140 likes | 155 Views
Explore the local context, challenges, and responses in education in the London Borough of Hackney. Discover the need for additional school places, the importance of quality provision, and innovative funding models. Learn how bespoke designs can maximize pedagogical and social benefits for a better future.
E N D
Education & Liveability – A Local PerspectiveMichael ColemanLondon Borough of Hackney
Contents • Local context • Need vs. Strategy • Aspirations vs. constraints • Our response • The future
Local Context • Area of 19.06 km2 , population 263150 (June 2015) • 25% of population under 20 • 11th most deprived borough in England (2015) • 1997, Stephen Byers, the minister for schools, declared Hackney as ‘the worst LEA in the country’ • 2002, LBH still the worst performing in league tables • Percentage of students with 5+ GCSE grades A*–C • 1990 = 14% vs. 35% nationally (lowest performer in England) • 2015 = 60.4% vs. 53.8% nationally (15th in London) • 2016, 86% first preference is for LBH secondary school
Need vs. Strategy • Demographic need: c. 1650 additional places by 2021 • But quality of provision is of equal importance • Building Schools for the Future delivered significant and palpable improvements to facilities • Austerity is not the answer to LBH’s challenges! • Local focus remains on providing quality facilities for all, working with ESFA & MATs to continue improvements • The compromise = supplement government funding to augment the learning environment • LA-led mixed use developments to generate capital
Aspirations vs. Constraints • Constraints (new schools) • Available space - 6FE secondary schools’ footprint alone is greater than most of our available sites (even if going ‘properly’ multi-storey) • Funding – government funding will meet c.60% of final costs for space allocation and facilities commensurate with existing secondary estate • Time – to develop, refine, approve, build, occupy = 4-5 years minimum • External space – we cannot match what shire counties have! • Aspirations/Responses • Designs led by pedagogy and behaviour management, not £ and habit • Buildings that make an unashamed statement – ‘You are valued’ • Every space must add value to the whole, given it is at a premium, but we should not be slaves to net capacity – flexibility is fundamental • Natural light, generous circulation, bespoke design, efficient use of the available external space, designed to a pedagogical model (but must not be entirely bespoke and thus inflexible)
The future • Continue to investigate innovative funding models to finance high quality schools • Continued focus on bespoke designs that maximise pedagogical and social benefits (e.g. ‘family dining’) • We want to work with all parties to achieve mutually beneficial results – MATs, ESFA, etc. • The quality of the school environment matters – the opportunity cost of austerity greater than fiscal savings • Even the architect of BSF’s demise has publicly regretted doing so… If only about ‘how’ not why’! • Primary schools now urgently need investment…