Theos responds to criticisms of More than an Educated Guess
Unbalanced response by BHA and Accord proves again how ideological and overheated the debate is.
Following the publication of More than an Educated Guess, the latest Theos report which offers a balanced summary and analysis of the evidence around faith schools, The British Humanist Association and Accord published a critical response.
Perhaps what is most baffling is that the BHA and Accord Coalition responses fail to really challenge our overall conclusions. It is worth reiterating that what the Theos report actually claims is that; first, the debate has become overheated (which these responses demonstrate), second, that exclusivity and elitism may be a problem where schools act as their own admissions authority (with which the BHA seems to agree), third, that the faith school effect is unclear (with which again, the BHA agree) and that questions over ethos are difficult to analyse (on which, again, we agree). Theos stands by these conclusions, which are not fundamentally challenged by either response.
Theos has published a response to this critique, which can be read in full here.
The substantive criticisms are as follows:
1) That the report is not exhaustive, excluding some related issues.
2) That it does not deal with academies, foundation schools or free schools.
3) That it includes research that is put forward by groups who are not members of Accord, especially the Church of England and the Catholic Education Service, and that it misses a recent Fair Admissions Campaign project.
To respond to those in order:
1) As it states in the introduction, the report is focused on existing research related to a limited number of key questions and did not set out to be exhaustive. Criticising it for not discussing “swathes of the public discourse around faith schools”, as Accord does, or levels of religious attendance, as BHA does, is vague and irrelevant.
2) This report is a summary and analysis of existing evidence. As the report states up front, the decision to exclude academies and free schools was taken because no developed body of evidence exists in relation to them comparable to that around voluntary controlled and voluntary aided schools. In their response the BHA admit this is a fair point. The report states that this area is expanding rapidly and hopes there will be more research in the future.
3) One of the reasons Theos undertook this project was to provide a place where people could access research put forward by those on both sides of the debate. The recent study by the Fair Admissions Campaign was published in August and the polling by the Westminster Faith Debates was published in September, after the cut-off point necessary for production of the report. However, neither of these omissions alters any of the conclusions drawn in the report but rather strengthen some of them. The BHA and Accord do not indicate that any other significant and relevant research studies were missed and as this was a study based on research, rather than “public discourse”, that would be the only relevant criticism.
Beyond these substantive points, the rest of the response is marked by repetition, point-scoring and ad hominem attacks. This is regrettable as it was precisely the kind of dialogue we have sought to avoid by publishing this report, which is at times critical of both parties in the debate. It does, however, underline our key point that some parties treat the education system as a trophy in an ideological fight.
For the BHA and Accord to launch such an unbalanced attack on a report which seeks to fairly present research from across the spectrum and comes to some of the same conclusions as the BHA itself is proof of how overheated this debate has become.
Notes
1. Theos is a religion and society think tank based in Westminster.
2. For further information or to arrange interviews contact the Theos press office:
Theos
77 Great Peter Street, London SW1P 2EZ
E. press@theosthinktank.co.uk
T. 0207 828 7777
M. 07796325170 (out of hours)
