Small schools facing the axe
Wednesday 19th September 2007, 11:49AM BST.
Twenty Shropshire primary schools could be at risk of closure under county council plans to tackle a major fall in pupil numbers and the loss of millions of pounds of Government grant, it was revealed today.But education managers have stressed they have not drawn up a hit-list of threatened schools and their proposals do not mean that every small school in the county is under threat.
Officials have been warning for some time that county schools would not escape serious problems as a result of the significant drop in the national birth rate.
And now figures being presented with a new policy document to the Shropshire County Council cabinet show the extent of the challenge the authority faces in managing the situation.
In five years’ time 3,400 fewer primary school places will be needed compared with 2001.
There are currently 3,250 spare places at the county’s primary schools and this is set to rise to 5,450 by 2012.
As pupil figures fall, not only will some schools be “significantly under-occupied”, the number with small and very small numbers of children will increase.
Some, the cabinet is being warned, will undoubtedly become “educationally unviable”.
The spending watchdog – the Audit Commission – has said that schools should have no more than 10 per cent surplus places.
But this year, of the 141 Shropshire primaries, there are 91 with 10 per cent or more and 20 with 25 per cent or above.
And if no changes are made, the number of schools with least 10 per cent and possibly more surplus places could rise to 110. Those with 25 per cent and above could reach 50.
As pupil numbers fall and surplus places grow, the amount of vital Government grant coming into the council is reduced, and by 2012 it will have lost nearly £4 million.
Liz Nicholson, the council’s Director of Children and Young People’s Services said today that her department had been working on a new policy for about two years.
She said it was aimed at securing a schools network with a sustainable future and in which high educational standards can be maintained.
What the proposals say:
- Schools should have a minimum of four classes, except in urban areas and areas of “geographical isolation”.
- In urban areas, the minimum size should be seven classes for primary schools, nine for infants and eight for junior schools.
- The normal maximum size for a primary will be 14 classes.
- Schools should normally be located in a “suitable centre” of population to minimise transport needs.
- The changes should result in just under 10 per cent – 1,710 – of places unfilled by January 2012.
- Every child should be entitled to a school place within six miles or less of where they live – two miles or less in towns.
- The scheme will be presented to the council’s cabinet next Wednesday with a recommendation that a public consultation be held.
By Dave Morris
Shropshire Star on Twitter
Keep updated with the latest breaking news and content on our Twitter feed.
Lifestyle
Interactive Dining Out map
Hundreds of reviews by the Shropshire Star and Express & Star's teams to help you decide where to eat.
LIVE traffic updates
Road, rail and airport - latest
Our new, live traffic and travel updates service - check before you set out.
OUR NEW APP
Get the new Shropshire Star app
Download the Shropshire Star’s new app to your iPad or iPhone to get one week of access to our digital newspapers absolutely FREE.
IF THEY DO THIS IT WILL BE AWFULL THEY CLOSE DOWN THE PRIMARY SCHOOL’S IN THE VILLAGES THEN A FEW YEAR’S LATER BUILD LOADS OF NEW HOUSES’S AND HAVE TO SHIP ALL THE KIDS OFF IN A BUS TO A SCHOOL MILES AWAY SHAME ON THEM
Report abuse
This really puts the “Building Schools for the Future” policy under great threat.
Report abuse
Telford Council Watch said:
This really puts the “Building Schools for the Future” policy under great threat.
Not in Telford it won’t – they’ll just cram in as many people as they can get, whether or not there are any jobs for them.
Report abuse
What happens when the birthrate rises in a few years (as these things cycle)? If the schools are closed and the land sold – we’ll never get them back when they are needed again – it’s short-sighted at the very least and just short-term money making at the worst.
Report abuse
As Education standards in this country continue to decline, lets just have bigger schools with bigger classes instead! Yes, as normal, everything is now completely financially driven and never has a phase such as “Every Child Matters” been such a farce! Life is not all about MONEY!!
Report abuse
Let’s see…
1) it seems to my most kids arrive at vilage schools by 4×4 – going by bus would be an improvement
2) Is it just me, or does this apply to Shropshire County, not Telford?
3) If birth rates are a cycle, it’s a heck of a long one – numbers have never got back up to the baby boom level – face it, Britains getting older and has fewer children
4) So the people in towns should pay for the middle class in the country houses to have small classes? Nicchi might want to (or maybe they benefit) but I don’t wan’t to – do you?
Report abuse
This is a silly idea. You can guess what will happen, they will close twenty schools and then in 10 years time they will need to build twenty back again when baby boom happens or babys from the increase in migrants pushes the numbers back up. This will cost twice as much as keeping the current schools running. Its so short sighted, although central government is to blame, their funding is so short term based on pupil nmbers. Wake up Labour Govt, use your brains! Think a little further than 2012, only 4 1/2 years away.
Report abuse
What do people want? Keeping a school open with 3 pupils just in case some more come along in 50 years time is a total waste of money which could be better spent in schools that actually have kids going to them.
If people choose to live in the middle of nowhere they can’t expect to have services on their doorstep if they are not economical to provide. Why should town dwellers subsidise those who choose a big house in the country?
The vast majority of kids in this country go to school in the towns and cities and there are enough problems there to be tackled without siphoning off money to subsidise those who deliberately choose a lifestyle that involves living in sparsely populated areas and who should live with the downside of that choice.
Report abuse
Its really sad to read some people’s comments, this has nothing to do with rich people living in the countryside. We all can’t live in the town. This is about children being pushed into huge schools where they suffer from a lack of pastoral care. Rural schools are family schools where everybody knows your name.
Report abuse
Anyone bothered to ask the children in small rural schools what they feel? its their future we are talking about dont they deserve the best education possible its all about filling the fat cats pockets with more money. so what if there is only a handful of children in a school – better education.this means in the future these kids are less likely to be relying on the dole…
Report abuse