UK to set school exams around Ramadan

[Pat Mustard]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...count.html

I don't think I've heard enough yet to fully form an opinion. It sounds like a lot of exams are simply being moved to the morning of the day they'd be on anyway. If we're talking about moving exams earlier by weeks though, doesn't that negatively affect everyone? It gives you less time to learn the curriculum and prepare.

I just think it's stupid. No discussion about the asinine practices that are the real cause of these kids' suffering education, no, everyone else has to move to accommodate it.

And side-note as well, I'm getting sick of hearing this selective "Britain is a Christian country" argument, that people who never go to church bring out when Islam hits the news. We're a country which has historically had a Christian majority, we are not a Christian country anymore in the 21st Century. Stop that.

It's Der Sturmer, I'll hold judgement until I see it, just like I do when they say its raining.

[Aractus]

Right. It's a shit system.

My friend made a good point though recently, which is that (in his opinion) the current royals are pretty decent people, and are preferable to be in power than most of the top politicians. So even though the system is bad, in reality, the result is OK, at least for now.

I don't know too much about the royals, but he seemed pretty convinced they are alright. And I would agree with him that I'd take them over the total moron David Cameron.

Whether they're good people/deities or not doesn't change the fact that neither the royals nor Jehovah are democratically elected into public service.

[Pat Mustard]

Right. It's a shit system.

My friend made a good point though recently, which is that (in his opinion) the current royals are pretty decent people, and are preferable to be in power than most of the top politicians. So even though the system is bad, in reality, the result is OK, at least for now.

I don't know too much about the royals, but he seemed pretty convinced they are alright. And I would agree with him that I'd take them over the total moron David Cameron.

Actually, if Charles gets the throne for any length of time there probably won't be a next monarch. He really is a deluded, entitled, idiotic long streak of piss who probably does think he could get away with ruling by fiat. While, constitutionally (can I apy this word to a system with no constitution?) he has autocratic power, by convention and tradition he has none, and any attempt by him to get power will kill the monarchy (and he's stupid enough to be trying right now).

[Ben Davis]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...count.html

---

I don't think I've heard enough yet to fully form an opinion. It sounds like a lot of exams are simply being moved to the morning of the day they'd be on anyway. If we're talking about moving exams earlier by weeks though, doesn't that negatively affect everyone? It gives you less time to learn the curriculum and prepare.

I just think it's stupid. No discussion about the asinine practices that are the real cause of these kids' suffering education, no, everyone else has to move to accommodate it.

And side-note as well, I'm getting sick of hearing this selective "Britain is a Christian country" argument, that people who never go to church bring out when Islam hits the news. We're a country which has historically had a Christian majority, we are not a Christian country anymore in the 21st Century. Stop that.

---

To me, this reads like an educational institution trying to do what's best for the students rather than an 'imposition' on exam schedules by muslims; religion is just an angle that Teh Fail is exploiting for headlines. The simple fact is that some students are muslim and celebrate Ramadan. In a truly secular system (which our educational establishment tries to be, in spite of Call-Me-Dave's best efforts), those students should not be disadvantaged by that fact: the process should anticipate the situation and flex itself to accommodate the needs of its consumers. That's what we're seeing here, not some back-door islamisation, which is the angle Teh Fail's going for. This piece is transparent, divisive fear-mongering, typical of their current editorial trends.

Shame on some of you for falling for it

[robvalue]

True, shame on me. I didn't read the article, I just assumed it was true. Of course, I wouldn't have taken any actual action without reading it! Just shooting my mouth off here

However, if they are pointedly avoiding some dates for religious reasons, then that leaves the door open for any other religious person to claim another date it can't be on... and so on. Sure, that probably won't happen, but I have to moan about something.

[Ben Davis]

Slippery slope arguments, Rob?

The Joint Council for Qualification advised that the actual impact on the overall exam window will be slight (a week or so over 5 years); since that pretty reasonable and as long as everyone has the same amount of time to study for their exams, does it really matter when, exactly, in the window or day it's sat? Additionally, Ramadan is only having this impact for 5 years; this will be a temporary accommodation.

One could argue that we should align this (and future) year's exam window to those of previous years, to ensure fairness of opportunity but I have no religious affiliation and Maths A-levels this year are scheduled for more than 3 weeks later than my slot. Should I complain to the board and have my scores artificially inflated to represent the aggregate improvement caused by the extra revision time they benefited from?

IMO, it's an obfuscation by the right-wing, designed to hide an inflammatory proposition: those pesky muslamic A-rabs, comin' over here and takin' our exam slots!

[Fidel_Castronaut]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...count.html

---

I don't think I've heard enough yet to fully form an opinion. It sounds like a lot of exams are simply being moved to the morning of the day they'd be on anyway. If we're talking about moving exams earlier by weeks though, doesn't that negatively affect everyone? It gives you less time to learn the curriculum and prepare.

I just think it's stupid. No discussion about the asinine practices that are the real cause of these kids' suffering education, no, everyone else has to move to accommodate it.

And side-note as well, I'm getting sick of hearing this selective "Britain is a Christian country" argument, that people who never go to church bring out when Islam hits the news. We're a country which has historically had a Christian majority, we are not a Christian country anymore in the 21st Century. Stop that.

---

To me, this reads like an educational institution trying to do what's best for the students rather than an 'imposition' on exam schedules by muslims; religion is just an angle that Teh Fail is exploiting for headlines. The simple fact is that some students are muslim and celebrate Ramadan. In a truly secular system (which our educational establishment tries to be, in spite of Call-Me-Dave's best efforts), those students should not be disadvantaged by that fact: the process should anticipate the situation and flex itself to accommodate the needs of its consumers. That's what we're seeing here, not some back-door islamisation, which is the angle Teh Fail's going for. This piece is transparent, divisive fear-mongering, typical of their current editorial trends.

Shame on some of you for falling for it  

But surely that's the wrong way around isn't it? Nobody is stopping them from taking the exam. They have the opportunity given to them to do so, is it not to their own disadvantage if they do not take it? The disadvantage is entirely self-imposed (or enforced, by parents).

I admit it's a relatively small concession, given the times involved, but it's just another concession on religious grounds given by the state to crazy cults and religions. Whether it be the exemption given to Sikhs allowing them to contravene health and safety laws by not wearing a hard hat on a building site, or one given to Jews and Muslims allowing them to break the law (Slaughter House Act) in their barbaric ritual killings of animals, it seems that this is demonstrably not secular.

I'm not about to side with the DM on this but one cannot ignore the religious angle of this. A truley secular system would give a firm date and say that's it. Whether you sit them or not is your choice, but it's on this date.

Then again, a truly secular system would remove state funded faith institutions, but here we are. A not so secular education system.

[robvalue]

I wouldn't call it slippery slope, it's just the consequences of such a concession. With just one ruling, then they would either have to also make the same concession to other religions or else they are showing favouritism. The only "slope" part about it would be being treating other religions the same, which obviously they would not do. That's what makes it a bad ruling, in my opinion.

I agree with Panda, set the date, and if you starve yourself and feint it's your own fault. If I nominate a day for constant wanking then no one is going to respect my religious right and add another date it can't be.

So even though the impact is small, I feel the principal is a bad precedent.

[Regina]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...count.html

I don't think I've heard enough yet to fully form an opinion. It sounds like a lot of exams are simply being moved to the morning of the day they'd be on anyway. If we're talking about moving exams earlier by weeks though, doesn't that negatively affect everyone? It gives you less time to learn the curriculum and prepare.

I just think it's stupid. No discussion about the asinine practices that are the real cause of these kids' suffering education, no, everyone else has to move to accommodate it.

And side-note as well, I'm getting sick of hearing this selective "Britain is a Christian country" argument, that people who never go to church bring out when Islam hits the news. We're a country which has historically had a Christian majority, we are not a Christian country anymore in the 21st Century. Stop that.

The UK is constitutionally a theocracy, and a monarchy. So if someone says it's a Christian country that's because it is. The Christian God is considered to be the highest authority in the land. You might claim that it "functions" as a democracy, and while that may be true it certainly isn't one. For example, no bill from parliament can be passed into law without approval from the Crown. The fact that the Queen's policy is to rubber-stamp anything doesn't detract from the fact that she holds the power over what becomes law and what doesn't, not the parliament and not the people.

It is true that The United Kingdom still, technically, has Protestantism as the state religion (with the Royal family as the head of the English Church). However, I think culturally when you look at everyday British people, it is wrong to call us a "Christian country" in 2016. Christianity has very little, if any, cultural influence in the everyday life of the average Brit in the 21st Century. It's very un-theocratic for a constitutional theocracy, Christianity isn't forced onto anyone here. The Churches are half empty, and the majority of the people who still go are a dying generation. Virtually nobody my age ever goes to church, it's not something people have any interest in anymore. Sure "we have Christmas", but even Christmas (now) is just an opportunity to decorate your house nicely and exchange gifts, and an excuse for a public holiday, nobody celebrates it as a religious holiday anymore.

But I also say all that to call out the selective argument of these people who love shouting "We're a Christian country!". I've heard people say this who I know are not in the slightest bit "religious", and are just saying it because they think it's a good argument against Islam. It's disingenuous hearing those words coming from someone who doesn't give a toss about Christianity, and hasn't been within 50 feet of a Church since the last wedding in their family.

[robvalue]

My wife said, "They have to do the Ramadan thing."

I said, "No they don't."

She said, "If they don't, they'll [get negative consequences from their family]."

If this is true, this is a matter for the police I would say. Forcing your child to not eat regularly or else face consequences is not OK just because it's your religion. I'm sure this isn't the case in most Muslim families in the UK. I'd love to think it's not the case in any. But I don't know.