by John Sandeman
Why do Christian schools so often aim at those most likely to climb the ladder of success?
This pewsitter would like to encourage you to read the shiny new Southern Cross cover to cover. Not necessarily while sitting in the pew, please. It pays to read the ads, too.
Because Christian ads can be terribly revealing.
A certain school, whose blushes will be spared, put in large coloured type. "At xxxx, bright young girls flourish into high achieving, confident and compassionate young women'.
Well, it's better than the slogan "it's all about you': which promoted another leading brand of school on bus sides around the Inner West for months.
I am sure that the Anglican school is telling the truth. Girls flourish there. Especially bright ones.
The ad told the truth. And it is the market segmentation hinted at in it that troubles me.
What about the non-bright? The children with learning difficulties and autism?
Jesus teaches us that our hospitality should not be aimed at those who can pay us back. We are to invite the poor and sick to our tables. So when issuing an invitation to take part in education at many of our schools why do we aim at those most likely to climb the ladder of success?
In school advertising there are the easily deciphered code words like "leaders'. HSC scores are displayed. This goes beyond honouring students who have worked hard. It is a marketing tool.
If his instructions for holding a meal is any guide, Jesus " if he returned as a headmaster " would award scholarships to the "blind and the lame' . Why not a scholarship for a Down Syndrome kid? If it sounds radical, it is because we do not think the Jesus way. Anglican schools are not usually the first schools that non-church parents of a child with a disability think of , but why shouldn't they be?
In fairness this pewsitter needs to point to the learning support some challenged kids are given in our schools. There are special teachers, who are dedicated, who do a good job. It would not be fair to leave them out.
My point is that these are not the kids the schools reach out to recruit. There is not a systematic attempt to make sure that independent schools take their share of challenged kids. Their way is not made easy by scholarships; their achievements are not featured in school ads.
There are some exceptions to the gloomy picture I paint. One is Danebank which teaches the "lifeskill' curriculum, (for kids unable to do the regular HSC) fulltime, in a school within a school. I am a grateful parent of this Sydney Anglican Schools Corporation school.
And there could be other ways of supporting even more challenged kids. Kingsdene is a small Anglicare school for severely disabled children which relies on parent fundraising to keep the doors open. The amount needed each year is exceeded by the profits at the annual fetes of just two or three of our richer schools.
If Kingsdene lost the last four letters of its name wouldn't it be great?
