. Back
8
David Singleton, Children Now (8 February 2006) City academies:
Ministers' deals with sponsors mean pupils have fewer rights. Back
9
http://www.darwinwars.com/lunatic/liars/layfield.html Back
10
http://www.christian.org.uk/html-publications/schoolcu.htmAnchor-47989 Back
|