Is bigger really better?

[Todaysthedayorisittomorrow]

The local state schools in my area (country town not city nor SE) both primary and secondary seem to be promoting that having more in the school is a good thing.

The "super" primaries are having around 6-700 children in them, and the "super" secondaries are having around 1900-2000 children in them.

I use the term super just in regards to their size and not their quality necessary, some are rated good but appear in the local paper due to drug dealing etc by pupils, and others require improvement.

Are these size schools really beneficial to the children or is it just a case of finances ie no new schools being built just cram more into existing?

I used to work for a company that had 2,500 employees on one site, it was awful just for feeling like a non entity and a number, and I look at the size of the secondaries and feel it would be the same for my child.

Fortunately we do have small primaries as well as super primaries so have gone for a small, but there are no secondaries smaller than 1,500 pupils in our local area and I'm not convinced bigger is better. Please convince me otherwise.

My DD is at a 1200 size comp, y7-11 and that is fine. I'd certainly have no problem if it were 300 larger (2 more tutor groups per year). In fact I may go so far as to say that much smaller than that for a comp and you would start to lose range of options at GCSE etc.

Not sure I'd be keen on a 600 size primary though.

Well, you certainly don't want a school to be too small. But no, bigger is not necessarily better.

I think it doesn't matter nearly as much at secondary than at primary though.

The advantages of a big secondary are:

• lots of subjects offered.
• can stream more
• more clubs and after school stuff happening
• bigger pool of children to be friends with
• have more experience of everything ( SEN / Bullying / transfers etc, etc)

Each school approaches things differently. You will find significant differences (more important than their size) between the schools.

For example some schools have a 2 week timetable, some a 1 week. Some set or stream, some don't. Some set or stream in Y7, some later. Some from KS2 results, some from tests done at school.

One of my DCs secondary does something they call 'small school', which means they divide the school into 2 halves, and they run each half like a separate school. The 1st floor of the school is for 1 half, and the 2nd floor for the other. 1st lunchbreak is for 1 half, 2nd lunchbreak for the other etc. This means that they are only interacting with half the number of students.

Also remember that no matter how big or small the school is, each class is about the same size, and each teacher teaches the same number of classes. So the teaching and learning shouldn't differ really.

Most of the schools round us are 3 form PAN 90 from nursery and are great. Tons of opportunities and resources. Loads of scope for friends what ever type of child you are. There have been lots of threads onthid subject. Tiny schools are cute at 4 and can be stifling by 10

Eton has 1300 pupils .....

Size is just a number.
Its what they DO with the size that matters.

SEtting, options, extra curricular, pastoral, SEN

there are great small schools and bad small schools
and great big schools and dire big schools

DDs 6th form college has 1800 per year group

We went for bigger to get lots more subject options, choices about extra-curricular activity and in particular a big strong music dept. Some small schools are rather constrained by resources in what they can offer.

DC go to a 4 form entry juniors, about to increase to 5 form entry. It does mean they get more opportunities in terms of the school can offer more. For DS it meant a wider choice of friends (he'd struggled at infants due to most of hte other boys being football mad!) Both DC know all the children in their year group and the school operates "vertical circle time" e.g. circle time with a group including children from each class in the school" so they know a large number of children in other year groups too. It also means that, for example, the Year 4 teachers work closely together. Main advantage for me is that when they move to secondary school (2 closest have 240 and 300 in a year group) they will be used to bigger groups.

I wouldn't mind at secondary age - I think older dc are potentially better equipped with being 'one of the crowd'.

Personally I really dislike large primaries. We viewed a couple of 3 form entry primary's and they just seemed...I don't know...anonymous? 4 secretaries on the front desk, greeting parents in the friendly-but-unfamiliar way you get in a shop kind of thing.

Dc's are currently in a one form entry Primary. Around 200 dc in the entire school, including two (different age) nursery classes. Ds1 and 2 have 24 and 17 in their classes. The head knows every dc and their parents...school reports have an individual summary (hand written) from the head, which is very personal. It's a real community feeling school and I'd hate it any other way tbh.

DD is in a 5 form entry junior school - the opportunities she gets compared to the 1 or 2 form entry primaries near us is amazing, you can't compare. The variety of sports, arts, music, drama, plus various other clubs is more like my secondary. They have a great sports hall and theatre too. The school has a stronger sense of the school community than the infant schools that feed into it, but it is a very pupil focused community, not parent focused, which is great. It has worked very well for her.

Draylon the upside of big primaries is that they often have seperate playgrounds. Ours has four - nursery / reception / yrs 1-3 and then 4-6 Works really well

draylon
THe National Curriculum is a red herring because Academies do not have to follow it, and 3/4 of secondary schools are now academies.

The drop in the number of GCSEs is more to do with the switch to linear.

Some of the worst overcrowding in primary school play areas is in private prep schools in London : the accident book never gets put away during the day.