Thousands of questionnaires are going out to parents across the Bradford district asking for their views on the biggest education shake-up in the area for decades. Here we give a parents' guide to the issues involved. Education reporter Chris Hewitt reports.

At the beginning of the century, Bradford was a pioneer in education.

Children who were once consigned to the mills and factories were for the first time introduced to organised education.

Bradford was at the very heart of those changes and developments.

But now as Bradford heads to the Millennium, educational standards in the district are struggling to compete with achievements nationally.

Performance in Bradford's schools now sits disturbingly in the very bottom quarter of the national school league tables

The goal for the next century must be to reverse those fortunes so children in Bradford can leave school with better skills and higher qualifications - and be capable of competing for jobs nationally and internationally.

The main objective of the school review is to gear up the education system in Bradford to make those advancements - before it is too late.

Just before Christmas, the education authority which is conducting the review, put forward radical proposals to close up to 75 schools.

This will make way for a new breed of schools, larger and better equipped to raise standards in the classroom.

Now 80,000 questionnaires have been distributed, asking parents and teachers which proposed change they favour:

the present system but with fewer schools of a larger size

a two-tier system of primary and secondary schools

a mixture of both (although this means two-tier except in Ilkley, which would retain the three-tier system)

It is imperative, if parents care about their children's future, that they register their opinions before the February 20 deadline.

After that, the authority's education chiefs will state their own preference and, on that basis, they will decide which schools to close, which to expand and where new ones will be established.

And this will be the system of education in Bradford for at least the next 20 years.

Before looking at each option, it is worth being reminded of the reason for the review in the first place - the need to raise standards.

Education chairman Jim Flood said: "We must recognise that Bradford is too far below the national average performance of schools and does not appear to be catching up.

"When you add to that things like the state of many of our buildings and the apparent duplication when small schools are found close together, you realise that a good hard look at the whole system is overdue. That is why we have said that no change is not an option."

Look at the facts:

the percentage of pupils passing five GCSEs at grades A*-C is 28.9 against a national average of 45.1

the number of 11-year-olds gaining national standards in English, maths and science is below average

£210m is needed to repair school buildings

schools in Bradford get less money to spend per pupil compared with national averages and schools in authorities with similar social and economic conditions.

No change is not an option so the question now rests on which system of education is best for Bradford's children.

The present system, which has existed since 1969, includes three tiers - first schools for children aged four to nine; middle schools for the nine-13 age range; and upper schools for 13-18-year-old students.

Its most fundamental flaw is that the age ranges of these schools do not match the key stages of the National Curriculum - Key stage I is for five-seven-year-olds; key stage II, seven-11; key stage III, 11-14; and key stage IV, 14-16.

With children changing from first to middle at age nine and middle to upper at 13, two of those key stages are interrupted half-way through and that disrupts the continuity of their education.

Unless there is good liaison between those different school phases, children can miss out on vital areas of learning, or waste time going over the same topic again.

Also effective liaison can be extremely costly and time-consuming with teachers from one school having to meet with colleagues from all their feeder schools regularly.

When a school such as Nab Wood Grammar has 22 feeder middle schools to contend with, liaison can be a logistical nightmare as well as taking teachers out of the classroom.

The interim review report concluded that there was evidence to suggest that standards were affected because middle schools disrupted these key stages.

Champions of the present system argue it is not the structure but years of under-funding that is at the heart of under achievement.

Middle school heads feel strongly that dividing schools in four-year age groups is extremely beneficial not only to the children's education but their social and personal development as well.

Yet the three-tier system is heavily criticised and many believe it should be replaced entirely by the two-tier system.

This would split schools into primary for children aged four to 11 and secondary for 11-16/18.

This would be in line with National Curriculum configurations and join 90 per cent of all other LEAs in the country which have two-tiers.

Supporters of this system are adamant it will raise standards although opponents argue there is no evidence to back that up.

Certainly, with only one transfer at age 11, it would seem less disruptive and less traumatic for children who currently have changes at nine and 13.

All in all, it is essential that Bradford weeds out the weaknesses if education in the district is to progress.

There are too many small schools, which are more expensive to run per pupil, and buckle under the pressures of teaching an overloaded curriculum.

Larger schools should enjoy a wider range and quality of teaching expertise and facilities.

The high number of empty classrooms waste money Bradford can ill-afford to waste. That needs to be addressed.

And concentrating on schools that can provide good learning facilities at the expense of extremely costly crumbling buildings must also be prudent housekeeping.

If under-funding is at the root of underachievement, closing schools should free up money that has been hitherto confined to supporting an outdated system, which most other authorities in England either never entertained or abandoned many years ago.

Converted for the new archive on 30 June 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.