|
Author
|
Message
|
|
Cllr David Alston
Moderated by: Stuart Downie
|
Friday 07 May 2010 3:55:11 pm
Are we running too many schools? - Strand 1 (Topic now closed)
If you had to make a choice, would you have fewer schools or have each school taking a cut in their budget?
|
|
Mr J Auchenar
|
Tuesday 11 May 2010 8:12:50 am
Primary Schools
Yes,, too many older smaller primary school where teachers time is wasted on a cost per pupil, along with heating, lighting, IT, admin etc. A review would be good but it must also be considered in the review of cycle routes, bus routes etc.
spend it well
|
|
John Boocock
|
Tuesday 11 May 2010 9:29:34 am
Management of Schools
To much time and effort is spent by head teachers on non teaching matters. Form clusters of schools each with a School manager and reduce the number of headteachers by sharing head teachers across a cluster of schools. Head teachers will have more time to deal with purely educational matters because the administrative load will have been removed. This would be especially appropriate in places like Invergordon where we have four schools all within close proximity of each other, all with highly paid head teachers duplicating effort.
|
|
D Mack
|
Tuesday 11 May 2010 2:47:02 pm
Too Many Schools
I don't think this is a straightforward choice. Rural schools must be maintained and will inevitably have lower rolls and cost more but they do represent the hear of a community. It may be possible to amalgamate some of the urban schools in order to reduce costs.
|
|
anony man
|
Tuesday 11 May 2010 8:44:01 pm
schools
Schools (especially Primaries) are already quite poorly funded, so cuts to budgets would be fatal.
The Council must accept that urban areas may have too many schools and that small communities can no longer have the luxury of small schools in every village.
Cluster Managers might be a way forward, with a senior smember of staff appointed for day to day running within each school.
anon
|
|
Robert Farmer
|
Tuesday 11 May 2010 9:45:37 pm
Too many Primary Schools
Scotland has been lucky in the past in the area of being able to afford Primary Schools for isolated communities and small country towns. In the days of poor transport links, a relatively stable and static population and the school being a major part of the community's focus this was an entirely justifiable and essential part of the social fabric.
In today's cash strapped educational environment the centralisation of services must be looked at as a way to saving money but also improving overall educational service provisions. The days of small schools with classes in the single digits can, unfortunately, be no longer justified, especially where larger primaries exist close by. Many of these small school buildings are extremely old, extremely energy inefficient, and extremely expensive in their overall upkeep.
Amalgamation of smaller, older schools into new, more centralised facilities may not be every parent's ideal, especially when you consider the advantages of extremely small class sizes, relaxed educational environment and handy location. It must surely be better to cut the number of schools slightly than to disadvantage all Highland Primary students by further budgetry strangulation. And unfortunately the needs of the many must outweigh the needs of the few. When teachers at certain Primary Schools need to buy in pencils for students from their own money something pretty drastic needs to happen. The really scary thing is that things will probably only get worse so I fear that this isn't a question of if, but when.
|
|
Linda Malik
|
Tuesday 11 May 2010 10:45:37 pm
Schools
I do not agree with the comments of closing smaller schools in order to save money. Many of these smaller schools which are mostly in villages pass with flying colours various inspections so why should they be penalised due to budget constraints.
Not all of them are in a bad state of repair so how would you pick which ones to close and which one to not.
Some of the larger schools are not in a great state either so would you close a smaller school in quite good repair to ship the children into a school of worse condition?
In many of the rural areas this would mean transporting the children possibly to a town school. Transport costs are on the rise and how many decent transport providers are there out there? Transporting the children is a long term financial commitment.
Yes we have tough times ahead but for many rural communities the school is a vital part of that community. Yes cluster more headteachers when possible but that is only a small amount of savings.
Short term thinking has long term effects !
|
|
Lizbeth R Collie
|
Wednesday 12 May 2010 12:05:33 am
schools
On the whole better to close some schools and keep better provision elsewhere than have budgets & standards falling across the whole Highland provision. Sorry, this is tough, but these are tough times.
L R Collie
Muir-of-Ord
|
|
John Inkster
|
Thursday 13 May 2010 8:09:10 am
Strand 1
Fewer primary schools are possible in larger conurbations where they are sufficiently close together ( within a two mile radius say).
To cut schools budgets is to cut frontline services and these have been extensively cut already to provide savings during the previous years; these need to be increased along with inflation so that there is adequate resources at the 'chalk face'.
Viking
|
|
lucy conway
|
Thursday 13 May 2010 12:27:57 pm
schools are often at the heart
as more and more villages become commuter communities with residents travelling to work in bigger Highland towns or Inverness, as planning permission continues to be granted for large supermarkets in central locations to which people drive to buy in favour of the local shop, the local primary is often the remaining heart of a small community. We want our young people to stay in teh Highlands so while amalgamating smaller primaries and bussing children from smaller communities into larger ones to spend a large proportion of their day might make economic sense, it might also leave a lasting impression in their young minds that where you live is only where you sleep - that everything else you do is elsewhere.
lucy conway
|
|
Cllr David Alston
|
Thursday 13 May 2010 5:08:33 pm
Feedback on comments so far.
Thank you for taking part in the discussion so far. It seems that sharing head teachers and management arrangements across clusters of schools has found some favour in the responses. We currently have 29 clusters in place for over 50 primary schools but the savings are minimal. This action alone will not help us find the saving we need.
A number of responses highlight the need for us to take into account school transport options and costs, and we will take this into account. Some comments focus on supporting and encouraging more walking and cycling. School travel plans to encourage safer routes to school are found in most of our primary schools.
It is clear from some of the responses that schools are very much valued as the heart of the community. Some people would prefer for schools to be amalgamated in towns before rural communities and others see the costs of running small schools in rural communities as no longer affordable.
These comments are welcome and all will be taken into account.
|
|
John Henderson
|
Thursday 13 May 2010 6:17:43 pm
School closures
I feel that the effect of closing schools is a very distressing one for all pupils and indeed parents. I doubt whether closing a number of schools would help the funding of so many others in any significant way and i therefore would be in favour of all schools having cuts proportionate to their size. Why should a few pupils suffer the axe in favour of others.
John Boy
|
|
Timothy Rule
|
Thursday 13 May 2010 10:07:21 pm
Budget Cut
There are several programs in place for schools that are of dubious nature. The one that comes immediately to mind is the fitting of renewable energy to school buildings. A very small school can expect to have a renewable energy system with a cost over 30.000 installed for what seems to be political reasons.
These systems are economically non viable due to their high cost relative to the power they generate. Most are unlikely to pay for their installation costs, by energy savings, in the next 25 years. The CO2 reductions such projects bring are insignificant and ineffectual.
Killing this program alone, and others like it, will save significant amounts of money.
Tim
|
|
Keith Falconer
|
Thursday 13 May 2010 10:20:48 pm
Schools
In rural areas the school is often the centre of life. In some towns however there are clearly too many school buildings e.g. Fort William where I think there are 7 but I think the Council has recognised this. The comparable town south of Fort William in Argyll & Bute i.e.Oban has always managed with three. No -one like school mergers but the fact is that it makes clear financial sense to merge half empty ones. Everyone knows more cuts are on the way as it has been well trailed recently so we have to be realistic and stop living beyond our means.
|
|
Linda Malik
|
Friday 14 May 2010 10:59:20 am
Closing village schools
Whilst many will argue to close small rural schools and bus the children to town schools I would strongly argue against this. Why should small rural communities be even more disadvantaged?
Already by living out of the town you receive fewer services in comparison to others and indeed the school is often the hub of the village providing more than a school service. From these buildings many other activities operate. Football clubs, Brownies etc, etc. Where would these groups relocate to if they loose the school?....... the town ? What then would become of the vacant building ? Its hard to sell a large building in a rural area where services are becoming less and less. It paints a bleak picture for small communities and villages across the Highlands.
The cost of transportation will be a long term commitment and with continual rises in fuel you will be signing a blank cheque for this provision. The next point will be how to transport the children? How many decent transport service providers are out there with the long term ability to transport varying numbers of children to town schools? With changing rules and regulations and falling profits many transport providers have thrown in the towel. Yes amalgamation of town schools removes the need to transport if the distance is not too long and this will involve looking at school boundaries.
Cuts in budgets have already affected all schools in this area with in many cases Parent Councils fund-raising for nice to have equipment. A rethink on where the cuts should fall is needed so that the children, who are the future of the Highlands are not feeling first hand the effects of what can only seem to be mismanagement of the past.
Short term thinking has long term effects !
|
|
c elder
|
Friday 14 May 2010 10:01:57 pm
are we running too many schools
I believe the only fair way to enable parents to continue to have adequate school choice is to cut the budget across all schools.
Parents choose the school for their child very carefully, regardless of catchment area - they look at the complete learning experience with many attracted by the ethos generated. The arts, music , sports, after school clubs etc all attract many parents to make their choice.
Surely any clustering/closure would need to demonstrate that the resulting change would be of significant educational benefit to the child. In order to comply with Scottish Executive guidelines the council would surely need to ensure this criteria was met. Are they going to build brand new state of the art schools with white boards, music areas, larger classrooms etc. Can they financially afford to do so ?
I would be very disappointed to see any school close - the Curriculum for Excellence states
relevant, engaging, inspiring education for every child...........
we have a duty to live up to this.
|
|
Karen Davis
|
Monday 17 May 2010 11:42:05 am
Are we running too many schools?
Can you ever actually have too many schools?
I would ask are we running too many local councillors and are we paying them too much?
Why not at least halve the number of councillors, and their pay in order to save money?
Education is the heart of our society's life.
Rural schools need to exist as they are often the young heart of our communities.
Please do not consider closing rural and remote schools in order to save money.
To close rural schools and then bus or taxi the children to school further (20-50+ miles) away surely defeats the purpose of saving money and helping the environment especially with the current fuel prices.
Education in such areas is far more important not only for the children and their families but for the community as a whole.
|
|
BI Bain
|
Monday 17 May 2010 12:55:16 pm
Strand 1
Yes, we are running to many schools as the rolls in some areas are falling, the council - or senior management has been neglecting the schools and wasting money, by using to many support staff, which is costing a fortune, this money could have been put to better use by looking and maintaining the schools, keeping them up to good standards instead off letting the buildings fall into disrepair. Also too many admin workers streamline them and also the senior management. By reducing senior management, you can save a wee fortune.
Caithness
|
|
Alexander Walker
|
Monday 17 May 2010 6:46:32 pm
Side Schools
Our rural Highland primary schools go back a long way into the middle & latter part of the 19th century. Mainly sponsored by the religious ethic of the "Scottish Society for the Propagation Christian Knowledge " acronym SSPCK. This was a established church organization. This body was responsible for the education of our children through the countless side schools that prolifirated our Highland glens. With the gradual phasing out of church involvement & the introduction of State schooling in 1872 the way was paved for Scotlands childrens education to become the wonder of the world. I say, rather than close a single school or sack a single teacher. Sack this mish mashed cobbled together bunch of lib- tor rags & use the money saved for our childrens education. Danny Alexander 1st. My anger is now so palpable it hurts.
zanders74
|
|
Tracey R
|
Monday 17 May 2010 8:10:04 pm
Budgets tight enough
I think primary schools could share head teachers. Maybe having one head teacher covering 2 schools. I think it would be possible to close a few schools but then you have to look at the alternative and how much it would cost for transporting the pupils to their next nearest school.
Tracey
|
