Article on Toby Young's west london free school - I don't understand admissions

[PollyParanoia]

Ok article is here from yesterday's standard.
I do find all this stuff about "we want a school with high standards" a bit strange - is there anyone head or parent who actively wants a crap one?
But my main question is one of admissions. It says that the site is 3 miles from Toby Young's house. Presumably that would mean that his four children wouldn't get in if it's done on catchment. Is this the case? If true, it seems strangely admirable and altruistic of him to be doing all this hard work. I suppose I should be applauding his philanthropy rather than assuming he wants an education he can't afford to pay for...

TY's slightly older sister did extremely well academically at the same schools (I think??) where he floundered. I humbly submit that there was a problem with TY's teen attitude, not just about where he went to school.

TY also has 4 children; he could probably afford to educate one or 2 privately, just not 4. So he made choices there, too.

So why is the demographic of the free school so different from surrounding schools (at least in terms of FSM, which is a significant indicator)?

Xenia, have you read about brain plasticity and recent developments in cognitive science? Your ideas about intelligence are out of date. Latest research seems to show the brain is like a muscle, the more you use it the smarter you get, 'cells that grow together glow together' etc.

Having done some research it may simply be a case of microdemographics. Hammersmith and Fulham has wide contrasts with some areas being quite affluent. Some of the nearest state schools to this school are below the national average on FSM. However, others nearby are well above the national average so it is difficult to tell what the true demographic is for this locality. Unfortunately I haven't been able to find any figures for the ward in which this school is located.

I also note that the school is quite close to the border with Richmond Upon Thames which is below the national average for FSM. If it is drawing in children from Richmond that could well bring the proportion of FSM children down.

However, this is all guesswork and I don't know the area well enough to say for sure. Yes, it could be that poorer families think this school is not for them. I would love to know the real answer.

"In what way do you think that his first class degree from Oxford is a poor exam result?"

His going to a state school meant although he's well qualified he made poor career choices which make it hard to support his family and pay school fees. It's very common. Very bright state school puplis who excel think being a teacher etc is a wonderful achieving job because they don't have the role models who earn £500k a year plus.

"His going to a state school meant although he's well qualified he made poor career choices which make it hard to support his family and pay school fees. It's very common. Very bright state school puplis who excel think being a teacher etc is a wonderful achieving job because they don't have the role models who earn £500k a year plus."

Xenia, I think that you do know that the statement you made is ludicrous in so many ways. I certainly am not going to bother pointing out all of the inaccuracies, but will say that statements like this make you seem quite ignorant.

BTW: I don't think you know much about Toby Young if you think that he is "unsuccessful" and earns a low income. Trust me, he lives a very nice lifestyle and would certainly NOT be considered low income.

Xenia your ideas are completely bonkers, utterly mad, ignorant and totally elitist.

Ladies, don't bother... have you read the thread 'AIBU to consider retraining as a barrister?" Tells you all you need to know about Xenia's rather unique views on what is a reasonable salary. (Half a mill is peanuts.)

I was going to point out that Xenia hadn't answered by question about her statement that it's a bit daft to call a first from Oxford a poor exam result and that maybe one could measure quality of life in terms other than how much one earns, but I've been here before with Xenia, so will desist.

prh, it's interesting, isn't it? I think time will give greater clarity. Will be interesting to see the exclusion rates.

A first is good but employers look at GCSE and A level grades too in many careers and accent and looks and a heap of other things and sometimes a state school just doesn't cut the mustard as it clearly hasn't with Mr Young hence his now lowish earnings.

Bue, I never said £500k was a low salary . I said some people are unaware that in some careers at the top you can earn over £1m and particularly women limit themselves too much. I am in favour of variety in education so that parents can choose fundamentalist Islam/christianity or no lessons or home education or selective from age 4 or whatever. Thus I would agree with the free schools principle. I would go a stage further. Apparently i t costs the state £5k a year to educate every child from age 4 - 16 or 17 so why not just privatise schools and let parents spend that £5k on the school of their choice with a right to top it up if they choose? Then Government can get out of education entirely and teachers can be left alone to teach in the way they choose. Government has never interfered well to improve things in the education sector. It's why private schools which aer free of that educate 6% of children and get 50% of good university places and (see other thread) about 70% of top judiciary posts, high percentage of best journalism jobs etc etc

In fact this is the other side of the argument abolish all home and abroad schooling and all private schools so everyone is at a comp and bus them or do the places by lottery at one extreme. If instead there is no state schooling at all then everyone is free, much freer even than in a pure comprehensive system whcih we will never have until we bus poor and deprived children in to leafy areas to ensure a true comprehensive mix in state comps.

Had some scandinavian relatives here last night. Seems are a lot of free schools there. No private schools at all. And they get the best results according to the OECD

Someone suggested upthread that schools get funding per pupil that's the same. This isn't the case. The school funding system is complicated, but there are financial incentives to the types of school government wants and disincentives to local authorities opening new community schools.

Basically, the "new" types of school get more money. So they take resources from other schools in more ways than just taking pupils.

DfE now publishes actual school spending data. This highlights massive differences between existing schools and local authorities in what is spent per head on pupils in seemingly similar schools (in terms of pupil composition etc).

I see what Xenia is saying about aspiration, I went to a comprehensive school and careers advice was almost non-existent. salary for jobs was never discussed. Not that it's the only important thing, but it's not unimportant.

I don't agree with her proposals, but do think that careers advice for teens needs to be better, and provide lots of facts and figures on different options.

Yes school funding is complicated but these schools are not directly taking money from existing schools.

Each LA receives a grant each year for the schools it controls based largely on the number of pupils within the LA. They retain a proportion of this for central services and then distribute the rest to schools. The proportion retained for central services varies significantly from LA to LA. Academies and free schools do not receive the full range of central services from the LA although they do still get some. The LA's portion of the central government grant is therefore divided with some going to the school and some still going to the LA. The portion that goes to the school is known as LACSEG (Local Authority Central Spend Equivalent Grant). That is the only additional funding per pupil received by academies and free schools. So the other schools in the area receive exactly the same amount of money per pupil as they would if there were no academies or free schools. The LA still has the same amount of money per pupil as they would if there were no academies or free schools. The LA does, however, have less money overall as it is providing services for fewer pupils.

The additional money that free schools and academies can get to help them set up comes from other parts of the DfE's budget which would not form part of the grant to LA's even if the government wasn't doing this.

It's certainly interesting that the choice will be there but hardly any have been approved to at the moment it will have a very minimal impact on children. IN large parts of the country there is one state school. There may well not even be a Catholic secondary so you go to the local comp (or private school if there is one or be educated at home). In urban areas it can be very very different with more choice.

What is amazing is what large % of high achieving schools in all sectors are in the SE when presumably high IQ is randomly distributed. I am from the NE not known for high exam results and I suppose I ended up down here (and am reasonably bright) so perhaps there's a brain drain thing operating.

I see from today's papers that despite everyone's best efforts 7% of pupils go to fee paying schools and they obtain 30% of the A level A* grades and concetrate on traditioal academic subjects whch are harder maths, physica, bh iolyg languages and hence more not fewer pupils from private schokls have obtained places at Durham, Exeter, LSE, Warwick.

At Brmingham, Exeter and Soughmpton more than 80% of those applying from the private sector obtained offers.

Mr Young might have been better to choose a job which would enable him to pay school fees for 4 children. it's not that hard - I manage it for 5.

Xenia - I know someone who attended William Ellis school - probably around similar sort of time as TY. Got 4 A's, went Oxbridge on merit not through a mixed up letter, earns a lot of money, could send kids to private school - actively chooses not to. William Ellis at the time Toby Young would've attended was a few years out of being a grammar school and was one of the best state schools in London.

Also £5000 per year as a voucher wouldn't cover a term at the private schools in my area (SE).

Xenia - Ignoring the fact that some people following Toby Young's career can easily afford to pay school fees for 4 children I am struck by the arrogance of your posts. So you think he should have sent his children to private schools rather than trying to do something which he believes, rightly or wrongly, will benefit all the children in the area?

He could do both. Most of us do what is best for our children. We don;'t go out between 5 and 8pm to read books to children of the poor. We read to our own which is the correct thing to do.

Yes £5k which I think is the state cost for each child is about half most private school fees although I'm sure the priate sector could come up with some rough and ready basic schools at that price and parents could then top up if they wanted at more expensive places. However no political party wants to privatise education so there's no point in my writing about it.

His plan of course doens't benefit everyone in his area but I don't decry his plan. The more variety we have in a liberal capitalistic economy the better.

there is some truth in what Xenia says about aspirations (although it is not quite so black and white!)

i think these free schools may be an interesting diversion but i just don't see it affecting the mainstream - the very nature of them seems to be that they'll stay on a small scale. the blockbuster multi-milion pound academy being built down the hill from me is more of a reference-point for what the majority will be getting. ..

as it hasn't bee finished yet, it remains to be seen!

"He could do both" - So what makes you think he isn't?

As far as I can see your posts contain a series of ad hominem attacks on Toby Young, apparently based on the belief that he has only started a free school because he can't afford to send all of his children to independent schools. But you don't decry his plan. I'm sure he is relieved to hear that.

I am sure he is. Most of want not only to help our own children and usually don't neglect them to help others and also to do good in a more general sense in our lives.

I was just making the obvious point that lots of middle class journalists get fed up about schools because they were silly enough to pick low paid work. It's something our teenagers need to be told about so they realise X career means a life of relative poverty and Y career does not.

If he could afford 4 sets of private day school fees and his children were at Westminster Under, Colet court, St Paul's girl etc or whatever depending on age then he may not be starting the free school. Now someone will tell me all of them have been in private schools since they were 3 and I will shut up.

Much more interesting though is the fact there may be these extra schools. The problem is as soon as you allow variety (as we do with state/grammars in a few areas and private schools and state religious schools) you get further away from the state comp ideal (which is not an ideal I support as I think chidlren do better in selective edcuation with as little state involvement as possible). In fact the more different schools you come up with the more the comp becomes the modern secondary modern where you go if you cannot go anywhere else or y our parents aren't bothered. So far there are so very few of these schools it won't affect the comp model.

I am not TY's biggest fan (I started this thread, eons ago) but I genuinely believe he's starting the free school for ideological reasons and principles rather than trying to get a free education (although that's what I rather glibly suggested in op). I don't happen to agree with his principles and I think he's misguided and egomaniacal (spelling?) but I do think he believes in what he's doing.

With all due respect, Xenia, you are like Pavlov's dog when someone mentions state/private schools.

You trot out the same things over and over again.

If you're so happy with your life choices, why do you keep having to go on about them on t'internet, and insult people who make different - that's equally valid but just different - life choices by calling them meaningless, low level vocabulary words like 'silly".

There's something a big in it all, somehow.

that's desperate btw

I hae to show people the true path, which is a moral good. Too many women don't realise the choices they have. If we can cut back the frontiers of the state all will be well. All I am doing is something similar to Toby Y in my own way . There are ideological battles to be won and people to convince of the one true Xenia path.