A numbers issue

WITHER Guernsey's secondary school system?

There are many significant questions being asked about how it should evolve, the two biggest being whether there should be fewer States secondary schools and whether or not selection at 11 should continue.

While in some ways these are separate questions, they also strongly impact on each other.

Let's start with the number of schools we need. One result of an independent review into the La Mare de Carteret rebuild project was an unequivocal finding that Guernsey needed only three state secondary schools rather than the current four. Treasury and Resources is strongly backing that conclusion and I think they are absolutely right.

This is not primarily driven by any philosophical approach to education, although there are some educational and curriculum advantages to slightly larger schools. Rather it's because Guernsey's demographics are changing. In future the percentage of young people in the island will be far lower, so unless we are planning a very big increase in our total population there will simply be fewer youngsters to educate.

In fact this trend is already happening, with hundreds of spare places within our secondary schools. We simply can't afford to exacerbate that waste of resources. It may have escaped the notice of some – including many States members – but cash is tight. What's more, it's likely to stay that way for years to come.

So unless we are going to cane the local population with ever-increasing taxation, we simply must provide our public services in the most cost-effective way possible. That doesn't necessarily mean scaling them back, although sadly it may come to that if we are not careful. What it does mean is cutting out waste and inefficiency wherever possible. Which makes running a secondary education system with one more school than is really needed unthinkable.

Whichever way you look at it, dropping from four to three state secondary schools makes overwhelming sense. It is better educationally, it reduces the capital spending required across our total educational estate and – most crucially – it reduces the revenue costs of providing schooling for local youngsters without compromising quality. A win-win-win situation.

It's not even a novel idea.

It's exactly what was proposed by Education themselves back at the turn of the century. At the time that proposal got the full support of just about every head teacher in Guernsey, so it's hardly a dangerous flight of fancy.

So my answer to the first big educational question is 'yes, we definitely should move to one fewer secondary schools'.

How does that relate to the other big question about selection? To some they are completely unrelated. They argue that we can drop to three state secondaries with or without the 11-plus. That's true to an extent, but it's by no means that simple.

What we can't do is have three roughly equally-sized secondaries and designate one as a grammar school. When grammars were commonplace in the UK, they selected a relatively small percentage of the most academically able pupils. That's still the case in the few areas of the country where selection continues. Typically that might be the most academic 15% of children, but definitely not beyond 25% – which is where Guernsey is now.

If Guernsey had three equal-sized state schools, one a grammar school, and continued sending about 50 pupils from each year group to the private colleges on scholarships, we would be creating a unique, untried and perverse system. Firstly it would be dishonest, because we would be designating a school as a grammar when it was no such thing. Worse, we would be removing the most academic 40% from the two remaining high schools, which would be a dangerous social experiment.

Goodness knows what sort of exam results such schools would achieve or whether they would even be able to attract top-quality teachers. Remember all those head teachers 14 years ago pointing out that it was quite difficult to recruit, because many teachers from the UK didn't want to teach within our system? That problem could only be made worse if we took a complete flyer and removed the most able 40% from our high schools.

So yes, it would indeed be possible to shed a secondary and retain selection, but it would surely mean the grammar school having to be far smaller than the remaining two high schools.

That in turn begs the question of where it should be situated. It's hard to conceive that it could be on its current site, which it already under-occupies with a significant number of spare places.

An issue that will only be exacerbated if we see the predicted drop in total pupil numbers and the grammar school continuing to take a similar percentage of island pupils as it does now.

Dropping to three secondaries would be far easier if selection was scrapped. We then could have a trio of roughly equal-sized schools without creating any educational or sociological problems.

I suppose I would say that because my opposition to selection by school is well known.

That doesn't mean I favour mixed ability teaching, but rather the flexibility and inclusion provided by setting by subject within schools.

I'll return to the thorny issue of the

11-plus on another day and also the huge benefits that could flow from creating a tertiary college.

More immediately, where does all this high-level debate leave the La Mare project?

I feel desperately sorry for those being taught – or teaching – in a substandard building. They've been caught up in the middle of a political row and are also clearly suffering from the skewed priorities which perversely saw Les Beaucamps being redeveloped before their school.

I also very much take Deputy Matt Fallaize's point that some on T&R who are demanding that selection be looked at before any building takes place are actually dead against comprehensive education.

But that's not the real point. Selection is due to be looked at and that debate may go either way.

And whatever the outcome, the number of state secondary schools should definitely be reduced.

So many variables to consider, but I'm sure the current La Mare school site will end up being redeveloped. That makes it tempting to say, 'let's just press on with this long-overdue project'. Alas, that would be an error.

When it comes to big capital projects, there's nothing worse than not knowing the destination you are trying to get to before you set out.

It's a recipe for wasting money.