Educate Together refuse school

Floody Boreland

Would you send your child there?

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0827/723822-schools/

sm213

Floody Boreland wrote: »

Would you send your child there?

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/0827/723822-schools/

If its 8 km surely its only a 15 minute drive outside the town?
Takes 9 mins to drive 4.2km in Dublin through normal traffic.
Its not really that bad some people commute much further to get to an educate together.

EDIT:
Didn't see the video, the building is in some state more of an issue than the location I think. Would it not cost less to build a new one than renovate?

byhookorbycrook

I understand that the school was in need of some modernization, but I don't see why the location was an issue to be honest. Most start up schools don't get a new school straight off. Our school spent over 25 years in prefabs, not saying this should be acceptable, but for a year or two at least, until a school is fully up and running I would see no issue , tbh.

silverharp

sm213 wrote: »

If its 8 km surely its only a 15 minute drive outside the town?
Takes 9 mins to drive 4.2km in Dublin through normal traffic.
Its not really that bad some people commute much further to get to an educate together.

EDIT:
Didn't see the video, the building is in some state more of an issue than the location I think. Would it not cost less to build a new one than renovate?

its not a good idea to build a local school that has to be driven to. It should be walking distance of its natural catchment, no?

echo beach

Off topic I know but even if a school is within walking distance most children are driven. Even when there a car park nearby many parents insist on parking dangerously as close to the gate as it is possible to get.

byhookorbycrook

silverharp wrote: »

its not a good idea to build a local school that has to be driven to. It should be walking distance of its natural catchment, no?

But how do you define a natural catchment for a school that isn't run on "parish" boundaries? Our school doesn't have a catchment area, for example.

silverharp

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

But how do you define a natural catchment for a school that isn't run on "parish" boundaries? Our school doesn't have a catchment area, for example.

just based on population, if the majority of pupils are coming from a village /small town 8km away then shouldnt the schools be 8km closer?

katydid

sm213 wrote: »

If its 8 km surely its only a 15 minute drive outside the town?
Takes 9 mins to drive 4.2km in Dublin through normal traffic.
Its not really that bad some people commute much further to get to an educate together.

EDIT:
Didn't see the video, the building is in some state more of an issue than the location I think. Would it not cost less to build a new one than renovate?

It is the building AND the location, surely? Even if it was refurbished, it would still be grim and forbidding. It would take a lot of work to bring it up to 2015 building and educational standards.

Then the location; why should the children of the town have to travel 8k out of town to school when other children have a school IN the town? If people choose to live in a town, they should expect conveniences such as a nearby school. Ideally one kids can walk or cycle to. It's different for people who choose to live in the country.

katydid

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

But how do you define a natural catchment for a school that isn't run on "parish" boundaries? Our school doesn't have a catchment area, for example.

Common sense. If children live in a town, they aren't in the catchment area of a school 8k away in the country. :-)

byhookorbycrook

But my point is that many of the children will come from a distance away, it shouldn't be a deal breaker, as a start up. Once numbers increase, a new school would need to be built anyhow.

katydid

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

But my point is that many of our children come from a distance away, it shouldn't be a deal breaker, as a start up. Once numbers increase, a new school would need to be built anyhow.

I'm sure it wouldn't have been a deal breaker if the school had been suitable. But it's a kip. And would still be a kip even with a bit of refurbishing.

But location matters. If the children are from the town, why on earth should they have to travel out to the country to go to school. Once the school was established out there, they would be stuck out there. If RC children can go to school in the town, why shove the other children out into the back of beyonds?

byhookorbycrook

8km is hardly the back of beyonds. If there is no school building in the town, what do you suggest? People wait for years for a site to be found and built on, what happens the children in the mean time? Your argument about RC children is a bit of a red herring, the RC schools already exist.

StudentDad

I posted on another thread about this and frankly this whole issue stinks.

Why should the parents of children who want an education for their kids free from any particular religious grouping have to schlep out into the middle of nowhere?

It is in the middle of nowhere. In a place called the windy gap. Abandoned twenty years ago and left to rot.

Are the established schools afraid that if the ET school idea takes off they'll lose numbers and as a consequence funding?

I hope this mess gets sorted and fast.

SD

katydid

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

8km is hardly the back of beyonds. If there is no school building in the town, what do you suggest? People wait for years for a site to be found and built on? Your argument about RC children is a bit of a red herring, the RC schools already exist.

Well, it is to a person living in the town. If you live in a town, you have a lifestyle that takes town life into account. You may not have a car, you have an expectation of your child having easy access to the nearest school. You shouldn't have to bring your child out to the country to go to school.

If there's no school building in the town, build one. Make an extension to an existing school and let classes take place there until numbers increase, and then the extension can be handed over to the first school, for example.

byhookorbycrook

StudentDad wrote: »

Are the established schools afraid that if the ET school idea takes off they'll lose numbers and as a consequence funding?

I hope this mess gets sorted and fast.

SD

The "established schools " have nothing to do with it. They cannot veto a new school. The issue is a DES one.

StudentDad

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

The "established schools " have nothing to do with it. They cannot veto a new school. The issue is a DES one.

I'm sure that is the case. However, given the location of the proposed new ET school it smacks of deliberate marginalisation. 'Oh you can have a school alright, just not one within spitting distance of the 'established' schools.'

SD

byhookorbycrook

katydid wrote: »

If there's no school building in the town, build one. Make an extension to an existing school and let classes take place there until numbers increase, and then the extension can be handed over to the first school, for example.

Unfortunately, schools don't just fall out of the sky overnight. We were in prefabs for close on 25 years, despite having over 400 pupils at the time.

The DES is a slow moving animal, buildings take years to be approved, much less built. Surely the children who could have been in an ET school this year shouldn't have to wait that long.

byhookorbycrook

StudentDad wrote: »

I'm sure that is the case. However, given the location of the proposed new ET school it smacks of deliberate marginalisation. 'Oh you can have a school alright, just not one within spitting distance of the 'established' schools.'

SD

But no-one is saying it is a permanent building, it's a stop gap, I think people don't understand how the DES works, they won't just build a new school overnight, surely that is obvious?

katydid

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

But no-one is saying it is a permanent building, it's a stop gap, I think people don't understand how the DES works, they won't just build a new school overnight, surely that is obvious?

If they move into that rat hole, they'll be left there.

katydid

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Unfortunately, schools don't just fall out of the sky overnight. We were in prefabs for close on 25 years, despite having over 400 pupils at the time.

The DES is a slow moving animal, buildings take years to be approved, much less built. Surely the children who could have been in an ET school this year shouldn't have to wait that long.

They could put up a prefab in the yard of the existing school for a couple of years.

At least it would be warm, dry and convenient.

byhookorbycrook

Ok, I'm out now. I think some people want to see discrimination against ET, we have been through the new start up process and we didn't feel discriminated against, we just wished the DES would get off its official ass.

StudentDad

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

But no-one is saying it is a permanent building, it's a stop gap, I think people don't understand how the DES works, they won't just build a new school overnight, surely that is obvious?

Yeah, tell that to the parents with no car. Tell that to the parents who have a busy work day and have to juggle a busy life that they have to travel to a remote disused afterthought of a school premises to have their children educated.

Temporary site or not. This feels like an to marginalise those who want a choice other than what is available.

SD

martingriff

StudentDad wrote: »

Yeah, tell that to the parents with no car. Tell that to the parents who have a busy work day and have to juggle a busy life that they have to travel to a remote disused afterthought of a school premises to have their children educated.

Temporary site or not. This feels like a effort to marginalise those who want a choice other than what is available.

SD

School bus

martingriff

katydid wrote: »

I'm sure it wouldn't have been a deal breaker if the school had been suitable. But it's a kip. And would still be a kip even with a bit of refurbishing.

But location matters. If the children are from the town, why on earth should they have to travel out to the country to go to school. Once the school was established out there, they would be stuck out there. If RC children can go to school in the town, why shove the other children out into the back of beyonds?

Seriously there are many message on this with the we live in town you can't expect us to go out a bit to the country the inhumanity. Grow up. It is not that remote

In relation to the building it does loke a s#$th$e

StudentDad

martingriff wrote: »

School bus

That makes it ok then? Great! They did that in south Africa during apartheid. Sending black kids to 'other' schools by bus. Coz you know they couldn't attend the local schools.

This is about giving parents a viable, real choice. This abandoned, remote premises is not a real choice.

SD

katydid

martingriff wrote: »

Seriously there are many message on this with the we live in town you can't expect us to go out a bit to the country the inhumanity. Grow up. It is not that remote

In relation to the building it does loke a s#$th$e

If you live in a town, it IS remote. People in a town have different lifestyles and expectations, that's just the way it is.

There are schools in town. Other children don't have to go out to the country to go to school. It's discrimination against the Educate Together school to force them to do this, when they could put a prefab in an existing school for a few years, while they build a new school.

martingriff

StudentDad wrote: »

That makes it ok then? Great! They did that in south Africa during apartheid. Sending black kids to 'other' schools by bus. Coz you know they couldn't attend the local schools.

This is about giving parents a viable, real choice. This abandoned, remote premises is not a real choice.

SD

You are seriously trying to say this an the apartheid are comparable. people use school bussed all the time there is nothing wrong with having a school in the countryside. I went to one and guess what it was good. Lets cut to the chase what you are eluding to is the Chatholic church are trying to embarass you. Its out a bit in the country not in Timbukto. The inhumanity

katydid

martingriff wrote: »

School bus

Why should they? The RC children aren't being bussed out of town.

martingriff

katydid wrote: »

If you live in a town, it IS remote. People in a town have different lifestyles and expectations, that's just the way it is.

There are schools in town. Other children don't have to go out to the country to go to school. It's discrimination against the Educate Together school to force them to do this, when they could put a prefab in an existing school for a few years, while they build a new school.

Maybe they just can't just put a prefab in the area of another school. And in relation to expectations and lifestyle boohoo. I had to go to a school out in the countryside as did a lot of people I know. You are there to be educated not to enhance your lifestyle and expectations

katydid

martingriff wrote: »

You are seriously trying to say this an the apartheid are comparable. people use school bussed all the time there is nothing wrong with having a school in the countryside. I went to one and guess what it was good. Lets cut to the chase what you are eluding to is the Chatholic church are trying to embarass you. Its out a bit in the country not in Timbukto. The inhumanity

Nothing wrong with a school bus if you live in the countryside and need to get to school.

Lots wrong with a school bus if some children from a town are bussed out of town to a run down building in the country while other children can walk up the road to a nice modern building.

martingriff

katydid wrote: »

Why should they? The RC children aren't being bussed out of town.

Thats where there school is do you want the RC to be fecked out of there school give it to ye

martingriff

katydid wrote: »

Nothing wrong with a school bus if you live in the countryside and need to get to school.

Lots wrong with a school bus if some children from a town are bussed out of town to a run down building in the country while other children can walk up the road to a nice modern building.

I am agreeing that the building is horrible but there is nothing wrong with having to go to a school in the country. You make it sound as if it is hell to have to go to the countryside. Seriously and again to compare it to the apartheid.

StudentDad

martingriff wrote: »

You are seriously trying to say this an the apartheid are comparable. people use school bussed all the time there is nothing wrong with having a school in the countryside. I went to one and guess what it was good. Lets cut to the chase what you are eluding to is the Chatholic church are trying to embarass you. Its out a bit in the country not in Timbukto. The inhumanity

It is fascinating that attempts to establish schools other than those traditionally available to parents run into bureaucracy and red tape. Given the spread of traditional schools in the county. It is a bit perplexing to see the school being offered for the ET is remote and abandoned. Frankly where is the parity of esteem. Like I said before it smacks of, 'you can have a school alright but nothing near established schools.' It is a form of marginalisation, no matter how you dress it up.

SD

katydid

martingriff wrote: »

I am agreeing that the building is horrible but there is nothing wrong with having to go to a school in the country. You make it sound as if it is hell to have to go to the countryside. Seriously and again to compare it to the apartheid.

There is something wrong with dumping kids in a school in the country when there are alternatives, and when other kids, who happen to go to a school controlled by a religion, are not obliged to travel, but can go to school in their locality.

That is clearly discrimination.

katydid

martingriff wrote: »

Thats where there school is do you want the RC to be fecked out of there school give it to ye

That would be the ideal. The RCC aren't in there anyway, the state runs it and pays the teachers, the RCC just have nominal control.

But it doesn't have to go that far. A couple of prefabs in the grounds of an existing school would do fine until the school is established.

martingriff

StudentDad wrote: »

It is fascinating that attempts to establish schools other than those traditionally available to parents run into bureaucracy and red tape. Given the spread of traditional schools in the county. It is a bit perplexing to see the school being offered for the ET is remote and abandoned. Frankly where is the parity of esteem. Like I said before it smacks of, 'you can have a school alright but nothing near established schools.' It is a form of marginalisation, no matter how you dress it up.

SD

So your saying the Catholic Church and the rest are saying up you. I can see your point there with the building at least but to suggest it is hell or like apartheid to go to school in the countryside and to dare suggest take a bus like what are we savages we are townfolk not county people we have higher standards is frankly pathetic and sound snobbish.

martingriff

katydid wrote: »

That would be the ideal. The RCC aren't in there anyway, the state runs it and pays the teachers, the RCC just have nominal control.

But it doesn't have to go that far. A couple of prefabs in the grounds of an existing school would do fine until the school is established.

Where are the kids to go in the school if ye take it over maybe they don't want to have educate together to run there school what gives ye the right to say we want this school like it or lump it.

Prefabs would have been a nice way but maybe due to health or safety they could not be due to the size of the place or something.

katydid

martingriff wrote: »

So your saying the Catholic Church and the rest are saying up you. I can see your point there with the building at least but to suggest it is hell or like apartheid to go to school in the countryside and to dare suggest take a bus like what are we savages we are townfolk not county people we have higher standards is frankly pathetic and sound snobbish.

You choose to live in the country. Other people choose to live in the town. They choose to live in the town so they are near shops, schools etc.

If schoolkids who go to the RC school can go to a school in the town, why not other children? Are they of less worth?

The_Valeyard

I think people are forgetting and I will try to find a link later as I'm mobile, but parents in the local schools in castlebar voted to keep the current school patrons back when Ruairi Quinn was minister for education. so why should a local school be given up when the locals want that school to remain the way it is?

Gatling

katydid wrote: »

But it doesn't have to go that far. A couple of prefabs in the grounds of an existing school would do fine until the school is established.

And if the said other schools don't want /need prefabs on there grounds .

Yeah the building offered need work and modernisation but 12 /18 months solid work and investment it pretty doable .

We all can't have shiny and modern building just because

katydid

martingriff wrote: »

Where are the kids to go in the school if ye take it over maybe they don't want to have educate together to run there school what gives ye the right to say we want this school like it or lump it.

Prefabs would have been a nice way but maybe due to health or safety they could not be due to the size of the place or something.

Can't everyone go to the same school? What's wrong with that?

There are plenty schools in the country that use prefabs. If an existing school yard is too small, there are surely areas where they could be installed. In a community centre, sports grounds or whatever.

StudentDad

martingriff wrote: »

So your saying the Catholic Church and the rest are saying up you. I can see your point there with the building at least but to suggest it is hell or like apartheid to go to school in the countryside and to dare suggest take a bus like what are we savages we are townfolk not county people we have higher standards is frankly pathetic and sound snobbish.

Nope you're incorrect there. For me it's simple. If you look at the spread of state funded schools with religious patronage in the county and then consider what is being offered to the ET movement. It does raise questions. This isn't a real choice. It's an abandoned, near ruin in the middle of nowhere. They don't call it the Windy Gap for nothing.

Why precisely do those kids who want an ET education and live in the town have to schlep out into the middle of nowhere for their education?

SD

katydid

Gatling wrote: »

And if the said other schools don't want /need prefabs on there grounds .

Yeah the building offered need work and modernisation but 12 /18 months solid work and investment it pretty doable .

We all can't have shiny and modern building just because

Tough luck if they don't want or need. It's none of their business. The state pays their running costs and their teachers, they can put up what they like.

The school was supposed to open IN TWO DAYS TIME. It isn't ready. And even if it was, it's an insult to bus kids out of the town because they are not Roman Catholics.

katydid

The_Valeyard wrote: »

I think people are forgetting and I will try to find a link later as I'm mobile, but parents in the local schools in castlebar voted to keep the current school patrons back when Ruairi Quinn was minister for education. so why should a local school be given up when the locals want that school to remain the way it is?

No one's asking the RC to give up its school. It has nothing to do with them.

The_Valeyard

katydid wrote: »

No one's asking the RC to give up its school. It has nothing to do with them.

Then what's your point?

martingriff

katydid wrote: »

There is something wrong with dumping kids in a school in the country when there are alternatives, and when other kids, who happen to go to a school controlled by a religion, are not obliged to travel, but can go to school in their locality.

That is clearly discrimination.

What alternatives are there. The prefab one I will give you but maybe it could not have been done I have no idea. Maybe you want the school run by the religion and tell them to go somewhere else. The school is it was fit for purpose is only a few KM away not half way across the country

martingriff

katydid wrote: »

You choose to live in the country. Other people choose to live in the town. They choose to live in the town so they are near shops, schools etc.

If schoolkids who go to the RC school can go to a school in the town, why not other children? Are they of less worth?

Of course they are not and a school should be build for Educate Together in the town. There is not a school there at the moment so except for the prefabs which if it can be done should be what other alternatives are you suggesting. By the way its a school there there to learn it should not matter if its a bit out in the countryside

katydid

martingriff wrote: »

What alternatives are there. The prefab one I will give you but maybe it could not have been done I have no idea. Maybe you want the school run by the religion and tell them to go somewhere else. The school is it was fit for purpose is only a few KM away not hald way across the country

The prefab option is a genuine option. Ideally near an existing school, but if not then in the grounds of a community centre or similar. A modern prefab is way better than a victorian ruin.

The school they want the kids to go to certainly in NOT fit for purpose, and does not have convenient access for the people of the town.

Can you answer me this; why should the students of a non RC school be treated differently from students in an RC school, who can easily access their school by foot or bicycle?

katydid

martingriff wrote: »

Of course they are not and a school should be build for Educate Together in the town. There is not a school there at the moment so except for the prefabs which if it can be done should be what other alternatives are you suggesting. By the way its a school there there to learn it should not matter if its a bit out in the countryside

So if they are not of less worth, why should they be bussed out of town instead of going to school locally like their friends in the RC school?

There is no school building, but prefabs can be put up for a couple of years while one is built. Or a community centre can be use.

But the Dept. just want to take the easy way out and discriminate against them; the very thing they are trying to get away from.

martingriff

katydid wrote: »

The prefab option is a genuine option. Ideally near an existing school, but if not then in the grounds of a community centre or similar. A modern prefab is way better than a victorian ruin.

The school they want the kids to go to certainly in NOT fit for purpose, and does not have convenient access for the people of the town.

Can you answer me this; why should the students of a non RC school be treated differently from students in an RC school, who can easily access their school by foot or bicycle?

If it is then it should be done again I had no idea if it was possible then fine. I also agree and have been the building is not fit for purpose and should not be used.

Students from non RC school should not be treated differently but having to go to a school IF IT WAS FIT FOR PURPOSE out a bit in town is not discrimination. I am all for schools for different domination of faith or non faith to be build and be build as centrally as possible. I don't have a problem whith this WHAT I DO HAVE A PROBLEM with is people thinking having to go to school a bit out in the countryside or having to (dear god) ride a bus as discrimination or akin to apartheid

hardCopy

The_Valeyard wrote: »

I think people are forgetting and I will try to find a link later as I'm mobile, but parents in the local schools in castlebar voted to keep the current school patrons back when Ruairi Quinn was minister for education. so why should a local school be given up when the locals want that school to remain the way it is?

Local schools should never have been given a vote. Atheists are a minority, how would a school ever be divested by a popular vote under those circumstances? Of course the locals don't want to go secular, the need for a baptismal certs keeps the foreign kids out with their funny religions.

No school should have any religious ethos, but as a stopgap a proportional number of religious schools in each area should be nationalised and taken over by the organisation that funds them, the DES. Locals should be consulted but the decision should be made centrally if they won't play ball.