Loading…

Equal Access to State Funding: The case of Muslim schools in Britain

The decision to award government funding to four independent Muslim schools in Britain placed the spotlight on the issue of the public purse being used for private institutions, and also brought to an end the 15-year battle that Muslim communities waged in order to receive equality of treatment. Thi...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Race, ethnicity and education ethnicity and education, 2002-09, Vol.5 (3), p.273-289
Main Author: Parker-Jenkins, Marie
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c350t-4544da09ee5ae0e56022d9e11a5c61634db6e07c9b68f537f33fea5dc7c4864a3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c350t-4544da09ee5ae0e56022d9e11a5c61634db6e07c9b68f537f33fea5dc7c4864a3
container_end_page 289
container_issue 3
container_start_page 273
container_title Race, ethnicity and education
container_volume 5
creator Parker-Jenkins, Marie
description The decision to award government funding to four independent Muslim schools in Britain placed the spotlight on the issue of the public purse being used for private institutions, and also brought to an end the 15-year battle that Muslim communities waged in order to receive equality of treatment. This article provides an overview of this movement and highlights the issues surrounding equitable treatment of minority groups in society. There are presently around 100 independent Muslim schools in Britain today, a percentage of which have applied for voluntary-aided status and have aspired to fulfil government criteria. Up until 1998 they have always failed, often on spurious grounds which were not used to deny funding to other schools. The Conservative Government was confused in its thinking on the issue, declaring that it was uncomfortable providing finance for what would be an all-black (Asian) school, and that such institutions would be socially divisive (Swann report, 1985). These arguments lacked basis on two counts. Firstly, Muslim schools are faith-based schools drawing upon people hugely differentiated on grounds of cultural, socio-economic and linguistic background. Secondly, apart from the decision to award funding previously being articulated erroneously in discourses of race rather than religion, Asian schools were already a reality in Britain. Demographically, due to patterns of immigration, Muslim communities have concentrated in areas around the country and there were, and still are, local state schools with enrolments of 95% or more Muslim pupils. The decision to provide funding for Muslim schools thus needs to be located within a social justice model, whereby financial support is forthcoming for all religious schools which satisfy existing government criteria on health, safety and education, rather than on grounds of racial/ethnic origin. In short, we either provide equality before the law, or we dismantle existing legislation and embrace a 'common school' for all. There are compelling arguments for both cases, but we cannot have it both ways: what is required is state policy based on consistency and equity to ensure parity of treatment. Finally, the Labour Government's decision in favour of Muslim schools carries with it implications for Sikh, Hindu and potentially other groups, who give expression to the reality of a multifaith Britain, and who may also wish to have equal access to state funding. This requires examining more critically the c
doi_str_mv 10.1080/1361332022000004869
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_eric_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_38051090</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ654890</ericid><sourcerecordid>60620589</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c350t-4544da09ee5ae0e56022d9e11a5c61634db6e07c9b68f537f33fea5dc7c4864a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkMtOwzAQRSMEEqXwBbDwil3Ajh9JWCCV0vJQEQuKxC5ynQk1SuPWdgT9e1yCWFV0NjPSnHs1c6PolOALgjN8SagglCY4SfCmWCbyvahHWIpjgvO3_TAHIg4IO4yOnPvYUDljveh2tGpljQZKgXPIG_TipQc0bptSN-9XaDoHpKQDZCr01LpaL5BTc2Nqh3SDbqz2UjfH0UElawcnv70fvY5H0-F9PHm-exgOJrGiHPuYccZKiXMALgEDF-HeMgdCJFeCCMrKmQCcqnwmsorTtKK0AslLlarwEZO0H513vktrVi04Xyy0U1DXsgHTukJgkWCe5TtBmmEegsEBpB2orHHOQlUsrV5Iuy4ILjbRFluiDaqzTgVWqz_F6FFwlv2YXndr3VTGLuSnsXVZeLmuja2sbJQOF_zvn-802KIr_Jen32LPmRQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>38051090</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Equal Access to State Funding: The case of Muslim schools in Britain</title><source>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>ERIC</source><source>Taylor and Francis Social Sciences and Humanities Collection</source><creator>Parker-Jenkins, Marie</creator><creatorcontrib>Parker-Jenkins, Marie</creatorcontrib><description>The decision to award government funding to four independent Muslim schools in Britain placed the spotlight on the issue of the public purse being used for private institutions, and also brought to an end the 15-year battle that Muslim communities waged in order to receive equality of treatment. This article provides an overview of this movement and highlights the issues surrounding equitable treatment of minority groups in society. There are presently around 100 independent Muslim schools in Britain today, a percentage of which have applied for voluntary-aided status and have aspired to fulfil government criteria. Up until 1998 they have always failed, often on spurious grounds which were not used to deny funding to other schools. The Conservative Government was confused in its thinking on the issue, declaring that it was uncomfortable providing finance for what would be an all-black (Asian) school, and that such institutions would be socially divisive (Swann report, 1985). These arguments lacked basis on two counts. Firstly, Muslim schools are faith-based schools drawing upon people hugely differentiated on grounds of cultural, socio-economic and linguistic background. Secondly, apart from the decision to award funding previously being articulated erroneously in discourses of race rather than religion, Asian schools were already a reality in Britain. Demographically, due to patterns of immigration, Muslim communities have concentrated in areas around the country and there were, and still are, local state schools with enrolments of 95% or more Muslim pupils. The decision to provide funding for Muslim schools thus needs to be located within a social justice model, whereby financial support is forthcoming for all religious schools which satisfy existing government criteria on health, safety and education, rather than on grounds of racial/ethnic origin. In short, we either provide equality before the law, or we dismantle existing legislation and embrace a 'common school' for all. There are compelling arguments for both cases, but we cannot have it both ways: what is required is state policy based on consistency and equity to ensure parity of treatment. Finally, the Labour Government's decision in favour of Muslim schools carries with it implications for Sikh, Hindu and potentially other groups, who give expression to the reality of a multifaith Britain, and who may also wish to have equal access to state funding. This requires examining more critically the concept of 'multiculturalism' today, away from the more naive notion that the rhetoric of equal opportunities in the 1980s would somehow easily be translated into reality.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1361-3324</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1470-109X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/1361332022000004869</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Taylor &amp; Francis Group</publisher><subject>Civil Rights ; Education ; Educational Equity (Finance) ; Educational Systems ; Elementary Secondary Education ; Equal Education ; Equal Opportunity ; Ethnicity ; Financial Support ; Foreign Countries ; Government Spending ; Great Britain ; Identity Formation ; Muslims ; Private Schools ; Race ; Religious Education ; Resource Allocation ; Schools ; United Kingdom</subject><ispartof>Race, ethnicity and education, 2002-09, Vol.5 (3), p.273-289</ispartof><rights>Copyright Taylor &amp; Francis Group, LLC 2002</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c350t-4544da09ee5ae0e56022d9e11a5c61634db6e07c9b68f537f33fea5dc7c4864a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c350t-4544da09ee5ae0e56022d9e11a5c61634db6e07c9b68f537f33fea5dc7c4864a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,33224</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ654890$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Parker-Jenkins, Marie</creatorcontrib><title>Equal Access to State Funding: The case of Muslim schools in Britain</title><title>Race, ethnicity and education</title><description>The decision to award government funding to four independent Muslim schools in Britain placed the spotlight on the issue of the public purse being used for private institutions, and also brought to an end the 15-year battle that Muslim communities waged in order to receive equality of treatment. This article provides an overview of this movement and highlights the issues surrounding equitable treatment of minority groups in society. There are presently around 100 independent Muslim schools in Britain today, a percentage of which have applied for voluntary-aided status and have aspired to fulfil government criteria. Up until 1998 they have always failed, often on spurious grounds which were not used to deny funding to other schools. The Conservative Government was confused in its thinking on the issue, declaring that it was uncomfortable providing finance for what would be an all-black (Asian) school, and that such institutions would be socially divisive (Swann report, 1985). These arguments lacked basis on two counts. Firstly, Muslim schools are faith-based schools drawing upon people hugely differentiated on grounds of cultural, socio-economic and linguistic background. Secondly, apart from the decision to award funding previously being articulated erroneously in discourses of race rather than religion, Asian schools were already a reality in Britain. Demographically, due to patterns of immigration, Muslim communities have concentrated in areas around the country and there were, and still are, local state schools with enrolments of 95% or more Muslim pupils. The decision to provide funding for Muslim schools thus needs to be located within a social justice model, whereby financial support is forthcoming for all religious schools which satisfy existing government criteria on health, safety and education, rather than on grounds of racial/ethnic origin. In short, we either provide equality before the law, or we dismantle existing legislation and embrace a 'common school' for all. There are compelling arguments for both cases, but we cannot have it both ways: what is required is state policy based on consistency and equity to ensure parity of treatment. Finally, the Labour Government's decision in favour of Muslim schools carries with it implications for Sikh, Hindu and potentially other groups, who give expression to the reality of a multifaith Britain, and who may also wish to have equal access to state funding. This requires examining more critically the concept of 'multiculturalism' today, away from the more naive notion that the rhetoric of equal opportunities in the 1980s would somehow easily be translated into reality.</description><subject>Civil Rights</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Educational Equity (Finance)</subject><subject>Educational Systems</subject><subject>Elementary Secondary Education</subject><subject>Equal Education</subject><subject>Equal Opportunity</subject><subject>Ethnicity</subject><subject>Financial Support</subject><subject>Foreign Countries</subject><subject>Government Spending</subject><subject>Great Britain</subject><subject>Identity Formation</subject><subject>Muslims</subject><subject>Private Schools</subject><subject>Race</subject><subject>Religious Education</subject><subject>Resource Allocation</subject><subject>Schools</subject><subject>United Kingdom</subject><issn>1361-3324</issn><issn>1470-109X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2002</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7SW</sourceid><sourceid>8BJ</sourceid><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkMtOwzAQRSMEEqXwBbDwil3Ajh9JWCCV0vJQEQuKxC5ynQk1SuPWdgT9e1yCWFV0NjPSnHs1c6PolOALgjN8SagglCY4SfCmWCbyvahHWIpjgvO3_TAHIg4IO4yOnPvYUDljveh2tGpljQZKgXPIG_TipQc0bptSN-9XaDoHpKQDZCr01LpaL5BTc2Nqh3SDbqz2UjfH0UElawcnv70fvY5H0-F9PHm-exgOJrGiHPuYccZKiXMALgEDF-HeMgdCJFeCCMrKmQCcqnwmsorTtKK0AslLlarwEZO0H513vktrVi04Xyy0U1DXsgHTukJgkWCe5TtBmmEegsEBpB2orHHOQlUsrV5Iuy4ILjbRFluiDaqzTgVWqz_F6FFwlv2YXndr3VTGLuSnsXVZeLmuja2sbJQOF_zvn-802KIr_Jen32LPmRQ</recordid><startdate>200209</startdate><enddate>200209</enddate><creator>Parker-Jenkins, Marie</creator><general>Taylor &amp; Francis Group</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>7UB</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200209</creationdate><title>Equal Access to State Funding: The case of Muslim schools in Britain</title><author>Parker-Jenkins, Marie</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c350t-4544da09ee5ae0e56022d9e11a5c61634db6e07c9b68f537f33fea5dc7c4864a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2002</creationdate><topic>Civil Rights</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Educational Equity (Finance)</topic><topic>Educational Systems</topic><topic>Elementary Secondary Education</topic><topic>Equal Education</topic><topic>Equal Opportunity</topic><topic>Ethnicity</topic><topic>Financial Support</topic><topic>Foreign Countries</topic><topic>Government Spending</topic><topic>Great Britain</topic><topic>Identity Formation</topic><topic>Muslims</topic><topic>Private Schools</topic><topic>Race</topic><topic>Religious Education</topic><topic>Resource Allocation</topic><topic>Schools</topic><topic>United Kingdom</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Parker-Jenkins, Marie</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Race, ethnicity and education</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Parker-Jenkins, Marie</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ654890</ericid><atitle>Equal Access to State Funding: The case of Muslim schools in Britain</atitle><jtitle>Race, ethnicity and education</jtitle><date>2002-09</date><risdate>2002</risdate><volume>5</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>273</spage><epage>289</epage><pages>273-289</pages><issn>1361-3324</issn><eissn>1470-109X</eissn><abstract>The decision to award government funding to four independent Muslim schools in Britain placed the spotlight on the issue of the public purse being used for private institutions, and also brought to an end the 15-year battle that Muslim communities waged in order to receive equality of treatment. This article provides an overview of this movement and highlights the issues surrounding equitable treatment of minority groups in society. There are presently around 100 independent Muslim schools in Britain today, a percentage of which have applied for voluntary-aided status and have aspired to fulfil government criteria. Up until 1998 they have always failed, often on spurious grounds which were not used to deny funding to other schools. The Conservative Government was confused in its thinking on the issue, declaring that it was uncomfortable providing finance for what would be an all-black (Asian) school, and that such institutions would be socially divisive (Swann report, 1985). These arguments lacked basis on two counts. Firstly, Muslim schools are faith-based schools drawing upon people hugely differentiated on grounds of cultural, socio-economic and linguistic background. Secondly, apart from the decision to award funding previously being articulated erroneously in discourses of race rather than religion, Asian schools were already a reality in Britain. Demographically, due to patterns of immigration, Muslim communities have concentrated in areas around the country and there were, and still are, local state schools with enrolments of 95% or more Muslim pupils. The decision to provide funding for Muslim schools thus needs to be located within a social justice model, whereby financial support is forthcoming for all religious schools which satisfy existing government criteria on health, safety and education, rather than on grounds of racial/ethnic origin. In short, we either provide equality before the law, or we dismantle existing legislation and embrace a 'common school' for all. There are compelling arguments for both cases, but we cannot have it both ways: what is required is state policy based on consistency and equity to ensure parity of treatment. Finally, the Labour Government's decision in favour of Muslim schools carries with it implications for Sikh, Hindu and potentially other groups, who give expression to the reality of a multifaith Britain, and who may also wish to have equal access to state funding. This requires examining more critically the concept of 'multiculturalism' today, away from the more naive notion that the rhetoric of equal opportunities in the 1980s would somehow easily be translated into reality.</abstract><pub>Taylor &amp; Francis Group</pub><doi>10.1080/1361332022000004869</doi><tpages>17</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1361-3324
ispartof Race, ethnicity and education, 2002-09, Vol.5 (3), p.273-289
issn 1361-3324
1470-109X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_38051090
source International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; ERIC; Taylor and Francis Social Sciences and Humanities Collection
subjects Civil Rights
Education
Educational Equity (Finance)
Educational Systems
Elementary Secondary Education
Equal Education
Equal Opportunity
Ethnicity
Financial Support
Foreign Countries
Government Spending
Great Britain
Identity Formation
Muslims
Private Schools
Race
Religious Education
Resource Allocation
Schools
United Kingdom
title Equal Access to State Funding: The case of Muslim schools in Britain
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T08%3A27%3A24IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_eric_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Equal%20Access%20to%20State%20Funding:%20The%20case%20of%20Muslim%20schools%20in%20Britain&rft.jtitle=Race,%20ethnicity%20and%20education&rft.au=Parker-Jenkins,%20Marie&rft.date=2002-09&rft.volume=5&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=273&rft.epage=289&rft.pages=273-289&rft.issn=1361-3324&rft.eissn=1470-109X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/1361332022000004869&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_eric_%3E60620589%3C/proquest_eric_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c350t-4544da09ee5ae0e56022d9e11a5c61634db6e07c9b68f537f33fea5dc7c4864a3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=38051090&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ654890&rfr_iscdi=true