Debate, School | About school and prioritization

Former teacher educator Anne Grethe Solstad asks in AN 04.05.24 how we in H, V and FrP believe that content in schools should be prioritized. We are glad that she is asking, because this is the most important question in the school case.

Our answer is: Content in schools must be prioritized by spending money on teachers rather than on land.

We believe that the most important thing for the quality of the school is that there are enough teachers around the students. Therefore, since January 2023, we have strengthened the budget for the schools from what has been planned. Among other things through the “Angelsenhoppet” where we returned a lot of funds that had previously been cut by the then position. In addition, we have strengthened the budget for school content from what the director of the municipality proposed for 2024.

If we had not taken these steps, the school would have had resources equivalent to approximately 80 fewer teaching positions.

Unfortunately, the municipality does not have the finances to both strengthen the content of the school and deal with the rising costs of school buildings. Unfortunately, this is not new. In recent years, there have been cuts in teachers at the same time that the costs of school buildings have doubled. This is a development that must be reversed. Therefore, the municipal director has put forward proposals for changes to the school structure, and therefore we have been clear that changes must be made.

Solstad assumes that the changes in school structure will lead to overcrowded classrooms, and she asks how many students must be in the same classroom for us to be satisfied. Of course, we do not have a goal of having as many students in the classrooms as possible. Our goal is to have as many teachers around the students as possible.

The premise that the classrooms will be overcrowded is also not correct. Falling student numbers and available capacity mean that it will be possible to merge junior high schools and schools, without the schools becoming overcrowded. We have said that the changes should be made in the districts where the number of pupils is falling, and where the capacity is greatest. That’s why we watch

Alstad/Hunstad/Mørkved now, and therefore changes in Rønvik/Saltvern must also be considered in the next round. For the same reason, we said no to closing down Østbyen.

Solstad points out that there will be a generational change in the districts of Alstad and Hunstad. This is an argument we have been presented with from several districts. We also want growth in all districts, and work to make Bodø attractive to move to – but at the same time we have to deal with the forecasts as they are, and not as we would like them to be.

Solstad argues that good teaching requires space, including the space of empty desks. Of course it is in itself not a problem to have free capacity in the school. The problem arises when we do not have the funds to maintain the area we have without cutting funding for content and teachers. This is the situation now, and this has been the situation at Bodøskolen in recent years.

It is easy to argue against changes in school structure when you do not have to deal with the consequences of not making changes. But not making changes actually also has a consequence. We know the consequences of protecting the school structure well from recent years. That means cuts in content and fewer teachers. We believe that is not the right priority.