'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.

straggle "All the free schools rated outstanding so far have been set up by existing academy providers that have had other outstanding ratings (Dixons, Tauheedul, ARK) or the Church of England, and could have been set up as sponsored academies or voluntary aided schools working with the local authority".

Which is why I don't understand the point of the Free School programme.

"Which is why I don't understand the point of the Free School programme"

MumTryingHerBest, every Government has its own programmes for creating/expanding/improving schools, some more experimental than others, and some more successful than others. Optimistically I like to think that lessons are learnt along the way, and the best of past schemes is incorporated into future ones, so that things improve over the long term.

The Coalition Government's Academies Programme (of which the Free School programme is a part) is an evolution of the previous Labour Government's Academies programme. Some would say it's an evolution too far.

If Labour get in next year, they will symbolically "scrap" the Free School programme, and rescind some of the freedoms of academies, but academies will still continue, and Parent-Led Academies will be the new Free Schools.

In other words, they will reign in the Free School programme, and re-name it, but keep those elements of it that they consider have worked well.

I do think that the education system tends to improve over time as a result of all this innovation and experimentation. It's a bit like the stock market though, with lots of ups and downs along the way!

Having free schools and LEA schools independent of each other is utterly insane. In my area we have the case of the LEA having spent lots of money on expanding an upper school, as part of switching from a 3-tier system with middle schools to just the usual 2 tiers.

Much of the extra capacity already built will now not be needed because of the setting up of a free school as well.

Wasteful and insane.

I do not understand why it is so wrong for free schools to be set up in middle class areas. Surely if is not just about creating places, it is also about choice. Or should only the areas where extra school places are needed and the rich who can afford private schools have choice.

I would have liked the option to consider a free school for my DC but this is not going to happen as my youngest is year 5 now. One has opened in our area and people are falling over themselves to get in to it.

Or - shock horror - the places where there ARE NO SCHOOLS (state or private)

Look up central Southampton and find the secondary school .....
www.southampton.gov.uk/learning/schools/list_map.aspx

Vanillahoney 'Surely if is not just about creating places, it is also about choice.'

Choice requires a surplus somewhere in the system. A surplus costs the taxpayer money and is detrimental to children in undersubscribed schools.

'Choice' is uneven because it usually results either in the school choosing you - according to religious criteria, gender or aptitude - so it's not actually your choice. If the pupils at the unpopular school are only there because they live on council estates, too far away from the middle class areas where free school providers are trying to get a foothold, those pupils either will not live within catchment of the free school - so that's not fair - or some may get in but leave the established school with half as many pupils/teachers, a big deficit and a poor curriculum.

On the other hand, some free schools have not attracted enough pupils and have experienced that problem themselves. Like 'The Hawthorne's Free School' (having a spelling anomaly in your school name is a dangerous start). It had to make 8 members of staff redundant because of a budget crisis caused by undersubscription. Hardly surprising that it was recently rated inadequate.

VanillaHoney "Or should only the areas where extra school places are needed ... have choice".

This doesn't make sense. If the area needs extra school places it suggests there aren't enough places to meet demand i.e. don't have enough places to offer to every child that applies for a school place.

Choice doesn't even come into in this instance unless you are suggesting that they have the choice to move house to an area where there are school places or HE.

Yes these areas should be prioritised over and above those that just want more choice.

unless you are suggesting that they have the choice to move house to an area where there are school places or HE.

I don't think it is such a bad idea to move in to an area where there are school places. We did it and so did a lot of our friends. If I didn't have DC I probably would not have chosen the house we are in at the moment.

We have a few "very good" primary schools in the area which are oversubscribed as well as one primary which is not very good at all and undersubscribed, so overall yes there are enough places. If we had another free school in the area it would free up places at the good schools. I can not see the point of continuing to invest in a school nobody wants. I think choice is important. I do. Not believe in one choice suits all.

If we had another free school in the area it would free up places at the good schools.

No it wouldn't - they would continue to be full. Their catchments may increase slightly. But the undersubscribed school would end up with even fewer pupils. So it would have a smaller budget. I'll bet that school has a bigger proportion of deprived pupils. It might have a slight cushion now for being 20% undersubscribed because the pupil premium is worth £1,300 but funding per head is about £4,500. They would lose the advantage of being able to support pupils in smaller groups, or subsidise all the school trips to museums and theatres that middle class parents can pay for. But take away more of their budget and you may be depriving them of a maths, music or language specialist. Or a classroom assistant.

Now if that school really was ineffective it would have been rated inadequate and turned into an academy. That is 'meant' to improve it. If that wasn't enough, there is a real issue with getting rid of a bad sponsor. Still not a justification for opening a new school and duplicating provision. And as has been pointed out, why should taxpayers spend £10 million to house a new free school with an empty one next door?

I agree with all that Straggle. However, unfortunately it has taken the "wake up call" of the Free School Programme to make some LA's and academy sponsors realise that they can't be complacent over failing schools. They can't sit back and let them fester in the knowledge that they will have to fill up eventually because people have no other choice. I think it has given a "voice" to groups that aren't happy with local provision. Previously the only groups that had a strong voice n the choice debate were the (mostly CE and RC) voluntary aided schools. The academy programme has gone some way towards levelling the playing field.

As I said previously, it may be an evolution too far, but lessons will have been learnt along the way.

It hasn't been a wake up call for the government though. They haven't even begun the debate of the legal status of academies, how you replace bad sponsors - or whether the school legally exists at all without its sponsor - and acknowledging the role of the LA and success of the vast majority of LA-maintained schools in comparison. Many have converted to standalone status only because there has been financial inducement or a recognition that they should all jump together because having one remaining community school is an imbalance.

Maybe the LibDems realise how unpopular the academies programme has been. In as far as it is a wake up for Labour, they may have realised that they need parental support when they force schools to academise.

VanillaHoney - I don't think it is such a bad idea to move in to an area where there are school places.

I've lived in the area I am for 22 years, I have friends and a support structure, are your really suggesting that I should simply move to be in with a chance of a school place just so that people like you can have more choice?

Are you a politician by any chance as you certainly seem to have the same mentality.

If we had another free school in the area it would free up places at the good schools.

Really, so people are going to suddenly stop wanting the oversubscribed good school just because there is a Free School option? I have already highlighted that the Free School in my area is doing nothing to elevate the pressure on school places. Whilst the high performing schools (which unfortunately is all of those in the SW Herts Consortium) are heavily over subscribed, the Free School is under subscribed. I know people who were allocated the Free School even though it was not listed as one of their preferences. They have chose to go private.

I think choice is important. I do. Not believe in one choice suits all.

And for those who have no choice at all i.e. can't afford the cost of moving or have health issues that leave them heavily reliant on friends and family living close by? There are many examples of situations where your 'it's easily solved, just move' solution would be impractical and/or unworkable.

VanillaHoney I think choice is important. I do. Not believe in one choice suits all.

You already have choices:

a) Take your own advice and move.

I note that you chose to move to an area with oversubscribed schools and now you are saying that you should have more choice because those schools are oversubscribed.

b) Go private.

They haven't even begun the debate of the legal status of academies

Why should there be a debate? Their legal status is well established. An academy is operated by a charity incorporated as a company limited by guarantee.

how you replace bad sponsors

Again, well known. The Secretary of State has the right to terminate the funding agreement for any academy without notice in certain circumstances. The legislative framework allows the government to transfer the academy to new ownership. I believe (without checking) this process has been used once or twice.

whether the school legally exists at all without its sponsor

Yes it does, otherwise it could not be transferred to a new sponsor.

the Free School is under subscribed

I'm sure there are some that are under subscribed. Some are massively oversubscribed with up to 10 applicants for each place. On average free schools are getting 3 applicants per place.

prh47bridge the comment was made off the back of VanillaHoney claiming:

We have a few "very good" primary schools in the area which are oversubscribed as well as one primary which is not very good at all and undersubscribed, so overall yes there are enough places. If we had another free school in the area it would free up places at the good schools.

If the "not very good" school is under subscribed, there is nothing to suggest, that a Free School will change the situation, without knowing the credentials of the that Free School.

The average applicants per place figure for Free Schools might be more meaningful if it is given alongside the average applicants per place for existing state schools.

I can tell you now that the applications per place figure for the secondary schools in my area exceed the average for Free Schools you have given.

Also bear in mind the applications per place figure may well be distorted by the number of preferences parents can make at the point of application and therefore be dependent on the area the school is set up. If I had 6 preference options I would likely list the Free School as a throw away option. As it stands I have four so it is unlikely I would list is as I would likely end up being allocated it in the event of not getting any of my four listed preferences.

It would be interesting to see the applications per place figure of Free Schools whereby the school was listed as the first preference. I think this will give a more accurate figure as to their desirability.

In West London a well-loved, successful primary school, in an area where there is pressure on primary school places, has been told it will have to close, as the council wants to give the (lovely) school site to an undersubscribed new free school which has not yet opened. The parents and staff of the primary school, Sulivan, are, understandably devastated.

This in an area where the flagship free school - Toby Young's WLFS - is pissing money away and can't keep a head teacher for more than five minutes.

Around here, at least, Gove policies and the free school movement have nothing to do with a sensible policy of creating new school places for those that need them, at a reasonable price, and everything to do with bullshit ideology.

Somebody explain to me how the Free School / Academy programme is doing anything for Central Southampton - where there are no secondary schools

while at the edge of Southampton are two Sponsored Academy schools in shiny new buildings with, between them, 800 empty places.

Talkin, if the LA thinks it needs a new school there, and no groups have proposed a Free School off their own back, and they don't want to coordinate one themselves (like the Kingston Academy example) then there is a process for putting out a request for free school providers to come forward. If none come forward, they can create a community school.

I haven't heard of that last step happening anywhere yet, despite seeing lots of calls for free school providers going put over the last couple of years.

Can you link to where LAs have permission to open new schools : I've not heard about it lately

Of course the 800 free places would mean they wouldn't be able to make a case for Basic Need, so probably couldn't do any of the above in the current climate.

On my mobile, but will find it later. It's in the legislation.

But the 800 free places are an hours journey away from where there are no schools ...
the catchments are already several miles across and the catchment gap is three miles wide and four miles long ....
it cover the whole of central Southampton

"catchment gap is three miles wide and four miles long"

Sounds like they could make a case after all then.

A lot depends on the political landscape though.

Talkin, this is the bit of legislation that introduced the "academy assumption", i.e. that LAs must seek proposals for an academy before they can create a maintained school. It's written as an amendment, so difficult to read without cross referencing with the existing legislation, but there is an explanation here, and guidance on how to open a maintained school (in the event that no academy is possible) here.

However another way of creating a maintained school, is the Voluntary Aided route described here. Strictly speaking there is no reason why a VA school needs to be a faith school. It would be very interesting to see a LocalAuthority test that route with a Voluntary Aided comprehensive school.