Peatstack

School closures - communities must organise a defence

Last Tuesday's meeting in Back School was very well attended by parents, and gave a very good insight into the events of the previous week in the various Comhairle meetings that ultimately resulted in the review of education in the Western Isles, that may, or may not - we were informed - include the closure of the S1/2 units.

But before getting into the heart of the issues, I think we need to be absolutely clear about what is happening in the name of a review of education. At the meeting on Tuesday we heard of the two major issues driving the possibility of school closures - the new curriculum for excellence and the current cost of education in the islands.

The Peatstack - as of my last contribution - remains absolutely convinced that there is really only one issue driving the possibility of closure, and that is finance. I do not believe, and in fact am even more convinced of this after last Tuesday night's meeting - that we would not now be discussing school closures if the only issue under discussion is the suitability of the S1/2 units to deliver the new curriculum. The Peatstack reasserts that the Comhairle - and, if our councillors are to be believed, it sounds as if the senior officers in education and finance are the principle movers of these closure proposals - are dressing up a closure for financial reasons in the clothes of a benefit for education.

At the meeting, some parents argued very cogently that we need to ensure that the high quality of the education delivered in the schools at present is both quantified in terms of outcomes, and placed centre stage in this debate. This The Peatstack whole-heartedly agrees with - but with a note of caution, as above. Let's not be fooled into thinking that the first issue we are dealing with is anything to do with the quality of the education to be provided to future generations of children in the affected communities. It is to do with Comhairle finances.

But that said, let's challenge the Comhairle to prove the value of its so-called 'review' and promise that any school that can prove the quality of its education, and its suitability to deliver on the new curriculum, will remain open. Without such an undertaking, the 'review' is meaningless, and exposed to be what I think it really is - a soft-landing for a programme of cuts in the education provision in these islands.

On the issue of the new curriculum, one possibility did emerge at the meeting, and that is the proposal that Back should be expanded to fit the new age-parameters of the curriculum and become home to a new S1 - S3 unit. However, it must be remembered that part of the reason for the new curriculum is to remove the rigid age-based structure of progression through the classes and replace it with attainment-based progression.

I will not in this blog detail the many areas in the new curriculum that I feel to be very much in-line with the ethos of the current S1/2 units - their community base, their holistic social education that encourages and enables our children to be confident and secure young people, the closeness to the history, culture and spirituality of the community in which they live etc. There are many reasons, especially when, as the meeting heard from a very well informed contribution from the floor, the new curriculum is a transcendent curriculum, not so much about new content but about attitudes and ethos in the very principles of our education system.

One dark note about the meeting. The ugly rowing between new and ex-councillors. There is no place for these rows to be conducted in public. Such rows will serve only to alienate parents and others from the entire debate, and if all the individuals concerned cannot resist the temptation to settle scores then they should stay out of the debate, whoever they are. This political squabbling was not the only negative. The Peatstack was not aware that one of our newly elected counillors is the deputy chair (or equivalent) of the education committee. The Peatstack feels very strongly that such a position is not compatible with best interests of the campaign to stop these closures and therefore the individual concerned should resign that position and commit to fighting this campaign with the local community. Given the level of alleged subterfuge detailed to us at the meeting by our councillors, the resignation of this position should have occurred immediately this issue emerged in the way it did last week, and is now overdue.

All that remains to be said now, is that we as parents must organise a campaign against these closures. We must do that now, and with a commitment to getting informed and active. Whether this campaign should include our councillors or be in addition to their efforts in the council chamber, is a matter of debate, but while one of their number remains in an official office in the education committee, I'd say that have to remain at arms length. How we do this, we must decide, but we must, and when we do we must ensure that we work in tandem with the other communities that face these problems.