Funding row: Find out how much your school in Shropshire could lose

Unions claim Shropshire’s schools will lose millions of pounds under the government’s proposed funding formula – and have worked out the amount they claim each school will lose.

The website
The website

Six unions combined to carry out research on the issue.

They have created a website, where teachers and parents can see the impact the new funding formula may have on their school.

The figures have been collated by the NUT, ATL, GMB, Unite, NAHT and Unison unions. The figures can be seen at

According to the website, Bishop’s Castle Community College will see its budget change by £257,969 by 2019 – equating to a net loss of £616 for each of its 419 pupils, according to teacher unions.

The Marches School in Oswestry, which has 1,220 pupils, will lose £522,032 by 2019, according to the unions – the equivalent loss of 15 teachers.

New College in Telford will see its budget change by £407,331 by 2019 and the projected loss of 10 teachers.

In Shrewsbury, Oakmeadow Primary School is one of the school’s to be hardest hit. The budget will be hit by £133,422, according to the figures.

Carla Whelan, headteacher of Oakmeadow, in Bayston Hill, said: “It is going to be a huge detriment to what we can provide for children. Most schools will have to look at the support mechanism for teachers and that means admin and TAs.

It is becoming unmanageable. It is getting hugely stressful for teachers. Teaching is no longer such a nice and attractive profession as it used to be.”

Meole Brace Primary will see it’s budget change by £115,504, Crowmoor Primary School will lose £104,342 and The Grange School, all in Shrewsbury, will have its budget slashed by £99,823, losing £346 per pupil.

St Laurence’s Primary School in Ludlow, which he has 199 pupils will lose £93,172 and Woodside Primary School in Oswestry will have a budget change by 2019 of £241,558.

In Telford, Newdale Primary School – which has 407 pupils will lose £33,464 and the budget of Old Oak Primary School will change by £50,427.

Oldbury Wells School in Bridgnorth, which has 701 students, will see its budget change by £393,670 by 2019 leading to £562 lost per pupil and the equivalent loss of 10 teachers.

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Comments for: "Funding row: Find out how much your school in Shropshire could lose"

Our ed

Class sizes increasing and teacher numbers potentially falling?

Decent teachers quitting or are considering to do so? Morale suffering? Knock on effect onto pupils, parents and or guardians?

Didn't think we could sink any lower but then again we have it seems been proven to be wrong. What a disgrace.


In fairness we have to consider two other factors. What is this as a %age of existing funds and how much will we gain when the redistribution of education funding is complete.

Shropshire Schools have so far been underfunded due to the distribution system where they gaet approaching only half of what City Schools get. So if we lose 20% through budget cuts up to 2020, will that be more than compensated for in the new distribution system?

How is the funding of the Academies affected? Do we know? Shrewsbury is going to need a new Secondary School if all the developments come off. Nothing has been planned for on this. No site, no funding. Will we be looking at a new free school in the South West of the town.? Will this be a bonus for Shrewsbury. Or will it be a new Grammar school to further repress education in the town and county. One child's gain being three children's loss.

So do we really know how education in Shrewsbury or Shropshire will look in 5 years time, or how well it will be funded? Or is this just typical Tory slight of hand. One well provided for Grammar school and and two deprived Academy Secondary Modern groups for secondary education in Shrewsbury, with a collection of Primaries unable to deliver their SATS. But don't forget the education budget as been protected at all times. Protected ar 2010 levels.

Now with diversions to the pet policies of academies and grammar schools Real losses for the majority and gains for Tory voters.

They have already savaged further education, now it's the turn of the Secondary Moderns. How they expect to deliver good vocational foundation education for their "T" levels is beyond me.

They don't seem to have grasped the concept of vocational qualifications at all. The starting point for good vocational qualification is exactly the same as any other form of further education. Five good GCSEs. Vocational foundation courses in Schools are for those who do not aspire or have the ability to deliver 5 good GCSEs. They need preparation for craft vocational education. For those who aspire to high level vocational education either full time or as a part of an apprenticeship they still need 5 good GCSEs. Their vocational pathway starts in the Technical Colleges under the supervision or appropriate professional institutions to bring them on to degree level qualifications and entry into the professional institutions.

Reward and recognition of vocational qualifications is vital to the economy but cutting education budgets is not the way to go about it. The creation of Grammar schools is not the way to go about it. Savaging the Technical colleges was not the way to about it. Sub standard apprenticeships completed in six months was not the way to go about it. The Tories talk the good talk but what they actually deliver is complete train wreck.

A grammar school for an aspiring professional engineer is as much help as a hole in the head. But the old concept that was Shrewsbury Technical High School was just the job. Recreate that and use it to support the other schools by taking more able children for a day or two a week to reinforce their strong subjects is well worth doing. Not an eleven plus to go to grammar but a institute for assisting schools to advance their best pupils on their best subjects at any age would be really useful. Providing specialist courses like Technical drawing that are not taught in normal academies. It could just as easily be Music or Spanish. At he end of the day the objective should be to assist a school leaver to have achieved their potential at sixteen within the comprehensive system. post 16 is the career forming part of education.

The job of a secondary school is to provide each pupil with a tool box containing the best tools that can be achieved by the individual. The essential preparation for the next stage of 16 to 18, in work, training or further education or any combination of the three. Nobody should be allowed to be out of this position before they are 21. There should be no such thing a youth unemployment. It is just a matter of what they get in the morning to do. No option to stay in bed.

We live in changing times so the individuals education tool box has to designed to aspire to skills as best possible but some of those skills must be transferable skills to meet the needs of the future. A foundation from which people can retrain to new jobs as yet not defined. Education and training are now life long issues so we need to educate our children to be adaptable to change, reeducation and retraining. So education should be about learning to learn and applying it. specialised leaning and education is for Employers, Professional Institutions and Universities to work together and define the current learning needs.their needs . Then further education to help deliver it. Post 16 learning is totally dynamic and pre 16 about developing that tool box to let students be dynamic. Therefore up to 16 we need universal availability of education on a core syllabus. Not all schools will be able to deliver everything so they need centres of excellence to refer pupils, for a period in their week, where they learn about the non main stream subjects and aspire to achieve.

No two tool boxes will be the same. They should all contain maths, English and General Science. basic information technology all preparation for for further education. But also personal skills. How to cook, how to do first aid, a foundation level of understanding the law, History an Geography to draw on. Sports and general fitness for personal use. A general understanding of religion, politics and economics. A rounded education to provide the basic tools required to move ahead post 16. For those who can the additional tools of examination passes indicating higher ability. at foundation or GCSE level. For all that we need teachers and premises to be taught in. That means the right funding for the location. The support of others to ensure that every child reaches their potential. That is something that be ordained at 11. It a dynamic to which the system must be able to adapt.

Education is about learning not social work. The support of children outside education is a matter for a separate work stream equally professional to resolve difficulties either within the school or with the support of out side agencies. Let the teachers teach and the social workers look after the children. Schools should be a part of a community with the parents capable of child minding year round as a community asset. The one place in a community where people can meet and exchange ideas. Parents should not be by invitation only. They should be an integrated part of bringing up children as a partnership of school and home.

The grammar school is no part of any of that. It is exclusive not inclusive. It is selective not universal. It is a narrow education concept to the neglect of the whole child where all the talent is removed from other schools so there are no exemplars to aspire to match. They create division and jealousy, locking the majority into sub standard education and preventing the late developers from flourishing.

I thought this nineteenth century device to hold back the poor was abolished and gone for every. But then along comes the Tories and it's back to division again. I have no idea what a "T" level is but I am sure they do not apply to secondary schools. There are plenty of different qualifications and a national qualifications framework. There is no problem to solve there. The problem is recognition and the glass ceiling. Will a "T" level dispose of that or simply make it easier to identify non graduates to maintain the lack of recognition and glass ceiling? Are they doing something for the sake of it, to say they did something. Training for skills is the problem. We have to do it by training more youths with more consistency. Post 16.

Tony in BC

Your curriculum suggestions are not far off the curriculum at Planta's school in the Grisons (Switzerland) circa 1740. The curriculum included:

Three modern languages and Latin, arithmetic and advanced mathematics, physics, history, geography, drawing, dramatics, bookkeeping, music, and dancing. Observation and independent thought were encouraged and the curriculum and methods were adapted to individual capacity and need. Gymnastic exercises and mountain climbing in the Alps were features of the School, excursions were taken to collect minerals and plants. There was a shop for work in glass, wood turning, and cabinetmaking. A student government was used to prepare the pupils for participation in democratic political life.

As you likely know Roger - Shirley Williams got rid of the Grammar schools in favour of Comprehensive schools back in the 'seventies - but I believe she also got rid of the Technical Schools such as the one you mention. But I think the tripartite system, introduced by Butler in 1944, worked well for that period. It improved opportunities for some working class kids to get a better education and gave millions the opportunity for technical education. The comprehensive system offered neither academic rigour nor opportunities in technical or trade qualifications.

This had a negative affect on the British economy and overall working class students had less opportunities in either professional, trade or technical careers.

One of the problems today with public education in Britain, and perhaps elsewhere is that it has become too politicised - and with a few people in power deciding it is "my way or the highway"- then we will see more problems and more conflict in the future.


I know no government is perfect, but this Tory one has gone too far now.

Yet people still vote for them.


Yes Derp people still vote for them. Probably as they know the alternative is far far worse. We have a £50 billion deficit which is a massive reduction on where it was in 2010 when they took power. You don't want the self employed to pay more tax and you criticize the government for not getting the deficit down and not spending enough on education and the NHS. The ultimate fact is that left wingers cant count, never have been able to. There is no money spare, the rich cant and wont pay more, they are already being taxed to the hilt and will leave if they are taxed any more. There is no pot of gold in taxing big businesses otherwise it would have been done by now.

Cunning Linguist

And we have a massive increase in the national debt since 2010, an extra £800 billion and counting (the worst record in peacetime history):

As for 'the rich cant and wont pay more, they are already being taxed to the hilt', they're paying £1 billion less a year than in 2009, despite being considerably more wealthy:


Think you need to go to spec savers


think you need to grow up and have a reasoned argument about what is happening. There is a reason why the conservatives are so far ahead in the polls you know.

Cunning Linguist

Reasoned? You haven't given a reasoned argument, only a simplistic, knee-jerk reaction to what you read in the tabloids. Why is the national debt rising? Why are the richest 1% getting richer? Why are the rest suffering austerity cuts? Grow up.

the fat controller

And why is the Government still failing to get a grip on tax avoidance. Amazon still puts a large proportion of its British sales through Luxembourg while Google uses Ireland so doesn't pay anywhere near the tax it should for the money it makes in Britain.

We could sort out the deficit, the NHS and school funding if those with the broadest shoulders (i.e. big business and billionaires) paid a reasonable amount of tax. The trouble is though, most of those people are probably friends of the Tory Government, while some are members of the Tory Government.

If a UKIP Government looked anything like Trump's, things would be even worse with asset stripping on a grand scale and personal fortunes made at the expense of the majority of people they are supposed to serve.

Try our beta site!

We’re getting ready to launch our brand new website for and we’d like to give you a sneak preview.

We’re still applying the finishing touches, so please bear with us if something’s not quite right.

We'd love to hear your thoughts, good or bad, via the simple feedback button that you'll see to the right side of every page.

Try the beta