153 more new "Free" Schools

I am surprised that there are not more ex teachers on this thread talking about the subject.

Oh dear Anya. I did 6 primary schools where I "did" the stone age or the vikings repeatedly. I was taught to do long division in so many different ways, I still go slightly cold when I have to use it. I had hoped the NC would help children who move school frequently. Ah well

Quite Eloethan. I was hoping that the first free schools were "failures", so that there wouldnt be more.
All this is asking for terrible trouble.

On a lighter note Iam my GS has changed schools three times. He's now the resident expert on all things Egyptian having 'done' them three times.

He asked 'when do I get to do the Romans?' so I sat down with him one rainy weekend and we watched The Life of Brian. Job done! And, being a very serious young boy, I was delighted with the rude bits playing on Roman names which, for once, did raise a snigger!

The point is, who is going to monitor exactly whether the guidelines are being followed?

They do say on the vision and Values page of their website that "We also want to support the ethos of Church of England primary schools, by offering continuity of ethos, but without imposing church attendance related admissions criteria."

From the Offsted report it sounds as though they are derogatory about other faiths and races.

The teaching of creationism has been banned in free schools as well as all other state-funded schools since June last year:

"New clauses for church academies published on June 9th clarify the meaning of creationism and state that it is a minority view within the Church of England and Catholic church."

It then adds: "The requirement on every academy and free school to provide a broad and balanced curriculum in any case prevents the teaching of creationism as evidence based theory in any academy or free school."

www.politics.co.uk/news/2014/06/18/secular-triumph-as-government-bans-creationism-from-free-sch

I may be missing something jen but that article doesn't seem to say it was a C of E school. If they are teaching creationism it is certainly not like any C of E school I have come across.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/creationism-taught-at-durham-free-school-10080714.html?origin=internalSearch

That's one of the problems rose quartz - Free Schools are exactly that, don't have to work to the national curriculum and free to teach Creationism. I'm not a complete NC advocate, but it does provide a framework and more importantly, children who move school have a better chance of consistent teaching. There seem to be many risks involved for we, the tax payers, to be coughing up and being left with no influence.

The above is not an endorsement of free schools, btw!

It was a Church of England school which taught creationism
That's odd, because I did not think that the Church of England had taught creationism for years.
As far back as 2006 Archbishop Rowan Williams said it should not be taught.

Yes, Mishap, they do get a start up grant. I don't understand how spending public money on Free Schools is seen by this government as a good use of public money, whereas spending on other public services is seen as Bad.

I agree with those who have said that this is a purely political move. They seem to have had a very mixed success rate so far which would certainly worry me if I had children or grandchildren likely to have to go to one of them.

Free schools do not cost less. Local government education departments have withered on the vine and provide virtually zilch for maintained schools; so a free school saves nothing - as far as I am aware they get the same per capita funding as any other school. They do however get a set-up grant I believe.

I'm with Eloethan and the other posters, who are opposed to Free Schools. There doesn't appear to be any overview of whether another school is needed.

soontobe - I haven't seen any evidence that supports your comment that Free Schools drive up standards in other local schools. I can't imagine that they save tax payer money either, but that's a gut reaction rather than based on evidence, so I'll have a google.

I now appear to be disagreeing with myself.

I would have thought that free school cost less to the Government as not so much Government involvement? Only when there is trouble?

I heard that when there are free schools, it makes the other schools in the area more competitive which drives up standards of those schools?

Someone needs to have an overview of where and what sort of schools are needed in an area, so that the needs of the children in that area can best be covered. Piecemeal small new "free" schools hijack that overview and our money is thus spent inefficiently.

Having said that, a group of parents near here worked very hard to set up a forest school, but it was refused on the grounds that there were sufficient schools in the area (very rural) and creating another school would cause others to wither. What those parents failed to notice was that the school at which I am governor does an enormous amount of outdoor learning and has specific forest school sessions around and about; as do most of the other local rural schools - so they can get what they want without setting up a free school.

Another problem with free schools is that it sets up dissatisfactions and endless heart-searching and agonising amongst local parents who wonder whether they are doing right by their child or whether they should move them to a free school with different ideas - I know of several children who have been perfectly happy in their school and the parents have wanted to try something else and the poor children get moved around like parcels in the post.

I wonder how all these schools are going to be properly monitored, since this is no longer the local authority's job. It has already been seen with academies that there have been quite a few cases of money being misused or even fraudulent acts being carried out.

There have already been several free schools shut down, with words like "chaos" and "dysfunctional" being used to describe some of them - and that's within the space of only three or four years. The Durham school was closed after only 18 months.

On the BBC Q&A site it is stated that free school pupils are given the same per head allowance as other schools. However, as I understand it, it is the government/tax payer that pays for the buildings and the redevelopment - which can sometimes be extensive and costly. One wonders how appropriate and cost-effective it is to site a school in an old library or a listed building. Head teachers report that they have found listed buildings difficult to maintain and heat - so presumably the ongoing costs will be greater.

It also seems ridiculous that councils have no say as to where the new schools are sited.

Correct Jen the aim of the government is to take power and money from LEAs and encouraging free schools and academies does this. The LEAs supported schools in many ways, and especially against the excesses of government interference in education. That is why they had to be broken up and diminished.

Trouble is now there is no one except OFSTED who has any idea what is actually going on in schools any more. And they only inspect every few years. The Trojan Horse debacle would never gave happened in the days when LEAs had an input into the day to day running and funding of schools.

As a retired teacher who worked in the a state school for many years, I have grave misgivings about free schools. Too many to mention here but it worries me that money is being taken out of the state system to fund these expensive experiments and promote the Governments flawed ideology regarding Education.

Free schools are a liability - the only criteria seems to be that there are enough children whose parents wish them to go there to make it viable - the presence of the lunatic fringe amongst the instigators of the project seems to be a secondary consideration.

They are set up for reasons that do not relate to educational need in the area, which is clearly nonsense.

If people want to set up schools to propogate fringe ideas then let them do so at their own expense. And I speak as someone who is very much in favour of diversity of education and against the one-size-fits-all that pervades state education.

There is nothing wrong with a school set up by parents that explores various alternative styles of education, but these schools seem to attract religious fanatics and there seems to be little real control over what they are doing.

I am very much against religion-based schools because they are divisive - I think they should be phased out and we certainly should not be encouraging more of them via the free schools system.

Security is his buzzword for the next election. Security for hardworking families means free schools, obviously.

Cameron on news at the moment about Free schools. He has mentioned the governments long term economic plan 4 times already.