I would ask you to widen the view a little
.those schools that teach the songs of the Empire (from religious to Glorifying) could just as easily teach the ones of the seasonal round, not just the religious ones
.so harvest songs, the ones of the land, the hills and the seas, and Mayday songs, and
ah, but that touches the pagan, doesn't it ? and since the schools are RC or C of E, you're rather stuck with their status quo. The school terms and holidays were originally set up around the need for child labour during planting, harvest, etc., Not many kids pick fruit or plant or gather tatties nowadays though. The holidays don't really mesh now with most parents working lives.
I suspect that the choice of songs has more to do with whats available, what the kids will vaguely enjoy singing, and of course the time/expertise available. You dont get that much kudos for getting a bunch of 9 year olds to learn local county harvest songs, but OFSTED will kill your career if your paperwork isn't in order. In much the same way, 20th Century History is dominated by studying the Dictators, because the material is easy to find and thats what everyone is familiar with.
Personally, I'd love it if there was a wider curriculum, but there is only so much time in the school year. And although in theory you could shorten the summer holidays, I seem to remember that there was a plan to do that, but it didn't work out so well when trialed.
What can't change dies.
That's the one clear overwhelming message of the eons
.well, unless you're a shark, I suppose, or amoeba.
I think that's the clearest lesson for humanity. Change isn't always a bad thing, though it's usually driven by something or other.
The skill is in using the change to your society's benefit, in adapting to it as individuals to strengthen the bonds of family and culture.
So, back to using modern technology to keep the words alive, to keeping in touch with distant family, to encouraging the children to appreciate their roots, their heritage, in all it's diversity.
Totally, and that evolution is still going on, although we might not like it. The best we can do is to remember as much as we can.
Santaman - to answer your question:
A "state run Catholic school?" Isn't that an oxymoron though? I'm not being facetious; I'm genuinely curious. Aren't church schools separated and private?
Things are slightly different in the UK from the US, where there is in theory a separation of church and state with regard to education (although Betsy De Vos will be doing her very best to bring them together).
Since the Church of England was (and still is) the 'state church' (the head of the church being the Queen), it was the Church that started many schools, particularly in the 19th century. However, as the state (or local councils) took on the provision of education, there was a very British 'understanding'. If a religion wanted to found a school, and there was a local need, then as long as they raised a certain percentage of the cash, the state would pony up the rest.
So you could have a school with religious links (at first C of E, then Catholic and Non-Conformist, Jewish, and more recently Muslim and Sikh), which are state schools, but with input from a religious denomination, with perhaps the local bishop, etc being on the Board of Governors.
My siblings went to a Catholic primary school (my mum was Catholic) and we all went to the same Catholic Secondary school. The only way they really differed from any other schools was that nuns were on the staff of the primary school (including the head teacher), plus some 'Catholic' prayers, and the fact that my parish priest would come around once a term and say hello to everyone. My kids are at or have been at local C of E schools, and although part of the criteria to get in is religious (hence the phrase familiar to local vicars - '
down on your knees and save the fees' - church school places are highly sought), a lot of the kids are local to the area, no matter what their religion.