egafd.com

My old infant school,a beautiful solidly built redbrick building in South London was sold off last year as expensive apartments. It now houses the rich. Since then I have noticed other schools where they have done the same. I was over the East End the other day and my partner noticed that her old school had gone the same way too. Meanwhile cheap new pre-fabricated schools have been built, usually with their playgrounds near mainroads, with traffic spewing out lead and pollution.

I wonder how wide spread this heinous practice is and would like to hear from anyone who has noticed this unpublicised phenomenon of New Labour?
Mike Freeman

Its not a New Labour phenomenon, it's happening in Tory, Lib-Dem and even NOC areas.

It's called economics. The old schools with high ceilings, tall, single glazed windows were hard to maintain and expensive to heat. The brick walls between classrooms are hard to modify to deal with both falling rolls and the educators' demand for smaller class sizes.

Rather than pull them down councils of all political hues make money on the sale.

Simple really. What they put up in their stead is something else but , again, all parties are equally guilty.

Mysteryman,

It is happening under a New Labour government. The buildings are inexpensive to heat and to maintain because they are built solidly. Class sizes are larger now than when they were built.

Of course it is economics and that is why the rich can buy them!
Mike.

Check your facts. High ceiling, single glazed buildings are MORE EXPENSIVE to run than modern low ceiling, double glazed buildings.

Most of the old brick school buildings have suspect damp courses, many are not insulated and have no cost effective ways of insulating them.

Roll numbers are falling across the board leading to school closures and integration.

Claass sizes in the 1950s were averaging around 45 per Infant/Junior school, it came down to around 36 by the early 1970s and is stable around 32 currently. Educators want to see classes of a maximum of 25-28

When theVictorian and Edwardian schools were built, class sizes often hit 60.

Finally, LEAs get money from Central Government. THEY decide how to spend it and what to do with their buildings not the government.

Mysteryman ,

Then why are the rich in them! Fact is that double glazing could be fitted if heating is so expensive. Moreover high ceilings and plenty of fresh air are what our kids need.

In the Forties there were twenty eight kids in my class whereas now there are thirty five upwards.

Schools are controlled by Central government and that is why we have a Minister for Education. Local councils do what they are told. Check your facts. Do you think that local councils could sell off their schools, without government permission to the rich?

Tony Blair shouts "education,education,education" but what we have got is "corruption,corruption,coruption".!furious!

Mysteryman,

It could be worse, old Victorian listed buildings are just given over to the Muslim community where I live. They strip the school of it's cast iron railings, strip it of it's lead roofing and old cast iron radiators and sell the stuff off to the scrapmen.

When it's cold in winter and the roof is leaking they then apply for ?500,000 council grants to fix it up because the buildings in a state of near collapse.

The buildings aren't used as Mosques or community centres, no one seems to know why the Muslim community need all these old schools. We just know that they're just about derelict, where as 10 years ago they were beautiful buildings full of children.

I'd much rather see people making homes and looking after the 200 year old buildings with pride.

Sam,

Down here apartments in the local school buildings that are basically unchanged go for ?750,000.
Mike.

Simple physics, hot air rises and a large volume of space needs more energy expended to generate the heat to fill it. The cost of double glazing tall window spaces and changing frames is prohibitive under most LEA's budgets.

As far as the "rich" occupying the buildings goes, those buildings have been converted - at great expense, that is why they command high prices. Under building regs there has to be a minimum amount of insulation and there are other rules about heat, light and space for dwellings. They may look the same from the outside - take a trip inside.

If you were in a class of only 28 in the 1940s you were either in a small rural school, a private school or in an area that had lost a large amount of its population due to the war. The figures I mentioned were for urban schools, as the schools you talk about as being converted are in urban areas.

I've tried to find comparative figures on the Net for each decade from the 1940s to the present but even the DfES website doesn't help.

What I have are my school photos at primary school (1952-1958), my wife's (1956-1962), my daughters, (1979-1985) and I've called a couple of pals in education (both senior education officers) in two distinct parts of the UK who say may figures are pretty much correct.

Why back your "case" with a newspaper article written to give "wow" factor to a tiny increase in class size in one age band (5-7) where the same article shows the 7-11 age band has seen a fall. Much of the increase is due to amalgamations and the current fad for getting one's kids into schools that top spurious league tables.

Look at http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/management ... hoolrolls/ for the trend.

As for how LEA's spend their money and their powers, have you had more recent experience than my wife (school bursar for an LEA school for 12 years before we left the UK)?

My old school was demolished ages ago and houses built on the site, as was my sister's grammar school for the same reason. My older brother's school was closed years ago and lay empty for ages, before being converted into a training centre for the unemployed.

My younger brother's old school has been closed, or will be very soon. There are extensive playing fields in the back and I don't know what the plan is for those, though OI can guess.