Something doesn't add up

 It’s recently emerged that a percentage of any savings from the proposed closure of two schools will be paid to the consultant firm involved with the FTP.

When our Education Department announced these proposals, and during their roadshows, it was emphasised that the driving force was the research favouring against single form entry schools. 

Yes, it would save money but that wasn’t the prime factor.
 
We now learn that the consultant driving this was and is employed on behalf of the FTP firm. Now call me cynical but I can’t imagine any such consultant promoting research without having regard to his prime function which was to save money.
 
It therefore seems that the whole thing is driven by the need to make savings. Don’t get me wrong, I’m happy for any efficiencies to be made which can save substantial funds but something doesn’t add up.
 
Either our Education department weren’t aware of this large body of research (aka evidence) which clearly indicates the superiority of multi entry form schools, or they chose to ignore it when promoting their “Vision” because either it wasn’t relevant or else not really appropriate to Guernsey.
 
Or maybe the evidence isn’t too compelling until you need to save money.
 
Suddenly this research became the driving factor and presumably would be the way to go even if it turns out that it’s going to cost us more.
 
But that isn’t what they said. They said that the closure of these two schools was primarily based on researched evidence.
 
They neglected to mention that their consultant was there with the prime and possibly sole function of saving money.
 
The driving force was money and we, the general public seem to have been misled.
 
A more cynical mind might suggest that someone lied.
 
Sadly it doesn’t stop there.
 
Having in their mind already closed these schools, our department (or their consultant) then seemed to forget the knock on effects. On paper there are obviously places available in the receiving schools but the reality is different.
 
Most of the schools do not have the physical space to accommodate any big increase in class sizes. A number of them already have major access problems at dropping off and picking up times. But none of this shows up on paper and none of this shows in the research because their consultant apparently never set foot in any of our schools while he was here.
 
Only recently have we had Deputies scurrying around the place and actually getting through the school gates.
 
Only now do we find out that actually, we’re going to need a couple of new classrooms at the Vale and maybe have to use some rather unsuitable spaces as main classrooms at St Martin’s and… the list goes on.
 
The older Guernsey schools could only accommodate large class numbers because all of the kids sat at their desk in rows all day. 

Modern education isn’t like that. Children need to move around, they need to work in small groups and as part of teams. They need more space than their grandparents.
 
With all of this in mind I suggest that someone with a bit more power and a bit more knowledge have a look at Education’s proposals because something doesn’t add up.
 
Misleading comments, missing information, and forgotten costs do not give confidence.
 
As a closing point I would guide anyone interested to Education's own website and the Primary School Attainment figures for 2012/3. 

Guess which schools came top of the league?
 
All single form entry schools.



But don't worry, I'm sure someone can rejig the statistics to mean something else.