1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice


Discussion in 'Ofsted inspections' started by Iftilsi, May 30, 2016.

  1. Iftilsi

    Iftilsi New commenter

    "Sir Michael Wilshaw estimated only one in 500 pupils wear the veil in the UK"

    Surely there can't be that many veiled pupils. 250 out of every 500 are boys. Is there really one veiled girl out of the remaining 250 students?

    Question: would you want your children's head teacher to be wasting time on this silliness - which boils down ideological conflict versus political correctness - instead of improving maths teaching...? Schools are now grappling with lots of stuff and nonsense which should actually be the job of the Home Office.

    Schools will be marked down by Ofsted for the first time if inspectors judge that wearing the veil – by students or teachers – is a "barrier to learning".

    Sir Michael Wilshaw, the chief inspector, has on Tuesday written to all inspectors instructing them to mark down institutions where they believe the veil hinders "positive social interaction".

    He said that people need to listen to David Cameron’s concerns that “our liberal values, our liberal West values, are protected”. The new rules will affect around 16,000 children and just under 1,000 teachers who currently wear the veil to school.

    It comes after the Prime Minister announced that Muslim women can be banned from wearing veils in schools, courts and other British institutions. This is the coward's way out - putting inspectors, head teachers and schools into the ideological front line. Cameron should lead from the front instead of shoving educators into the front line and washing his hands .

    An school inspection expert said there was no research to support Ofsted's veil penalty for schools. Dr Andrew Clapham, senior lecturer at Nottingham Trent University, said: “Ofsted’s threat to penalise institutions where the Muslim veil is worn has no basis in research. There is no credible evidence base to suggest that “wearing a piece of clothing on one's head has an impact on intellectual or academic ability”.

    “Moreover, the veil is no more or less physically inhibiting than a whole range of other headwear. Consequently, it appears bemusing that this piece of clothing should be signalled specifically as having a hindrance on learning. To claim that the veil, as Sir Michael Wilshaw the Chief Inspector suggests, can impact negatively on “positive social interactions” is also lacking a basis in research.

    “Penalising an institution because of a piece of clothing raises a whole range of questions which appear beyond the remit of the school inspectorate. If Ofsted is to pursue this initiative, then empirical evidence should be analysed prior to making such a policy decision.”

    A Department for Education spokesman said "we fully support" the statement from Sir Michael that head teachers who "restrict the wearing of the veil to support effective teaching and learning will receive Ofsted's backing".

    Mr Cameron said that he will give his backing to public authorities that put in place “proper and sensible” rules to ban women from wearing face veils in comments which will reignite debates.

    Schools have had uniform rules challenged time and again and courts typically show then to be unenforceable. Face coverings are not banned by law. Schools will find it difficult to enforce any ban as part of the uniform. Ofsted will therefore criticise schools for allowing something that is completely legal.

    If the government are prepared to stick their neck out and ban then then they should do it. Calling on others to do something is pathetic whilst they're unwilling to do something themselves. Is there anyone in government with any balls to say what they mean?

    The Government is preparing to announce a series of measures designed to stop British Muslims becoming radicalised and traveling to the Middle East to join terrorist groups such as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).

    As part of the plans, ministers will pledge to outlaw gender segregation during meetings in public buildings amid concerns that some Muslim organisations are forcing women to sit separately.

    Ofsted's move was faced with opposition by Muslim leaders. Dr Sheik Howjat Ramzy, director of Iqra Institute in Oxford and former head of an Islamic school, said Ofsted’s move was “unjust” and it was “picking on Muslims in particular”.

    He told the Daily Telegraph: “I believe he’s totally wrong and this is totally unjust. Ofsted is picking on faith schools, specially Muslim schools. There is nothing wrong with wearing the head veil.”

    He estimated only one in 500 pupils wear the veil in the UK. He added: “Not many pupils wear the veil. The veil doesn’t make pupils intelligent or not. It gives them their identity and some security. Pupils have the right to wear the veil if they go to Islamic schools. That is no problem.” "It is also clearly right that if the wearing of the veil is interfering with education in schools that should trigger action from Ofsted."

    Teachers criticised Ofsted's move too.

    Leora Cruddas, Director of Policy at the Association of School and College Leaders, said: "We do not think that it is the role of Ofsted inspectors to judge schools on uniform policies and dress codes. Inspectors should focus on what schools achieve rather than what people wear. Schools make decisions on uniform policies and dress codes with the needs of their staff and pupils in mind and take into consideration relevant educational, welfare and equalities issues."

    You cannot have a multi-ethnic society and then impose restrictions on people's ethnicity. If their religious requirements are to wear a niqab/veil/yashmak/burka they must be free to choose to do so. It's not for the government or school teachers to dictate what should be worn in school or anywhere else. If teachers need to identify pupils whose faces are covered there is always the simple expedient of wearing an ID tag, if you go into any government department they give you one to wear so that you can be identified, it's no big deal. The government is a servant of the people, they are not dictators. Have you never heard of religious freedom? The government is there to see that in a democracy people of different faiths or none can abide by the tenets of their faith without interference. The women I see going about with a bit of black cloth ties round their heads never seem very subjugated. They are in groups with other, unveiled, women, and chatter away to each other in local accents as they shop.

    But wearing religious garb must be left to the discretion of the wearer. If it offends the teacher on the grounds that covering the face is incompatible with his/her ability to teach a class then some compromise must be reached. That is what this whole question revolves around. Who is prepared to give ground? It could be argued that the pupil is welcome in the class but the face must be recognisable. If the pupil insists that their religion demands a complete cover-up then it is a simple matter that on religious grounds they cannot be part of the class. If the teacher is comfortable with teaching a covered-up pupil then a suitable compromise has been reached.
    Banning the wearing of the burka is every bit as oppressive as enforcing its use. If women choose to adopt this apparel it's their decision.
    Would you ban Scotsmen from wearing the kilt?

    Would you ban Sikhs from wearing the turban?

    Would you ban priests from wearing the clerical collar?

    Would you ban Tibetan monks from wearing their orange robes?

    I think that adopting a style of clothing to please your imaginary friend is a bit silly I would never deny you the right to dress as you choose,

    “However, Sir Michael Wilshaw once again has chosen to issue punitive dictates to threaten schools through the use of ‘inadequate’ Ofsted judgements rather than enabling them to develop their own sensible and appropriate policies on the wearing of religious clothing at school. Rather than assisting school leaders this will have the effect of alienating many staff and pupils.”

    Burqa, Niqab,burkini, sharia laws, halal food, state funded Muslim schools with Muslim teachers, Masajid are for the Muslim community and nothing to do with non-Muslims. There is no place for a non-Muslim child or a teacher in a Muslim school.

    Muslims in the West are not asking for Sharia to be the law of the land. The Law of the land is the only law applicable and executable in affairs of the individuals.

    All they are seeking is to let Sharia be available as an alternative to resolve their spousal and contractual disputes between two individuals. That is their prerogative. Indeed, every human, no matter who it is, goes first to their family members and friends for seeking solutions to their problem some will go to their clergy (all religions) and some will appoint a mediator.

    When Muslims go to their clergy, he or she will look up similar situations in the past and guide the couple or business partners to find a solution, since the immigrant Muslims are familiar with the Sharia laws, they may accept it, and if they do, that is good for them.

    The problem is that of trust – when the parties agree to the terms per their Imam/clergy, and don’t abide by it, there is no way the aggrieved party can seek damages for the violations. This is what Muslims are asking, to make that binding.

    Indeed, it would be binding if they go to the judge and say, we have agreed to these terms and conditions per our religious conviction, and seek the judge to sign the order and the court order becomes executable.
    The judge looks to it as mediator resolved decision and signs it
    and it will become executable. The right wing Americans are downright stupid and making a bid deal about this, as if Sharia will become the law of the land.

    What Muslims have is Personal Sharia, that is a private relationship between the individual and God. How they pray, worship, fast, pay zakat, how they bury their individuals, marry per the requirement as a religious rite. All of that is a private matter and does not need any regulation or execution.

Share This Page