The Accord Coalition has welcomed the ruling, arguing that the ability of faith schools to cause divisions even within religious communities is a strong reason for opening up all state schools to those of all beliefs and backgrounds.

Although campaigning groups such as Accord are not able to refer cases to the Schools Adjudicator, it is not the first time that the admissions requirements of faith schools have come to our attention. It will be interesting to see if the approach taken in this case will lead to changes in the policies of other schools that have sought to bend the meaning of the School Admissions Code.

Prof Brighouse has good intentions and we wholeheartedly support the aim of increasing the autonomy of children. We agree that children should be able to mix with those of other backgrounds and we agree that children should be exposed to a range of viewpoints, including those that are at odds with those of their parents. But that is the reason Accord believes that schools should be open to students without regard to religion and that is why we strongly support the teaching of balanced Religious Education in all schools, whether or not they have a religious character.

However, by setting up the alternative of an American-style system in which “slavishly conformist loyalty” to schools is enforced through a morning pledge of allegiance, the article fails to engage with the more pressing issue of how faith schools are allowed to operate in Britain.

If the aim is for children to be autonomous then we see no reason why schools should be able to reserve 30% of their places for pupils of the school’s faith, as Prof Brighouse suggests they should. Equally, it is strange to argue that faith schools are the best way to expose children to a range of beliefs when the law means that voluntary aided schools (the majority of faith schools) are able to write their own syllabuses for RE.

So although it is true that the imperative when designing schooling should be “to ensure that children’s interests are well attended to”, we think that Prof Brighouse should look elsewhere for ideas of how that would best be done.

By law, the religious foundations of voluntary aided schools should be contributing 10% to the cost of building work, but new figures show that they actually cover just 7.5%, with the £18.4 million shortfall being met by the taxpayer.

Campaigners from the Accord Coalition also argue that when compared to the total costs of education, the financial contribution from religious groups is insignificant. The £56 million given by the religious foundations of faith schools in 2008/9 is equivalent to just 0.15% of the total schools budget, even when pensions are excluded.

Accord Coalition Chair, Rabbi Dr Jonathan Romain said:

“Perhaps the government has recognised the financial reality that religious groups can no longer afford to pay as much as they once did, but not the social reality that religious discrimination is unacceptable in the 21st century. Taxpayer funded public services should be for the public, not one segment of it. It is vital for the long-term health of society that children of different traditions grow up together and learn to interact on a daily basis.”

Andrew Copson, Director of Education and Public Affairs for the British Humanist Association said:

“The requirement for a contribution to capital costs from the religious foundations of voluntary aided schools dates back to the 1944 Education Act. But given that capital funding from religious groups has fallen from 50% in 1944 to just 7.5% today, it is high time that the government legislates to stop religious discrimination in schools”.

Simon Barrow, Co-Director of thinktank Ekklesia commented:

“We have long argued that the legal and funding arrangements that give particular advantages to faith schools and limit the choice and freedom of belief of parents and children need to be changed – not just on general grounds of fairness, but because they contradict the claims of justice, equality and compassion which the religions themselves lay claim to. The latest TES findings are another example of the need for reform.”

“If Labour has been at its best when at its boldest, then that certainly hasn’t been when dealing with the issues around faith schools—a point that was not lost on James Purnell who recently branded the government ‘allergic’ to discussing the topic.

Even since Alan Johnson’s ‘fastest u-turn in political history’ over plans to introduce admissions quotas for faith schools, ministers have done a good job of pretending that there isn’t even a debate to be had.

Part of the reason for that reluctance has been the (sometimes correct) perception that the faith schools debate can too quickly become polarised. If the debate is faith v secularism, or choice v equality then it is little wonder that some think it is best to steer well clear.

If that perception was ever right, it is no longer. For the last year the Accord Coalition has brought together religious and non-religious voices who share serious concerns about the way that faith schools operate. Accord takes no position on the principle of whether faith schools should exist. The reason is not only that our members have different views on that question: it is that we don’t think it is the most crucial issue. What we instead focus on are the basic standards of non-discrimination that all state-funded schools should follow.”

“It’s difficult to do a comparison between Church in Wales schools and other schools because it’s very difficult to compare like with like. There are all sorts of issues that come into play – inner city schools compared with rural schools, for example.”

And, as the Secretary of Cardiff Humanists Julian Bennet pointed out in the same article, any difference in results is unlikely to be due to collective worship and the belief in a supernatural power.

That point is backed up by government statistics, which show that while religious voluntary aided schools get better average results than community schools, so do voluntary aided schools with no religious character. The important thing to remember with all of these large scale comparisons is that there are far larger differences within categories of school than between them. By far the biggest determinant of the results that a school achieves is its intake. The remaining differences can be explained by a wide range of factors—teaching quality, school leadership, governance and discipline, for example—that are common to all schools.

Because school intake has such an impact on schools results and behaviour, schools which have complex admissions arrangements can end up selecting better off families, even if unintentionally. The impact of this selection can then snowball, as differences in intake affect results and behaviour. The truth is that there are very many good schools that are inclusive and that inclusive schools can achieve great results while being engaged with the whole community.

We hope that one such school will be Oakhurst Primary School in Swindon, which has just opened. The community school had the help of 170 people from the community to help decorate the school as it opened, many of whom had been concerned about alternative plans for an Islamic faith school on the site. http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/4630229.Oakfield_School_opens_its_doors_to_community/

The aim is to bring together and summarise high quality research from reliable sources. With the exception of the 2009 poll commissioned by Accord from YouGov—itself a respected member of the British Polling Council—all evidence in the report is from sources independent of Accord and its members. The evidence is also recent – all of it dates from 2001 or later and the majority was produced in the last two years.

Topics covered include:

1. The impact of religious admissions on social segregation (sometimes called “cream skimming” or
   social selection)
2. Faith schools and school standards / attainment
3. Faith schools and community cohesion
4. The number of new faith schools
5. Faith schools and homophobia
6. Faith schools and recruitment
7. The number of schools of different types, and their denominations

You can download it here!

What the new policy marks is yet further recognition of the need to strive for a society in which children are no longer separated at school according to their background. Like Accord, Greens have also argued that it is wrong to discriminate against staff in schools by their beliefs,  have called for the end of collective worship and have opposed one-sided teaching about religion and beliefs.

The new Green Party policy follows the Liberal Democrats’ adoption of a similarly progressive position earlier this year. Accord was proud to have played a part in shaping those ideas and we look forward to a time when Labour and the Conservatives recognise the widespread desire for change to the current system.

“I have had Northern Ireland as my home since the war and have seen the affect on communities living almost side by side of a totally segrated education system (Roman Catholic & Protestant). Never shall the twain meet or ever come to understand each other.”

Glentoran is one of a growing number of politicians from all parties prepared to speak out against laws that allow state schools to divide children. Accord welcomes support from across the political spectrum and from people of all religious beliefs and none. If you would like to support Accord then please sign up for campaign updates.

Under laws dating back decades, all schools except non-Christian faith schools are required to have a daily act of collective worship of a “wholly or mainly broadly Christian character”. The consequence is that many schools are forced to make the choice between breaking the law and holding religious services that staff, students, parents and governors consider inappropriate. Although all parents have the right to withdraw their children from collective worship, young people are not allowed to make the choice for themselves.

Responding, Accord Chair Rabbi Dr Jonathan Romain said:

“Parliament’s Joint Committee on Human Rights has already argued that compulsory collective worship infringes the rights of children and that the law should be changed. Astonishing as it seems, until this year Welsh teenagers legally old enough to get married, join the army or start a family have not had the freedom of their own consciences in school. I wonder whose interests Archbishop Morgan thinks are served by forcing those who are not Christian to go through the motions?”

Accord’s response to the consultation pointed out that if faith schools are able to write their own RE syllabus and teach the subject from the perspective of their own religion then national policies promoting balance and community cohesion in RE could count for little in practice.

Accord has also argued that non-religious beliefs deserve to be taught and discussed in RE and that there needs to be clearer guidance about how schools should treat children who have been withdrawn from RE by their parents.
Although the scope of the consultation has been limited to asking what form the non-statutory guidance should take, Accord also took the opportunity to make the case for RE becoming a National Curriculum subject that teaches children and young people about religions and beliefs, but doesn’t teach them to be religious (or otherwise).

At the same time as consulting on the future of RE, the government invited responses about plans to make Personal, Health, Social and Economic Education a statutory part of the curriculum. Accord supports this move but is concerned that faith schools may be able to add religious caveats to Sex and Relationships Education. Our consultation response therefore makes the case that all schools should be equally accountable PSHE and that the lessons should be treated in the same way as any other National Curriculum subject .