Ragtime wrote:
Why would the inconsistency in accounts go that way rather than the other way? There's the account of students shivering and needing gloves, and then there's the account that it was 18C.
i don't think there is an inconsistency. i think the students and some staff and parents were angry/upset that the heat was off, regardless of whether there was any actual discomfort involved. maybe they were even slightly chilly. your article simply neglected to mention the indoor temperature, so it was not inconsistent but rather incomplete.
You say: They weren't shivering, because it was a couple of degrees below room temperture.[/quote]
no, i said they needed to harden up.
Ragtime wrote:
But one could just as easily conclude: The temperature in the classroom could not have been a couple of degrees below room temperature, because the students were shivering and wearing gloves. It probably read 18C at the thermostat, which was perhaps located more centrally in the building -- such as a corridor -- whereas the classroom would like be chillier, being nearer the windows.
no, the heating system was radiators, which are usually located under windows.
Ragtime wrote:
Secondly, if the cooling would only be to 18C, why turn the heat off, rather than simply down a couple of degrees?
if the radiators are on, they are using energy (less energy if the thermostat is turned down, but energy nonetheless).
Ragtime wrote:
Thirdly, why would the parents by "furious", and quoted as such in their statements?
i don't know. probably the same reason you were up in arms about it. there is an assumption the pupils suffered somehow.
it's worth noting that this project was the initiative of a student group and the administration agreed to try it. so it wasn't imposed on them from above.
_________________
on a break, so if you need assistance please contact another moderator from this list:
viewtopic.php?t=391105