Education sets Catholic primary admission policy, head confirms
Friday 23rd September 2011, 11:30AM BST.
THE head teacher of Notre Dame Primary School has moved to clarify that the admissions policy is set by the Education Department and not by the school.
The issue of whether non-Catholics should be allowed to attend Notre Dame or St Mary and St Michael Primary School was publicly debated over the summer following a Review Board hearing into the Education Department’s decision to refuse admission to a child.
‘The church’s view is clear,’ said Peter McGovern (pictured), writing in the school’s newsletter.
‘Catholic schools are open to all who share in its desire for a Christ-centred education.
‘However, the Education Department controls admissions to Notre Dame and in line with its catchment area policy has decided that only children who have been baptised in “Roman Catholic” churches may be admitted to our school.’
- Read the full story in the Guernsey Press. Click here for subscription details. Individual editions are now available online.
Island Life
All about Guernsey
Ambassador of the Year 2011
History & Heritage
Visitor Information
Guernsey's government
Campaigns
Voice For Victims
Voice for Victims is a campaign aimed at promoting the rights of those affected by child sexual abuse.
This is Guernsey
Guernsey Press
Useful Links
So watch out … The Catholic Church in Guernsey will be getting inundated (as it does) with requests for Baptism from Tom, Dick, and Harry, who want their children baptised into order to have a Catholic education – but never deign to make their presence felt in Church.
Report abuse
So, does this mean that the parish schools don’t have to accept catholics? or muslims? or jews? or in fact anyone who isn’s catholic?
Report abuse
Veritas,
Quite.
Meanwhile, you can have a Catholic father and Anglican mother, who go to church every week, but if as it happens they had their child baptised in an Anglican church, then they are locked out. But not by the school or church – by the Education Department!
Absolute madness. Why on earth Education wants to wade into this particular hornet’s nest, I have no idea.
Report abuse
Bridge,
Not quite sure what you were getting at with your question, but the actual policy is described here:
http://www.education.gg/article/2012/Applying-for-a-school-place
Report abuse
ChrisJ
I agree with you, and from a Catholic point of view, whether you are baptised Catholic or another demonination doesn’t matter on one level, because Baptism is Baptism is Baptism regardless of denomination.
Report abuse
The full article in the GP once again shows the arrogance of Deputy Carole Steere.
She simply cannot seem to bear the fact that some parents (of any/no faith) would rather their children get a faith based education than be educated at one of her schools.
As ChrisJ pointed out, why on earth did they choose to get embroiled in something that should be outside of state interference. In the immortal words of pbfalla, this is an utter shambles.
Report abuse
As I understand it, the Catholic Church completely accepts the validity of baptism carried out by any Christian whether or not an adherent of the Roman Catholic Church. They believe a person can only be baptised once so queues outside Catholic churches of aspirational parents whose children have already been baptised in the C of E, for eaample, would be inappropriate.
Is the Education Department saying that they do not recognise baptisms unless they are done in Catholic churches?
Report abuse
Just read the print article – Carol Steere basically saying that the reason for the policy is because the primaries are undersubscribed. What kind of a reason is that? Wouldn’t that mean they can relax their policies if the schools have lots of space?
The ‘Catholic Baptism’ policy is barmy for the reasons Veritas gives above. It’s also probably illegal under Human Rights (Protocol 1 Article 2). Why does the primaries being undersubscribed make it any less barmy or illegal?
Perhaps Education could publish the capacity reception intake for each primary school, just so we can all understand how applying a barmy and illegal admissions policy to Notre Dame is helping the situation?
Report abuse
chrisj
education are absolutely right. I hope this stops people like you from spending every waking hour trying to gain a percieved advantage for their children.
Why I can just imagine chrisj running to the nearest catholic church to get his offspring babtised so that at a catholic school ( he thinks) they will have a better chance of finding the “holy grail” YES! a place at one of the colleges (bet it wouldn’t be Blanchelande though)
Report abuse
Kevin – the whole point of faith schools is to provide a faith-based education, not to give some “academic advantage”.
Those who send their children there do so primarily because they see something of value in the underlying philosophy – even if they don’t necessarily subscribe to the beliefs.
Unless you have evidence that Catholic primary schools send a disproportionately large amount of children to the colleges through scholarship, your point is invalid and your criticism of ChrisJ undeserved.
Report abuse
kevin,
Yours is an understandable point of view. But that’s not Education’s reasoning at all – their justification is that it’s something to do with school numbers. But it just doesn’t stack up at all – and after we’ve had all the stuff over GCSE results now, I just think it’s probably a load of bull!
Report abuse
Ted,
We baptised our children in an Anglican Church, and applied in 2009 for a place for our eldest at Notre Dame. I had this very argument re baptism with the officer from Education after he had rejected our application – he was absolutely adamant that, since we had opted not to have her baptised ‘a Catholic’, we basically had no religious or philosophical grounds whatsoever. I recall his exact words in fact: ‘if faith mattered to you that much you would have had her baptised a Catholic’.
Our written appeals included representations from the Anglican church explaining very carefully the Christian churches’ position on baptism. After a further two months of wrangling Education eventually performed a straight U-turn and approved our application. There was nothing in that approval about our catchment school being oversubscribed – in fact, it simply said that our application was being approved because there was space at Notre Dame.
To kevin, who evidently has a chip on his shoulder about this kind of thing, I would say that see absolutely no shame in spending ‘every waking hour’ trying to ensure children have the best upbringing possible. It is not about ‘advantage’ – ensuring children receive a good education is a parent’s responsibility, and an end in itself. A policy which discourages parents from taking the greatest of care over their children’s upbringing is a bad one.
Report abuse
Quite right John Surcombe – and furthermore any policy that removes a parent’s reasonable right to choose a different form of education to that provided by the state is even worse.
What amazes me in all this is that home schooling is permitted by law. How can home schooling be a legal right for parents while sending children to a Catholic primary school isn’t? The reason provided by Education is so laughable that one does wonder whether someone high up in Education has a bee in their bonnet about faith schools.
The responsibility of the state is to ensure children get an education to a good standard – it is not to dictate to parents how or where that should be done.
It’s time for those parents who want to retain their right and responsibility to raise their children to take a stand and refuse to be steamrollered. John Surcombe has shown us the first steps with his refusal to back down. Step 2 is to get Deputy Steere and her nanny-state policies out of office next year.
Report abuse
ChrisJ – Perhaps if the state primary schools are so under-subscribed Education should be revisiting the whole idea of closing one?
Before people get all up in arms (remember St Andrews) I’m not suggesting we do that. I’m just pointing out how ludicrous their reasoning is.
Still, John Surcombe has shown us that, actually, if you dig your heels in long enough they buckle. Hopefully his case will act as a type of “case law” for others so minded.
Report abuse
Paul Le Page,
I’m not sure John Surcombe’s case sets a ‘precedent’ in that way, because administrative bodies can’t be fettered by such decisions – they don’t work like courts.
However, since I handily have a friend who is a Human Rights lawyer, I can reveal there has been a case in the courts which does set a precedent, namely R (ex parte K) v Newham [2002] EWHC 405, in which it was held that administrative bodies must set respect human rights in settings policy, and specifically that education authorities must incorporate some means of giving ‘due weight’ to philosophical and religious convictions into school admissions policies.
Since Education’s only criterion is ‘Catholic baptism’, and that’s not equivalent to religious or philosophical conviction (for reasons given by me and Veritas above), Education’s policy is probably illegal. There is a little room for doubt, but since you’d need a test case to go to court in Guernsey to be sure, and I don’t imagine Education wants to go down that road, they’d be better off just changing the policy.
Report abuse
ChrisJ – Education do think precedent has some importance. In our case they never missed a chance to explain that approving our application would ‘prejudice resources’ because it would mean admitting all similar cases in future. But then whenever we raised the issue of similar cases from the past, they said they didn’t follow precedent.
Basically, the answer to the question of precedent depended on what point they were trying to prove at the time!
Report abuse
john surcombe
I’m not going to get into name calling I’ll leave that to devout chrisians like you. would have thought that the biggest single influence on a child’s upringing is the parents not a school.
Honest no strings question so an honest no strings answer would be good.
What exactly is your motive for sending your child to Notre Dame.
Report abuse
Chris J
Thank you for the link. I remain confused however. Is Notre Dame not funded by the tax-payer? If so, why are only a minority of the tax-payers’ children permitted to be educated there?
Furthermore, is the exclusion of children on the basis of religion not a blatant breach of basic anti-discrimination principles?
Report abuse
Bridge,
Notre Dame is partly funded by the taxpayer. The school is maintained by Education, which means they provide all the staff, books, computers etc. The buildings are provided and maintained by fundraising and the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portsmouth.
So yes, it is taxpayer funded but, as there aren’t the same overheads for the buildings, it’s cheaper for the States to educate children at one of the Catholic primaries than in the other States schools.
So restricting access in the way Education does doesn’t really make any economic sense either – I’m as baffled as you really!
Report abuse
kevin – have a look at this thread:
http://www.thisisguernsey.com/2011/08/15/education-is-out-of-step-on-faith-schools/
Hopefully the answers I gave there are ‘honest’ and ‘no strings’ enough for you.
Report abuse
Chris J: I have to say that although admittedly the States of Guernsey make a mess of everything they get involved in to a greater or lesser extent, the mess they have made of our education system is truly staggering.
Report abuse
Kevin
Why do you have such an issue with people wanting what (they percieve) as the best for their children.
It may have escaped your attention, but the education on this island is for the most part up a creeek without a paddle, I’m not suprised parents are fighting tooth and nail to get their children a better education.
Its what a good parent does.
Report abuse
I don’t really see what the fuss is about. If you want your child to go to a catholic school, have them baptised catholic.
At the end of the day, Notre Dame is a very small school with not a lot of facilities. They can’t take every child out there so there needs to be some kind of limit in place.
As mentioned above, it is partly taxpayer funded, but mainly funded by the Catholic Church. It therefore seems obvious that catholic children should be given priority.
Theoretically after all catholic children desiring a place have been granted one, any additional spaces could be given to non-catholic children, up to an overall limit – but that would then end in a situation where there were more children in the catholic school classes than in the regular primary school classes – disadvantaging the catholic children.
Arguments about the human rights act are moronic. It is a terrible piece of legislation that is abused far more often than it is applied for its intended purposes.
I reiterate – if you are desperate for your child to have a catholic education – have them baptised catholic.
Report abuse
pcm – it’s not quite that simple!
There are various circumstances in which you might want your child to go to a Catholic school, but you can’t have them baptised ‘a Catholic’.
As far as the Catholic church is concerned, there isn’t really any such thing as being baptised ‘a Catholic’. If your child was baptised in an Anglican church for example, you can’t get the bit of paper Education want to see, even though, as far as the Catholic church is concerned, the child is no less Catholic or baptised than a child baptised in a Catholic church. Or you might be a member of a denomination which rejects baptism.
The result is perverse: parents who have strong views on religion or religious education are effectively barred from giving their children a faith schooling, while there is nothing at all to stop a parent with no particular religious affiliation from baptising their child in a Catholic church and gaining automatic admission to the RC Primary of their choice.
The Catholic church wishes its schools to be open to all. From what you are saying it seems you feel that it would be reasonable for the Catholic church (who are stumping up for the buildings) to want to restrict access to Catholics. Perhaps it would, but the Catholic church doesn’t want that at all – what we’re talking about here is actually an Education Department policy. You would have thought Education would be pushing in the opposite direction – since Education is stumping up for the staff wages, they would want to open up access to all taxpayers.
I understand concerns that you might end up disadvantaging ‘catholic children’, which is a question which merits further debate, and dialogue with the church in particular. It’s a shame therefore that Education has opted to overhaul its admissions policy twice in the last three years without a single word of consultation.
And finally, arguments about Human Rights are not moronic. Education seems unwilling to defend its policy in court, and given ChrisJ’s points regarding the R (K) v Newham case, I’m not surprised. As a result Education, in the midst of all the unfairness I’ve already outlined, also gives access to the school to one further class of applicant: People who have the resources to make a credible threat of legal action.
Report abuse
pcm – If you real the full story here you will see that the problem here is the Education Department are preventing the Catholic Schools from admitting non-Catholics, even though the policy of the Roman Catholic church is to admit all who want a “Christ-centred education.”
Since the Catholic Church don’t seem to have a problem with non-Catholics being admitted to their school, why should you?
I think you will also find the policy is to give priority to children from Catholic families, so there would be limited space for non-Catholics anyway.
Report abuse
Paul Le Page – your last paragraph is incorrect. Education’s stated policy is that the only circumstances in which a child from a non-Catholic family will be admitted is if the parents can demonstrate that it would be detrimental to the child’s education for them to attend their catchment school, or if it is otherwise ‘convenient’ for Education to admit them (e.g. because the catchment school is oversubscribed).
Under this policy, these determinations are made by civil servants, who can also deny families the route of appeal to the political Board.
By these restrictions, the policy actively discounts the possibility of due weight being given to religious convictions (which is the test set by R (K) v Newham). It’s also impossible for an applicant to know whether their application has been dealt with consistently or fairly, since the method and process of determining which schools are oversubscribed is kept secret.
Report abuse
John, I think you misunderstood me.
I was responding to pcm’s comment “It therefore seems obvious that catholic children should be given priority” and stating the usual policy of the Roman Catholic Church is to give priority to children of Catholic families.
That is certainly the case in Catholic schools like Blanchelande who are not subject to the whims of the Education Dept. All are welcome to apply but priority is given to Catholics.
Isn’t that the case? You have done far more research that me so I’ll defer to you on it.
Report abuse
Well John Surcombe for someone who says he’s an atheist you certainly take this catholic education bit very seriously don’t you !.
Report abuse
PLP – I get you. I believe that is the sort of policy which is applied by RC schools elsewhere. Likewise in Guernsey I think Education routinely admitted non-Catholics to the local RC schools until around 2008.
It would be practically the simplest policy to apply in Guernsey for now at least, simply because there is overcapacity in the primary sector, so the possibility on non-Catholic families crowding out Catholics just wouldn’t arise.
Report abuse
The Education (Guernsey) Law, 1970 Part IV (34) states ‘In the exercise and performance of all powers and duties conferred and imposed on it by this Law the Council shall have regard to the general principle that, so far as is compatible with the provision of efficient instruction and training and the avoidance of unreasonable expenditure by the states, pupils are to be educated in accordance with the wishes of their parents.’
So doesn’t that mean that Guernsey parents have a legal right to a faith based education if that is their choice. To create more faith faith based places if the school is full might well be deemed unreasonable expenditure. But if there are places available why not allow them to be filled? Is not the Education department’s inflexible catchment area policy actually contravening Guernsey’s Education Law?
Report abuse
Here in Oz they have to take a certain % of non catholics (like Us) a percentage of special needs children, so obviously the pecking order is catholics and siblings first, then the non catholics in the catchment area, but the school didn’t work for us so were now in a christian college (being a St.sampson church gal)
Report abuse
My son was refused entry to Notre Dame in September 2008 by Education despite my husband being Catholic, raised as a Catholic and schooled in Catholic schools. I then hear of several children in the same year who have no Catholic connections whatsoever. Smacks of an elitist system which picks and chooses their students at will.
Report abuse
The Chatholic schools are primarily funded by the States, including staff, consumables, all running costs including heating, water, electricity as well as a annual contribution towards maintenance of the building. They are effectively a States school that have most costs covered for them by the States which means they can operate their buliding and facilities as they wish and the States will pick up the bill. Is this right? i don’t think so! Do we really need these schools? if we do then what about other faiths? seems a mass of contradictions to me and a drain on the taxpayer who currently pays for the running of two small catholic schools when the business case for keeping only one open would not stack up.
Report abuse
John Surcombe / Paul Le Page. Your comments still don’t address the fact that Notre Dame is a very small school. It cannot take all children and so the policy works.
Parents of non-catholic children should push their own churches to set up schools and/or be content with teaching their children about their faith at home and through Sunday school.
Report abuse
Digger, your argument would stand to reason if the catholic schools only taught a few children, but they are full.
On that basis, they represent value for money – the states pays less per pupil in the catholic schools than it does in the regular primary schools.
Report abuse
pcm,
Try telling Andy that the policy works. Education denies her application in 2008, even though her husband actually is a Catholic, and as far as the church is concerned their child is just as much a ‘baptised Catholic’ as any child already in the school.
The following year John Surcombe’s application gets approved not because he has better grounds (he doesn’t), but because he refuses to take no for an answer, asks the right questions, finds out what his rights are, digs his heels in and makes a stand.
Report abuse
PCM – I have every intention of teaching my child about faith at home. I don’t expect a school to do my job for me.
Regarding admissions, if they were left to the Catholic Church and not the Education Department what I imagine would happen is:
- Catholic families get first dibs
- The remaining places are assessed on a case by case basis.
Judging by recent history I don’t see parents flocking to send their children to Notre Dame so I can’t really see a problem. If there was a sudden increase in interest then some people would miss out – it happens in life – and have to send their children to a state school
Report abuse
PCM
But the States primary schools are apparently not full and i’m sure they could shut both catholic schools as well as a couple of other states primary schools and still have capacity, which could save a small fortune.
Report abuse
pcm,
You seem to be under the impression that Education’s policy is justified because the Catholic primaries are full.
Actually, when we attended a hearing in 2009 with the Education Board (our application already having been initially refused, and refused again on appeal), the representative from the Department freely admitted that the Department had made those refusals despite not actually knowing what the capacity of Notre Dame was.
The January 2009 Billet contains some helpful stats though:
http://www.gov.gg/ccm/cms-service/download/asset/?asset_id=9586038
Page 114 shows that, with the possible exception of Hautes Capelles, none of the primary schools are particularly bursting at the seams to the extent that further admissions would mean needing extra staff.
And page 131 shows that Notre Dame’s annual revenue costs per capita are lower (at £3878) than either Vauvert (£4134) or Amherst (£4392), despite Notre Dame being about 30% smaller than either. And those figures probably aren’t really like for like; the chances are that they will include the peppercorn ‘rent’ paid for the use of Notre Dame’s buildings, but no apportionment of the notional cost to the States associated with having to hold on to the capital assets of the other two schools.
So it’s hard to argue that the option of educating a child at Notre Dame is inefficient – on the contrary, in fact!
Finally, you should remember that, despite what they say, Education’s position on non-Catholic admission to Notre Dame is a new one as of sometime around 2008, although its hard to tell when because Education forbade us from seeing a copy of the admissions policy which was applied in rejecting our application. Those figures in the Billet therefore undoubtedly include many non-Catholics, and we were aware of many previously approved cases when we applied.
Report abuse