So when will being 'white British' become a crime?

Amid all the furore about Islamist infiltration of schools in Birmingham, another story involving the education watchdog Ofsted has received rather less attention.

Inspectors have criticised a rural school in Devon for being insufficiently ‘diverse’. Although they concede that Payhembury Primary is a ‘happy place’, it has been denied an ‘outstanding’ rating because all 68 pupils are of ‘white British heritage’. Well, they would be. Small villages in Devon tend not to be melting pots of multiculturalism. Parents have been told that they must pay £35 to send their children on a ‘sleep-over’ at a school in Isleworth, West London, where three-quarters of pupils are from ethnic minority backgrounds.

What bothers me about all this is the language being used and the element of compulsion — as well as the frankly sinister revelation that a school can be marked down by Ofsted not because of the standard of education it provides but because there are too few black and brown faces in the playground. Why should a school be penalised because its pupils are from a ‘white British heritage’ background?

In some schools in London, the roll call is similarly mono-cultural, but 100 per cent Muslim rather than exclusively C of E. Are devout Islamic parents in Tower Hamlets going to be told they must fork out £35 for their children to be sent on a sleep-over in Devon so they can meet people of a ‘white British heritage’ and learn all about the Anglican faith?

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2653494/RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN-So-white-British-crime.html#ixzz34Eo8eA7x

Pc madness.

Spread through our govt and organisations like a disease.

I think these cultural exchanges are very beneficial, though it shouldn't be a financial burden to any one group.

But come on, the idea of being white British becoming a crime is silly; yes, there are a lot of white people committing crime every day in the U.K. but it's only a small percentage.

Ben_Reilly wrote:I think these cultural exchanges are very beneficial, though it shouldn't be a financial burden to any one group.

But come on, the idea of being white British becoming a crime is silly; yes, there are a lot of white people committing crime every day in the U.K. but it's only a small percentage.

The exchanges can be a good idea but should they be forced?

If you were living in a small town in the US which had a generally homogeneous population how would you feel if the government told you that there was a problem with the schools because all the students were the same race and to combat this the parents would have to shell out to send the children on a trip to the inner city so they could experience a school where some pupils were of different race?

Or would it be better if the British government introduced a law to say that all villages, no matter how small and distant, must have a minimum of one ethnic minority family so the local school children could "experience" them.

I mean come on the root of this story is a school being told that it will not be awarded maximum status because all of its pupils are white. If the story was of a school being told it had to stay at minimum status because all pupils were black you would be screaming racism - so how come it is not racist to say your school is not good enough because the pupils are all the wrong race?

They should be more concerned that schools are too foreign.



What country is This?

sphinx wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:I think these cultural exchanges are very beneficial, though it shouldn't be a financial burden to any one group.

But come on, the idea of being white British becoming a crime is silly; yes, there are a lot of white people committing crime every day in the U.K. but it's only a small percentage.

The exchanges can be a good idea but should they be forced?

If you were living in a small town in the US which had a generally homogeneous population how would you feel if the government told you that there was a problem with the schools because all the students were the same race and to combat this the parents would have to shell out to send the children on a trip to the inner city so they could experience a school where some pupils were of different race?

Or would it be better if the British government introduced a law to say that all villages, no matter how small and distant, must have a minimum of one ethnic minority family so the local school children could "experience" them.

I mean come on the root of this story is a school being told that it will not be awarded maximum status because all of its pupils are white.  If the story was of a school being told it had to stay at minimum status because all pupils were black you would be screaming racism - so how come it is not racist to say your school is not good enough because the pupils are all the wrong race?

I've really just been commenting on the educational value of the field trip itself; I'd appreciate it if you didn't make me out to be endorsing the school rating status or the expense to the parents.

But yeah, here in the states we do this sort of thing all the time, kids are routinely rousted out of their classrooms and taken to meet people different from them. It's healthy and good, and I don't consider it "forcing" anything on them any more than mathematics class "forces" them to learn algebra.

There's already a thread about this.

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t5112-too-white-devon-primary-gets-parents-to-pay-for-trip-to-black-london-school

Ben_Reilly wrote:

sphinx wrote:


The exchanges can be a good idea but should they be forced?

If you were living in a small town in the US which had a generally homogeneous population how would you feel if the government told you that there was a problem with the schools because all the students were the same race and to combat this the parents would have to shell out to send the children on a trip to the inner city so they could experience a school where some pupils were of different race?

Or would it be better if the British government introduced a law to say that all villages, no matter how small and distant, must have a minimum of one ethnic minority family so the local school children could "experience" them.

I mean come on the root of this story is a school being told that it will not be awarded maximum status because all of its pupils are white.  If the story was of a school being told it had to stay at minimum status because all pupils were black you would be screaming racism - so how come it is not racist to say your school is not good enough because the pupils are all the wrong race?

I've really just been commenting on the educational value of the field trip itself; I'd appreciate it if you didn't make me out to be endorsing the school rating status or the expense to the parents.

But yeah, here in the states we do this sort of thing all the time, kids are routinely rousted out of their classrooms and taken to meet people different from them. It's healthy and good, and I don't consider it "forcing" anything on them any more than mathematics class "forces" them to learn algebra.

Read again Ben.

This is not about the trip itself - is is about why the trip is needed.

It is about a school being told it cannot achieve the highest rating because its pupils are all white. Even with the trip the school will not be able to achieve highest rating. The only way the school can achieve highest rating is by getting a couple of ethnic minority pupils.

Do you believe that a school cannot adequately educate pupils about other races and other faiths if it does not have some pupils from those races/faiths attending?

That seems a bit ridiculous, but I do, of course, think learning about other cultures is possible without a member from that culture physically present. In fact, that scenario raises a lot of awkward situations. However, I don't think you can learn nearly as well about people from other cultures in a classroom as you can by actually visiting with them.

Ben_Reilly wrote:That seems a bit ridiculous, but I do, of course, think learning about other cultures is possible without a member from that culture physically present. In fact, that scenario raises a lot of awkward situations. However, I don't think you can learn nearly as well about people from other cultures in a classroom as you can by actually visiting with them.

So what do you think of a school being told it cannot reach the highest standard because its pupils are all the same race?

sphinx wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:That seems a bit ridiculous, but I do, of course, think learning about other cultures is possible without a member from that culture physically present. In fact, that scenario raises a lot of awkward situations. However, I don't think you can learn nearly as well about people from other cultures in a classroom as you can by actually visiting with them.

So what do you think of a school being told it cannot reach the highest standard because its pupils are all the same race?

That is just the DM version and not true. It said: It follows comments by OFSTED that Payhembury Primary was being - insufficiently multicultural - although inspectors rated the school as good. http://www.itv.com/news/westcountry/story/2014-06-09/devon-school-labelled-not-multi-cultural-enough/

And it didn't mean that there were not enough children from different races in the school, it meant that they were not being taught about different ethnicities, hence the trip to teach them about others, just like I had a trip to teach me that Germans were not all monsters in the 50s.

well they cant get the highest rating that is true and fair. they have failed to expose their students to diversity. Even if Academically perfect the school that is Academically perfect and Multicultural will have given their students a more complete education simply by exposure to people of other races.

I would put the lack of exposure to other races as one of the UK's biggest problems and probably the major factor in it's racist attitudes. Which will inevitably limit your trading and business opportunities into the future.

No don't take it the wrong way a Multicultural school is not by default better but IF it can achieve the same academic results while prompting diversity it is 'better' than the monoculture school.

So you people think if fair that a little school in a little village with no diversity should be held back for not exposing the pupils to something that is not there in their area?

You think that taking them to a totally different environment (the city) is going to reduce racist attitudes?

I wonder if you have any idea of the differences between white british city inhabitants and white british village inhabitants or get the idea of negative attitudes between groups of the same ethnic racial roots but different environments.

Presumably also as you think that as multicultural schools at the same academic results are better than monocultural schools you think multicultural villages are better than monocultural ones and would like to see government initiatives to get some diversity into those villages so awkwardly remaining white British.

@Sphinx
hill shepherds  :\\:[: 

why are the being held back? the school just didn't receive the HIGHEST rating. it got very good, just not outstanding... what is the big deal it is not outstanding it is missing a part of the COMPLETE education IF someone is to be a profitable member of society, which the whole point of public education in thew first place.

  IF they ever leave their village to enter the Big wide world that may be a useful education probably a lot better doing it as kids in a situation where the whole point it is the first time you are seeing people of other races than say at university or a job when you move to a city  

and yeah i do sort of agree with the last part.... you don't want to end up like the inbred hill shepherds in parts of the middle east  
or at least make them tourist attraction things like they do in the third world nations   
::troll:: 

the evidence is already in Multiculturalism creates a stronger more efficient economy  ::D:: 

I am not talking about hill shepherds in the Middle East - I am talking about villages in the UK where the residents have far more issues with whether the new neighbour is from the city than they are what colour their skin is or what religion they are.

They can (and do) despise the white British guy who originated in the near by city who does not take his litter home, and who has a nice new flash 4x4 for "country living" but doesnt know how to drive it, far more than the some other colour guy from thousands of miles away who is learning to read the sky for British weather and displaying new "ethnic" craft skills.

I guess the villages are monocultural - just not the mono culture you are thinking of.

Their culture is of being close to nature even while using modern technology for full benefits - and they have little time for people who have lost their links with the natural world. Colour and religion dont come into it - an understanding of soil, an ability to approach a large animal without fear, a nose for weather change - they do. The "ethnic" family from rural India or Africa will settle quicker and be taken deeper than a white family from London.

Those children from that village will, when (if) they leave for university and city life have far more problems adjusting to the British whites they meet than they will the ethnics. Sending them on a sleep over to meet some different coloured children is not going to help that one iota.

sphinx wrote:I am not talking about hill shepherds in the Middle East - I am talking about villages in the UK where the residents have far more issues with whether the new neighbour is from the city than they are what colour their skin is or what religion they are.

They can (and do) despise the white British guy who originated in the near by city who does not take his litter home, and who has a nice new flash 4x4 for "country living" but doesnt know how to drive it, far more than the some other colour guy from thousands of miles away who is learning to read the sky for British weather and displaying new "ethnic" craft skills.

What a very negative poor stereotype view you have of people from the city.

veya_victaous wrote:well they cant get the highest rating that is true and fair. they have failed to expose their students to diversity. Even if Academically perfect the school that is Academically perfect and Multicultural will have given their students a more complete education simply by exposure to people of other races.

I would put the lack of exposure to other races as one of the UK's biggest problems and probably the major factor in it's racist attitudes. Which will inevitably  limit your trading and business opportunities into the future.

No don't take it the wrong way a Multicultural school is not by default better but IF it can achieve the same academic results while prompting diversity it is 'better' than the monoculture school.

Is 'exposing students to diversity' part of the curriculum nowadays then? I thought that was what Ofsted ratings were about.

Didge wrote:

sphinx wrote:I am not talking about hill shepherds in the Middle East - I am talking about villages in the UK where the residents have far more issues with whether the new neighbour is from the city than they are what colour their skin is or what religion they are.

They can (and do) despise the white British guy who originated in the near by city who does not take his litter home, and who has a nice new flash 4x4 for "country living" but doesnt know how to drive it, far more than the some other colour guy from thousands of miles away who is learning to read the sky for British weather and displaying new "ethnic" craft skills.

What a very negative poor stereotype view you have of people from the city.

And where did I say it was my view?

I simply tried to describe a common attitude among country village folk to those in the big cities to try and help people see that the monoculturalism they are fighting in this area is a mistaken target.

Personally I am well aware of good and bad in both groups - and used to observing times when there is a total lack of understanding between the 2.

When will people learn that often the greatest divisions are between those within a group than between the groups themselves