Comprehensive schools 'are too big' says schools minister...

[edam]

Durrrrrr.... I could have told them that 20 years ago.

split comps into smaller schools

Errrrr...

So this must be why those dim fuckwits at Sheffield City Council want to merge two smaller schools in the north of the city (one of which was one of the most-improved in the UK) into one big, humungous "new school", whose location will present a ridiculously long round trip every day for some of the kids it will allegedly serve.

Righto.

I went to the comp that Cod taught at. Must admit- it didnt really affect me as a pupil- it is split into three seperate buildings so never felt 'overcrowded'.

It was a good school- not sure about it now though- the kids behave like animals on the local buses at hometime.

I think the main plus point of smaller schools would be that it would be more of a community with teachers and pupils knowing one another. The big disadvantage that I could see is that there would not be enough money to go around for extra facilities which the larger schools currently take for granted. Three or four smaller schools surrounding central facilities for sport, science, design etc could be the answer. Although, if each school had it's own OFSTED report and league table results, then there would be the ludicrous situation of all parents applying for the one with the best results on paper and no way of deciding which pupils are allocated to which school.

chopchopbusybusy - I went to a highly academic school, with a 3 class intake, with very few facilities indeed! No pool, no drama studio, playing fields a bus-ride away, classrooms in converted Victorian houses.

The school still features in national league tables, we had a good time, and I became a theatre director, despite not even studying drama at school.

I think we value buildings and 'stuff' more than people, listening to young people and working with them, tbh.

The school my DC's are going to go to has less than 700 pupils. It's really dinky

Sorry. Not helpful or constructive but I'm feeling quite excited about it. As is DS#1.

The thing is, if you want comprehensive schools, but you also want effective streaming/setting, then bigger schools might be the way to go. Because otherwise you have fewer classes for the same ability range.

TM - you are right.

Looking over this thread, I am only reaffirmed in my own belief that size is not the real issue. You can have fantastic small schools and fantastic large schools. But they will require different management skills - that's the critical issue.

DD1 has to attend the local comp (we moved here suddenly during summer hols right before Yr 7), and I'm not overly impressed with it TBH. It does seem to have about a million pupils and is too large and anonymous. I can't even let her have school dinners, because she says she has to queue up so long to get it, lunchtime is practically over by the time she sits down.

I also don't like the slutty-looking girls lighting up whilst they are still on school property, or snogging their builder boyfriends at the gates whilst the teachers walk past them, but that's an entirely different thread.

Blu, in order for schools to teach the National Curriculum then they do need to have certain facilities available to them and in an ideal situation these will be situated in the school grounds. DD1s school covers a huge semi rural catchment area. We live 13 miles from it. For many children whose parents do not have transport or are unwilling/unable to ferry them around they would not have access to sports facilities, drama groups etc if the school did not provide them. I am pleased that these options are open to DD. Is it not possible to have good teaching and 'stuff'?