Parkfield Primary School in Birmingham has found itself at the centre of a media storm over the last few weeks after parents took objection to an anti-discrimination programme called ‘No Outsiders’. The programme, which aims to teach children to “respect and accept difference and diversity,” is a pro-active effort to prevent bullying and radicalisation in schools – and to prepare young people for life in modern Britain.

Yet a large number of parents – mainly, but not exclusively, from a Muslim background – have taken exception to the programme. The argument used by these families is a familiar one. They claim that the unit on LGBT issues  – which is studied alongside issues such as disability, age and race – is in direct opposition to their values and shouldn’t be taught to students of this age. Some have gone further and claimed that No Outsiders is an attempt at indoctrinating children.

As is so often the way, what started as a petition against the teaching of the programme quickly escalated into weekly protests outside the school whilst parents began withdrawing students from the school in order to avoid the lessons. Meanwhile, Andrew Moffat, the openly gay assistant headteacher at the school, has received threats and the police are investigating the use of homophobic language at some of the weekly protests. This week the school announced it was ending the lessons pending discussions with the protestors in the coming days – despite an Ofsted pronouncement that the lessons were age-appropriate and not unduly focussed on LGBT issues.

To think that a programme that is designed to prevent bullying and radicalisation could be opposed and ultimately brought down by parents is deeply disappointing. To pretend that our primary school children are not aware of the differences that exist in society is to bury our heads in the sand. To deny them the time and space to understand and accept those differences is to wilfully encourage misunderstandings and boost prejudice.

Yet for all the frustration at this programme’s downfall, this whole episode pales in comparison to the systematic failure of Northern Ireland’s education system to address diversity in general, and LGBT issues in particular.

This was all meant to have changed since the establishment of Northern Ireland’s much heralded ‘Local and Global Citizenship’ (LGC) course. The course – which is a statutory requirement in all post-primary schools up until the age of 16 – explores four key themes including diversity and inclusivity, human rights and social responsibility, equality and social justice, and democracy and active participation. The minimum content order goes on to specify that students should have the opportunity to explore a wide range of issues ranging from identity to inequalities and from the basics of democracy to key human rights principles.

On the surface then this sounds very positive – progressive, even. Yet, on the ground, in schools across Northern Ireland, delivery of this vital content is, at best, varied and, at worst, an absolute waste of time. Early on, a decision was made to place LCG within a collection of subjects known as Learning for Life and Work (LLW) which also includes Personal Development and Employability. This placing of LGC within LLW has seen its status diminished.

This is compounded by the structure of the curriculum itself. By dividing LGC at Key Stage Three into four concepts the curriculum invites teachers to treat the concepts as individual topics. This lack of connectivity, combined by timetable constraints, will almost certainly result in these concepts being taught separately and perhaps even across different years as there is absolutely no requirement for schools to deliver the content within any specified timeframe.

The global requirement, whilst admirable, will also frustrate outcomes given the overwhelming evidence that teachers will attempt to avoid ‘controversial issues’ if they can. Due to the vagueness of the curriculum, teachers are perfectly entitled to ‘go global’ when it comes to the concepts of human rights and diversity – or to choose to focus on certain groups to the detriment of others when studying discrimination. There is therefore no sense that changing and challenging perspectives is a key outcome of this course.

All of this could change through changes to the curriculum or with better training for teachers – many of whom are not subject specialists. Yet for this generation it is already too late. A 2017 report for Cara Friend found that 68% of LGBT students had been bullied at school. 84% indicated that they had not received any support or information at school regarding sexual orientation or gender identity – and 72% reported a negative attitude towards the issue in school that extended to a lack of support and even homophobic language used by staff. It is worth noting that the entirety of this sample attended secondary school after LGC was introduced.

The only other potential vehicle for addressing LGBT issues in schools would be Sex Education – a specific course for which schools usually bring in outside assistance. This has resulted in Love for Life – an Evangelical Christian outfit – delivering over 70% of Sex Education classes in Northern Ireland. They have also been invited to assist with the training of teachers as part of the Queen’s University PGCE programme in recent years. It goes without saying that allowing just one group to deliver this information in schools is extremely regrettable and an opportunity lost for an open discussion on sex, sexuality and gender. For LGBT students in particular, the content delivered by Love for Life simply adds to the sense of isolation for which the wider curriculum has already built the foundations.

This situation hasn’t developed overnight – and there are certainly some schools that have done more to become inclusive than others. Yet we cannot allow this situation to go unchallenged. As the recent events in Birmingham have shown, there will always be those who stand in the way of progress – but we must not allow another generation to be educated in a non-inclusive atmosphere.

Fortunately, we do not have to look very far for inspiration. Across the water in Scotland, state schools are now required to teach pupils about the history of LGBT equalities and movements, as well as to tackle homophobia and transphobia and explore LGBT identity. This encouraging step – brought about through the efforts of the Time for Inclusive Education (TIE) campaign – makes Scotland the first country in the world to embed LGBT issues within the curriculum. This is addition to the statutory requirement for all teachers in Scotland to promote wellbeing – on top of the literacy and numeracy requirements in Northern Ireland. We could learn a lot from this approach.

In all of this it is essential we go back to the very basics of education. School is not merely a vehicle for passing on information and skills to the next generation. A good school, an excellent school, develops the character of its pupils, moulding them into respectful citizens who are capable of making good choices and contributing to society. If a school, or indeed an entire education system, is failing systematically in this regard, isn’t it time to revisit our priorities?