.
AS a parent of children at Hillhead High School in Glasgow, I was pleased to see that you published a letter from the School Board of Woodside Secondary pointing out that Woodside too has standards (June 4).
I deplore the intemperate language that has been used by some ''supporters'' of Hillhead, culminating in the articles on Tuesday, June 2, which can only be seen as attacks on Woodside. For one school to attack another is both ill-mannered and stupid, and I feel ashamed that people connected with Hillhead should descend to this.
Of course, it no doubt suits the council very well to stir Hillhead parents into a frenzy. That sets us up nicely to take the flak which should be directed at the councillors themselves! After all, it is the council that is proposing to close schools; it is not parents, teachers, or pupils.
Both Hillhead and Woodside have a strong case for continued existence. The council's proposals are wrong on both educational and social grounds, and even on economic grounds they seem weak, at least based on the sketchy evidence which has been presented.
In view of the recent Private Funding proposals from Mr McAveety, the whole rationalisation exercise has come to bear an uncanny resemblance to the ''trimming down'' of nationalised industries prior to their sell-off, which took place in the Thatcher era.
We should fight together against these ''anti-socialist'' proposals from the council. At least that way, whatever the result, we may be able to live with each other afterwards. The future education of our children will not be helped by a legacy of ill-will.
A D Small,
245 Wilton Street, Glasgow.
June 4.
CHILDREN from areas in Glasgow such as Easterhouse, Ruchill, and Possilpark are losing their local schools and will have to travel up to four miles (without adequate travel arrangements) for their schooling. At the end of their journeys many of these children will be accommodated in huts.
Cleveden pupils will have their recreational space greatly reduced as the education department ignores the Education Act regulations regarding school acreage requirements. These regulations were intended to safeguard children from the overcrowding of school sites which Glasgow City Council is now planning.
In the light of such harsh reductions in education provision for the majority of children in Glasgow, it is difficult to understand how Glasgow City Council can afford to indulge minority groups in the provision of a single-sex school, denominational schools, and a specialist sports school.
In an ideal world provision for all minority groups would be wonderful. However, Glasgow's status at present is far from ideal. Glasgow City Council cannot even provide the basics - a local school for many of the most needy children in the city.
Margaret Allan,
48 Baronald Drive, Glasgow.
June 2.
YOUR leader comment (Schools disgrace, June 2) is heartily welcome. For too long the issue of the mishandling by the Labour group of a much-needed rationalisation of education in Glasgow has been left solely to the various action groups to bring to the public's attention. Many questions about this seriously irrational ''rationalisation'' remain to be answered.
Why were the many cogent public submissions made during the (so-called) consultation exercise comprehensively ignored, when the council might have been expected to try to maximise the cost-effectiveness and public acceptance of this difficult transformation?
Why (for example) has All Saints School in Councillor McAveety's ward (according to official figures) remained relatively unaffected with a planned occupancy rising only to around 54%, when Cleveden School, in a non-Labour ward, has a planned occupancy of 94%?
Why has Notre Dame School been given a complete reprieve from change when neighbouring Cleveden, with a similar current size and academic record, will be increased by a massive 75%? Why, if the effect of Notre Dame being reprieved is also to leave St Thomas Aquinas School unchanged with a current occupancy of around 42%, should North Kelvinside School have to close with a virtually identical occupancy?
It is high time that the blatant maladministration of education in Glasgow by the Labour Group is tackled, above all for our children's sake. We call on Donald Dewar to honour his party's main election promise over education and his own recent pledge to tackle mismanagement in local government firstly by placing an immediate moratorium on the current ''rationalisation'' of education in Glasgow and secondly by instituting a public inquiry into this most serious matter.
Dr Robert J Sutherland,
Lieve M Sutherland,
8 Manchester Drive,
Glasgow.
June 2.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article