(no subject)
Edit: As has been pointed out to me in the comments by gwyntar, my indignant outrage is somewhat misplaced. It's bizarre that the Telegraph has latched onto this as a new thing, but it's been in place (and apparently largely ignored) for at least a decade. There's more information at Left Foot Forward.
I'll leave this here for posterity in the name of owning my fuck-ups. The lesson here: even when it seems the Telegraph is damning its own, double-check the facts. At least I hadn't posted the letter…
You may or may not be aware that earlier this year, the guidelines for the government's flagship "free schools"-which their funding depends on-changed. These schools now must teach that bringing up children well requires marriage (and not, for example, civil partnerships).
And because the government has a "sense of humour", this rule is Section 28 of the Free School Model Funding Agreement.
Nick de Bois MP
House of Commons
London
SW1A 0AA
Dear Mr de Bois,
Section 28 of the Free School Model Funding Agreement
I write with great concern about the above agreement, as reported by the Telegraph two days ago at tgr.ph/utSP5X, and available from the Department for Education at goo.gl/y1Xxp. I find the guidance incredibly worrying.
The relevant section reads as follows: The Academy Trust shall … ensure that children at the Academy are protected from inappropriate teaching materials and they learn the nature of marriage and its importance for family life and for bringing up children.
I object vehemently to the idea that marriage is important for family life and bringing up children, at least in absence of legislation allowing for same-sex couples to marry. Teaching that exclusively married couples are important at the expense of same-sex or unmarried couples, or indeed single-parent families, seems exceedingly homophobic and unconstructive, when schools could be teaching about stable and loving relationships regardless of the genders involved.
The remark about inappropriate teaching materials also concerns me: I find it highly unlikely that schools would use teaching materials that would not be appropriate for teaching their pupils, and I fear that clause being abused to prevent teaching of vital information, such as the importance of safer sex techniques.
Compliance with these rules is mandatory for the government's flagship free schools to continue to receive funding. By my understanding, such explicit and prescriptive rules contradict much of the purpose of free schools, and should be removed with all haste.
I would be grateful if you would raise these issues with the Education Secretary, who I believe is responsible for the existence of these guidelines.
Yours sincerely,
logmplus1