Topic ID 2587
and here is another thing that has really annoyed me http://www.herts-essex-news.co.uk/news/mercury/hertfordshire_mercury/2007/03/09/schools%20devastated%20as%20funding%20is%20withdrawn.lpf why should the pupils of local schools who do go when they are supposed to and behave well lose out on new facilities so that the money can be used for the benefit others who have been "excluded" from schools. I presume they are excluded for good reason, why should they have special facilities. I am sorry but this seems so unfair that these schools were promised new facilities etc for it to be withdrawn like this is simply not right.
Reply ID 37252
Completely agree. The chronic underfunding of schools is a scandal. What sort of message does this send to the children who are our future? I'm not sure that this is all the fault of the local authority. I'm not familiar with the budget for 2007-8 or how much funding HCC will get from central government this year, but I would suspect that HCC are having to draw a higher proportion of their income from local taxpayers whilst facing increased costs and a cap on tax increases. Rock and hard place!
Reply ID 37254
quote:Hear bloomin' hear!!!! I don't know about budgets either but how exactly am I supposed to explain to my 10 year old, who is going up to Sele in Sept and read this article, that for all her hard work she is less deserving than someone who doesn't even want to go to school!! Hardly a good example! As promises had been made, it was mentioned when we families did the rounds last year. Although it would not have effected our 1st choice of Sele, my daughter was gutted as science is her main subject. With 39 schools being let down how many other children feel exactly the same?! The whole thing is just wrong! [:(!]
Originally posted by Marilyn
and here is another thing that has really annoyed me http://www.herts-essex-news.co.uk/news/mercury/hertfordshire_mercury/2007/03/09/schools%20devastated%20as%20funding%20is%20withdrawn.lpf why should the pupils of local schools who do go when they are supposed to and behave well lose out on new facilities so that the money can be used for the benefit others who have been "excluded" from schools. I presume they are excluded for good reason, why should they have special facilities. I am sorry but this seems so unfair that these schools were promised new facilities etc for it to be withdrawn like this is simply not right.
Reply ID 37255
Unfortunately, in the Real World, outside the pages of the Daily Mail, things are a bit more complicated than there simply being Bad Kids who are excluded from school and don't deserve to have our hard-earned council tax lavished on them as much as the Good Kids who have not been excluded. I think most people working in this sector would agree that, with a couple of exceptions, it is pretty much down to p1ss-poor parenting skills that some kids cannot behave acceptably and are excluded from school. These kids often have no idea about boundaries, respect and tolerance, because they come from homes where such values don't exist. They are rightly excluded from school when other measures have failed and they are still too disruptive - this is only fair on the staff and the other children. So, should these children be consigned to the scrap heap because their parents are weak/stupid/incompetant/absent? KS4 alternatives work. They can turn around kids that are marginalised and heading for a life of crime and instead give them the life skills and self-belief to get along in society. In an ideal world, there would be enough money for KS4 programmes AND capital improvements to schools. But unless you are prepared to pay a great deal more in council tax, your elected representatives will have to make difficult decisions about priorities.
Reply ID 37256
quote:Agreed ........ but IMO If there was any question that the funding would not go ahead it should not have been promised to all these schools and then withdrawn at the last minute.
Originally posted by Rachel
Unfortunately, in the Real World, outside the pages of the Daily Mail, things are a bit more complicated than there simply being Bad Kids who are excluded from school and don't deserve to have our hard-earned council tax lavished on them as much as the Good Kids who have not been excluded. I think most people working in this sector would agree that, with a couple of exceptions, it is pretty much down to p1ss-poor parenting skills that some kids cannot behave acceptably and are excluded from school. These kids often have no idea about boundaries, respect and tolerance, because they come from homes where such values don't exist. They are rightly excluded from school when other measures have failed and they are still too disruptive - this is only fair on the staff and the other children. So, should these children be consigned to the scrap heap because their parents are weak/stupid/incompetant/absent? KS4 alternatives work. They can turn around kids that are marginalised and heading for a life of crime and instead give them the life skills and self-belief to get along in society. In an ideal world, there would be enough money for KS4 programmes AND capital improvements to schools. But unless you are prepared to pay a great deal more in council tax, your elected representatives will have to make difficult decisions about priorities.
Reply ID 37258
I do have absolute sympathy for the parents who feel they have been let down because "commitments" have not been honoured but the words "chronic underfunding" of schools leaps straight out of the pages of the Daily Mail too!! I was a governor of a local school between 1996 and 2003 and witnessed significantly increased resources going into schools. We moved from a hand-to-mouth existence to running with an annual surplus and much better provision all round! As I say, I sympathise with victims of recent developments but they reflect a cut-back in perhaps over-ambitious plans rather than chronic underfunding!!!
Reply ID 37259
I would like to state for the record that I am not a Daily Mail reader, nor would I want to be thought of one. It's a publication I have no time for whatsoever. [:0]
Reply ID 37261
Reading stuff like that reminds me why I go without to send my kid to a private school. The lunatics have truly taken over the assylum.
Reply ID 37262
quote:Interesting, did this increased funding go to all the schools?
Originally posted by Sooty
I was a governor of a local school between 1996 and 2003 and witnessed significantly increased resources going into schools. We moved from a hand-to-mouth existence to running with an annual surplus and much better provision all round!
Reply ID 37267
I know there is not enough funding and all that but these schools were promised their funding, it should not be possible to then take it away. Whoevers fault it is and good/ verses bad etc it is wrong that so many should suffer for a few.
Reply ID 37294
quote:Does that include fare dodging [;)] Seriously though, the article mentions the school in Newgate Street where children are working in temperatures of over 40C - that is an outrage. No doubt John Harris enjoys air conditioning [:(!]
Originally posted by Rachel I think most people working in this sector would agree that, with a couple of exceptions, it is pretty much down to p1ss-poor parenting skills that some kids cannot behave acceptably and are excluded from school. These kids often have no idea about boundaries, respect and tolerance, because they come from homes where such values don't exist.
Reply ID 37299
I'd have to chip in there and say that I can confirm that John Harris *doesn't* have air conditioning in his office. Now if you went down to the other side of County Hall, it may be a different story.... I'm saying no more than that![8)]
Reply ID 37321
I'm gonna need long legs, coz this is one very high horse I'm riding! I work with these so-called 'bad' kids, teaching them in order to help them get on with their lives. As yet, I have not found one who was excluded from school because of their discipline. In 1-2-1 sessions with them, they felt let down by the schools they attended by not diagnosing learning difficulties that they have - Aspergers, dyslexia and so on. Because of this lack of diagnosis, they are labeled as 'disruptive', 'naughty' or 'unteachable'. Most of these youngsters want to learn, but because they have a problem that nobody knows about the teachers cannot help them, so they get pushed to the back of the room, while the ones who find learning easier are lavished much more attention. So then the back three rows of the classroom think that they do not have to work, as they ask questions that go unanswered and ignored. These youngsters are not problem students - just misunderstood. When I start showing them some attention and give them help to do their work, they become responsive and willing to learn. I work for a company that is funded, not by the County Council, but by the Learning & Skills Council - who believe in giving disadvantaged youngsters a chance. I know that schools are run like businesses and have a budget to work to, but just one important member of staff should be employed by all schools - both primary and secondary - and that is a Special Educational Needs Co-Ordinator (SENCO). One school in Hertford that I looked round about 2 years ago, when asked if they had a SENCO, said that they did not have one. It seemed to me that they were trying to say that they did not have any problems regarding pupils with learning difficulties. I feel that there are no bad teachers, no bad pupils, no bad schools but a bad funding policy by the County Council
Reply ID 37328
quote:Please elaborate Sooty. Assuming your previous comments weren't fantasy, I'm sure you have considerably more rich experiences to contribute here. Much like the health service debate,countless bundles of cash are apparently thrown at the problem without perceivable improvement in service... Maybe it's down to the fact that none of us as prepared to be the object of low-achievement in public services. Surely as a society we've never really been able to meet our implied moral obligations. It's just that we are all so more aware and that every injudicious event is analysed til even Trevor McDonald cares. ps - Steve is a Daily Mail reader.
Originally posted by Sooty
I do have absolute sympathy for the parents who feel they have been let down because "commitments" have not been honoured but the words "chronic underfunding" of schools leaps straight out of the pages of the Daily Mail too!! I was a governor of a local school between 1996 and 2003 and witnessed significantly increased resources going into schools. We moved from a hand-to-mouth existence to running with an annual surplus and much better provision all round! As I say, I sympathise with victims of recent developments but they reflect a cut-back in perhaps over-ambitious plans rather than chronic underfunding!!!
Reply ID 37329
Grass [B)]
Reply ID 37334
quote:Sorry Tazz I wasn't blaming the kids I realise it is a very emotive and comlicated question. It just seems basically wrong that these scools were promised funding from new classrooms/ science labs etc and at the 11th hour it is taken away. As you say it is the funding polocy that needs looking at if there was a possibility it wouod not be avaliable it should not have been promised, I am sure most of the schools proudly told parents of new pupils what was going to happen and now everyone has been let down schools and parents alike.
Originally posted by Tazz
I'm gonna need long legs, coz this is one very high horse I'm riding! I work with these so-called 'bad' kids, teaching them in order to help them get on with their lives. As yet, I have not found one who was excluded from school because of their discipline. In 1-2-1 sessions with them, they felt let down by the schools they attended by not diagnosing learning difficulties that they have - Aspergers, dyslexia and so on. Because of this lack of diagnosis, they are labeled as 'disruptive', 'naughty' or 'unteachable'. Most of these youngsters want to learn, but because they have a problem that nobody knows about the teachers cannot help them, so they get pushed to the back of the room, while the ones who find learning easier are lavished much more attention. So then the back three rows of the classroom think that they do not have to work, as they ask questions that go unanswered and ignored. These youngsters are not problem students - just misunderstood. When I start showing them some attention and give them help to do their work, they become responsive and willing to learn. I work for a company that is funded, not by the County Council, but by the Learning & Skills Council - who believe in giving disadvantaged youngsters a chance. I know that schools are run like businesses and have a budget to work to, but just one important member of staff should be employed by all schools - both primary and secondary - and that is a Special Educational Needs Co-Ordinator (SENCO). One school in Hertford that I looked round about 2 years ago, when asked if they had a SENCO, said that they did not have one. It seemed to me that they were trying to say that they did not have any problems regarding pupils with learning difficulties. I feel that there are no bad teachers, no bad pupils, no bad schools but a bad funding policy by the County Council