Liberté, égalité, fraternité
Actually, I would argue that, perhaps, a rigid curriculum is a good thing as long as it is based on evidence-based policies rather than the whims of a Minister of Education and his or her upbringing. It is an argument that needs much more development and research that I intend to do over the next couple of years. In the meantime, I agree that we are definitely experiencing the worst of of all worlds.
I didn't really have a point to make as such. What laverte picked up on - the French not granting state subsidy to the school when it does to thousands of religious schools - is what made me initially interested. However, it does throw up many other points.
Although this Muslim school opened roughly the same time as 9/11 so can't really be seen as any reaction to that, it is notable that Muslim schools have been opening since then. Not many still but more than previously. Again, I doubt whether 9/11 directly affected that but, indirectly in France's reactions to Muslims as listed on this thread, there could be a move to Muslim schools. I doubted whether secular France wanted to drive children into Muslim schools. However, as laverte has clarified, no state subsidy does mean more inspections.
Another notable point arising from that article is the state subsidy of religious school per se. This was something that, due to its secular nature, I didn't realise France did at all. That this state subsidy is given out to Jewish and Catholic schools but is held back from Muslim schools is odd and divisive.
The erroneous point about it being in St Denis was just a post script that, in an area that has been portrayed this week as a mostly Muslim area, there is, firstly, an obviously long held feeling that a Muslim school was needed. Whether this is just due to a need for Islamic instruction in a school or a reaction to the post-9/11 anti-Islam laws we have discussed, I do not know. Secondly, whatever the reasons for the opening the school, people will see that it - and other Muslim schools that have been opened in its wake* - it is not getting state subsidies that Jewish and Catholic schools. This does not project a attitude of equality from the government.
I suppose my main point is, as laverte alludes to, the government are not doing anything for inter-cultural relations by not subsidising the school. Indeed, as discussed before on this thread, they seem wantonly sowing the seeds of Muslim suspicions. They have also seem to have shot themselves in the foot if they want Muslim children educated in a secular, free, united and equal manner.
*
I thought the Lille school was still waiting for state subsidy, laverte?
laverte wrote: I guess this isn't the thread for discussing our visions of a better education system, but I will note that, in England, I think we have the worst of all worlds. The rigid curriculum and lack of diversity in teaching goals mean that the differences between one school and another are vertical (better exam results, selective intake). I don't think that's the only type of difference there should be.
ad hoc wrote: I get the feeling that you had a reason for posting this school Bored, and it all made sense in your head and so you just put your thoughts down, without explaining what was the background and the context you wanted to highlight. It has brought up laverte's interesting post, but I think if you've got a point to make and begin debate on, you perhaps need to rewrite your 19:13 post to make it clearer what you want to ask and why. Because at the moment it's just massively confusing.
Although this Muslim school opened roughly the same time as 9/11 so can't really be seen as any reaction to that, it is notable that Muslim schools have been opening since then. Not many still but more than previously. Again, I doubt whether 9/11 directly affected that but, indirectly in France's reactions to Muslims as listed on this thread, there could be a move to Muslim schools. I doubted whether secular France wanted to drive children into Muslim schools. However, as laverte has clarified, no state subsidy does mean more inspections.
Another notable point arising from that article is the state subsidy of religious school per se. This was something that, due to its secular nature, I didn't realise France did at all. That this state subsidy is given out to Jewish and Catholic schools but is held back from Muslim schools is odd and divisive.
The erroneous point about it being in St Denis was just a post script that, in an area that has been portrayed this week as a mostly Muslim area, there is, firstly, an obviously long held feeling that a Muslim school was needed. Whether this is just due to a need for Islamic instruction in a school or a reaction to the post-9/11 anti-Islam laws we have discussed, I do not know. Secondly, whatever the reasons for the opening the school, people will see that it - and other Muslim schools that have been opened in its wake* - it is not getting state subsidies that Jewish and Catholic schools. This does not project a attitude of equality from the government.
I suppose my main point is, as laverte alludes to, the government are not doing anything for inter-cultural relations by not subsidising the school. Indeed, as discussed before on this thread, they seem wantonly sowing the seeds of Muslim suspicions. They have also seem to have shot themselves in the foot if they want Muslim children educated in a secular, free, united and equal manner.
*
The first one to successfully apply, in Lille, is now considered the best-performing lycée in France.
Comment