Is Anyone Counting The Real Cost Of Buildings That Are Literally Crumbling Around Young Learners?
A whopping £6.7 billion is needed now to get all school buildings up to scratch, while the capital budget this year stands at £4.5 billion
- by Fiona Millar
It is funny how little incidents can trigger big memories. Sitting in a classroom recently, at the school where I am a governor, we suddenly noticed a slow steady drip coming from the ceiling.
As the rainwater continued to splash into the waste paper bin hastily shoved underneath, I was taken rapidly back to the 1990s when I first became a parent governor. Leaky roofs, children taught in Portakabins, even outside toilets, were a fact of life back then.
Capital investment in schools in the intervening years has thankfully made these a distant or non-existent memory for many parents, pupils and teachers. Those who didn’t benefit from the Building Schools for The Future programme, and our school just missed out, usually had enough money in their budgets to make do and mend.
It’s happening now
So as school revenue funding jostles for public attention with other austerity-hit services, and anti-cuts campaigns spring up around the country, spare a thought for the investment in bricks and mortar that may go ignored as heads struggle to find enough money to maintain staffing and curriculum. And remember the personnel and resources that may be foregone if the roof literally does fall in.
The latest report from the National Audit Office on school capital funding lays bare the full extent of the problem. A whopping £6.7 billion is needed now to get all school buildings up to scratch, while over 400,000 new school places will be required in the next five years and the capital budget this year stands at £4.5 billion.
Clearly, the maths doesn’t really add up. The NAO also warns that the process of allocating scarce resources is inefficient and that if repairs or rebuilding are not tackled now, the total cost of sorting out the condition of our schools could double by 2021. Also worth noting that this report is dealing only with condition, rather than “suitability” changes to ensure that facilities, equipment and study spaces are appropriate for a first class education.
Environment has an impact
Ever since BSF was ditched, and the review into school capital funding, carried out by Sebastian James an old Etonian mate of former PM David Cameron, decided that there was “little evidence that a school building that goes beyond being fit for purpose has the potential to drive educational transformation”, the importance of school environment has been downplayed.
A myth has been perpetuated that new schools can pop up in office blocks, old garages, and disused public spaces. I almost buy that argument if we are simply talking about functional classrooms, though even they need to be light warm, safe and conducive to learning with a minimum level of technology.
But asking children to be taught under a dripping roof or with wind whistling through inadequate windows shows a basic lack of respect in my view. Many of our most disadvantaged young people come from homes that are overcrowded, substandard and lack outdoor space. School environments that make them feel valued, while providing enrichment opportunities and a broader curriculum can be transformational.
It wouldn’t happen at Eton
This is why the top public schools (which still dominate elite universities, the arts and professions) don’t teach their children in flat packed IKEA style buildings. It is why the Eton College websites boasts a 250-seater concert hall, a three-story music school, a fully functioning professional 400-seat theatre (plus studio space), a purpose built Drawing School and sports facilities good enough for an entire Olympic squad.
It is also why Eton enjoys a well-planned investment programme to ensure that continuously developing equipment and technology is a top priority. To get the best for their boys, naturally.
This is a long way from the waste paper bin and the leaky roof. I don’t use the example of Eton glibly – this isn’t about class war or the politics of envy. Parents are entitled to spend thousands on their children’s education if they so wish. But if it is good enough for the wealthiest children in society, it should at least be an aspiration for the poorest.
