There is more money going into schools than there ever has been before

If you suspect that more grammars were applying for expansion than non-selective schools, then that would raise the question as to why, when hundreds of thousands of more places are needed across the country. Do you think they’d been given the nod?

Well, considering that only 8 selective schools and 7 non-selective schools were granted money for expansion in 2017-2018 (from this particular fund - stats from Comprehensive Future) - they are going to be short of a few hundred thousand school places! I assume that the majority of the money needed is coming from elsewhere?

No, that's incorrect - I recognised Comprehensive Future immediately but I picked up on Melissa Benn's father before I discovered she was their Chair - I assumed Melissa Benn was just another left-wing Guardian journalist.

Clavinova More than 3,800 schools applied to the Condition Improvement fund last year

No, how many non-selective secondary schools applied to the expansion fund? Assuming that the 608 schools granted money for roofing repairs, the 204 schools granted money for window replacements and the 226 schools granted money for boilers and heating were not also applying for expansion.

The figures came from a Freedom of Information request

What figures did Comprehensive Future obtain via a Freedom of Information request that they couldn't research on the government website below (accessed from the Comprehensive Future link you posted)?
www.gov.uk/guidance/condition-improvement-fund

CIF also supports a small proportion of expansion projects. These are for Ofsted-rated good or outstanding academies and sixth-form colleges that need to expand their existing facilities and/or floor space

So, how many non-selective secondary schools applied for expansion under this criteria?

Melissa Benn is the Chair of Comprehensive Future - a campaign group specifically set up to stop the expansion of grammar schools.

Maybe they were in areas that were previously underfunded or more likely to be in older buildings. Maybe extra money had been pumped into local non selective schools first. Without a break down of every case you can't really make assumptions.

I still don't think new science blocks and sports halls can be called expanding.

I don't call new science blocks or sports halls expanding,its simply updating. Without seeing the before and after for every school you can't really make assumptions. If such schools for whatever reason had less money before then I can see why they'd be more likely to get money with this fund,their facilities are going to be in more need of updating.

Ah so its Tony Benn's daughter who wrote that article. That explains the lies, damned lies and statistics.

There are pots of money that could be reduced and spent on schools and the NHS etc. If that were true then why did no party at the last election tell us about them? The only extra money any one was able to find was from tax rises or borrowing.

Have you been asked to vote specifically for or against tax rises? I haven’t. I have been specifically polled and canvased for my views on tax rises. And at every local and national election I am able to specifically vote for candidates that either support tax rises or dont. At the moment most people choose not to support tax rises, unless they wont be affected of course .

Yes they've certainly managed to switch the statistics to meet their cause.

More funding in actual figures is not more funding per pupil!

More teachers in schools is not more teachers per pupil.

Nice try Damian

I find it interesting that Wokingham, one of the most expensive areas to live in outside of London, has some of the best performing schools and yet is one of the poorest funded councils. Why? How do they manage it? Do the parents pay extra to the schools?

I doubt that Grammar schools were underfunded because they are grammars. In non grammar areas, the funding tends to be concentrated on under performing schools. Therefore grammars are probably getting the same level of funding as other good schools.

If anything ringfencing money for grammar schools unfairly disadvantages good schools in non grammar areas - they don't have access to this money and they find in hard to complete for money with the underperforming schools in their area.

Well I’d like to have him come here and tell me that then explain how the Head of DS’s school is supposed to run it on over 300k less than a few years ago?

The end result is that DS now can’t do Computer Science as a GCSE as the numbers wanting to were too small to be viable given the funding squeeze. German got chopped slightly before he got there so we knew about that but I’m gutted for him about Computer Science and pressuring school to see if anyway round it.

The amount per head in our county has always been low and to be fair to our Conservative MP who pisses me off no end on most things, he has been trying to get more funding.

Damian Hinds is a disgrace trotting this out. I’ve had children in school for 14 years and it has never been as bad as this. Our local Grammar is apparently cutting the curriculum too.

The link also states this though:
More than 3,800 schools applied to the Condition Improvement fund last year, with 1435 of these projects successfully receiving funding. The vast majority of the projects were for essential work including 608 roofing repairs, 204 window replacements, and 226 projects involving boilers and heating

Read the article: “Melissa Benn said, “More than 2,200 projects were turned down for funding from the Condition Improvement Fund last year, many with a clear and urgent need for essential repair and refurbishment

Is that Melissa Benn, Tony Benn's daughter?

Surely, the applicants of the 2,200 unsuccessful projects just reapplied this year when a further £500 million was available and a further 1,000 plus projects were approved?

How many non-selective secondary schools applied to the expansion fund in 2016? Without that figure, the analysis means nothing.

Isn't that just correcting all those years when improvements were disproportional against grammars?

www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/25968

schoolsweek.co.uk/grammar-schools-benefit-from-dfes-largesse/

Walkingdeadfangirl
Rather than blaming the politicians, how about we the voters take responsibility for refusing to vote for tax rises aka the choices we make.

There are pots of money that could be reduced and spent on schools and the NHS etc.

Read the article

Yes I did. Nothing in it about prior years which is why I asked. Nothing in it about urgency of repairs/renovations/improvements/expansion. Nothing in it about definitions used. Just yet another biased article that's all fur coat and no knickers. Looking at our 2 grammars, they were really suffering from antiquated buildings that had barely little any renovation for a decade or two. Compare that to every single comp in our area that's had new sixth form centres, new theatres, new sports halls, new science blocks over that same decade or two. As I say, I want to see comparative figures for earlier years. From my own eyes, it's simply a historical correction of lack of investment with funds diverted away from grammars and into comps over the last decade or two. Sooner or later that has to be addressed and it seems that it is now being addressed with some grammars requiring a lot of remedial work now after years of not being able to "tick the boxes" to get funding.