Response to Consultation:
Review of Schools in Midlothian 2003-04: Public Consultation
Borthwick Community, April 2004

The case for the closure of Borthwick Primary School has been made via a consultation document, a Council Cabinet Paper and at public meetings. The rationale for the proposed closure is based on four key areas. They are property and capacity, quality of education, cost and effects on the Community.

The Borthwick Community utterly rejects the arguments put forward in each of these areas. We show that the Council's evidence has been either lacking or misrepresents the truth.

We show that Borthwick does not require extensive refurbishments and there is no maintenance timebomb. Major refurbishments have been carried out in the past three years. Only minor maintenance is required and the physical condition of the School is excellent. The School offers an excellent facility for 21st Century education. The Borthwick Community area has a growing population, which will support the school roll in future, while if the cap on the school roll was removed we would expect Borthwick's roll to move back towards full capacity.

The evidence presented by the Council to suggest that a move to a two-stream large urban primary school would be better for rural pupils is almost non-existent, while our research shows that rural primary schools tend to outperform urban schools. Borthwick is currently outperforming both the Midlothian and national averages for attainment.

The provision of information to examine the financial case in the proposals has been lacking, but we show that retaining Borthwick would likely save the Council significant sums every year.

In the final area, we show that the arguments that the closure of the School would have no negative effect on the local Community are utterly incorrect.

We show that Borthwick is highly valued by the Community, that the School offers excellent educational and social value and that there is no case for closure. The School is at the Heart of the Community.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

There are problems with Midlothian's primary schools …

The Midlothian Schools Strategic Asset Management Primary and Nursery Report (the 'Report') outlines the problems in the primary school estate inherited by the Council, and acknowledges that substantial investments and improvements are necessary to improve the quality of primary education in Midlothian. However, it is unfortunate that the Director of Education has chosen to include Borthwick Primary School amongst the general description of the estate suffering a "maintenance timebomb". This assertion is almost completely incorrect in the case of Borthwick.

… but not at Borthwick after the substantial refurbishments

We do not believe that the Council has made modest improvements to Borthwick; we believe that substantial improvements have been made for which the Council should be congratulated. As we will explain below, there is no real maintenance backlog at Borthwick and certainly no 'maintenance timebomb'. The improvements made in recent years mean that only minor upgrades are necessary. We suggest that the school is providing a quality learning environment. We welcome proposed improvements to the urban schools – as they require improvements. In order to bring equality to Midlothian's schools, the urban schools should be brought up to the high standards of Borthwick.

We will show that small rural schools can provide a superior educational experience

The parents and Community do not believe that Borthwick is either functionally or economically obsolete. The Director of Education has chosen to argue that large urban schools provide a higher quality of education for rural children. However, as we show in the Education section below, the evidence is that small schools in rural areas outperform their counterpart schools in urban areas. The Director of Education also argues that creating an enormous school at Stobhill will allow more use of specialist teachers. However, as we show below, the evidence is that the use of specialist teachers in primary schools for 'basic subjects' is not common in many countries in the world – and that there is no evidence for specialist teachers leading to a better standard of education.

Retaining Borthwick will save the Council money

The third argument which has been put forward for closing Borthwick is to reduce costs. The Director of Education has failed to provide enough information to make a definitive case against this proposition, but we can show that keeping Borthwick open would be likely to save the Council tens of thousands of pounds per year.

To close the School would rip the Heart out of the Community

The fourth argument put forward is that there would be no effect on the Borthwick Community from the closure of the School. There has been no evidence provided to support this assertion. We show in the Community section below that the Council believes there has been a disproportionate loss of local services in rural areas in recent years. We believe that there would be negative effects on the Community in a variety of ways.

There is no case for the closure of Borthwick

We show that there is no case for the closure of Borthwick Primary School. On each of his chosen arguments – property, cost cutting, quality of education and effects on the Community – we believe that the Director of Education is wrong. We support the investments in primary schools in Midlothian – but to rip the Heart out of Borthwick's Community would be very wrong.

The Council has already defused the 'maintenance timebomb' at Borthwick

The Report suggests that the "Council inherited an education estate in need of improvement and renovation" and that a "maintenance timebomb has been inherited that has started to impact on the delivery of education". It is to the Council's great credit that it has invested heavily to improve the condition of the school such that it does not need any more 'improvement or renovation' and that the 'maintenance timebomb' has been defused. Though we note that the Scottish Executive does not have any research to suggest that the fabric of school buildings alone will account for differences in attainment at schools (Written Answers, 22 April); we welcome the improvements to schools which require this work. Borthwick does not require this work.

The Director of Education has continued to maintain that at Borthwick the "buildings require considerable refurbishment" and that "extensive expansion would be required" (letter, 18 March). This is apparently based on a statement that:
"in the last few years, three professional bodies have surveyed the school, each endorsing the other's findings. It has also been surveyed by a project team under criteria of fitness for purpose". (letter, 18 March)."

It is unfortunate for the Director of Education that he, and these professional bodies and the project team are almost entirely wrong in terms of the evidence provided in the Report. The Director of Education himself had been at Borthwick on the 8 March for the School Board Meeting where he said that compared to the other Midlothian Schools:
"Overall Borthwick is in much better condition" (Borthwick School Board Meeting Minutes, 8 March)
Please note that this was before he wrote that the 'buildings require considerable refurbishment'. Borthwick does not require considerable refurbishment. Borthwick does not require extensive expansion. Borthwick does provide the facilities which meet the "multifarious demands of education in the 21st Century" (letter, 18 March). We show the evidence below.

Refurbishment of Borthwick has already been carried out

Major refurbishment began following HMI inspection in July 1999. In the first phase, the internal layout of the building was altered to create an open area to provide dining, library area, PC suite, head teacher workstation and staff base. A soundproof partition wall was installed to increase the versatility of this newly created area. Furthermore, the building was decorated throughout, both internally and externally, to provide a bright, modern and stimulating environment for teaching and learning. The unique 'playshed' was restored to its original condition, thus allowing the children greater playtime scope in all weathers. Phase 2 followed in October 1999 with the remodelling to provide new toilet area, specific storage space for the dining tables and mezzanine attic storage. At this point, all windows were replaced with double glazed units. In April 2002, the heating system was replaced and upgraded considerably with state-of-the-art oil fired central heating. Finally, in July 2003, the playground was completely resurfaced. It is clear that all of the major areas of potential expenditure – heating, windows, playground and drainage and internal refurbishment have been carried out.

No major areas require substantial upgrade or maintenance

The Report alarmingly suggests that an item of major expenditure is required with "slate covered pitched roofs which need renewed". This is incorrect and is contradicted by the Hardies' Report. Hardies do not say that the roofs need to be renewed. They suggest that a "modest budget is now required for [the] maintenance and upkeep". This is a very different position from complete renewal of roofs. In no major area do Hardies find that more than 'modest' or 'minor' repairs or maintenance are required. To bring the School up to completely pristine conditions Hardies estimate that the Total Estimated Cost of Works Identified is just £22,700 – a figure which includes a number of areas of routine maintenance. Given the scale of investments in education in Midlothian which are proposed, we do not find this to be 'considerable refurbishment'.

School office, staff facilities and Headteacher facilities are not constrained

The Report suggests that these facilities are constrained. This is incorrect. The internal layout of the building was altered as part of a major refurbishment following the HMI Inspection in July 1999. As mentioned above, this included changes to provide a head teacher workstation and staff base. Contrary to the March 2004 Hardies report, the office and staff room are not combined and the headteacher's workstation is separate. Please note, this Hardies report is based on the pre-refurbishment floor plan (section 3) and room details (appendix 2).

No shortage of opportunities for physical education

The Report states that the school lacks space for physical education and states that the school has no PE facilities. This assertion was repeated by the Director of Education at the School Board meeting. The assertion is both incorrect and misleading. The children at Borthwick enjoy a wide range of physical education activities; once a week they go to Greenhall for PE but they have an additional period at Borthwick on a different day when they do things like circuit training or keep fit in the refurbished playground or yoga inside. They also have a block of swimming lessons once a year from P1 to P7 and ski-ing lessons from P4 to P7. Larger schools in Midlothian often restrict activities such as orienteering, bowling, rugby, badminton, basketball and football. From P5 onwards, the children also take part in interschool residential camps – at Rowardennan, Lowport and Aberfoyle – which introduce yet more activities. Compared to the misleading statement that Borthwick children have limited PE facilities, these are children who have a huge range of physical education activities already. We suggest that if the Council would wish to improve the local facilities for PE the new Village Hall in North Middleton could be kitted with gymnasium equipment, perhaps funded by developer contribution.

Borthwick's children have PE for 1hour 15minutes per week. This is not a school which lacks opportunity for PE.

Borthwick's children have no shortage of access to music tuition

The Report states that space is lacking for music. Borthwick does have access to music, art and drama. For example, Borthwick has recently taken part in a filmmaking project under the auspices of the Midlothian Drama Team. Children from Borthwick are members of the newly formed Midlothian Primary School Band and are now in their seventh year of taking part in the RSNO Prom for Schools.

Borthwick does have dedicated dining facilities

Contrary to the comments of the Director of Education at the Borthwick School Board, Borthwick does have dedicated dining facilities which are thoroughly cleaned every day and stored in a specific area. The children do not eat off their desks. The tables are used for no other purpose.

Above average provision of IT facilities at Borthwick

Borthwick is fully equipped with the necessary technology and space for developments in IT. There are 7 PCs which even at maximum capacity would exceed national guidelines. There is 1 PC in each of the classrooms and a suite of 5 PCs to which all children have easy access. These IT facilities allow access to electronic teaching resources that are available to pupils regardless of the size of the school.

Transport issue is a red herring

The Report states that "all catchment area pupils are transported to the school" and bizarrely this fact was used by the Director of Education on the 'Lesley Riddoch' radio programme as an example of a lack of Community involvement in the school. Borthwick is a rural school – clearly children from farms and outlying areas have to be transported to the school. The remaining majority of the children would be able to walk to school if the Council provided a safe footpath and lighting between North Middleton and the school. There will be (and has been) the opportunity to use developer contributions to allow this option. It appears that the Council has not considered this. Note also, that if pupils were shipped to Stobhill there would be no option but to bus every child – with very long potential journey times for 5 year-old children. This would also be very costly.

Pupils respect and take care of their School

In the original report dating from 1999, the HM Inspectors state that "Pupils took good care of their school buildings and grounds". Vandalism is unheard of.

HM Inspectors praise the facilities at Borthwick

It is clear from the above that Borthwick is not a school which requires vast investments to provide a top quality facility for education. In 1999, The HM Inspectors criticised the accommodation and facilities on issues such as use of space, staff facilities, heating and sound proofing, dining facilities, dining facilities and the quality of windows [some of the issues which the Director of Education appears to have relied on in the Report]. As we show above, all of these issues and more have disappeared following the refurbishments and investments. In their letter accompanying the Follow-up to Standard Inspection Report (following their visit in May 2001) the HM Inspectors praise the major refurbishment which had been made; stating "the authority had completed this refurbishment very well'. None of the criticisms that the Report uses as reasons for closure on the basis of the structure or fabric of Borthwick are now valid. They cannot be used as part of any rationale for closure of this school.

The population of the catchment area is growing and will grow further

The Report suggests that the School is situated on the edge of the small Community of Borthwick. This may be geographically correct but is misleading. The School is at the centre of the rural Community of Borthwick, the village of North Middleton and the surrounding farms and dispersed housing. We note that basic facilities in North Middleton have been upgraded to allow for increased housing developments and that planning permission for the next phase of new houses has been sought. There are other prospective developments of housing. The Borthwick Community is growing. We know of families who have moved to the area to ensure that their children receive their primary school education at Borthwick. Please note that the Director of Education has failed to provide information on the numbers of pre-school children in the catchment area in his Report.

Report's capacity factor for the School is misleading

The Report misleads on the capacity factor of Borthwick School. On first reading the Report looks clear with a roll of 31 and a capacity factor of 62%. This suggests that the maximum capacity of the School is 50 pupils. However, the maximum school roll for a two-teacher school is 47. This suggests that the current capacity factor is actually 66%.

However, this is still misleading. A recent building development in the Borthwick catchment area resulted in a cap being placed on the School's roll in 2001 in order to safeguard places for children from new housing. Since then all non-catchment placement requests have been denied. When the expected number of children from the new housing did not materialise, the Head Teacher, on behalf of the School Board, asked for the cap to be lifted. This request was turned down. The request to lift the cap has been turned down annually since then. Note that we understand a number of children from the new houses attend St. Andrews Primary in Gorebridge. The Director of Education would have been aware of this as he will have received placement requests for those children. The requests to lift the cap were still refused. We do not think it is unreasonable that the cap should be lifted.

If the cap was lifted, it could reasonably be expected that the high quality of Borthwick School would lead to placement requests and the pre-cap roll levels being reattained. In the 8 years prior to the capping, the average roll in the school was 41. We understand that a number of placement requests have continued to be made every year for the past 3 years, which have all had to be turned down. If the cap was lifted and the school roll reached the pre-cap average, this would equate to 87% capacity for a two- teacher school, or 82% by the Director of Education's formula. We note that this level falls above the 80% level where the proposals are required to be submitted to the Scottish Executive.

Using the average school roll pre-cap the School is at 82% capacity (even using the Director of Education's formula). The Report attempts to mislead with the worst-looking case of 62% capacity and does not even mention the cap which was placed on the school roll. It should be noted that should the cap be lifted and the school roll return to the average level it would bring down the costs per pupil of education at Borthwick significantly.

Financial information is partial and potentially misleading

The Director of Education (letter, 2 April 2004) suggests that the
"financial data on pages 12-13 of the Strategic Asset Management Report should help [you] to see the financial implications of amalgamating schools".
These pages contain the only financial information in the whole Report and are at an aggregate level for the whole package. Once again this information is partial and potentially misleading. The Report does not provide the Community or Councillors with the information necessary to look at any different options other than the proposal of the Director of Education. The Report does not allow interested parties to break out any information on specific schools or even on schools in specific towns. No base case scenario of the status quo is offered, no evidence of running costs or even details of the spend necessary to refurbish the schools. In our particular case it does not offer any information at all on Borthwick.

We show that retaining Borthwick would save money

In the absence of the financial information we have to construct our own case to show that Borthwick is the cheap option which can save the Council money. We compare the 'total cost' for one year at Borthwick compared to one year at a rebuilt 'new Stobhill' for the Borthwick pupils. We take a case where Borthwick and for the sake of argument Temple Primary Schools are retained and Stobhill is refurbished as a one-stream primary school (noting that it is at just over half-capacity at the moment). We use conservative assumptions. We allow for all of the maintenance-type upgrades to Borthwick called for by the Hardies report. We suggest that the traditional difference between running costs and capital spend would be blurred anyway via the use of PPP. We note that these figures have to be simplistic due to the lack of information provided by the Director of Education. By adding the maintenance spend to the 2003-4 running costs we can see the 'total cost' of Borthwick.

Borthwick

To measure the total cost of the proposed 'new Stobhill' is difficult with the data provided in the proposals. No data for individual school costs under the PPP scheme has been provided. Therefore, given that there are 7 new schools we have to take 1/7th of the unitary charge of each year. The unitary charge is described in the Report as the amount the Council will have to pay each year for the 30 years of the project. The total unitary charge is reported at £4,452,000 and we take 1/7th for the simple average cost of a new school. This amounts to £636,000 per year. Of course, given that the Director of Education wishes to build a two-stream school at Stobhill and build around the existing school remaining open it will likely cost more than the average, but we are making conservative assumptions here.

Taking all the Borthwick and Temple pupils and adding them to the Stobhill roll results in a potential school roll of 187 pupils. The cost of the new school under the PPP attributable to the Borthwick pupils (and note that Borthwick's school roll will likely rise in the next few years) is 31/187 or £105,433. This is just the cost of the school facilities – it does not cover teaching expenses etc.

Stobhill 'Case Study'

We take the difference between the 'total costs' to show the maximum 'teaching expenses' which would be available to make the proposal cost neutral with regard to the Borthwick pupils.

We have been provided with no information on what is covered by 'teaching expenses' but note that it would be difficult for the 'Borthwick' pupils' share of expenses on teachers, support teachers, power, transport, supplies and sundries and staff development to be less than £44,643 (the difference between the 'total costs' above). In particular, we note that the extra transport costs for shipping pupils to Stobhill would be substantial. As we show above the costs of building and operating a new Stobhill is an extremely expensive option for the Borthwick pupils.

We admit that this analysis is obviously simplistic but there has been no public disclosure of the actual costs of the proposed new Stobhill, which means that more sophisticated analysis is not possible. Our best estimate is that the Council would be wasting money – in the amount of tens of thousands of pounds every year by forcing the Borthwick children to go to Stobhill. Noting that Borthwick has required renovations only every twenty years, at a basic level we can consider the equation this way. Does it make financial sense to close a School which is not likely to require substantial maintenance for 10-20 years – and build a new School for those children? It does not.

It is not about costs, or is it?

According to a report in the Evening News on 15 April 2004 the Council Member responsible for Education, Mr Boyes, stated that the proposed investment plan has been "completely overlooked by the focus on the rural schools issue". The Member went on to suggest that "If the Executive … had agreed to fully fund our original submission, we would have been investing much more in education and looking at a different set of options". This was backed up by Councillor Imrie in the Advertiser of 15 April who suggests that the "Council had hard choices to make but would not have had to make them if the Scottish Executive provided the funding". According to the Mr Milligan, the Member responsible for Commercial Services the Council is "in this position because the Scottish Executive allowed us to go down the PPP route". What these comments would seem to suggest is that rural interests may be being sacrificed to fund the necessary redevelopment of dilapidated urban schools. The Borthwick Community supports investment in dilapidated schools, but not at the expense of their own top quality School.

As the Director of Education has refused to remove the cap on the School roll the largest element of costs, the staff costs, have been spread over a lower number of pupils. This has inflated the running cost per pupil of Borthwick at the current time. We also have concerns over some of the reported running costs for Borthwick. It appears that the electricity and water budgets have been inflated beyond reasonable levels for a School with brand-new oil-fired heating.

There has been a reliance on flawed statistics

During the consultation period the Director of Education has relied on flawed statistical measures in an attempt to provide a case for closure of Borthwick [Lesley Riddoch, Radio Scotland programme; public consultation meeting at Greenhall]. He used a single year measure of attainment of Level D for P7 pupils in an effort to show that education at larger primary schools is likely to be of higher quality. This was later changed to a suggestion of a three year period comparing large and rural schools for the same single criterion (letter, 2 April). Unfortunately, in the Education Division's Annual Report 2003 published in January 2004 the Director of Education suggests that:
"given that Midlothian is one of the smallest mainland education authorities annual statistics only provide a snapshot picture of the annual position in Midlothian. Some annual variations may be caused by the changing composition of pupil cohorts as a change in performance of a small number of pupils can cause a pronounced effect on our statistical percentages."
Within two months, the very same Director of Education has then tried to use such a snapshot of the attainment levels of a very small number of pupils as a justification for his desire to close every rural school in Midlothian. Academic opinion is that reliance on a single attainment target measure is not enough to construct an argument for closure of schools. We agree with the Director of Education that the use of such a snapshot is unhelpful, particularly in the case of small rural schools where the data could be skewed by a small number of pupils. This has not stopped the Director of Education from claiming that the case for closure is supported by his measure of Level D attainment for Primary 7 pupils.

Borthwick is currently outperforming Midlothian and national schools

Despite the statistical problems identified in the previous section; we include the recent attainment data for the whole school to illustrate that in recent years Borthwick has been outperforming both the Midlothian and national schools average. It is worth repeating this point – Borthwick's attainment level has been better than the average Midlothian and national school. This is a pattern which recurs across the whole country – as we show in the next section – rural primary schools outperform urban schools in Scotland.

Source: Scottish Office Education Department

Scottish Executive finds that rural primary schools outperform urban schools in Scotland

As we cannot trust the Director of Education's assertions that smaller schools will be less successful in educating the Borthwick children we have to turn to the academic evidence. We understand that there can be a perception that larger schools will lead to better results. The Director of Education apparently has this perception according to his comments at the Public Meeting at Greenhall where he stated that "smaller schools do a good job but bigger schools do even better". The actual evidence does not suggest that small rural primary schools will underperform larger schools. As we saw above, Borthwick has outperformed the Midlothian average attainment for the last few years. The Scottish Executive Paper 'Social Focus on Urban Rural Scotland 2003' states that there is:
"evidence to support the claim that on average attainment in accessible and remote rural primary schools is higher than in schools across other parts of Scotland. There would also appear to [be] a gradient running through the attainment in writing from urban – lowest attainment – through to remote rural – highest attainment. However in reading and maths, the distinction is less clear."
Further supporting the case for rural primary schools, according to the Scottish Executive they have:
"no evidence to suggest that pupils in rural schools have worse outcomes in directly comparable measures, such as attainment in national qualifications" (Written Answers, 22 April).
It is worth repeating this argument: average attainment in rural primary schools is higher than in urban schools.

In England too, small primary schools do not underperform large schools

There is a similar picture in England – small schools do not underperform. In England, Thornton ((1998) reported in Hall (2000)) finds that:
"one might expect small to average [-sized] schools, with few teachers and thus a limited range of National Curriculum subject expertise, to do badly in national league tables compared to their large peers, but they do not".
She continues to say that "hard evidence is needed, not assumption or assertion". The Director of Education has not provided this hard evidence.

No evidence of two-stream urban primary schools being better for rural pupils

According to the minutes of the Borthwick School Board meeting of 8 March 2004 the Director of Education was asked for research to show that a move of rural pupils to a two stream primary school would lead to children flourishing. The Director of Education replied that some research has been done in North Yorkshire and by Professor Brian Boyd of Strathclyde University as well as possibly some others. He promised that he would provide a list. This list has not been provided. We consulted with Professor Boyd and he stated that he:
"was not aware of the research which appears to have been cited. I haven't been involved in research specifically looking at the value of large versus small primary schools" (Email 21 April).
We asked North Yorkshire Council if they knew of such research. They have not carried out systematic research nor have they:
"reached the conclusion that small rural school pupils will perform better at large urban primary schools" (Owen, Email 28 April).
From this evidence we have to assume that the research to prove the Director of Education's case does not exist. According to Professor Walter Humes, Head of Department, and Professor Tom Bryce of the University of Strathclyde's Educational Studies Department, Jordanhill Campus – they:
"are not aware of any academic evidence to suggest that rural primary school pupils would do better at a two-stream school in an urban area" (Email, 19 April).
It does not appear there is any evidence that two-stream urban primary schools are better for rural pupils.

More rural pupils go on to further education

We do not believe that there is any case for closure of the School on the basis that pupils will struggle with the transition to a large school for secondary education. Adjustment to new surroundings is necessary for any pupil transferring from primary to secondary education. We have been provided with no evidence that rural school pupils will suffer more than any other child in this respect. We note that a higher proportion of rural pupils go on to further education than from urban areas (Scottish Executive, Written Answers, 22 April).

Small school pupils have more positive personal and social attitudes

The Report suggests that the creation of a two-stream school will mean there are opportunities for social interaction for groups of pupils within each of the primary stages. A huge increase in numbers of pupils will obviously mean there are more pupils with which to interact. However, the Report does not mention that the doubling of class size at Stobhill would weaken interaction between teachers and pupils. It does not mention that social or curricular interaction between age groups may be reduced. Our research shows that there are substantial social benefits of mixed-age classes. According to Bell and Sigsworth (1987) reported in Gallagher (2002), the peer group for pupils in small schools was more extensive in terms of mixed-age and cross-sex relationships than was the case in larger, urban schools. The pupils in small schools liked their situation, and research evidence suggested they had more positive personal and social attitudes. The HMI Report for Borthwick backs up this argument by showing that there is a clear positive social ethos at Borthwick. Pupils with learning difficulties are given a very good quality of support. Furthermore, from the HM Inspectors Report:
"Relationships among pupils and staff were very good. Older pupils cared for their younger colleagues. There was a clear sense of equality and fairness in school, with all staff and pupils valued as members of the school community. Pupils took good care of their school buildings and grounds. They were generally courteous, well-behaved and attentive in class. Pupils and staff identified with the school and worked well together as a team."
This is not a School which requires improvements in social interaction.

Case for specialist teaching is not supported by evidence

The Director of Education has stated that 'emerging thinking is for the growing use of specialist teachers in primary schools' (Lesley Riddoch, Radio Scotland interview; letters). He has provided no evidence that this is the case.

We understand that again there may be a perception that specialist teachers may lead to improved quality of teaching, but it seems that this does not happen in practice. According to Hall's (2000) review of the academic literature
"the best we can say from the data is that the case for the effectiveness of subject specialist teaching at primary level does not appear to be supported".
In England, according to Thornton (reported in Hall (2000))
"it is by no means clear that subject knowledge and higher quality teaching are more likely to come from subject specialists than from generalist class teachers. … Hard evidence is needed, not assumption or assertion".

Tomorrow's teachers – the current Bachelor of Education students at Scotland's universities are not being trained as specialists – they are expected to be generalists. It is unclear where the Director of Education's specialist teachers are expected to materialise from.

It is the global practice for non-specialist teachers to provide primary teaching

It is the established practice in almost all major countries in the world that the same teacher provides in basic subjects. Hall (2000) reviews teacher provision in countries across the world. He shows a list of where the teacher gives instruction in all basic subjects – this includes: Belgium, Greece, Spain, France, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, United Kingdom, Austria, Finland, Sweden, Iceland, Norway, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia, Cyprus, Japan, Korea, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the, USA. It is obvious that these countries do not share the Director of Education's view and given that the academic community does not share it – why should Midlothian experiment here at the possible expense of the children of the Borthwick Community?

Specialist teaching in 'specialist' subjects is available at Borthwick

Professors Walter Humes and Tom Bryce of the University of Strathclyde (Email, 19 April) note that a particular issue for rural schools is how to provide music and physical education where no particular teacher is able to take a lead. We note that specialist teaching in 'specialist' subjects is welcome. Children at Borthwick currently receive the benefit of class teacher expertise in music and specialist teaching in art and in PE.

Small school headteachers can overcome administrative issues

The Director of Education has suggested that small schools suffer disadvantages in terms of administration, monitoring and managing change. He suggests that large schools (two-stream primary schools) offer this administrative convenience. However, in this regard it is odd that the Director of Education is proposing that only some schools become two-stream primary schools – under his eventual proposal Gorebridge would have only one two-stream primary school and three one-stream primary schools. Presumably, these one-stream primary schools would not gain the same administrative benefits.

We cannot deny that larger schools will be able to employ more administrators, but would point out that the Scottish Office in 1997 found that small-school headteachers were able to surpass difficulties in this area by working as a team, working with others as professional colleagues and leading from within the group rather than directing from the outside. This involved networking, avid usage of advisory and educational development services. Skilled small-school headteachers appear to be 1) pragmatic 2) able to prioritise 3) able to operate with focused plans 4) able to lead from within the team using professional teaching experience 5) prepared to draw extensively on any additional resources 6) professionally outward looking 7) environmentally conservative by demonstrating an awarenessness of community restraints 8) willing to utilise all available resources.

The Scottish Office report did not suggest that administrative factors should be a reason for closing small schools. We note that the HMI follow-up report suggests that the School had made very good progress in such issues as planning, continuity of provision, arrangements for assessment of monitoring, priorities for development and information provision. There was no area in the original HMI report or the follow-up report where the School was performing unsatisfactorily. The Borthwick Community are proud of their recent headteachers who have dealt admirably with development of the skills necessary to run a small School very successfully.

The view of the Director of Education

"This School is not situated within the Community" (Borthwick School Board Meeting Minutes, 8 March)

"I would reaffirm that the Council believes its proposals to be consistent with the continuation of thriving rural communities" (letter, 2 April).

In other words the Director of Education, and by his extension the Council, believes that the obliteration of the school is consistent with the continuation of thriving rural communities. He has provided no evidence on this matter at all, with the exception of his assertion (Lesley Riddoch Radio Scotland programme; letter 18 March) that there would be no effect on the Community because children are currently bussed to Borthwick and would be bussed to Stobhill. The Borthwick Community do not believe that the closure of the School will help its rural Community to thrive. There are implications for population structure, incomers, new housing, employment, tourism and village life.

The Council's 'grand plan' is inconsistent with the proposal

We have consulted Midlothian Moving Forward; Midlothian's Community Plan (2003) – "the "grand plan" for Midlothian" which seeks to involve partnership working and community involvement by:
"involving the genuine participation of the many constituent parts of the community and responding to their needs".
The community planning which should emerge aims to increase the:
"capacity of public sector agencies to tackle cross cutting issues that require 'joined up' action, …, and prevent conflict between plans and strategies".
In that context it is hard to see where the Council's effort to support and develop rural communities is being assisted by this proposal to close the school. One of the aims is to "maximise sustainable rural community development potential" and another to "encourage communities to become involved in shaping decisions and to prioritise action in their local environment" and another to "offer an outstanding and distinctive environment for work, housing and leisure by: seeking the necessary … local facilities". None of these are consistent with the proposal to close the school.

Proposal would rip the Heart out of the Community

We note that the Council admits that the rural communities should be treated differently from urban communities.
"Midlothian as an area consists of small urban settlements together with large rural areas. These rural areas of Midlothian are subject to a number of economic trends which do not affect or have the same impact in the urban areas. For example, rural areas in Midlothian have experienced a significant decline in local services in recent years." (Midlothian: Moving Forward)

The Borthwick Community has been particularly hard hit in this regard in recent years: with the loss of the village shop, postal services, butcher, blacksmith, cafe and the two public houses. The only public facilities which remain are the Church, the village hall in Middleton and of course the School. We believe that it would be iniquitous for the Council to remove one of the key remaining services from the Community.

School is at the heart of the Community

We note that the Scottish Executive and COSLA in 'Building our Future: Scotland's School Estate' (2003) states that the key objectives for the 21st Century School are to
"Deliver better services within the School environment that focus on:
1) the child at the centre – meeting the needs of individual children and
2) the School at the Heart of the Community – meeting the needs of Communities".
According to the Scottish Executive and COSLA, schools are "a physical focus for many communities" and that local authorities should be "developing local solutions". The view is shared by academics. According to Northcroft (2004), author of 'Scots at School' (2003):
"a rural school is an integral and irreplaceable centre to its community"

In explaining their decision to create a presumption against closure of rural schools in England in 1998 the then Education Minister stated:
"Closing a village school can be a death-blow to the community … When a school closes the village loses a vital focus. Children spend longer travelling to other schools. Young families will come under pressure to move elsewhere. School closures can have a knock-on effect on other services, like village shops, setting up a spiral of decline. This is what we want to stop." (Gallagher)
To close Borthwick would be to rip the Heart out of the Community.

Proposal would damage the Community

We illustrate below further examples of damage to the Community which could be caused by the loss of the School.

The School has attracted families back to growing Borthwick Community

We know that young families have been attracted back to the area. The Borthwick area is an attractive place to live – and one of the key attractions is the quality of Borthwick School. These young families have included parents who attended Borthwick School and understand just how good an education and life experience it provides. There has been a significant amount of new housing developed in North Middleton already and a large number of new houses are planned for the Borthwick area. The population of North Middleton and the Borthwick area is growing, and we believe a key attraction to ensure continued growth is the School. We argue that should the School be closed, the population make-up of the area will change. Farms will find it more difficult to attract young people and the village is likely to become a commuter town for Edinburgh as well as a retirement village. A key element of the current Community is the diversity of population and this should be celebrated and not harmed. We note that there are developer contributions from new housing in the area which are as yet unspent. These could be used to invest in the area rather than taking away the key local service, the School.

Closure of the School could have serious effects on employment

We believe that the closure of the School could have serious effects on employment in the Community. It is difficult for farms to attract workers and particularly stable workers with young families. To remove the rural School would take away a key attraction for these families. We believe it would become more difficult to attract workers for other key employers in the area such as the sawmill, limeworks, Borthwick Castle and the numerous farms.

Closure could limit opportunities for small business growth

The broadband era provides great opportunities for homeworkers and small businesses to set up in rural areas. We are sure that the Council would like to encourage these developments in Midlothian, and particularly in the Borthwick area. However, we believe that local services will be extremely important – and if the School is closed it will remove a key attractive service which could draw people to the area.

Closure could have negative effects on tourism

The closure of the School may have a negative effect on tourism. Borthwick is a historic village. The Castle still bears the marks of the cannonballs fired at it by Oliver Cromwell. It now operates as a luxury hotel, which is extremely popular with US guests. However, the village is kept 'alive' by the Church and the School. If these services were taken away then the village would die and this could have a negative effect on tourism.

The school provides a communal, bonding experience

The School provides an experience which is intangible but is felt by those who actually live in the Community. It provides a bonding experience, particularly for outlying rural families, who may not have day-to-day contact with friends and acquaintances. It is a meeting place at School events, parent's evenings, the School Board, fundraising activities, drama productions and the like. Children form strong friendships. The School provides a focus for grandparents and senior citizens to watch over the next generation of young people while parents are at work. It is impossible to quantify these factors but the widespread opposition to the proposals from parents, school children, former pupils, former teachers and other staff, grandparents, the Church Minister, Kirk elders, the Scottish Womens' Rural Institute, the Women's Guild and the employers in the area among others should measure the strength of feeling on the School's role in the Community. The ethos and culture of the School would be lost to future generations. This small Community is resolutely against the closure of its School.

We believe that the proposal to close Borthwick Primary School should be rejected by the Council. We believe that Borthwick is a wonderful asset of the Community and the Council.

In this report we have considered each of the arguments that have been put forward by the Director of Education and we find that they are not even close to convincing. On each factor chosen by the Director of Education to argue the case for the proposal we believe there is no case for closure. It appears that the Director of Education is mistaken on the property issues, education issues, financial issues and issues about the Community.

We have shown that:

1. Borthwick requires no more than modest or minor upkeep expense. There has been substantial modernisation and renovation of the facilities available at Borthwick in the last three years. We note that the School has existed for 134 years so far and is fit for a quality 21st Century education.
2. There is no evidence to suggest that small rural schools will underperform large urban schools. The Director of Education has provided no evidence that this is the case – while our research has shown that in fact the converse is true. Small rural schools outperform large urban schools.
3. We have not been provided with enough information to definitively show that not closing Borthwick will save money. However, our best estimate is that closing the School and building a new School for those pupils would cost the Council's taxpayers tens of thousands of pounds per year extra.
4. Contrary to the view expressed by the Director of Education, the Borthwick Community believe that their Community would be adversely affected by the closure of the School. The Community believes that the Heart would be ripped out of the Community.

We reject the suggestion that pupils should be moved out of their high quality School and into an environment where the buildings are of lower quality and potentially in the centre of a building site for at least the next 2 years.

We welcome the investment in dilapidated urban schools, but do not believe that Borthwick should be drawn into this issue. We have shown that Borthwick, can and does offer a top quality learning environment. Borthwick is the School that its growing Community wants to keep. There is no case for closure. Do not rip the Heart out of our Community.

Advertiser (2004) "Schools: Council turns on MSP" Advertiser 15 April

Borthwick Primary School Board (2004) Minutes of School Board Meeting 8 March 2004

Boyd, Prof. B (2004) Email (Reader In Education, University of Strathclyde) 21 April

Consultation 2 (2004) Minutes of Public Meeting at Greenhall Centre 23 March 2004

Educational Research Unit (1997) "Managing Change in Small Primary Schools" Scottish Office Education and Industry Department
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/edru/Pdf/ers/interchange_54.pdf

Education Division (2004) Midlothian Council Annual Report 2003
http://www.midlothian.gov.uk

Education Division (2004) School Budget Statement 2003/4 Borthwick Midlothian Council 8 April.

Gallagher, T Prof (2002) Small Rural Schools in Northern Ireland School of Education, Queen's University, Belfast
www.ruralcommunitynetwork.org

Gheorgiou, N (2004) School Closures SPICe Briefing 23 March
www.scottishparliament.co.uk

Hall (2000) "Initial Teacher Education: Specialists and Generalists" Scottish Council for Research in Education
www.scre.ac.uk/scot-research/hallinitial/index.html

Hardies (2004) Midlothian Council Property Condition Survey Borthwick Primary School March

Humes, W and Bryce, T (2004) Email 19 April (Head of Department and Professor, Educational Studies, University of Strathclyde, Jordanhill Campus) - Editors of Scottish Education (2003) Edinburgh University Press

HM Inspectorate of Education (1999) Standard Inspection of Borthwick Primary School, Midlothian Council
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/hmis/pdf/primary/borthwick_ps.PDF

HM Inspectorate of Education (2001) Follow up to the Standard Inspection of Borthwick Primary School, Midlothian Council
http://www.hmie.gov.uk/documents/followup/borthwick_ps_fu_report01.pdf

Mackay, D (2004) Midlothian Schools Strategic Asset Management Primary and Nursery http://www.midlothian.gov.uk

Mackay, D (2004) "Midlothian Schools Plus Programme: Better Buildings Better Future" Letter 18 March

Mackay, D (2004) "Midlothian Schools Plus Programme: Better Buildings Better Future" Letter 2 April

MacGregor, F (2004) "MSP 'grandstanding' in rural schools fight" Evening News 15 April

Midlothian Council (2003) Midlothian Moving Forward: Midlothian's Community Plan http://www.midlothian.gov.uk

Midlothian Council (2004) Review of Schools in Midlothian 2003-04: Public Consultation http://www.midlothian.gov.uk

Northcroft, D (2004) Email – Retired Vice Principal of Northern College, University of Aberdeen – author of 'Scots at School' (2003) Edinburgh Press

Owen, J (2004) Email – Principal Adviser to Director of Education, North Yorkshire Council 28 April

Scottish Executive (2003) Social Focus on Urban Rural Scotland 2003
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/stats/bulletins/00257-05.asp

Scottish Executive and COSLA (2003) Building Our Future: Scotland's School Estate http://www.scotland.gov.uk/library5/education/bofs.pdf

Peacock, P (2004) Written Answers Scottish Executive 22 April
www.scottishparliament.org.uk