Anybody read the document (spent hours last night going through it)

They must have desperately underestimated how many people would want 
access to the site and completely cocked up the PDF downloads

"KJ"  wrote in message 
news:nJSdnQ_EibsnABHaRVnyvgA@bt.com...
> Anybody read the document (spent hours last night going through it)
>
> They must have desperately underestimated how many people would want 
> access to the site and completely cocked up the PDF downloads

I'm fucking furious about this.....I bought the house next door to 
Greenmount primary (Ryde)so I could guarantee my daughter would go 
there...now they will close it down in all 3 versions of the plan according 
to the CP article. Can you check this in the pdf KJ?

Cheers

Alex

On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 14:28:30 -0000, "Alex Wilson"
 wrote:

>
>"KJ"  wrote in message 
>news:nJSdnQ_EibsnABHaRVnyvgA@bt.com...
>> Anybody read the document (spent hours last night going through it)
>>
>> They must have desperately underestimated how many people would want 
>> access to the site and completely cocked up the PDF downloads
>
>I'm fucking furious about this.....I bought the house next door to 
>Greenmount primary (Ryde)so I could guarantee my daughter would go 
>there...now they will close it down in all 3 versions of the plan according 
>to the CP article. Can you check this in the pdf KJ?
>
>Cheers
>
>Alex 
>

You and many others - a minimum of 23 schools will close whatever
option is chosen.
I still can't believe they can be serious about this.

qwight@not-qwight.com wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 14:28:30 -0000, "Alex Wilson"
>  wrote:
> 
>> "KJ"  wrote in message 
>> news:nJSdnQ_EibsnABHaRVnyvgA@bt.com...
>>> Anybody read the document (spent hours last night going through it)
>>>
>>> They must have desperately underestimated how many people would want 
>>> access to the site and completely cocked up the PDF downloads
>> I'm fucking furious about this.....I bought the house next door to 
>> Greenmount primary (Ryde)so I could guarantee my daughter would go 
>> there...now they will close it down in all 3 versions of the plan according 
>> to the CP article. Can you check this in the pdf KJ?
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Alex 
>>
> 
> You and many others - a minimum of 23 schools will close whatever
> option is chosen.
> I still can't believe they can be serious about this.
Greenmount closes under all three options.Your option will be.

Option 1  Binstead, Dover Park,Oakfield, Bishop Lovet, Mayfield

Option2 Dover Park, Haylands,Bishop Lovett, Mayfield

Option 3  As Option 2

qwight@not-qwight.com wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 14:28:30 -0000, "Alex Wilson"
>  wrote:
> 
>> "KJ"  wrote in message 
>> news:nJSdnQ_EibsnABHaRVnyvgA@bt.com...
>>> Anybody read the document (spent hours last night going through it)
>>>
>>> They must have desperately underestimated how many people would want 
>>> access to the site and completely cocked up the PDF downloads
>> I'm fucking furious about this.....I bought the house next door to 
>> Greenmount primary (Ryde)so I could guarantee my daughter would go 
>> there...now they will close it down in all 3 versions of the plan according 
>> to the CP article. Can you check this in the pdf KJ?
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Alex 
>>
> 
> You and many others - a minimum of 23 schools will close whatever
> option is chosen.
> I still can't believe they can be serious about this.
Purely on paper it all makes complete sense....apart from the increased 
travel required.  Unfortunately no human input was made.

On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:10:57 +0000, KJ  wrote:

>qwight@not-qwight.com wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 14:28:30 -0000, "Alex Wilson"
>>  wrote:
>> 
>>> "KJ"  wrote in message 
>>> news:nJSdnQ_EibsnABHaRVnyvgA@bt.com...
>>>> Anybody read the document (spent hours last night going through it)
>>>>
>>>> They must have desperately underestimated how many people would want 
>>>> access to the site and completely cocked up the PDF downloads
>>> I'm fucking furious about this.....I bought the house next door to 
>>> Greenmount primary (Ryde)so I could guarantee my daughter would go 
>>> there...now they will close it down in all 3 versions of the plan according 
>>> to the CP article. Can you check this in the pdf KJ?
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Alex 
>>>
>> 
>> You and many others - a minimum of 23 schools will close whatever
>> option is chosen.
>> I still can't believe they can be serious about this.
>Purely on paper it all makes complete sense....apart from the increased 
>travel required.  Unfortunately no human input was made.

I haven't read the pdf because I'm not directly affected yet but from
what I understand it's going to mean a LOT more school-runs, parking
outside schools etc.  It's totally against the sensible govt policy
for kids to walk to school whenever possible.  What about working
parents who can't get away to fetch kids from school?
Where is the 'no change' option?

qwight@not-qwight.com wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:10:57 +0000, KJ  wrote:
> 
>> qwight@not-qwight.com wrote:
>>> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 14:28:30 -0000, "Alex Wilson"
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> "KJ"  wrote in message 
>>>> news:nJSdnQ_EibsnABHaRVnyvgA@bt.com...
>>>>> Anybody read the document (spent hours last night going through it)
>>>>>
>>>>> They must have desperately underestimated how many people would want 
>>>>> access to the site and completely cocked up the PDF downloads
>>>> I'm fucking furious about this.....I bought the house next door to 
>>>> Greenmount primary (Ryde)so I could guarantee my daughter would go 
>>>> there...now they will close it down in all 3 versions of the plan according 
>>>> to the CP article. Can you check this in the pdf KJ?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>>
>>>> Alex 
>>>>
>>> You and many others - a minimum of 23 schools will close whatever
>>> option is chosen.
>>> I still can't believe they can be serious about this.
>> Purely on paper it all makes complete sense....apart from the increased 
>> travel required.  Unfortunately no human input was made.
> 
> I haven't read the pdf because I'm not directly affected yet but from
> what I understand it's going to mean a LOT more school-runs, parking
> outside schools etc.  It's totally against the sensible govt policy
> for kids to walk to school whenever possible.  What about working
> parents who can't get away to fetch kids from school?
> Where is the 'no change' option?
I think everybody agrees that things have to improve, the problem is 
that the problem is perceived as institutional.  The real problem is 
encouraging good teachers to the Island.  Without good teachers, the 
three options are pointless.

I would rather go to a completely decentralised system with local 
schools from Primary to Secondary, with maybe 12 Secondary/High schools 
on the Island, making education more community based rather than less. 
These schools would be designed to meet the requirements of the 
community number wise.  Of course this would be expensive, but no more 
so than the current plan, which will inevitably fail without any proviso 
for encouraging the best teachers.

On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 16:32:09 +0000, KJ  wrote:

>qwight@not-qwight.com wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:10:57 +0000, KJ  wrote:
>> 
>>> qwight@not-qwight.com wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 14:28:30 -0000, "Alex Wilson"
>>>>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "KJ"  wrote in message 
>>>>> news:nJSdnQ_EibsnABHaRVnyvgA@bt.com...
>>>>>> Anybody read the document (spent hours last night going through it)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They must have desperately underestimated how many people would want 
>>>>>> access to the site and completely cocked up the PDF downloads
>>>>> I'm fucking furious about this.....I bought the house next door to 
>>>>> Greenmount primary (Ryde)so I could guarantee my daughter would go 
>>>>> there...now they will close it down in all 3 versions of the plan according 
>>>>> to the CP article. Can you check this in the pdf KJ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>
>>>>> Alex 
>>>>>
>>>> You and many others - a minimum of 23 schools will close whatever
>>>> option is chosen.
>>>> I still can't believe they can be serious about this.
>>> Purely on paper it all makes complete sense....apart from the increased 
>>> travel required.  Unfortunately no human input was made.
>> 
>> I haven't read the pdf because I'm not directly affected yet but from
>> what I understand it's going to mean a LOT more school-runs, parking
>> outside schools etc.  It's totally against the sensible govt policy
>> for kids to walk to school whenever possible.  What about working
>> parents who can't get away to fetch kids from school?
>> Where is the 'no change' option?
>I think everybody agrees that things have to improve, the problem is 
>that the problem is perceived as institutional.  The real problem is 
>encouraging good teachers to the Island.  Without good teachers, the 
>three options are pointless.
>
>I would rather go to a completely decentralised system with local 
>schools from Primary to Secondary, with maybe 12 Secondary/High schools 
>on the Island, making education more community based rather than less. 
>These schools would be designed to meet the requirements of the 
>community number wise.  Of course this would be expensive, but no more 
>so than the current plan, which will inevitably fail without any proviso 
>for encouraging the best teachers.

I agree completely. It is the standard of teaching that that has to
improve, if the school-leavers I deal with are typical - and I am sure
they are. Changing where the teaching is done - to the inconvenience
of all concerned - in itself won't help at all.

qwight@not-qwight.com wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:10:57 +0000, KJ  wrote:
>
>> qwight@not-qwight.com wrote:
>>> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 14:28:30 -0000, "Alex Wilson"
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>>> "KJ"  wrote in message
>>>> news:nJSdnQ_EibsnABHaRVnyvgA@bt.com...
>>>>> Anybody read the document (spent hours last night going through
>>>>> it)
>>>>>
>>>>> They must have desperately underestimated how many people would
>>>>> want access to the site and completely cocked up the PDF downloads
>>>> I'm fucking furious about this.....I bought the house next door to
>>>> Greenmount primary (Ryde)so I could guarantee my daughter would go
>>>> there...now they will close it down in all 3 versions of the plan
>>>> according to the CP article. Can you check this in the pdf KJ?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>>
>>>> Alex
>>>>
>>>
>>> You and many others - a minimum of 23 schools will close whatever
>>> option is chosen.
>>> I still can't believe they can be serious about this.
>> Purely on paper it all makes complete sense....apart from the
>> increased travel required.  Unfortunately no human input was made.
>
> I haven't read the pdf because I'm not directly affected yet but from
> what I understand it's going to mean a LOT more school-runs, parking
> outside schools etc.  It's totally against the sensible govt policy
> for kids to walk to school whenever possible.  What about working
> parents who can't get away to fetch kids from school?
> Where is the 'no change' option?

Having just looked at the Schools list, Both Brading and Godshill will close 
under all options.
I've filled in the questionaire, unfortunately the options given are not 
fair to us- in several sections you are asked to rate statements in order of 
importance.
There are only 2 options that are important as far as I'm concerned - 
Transport and closure- yet I have to rate all sections. This just muddys the 
answers.
and if you don't fill in to their satisfaction they may not forward your 
answers !!
Jan

Jan wrote:
> qwight@not-qwight.com wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:10:57 +0000, KJ  wrote:
>>
>>> qwight@not-qwight.com wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 14:28:30 -0000, "Alex Wilson"
>>>>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "KJ"  wrote in message
>>>>> news:nJSdnQ_EibsnABHaRVnyvgA@bt.com...
>>>>>> Anybody read the document (spent hours last night going through
>>>>>> it)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They must have desperately underestimated how many people would
>>>>>> want access to the site and completely cocked up the PDF downloads
>>>>> I'm fucking furious about this.....I bought the house next door to
>>>>> Greenmount primary (Ryde)so I could guarantee my daughter would go
>>>>> there...now they will close it down in all 3 versions of the plan
>>>>> according to the CP article. Can you check this in the pdf KJ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>
>>>>> Alex
>>>>>
>>>> You and many others - a minimum of 23 schools will close whatever
>>>> option is chosen.
>>>> I still can't believe they can be serious about this.
>>> Purely on paper it all makes complete sense....apart from the
>>> increased travel required.  Unfortunately no human input was made.
>> I haven't read the pdf because I'm not directly affected yet but from
>> what I understand it's going to mean a LOT more school-runs, parking
>> outside schools etc.  It's totally against the sensible govt policy
>> for kids to walk to school whenever possible.  What about working
>> parents who can't get away to fetch kids from school?
>> Where is the 'no change' option?
> 
> Having just looked at the Schools list, Both Brading and Godshill will close 
> under all options.
> I've filled in the questionaire, unfortunately the options given are not 
> fair to us- in several sections you are asked to rate statements in order of 
> importance.
> There are only 2 options that are important as far as I'm concerned - 
> Transport and closure- yet I have to rate all sections. This just muddys the 
> answers.
> and if you don't fill in to their satisfaction they may not forward your 
> answers !!
> Jan 
> 
> 
Godshill will gain a brand new 'Community' Primary school at a yet to be 
revealed location.

The questionaire is very well designed to provide the answers required 
of us.  Option 1..out of the question, Option 3, better but not quite 
there because the council won't make as much money from the property 
sale and Option 2...the clear favorite, loads of property to sell and a 
two tiered system (of which I am in favour)

KJ wrote:
> Jan wrote:
>> qwight@not-qwight.com wrote:
>>> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:10:57 +0000, KJ  wrote:
>>>
>>>> qwight@not-qwight.com wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 14:28:30 -0000, "Alex Wilson"
>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> "KJ"  wrote in message
>>>>>> news:nJSdnQ_EibsnABHaRVnyvgA@bt.com...
>>>>>>> Anybody read the document (spent hours last night going through
>>>>>>> it)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They must have desperately underestimated how many people would
>>>>>>> want access to the site and completely cocked up the PDF
>>>>>>> downloads
>>>>>> I'm fucking furious about this.....I bought the house next door
>>>>>> to Greenmount primary (Ryde)so I could guarantee my daughter
>>>>>> would go there...now they will close it down in all 3 versions
>>>>>> of the plan according to the CP article. Can you check this in
>>>>>> the pdf KJ? Cheers
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Alex
>>>>>>
>>>>> You and many others - a minimum of 23 schools will close whatever
>>>>> option is chosen.
>>>>> I still can't believe they can be serious about this.
>>>> Purely on paper it all makes complete sense....apart from the
>>>> increased travel required.  Unfortunately no human input was made.
>>> I haven't read the pdf because I'm not directly affected yet but
>>> from what I understand it's going to mean a LOT more school-runs,
>>> parking outside schools etc.  It's totally against the sensible
>>> govt policy for kids to walk to school whenever possible.  What
>>> about working parents who can't get away to fetch kids from school?
>>> Where is the 'no change' option?
>>
>> Having just looked at the Schools list, Both Brading and Godshill
>> will close under all options.
>> I've filled in the questionaire, unfortunately the options given are
>> not fair to us- in several sections you are asked to rate statements
>> in order of importance.
>> There are only 2 options that are important as far as I'm concerned -
>> Transport and closure- yet I have to rate all sections. This just
>> muddys the answers.
>> and if you don't fill in to their satisfaction they may not forward
>> your answers !!
>> Jan
>>
>>
> Godshill will gain a brand new 'Community' Primary school at a yet to
> be revealed location.

In the Godshill area ....  which could be as far from Godshill as  ...?????

Jan

Jan wrote:
> KJ wrote:
>> Jan wrote:
>>> qwight@not-qwight.com wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:10:57 +0000, KJ  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> qwight@not-qwight.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 14:28:30 -0000, "Alex Wilson"
>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "KJ"  wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:nJSdnQ_EibsnABHaRVnyvgA@bt.com...
>>>>>>>> Anybody read the document (spent hours last night going through
>>>>>>>> it)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They must have desperately underestimated how many people would
>>>>>>>> want access to the site and completely cocked up the PDF
>>>>>>>> downloads
>>>>>>> I'm fucking furious about this.....I bought the house next door
>>>>>>> to Greenmount primary (Ryde)so I could guarantee my daughter
>>>>>>> would go there...now they will close it down in all 3 versions
>>>>>>> of the plan according to the CP article. Can you check this in
>>>>>>> the pdf KJ? Cheers
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Alex
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> You and many others - a minimum of 23 schools will close whatever
>>>>>> option is chosen.
>>>>>> I still can't believe they can be serious about this.
>>>>> Purely on paper it all makes complete sense....apart from the
>>>>> increased travel required.  Unfortunately no human input was made.
>>>> I haven't read the pdf because I'm not directly affected yet but
>>>> from what I understand it's going to mean a LOT more school-runs,
>>>> parking outside schools etc.  It's totally against the sensible
>>>> govt policy for kids to walk to school whenever possible.  What
>>>> about working parents who can't get away to fetch kids from school?
>>>> Where is the 'no change' option?
>>> Having just looked at the Schools list, Both Brading and Godshill
>>> will close under all options.
>>> I've filled in the questionaire, unfortunately the options given are
>>> not fair to us- in several sections you are asked to rate statements
>>> in order of importance.
>>> There are only 2 options that are important as far as I'm concerned -
>>> Transport and closure- yet I have to rate all sections. This just
>>> muddys the answers.
>>> and if you don't fill in to their satisfaction they may not forward
>>> your answers !!
>>> Jan
>>>
>>>
>> Godshill will gain a brand new 'Community' Primary school at a yet to
>> be revealed location.
> 
> In the Godshill area ....  which could be as far from Godshill as  ...?????
> 
> Jan 
> 
> 
I'm guessing Sandford...Furze Hill (Shanklin CofE) where my daughter 
goes is due to close under option2 (because it is oversubscribed!!!!) 
and the new Godshill Community is one of the alternatives the other 
being the new Lake Community Primary on the site of the current Lake 
Middle School (to close)

"KJ"  wrote in message
news:nJSdnQ_EibsnABHaRVnyvgA@bt.com...
> Anybody read the document (spent hours last night going through it)
>
> They must have desperately underestimated how many people would want
> access to the site and completely cocked up the PDF downloads

The whole thing stinks and is disgusting.....

"KJ"  wrote in message
news:tvednQSB4eKRfRHanZ2dnUVZ8s2mnZ2d@bt.com...
> qwight@not-qwight.com wrote:
> > On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:10:57 +0000, KJ  wrote:
> >
> >> qwight@not-qwight.com wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 14:28:30 -0000, "Alex Wilson"
> >>>  wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> "KJ"  wrote in message
> >>>> news:nJSdnQ_EibsnABHaRVnyvgA@bt.com...
> >>>>> Anybody read the document (spent hours last night going through it)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> They must have desperately underestimated how many people would want
> >>>>> access to the site and completely cocked up the PDF downloads
> >>>> I'm fucking furious about this.....I bought the house next door to
> >>>> Greenmount primary (Ryde)so I could guarantee my daughter would go
> >>>> there...now they will close it down in all 3 versions of the plan
according
> >>>> to the CP article. Can you check this in the pdf KJ?
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers
> >>>>
> >>>> Alex
> >>>>
> >>> You and many others - a minimum of 23 schools will close whatever
> >>> option is chosen.
> >>> I still can't believe they can be serious about this.
> >> Purely on paper it all makes complete sense....apart from the increased
> >> travel required.  Unfortunately no human input was made.
> >
> > I haven't read the pdf because I'm not directly affected yet but from
> > what I understand it's going to mean a LOT more school-runs, parking
> > outside schools etc.  It's totally against the sensible govt policy
> > for kids to walk to school whenever possible.  What about working
> > parents who can't get away to fetch kids from school?
> > Where is the 'no change' option?
> I think everybody agrees that things have to improve, the problem is
> that the problem is perceived as institutional.  The real problem is
> encouraging good teachers to the Island.  Without good teachers, the
> three options are pointless.
>
> I would rather go to a completely decentralised system with local
> schools from Primary to Secondary, with maybe 12 Secondary/High schools
> on the Island, making education more community based rather than less.
> These schools would be designed to meet the requirements of the
> community number wise.  Of course this would be expensive, but no more
> so than the current plan, which will inevitably fail without any proviso
> for encouraging the best teachers.

So how should a 'bad' teacher be able to get through training etc?

So this is a fundamental training issue. Wouldn't this money be better of
going into sorting this out first before knee jerk school closures.

On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 13:07:15 -0000, "The One"  wrote:

>
>"KJ"  wrote in message
>news:tvednQSB4eKRfRHanZ2dnUVZ8s2mnZ2d@bt.com...
>> qwight@not-qwight.com wrote:
>> > On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:10:57 +0000, KJ  wrote:
>> >
>> >> qwight@not-qwight.com wrote:
>> >>> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 14:28:30 -0000, "Alex Wilson"
>> >>>  wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> "KJ"  wrote in message
>> >>>> news:nJSdnQ_EibsnABHaRVnyvgA@bt.com...
>> >>>>> Anybody read the document (spent hours last night going through it)
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> They must have desperately underestimated how many people would want
>> >>>>> access to the site and completely cocked up the PDF downloads
>> >>>> I'm fucking furious about this.....I bought the house next door to
>> >>>> Greenmount primary (Ryde)so I could guarantee my daughter would go
>> >>>> there...now they will close it down in all 3 versions of the plan
>according
>> >>>> to the CP article. Can you check this in the pdf KJ?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Cheers
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Alex
>> >>>>
>> >>> You and many others - a minimum of 23 schools will close whatever
>> >>> option is chosen.
>> >>> I still can't believe they can be serious about this.
>> >> Purely on paper it all makes complete sense....apart from the increased
>> >> travel required.  Unfortunately no human input was made.
>> >
>> > I haven't read the pdf because I'm not directly affected yet but from
>> > what I understand it's going to mean a LOT more school-runs, parking
>> > outside schools etc.  It's totally against the sensible govt policy
>> > for kids to walk to school whenever possible.  What about working
>> > parents who can't get away to fetch kids from school?
>> > Where is the 'no change' option?
>> I think everybody agrees that things have to improve, the problem is
>> that the problem is perceived as institutional.  The real problem is
>> encouraging good teachers to the Island.  Without good teachers, the
>> three options are pointless.
>>
>> I would rather go to a completely decentralised system with local
>> schools from Primary to Secondary, with maybe 12 Secondary/High schools
>> on the Island, making education more community based rather than less.
>> These schools would be designed to meet the requirements of the
>> community number wise.  Of course this would be expensive, but no more
>> so than the current plan, which will inevitably fail without any proviso
>> for encouraging the best teachers.
>
>So how should a 'bad' teacher be able to get through training etc?
>
>So this is a fundamental training issue. Wouldn't this money be better of
>going into sorting this out first before knee jerk school closures.
>

Absolutely! Spent the money on sorting the problem rather than
creating lots more problems with buildings and transport.
It's going to cause far more 'school run' problems.
Apart from that it will hit villages that are already losing their
post offices. Now they are losing their schools as well, tearing the
heart out of the community. The school sites will be turned into
housing for commuters into Newport.

qwight@not-qwight.com wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 13:07:15 -0000, "The One"  wrote:
> 
>> "KJ"  wrote in message
>> news:tvednQSB4eKRfRHanZ2dnUVZ8s2mnZ2d@bt.com...
>>> qwight@not-qwight.com wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 15:10:57 +0000, KJ  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> qwight@not-qwight.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 14:28:30 -0000, "Alex Wilson"
>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "KJ"  wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:nJSdnQ_EibsnABHaRVnyvgA@bt.com...
>>>>>>>> Anybody read the document (spent hours last night going through it)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They must have desperately underestimated how many people would want
>>>>>>>> access to the site and completely cocked up the PDF downloads
>>>>>>> I'm fucking furious about this.....I bought the house next door to
>>>>>>> Greenmount primary (Ryde)so I could guarantee my daughter would go
>>>>>>> there...now they will close it down in all 3 versions of the plan
>> according
>>>>>>> to the CP article. Can you check this in the pdf KJ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Alex
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> You and many others - a minimum of 23 schools will close whatever
>>>>>> option is chosen.
>>>>>> I still can't believe they can be serious about this.
>>>>> Purely on paper it all makes complete sense....apart from the increased
>>>>> travel required.  Unfortunately no human input was made.
>>>> I haven't read the pdf because I'm not directly affected yet but from
>>>> what I understand it's going to mean a LOT more school-runs, parking
>>>> outside schools etc.  It's totally against the sensible govt policy
>>>> for kids to walk to school whenever possible.  What about working
>>>> parents who can't get away to fetch kids from school?
>>>> Where is the 'no change' option?
>>> I think everybody agrees that things have to improve, the problem is
>>> that the problem is perceived as institutional.  The real problem is
>>> encouraging good teachers to the Island.  Without good teachers, the
>>> three options are pointless.
>>>
>>> I would rather go to a completely decentralised system with local
>>> schools from Primary to Secondary, with maybe 12 Secondary/High schools
>>> on the Island, making education more community based rather than less.
>>> These schools would be designed to meet the requirements of the
>>> community number wise.  Of course this would be expensive, but no more
>>> so than the current plan, which will inevitably fail without any proviso
>>> for encouraging the best teachers.
>> So how should a 'bad' teacher be able to get through training etc?
>>
>> So this is a fundamental training issue. Wouldn't this money be better of
>> going into sorting this out first before knee jerk school closures.
>>
> 
> Absolutely! Spent the money on sorting the problem rather than
> creating lots more problems with buildings and transport.
> It's going to cause far more 'school run' problems.
> Apart from that it will hit villages that are already losing their
> post offices. Now they are losing their schools as well, tearing the
> heart out of the community. The school sites will be turned into
> housing for commuters into Newport.  
every week for years there have been adverts in the paper for dozens of 
teachers jobs..we just do not entice the up and coming teacher who wants 
to achieve something in their life..teaching on the Island is for those 
at the end of their career who wish to retire here or ex-teachers that 
move here and then take part-time work because of family commitments. 
Why would a teacher move to the IOW to further their career?