As I walk between portable classrooms at Green Timbers Elementary in Surrey, the growing pains of British Columbia’s fastest-expanding school district are impossible to ignore. Students navigate narrow pathways between these temporary structures that have become permanent fixtures on school grounds throughout the city.
“We’ve been using these portables since my oldest started kindergarten – he’s in Grade 8 now,” says Anjali Sharma, a parent of three children in Surrey schools. “They were supposed to be temporary. Nothing feels temporary anymore.”
Surrey’s school population crisis has reached a breaking point. With 350 portable classrooms currently in use across the district and student enrollment growing by approximately 1,200 students annually, the Surrey School District has launched a controversial pilot program introducing hybrid remote learning options for some students.
The initiative, announced last week by Superintendent Mark Pearmain, will allow Grade 6-7 students at five of the district’s most overcrowded elementary schools to participate in a blended learning model starting this January. Students will attend in-person classes three days per week and learn remotely for the remaining two days.
“This isn’t our first choice, but we’re facing unprecedented growth with limited infrastructure,” Pearmain told reporters at Wednesday’s press conference. “We’ve exhausted traditional space-creating solutions while waiting for capital projects to be completed.”
According to district figures obtained through a Freedom of Information request, Surrey schools currently operate at 127% capacity on average, with some schools reaching as high as 156%. The portable classroom count has increased by 22% over the past three years alone.
Provincial funding for new school construction has failed to keep pace with Surrey’s population explosion. Census data shows Surrey grew by 17.4% between 2016 and 2021, far exceeding the provincial average of 7.6%. The Ministry of Education has approved funding for seven new schools and eleven expansions over the next five years, but district officials say these projects will still leave them short by thousands of student spaces.
Parent reaction to the hybrid learning announcement has been mixed. At a hastily organized information session at Goldstone Park Elementary – one of the pilot schools – I witnessed both support and vocal opposition.
“Some flexibility might actually benefit my daughter,” offered Michael Chen, whose child will enter Grade 6 next year. “But I worry about supervision on home days since both my wife and I work full-time.”
This concern was echoed repeatedly throughout the evening. The Surrey District Parent Advisory Council (DPAC) has raised questions about equity and access, particularly for families where parents cannot work from home or lack adequate technology.
“We’re deeply concerned this creates a two-tier education system,” said DPAC chair Ramandeep Kaur. “Families with resources will manage, while vulnerable families face additional barriers.”
When asked about these concerns, district officials pointed to their technology lending program and partnerships with community centers to provide supervised spaces for students on remote learning days. However, capacity for these programs remains unclear.
The BC Teachers’ Federation has also expressed reservations. “Remote learning should be a choice, not a solution to infrastructure deficits,” said BCTF President Clint Johnston in a statement released Friday. “We’re particularly concerned about the workload implications for teachers who will effectively be managing two learning environments simultaneously.”
Education Minister Rachna Singh defended the province’s capital investment strategy when reached for comment. “Since 2017, we’ve invested over $750 million in Surrey schools, creating thousands of new student spaces,” Singh said. “We recognize the unique growth challenges in Surrey and are working closely with the district to address them.”
However, a report from the Surrey Board of Trade suggests these investments represent only about 60% of what’s needed to eliminate portables within the next decade. The economic impact of overcrowded schools extends beyond education, potentially affecting property values and business investment in the rapidly growing city.
Surrey City Councillor Linda Annis, who has frequently advocated for accelerated school construction, was blunt in her assessment. “Our planning is perpetually behind the curve. Families move into new developments years before schools are built to serve them. This hybrid model is treating the symptom, not the disease.”
For teachers implementing the program, practical concerns dominate. “I’m still waiting to hear exactly how curriculum delivery will work,” said Emma Leung, who teaches Grade 6 at one of the pilot schools. “Will I be creating separate lesson plans? How do we maintain engagement with students we see less frequently? These are significant pedagogical shifts we’re being asked to make mid-year.”
The district has promised comprehensive training for participating teachers in December, though specifics remain vague. The pilot will run from January through June 2025, with ongoing assessment to determine whether the model should be expanded to additional schools next fall.
As Surrey continues to grow – with projections suggesting another 25,000 students by 2035 – innovative approaches to education delivery may indeed become necessary. The question facing families, educators and policymakers is whether remote learning represents genuine innovation or merely a stopgap measure masking chronic underinvestment in school infrastructure.
Back at Green Timbers, I watch students filing between portables during class changes. Rain has created muddy pathways between buildings, and younger children huddle under overhangs for shelter during recess.
“We deserve better than this,” says Grade 7 student Jayden Williams. “My little sister might have to do that hybrid thing next year. School should be, you know, at school.”
As Surrey families prepare for this educational experiment, the fundamental tension remains unresolved: how to balance immediate space needs against the proven benefits of full-time, in-person learning for developing students. Whether this represents the future of education in growing communities or merely a temporary response to infrastructure failures will likely depend on the political will to invest in permanent solutions.
