Faith Schools. posted by Richard Seymour

A few thoughts prompted by the intervention of Osama Saeed in this morning's Guardian (which I cannot link to at the moment as The Guardian's server appears to be down). Saeed has consistently argued for separate 'faith schools' for young Muslims growing up in Britain, and the arguments supplied today are a good summary of the standard: faith schools produce higher average test results; other faiths are allowed state-funded schools; it will help support Muslim identity where the present integrationist approach dilutes it.

Well, I hate to be platitudinous, but the very idea of a 'faith school' is a contradiction in terms, and obviously so for anyone who thinks about it. Education is, or should be, about how to think as much as what to think. It is about cultivating a critical, questioning attitude, which will help people understand rather than merely adapt to the world in which they live. I am not arguing for a second that the present secular state school system does that (or indeed that it is entirely secular). But the answer to the present imperfections is in part to abolish faith schools in their entirety and expunge religion from schools, except as a topic of study. I am not here reinforcing some naive Enlightenment dogma about the inevitable conflict between science and religion - there is not such thing. But faith is about acceptance, an acceptance that goes beyond the evidence of our senses and the grasp of reason. One believes precisely because one cannot rationally grasp or prove. It wouldn't be faith otherwise.

To depart from the obvious for a second, I should point out that it is true that faith schools generally provide better results. They are, in fact, over-subscribed as schools. Doubtless, some will aver that this is because the Founding Father is watching, and approves. However, the National Secular Society points out that while 20% of state school children take free school meals, only 12.2% of CofE school children do. Similarly, the number of kids with special needs in CofE schools is lower than the national average. (For the bewildered, I should point out that the number of kids taking free school meals is an index of poverty in the school. Children from poor backgrounds tend to have more emotional problems, fewer advantages in education, more turbulent family backgrounds and so on). The other thing to point out is that because faith schools are over-subscribed, the schools are allowed a de facto selection process, wherein they can cream off the brightest students (or at least those who do well at tests, which isn't quite the same thing).

The other argument provided by Saeed is that Muslim identity is being diluted in state 'secular' schools. At home, the children are invited to believe there is only one God, while at school they are swishing around in nativity plays pretending to be Magi. I don't find that particularly compelling. For one thing, the topic of that dreary little play (ickle baby Jesus) is the most quoted prophet in the Quran. For another, if that is a problem, the answer is to allow Muslim children to absent themselves from such activities - if they wish.

As a socialist, I don't find it sufficient that we atheists ('Christians in drag' Nietzche calls us) share a land-mass with Muslims. Our children should grow up together, play together and learn together. Then it will be harder for white non-Muslims to grow up and believe in the justice of bombing Muslims. It hardly needs pointing out that the reverse applies. Separating Muslim children from other children is not the answer to the problems (of discrimination, of poor performance, and lack of opportunity) that they have. No state funding for state schools of whatever religion. Parenthetically, I would add that this isn't an expression of that formal neutrality to religion that often ends up specifically targeting Muslims. Socialists ought to be sensitive to the crying need to improve the situation for non-white children growing up in this country - but that is a universalist demand, not a particularist one, and the answer is to provide a system that adequately serves us all.