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

Whooooaaaa there!

I really don't think British society is ready for this. My sister, who is a primary school teacher, regales me frequently with tales on the 'active' PTA at her school. There have been fisticuffs at meetings when domineering parents pulled in different directions and the poor retiring headmistress had to go to about 8 'leaving dos' because they all wanted something different and just couldn't agree.
IME, British parents generally fall into 2 categories - the over-zealous and the can't-be-arsed.
It's all a utopian fantasy.

Coolfonz:
'If you want a decent education system...copy the French/Germans/Scandies...'

Yes please:

Can I have the Danish System? - if you really don't want to send your child to the excellent local school with is 20 dc's per class and MA qualified teachers, then the government will give you an allowance to go private.

Of course, the Tories are actually proposing Swedish schools (see OP) if you fancy a more progressive education.

Or, perhaps the German system. Decentralised, with acadeimic selection at secondary level, with a proper vocational eductation for the less academic.

Which one were you thinking of?

If anybody wants to know what schools set up like this, in this country would be like, go and have a look at Emmanuel College, Reg Vardy and Darwkins. This school is partially funded by the tax payer.

It is already happening. The entire idea is basically faith schools by stealth. The gradual privitisation of the education system.

Seriously, look at Emmanuel College in Gateshead - it's science teaching in particular. It is chilling.

I dont want society segregated along 'faith' lines, especially not if Im paying for it.

I agree this seems a way for the already privileged to get their own better schools at the taxpayers expense.

Im very uncomfortable about private organisations making a profit from our childrens education (at our expense).

Im concerned about how much all these extra schools will cost, and what will happen to the current schools which will see dropping numbers, staff redundancies etc? Are we prepared to 'waste' a school and all the children in it?

The policy looks like a misdirected waste of money to me. I dont need 20 different choices of school, just 1 good one!

The whole idea is daft IMO. There are already plenty of parents volunteering in schools - in fact school governors are the largest group of volunteers in the country (300,000 of 'em) and once you add in all the people who go in to hear kids read or help out on school trips or run the summer fair... I think those who are willing and can help out are already doing it.

Since becoming a governor I have realised quite how massive a task running a school is - much more complex that I'd expected.

And the last thing we need are more millionaires with God complexes thinking they can indoctrinate our children with their nutty views.

Sorry don't have time to read all of this interesting thread but those that talk about the Scandanavian system...don't they pay a lot more taxes to be able to fund things like this?

The practicalities bother me - I'm sure there are some groups of committed, keen parents who would go for it, but I have no faith that many people would be prepared to take it on. It's hard enough getting someone to man a PTA stall for half an hour, FFS. People just don't have the time.

I don't like the sound of the tories education policy at all. I would like schools to continue to be run by professional teachers. I want schools to be financed by the state plus parent fund raising as at present as the minute companies get involved they will be motivated by profit rather than providing a good education.
Some of the best schools in this country are private schools and they are not run to make a profit (apart from the cognita group). I would like the government to make state schools as good as private schools - eg. smaller class sizes, less bureaucracy, broad curriculum including sport and music etc.

Parents are already involved in schools eg. governors, pta..the current balance is fine.

The problem is many tory voters probably don't care about state education as they can afford private or don't have school age children. So they may not give the tories dodgy education policy much thought.

The trouble with this sort of concept is it is very expensive. There will be the huge cost of setting up a new school (especially given that those setting up the schools will of course want the best provision), alongside the continuing one of providing the existing schools alongside. Increasing choice always means increasing capacity, and that is very inefficient. This concept was tried in the NHS with bringing in the private sector to set up and run new treatment centres. Hugely expensive, damaging to existing institutions (good and bad) , and big quality issues too. Many of the centres have now been closed, and the later waves didn't happen at all. Things like education and health can't be treated as any other good. Children can't just switch from one school to another and then another without a fairly large cost to them, and choice is often non existent for all sorts of reasons some of which will continue, for example if your child has a special need of any sort, but there are not enough other similar children in a reasonable radius (transport being an additional cost), or where it's just not cost effective to have more than one school in an area, or there aren't buildings that any school could afford. When we lived in London we had an area with lots of "choice" - the choice between really bad local schools, or at the end of long bus rides where they might well not have got in a boys "sports college" and a girls "arts college", several single sex schools and a ridiculously large number of religious schools (all single sex too), oh and two ex-grammars, both now religious Academies. What I wanted was a decent mixed local school, where both of my children could have been happy but no chance of that, so really no choice at all.

Charter schools in the States have been popular in concept, but very variable in practice. www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/29/AR2009112902356.html

I live in Canada now, and when the children go to High School I think that we have four schools in our district (and it's this secondary level where people on the whole want extra schools, on the whole even in deprived areas the primary schools are not too bad). I am told they are all equally good, and that the vast majority of children go to the most local (some move later for particular courses) no one seems to worry too much, and performance is in line with national averages, which internationally are very good. Surely that's what we really want?

I don't really see how this would work especially in diverse inner cities. It seems that the people who want to set up these schools are the ones who don't want their dc attending the local sink school. They then go about setting up their own school with other like minded parents, so what happens if large numbers of children who would have traditionally gone to the sink school wanted to be admitted to the newly set up school will they be allowed in or will some barrier selection process be applied to them to keep them out? My personal wish would be for a comprehensive education system with streamed classes so children can be taught at a pace which suits them. I would also like the lower streams to have smaller class sizes so the kids there get extra help. This idea of the tories is a bad one as I believe it will create even more polarized schools in the end

Strande For sure - Denmark's the 'most taxed' country in the world. About 40% base rate and 60% top rate, I think - they have reduced in lately. They also pay 25% vat. Whether those rates are sustainable in a global economy I don't know. I guess they hope their excellent education breeds loyalty and Danes, who do take well paid, lower taxed jobs abroad, come home eventually.

I am actually a teacher with experience in both the maintained and independent sector. Money really is the main issue in education - in my opinion.

In some respects it would be lovely to run truly community based schools but there aren't a whole load of empty public buildings with the correct amount of outdoor space (yes there is a regulation about that - and its fair in my opinion) just waiting to be turned into schools with some new curtains. I think that effectively this means that we would always need a 'backer' to build schools for us. How does this help parents - there would always be a shareholder (or is that stakeholder) with their own views to take into consideration.

In any case effectively we do need to follow an accepted curriculum because education takes place within a sequence of schools and you need to make sure that the children know what they need to know for the next phase.

I can't help feeling the regulation for this would be cripplingly expensive.

I don't know a huge amount about this.

I would say though that considering how difficult it is to get even basic parental involvement in schools locally, never mind a decent, professional, school governor who has the time and skillset required these days, I don't see it getting off the ground to a huge degree.

The tory policy sounds probably appealing to those disenfrachised with their local schools and the availibility of child places. However the tories seems to have developed a policy without thinking of the wider ramifications.
We could potentially have a multi-tiered system of schools. If us parents were given the opportunity of setting up a school I would be concerned with the running costs of that independent school not just for the year but for the entire time my children would be school. How would parents pay for it, would this mean that us parents would have to contribute to this school just like private schools today. If this is the case which is most likely then we could see problems develop as in these schools drafting teachers from state and church schools thereby leaving those children whose parents cannot afford these independent schools left without their right to a decent education.
Setting up a school involves sports, music, meals, heating, IT equipment, libraries et al never mind about english and maths which gives our children a rounded education. I fear that it is typical tory policies that basially says "you get on with it". If parents want to set up their own school which would involve fee paying then why don't they send their kids to private schools already in existence. Also the Steiner school which is indpendent had to be shut down here as they did not have the funds to keep it going as parents could not afford to keep their child there. Possibly good on paper but on a realistic level an absloute nightmare.
Also if Cameron believed in independent schools then why does he not set up one now so he can send his own kids there instead of the state school that they go to currently. The provisions are in place to set up your schools now. ALSO If the current state school system is so bad then why does he send them to state schools and not private schools like he and his wife went to. I fear that his kids go to state school as a political measure. They can afford to send them to private school, I have nothing against private schools, state or faith schools as long as your child is integrated, getting an education and having fun just like my eldest does in his school which is not private. I rather Cameron be honest instead of him using his family as Political leverage. So state schools cannot be all that bad if Cameron eldest goes to state school and he has not already set up his own indpendent. Just wonder if he thinks that private school is not all that good. Hmmm. Anyway must go as I am going to look at setting up my own supermarket, library, sports centre, hospital, court system et al, busy mummy that I am. lol Vote for what you believe in rather that style because otherwise you will get stuck with style and no substance for 5 years. That is a longtime for lipgloss, airbrushing and hairgel for the Tory Party, could send us into a recession just by the beauty products they use along with photographers and airbrushing.

I think it is an excellent idea. Yes, I would set one up/help set one up. It would be quite a challenge of course in a lot of ways but yes, I would like the chance to provide the kind of school education I would like so I welcome this move.

If the Tories want us - the public - to run everything ourselves, does that mean we can get rid of the politicians (because what will they be doing all day?). Think how much money we'd save.

It sounds like a nice idea but for parents to set up school near to their homes surely you must be living close to either an unoccupied property or sone vast land next door unless of course the school has be be in another parents garage (ie if they have one)

Caoimhe - now THAT is a great idea!

Although can we get rid of just the tory ones as my local MP is quite good and makes himself useful.