Girls been forced to sit at the back of the class

[Wannabestepfordwife]

Apologies that I can't link but has anyone else seen recent stories on the Al-Madinah school in derby.

Not only are female staff required to wear a headscarf regardless of religion and having their contracts changed to reflect this.

But female students are being forced to sit at the back of the class and have to give up their place in the dinner queue for male pupils.

Now I'm not what you would call an active feminist but I'm absolutely disgusted by this. A free and equal education for everyone regardless of sex, creed, race is one of the best things about this country IMO.

Does anyone know what powers the government have over free schools or can they basically do what they want?

Yes - this particular school appears to have been treating girls and adult women unequally. Kitten, many of us on this thread are mostly concerned about the governance of Free Schools .... tbh your post doesn't really seem too much related to most of the discussion.

Yes Errol I agree - but I am not ok with some of the ignorant and inflammatory statements made which are also not related to the main content of this thread and therefore I addressed it. As you have said - you are referring to this particular school but there are others who have used this one example to have a generalized opinion about a large diverse group of ppl

Oh and to be clear - no I don't agree with girls being made to sit at the back it's total BS

It is a clear governance issue to me, but it is interesting that although the Daily Mail usually defends single sex and/faith schools, it obviously doesn't see Muslim schools in the same way even when they have even rated good or outstanding by Ofsted.

The other thing that strikes me is that there is no central body that might organise things or negotiate when it comes to Muslim schools, like a diocese. Most of the 5-6 VA schools were formerly private schools so they had probably been inspected at some point. But that's not always true of the newer sponsors so maybe that's why there are problems here. Too many new schools have been set up too quickly. That's not something the DM is highlighting either because it would then have to criticise Michael Gove's policy on free schools.

I do think the policy on new faith schools is muddled. Voluntary aided schools are still opening and they can prioritise 100% according to religious criteria. Free schools are opening too - nearly a third have a religious sponsor. They are meant to reserve no more than 50% of places on religious criteria but are often no different in intake from VA schools and there seems to be no agreed cap on number. Meanwhile, LAs can't open non-denominational community schools.

TBF the thread did at one point get a bit Muslim bashing.

I think this is a free school issue. An group were allowed to open a school and it has appeared that that group has either misrepresented what they stood for at approval stage, or has changed since the approval was granted. It does not matter to me what that group is.

Throw into the mix a H&S issue serious enough to close the place down on the spot just amplifies the whole thing to me. Wouldn't part of the approval process be to check the premises were safe? These schools are popping up in all sorts of weird and wonderful buildings being reused.

The whole idea just appears so amateurish to me.

The issue here is free schools. Someone mentioned Sweden upthread, one of the biggest providers of free schools in Sweden went bust, What would happen to the children if that happened here?

I just don't understand who thought free schools would be a good idea.

How does the funding for free schools in the UK work - do they get per capita amount from the government or what?

Errol they will eventually get the £5,000 approx per pupil as for other state schools but in the early days and even before opening they get additional start-up funding (£1.4 million for this school - no breakdown) as well as capital expenditure for buildings, etc. In one case a school opened with only 8 pupils.

How a school is run, whether it is good or not, whether pupils are cared for properly and make academic progress - it's always a governance issue. The governing body of this school were responsible for the segregation, dress codes, and whatever health and safety failure there has been. Governors are expected to work with the school leadership team, but ultimately the buck stops with them.

Start up 1.4 million plus extra for buildings?

What if it fails? Who owns the buildings? Is the 1.4 mill written off?

You can see on that spreadsheet where £440,000 was given to projects that were approved but never opened.

Just found a few more statistics: 'Prior to opening in 2011 and 2012, 79 free schools received a total of £19.6 million in project development grants followed by £40 million of start-up funding once opened.' £1.7 billion in capital funding has been allocated. Costs of staffing the government's free school unit was a salary bill of £8 billion in 2012.

Meanwhile land and buildings are being transferred to the free school trusts on 125 year leases so it would be regulatory headache and big expense to transfer it back again, and preumably only after the funding agreement has been terminated and trusts wound up.

Oh, and I think by the end of last year there were only about 10 secondary phase free schools with more than 100 pupils in the year, some of which were ex-privates.

It's all smoke and mirrors isn't it? These schools aren't being set up by parent groups, they are being set up by Gove and Cameron's mates. It seems to be money out the door with no clear way of measuring what we are getting for it.

Yes, it is smoke and mirrors.

1. Religious free schools could have been set up as voluntary aided schools - that would have been cheaper as they contribute 10% to the capital costs, and are part of a network with experienced partners. And they are also inspected by LAs as well as Ofsted and follow the national curriculum.

1. Academy chain schools could have been set up by the LA anyway and targeted need.

1. Parent-proposed schools could still have been set up as community schools by LAs like this Lambeth one. But not under this government.

Instead we are getting new religious schools with untested sponsors, ex-independents, which are getting debts of up to £5 million written off, teacher-led schools where governance and leadership is blurred, or new/for profit chains which charge a commission (IES or RET). They are either a risk or more expensive than community schools.

My son's SN school is looking to expand its provision for older children but has been unable to find a suitable building. I mentioned to the head that a school a few minutes from my house has recently become a free school but that they are saying they will only be there a couple of years before they outgrow the premises. Perfect I thought, especially as they have spent all the summer holidays refurbishing the place. However I was surprised to be told that the free school have been given the building and the council will not be able to take it back to use as a school when they have finished with it. I think it's terrible as that building (and large plot of prime land incidently) belongs to the local people, especially as there is a shortage of school places anyway. How can they just give it away like that? Dh is predicting that it will be replaced by blocks of flats in a few years and someone will be counting a huge profit.

Nice to see the thread back on track and talking about the real issues - for quite a while it turned into a muzlamic thread. Well done to those who stand against any form of inequality and dont muslim bash at the drop of a hat - but sadly, many do!

PS: my definition of a muzlamic thread is one that is muslim bashing!

This free school business is starting to sound an unpleasant hybrid of PFI and care homes being taken from LA control and sold off to big conglomerates and we all know how both those things turned out.

4. There is a reason why islam is the fasted spreading religion in the world. It is not extremism or brainwashing or whatever other sensational word people want to use. It is because when you look at it with an open mind it actually is pretty damn good

Just because a lot of people do something does not mean it's good.

Greythorne thanks for sharing that great insight with us.

Any particular reason why people becoming Muslim is a bad thing?

No but thousands of people doing so etching is hardly a justification for doing anything. That's all.

No Greythorne, but significant numbers of people converting to Islam in western countries, might indicate that Islam is not such a terrible bogeyman faith that is incompatible with modern Western society, in contrast to what the Daily Mail et al would like you to believe.

So the government is handing over property and cash to organisations to run schools, without a guarantee that we can get it back if the school fails and has to close.

I'd like to see a breakdown of who is behind these organisations.

Private schools are also getting public money by becoming free schools. Why are they doing that and what are the non fee paying community getting out of it. Are there places in this schools for the local community now? And are they actively encouraged to apply for them?

Also ever curriculum changes in state schools, moving targets, changing goalposts are designed to show more as failing and forced to become academies. So the same thing can happen to them.

The effects of this policy and the haemorrhaging of state assets into the private sector should be much more widely reported in the media.

The Muslim angle of this thread is the smoke and mirrors around the real story. As are things like the fines for term time holidays and trying to create anomosity between parents and teachers who are standing against all of this with their strikes.

It's done quite deliberately so they can distract us while they get on with this quickly and on the QT.

crescentmoon Tauheedul Girls is a good example of a very successful faith school and was a private school that converted to state as a voluntary aided school in 2006. So perhaps a better track record and better due diligence. It is sponsoring most of the new Muslim free schools so may be a much more reliable partner. However, like the London Oratory or Lady Margaret school it is hard to get into (e.g. members of particular mosques are prioritised) and has a lower percentage of children on FSM than the local area. Having said that, its newer schools may have slightly different admissions criteria and it's obviously important to have a strong sponsor with a good record.

But agree 100% with Growlithe 'The Muslim angle of this thread is the smoke and mirrors around the real story'. There is a list of academy sponsors on the DfE website and a list of open academies and who is sponsoring them. Does it include free schools? No. Is the DfE trying to hide something and use free schools (not necessarily the faith ones) as a fast-track route to privatisation and profit-making without proper due diligence and scrutiny by local bodies? What do you think?