Tory schools policy - what do you think of idea of allowing parents/others to start their own schools? A good plan or no?

[JustineMumsnet]

The Tories are saying in their manifesto that they plan to develop schools under the Swedish "free schools" and the US "charter school" models: small, autonomous schools run and set up by parents, teachers, universities, faith groups and voluntary groups.

What do you reckon? Could you find the time/energy to start a school? Would you rather attend a school run by a small autonomous group or by central government?

(Am due on BBC news 24 to discuss so your thoughts would be much appreciated)
Txs

I still think the crucial issue that hasn't been addressed is how these schools are to be funded. Until and unless the Conservative party actually comes up with a clear statement of how it plans to find the money to fund these new schools, it is just an election gimmick aimed at pacifying middle-class parents who for whatever reason are unhappy with their local comp.

When listening to the chat of the mums in my school playground the big worry in our area is that the secondary school pull in from a huge catchment including "deprived" areas which the middle class ethos of my area sees as children who will be disruptive and not want to learn and thus jeopardise their own child's education by making classes ineffective and being badly behaved.

Yes, the Tories are aiming at that socio economic group.
The perennial problem of "how can I make sure my child's classes are not disrupted by children who don't want to learn and who the school can't get rid of".

Wilbur

I suppose the difference is that in a primary school it's only some learning that is setted (differentiated rather) and children aren't physically divided on different sites by their abilities.

So a primary aged child may do maths and literacy with other children of their ability, but they will be in the same room and all other activities will be together.

I'm not actually sure whether I agree with setting in primary school but I was just trying to explain to LINGSTASH that comprehensives aren't what she thinks.

However, my comp. was very heavily setted and I would be interested to see how mixed ability classed would work. My feeling is that bright children always thrive but less able children feel demotivated if stuck in a bottom set.

We seem in the UK to be so hung up about ability (everyone gets labelled early on) and want to always divide people (whether by class, ability, background). I suspect that if comprehensives taught in mixed ability groups (like in Finland) the chattering classes would get nervous and start looking at private schools.

But, dividing people at 11 is very wrong. (sitting children on different tables at primary school is a much lesser evil!) (Luckily my children aren't growing up in an area with the grammer school system).

Builde - My local comprehensive does not set. Apart from maths, it is mixed ability teaching throughout. Its catchment encompasses leafy middle-class Muswell Hill as well as (40%) from some of the most deprived areas in the country. Many of these children enter Y7 below level 4. The vast majority of pupils entering Y7 from Muswell Hill primary schools have achieved level 5 in their Y6 SATS. Furthermore, 33% of the children who sat GCSEs this year had some sort of special need. Whilst I agree that most mature and motivated bright children will succeed wherever they are educated, I fear the bright but immature (teenage boys anyone?) are more likely to become bored and switch off. Why push yourself to succeed when you can coast a "C" grade? This has happened to too many sons of my friends to mention.

I would worry that this policy will create more faith schools. I don't think religion should be allowed in schools at all.

And can you IMAGINE the hoo ha if Toby Young's kids are not in the top set....

Of course they'll be in the to set. They're all called Ludo and Miranda. The bottom set will be the ones called Darren and Chardonnay.

LOL (in spite of herself) re Toby Young's children

Ridiculous Ideas - what happens to the poor sods that live on the council estate do you think their parents are likely to have the skills to run a school.

This idea that anyone can run a school, health service whatever is mad - you need professionals. Plus surely the key to creating a fairer society is that ALL children have access to the same opportunities not the previledged few that have the parents with the spare time to run a school.

Would you rather attend a school run by a small autonomous group or by central government?

small autonomous group any day. I am crippled by school fees in order to avoid central government control. Heaven help anyone who can't afford fees. Personally, I'd home educate.

www.thensc.net/ is another current campaign for a secondary school

Barefootinthepark. I was a maths teacher for a dozen years. I don't have a maths degree. My first degree is in Psychology. At the time and place I did my degree, psychology included some fairly heavey statistics, which is where my mathematical background lies. I also have a computing degree, which is fairly maths heavy too. (I also have a religious studies degree too, but then I'm incurably academic)

There is an argument that maths teachers who don't teach the higher level stuff are just as effective if they aren't natural mathematicians. If you've always found the numerical universe an easy one to move around in, it can sometimes be difficult to relate to students who find the basic concepts hard to grasp. The fact that I struggled with calculus both when I first learnt it and again when I relearnt it in order to teach it, means I could empathise, guide and help students to find alternative methods when they were equally struggling. This is not to say that Maths graduates make bad maths teachers, but if you've ever had the experience of a teacher not recognising when you can't make the conceptual leap because it comes easy to you, then you'll understand what i mean.

Can I just ask those who think it's a bad idea for parents to be able to set up schools:

Is it because you wouldn't want to do it yourself (or see the need in your area)?

Or, do you feel strongly that others shouldn't be able to set one up?

soph24 My understanding is that the government's plan to help those in more deprived areas is the Academy Programme. Outside of this the council estate kids are mainly attending the poorly performing schools at the moment anyway.

Soph I think the theory is also that while there will indeed be groups of middle class parents just after a better education for their own kids, there will also be charities and other organisations doing it for more altruistic reasons and this is why the deprived areas will get helped too.

jackstarbright, I think it's because after a career in UK education I realise just what is involved in the administration of a school.

It's a job that defeats hardened professionals.

It's a disgusting idea, part of the class war waged by the Tories for generations.
It basically says - we don't want to educate our kids with working class and immigrant kids, or the black and Asian second and third generation kids - so let's take state funding and do exactly what we want. It's obscene, not that you'd expect much more to be honest. It is bad enough we have parasitic faith and private schools in this country, destroying choice for the majority of parents, undermining standards, segregating children on class, race and ethnic lines, but this is just pure hate dressed up. You want a decent education system, don't copy the US, copy the French/Germans/Scandies...

Here is an example of a charitable foundation and their involvement in an inner city acadamy. Temple Grove. In this case working in schools rather than setting one up.

So are you accusing the LibDems of class warfare as well, since their idea goes beyond what even the Tories are proposing? What a simplistic take you have, and I would hardly consider my position to be one of hate.

Slug - sorry cross posted. At least two schools have been set up and amongst the 350 groups who have aleady registered interest are several groups of teachers. You might not fancy it (and quite frankly neither do I) but if others are keen and feel there is a real need in their area - why not let them?

I'm sure the Lib Dems are equally capable of rubbish like this, I don't know their policy. All schooling outside of the state system should be shut. Creaming off funds from the taxpayer to create schooling, (most likely) segregated by class is sick.

Nothing less than I'd expect mind you, it's super trendy to hate/fear your neighbours, especially if they are poor/wear sportswear/are out of work/look funny. Chavs, feral children, broken Britain, underclass etc. Nothing to do with 30 years of lunatic economics, underfunding and part-privatisation of public services.

It's not a surprise, pretending that eliminating choice is in fact choice is pretty modern UK plc. A culture of educational fear presented as choice, pretty hateful yeah.

I think its a great idea.

I would love for there to be a school for children like my dd1, dd1 has HFA/AS (Aspergers) and is too high functioning for a special school but is struggling with the social side of things in MS. There are SN schools but the cater for children with moderate and severe disabilities, there is nothing for high functioning children.

Although it sounds like a mad unrealistic idea (would probably never happen) i think it could be a good thing if done correctly.

Those taxpayer funds you are complaining about creaming off are paid by my family are would be directed to educating my dc, hopefully with a more diverse cross section of society than we'd get through a fee-paying school. I don't see how your comments relate to this post, Cool.

absolutely ridiculous. and a haven for extreme views.

what they are really saying is , 'well if you don't like it, well go and make your own then' .

they will not take resposibility for providing decent education, so it will just create a greater divide between the state and the private sector. and then give rise to a few bonkers faith schools in between. its nowhere near towards a fairer soceity.

plus if they want us to run ourselves, whats the point in turning out to vote at all?

reminds me when I was a waitress in a cafe with a very inadequate boss - whenever I went to him with a problem, he would say'you know what - deal with it!

Anyway since the tories published their manifesto I can't believe that they have any chance of getting in. Seems like they will close it all down and keep all the money.

As for businesses backing them - well soceity is not business is it? Its about people, schools, healthcare, being happy and secure not about making a quick buck.

er, that should have been thread, not post . . .

dibbler re the brainwashing - god i hadn't even thought of that!

otherwise even though i kind of agree with the theory i am against this policy. firstly it makes society even more unequal - hyou can imagine the kind of parents who will manage to set up schools seeing as the whole process would put most people off. so you'd have these maybe really great but tiny schools - so then what happens to the kids left over who don't have cash/time rich parents to do this - sink schools will sink deeper as it will take monet away from state schools.

on the other hand i agree that this option should be (and is i reckon) available for exceptional situaions such as village schools closing and kids face nightmare commute etc.

surely they would be private schools in the literal sense - i can just imagine the admission policies!

incidentally i plan to send dd to a private progressive school but not being a tory, i still think the kids who go to state schools don't deserve to be short changed.