First free school to be closed (and it's not Al-Madinah)

[lalalonglegs]

Apparently there is a free school that has been quietly doing even worse than the notorious Al-Madinah in Derby. The Discovery New School in Crawley seems to have had the same systemic problems and begs the question how many more schools will the government allow to be opened by the enthusiastic but incompetent? Report here

My concern would be that if the government are moving goal posts now, a different government will move them even futher (particularly as free school seems to be only funding for any new school), and the choice will be change your ethos and conform or loose funding. All seems very uncertain.

Well from what Bundaberg has said, it does all sound terribly unfair. The new management team should be given adequate time to make the changes needed. Certainly, they should be given the same length of time that any other school in special measures would be given. It does sound as though the school is being made an example of, and I really do wish all you the very best. What a stressful situation for the parents, children and staff...and just before the festive season too.

I wonder if the funding channeled into the Discovery school had been channeled into the failing schools in the area, would they still be failing?

Have people read the OFSTED reports? However biased the inspectors may have been, there is no way that was a good school.

And what on earth is in it for the government to have part of a flagship policy fail so publicly and completely?

Forgive me if I have the wrong end of the stick, but isn't Ofsted an independent body from the education dept/government, and therefore couldn't be used as a political tool that way?

Of course never underestimate the reach of the govt and all and what us little people are told but theoretically it shouldn't be possible, right?

Was your yr1/2 teachers last inspection some time ago? The inspection regime has changed. When OfSTED were in school for a week 2hrs may well have been standard, these days they're in school for 1-2days and 20 mins is standard.

Feel free to complain that 20mins isn't long enough to make a judgement. Many teachers have in maintained schools, VA schools, academies and presumably free schools too. But to complain that this is an example of OfSTED prejudice or a campaign makes you look slightly uninformed. I would be worried if the school were using this as some sort of official argument as it suggests to me they really don't understand what they need to be doing to improve.

bundaberg, were the teachers experienced montessori teachers?

I looked at the report and wonder how Ofsted will judge the free steiner school. Traditionally steiner schools do not teach reading until children are year 6/7 (so year 2) and don't use a phonics method. On the other hand montessori traditionally introduces letter sounds as part of the 3-6 curriculum. Not sure when they introduce blending.

Was the problem bad teaching or the method of teaching?

sorry, not year year 6/7, age 6/7

Judging by the OFSTED it was diabolical teaching- and a complete lack of self awareness by all concerned............

"several have already turned down offers at other local schools which are either in special measures or "inadequate"... ie the only ones with spaces available!"

but your DC's school is in special measures and has been judged inadequate, and you think it's great. So these local schools may well be fabulous, why won't you try them?

Seriously, do you not see the irony of what you are saying. OFSTED have said other schools are inadequate and put them in special measures and you are upset at the suggestion that you send your DCs there, yet when OFSTED say your DCs' school is inadequate and put it in special measures you are outraged and pledge to keep it open.

I knowing nothibg of thjs school or the ins and outs of the inspection so I shall do some reading but I suspect that part of the problem may be OFSTED and their approach to Montessori in general. Several EY settings have een in trouble because they were following the principles closely, so there was no provision for dressing up and role play.

I would think the difference between a free school and a standard state primary is that in theory the standard state primary's aims are defined by the national curriculum and, while there may be inadequate staff, it should be possible to replace them with adequate staff who should just continue teaching according to the national curriculum.

If a school defines it's own way of doing things, then it is less easy to understand how/trust that they will make changes.

(On the other hand, I get the impression that free school funding is now more a way of transferring power from the LA to the school and enabling more private organisations to run schools than a way of enabling parents to run their own schools. I am getting the impression that the 'Big Society, "Hey, let's put on the show right here in the barn!" thing might be being quietly abandoned.)

Balloonslayer - I also saw the irony in parents unwilling to send children to other local schools that are in special measures.

I think ofsted is fucked up though. Should bring back the old system of HMI assessment/assistance rather than the somewhat adversarial and critical assessments of ofsted now.

I think the transfer of funding from LA is more true of academies than free schools, merrymouse.

I'm not sure OfSTED have fucked up here. And it goes way beyond a different style of teaching and learning. Even if only half the stuff in that report and the interim reports is true it would still be in special measures. It's atrocious.

The DfE did their initial checks and flagged up serious concerns. 7 months later when ofsted turn up nothing has been done about those issues and the inspection flags up a load more so it goes into special measures. An interim inspection 4 months later finds nothing has changed and there is not suitable action plan for improvement. There still wasn't one for the 2nd interim inspection in November.

Since when did Ofsted observe teachers for two hours? Not since I've been teaching and I've be teaching 8 years, my first Ofsted was the standard half lesson.

Also, many previously good or outstanding teachers have been rated inadequate under the new framework. That's not unusual. Shitty, yes, but not unusual.

Tbf noble if you manage to lose a child and don't notice while being observed by an inspector you are going to get inadequate however good the rest of your lesson is.

I don't mean that ofsted have fucked up in this particular case. More that the whole current inspection system is fucked up. It's so aggressive and adversarial. My mother was telling me about the old HMI inspections and how there was much more of a mutual relationship where assistance and guidance was offered. Everyone was working together to improve schools rather than ofsted swooping in, taking ridiculously short time to inspect and generally undertaking a desktop assessment before visiting to confirm suspicions.

The new Framework and changes of focus does little to the help the situation.

Why do people always jump all over any story that reports a 'failing' Free School but barely a mention of the dozens of state and private schools that close or merge every year as they are not viable?

There is no doubt that the Free School idea is deeply political and some LEAs would like to see them all close. There are no doubt a few Free Schools that should close and no doubt quite a few that are very good and hence loved by parents and pupils alike.

I'm not sure of the in's and out's of it, but I know that in my old borough a proposed secondary school that lost 'BSF' funding when the coalition got in is now getting funding as a free school. (School needed because of lack of spaces, not because parents wanted a different kind of school). I know that there is no funding for new LA schools and understand that (I read it on mumsnet so it must be true) the vast majority of new applications for free schools are now coming from private consortiums, not parents.

I get the impression from this document that the difference between an academy and a free school is that an academy is an existing state school and a free school is a completely new school.

it says in the document that currently free schools aren't allowed to make a profit, however apparently plans were leaked suggesting this might change

I foresee free schools and academies becoming the same thing, particularly if labour get in. (I think they won't close free schools down, but they will change their status to academy status and withdraw funding if they don't meet their criteria which may include more LA control).

Re: failing private schools, in the UK parents have always been able to educate their children as they see fit. The difference is that if you decide to send your child to a private school, you are footing the bill.

Why do people always jump all over any story that reports a 'failing' Free School but barely a mention of the dozens of state and private schools that close or merge every year as they are not viable?"

Not bothered about private schools- I don't pay for them so I don't care what'd happens to them. I would be interested in a list of the dozens of state schools that close or merge every year because they are not viable.

An particular interest is being paid to the failure of a Free School because they are part of a flagship education policy which is supposed to be showing other schools the way forward. And they are very expensive indeed.

Dos that answer your question?

Also, given that free schools are really supported by LibDems, it's a massive change to educational policy by a party without a majority.

I think morebetamight be referring to the forced academisation of state schools in special measures. They are essentially closed and then reopened as academies out of LA control. Then they fail their next ofsted inspection and get closed again and reopened as new academies. The other option is to form a consortium with a local outstanding school and work under an 'executive head' who has overall control of both schools.

I've just read the Ofsted report and some news stories. So it used the name "Montessori" despite not being accredited by any sort of Montessori association because the word Montessori isn't patented. Great. Not sure I'd be happy with it using "Montessori" as an excuse for not marking books when it doesn't even have a Montessori certificate.

All the teachers were graded inadequate or requires improvement. The amount of training that these teachers would need to get up to speed would be so much as to effectively leave the kids with no one to teach them. No one in the school has the experience or competence to come up with an effective training plan for the teachers.

It seems that even if they threw a tonne of money at this school, they are so clueless that it wouldn't be enough. And certainly, why should we throw a tonne of money at this school which has already had a tonne of money and is completely inadequate? Good money after bad is not a satisfactory strategy, just because some parents like the school (and since when have parents been a good judge of educational standards?). The school only has a handful of kids, so no great loss.