Editorial By Terry Sanderson
The reassuring news from this week is that the Government has not taken kindly to a report published by the Muslim Council of Britain which demanded that schools in this country make large-scale provision for the traditions and religion of “Muslim” pupils. “This is not official guidance and is not endorsed by the Government, nor does it have any binding power whatsoever on schools,” said a spokesman for the Department for Education and Skills (DfES).
The MCB’s “guidance document” entitled Towards Greater Understanding – Meeting the Needs of Muslim Pupils in State Schools claims to give “information on how schools can respond positively to some commonly raised issues concerning Muslim pupils including halal food, dress code, Ramadan, provision for prayers, collective worship etc”. It was launched by Professor Tim Brighouse, Chief Adviser for London Schools and you can read it here.
Naturally we all want pupils from every culture to be respected and cared for, but as you read through the MCB’s “guidance” you rapidly realise that it is the product of theocrats who want to turn our schools into religious minefields where Islamic sensibilities are waiting to trip you up around every corner.
It starts with the MCB’s favourite definition of “Islamophobia” – a definition that brands anyone who has doubts or fears about the ideology of Islam as a racist. “Islamophobia,” says the report, “is the term currently being used to denote an extreme and abnormal fear and/or aversion to Islam in general and Muslims in particular.”
Neat, isn’t it? If you don’t like Islam you don’t like Muslims, ergo – you’re a racist. The worst excesses of Islam are therefore beyond criticism by anyone who doesn’t want to be branded as racist.
Not all Muslims are as attached to their religion as the MCB document would have us believe. A graph at the beginning of the document claims that 85% of children from Muslim backgrounds regard their religion as “extremely important to them”. There is no indication where this figure came from, though.
There is no acknowledgement that some children from Muslim families might actually not want to put so much emphasis on religious observance while they’re at school. If these recommendations were to be accepted, we would have schools where all Muslims are pushed into the arms of the local mullahs. Girls who don’t want to swathe their heads in scarves will feel obliged to do so. People who don’t want to eat halal food will find they have no alternative.
The demands are never-ending – no Western clothes, no swimming during Ramadan (or at any other time if there is a likelihood that pupils might see somebody naked in the changing room). No dancing, no music (except voices and drums), no sex education, no representative art, no handshaking between sexes – and for goodness sake don’t mispronounce people’s names or give them nicknames. It might be unIslamic.
The Communities Secretary, Ruth Kelly, is holding an enquiry into how to build community cohesion. Well, the first thing she should do to bring people together is to consign this report into the bin. Community Cohesion is not encouraged by emphasising religious differences in schools. Different times for Collective Worship, different times for prayers (in separate prayer rooms), different days for holidays, Arabic lessons, learning the Koran – when are these kids going to find time for lessons?
The more this kind of thing is pushed by the people with a heavy, authoritarian, controlling religious agenda, the more I long for the good sense of the French and the Americans and the Turks. Get religion out of schools. Get all of it out: collective worship; religious education; prayer rooms, the works. Let’s return schools to their primary purpose – academic education. Let’s bring our children together, not drive them apart. Get the self-interested “faith leaders” – Christian, Muslim, Jew, intelligent designers and creationists – out of our education system once and for all. And keep them out.
and
Was Muslim guidance reasonable?
By Mike Baker
Muslims demand "Taleban-style" conditions in our schools.
That was the Daily Express' version of new guidelines for schools from the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB).
In fact, there was no reference that I could find to the Taleban anywhere in the report. Such are the dangers of polarising this debate by inflated language.
Indeed, the document stressed it was intended as "a source of reference" for schools when reviewing their policies in relation to Muslim pupils.
It set out to improve relations between communities.
Yet, what presumably upset the Express was the sheer length and detail of the requests that the MCB was making of schools.
The language was polite but there was a strong insistence that schools should adapt.
How reasonable were these requests? Were they, in fact, demands?
And how practicable is it to expect schools to adapt so many of their practices to meet the needs of, not just Muslim pupils, but other ethnic or religious minority groups?
Emphasis
This debate will beset head teachers, teachers and governors for some time.
This week the High Court upheld the right of a Buckinghamshire secondary school to ban a pupil from wearing the full-face veil or niqab in class because, among other things, it was deemed to be a barrier to communication.
There have been other legal challenges - about the headscarf, for example - and no doubt there are more to come.
After all, there are said to be more than 400,000 Muslim pupils in school education - 96% of them in state schools.
So, how reasonable is the MCB guidance?
The emphasis is almost entirely on how schools should adapt to Muslim pupils rather than vice-versa.
This may be understandable in a guidance document of this kind. However it may explain why hackles were raised at the Daily Express and elsewhere.
The document says more needs to be done to respond positively to the concerns of Muslim pupils and parents.
It calls for special considerations for Muslims in almost every aspect of school life: collective worship, PE, dance, swimming, exams, school meals, sex education and parents' evenings.
Proposals
The report rejects from the outset the policy that religion is a strictly private matter that lies outside the school's remit.
It says such an approach makes it "more difficult" for schools to respond positively to the "distinctive" needs of Muslim children.
Dress codes are one obvious source of potential problems. The MCB report is silent on the full-face veil.
But it does say schools "should accommodate" Muslim girls so they are allowed to wear "a full-length loose school skirt or loose trousers, a long-sleeved shirt and a head scarf".
It adds that the headscarf, properly tied, should also be allowed in PE and science. It also says that amulets containing Koranic verses "should not be considered as jewellery".
As for boys, the guidance says they should be allowed to wear beards. Like the girls, they should be allowed to wear tracksuits during sport and PE.
Changing for PE, which is a compulsory part of the national curriculum, is one of the more troublesome areas.
Many primary schools lack separate changing facilities for boys and girls. Younger children often change in classrooms. This guidance says they should use portable partitions.
It argues that all schools, including secondaries, should ideally have separate changing facilities with "individual changing cubicles".
Muslim children "should not be expected to participate in communal showering".
The compromise of allowing Muslim pupils to shower in bathing costumes is not acceptable either, says the guidance, because Islam also forbids being in the presence of nakedness.
Sports involving physical contact (basketball, for example) should happen only in single-gender groups.
Swimming is fraught with difficulties. Again schools are urged "to make every effort" to provide single-sex swimming lessons, as well as allowing Muslim girls to wear full leotards or leggings in the water.
During Ramadan, some pupils might wish to be excused swimming if they fear that swallowing water would break their fast.
There are many other areas in which Muslim pupils need special consideration:
- they cannot take part in dance school
- meals must include halal options
- Islamic Studies should be offered to all Muslim pupils in RE at Key Stage 4 (GCSE level)
- schools "should consider" offering Arabic to Muslim pupils.
The list is long: there are stipulations covering music, drama, art, school libraries, provision for prayers, school visits, and raffles.
'Backlash'
So does this long list of special requirements help or hinder integration?
The leader of the National Association of Head Teachers, Mick Brookes, clearly has some concerns.
He said: "Schools are trying to create societies within their walls which are tolerant and celebratory.
"I just worry that the list of demands - if that is what it is - may be too much and will simply create a backlash."
I suspect the MCB did not consider this list of special considerations as "demands". But the guidance document does contain a very high count of the word "should".
Inclusivity and racial harmony are important to schools. They certainly have a role in countering racism, prejudice and Islamophobia.
But how far is it reasonable to expect schools to go? And how far should Muslim pupils and parents adapt to British school traditions?
I do not know the answers but would welcome your views.
Hard to manage
However the MCB report does not appear to address this as a two-way process.
While there is much stress on what Muslims might find offensive there is little about the offence that might be taken by other pupils and parents if school practices - such as dance or swimming - have to be changed.
The reality is that some of these special considerations would be hard to manage in schools.
How do you supervise pupils who are, for whatever reason, not taking part in a swimming or dance class?
Is it really reasonable to expect a primary school teacher to erect and dismantle portable partitions every time the class gets changed for PE?
Ban
These are difficult issues. The clashes between school uniform codes and the wearing of the veil have proved that.
There are other sensitivities too. A recent survey showed that 53% of people would support an outright ban on veils in schools.
They may find the veil a barrier to communication or regard it as raising issues of identification. Or they may find it offensive or just simply unfamiliar.
Schools are mostly tolerant places. It is important that these issues are aired and that everyone understands the sensitivities and concerns of others.
Schools certainly need to know what is offensive or problematic for Muslim students. No-one wants to cause offence through ignorance.
But in the end schools also have the right to expect some willingness to conform, whether it is to school uniform codes, curriculum requirements, behaviour policies or parental co-operation.
Also, language will be very important in this: telling schools what they "should" do for one particular group, without necessarily considering the impact on others, may not be the most persuasive approach.
Pertinent Links:
1) Muslim Council Wants To Turn Schools Into Religious Minefields
2) Was Muslim guidance reasonable?
3) Meeting the Needs of Muslim Pupils in State Schools (pdf file)
No comments:
Post a Comment