Primary school admissions, 'super size' classrooms and 'titan' schools - what do you think?

If you have an excellent teacher and a well behaved class probably upto to 40 is fine. However given its good to get a social mix and the teaching profession is hemorrhaging good teachers probably a class size of 25 is needed. Also reduced funding means TAs are being lost so it can end up being one adult in the room.

Similarly if you have a brilliant head they can get to know each child in a school of 400+ children but the babyboomer heads are retiring and teachers are not finding headships attractive

There were plans in the 2000s for estates with schools included but due to nymbyism most plans were rejected and then the recession meant that all remaining plans were shelved. Now there is piecemeal building all controlled by private developers who will be able to get out of building rented housing and infrastructure.

LAs need to be able to build schools and be in control of admissions to make sure everything is equitable and above board. Its more efficient and I suspect cheaper in the long run

When my son started at school the year before last there was talk of making it into 3 form entry. I went to the consultation and personally thought there was a lot of nimby talk. I mean if you work, how far to do you want the school to be away from your home? Because you havr to factor in logistics at some point.

Anyone here got 2 children in different primary schools? Because that would be a nightmare.

Just heard this discussed on You and Yours on radio 4.

I hadn't realised that the Local Authority is NOT ALLOWED to build new schools. They are dependent on Free schools opening, or academies expanding. Except they have no control over the expansion of academies who are self governing.

How is this possible? How is it possible that we as a society have no control over the planning or provision of school places? It si completely ridiculous.

Some of those pubs/petrol station etc that CorBlimey mentions need to be purchased and turned into schools. It just isn't possible to continually expand existing schools.

There is another issue though.
When I started training in 1990, there was a school near us that was the biggest in Europe (it was only 600 kids or so, tiny by today's standards) brand new, purpose built flag ship school on a new estate we will call NewBuild. A few years later the demand for places was so high that they built School2 across the road.

10 years later the number on the rolls of the Newbuild School and School2 had plumeted, and when I moved back to the area a few years ago, I read with interest that the 2 schools had merged and now have a 2 form entry.

The reason is that those families that bought their houses on the Newbuild Estate are still there, their kids went through primary and secondary and have now flown the nest and Mum and dad still live in their nice 3 bed house they bought 20 years ago.

That is a more common problem than we appreciate, and there is an argument for core school buildings with the possibility of expanding/contracting the number of classrooms by using mobile etc classes. These classrooms can then be used by secondary schools as the bulges pass on through them.

My Year 1 son is at a 3 form entry school. There are 31 children in his class. The school was under pressure to expand or at least take a bulge class but there simply isn't space. Instead they have built a facility for children on the autistic spectrum who can spend time in mainstream classes as appropriate.

I actually like a bigger school. Our son's teacher this year is newly qualified and I like that she has the support of two other more experienced teachers teaching the same year group. I think there are more opportunities. I can see downsides too - the nativity cast of 90 still only has one Mary, one Joesph and a LOT of villagers (last year son was Narrator 15).

The issue round here is things like pubs, petrol stations, offices and car parks are disappearing and flats are springing up. Last year the maximum distance a child allocated a place on distance lived was 0.3 miles and yet the traffic at drop off is a nightmare (we walk). 48 of the 90 places went to siblings. Lots of people play the system by moving into the area and out again quickly and a greater supply of rental flats is just going to exacerbate that.

Where we used to live, 2011/2012 was recorded as having the highest birth rate in years. Stories in newspapers and so on, talk of what to do re schooling in the future. What actually happened? Nothing. You can't get into a local school unless it's on your doorstep, and even then, you're lucky. At the same time, a whole new housing estate sprung up. Extra school? No. Seems no one thought of that. I'm quite glad we moved! They're now deparately trying to add in extra classrooms and so on to existing schools, but the plain truth is that there is no space, no playground space, and the schools are not fit for purpose. They're old buildings, it's built up around and about and so playgrounds are crammed with portacabins. And the worst thing? The local council act as if it's a shock to the system. No it isn't. 5 years' notice seemingly wasn't enough...

DD is in a 4 form entry junior, which will take a bulge class next year.

I think the bigger school actually has lots of benefits - she has a lot of opportunities and have a wide friendship circle (actually several circles).
My issues are logistical - school run time is a nightmare (even if you don't drive) and the school has had to give up communal space to accommodate extra classes. I have no idea where the bulge class is going. If the infrastructure was there, I would find it fine.

Plus, the three and four form schools are all schools that have been expanded, so they've built on the playground etc, very little outdoor space, lunches are done in shifts.

All the schools in our old area were three or four form intake. DD howled and howled at all the open days - one school had one enormous open space for all three nursery classes, so ninety children running around, it was utterly chaotic.
We found a school further away that was smaller, and she was fine.

'Super-size' classes are not those slightly over thirty; anything up to 36 is manageable, depending on the space of the classroom.But thirty is preferable, although it rarely happens in Junior schools. It is the ridiculous impositions, such as marking all pieces of work in three different coloured pens (never red), filling in endless target sheets: 'I can spell words that are usually misspelt'(?)and weekly individual plans for far too many pupils, that add to the workload, not two or three extra children.

Larger schools are able to offer better facilities, but it depends on the size of the classrooms, cloakrooms, storage facilities and outdoor space.
The 'cosy' atmosphere that parents like in small schools is quite often stifling and restrictive, and facilities and resources are limited.

It is teachers who should be consulted, not parents; teachers work in a variety of settings and schools and see the long-term effects; parents have pre-conceived notions and usually little experience; politicians are concerned with promises and votes, and getting housing built, and Governors with money.

New housing estates are erected with the promise of new schools, but they are a long time coming, as they wait to see how many children an estate will yield. With this ridiculous proviso that only academies can expand, the problem will simply get worse. (Thank you Michael Gove).

Don't dismiss mobile classrooms; parents get into a terrible state about them but they are frequently better than small, cramped, dark classrooms in the main buildings. I, and a succession of classes, actively preferred ours to the cramped, open plan classrooms with small windows, low ceilings and lights on all day in the new building. They were light, sunny and airy, had windows that could be opened without causing draughts, doors that could be closed, their own cloakroom and storeroom and no external noise. But parents, who had never set foot in them, regularly campaigned to get them removed. They finally succeeded, and at the expense of the computer suite and the library they have their the new classrooms:cramped, internal, scant daylight and fresh air coming via corridors and a courtyard, dripping with condensation, low ceilings, no cloakroom and no storage. They are also extremely noisy.

I agree that better planning would help enormously! The estate we live on was built nearly 20 years ago, and is massive. They did build a primary school in the middle of it, but only 1 form entry. The school is massively oversubscribed and there have been debates about increasing the number of admissions for the past few years, but nothing has yet been done.
How anyone thought that an estate this size of thousands of almost entirely family homes would only produce 30 kids a year was bloody stupid.

I agree with you tiggy, but taken a philosphical view as it were, where 2-3 form entry is the ideal, then the government needs to be much more active in getting school sites.

Rather than building schools miles away, maybe they should be compulsory purchasing buildings to convert?

Maybe our planning regs should include space for school for every xx number of houses built?

Maybe school playing field should be protected instead of being sold off? A large playing field could accommodate a new primary school and still have space left over.

How is it that in our area (not London) they built a huge new estate, with no school provision at all, and no space reserved for it etc etc. the council made no school provision either, and then when surprised by the number of kids looking for schools the next September, the councils response was 'we didn't expect families with school age children to move into these houses because they are only 2 bedrooms'

So, yes, I would rather they added the classes on than left kids without places, but an ideal is 2-3 form entry with 25-30, and the PLANNING should be proactively towards that, rather than reactively adding bulge classes.

I am an (ex) teacher. When I was teaching it was in a school in London with 400 kids. It was considered to be a large school. This size school (2 form entry) is now standard.

My kids go to a local one form entry school.

I am really sad at the increase in the larger schools. At primary level, the sense of knowing everyone and having a family atmosphere is really good for our kids. Being able to fit the whole school into the school hall for important 'family' moments in the school is good too, as is the sense of support from older kids to younger when they know each other.

We have also spent time in a village school which was too small (lack of other kids of same age, lack of opportunities eg no football team)

I think 1 or 2 form entry is the right size at primary. Larger schools lose that intimacy, that community feel. I would prefer to see a new school next door, rather than double the size of the original school.

As to larger classes, well, having two classes alongside each other with a shared teaching set-up is nothing new, so one room, 2 teachers, 60 kids. There are pros and cons, but I don't have a problem. I do have a problem with classes of 30+ and one teacher.
Teachers are not super human, there is a limit to how many classes they can teach, and TAs are not the same as teacher, and so one teacher plus one TA is not enough