The Kintyre Forum

Following on from an article that appeared in the Courier last week with regards Campbeltown Grammar School achieving the best results in the worst facilities what are people's opinions on the school set-up here in Campbeltown?

This is a serious question and debate so please keep to the subject and avoid any silly remarks.

Over to you..

Depends what you mean by 'set up'. Do you mean the way in which the children are being educated or do you mean the lay out of the school? If it's about the way the children are being educated, Campbeltown Grammar have a very dedicated staff with only the best interests of the pupils. The school is in a terrible state. I have children who attend this school and they are always complaining about the general condition of their classrooms.

Not sure if this is what you are trying to debate but I don't think sectarianism has a place in education. Integrate all religions in one school and that small rural schools should be closed if there is an alternative larger facility a few miles down the road.

They all end up in the same place in the Grammar or Tarbert so why do they need so many schools at the primary stage?

Please feel free to delete if the above is too left wing.

I guess it was aimed more at the conditions of the schools, the fact we have three primary schools in Campbeltown. What about rural schools.

History - certainly not too left wing. It's an opinion and adds to the debate.

A few years ago the council intended to put everyone in one school. I attended the meeting for this as I didn't think it was a good idea, and still don't. Children need their wee primary school. As for the religious side, I don't care what religion anyone is but the catholic schools still have different services. As a result of there being huge opposition to 5 to 18 year olds all together (including that of teachers) the plan to build this school was scrapped. We are now left with a Grammar school that is literally falling down around everyone! There are plans to upgrade this school (heating ,walls,etc) this year. The staff there do their best as each situation regarding burst pipes etc arise. Ideally a new Grammar should be built but leave the primary schools as they are. (meaning, keep them seperate)

EileenH wrote: Children need their wee primary school.

EileenH just wondering what you mean by the above. Could you explain further?

EileenH wrote: As a result of there being huge opposition to 5 to 18 year olds all together (including that of teachers) the plan to build this school was scrapped. We are now left with a Grammar school that is literally falling down around everyone! There are plans to upgrade this school (heating ,walls,etc) this year. The staff there do their best as each situation regarding burst pipes etc arise.

Not replying in particular to you Eileen but just the point about the new build. Was it not just a case of you can have an integrated secondary and primary school on the lower laying field or that is it? The lower playing field is one of the worst pieces of ground in Campbeltown.

It only seems like yesterday I was at the official opening of the then new Campbeltown Grammar School. The official opening was by Bruce Millan MP, then Secretary of State for Scotland. This building is only 40 years old! Was it anticipated then that the building would have such a limited lifespan?

When I said children need their wee primary school, I meant that wee ones need a place where they're all about the same age and don't feel intimidated by older ones. My kids, as were many, were quite shy about mixing in bigger groups at primary. Now that they're older, especially my oldest at 15, I know that they don't give that wee bit extra consideration to kids alot younger. I know it's normal in their teens to think they know best but I'm happy that when they were in primary it was all wee ones in the school. I hope I managed to explain myself on this point ok. As for the matter of having a new school built at Limecraigs on that boggy field, yes, as far as I was aware it was a case of take it or leave it. That intended school, as far as I can remember was to have very little playground. The intention was to be that the kids had to cross over the busy road to Meadows playing field at play times (I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong!) Also, there was to be no drop off/ pick up point at the school.I still have the plans for the set up kicking about.

EileenH wrote:When I said children need their wee primary school, I meant that wee ones need a place where they're all about the same age and don't feel intimidated by older ones.

Don't want to sound obtuse but I really don't quite follow your point on children needing their wee primary.

When children of 4 or 5 move into primary one they are in with children of 11 or 12 who's next step is the Grammar. If there was one school for all the new pupils they would not be mixed with older children in classes so I assume you are talking about when they are on break? Why do you see that problem. Not all teenagers don't give consideration to younger children.

That said I don't know if I would like to see one huge building for all pupils in Kintyre but it would make economic sense to integrate some of the smaller rural primaries into the larger primary scools in town.

It's something that has to come at some point. I am not saying there is anything wrong with these smaller schools I wouldn't know but I do know that they are a luxury that Argyll and Bute should seriously consider trimming down. We all have to cut our cloth.

EileenH wrote "As for the religious side, I don't care what religion anyone is but the catholic schools still have different services."

That made me laugh. You don't care what religion anyone is BUT Catholics should be treated differently! That is one of the fundamental problems in the West Coast of Scotland. Group all the children together - DON'T make any differences due to religion.

The Grammar School is a disgrace in terms of facilities. You have to wonder if it is really fit for purpose?

On another note. How do I get these quote things to work properly!!!!

I didn't say that catholics should be treated differently ! And I didn't mean literally that I don't care about religion!! I wrote that it made no odds to me that the schools were of mixed religion. Talk about putting words into peoples mouths! History, do you have school age children? If you do then you will realise that primary school is set in sections. Primaries 1 to 3 play in a different playgound area from that of, say, p6 and p7. They are encouraged to get on in school. The 'wee ones' get in for lunch in the dinner hall first and are well supervised in the playground. They ARE treated a wee bit differently when they first start school. That would be lost if they were put in with teenagers. I'll bet there are plentymums reading this who will agree with me.

EileenH wrote: That would be lost if they were put in with teenagers.

......and why would that be lost? I still don't get your point about how children need their wee school. I am sure there would be the same amount of care taken to all pupils and their needs met no matter the age of pupil or size of school.

An alternative would be to leave them in nursery until the wee darlings turned twelve before exposing them to the rest of the mainstream school children just in case someone over the age of thirteen shouted BOO

I can't explain it any simpler to you history. Maybe you should go back to school and learn some better manners! You seem intent on refusing to understand what's written. And you never answered my question on whether or not you have children. I only made a comment on my views as a parent. I didn't say it was right or wrong, only my opinion. So let's leave it at that!

Hmmn. Time to lock this thread methinks.