Teaching pupils aged 3 to 18 in one school prompts backlash
TEACHERS have overwhelmingly rejected plans for a new generation of schools where primary and secondary pupils would be taught at the same site.
A number of “all-through” schools, which could accommodate pupils aged three to 18, are planned by eight councils – Aberdeen, Dumfries and Galloway, Dundee, East Ayrshire, Highland, North Ayrshire, North Lanarkshire, and Perth and Kinross.
However, a poll of teachers in Dumfries by the Educational Institute of Scotland (EIS) union found 85 per cent would prefer to retain the current set-up of four secondary schools, but with integrated timetables allowing pupils to move between schools to study specific subjects.
A second option proposed by the council, would see the creation of a “superschool” for S4-S6 pupils, while keeping the existing four secondaries for S1-S3. A third option would see a new school for S4-S6, with children aged P6 upwards using the four existing secondaries.
John Dennis, EIS local association secretary, said: “Many made clear in the survey that they value being in a six-year secondary school and that their job satisfaction, their expertise, their conditions of service and their Scottish Secondary Teachers’ Association annual conference backed an emergency motion demanding that the Scottish Government “exercise caution in encouraging the proliferation of three-to-18 schools”.
Members feared that threeto-18 campuses, by reducing the overall number of schools, would result in fewer jobs and damage those communities left without a school. Concerns were also raised around “bullying of young children and exposure to teenage issues too young”.
Councillor Gail MacGregor, chair of Dumfries and Galloway Council education committee, said: “I am glad that a vigorous debate is taking place around the Dumfries Learning Town project and what gives the best potential opportunities for our children.
“I have, however, sought clarification from the EIS as to why the survey was carried out prior to the publication of the learning and teaching report, and why only secondary teachers were involved in the survey when it affects primary teaching staff as well as non-teaching staff.”