• Welcome to DOSBODS

     

    DOSBODS is free of any advertising.

    Ads are annoying, and - increasingly - advertising companies limit free speech online. DOSBODS Forums are completely free to use. Please create a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

     

Sign in to follow this  
sarahbell

Schools are too dear to run

Recommended Posts

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/jul/04/figures-reveal-english-schools-cant-afford-to-teach-five-days-a-week

 

 

A spokesperson said: “The funding for an average primary class of 28 in Birmingham is £125,000 – above the national average of £115,000 for an equivalent-sized class. These amounts are to cover a full five-day week in term time.”

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, One percent said:

Where to start...  government have made it all so complicated. They have filled school with the unreachable, taught by those unable to teach. 

You've got £125k for 28 pupils.
 

Top whack for a teacher is 40k? 

 

So you've got 85k to fritter away on pens, books and the upkeep of the room.

X 6 years

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, sarahbell said:

You've got £125k for 28 pupils.
 

Top whack for a teacher is 40k? 

 

So you've got 85k to fritter away on pens, books and the upkeep of the room.

X 6 years

£150k for a primary school head teacher.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, sarahbell said:

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/jul/04/figures-reveal-english-schools-cant-afford-to-teach-five-days-a-week

 

 

A spokesperson said: “The funding for an average primary class of 28 in Birmingham is £125,000 – above the national average of £115,000 for an equivalent-sized class. These amounts are to cover a full five-day week in term time.”

 

 

 

That will be for all the extra help to deal with the 14 languages, teaching English as a foreign language, plus the special dietary and cultural requirements of the 'special' children.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But spunking 60 odd million on a non-existent 'garden bridge' is fine apparently. Fuck the schools.

The high school near me looks like some kind of Soviet-era construction, in fact it looks like fucking Chernobyl post explosion. It's falling to bits and has just had to shut down sixth form through lack of funding.I often look at it and wonder what sort of country chooses to educate it's new generation in such a decrepit shithole but seems to have deep enough pockets to run 'consultations' for non-existent projects that run into the tens of millions.

Fucking scum. I'd have them up against a wall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, sarahbell said:

You've got £125k for 28 pupils.
 

Top whack for a teacher is 40k? 

 

So you've got 85k to fritter away on pens, books and the upkeep of the room.

X 6 years

Don't forget their pensions.

Oh and teaching assistants.

4 minutes ago, Sgt Hartman said:

But spunking 60 odd million on a non-existent 'garden bridge' is fine apparently. 

Nobody ever mentions Joanna Lumley.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sgt Hartman said:

But spunking 60 odd million on a non-existent 'garden bridge' is fine apparently. Fuck the schools.

The high school near me looks like some kind of Soviet-era construction, in fact it looks like fucking Chernobyl post explosion. It's falling to bits and has just had to shut down sixth form through lack of funding.I often look at it and wonder what sort of country chooses to educate it's new generation in such a decrepit shithole but seems to have deep enough pockets to run 'consultations' for non-existent projects that run into the tens of millions.

Fucking scum. I'd have them up against a wall.

The children of the people in Westminster (including LibLab fake lefties) do not attend institutions like the one you describe. So your kids having to share a class with illiterate Roma (and all the other problems, that's just one example) is not an urgent matter to them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Sgt Hartman said:

But spunking 60 odd million on a non-existent 'garden bridge' is fine apparently. Fuck the schools.

The high school near me looks like some kind of Soviet-era construction, in fact it looks like fucking Chernobyl post explosion. It's falling to bits and has just had to shut down sixth form through lack of funding.I often look at it and wonder what sort of country chooses to educate it's new generation in such a decrepit shithole but seems to have deep enough pockets to run 'consultations' for non-existent projects that run into the tens of millions.

Fucking scum. I'd have them up against a wall.

They’re called schools, because that is their function. Their purpose is to school your expectations, not educate.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, sarahbell said:

You've got £125k for 28 pupils.
 

Top whack for a teacher is 40k? 

 

So you've got 85k to fritter away on pens, books and the upkeep of the room.

X 6 years

+ employer NI and pension and PPA cover might take teacher costs up to 50k?

Each class has a TA adds another 20k, share of salary cost of secretary, headteacher, senco, lunchtime supervisor, cleaners, upkeep of the fields and buildings.

Electricity and gas, water.

Free school meals for infant school children cost £12k a year per class but that might come from a different budget.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, sarahbell said:

You've got £125k for 28 pupils.
 

Top whack for a teacher is 40k? 

 

So you've got 85k to fritter away on pens, books and the upkeep of the room.

X 6 years

Not really. 

The real cost of inflation has been hidden from people for years, which is the real problem. Inflation has put fixed costs and future liabilities through the roof, which makes doing anything incredibly expensive.

Hide the true cost of inflation for a decade or two then suddenly everything is too expensive to do, regardless of how much you throw at it.

Who'd a thunk it?

One other thing... Overlaid on this is the issue of too many users, not enough payers. But it's really just the other side of the same inflation coin.

Edited by Roger_Mellie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there is a disabled kid in the class they get their own guardian come teacher. It truly is beyond belief that someone thinks this is affordable ... especially with medical science now able to get very early premature babies with all sorts wrong with them alive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Bedrag Justesen said:

Don't forget their pensions.

Oh and teaching assistants.

Nobody ever mentions Joanna Lumley.

What is the story with teaching assistants?  I don't remember any such thing when I was a nipper.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Bedrag Justesen said:
39 minutes ago, Sgt Hartman said:

But spunking 60 odd million on a non-existent 'garden bridge' is fine apparently. 

Nobody ever mentions Joanna Lumley.

First time I read that I took it as spunking on Joanna Lumley... O.o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was a programme on R4 a week or so back -- with the 'person from school' moaning about not enough money.  Then they started going on about what they had to spend it on -- social outreach for children from difficult backgrounds, providing meals for the hungry ones, some ridiculous %age of the classes were SEN* (something like half), some crazy %age that were EFL**.  I just wanted to shout -- that's not your problem.  Just do the education.

* if the %age that are SEN is over about 50%, then it ceases to be special, doesn't it.  Eventually the ones that are okay to just learn on their own become the 'special' ones, and the bulk of the class (currently SEN) are the normal ones.

** EFL?  Tough.  Parents can work that out.

I'll refer to this, which I think speaks volumes:

main-qimg-fffbd09a46a63f99c44fce12e90c60

The problem here is that schools have adjusted as 'new normal' to the massive increase in spending on education from '98 to '12.  Thus the very slight reduction in funding is causing mayhem, even though it isn't even a reversion to trend.  I suppose I'm a teensy bit sympathetic, as money lost is always more painful than money never actually got, but nevertheless it isn't a fundamental problem -- the money exists to run the schools and they've just got to relearn how to run them with '96 levels of funding (say).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, dgul said:

There was a programme on R4 a week or so back -- with the 'person from school' moaning about not enough money.  Then they started going on about what they had to spend it on -- social outreach for children from difficult backgrounds, providing meals for the hungry ones, some ridiculous %age of the classes were SEN* (something like half), some crazy %age that were EFL**.  I just wanted to shout -- that's not your problem.  Just do the education.

* if the %age that are SEN is over about 50%, then it ceases to be special, doesn't it.  Eventually the ones that are okay to just learn on their own become the 'special' ones, and the bulk of the class (currently SEN) are the normal ones.

** EFL?  Tough.  Parents can work that out.

I'll refer to this, which I think speaks volumes:

main-qimg-fffbd09a46a63f99c44fce12e90c60

The problem here is that schools have adjusted as 'new normal' to the massive increase in spending on education from '98 to '12.  Thus the very slight reduction in funding is causing mayhem, even though it isn't even a reversion to trend.  I suppose I'm a teensy bit sympathetic, as money lost is always more painful than money never actually got, but nevertheless it isn't a fundamental problem -- the money exists to run the schools and they've just got to relearn how to run them with '96 levels of funding (say).

SEN needs?

IIf the kids has no chance of getting a couple of GCSE then school is totally the wrong place for them. Put them in day care, which theyll need for the rest of their life.

SEN is a massive make work for the teachers and support staff.

EFL? Fuck that. Stop allowing migrants into the UK who cannot support themselves financially. Bill them for schooling cost. Deny hem benefits.

Do those two things and you can reduce school spend by 30%.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

That's almost 4k per year in real terms less than the spending a 1960s born got in State education per year. Add on extended years in further education, and you are rapidly narrowing that inter-generational fairness gap. Put it this way I got just 10.5 years, from 5 years four months to 15 years 10 months.

We had better investment and career opportunities, but they've had the public sector cash splurge; may explain differing generational attitudes to politics too.

Edited by crashmonitor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, crashmonitor said:

That's almost 4k per year in real terms less than the spending a 1960s born got in State education per year. Add on extended years in further education, and you are rapidly narrowing that inter-generational fairness gap. Put it this way I got just 9.5 years, from 5 years four months to 15 years 10 months.

We had better investment and career opportunities, but they've had the public sector cash splurge; may explain differing generational attitudes to politics too.

Are you sure?

Ive seen a chart of pupil/spend from the 50s to today.

Current spend is waaaaay more than the 70s, about 2x.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Hail the Tripod said:

They’re called schools, because that is their function. Their purpose is to school your expectations, not educate.

 

Prior to the industrial revolution there was no such thing as school. However with parents suddenly herded into 't Mill and factories there was now a need for somewhere to park the kids en masse. Hence the Butler education act 1870. Nobody did or does really give a shit if they learn anything or not, hence why budget anything for it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, spygirl said:

Do those two things and you can reduce school spend by 30%.

Prove it.

Let's start with a comparison of fixed vs. variable costs for a typical school. 

Which dataset should we use?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Roger_Mellie said:

Prove it.

Let's start with a comparison of fixed vs. variable costs for a typical school. 

Which dataset should we use?

80% of education is salary.

Gid rid of no speakee English and SEN and you can get rid of a huge number of staff, which reduces the admin cost.

Good look at getting set. The schools and LAs are just vague and clueless where it all goes.

 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/teacher-network/2015/may/23/secret-teacher-support-inclusion-but-not-at-any-cost

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

That guardian article is not a dataset. I'm really keen to understand this and you seem to know a lot already. So where do we start? Is there somewhere online we can take a look at a typical school budget. An actual accounting type budget, not just an overview or summary?

If you can't access a good dataset then you can't make your claim, and all you're left with is rhetoric.

Edited by Roger_Mellie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Roger_Mellie said:

That guardian article is not a dataset. I'm really keen to understand this and you seem to know a lot already. So where do we start? Is there somewhere online we can take a look at a typical school budget. An actual accounting type budget, not just an overview or summary?

If you can't access a good dataset then you can't make your claim, and all you're left with is rhetoric.

I think you mean rthatrric.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see where this is going.

How about skool tuition fees - just use the same model as the university.

From 5-16yrs you take out a school student loan of £3K per year, and the child doesn't have to pay it back until they reach 16 and they are earning X amount.

They can now buy more ipads and iphones for the each kid! Hurrah!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Similar Content

    • By sarahbell
      https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-flu-vaccine-available-this-winter-for-those-aged-65-and-over

      A more effective flu vaccine is available this winter for those aged 65 and over, which could prevent deaths and reduce the burden on the NHS.

       
      The newly available ‘adjuvanted’ vaccine is expected to significantly boost effectiveness by improving the body’s immune response to the vaccine. This is important because typically, older adults’ bodies do not respond as well to the flu vaccine due to their naturally weaker immune systems. Older adults are also more likely to suffer complications from flu.
      The broader flu vaccination programme will also be improved by offering all eligible adults under 65, including pregnant women and those with long-term health conditions, the ‘quadrivalent’ vaccine in injected form.
      This protects against a total of four strains of flu; two strains of flu A and two strains of flu B.
       
    • By JackieO
      As a female why the need to kill zombies forever?
    • By DTMark
      Why would anyone have a pension with the company for whom they work?
      Thinking of Carillion and BHS here.
      The way it seems to work is that you allow your employer to hive off some of your money from every pay packet and if they are still around when you retire you might get something back.
      You might, however, end up with absolutely nothing depending on whether or not the company chooses to make good on it or not.
      I use the word "chooses" in part to imply that there don't seem to be any "rules". If the company is mismanaged and/or fraud is involved, you could lose everything and seem to have no standing whatsoever regardless of your contributions.
      Maybe there are rules that the companies are supposed to abide by, but not doing so appears to bring no penalty. Therefore there are, in effect, no rules. It's like having the law, but not having any police.
      Why would any company want to put capital into a pension fund for people who aren't going to be working for the business anyway when they start drawing it? It's dead money. Dividends are much more juicy and "in the now".
      Is having a "company pension" some historical legacy thing?
      Is there supposed to be some protection for people who've paid in for decades, done nothing wrong themselves, but now have nothing to retire with?
      Is it "their fault" for "choosing the wrong pension scheme", the buyer should have been more careful and shopped around?
      There surely must be some legislation on the subject but whatever it is, it doesn't seem to be effective.
       
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.