Free Schools - What scares the teaching profession so much?

[Countdown]

turbobloke said:

That's odd as I answered that earlier!

Capital costs are reduced since the starting point for Free School discussions is BB98 or BB99 less five percent. Labour largesse Academies produced some iconic buildings that may have taken 'only' the full BB recommendations but then interpreted the design criteria extravagantly in many cases. One significantly exceeded £50m in the end iirc taking all costs into account.

In simple terms

Capital costs are different from revenue costs. They do not farm part of the revenue running costs. In any case a 5% saving over the lifetime of the school will be relaively small.
The rationale that Free Schools will be cheaper because of some apparent "Labour largesse" is flawed. The vast majority of Academies have been built within budget. In both cases (within budget and oversepnt) the fault or success was NOT down to one party.

turbobloke said:

Revenue funding is based on the average for the LA in which the Free School is situated via what the DfE calls a 'simple and transparent' formula, if I remembered their wording correctly. It may well be that particular Labour-established Academies in any Free School's LA exceed this average, your claim is that they are more costly than LA schools so this conclusion must surely fit with your findings and related remarks.

Add these two together - and if the second point isn't conceded due to devilish detail, then the first point will do.

Academies are more expensive because of start up funding and because of diseconomies of scale. Assuming the DfE continue to use the replication method for calculating funding both these will apply to Free Schools so how will they be cheaper ???

Revenue spend on schools is massively more than capital spend so suggesting that they'll be cheaper because of hypothetical savings of construction is, I think, wrong.

We're going round in circles with this one so i think we're just going to have to agree to disagree.

[Countdown]

turbobloke said:

Didn't a recent interview with Gove put the average capital cost of a Free School, as per the first 28, at about £6m? Compare that with the first 27 Labour largesse Academy capital costs which averaged nearly £26m in today's money.

Also from the project management side, Free Schools are significantly less expensive. The project management cost of any of the first tranche of Academies wasn't far short of £1m while Free Schools that get put out to tender typically involve about £25k these days. Isn't that about the same as the sums available for similar costs to a secondary school converting to Academy status (under the DfE not DCSF)?

£6m for a full size new build secondary school? If you've got any links I'll start to eat my hat

The last Academy I worked with the project management fee was £500k, a massive waste of money if you ask me. What some Academies started doing was getting rid of PMs and keeping the money themselves which IMO was far better value for money.

[turbobloke]

Countdown said:

turbobloke said:

Didn't a recent interview with Gove put the average capital cost of a Free School, as per the first 28, at about £6m? Compare that with the first 27 Labour largesse Academy capital costs which averaged nearly £26m in today's money.

Also from the project management side, Free Schools are significantly less expensive. The project management cost of any of the first tranche of Academies wasn't far short of £1m while Free Schools that get put out to tender typically involve about £25k these days. Isn't that about the same as the sums available for similar costs to a secondary school converting to Academy status (under the DfE not DCSF)?

£6m for a full size new build secondary school? If you've got any links I'll start to eat my hat

That's the whole point, isn't it?

No more iconic new builds costing £50m when a mix of conversions, updates and less expensive new builds will do the job at an average of £6m which I seem to recall a kindly PHer posted earlier in this thread from a Gove interview.

[Countdown]

But that's not comparing like-for-like is it? Conversions and updates won't include the original cost of the land & buildings so calling that a capital cost is flat wrong. Its a bit like painting a house for £500 and suggesting the average cost of houses in that area should be £500.

I agree with the poster about education in craniums but it disregards a fundamental fact. A lot of failing schools were

(a) In a very poor condition
(b) Required substantial "conversions & updates" to reflect modern teaching practices(as seems to be happening to Free schools)
(c) Were in the wrong place
(d) Had very bad reputations and needed rebranding

This was why so many were built. Why tinker with conversions/updates when that would not resolve the other issues?

If you weren't a st-poor failing school you would not be able to convert. This has now changed. You do not have to be a failing school with falling numbers to be able to convert. So chances are you won't need as much capital investment (Previously capital funding has been on a NOR basis, the more students you have, the more funding you get).

Looks like my hat is safe for a while anyway

[Ten Ninety]

The desire of a parent to shield their offspring from the vicissitudes of sharing a classroom with the great unwashed is, perhaps, understandable. Historically, entry into educational enclaves free from class-contamination has remained the preserve of those who can afford to privately educate their children. The real question about Free Schools is whether the taxpayer should now be asked to sponsor such segregation for a small number of (theoretically) less well-off parents.

The answer to that question is likely to depend entirely on an individual's political persuasion. We know that the teaching 'profession' in general tends to lean to the left, so it's hardly surprising that most of them are going to be highly suspicious of Free Schools. We also know that contributors to this forum collectively tend to favour more right-wing philosophies so it's equally unsurprising to see considerable support for Free Schools here.

I'm not sure that the arguments about costs and efficiency are the ones which really determine support one way or the other.

[turbobloke]

Countdown said:

But that's not comparing like-for-like is it?

No, thank goodness

Policy has changed.

[turbobloke]

Ten Ninety said:

The desire of a parent to shield their offspring from the vicissitudes of sharing a classroom with the great unwashed is, perhaps, understandable. Historically, entry into educational enclaves free from class-contamination has remained the preserve of those who can afford to privately educate their children. The real question about Free Schools is whether the taxpayer should now be asked to sponsor such segregation for a small number of (theoretically) less well-off parents.

That's myth not reality, not the unwashed bit but the notion that Free Schools are selecting pupils socially. The National Admissions Code must be complied with and as Free Schools are generally looking at smaller class sizes, the Pupil Premium is very much on their minds. Marketing is focusing on deprived areas.

Ten Ninety said:

The answer to that question is likely to depend entirely on an individual's political persuasion. We know that the teaching 'profession' in general tends to lean to the left, so it's hardly surprising that most of them are going to be highly suspicious of Free Schools. We also know that contributors to this forum collectively tend to favour more right-wing philosophies so it's equally unsurprising to see considerable support for Free Schools here.

Unfortunately the generally appalling track record of state education over the last 20 years at least, must be taken into account. This country's independent schools are the best in the world, our state schools have been plummeting fast. Particularly over the last 12 or so. Grades have hit the ceiling, yet the reality is so different. Sure there are high performers, but there's too much boggo comp mediocrity around.

Ten Ninety said:

I'm not sure that the arguments about costs and efficiency are the ones which really determine support one way or the other.

You've been reading my posts

[Welshbeef]

Puggit said:

So free schools will have a higher ratio of A*s to As? I don't get how results can be any higher?

Standards, yes - results, no...

It is because the view is these schools will be pretty middle class with a good selection of kids ie very very few rebels and no hooded as such of course the average grade the school gets will be higher than an average state school.

The hardest thing is to go into a dire performing school in a deprived area with low expectations for the kids and then turn it around. That's impressive. While getting good results from good smart kids is notably easier.

I'd say the fear is generally Joe bloggs will not understand the above reason ad then think hey my school is crap when in fact it may be superb given the situation they are in.


Also will it be a STD course??? Will it teach creationslism? Will it teach christianity and a mix of religions or purely focus on extreme religions?
Science how on earth can you teach that in any sensible way itmf the school is a creationilst school??


Another thing the schools will be small and generally middle class people/kids so why is that not so good?? The kids are not exposed to all types and lose out on a firm grounding in life due to mixing with all sorts.

[turbobloke]

Welshbeef said:

It is because the view is these schools will be pretty middle class with a good selection of kids...

While getting good results from good smart kids is notably easier...

I'd say the fear is generally Joe bloggs will not understand the above reason ad then think hey my school is crap when in fact it may be superb given the situation they are in.

Will it teach creationslism? ...extreme religions?

Science how on earth can you teach that in any sensible way itmf the school is a creationilst school??

Focusing on the points, not being personal, these aspects have already been convered in the thread.

Free Schools cannot select pupils socially or by ability. Many do want smaller class sizes and not least for that reason but also because of an inclusive approach, they're actively looking at deprived areas and the Pupil Premium.

The rules of the game for proposers means that there cannot be a creationist Free School or one focusing on extremism. DfE has gone so far as to instigate a Due Diligence Unit apparently staffed by former MI5 types to look into the details of proposers beyond what they say in response to the application rubric, which specifically indicates that creationism and extreme religious groups will be refused.

Not sure what else can be done, or said. I don't have a brief for the DfE or any Free School, the information is there to see on DfE web pages and other sources for anybody interested.

If people read the social selection or ability selection myths often enough from anti-reform propaganda, or manage not to look into what type of Free School can be proposed and set up and equally what cannot, then sure the above myths may be, or indeed are, believed.

[turbobloke]

PM to give what is being termed an education elitism speech when opening one of the first Free Schools today

[Deva Link]

turbobloke said:

Free Schools cannot select pupils socially or by ability. Many do want smaller class sizes and not least for that reason but also because of an inclusive approach, they're actively looking at deprived areas and the Pupil Premium.

The first 24 that are opening now are all said to be in middle-class areas. Any school in those areas would do well with an open admission policy, but there are ways around that if necessary.

Let's face it, parents in poor areas aren't going to bothered with opening their own school.

[Countdown]

just a quick comment .

What (tf) is wrong with educational "elitism"? When did elitism become a dirty word???

And bring back Grammar Schools

[turbobloke]

Countdown said:

just a quick comment.

What (tf) is wrong with educational "elitism"? When did elitism become a dirty word?

Nothing wrong with elitism, highly aspirational schools with attributes of excellence are just what the country needs.

Countdown said:

And bring back Grammar Schools

Not likely with CMD worrying about Guardian headlines.

Deva Link said:

Let's face it, parents in poor areas aren't going to bothered with opening their own school.

No, but groups that do want to set up new Free Schools know that courting disadvantaged pupils via their parents gets them brownie points with the DfE and the Pupil Premium on top.

Parents who do set up a new Free School have to apply for a place for their kids like everyone else.

[Countdown]

Deva Link said:

turbobloke said:

Free Schools cannot select pupils socially or by ability. Many do want smaller class sizes and not least for that reason but also because of an inclusive approach, they're actively looking at deprived areas and the Pupil Premium.

The first 24 that are opening now are all said to be in middle-class areas. Any school in those areas would do well with an open admission policy, but there are ways around that if necessary.

Let's face it, parents in poor areas aren't going to bothered with opening their own school.

Therein lies the crux of the issue. Failing parents (and especially absentee parents) are one of the key reasons for failing children. Free Schools provide an escape route for middle class parents whose children are effectively held back by children who are underperforming.

[turbobloke]

Deva Link said:

turbobloke said:

Free Schools cannot select pupils socially or by ability. Many do want smaller class sizes and not least for that reason but also because of an inclusive approach, they're actively looking at deprived areas and the Pupil Premium.

The first 24 that are opening now are all said to be in middle-class areas.

Sainte Mere Eglise, a farming town not known for its massed ranks of rioting underclass, was the first town liberated by allied forces on D-Day but eventually it went further than that.

Countdown said:

Therein lies the crux of the issue. Failing parents (and especially absentee parents) are one of the key reasons for failing children. Free Schools provide an escape route for middle class parents whose children are effectively held back by children who are underperforming.

Given that Free Schools have been required to demonstrate what steps they are taking to reach parents in deprived areas near the proposed site, but more out of interest than policy - what schools does anybody see as an escape route for children of failing parents?

[0a]

I just listened to an ex teacher on radio 4 stating that these schools "leach" money from the other state schools, and mean they can't afford to pay her more expensive (due to experience) salaries, they end up hiring graduates or "GOD FORBID" members of the armed forces.

What a stuck up cow!