Bad Mouthing Catholic Schools on the Internet
Blogged by James Preece on 8th March 2013
Remember the good old days? When bad mouthing folk on the internet was something only nasty bloggers were allowed to do?
I used to get lectured about how one should never say anything negative about anybody ever even if it's true because people 'have the right to a good name' (do they? even if they are serial liars?) and so on.
These days Catholic bloggers don't need to go around heaping scorn on Catholic schools publicly on the internet. The Diocese is doing it for us...
Inspectors undertaking this inspection in accordance with the Bishop of Middlesbrough Diocese are of the opinion that St Vincent’s school is currently failing in its provision for Catholic education.
...
Leadership and management are inadequate
...The head teacher does not give sufficient leadership or direction to the school’s Catholic life.
...
Governors have too little impact on the direction and work of the school because they are poorly informed. Governors do not take account of the views of parents, pupils and staff because these views are not sought by the head teacher and senior leadership team.
...
The head teacher has recently, and belatedly, joined the Hull Family of Catholic schools.
...
RE is not part of the School Development Plan. The head teacher and Governors fail to work co-operatively in sharing key information for school improvement.
...
Currently, the school’s capacity for sustained improvement is inadequate.
[PDF link]
I'm shocked! Shocked I tell you! How can any Catholic speak about another Catholic in this way? It's nasty! It's undignified! It's uncharitable! The fiends! It's blogs, er I mean Twitter, er I mean reports... that's what does it. Reports have a way of making turn people nasty. Better to only say nice things.
Honestly, if I had written all that on my blog I would have got an angry letter from Dr Jim Whiston by now. If you are wondering who he is - he's the guy the Bishop of Middlesbrough has to ask for permission before he is allowed to blow his nose. Then they say we have no lay involvement...
Still, I'm glad to see that somebody somewhere is finally acknowledging a bit of reality. Unfortunately a part of their solution is to "Enable staff to increase their subject knowledge by attending Diocesan courses". Would those the same Diocesan courses I'm banned from because *gasp* I might call them 'inadequate' on the internet?
Here's an idea. Perhaps we could acknowledge that negative criticism can actually be useful. Pretending everything is okay when it isn't - not so good. It might even be a good thing to have Catholics out there who care enough about improving things to write about it? Even when it loses them friends..
No? Oh I suppose not. Far better to pretend. La la la. I can't hear you. You only wrote that nasty report because you hate everybody.
Reader Comments
+11
Chrysostom said...
I am a little confused by the status of all these comments, but if they are actual comments by inspectors then they are most revealing. The comments are all about the staff and governors and what they do or do not do. There is no mention of what the pupils know and understand about the Catholic Faith. Time was when Catholic religious inspection concentrated on the pupils and their knowledge, not on the "processes". If the pupils know and understand their faith, all is well. If the pupils do not know and understand their faith, then inspectors should say so. The model for inspections should not be the discredited Ofsted but those of the Independent Schools Inspectorate. Their reports are all published on their website and show the concentration on the pupils and how good they are not on processes. After all, parents at independent schools can take their children away if they are not satisfied and parents are keen on their children knowing and understanding and being able to do things: they are not too bothered about the processes by which it is all achieved.
Our Lady Help of Christians - pray for us.
St Athanasius - pray for us
All Ye English Martyrs - pray for us.
St. Charles Lwanga and Companion Martyrs of Uganda who were martyred because they resisted the advances of an evil homosexual paedophile – pray for us.
St John of God - pray for us.
+
+5
James said...
The full report is quite complimentary about the children...
"The children are a real strength of the school. They are polite, caring and keen to talk about their school"
+
+3
Catherine said...
oh er....could it be that the reason that the children are a "strength" of the school is because in fact their primary educators, i.e. their parents are enabling them to be so and NOT the teachers [with all die respect to the positive influence of the few good ones?
+
+1
Mockery of the Sacraments said...
LOL Well behaved children are a credit to their parents, badly behaved children are the result of a badly-run school.
+
+6
Nicolas Bellord said...
"RE is not part of the School Development Plan."
Does that not indicate something about your question as to what the pupils know and understand their faith?
+
+8
Ora Pro Nobis said...
In many respects this report could almost be classified as a miracle because Catholic schools up and down the land are normally allowed to get away with murder by diocese.
There are obviously some good ones out there, but headmasters and school managers, in my experience, are invariably the problem. Most do not seem to give two hoots about the faith (they just pay lip service to it).
Of course, they are trying to concentrate on good results, but this is not good enough. They are paid too much money and they should deal with faith and curriculum in the same measure without exception.
If they are not prepared to successfully fulfill both criteria they should resign. They get paid far too much money to perpetuate mediocrity.
Never mind about Ofsted, as far as Catholic school headmasters and managers are concerned they should be subjected to 'Cathsted' and if found wanting they should be sacked. Enough is enough of their mediocrity.
+
+1
New Friend said...
Any head ignoring Ofsted would soon find themselves in big trouble. It is simply not a viable course of action for any school subject to their inspections. A balance has to be found. If the school is part of the state system (and in my view they all must be) then they have to be run in a way that is approved by the state. You cannot allow a school to be subject to unreasonable pressure from parents over issues which might be important to them, but are not so considered by others. Compromises are required.
+
New Friend said...
If I were the head teacher of that school I would feel pretty satisfied with that report. Ofsted will also report (I have been on the receiving end of many Ofsted reports), and will come from another direction. Balancing their demands, against these, will never be easy and is probably impossible. This report is written in an Ofsted style and uses the same grading system. Like any such report it represents the personal view of the inspector about many aspects of the inspection. Another time, another inspector, another opinion and another report. Put the head, this inspector and the Ofsted inspector in a room and let them argue it out and I would take a big bet as to who would win. The head knows the school and the children much better than anyone else and I back them every time. If they fail then the governors need to step in. If parents are unhappy then take their kids away. The comments on the children are very positive, even about their knowledge of the importance of their faith in their lives, so it looks to me as though the school is doing a fine job.
+
+2
Hullite said...
This has been all over the local secular news, it is not just poor from a faith point of view but in all aspects of management and teaching but don't let that stop your illogical bias.
+
+4
Simon Platt said...
Of course it can cut two ways. I know a chap, headmaster of a catholic primary school, who got into terrible bother with his diocesan inspectorate. He was too catholic, you see.
Still, I take the point about public criticism. You shouldn't bother about it, though.
+
+4
Jack Regan said...
Ultimately, there are two types of criticism: one is born out of hatred and the desire to give our enemies a good kicking, while the other is given in charity and designed to strengthen those things deemed to be important. In my career I've seen plenty of both from large, official bodies and I've seen plenty of both from blogs (in general, that is). Both now seem to be coming round to the latter more and more and that's something I think we should all be grateful for. Inspections seem to be moving away from their 'this is either a hatchet job or a nice rubber stamp depending on the mood in the office' vibe, and blogs seem to be moving away from the 'we're really angry and we want to lash out' vibe. And in doing so, both seem to be proving themselves capable of doing some good stuff!
+
+2
epsilon said...
I'm looking forward to hearing back from the local 'good' Catholic girls school whose dep head promised me several weeks ago to investigate the possibility of having a couple of young people active in the prolife movement (40DFL) give an assembly presentation to their students.......
He also promised to have a word with them about the image they create when they use the Lord's name mingled with expletives in the main street.......
Waiting patiently!
+
+1
Mockery of the Sacraments said...
Perhaps these young ladies swearing & blaspheming the name of Christ is the correct & appropriate image that they ought to be giving.
LOL How many of these young ladies, & by extension "Catholic children" generally, are children from nonobservant homes, taught in schools where believing Catholics (orthodox or otherwise) are a minority, who experience the Faith merely as a mechanism of social control within an educational setting?
+
+5
Supertramum said...
If a Catholic school anywhere takes money and curriculum from a government, it has compromised Catholic teaching and identity.
I have much experience setting up real Catholic schools in America and Canada-private ones connected to NAPCIS which do a stellar job. The Faith is not a subject, it is a way of thinking and a lifestyle.
In England, the schools are pathetic and should be shut down.
I home schooled.
+
New Friend said...
I agree. They should all be closed, and re-opened as secular institutions, whilst retaining their commitment to discipline and high achievement. All fully private schools are also, by the way, subject to regulation, whatever their ethos. I would also not permit home schooling except in the most exceptional circumstances.
+
+4
Ben Trovato said...
Your mistrust of homeschooling is very interesting. It seems to imply that children belong to (their education must be regulated by and their first loyalty to) the State rather than the family.
I disagree.
The risk of dysfunctional families miseducating children is of course a real and actual threat; however they will be in a minority and will also mis-educate in different ways.
The risk of a dysfunctional state miseducating children is also a real and actual threat; and here they are all miseducated in the same way, which is far more harmful.
+
+1
Mark Dobson said...
Each and every family is a unique group of unique individuals, and consequently each and every family represents the “most exceptional circumstances”.
So I completely agree with NF’s proposal: limit the availability of home schooling to all families without exception.
Unless people are just walking statistics to be managed as the will of the majority sees fit, of course.
+
+1
New Friend said...
Mark
The exceptions I imagine are only those where, because of physical limitations, it is impossible for a child to attend school. That families are all "unique" is no more relevant than saying every finger print is "unique". It is what we share which is important, not what we don't. Denying children the benefit of a state education, alongside a loving home life, is not a sensible arrangement.
+
+3
Mark Dobson said...
“It is what we share which is important, not what we don't.”
Wonderful: I don’t share 99% percent of your opinions. Consequently, it’s a great relief to find that they are unimportant.
+
New Friend said...
Mark
As you don't know any of my opinions, other than the very few I have expressed on here, I doubt that is true. We don't agree about Catholicism for sure but, strange to tell, there are many other things to consider, and I suspect we would agree about many more than we would disagree upon. Finding areas of agreement are so much more productive than maintaining chasms of difference. I recommend it to you.
+
+1
New Friend said...
Ben
I distrust home schooling because of the likely motives of those who choose it, and the negative impact upon the children of being educated away from the mainstream. You might think those motives are entirely correct. I believe they have the potential to be approaching child abuse.
We have plenty of checks and balances to ensure we don't have a dysfunctional state. It is called democracy, and whilst you might like it, the rest of us do.
+
+9
Supertradmum said...
PS I home schooled in England and in the States
+
+6
Marguerita said...
If you check out home schooling organisations in the UK, you will see that the most common reason for homeschooling here is bullying in schools. In most cases home schooling is only taken up as a very last resort when every effort to improve the situation for the child at school has failed. The state doesn't seem to be very good at dealing with bullying.
+
+4
epsilon said...
Marguerita - that's because the state is the bully! Bullying in schools is a top-down affair. State schools sole purpose is to numb the masses into submission.
+
+7
Catherine said...
NF says
"I distrust home schooling because of the likely motives of those who choose it...I believe they have the potential to be approaching child abuse. "
can this man's warped opinion of the vast majority of parents who are legally free to homeschool in this country and elsewhere be any more....well...warped??
+
New Friend said...
Catherine
Whilst I accept that those parents who withdraw their children from school because of bullying have the purest motives, I think that this ought to mean that as a society we need to deal with this failing much more effectively. Withdrawal ought therefore to be only a temporary measure.
The parents whose motivation I question are those who do so because they wish their children to be educated surrounded solely with their own opinions. If they are to be denied the opportunity to consider alternative views, and be allowed to reach their own conclusions, this comes close to brainwashing. How can brainwashing be a warped conclusion? My targets, by the way, are not Catholics, but anyone who fits such a description. I realise that the legal right currently exists, and I respect that. Along with many others I would like to see it restricted and am arguing for change. Just as you argue for change on abortion. Its called democracy!
+
+6
Chrysostom said...
"New friend" is up to his, of her, old tricks of trying to flood this good website with his, or her, odd comments.
As I write this, there are 26 comments, seven by this person, two of them consecutive. No one else has written even three. He, or she, has put 53 lines of text.
Our Lady Help of Christians - pray for us.
St Athanasius - pray for us
All Ye English Martyrs - pray for us.
St. Charles Lwanga and Companion Martyrs of Uganda who were martyred because they resisted the advances of an evil homosexual paedophile – pray for us.
+
+1
New Friend said...
Chrysostom
I respond to comments, to continue the debate. No-one is obliged to either read them or themselves respond. My comments might seem odd to you, and those who are expected to think as you do, but will not be to those who don't. My hope is that by ensuring that the counter viewpoint is known to you, that you at least know it exists.
At least what I write doesn't always end with the identical 5 lines, especially the ones you select. Very odd!
+
+3
Marguerita said...
New Friend seems to be labouring under the illusion that anyone who is a faithful Catholic must be brainwashed and shut off from other viewpoints in order to remain so. He also seems to think that we want to shut off our children from other influences that are inimical to Catholicism. In todays world, it would be virtually impossible to do that, unless you locked your children in a dungeon. There is tv, mobile phones, the internet, newspaper and magazine headlines etc. Does he really think that our children (and ourselves) never have to deal with or debate alternative views? Even homeshooled children usually get involved with music, sports and other interest groups and of course will come across other lifestyles and viewpoints. Many Catholics too have had times when they have wandered from the faith, or at least become a bit lukewarm, and perhaps dabbled with other ways of doing things, and have come back because they realise what they left behind. We are not all blind sheep. To converse with anyone sensibly about the issues of the day, one normally will have to have done a little reading and research to understand the Church's teachings.
+
New Friend said...
Marguerita
I am fully aware of what you say, which is why I was careful to describe my concern as the "motivation" to achieve these things, and not the possibility that it might be successful. It is the mindset which concerns me and the type of indoctrination which accompanies it. It speaks of control and not of an encouragement to investigate.
+