'Zealot' Michael Gove is accused of 'lunacy' in £400m free school row...how is this affecting your children's education?

[MillyDLA]

www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/classroom-controversy-zealot-michael-gove-accused-of-lunacy-in-free-schools-budget-row-9350075.html

I would like some reactions and thoughts to this. As a teacher in an oversubscribed school, surrounded by other over subscribed schools money would have been better spent creating more places where they are needed in the state sector.

icecream, on average, only about 7 per cent of children in the UK go to private schools. There are some areas, some bits of London in particular, where it is higher than that. However mostly there is no real competition between the state sector and the private sector. There are numerically very few parents who are in a position to look at the local state provision, and make a choice between that and a private school.

The effect DOES exist but highly restricted as to area.

"There are some areas, some bits of London in particular, where it is higher than that"

I live in one of those areas, so the effect seems very tangible to me, and populations are large, so rising percentages mean big numbers, and private schools profiting on the back of the systematic under-provision of state school places.

And nlondondad, the effect will spread to other areas as surpluses are further decreased across the UK.

Cotwatcher
'Those experienced staff at the LA are not always the best people to advise and help. In my long experience in this area very often the LA staff are out of touch exteachers who are very expensive. They may have spent many years in education but that does not necessarily make them "experienced" or the best. They often have little experience of the world outside education.'

I take great exception to this. One of the huge issues with free schools is the lack of expertise by those setting them up and running them. These expertise need to be in education. Why is it that anyone can set up a free school, qualified/unqualified, experienced/not. I see first hand the vast amount of expertise needed to support schools. Even serving teachers/headteachers would be surprised at the level and range of support that the LA give using their skills and background. Of course much of this work is confidential so isn't for public or even other schools knowledge. Some issues are horrendous, some are on-going and take time, patience, and skill to sort. I certainly wouldn't attempt to run a school without this level of support.

I considered for my own children... Would I admit them to a hospital where the staff were untrained/unqualified/inexperienced? Would I admit them to a hospital that was run by an experienced manager from an engineering firm? Would I be happy with a hospital with no professional development for its staff, no support to improve. No, of course I wouldn't, I would want experienced, well qualified staff who have a track record and know what they are doing. Why do people think that schools are so different?

nlondondad the short fall of school places in just a few locations can and is having a cascade affect into surrounding areas. This is currently being experienced in Hertfordshire with overflow now targeting Buckinghamshire.

If schools are failing and have been doing so for some time I would not want to send my children there. I do not think there is any argument to be made for throwing good money after bad. If there is enough interest in opening a free school then it should go ahead...it is still a state school..it is not privatisation by the back door, or indeed any door....it is a STATE school....rather like the old direct grant schools used to be. I have family in London and the issue there is that parents are miffed because they did not/cannot get their children into one of the few high performing primary schools.....my family little one was offered a place but it was not one of the "favoured" middle class schools....it was just an ordinary school. Some London parents move into an area to be near a high performing primary and then the catchment area shrinks and people are outraged because they haven't got a place at "their" school. This is middle class sharp elbowed parents. Most people who support free schools are just ordinary parents. I fully support these schools.

MillyDLA: " Why is it that anyone can set up a free school, qualified/unqualified, experienced/not."

That's not true Molly. Demonstrating capacity and capability is a key part of the application process.

Of course there have been some high profile cases where things have gone very wrong .... the approvers haven't always made the right decisions in the rush to get schools open.

I agree with you that LA support is important for some things, but those can be bought in on a commissioning basis. Some LA's have been operating on that basis for several years so even maintained schools select services from the same catalogue as academies.

MillyDLA, I think schools are very different to hospitals because they are.
Clearly I would not want an unqualified person operating on my child.
However I know some inspiring teachers who are not qualified teachers....in the past I have appointed them. Not all qualified teachers are bright, conscientious, committed ....very obviously some are ......some people teaching the sciences and maths do not even have "A" levels in their subjects......I want someone who can inspire my kids...someone who may or may not be a qualified teacher. One of the best things about free schools and academies is the freedom from the LA

Remember that the money being given to free schools isn't made up of extra, new cash - much of it has come from cuts to existing school budgets. In the 6th Form College sector, in which I work, there has been a national budget cut of 100 million this year alone. In my (outstanfing, non selective) college, this has meant: 30 mins less teaching per week for each a-level subject; all learning support staff removed from lessons, apart from those supporting disabled students; pastoral tutors are now paid as learning assistants rather than teachers; no subject specific support time - all of this adversely affecting thousands of students, and replicated in other colleges up and down the
country. Meanwhile, Gove has allocared 45 million to a single free school 6th form college, just for their start up costs. If anyone can justify that transfer of scarce resources from many to very few, I'd be interested.

And cotwatcher, the reality is that many of these institutions will employ unqualified staff not because they are somehow amazing, inspiring naturals ( who somehow cba to get QTS, even though they could do this and work at the same time) but because they are cheaper. This is what happens in FE colleges, where many staff are poorly paid and on insecure contracts, and the quality of education suffers massively as a result.

Nobody, as it happens I was principal of a large FE College for many years..not in London. It is true many teachers were not qualified but they were bloody good engineers and experienced professionals...and all were well paid. We had support workers for our many disabled students but not for others.
Why should pastoral tutors be paid as teachers? They should be paid as pastoral tutors. We abandoned all "national" payscales and paid a rate for the job. Remember FE colleges came out of local authority control years ago and the freedom meant we didn't have to have all the overpaid and useless LA advisers and had more money to spend on our students. As far as I know they were made redundant.

"many of these institutions will employ unqualified staff ... because they are cheaper"

And many of them won't employ unqualified staff. Just because they have that freedom, doesn't mean they will choose to use it. And if Labour get in at the next election, that particular freedom (which applies to all academies, not just free schools) will probably be rescinded anyway.

Icecreamsoup, I raised unqualified staff because cotwatcher was suggesting they were a good thing. Cotwatcher, I can only speak for ,my own and colleagues experience of working in FE - maybe your unwualified staff were well paid industry experts - where I worked they were hourly paid with no holiday pay and insecure hours. And I think pastoral tutors deserve more than 13 TO 15 thousand a year as they are responsible for child protection, dealing with domestic violence, abuse, mental health problems, eating disorders, liaison with all kinds of outside agencies, writing references, supervising uni and job applications ... ours used to be teaching staff who taught 2 thirds of a timetable and tutored for the rest. Since they've been replaced, staff turnover amongst tutors has been huge, which helps not at all.

Cotwatcher, when you say you paid 'the rate for the job',was that ever more than national pay scales?

yes, sometimes a lot more, sometimes less, but we could write a job description that was nothing to do with any national scales eg for someone to run the travel shop which was a commercial shop but was also a work experience place for travel students....so it was an amalgam job.
To get a good engineering graduate or someone to teach accounting we paid way over the national scale but for someone to run our college nursery we paid nursery workers' rates.

and we never ever used agency staff....or LA staff!

cotwatcher if a person has no teaching qualifications or experience, what makes you think they can teach? Having knowledge is one thing, imparting it on others is something quite different.

"I want someone who can inspire my kids...someone who may or may not be a qualified teacher."

How would you go about selecting that person? Also bear in mind this person will not only be expected to inspire your kids but also those others attending the class.

Whilst a person may seem "inspiring" and engaging to you, what make you think your child will see them in the same light.

When presented with a candidate with no track record in the profession what would you base your decision on exactly?

Sorry cotwatcher, I didn't make it clear that I meant pay your teaching staff more. Yours must have been a great place to work if you did, because I have never heard of an FE college doing this, just the opposite in fact.

Icecream, you seem to keep saying that things might, or might not, or are likely to happen. I would rather have actual firm definite controls on who can open a school where and with ehat staff, hiven that schools are important and being funded by the public.
Still waiting for someone to justify that 45 million quid to a single 6th Form btw.

Also, 'because they are' is not a reason unless you are talking to a toddler.

"I would rather have actual firm definite controls on who can open a school where ..."

And if the "firm definite controls" resulted in the creation of an unpopular school, or even a popular school with an admissions policy that excluded you, what then? LAs don't always make the most sensible choices ... it depends on who holds the reins.

If ... what then .... it depends - there are those conditionals again.

Do you really believe that free schools are likely to solve any of these potential problems? Rather than, say, not cutting school budgets, but instead giving them a nit more money to expand? How is letting inexperienced, unqualified people open schools in buildings which are not purpose built and have no requirement for outside space going to tackle those issues?

"Do you really believe that free schools are likely to solve any of these potential problems?"

No, I didn't say they would. I think the free school policy is fraught with problems. However, it's the only way to set up schools at the moment. In my area new schools are needed because the existing ones have already expanded, or are in the process of expanding, to capacity, so your "instead giving them a bit more money to expand" option isn't possible. The numbers are too big.

"How is letting inexperienced, unqualified people open schools in buildings which are not purpose built and have no requirement for outside space going to tackle those issues?"

I've only seen experienced, qualified people opening free schools in my area so far, in buildings that have been adapted for the purpose. I'll wait for their Ofsted reports before making judgements on their success, but I haven't heard any negative reports so far.

icecream you've said a couple of times that LAs don't always make sensible decisions and that LAs have opened new schools that aren't popular.

I don't believe you are comparing like with like. Don't forget that very, very few new LA-maintained schools have been set up in the last ten years - they have almost all been amalgamations of existing schools, inheriting their staff and location (which dictates admissions policies - free schools have a big advantage in being able to 'pick' their intake ). Since 2007 'new' schools have been ones with sponsored academy status. But then - they are no longer LA schools.

If you are in the area I think you are, that applies to three previously underperforming schools which are still the less popular schools despite shiny buildings and academy status because they get less impressive results. Why? One, because the catchment is the same - they border more deprived areas and that puts off the middle classes. Two, and more problematic, is that the sponsors had originally no track record that would act as a 'pull' factor, and the record that is emerging is either mixed or poor. An academy school's management may be held back by poor governance but it cannot switch sponsor - or even exist in its own right without that sponsor.

On the whole the free schools programme has been mismanaged and poor value for money. A few will be good because their sponsors are more competent. But many standalone ones have been poorly managed like this one and there are new emerging chains and for-profit chains which at best perform no better than poorer performing LAs - just more expensive and less democratic.

icecreamsoup, that may be true in your area, but it is not true everywhere.

have a look at this posting, for example (and there are others)

www.localschoolsnetwork.org.uk/2014/03/inexperienced-leaders-contributed-to-failure-of-e-act-free-school-says-ofsted-and-tory-vice-chair-expresses-qualms-about-appointing-unqualified-teachers/

"However, it's the only way to set up schools at the moment."

The point many are making on this thread is that it shouldn't be, because that is damaging the education system.

To be a supported of free schools 'because they are the only option' is terrifically depressing.