Christians who don't make my skin crawl!

[bluehillside Retd.]

SteveH,

I wasn't taking sides in this debate before, but this bit of characteristic sneering nastiness from BHS has sided me with Gabriella.

Of course you weren't Steve, of course you weren't.

Are you seriously suggesting that, when given an argument about a generalised phenomenon, Gabriella doesn't routinely respond with a personal anecdote beginning with, "I", "my daughter", "my daughter's friends" etc as if that in some way addressed the argument?

Seriously though?   

[bluehillside Retd.]

Prof,

Here is an alternative. Rather than basing your conclusion on whether you think a poster is sneering at another poster, how about basing it on evidence, so for example the full application data on schools admissions from my local area.

It's Steve - he doesn't "do" evidence.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Why wont you take my word for it? I've given actual numbers for 4 out of the 9 schools.

If you cannot be bothered to check them out - I've given you the link - then I think that totally devalues you not taking my word for it. I have given you and everyone else the link to prove I am wrong. Go to the site, select under 'area' St Albans, limit to 'secondary' schools - you will find those 9 and you can go to each school. Then go to the tab called 'How were school places allocated in previous years' and the numbers I've given will appear for each school.

Do you really think I'd make this stuff up.

Thanks for the detailed instructions but I could not find Area on the site in order to select St Albans but did manage to find stats for application and allocation through another route. I actually ended up looking at some of the Primary school stats.

And to note this pattern has been pretty well constant for years. The only change being that a few years ago one non faith school failed its ofsted and was re-opened as an academy. For a couple of years this school was amongst the bottom 3 with the faith schools. It has been becoming steadily more popular and has now overtaken all of the faith schools, albeit is still the least popular non faith school.

If your point is that people prefer non-faith schools and are increasingly turning their back on faith schools, how does that support BHS's claim that faith schools are programming children to be religious as adults in order to not revoke the CofE's privileged place in society?

It seems it's only a matter of time before CofE privilege is revoked if people who did not go to faith schools as children become even less interested in faith as adults. Or do you hold the view that CofE privilege will not be revoked?

[ProfessorDavey]

Who, frankly, cares?

Are you for real - who cares about schools admissions!?!

Trust me lots of people care about schools admissions. This years' secondary admissions outcomes will be released on 1st March - there will be parents celebrating, others horrified at the school they have been offered. It is a massive deal, and not surprising as this decision will have a substantial bearing on their children's futures.

[ProfessorDavey]

Thanks for the detailed instructions but I could not find Area on the site in order to select St Albans but did manage to find stats for application and allocation through another route. I actually ended up looking at some of the Primary school stats.

And have you checked the ones I provided - can you confirm please that I am correct.

If your point is that people prefer non-faith schools and are increasingly turning their back on faith schools, how does that support BHS's claim that faith schools are programming children to be religious as adults in order to not revoke the CofE's privileged place in society?

It seems it's only a matter of time before CofE privilege is revoked if people who did not go to faith schools as children become even less interested in faith as adults. Or do you hold the view that CofE privilege will not be revoked?

Two separate issues.

There are arguments on principal to oppose faith schools - BHS's is one of them.

But the repost tend to be based on 2 arguments (neither arguments on principal, but on pragmatism), namely that faith school are better and more popular than non faith schools. Neither is true - in terms of progress made by pupils faith schools are no better (as a class of school) than non faith schools. And, as I have indicated I have never seen actual evidence to support a view that faith schools are more more popular, all the evidence points to the opposite conclusion.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Prof,

Yes, but you're forgetting that Gabriella will doubtless have a friend whose daughter knew this person that this didn't happen to so, you know, all this evidencey, statisticy stuff is, well, rubbish really 'cos she can trump it with an actual anecdote.

Glad I've cleared that up for you.

Yes you've cleared up any doubts anyone had that this is more your level of discourse.

You don't present evidence or statistics in your posts - trying to piggyback off another poster's efforts to provide stats does you no credit. Why do you keep doing this to yourself? Maybe you should go back into retirement if this is the best you can manage. Join Floo and take a break.

[SteveH]

Prof,

It's Steve - he doesn't "do" evidence.

Of course I "do" evidence - I am well aware of the uselessness of anecdotal evidence, and have criticised other people for using it before now.

[ProfessorDavey]

Thanks for the detailed instructions but I could not find Area on the site in order to select St Albans but did manage to find stats for application and allocation through another route. I actually ended up looking at some of the Primary school stats.

In which case no doubt you will be able to identify Maple school as the most popular, with an astonishing 304 applications for its 30 places, or 10.13 applications per place.

With Abbey CofE school the most popular faith school with 90 applications for its 30 places, or 3.0 applications per place, noting that Abbey CofE school is the only faith school in the top 18 most popular schools in the city - all the rest are non faith. By contrast faith schools occupy 4 of the bottom 6 places on popularity, with all 3 of the catholic schools in the bottom 5.

[SusanDoris]

I wish I could march up and down the country with a very large banner protesting about faith schools which teach a particular religion rather than teach ABOUT all religions; as part of history or humanities or whatever they want to call it.

[ProfessorDavey]

Of course I "do" evidence - I am well aware of the uselessness of anecdotal evidence, and have criticised other people for using it before now.

And would you therefore like to base your conclusions on the non anecdotal evidence I have provided rather than the anecdotes from Gabriella.

[SteveH]

And would you therefore like to base your conclusions on the non anecdotal evidence I have provided rather than the anecdotes from Gabriella.

I don't really necessarily side with Gabriella - I can't summon up enough enthusiasm to side with anyone. I dare say your evidence is valid.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Gabriella,

Yes you've cleared up any doubts anyone had that this is more your level of discourse.

You don't present evidence or statistics in your posts - trying to piggyback off another poster's efforts to provide stats does you no credit. Why do you keep doing this to yourself? Maybe you should go back into retirement if this is the best you can manage. Join Floo and take a break.

You're floundering. That might be true or not true, but it's not relevant. I've routinely made arguments about generalised phenomena, you've routinely responded with anecdotes. It'd be idle for you to deny that - just count the number of times your response has begun with, "I", "my daughter", "my daughter's friends" etc as if that in some way was relevant.

Why not just own the mistake and move on?

[ProfessorDavey]

I don't really necessarily side with Gabriella - I can't summon up enough enthusiasm to side with anyone. I dare say your evidence is valid.

But if you accept that my evidence is valid then I cannot see how you cannot come to the conclusion that faiths schools in my areas are hugely less popular than non faith schools. Now I cannot generalise to the whole country (but can to the rest of Hertfordshire), but then Gabriella's only 'evidence' of popularity of faith schools, even in her own area is a a few cherry-[picked anecdotes - which I could counter anecdote for anecdote. But I don't rely on anecdotes to make a point, I rely on evidence.

[ProfessorDavey]

Yes you've cleared up any doubts anyone had that this is more your level of discourse.

You don't present evidence or statistics in your posts - trying to piggyback off another poster's efforts to provide stats does you no credit. Why do you keep doing this to yourself? Maybe you should go back into retirement if this is the best you can manage. Join Floo and take a break.

Why don't you provide the data for your area Gabriella.

You could even tell us where that area is and others could look into it.

[Nearly Sane]

But if you accept that my evidence is valid then I cannot see how you cannot come to the conclusion that faiths schools in my areas are hugely less popular than non faith schools. Now I cannot generalise to the whole country (but can to the rest of Hertfordshire), but then Gabriella's only 'evidence' of popularity of faith schools, even in her own area is a a few cherry-[picked anecdotes - which I could counter anecdote for anecdote. But I don't rely on anecdotes to make a point, I rely on evidence.

I think SteveH's remark is somewhat flippant rather than a staunch defence of Gabriella's stance.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

And have you checked the ones I provided - can you confirm please that I am correct.

No I haven't as I don't have time to look for the 9 schools and read the stats. I just glanced at some of the Primary school stats in one area but not in detail  - I can see that a non-faith school received the most applications by far in that particular area.

Two separate issues.

There are arguments on principal to oppose faith schools - BHS's is one of them.

But the repost tend to be based on 2 arguments (neither arguments on principal, but on pragmatism), namely that faith school are better and more popular than non faith schools. Neither is true - in terms of progress made by pupils faith schools are no better (as a class of school) than non faith schools. And, as I have indicated I have never seen actual evidence to support a view that faith schools are more more popular, all the evidence points to the opposite conclusion.

My view is that it depends on the area as to whether the non-faith school has better results than the faith school or if a faith school is more popular.

The research paper - researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN06972/SN06972.pdf - seems to show on page 17 that faith and non-faith schools get broadly similar results.
 

Performance was higher on average at faith schools across all the other
headline performance indicators. However, pupil intake differs between
in faith and non-faith schools, both background characteristics (such as
free school meal eligibility) and their prior attainment, so headline
results may not give us the most meaningful comparisons. The table
below summarises a range of 2016 secondary performance data for
faith and non-faith schools and gives some background data on intake.

Pupils at faith schools were less likely to have low prior attainment when
starting secondary school, more likely to have high prior attainment and
less likely to be eligible for free school meals or be looked after by their
local authority. When the attainment 8 results are broken down by prior
attainment bands the faith/non-faith gap falls to a single percentage
point in each band

It might be better to start a separate thread on this.

[ProfessorDavey]

I think SteveH's remark is somewhat flippant rather than a staunch defence of Gabriella's stance.

Yet he seems reluctant to 'side with me' on the basis of the data I have provided - preferring to use the old 'I can see arguments on both sides' so I'll remain neutral - just as the closet climate change denier sees arguments on both side of the 'debate' as to whether their is global warming and therefore remains neutral!

[ProfessorDavey]

The research paper - researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN06972/SN06972.pdf - seems to show on page 17 that faith and non-faith schools get broadly similar results.

Yes that is correct and has been shown time and team again. Faith schools get better headline grades, but that is because they admit a different cohort of pupils, with higher prior attainment, from more affluent backgrounds and with lower levels of special needs. When the results are adjusted for intake, in other words to look at progress during their tie at that school (which surely must be the most robust measure of a good school academically) then progress scores are no meaningful differences on average between faith and non faith schools.

And actually any differences that exist cannot be attributed to the faith-ethos of the school - rather it is down to schools controlling their own admissions rules (potentially leading to back door selection) as there are similar differences between faith schools that set their admissions rules (typically academies and VA) and those that don't (typically VC), likewise there are differences between non faith schools that set their admissions rules and those that don't.

[Robbie]

Of course I "do" evidence - I am well aware of the uselessness of anecdotal evidence, and have criticised other people for using it before now.

Steve, take note:

Stand easy Private…

Thanks for asking after me. I guess I just got to the point where the endless repetition of nonsense, the dishonesty, the smug complacency etc I read so often in response to cogent argument got too dull to bother with. That’s not to say that there was nothing of interest - torridon and Stranger as examples consistently posted well thought out and intellectually nourishing answers - but it is to say that I’ve given up looking here for arguments for religious belief that have anything like the same degree of content or clarity. Or indeed with anything at all that isn’t logically hopeless.

And that’s a pity I think. Cock-eyed optimist that I am I cling to the notion that there could be robust arguments for god(s), albeit that no-one here seems able or willing to make them. When theists use this mb as a drunk uses a lamppost though – for support rather than illumination – then I’ve concluded that there’s nothing to talk about.

Who knows mind – maybe one day someone will post a sure fire argument for his god that looks irrefutable and I’ll return to the fray.

Until that day, my best wishes to all here.

He doesn't exist so ignore him.

[SteveH]

Yet he seems reluctant to 'side with me' on the basis of the data I have provided - preferring to use the old 'I can see arguments on both sides' so I'll remain neutral - just as the closet climate change denier sees arguments on both side of the 'debate' as to whether their is global warming and therefore remains neutral!

All right, all right! I side with you! Faith schools in Herts are less popular than non-faith ones! Gordon Bennet!

[Nearly Sane]

Yet he seems reluctant to 'side with me' on the basis of the data I have provided - preferring to use the old 'I can see arguments on both sides' so I'll remain neutral - just as the closet climate change denier sees arguments on both side of the 'debate' as to whether their is global warming and therefore remains neutral!

And again it was a flippant comment based on his taste in poster, which he made clear at the time/

[ProfessorDavey]

All right, all right! I side with you! Faith schools in Herts are less popular than non-faith ones! Gordon Bennet!

Thanks you - evidence always wins out in the end.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Gabriella,

You're floundering. That might be true or not true, but it's not relevant. I've routinely made arguments about generalised phenomena, you've routinely responded with anecdotes. It'd be idle for you to deny that - just count the number of times your response has begun with, "I", "my daughter", "my daughter's friends" etc as if that in some way was relevant.

Why not just own the mistake and move on?

I suggest you take your own adivce about owning your mistake and moving on.

You've routinely provided no stats to back up your generalisations, which are about as useful as anecdotes. Your polemics about faith and intellectual cover can't really be classed as arguments - they are entertaining especially when you drift off to discussing the Nazis in relation to a point about Welby, but not in the same league as arguments backed by data.

Your generalised principle is that faith does not establish fact. I have never claimed it does nor presented any anecdotes to counter that principle.

[ProfessorDavey]

My view is that it depends on the area as to whether the non-faith school has better results than the faith school or if a faith school is more popular.

Do you have any actual evidence to support this, or mere assertion and anecdote.

I would accept that academically good schools (based on results, progress etc), including those rated highly by Ofsted tend to be more popular those those that are achieve less well on those measures.

However the 'faith school deficit' remains - compare a fantastic (in Ofsted and other results terms) faith school with a similarly fantastic non faith school and the non faith will get more applications. Likewise comparing middling schools or poor ones.

I mentioned the most popular faith school in my area - Loretto College - this is a catholic girls school with excellent results and rated Outstanding by Ofsted across the board - 490 applications for its 160 places, 3.06 applications per place

Best comparison is with St Albans Girls School (non faith) also with excellent results and rated Outstanding by Ofsted across the board - 958 applications for its 210 places, 4.56 applications per place

You can do any number of like for like comparisons and the non faith school alway wins by a country mile. So this in nothing about the relative academic/Ofsted merits of faith vs non faith schools in a particular area.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Gabriella,.

I suggest you take your own adivce about owning your mistake and moving on.

You've routinely provided no stats to back up your generalisations, which are about as useful as anecdotes.

Stop digging. Seriously, stop doing this to yourself. Businesses spend huge amounts on advertising for a reason – to defend or to increase market share. Mainstream faiths have massive (and free) “advertising” inasmuch as they have open access to media outlets, faith schools set aside for their beliefs (and mandatory acts of worship even in other schools), seats by right in the legislature, countless buildings up and down the country with big signs outside them, carvings of a man being crucified etc.

Your, “but people will make up their own minds” effort is otiose unless you can come up with some argument to explain why advertising does sell Volkswagens but doesn’t sell God. Not providing statistics for how many extra sales VW's advertising budget causes doesn't moreover take away from the demonstrable fact that it does work - hence the huge investment involved.     

Your polemics about faith and intellectual cover can't really be classed as arguments - they are entertaining especially when you drift off to discussing the Nazis in relation to a point about Welby, but not in the same league as arguments backed by data.

You’re not the only one here who doesn’t understand how analogy works. The reference to nazis would have been about a specific issue, not suggesting that the Archbish was one. Take your regular resorting to, “but people derive value from their faith” when the conversation is actually about the epistemic value of the supposed facts some faiths assert. I might in reply (after several failed attempts to get you to see your problem) say something like, “that’s the “at least Hitler built the autobahn’s defence””. That wouldn’t for one moment be to suggest that you had anything in common with nazis though – it would just be using an analogy to explain the problem of addressing an argument you don’t like with an irrelevance.       

Your generalised principle is that faith does not establish fact. I have never claimed it does nor presented any anecdotes to counter that principle.

One “generalised principle” is that faith does not verifiably establish facts yes, necessarily so as there’s no methodology to test the claims of fact it makes. What you have done though is to fall back on anecdote frequently (“I”, “my daughter”, “my friends” etc) when various arguments about generalised phenomena (that advertising works for example) are put to you.

Look, I get that your faith is important to you. I really do. Just throwing irrelevancies, ad homs, anecdotes etc at the the undermining of the arguments you think support it does you no credit though. Why not instead just address openly and honestly the arguments themselves and see where that takes you?