What are we paying for - education or dogma? parallels between NHS commissioning and free schools policy

Emma Bishton's picture
 192
I work in the NHS, where the principle that healthcare should be commissioned in accordance with local need, in order to make most effective use of scant resources, is well-established. I have been wondering if there are any parallels in the NHS with current free schools policy. The post which follows is the result of my musings:

Imagine a rural area of roughly 600 square miles, where the population of around 270,000 is divided between four market towns and a large number of villages (some of which are fairly large and provide facilities for smaller surrounding villages). This area is currently served by a district general hospital known as St Michael’s, based in the largest of the market towns.

The population is ageing (by 2021 over 65s will account for a quarter of the population), and the numbers of school-aged children are decreasing. It is a fairly affluent area, with house prices above national average, and although unemployment itself is low, the average wage is less than nationally. Larger towns are within 30-45 minutes drive. However, in common with many rural areas, public transport provision within the area and to the surrounding region is poor.

Health and wellbeing are generally good in the area, though as would be expected with an ageing population, there is a relatively high incidence of heart disease and falls (often causing broken hips in the elderly). Public satisfaction with services is generally good, though with concerns about access to services (patient transport in particular), and response times from emergency services. St Michael’s itself is looked on favourably by most people in the area. As part of NHS developments, more outpatient care is now provided in community clinics.

The area is not known for innovation in public services. However in recent years patients in one area (around the village of Abbotsford) have leapt at the opportunity to become more involved in planning healthcare. They recently seized a Department of Health funding opportunity only available for building new hospitals (it could not be used to expand existing facilities), and proposed a new small hospital for Abbotsford. It was to focus principally on delivering elective care in orthopaedics and ophthalmology (hip and cataract operations, for example), as these are areas of high demand by the elderly.

The proposal appeared on first glance to have a number of positives: Patients living nearby Abbotsford would travel shorter distances, local GPs would have closer ties with the new hospital, and staff would be more familiar to local patients. As a new build, it would have excellent though limited facilities and was considered likely to attract staff.

However, on closer inspection there were a number of disadvantages: As a small hospital providing a specific set of services, it could not provide extensive consultant cover or intensive care beds, so would not be able to provide for patients with complex needs such as those with additional heart disease or poorly-managed diabetes. So, many patients who might have wished to use the new hospital would still need to travel to St Michael’s for treatment. At the same time, St Michael’s would not need to provide as many routine procedures as now, so would reduce its capacity in these disciplines. But as there would also be an increase in the proportion of complex patients requiring a longer stay in hospital to recover from operations, overall waiting times for surgery at St Michael’s were considered likely to increase, for factors completely outside St Michael’s control. In addition, there would be risks to patients whose condition deteriorates whilst at Abbotsford, as they would need to be transferred urgently to Intensive care beds in St Michael’s or hospitals elsewhere in the region (providing beds were available). Lastly, core costs at the Abbotsford [new] hospital would be relatively high as the hospital would be a stand-alone provider, with its own board of directors. So overall, costs of providing orthopaedic and opthamology services across this rural area would increase, because two hospitals would need to provide the basic service instead of one, yet standards or patient experience would not necessarily improve, as the new service would only be suitable for some patients.

The proposal enjoyed significant support from Abbotsford patients. However, given the concerns over the impact on St Michael’s, the potential risks to patients, and the expense, the proposal was judged too risky and poor value for money, and the plan was dropped. Yet in education, the opposite happens when Free Schools are proposed in areas like this. Why?
Share on Twitter Share on Facebook

Be notified by email of each new post.





Comments

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 09:19

There's been a vociferous, highly organised and systematic campaign to portray the unions and every associated with them as being deeply ignorant. It's been mortifying to watch. In my experience the people I've worked with from unions have been highly educated, experienced and personally credible.

During the 1980s the law surrounding trade union activity was vastly reformed so it was extremely difficult for unions to have a voice even when politician are being exceptionally ignorant. Here's a nice easy to read text which describes precisely what was done and why it was done. It was translated into many language and guided reforms in union law around the world. I recommend it as basic reading for anybody who is suggesting that unions have too much power:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Taming-Trade-Unions-Governments-Employment/dp/03...

Walking in the Manchester rally outside the Tory Conference I wondered if some of those politicians were confusing the union groups and the SWP groups at they looked at the crowd and not realising that the SWP lot were only at that particular rally. Most rallies were just full of very ordinary people not chanting, just listening to and discussing the issues.

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 12:45

I look in the mirror and I'm me. I can't change that. What I can change is specific aspects of the way I behave. I am aware I am angry with Michael Gove and may have said things which are not up to the standard I set myself because of that. Please point out the specific things I have said so I can apologise. Mainly I'm critical of his policies and they way his shut down consultation regarding educational policy. I'm also critical of his fit for this job which he is doing which is having such an impact on so many people's lives.

But if I have attacked him as a person please point to this.

Andy's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 13:22

I had already pointed out your personalised attack on Mr Gove by copy and pasting your own comments into my thread. For clarity I will repeat the process:

Ricky I think you have no idea quite how horrific it is to suddenly have a ‘crown prince’ in charge of education who doesn’t even seem to have an MBA level qualification in management. Most of his mistakes are so pigging obvious to so many people in society who are educated and experienced to that kind of level and beyond as many of us are and it’s just so blooming unnecessary. I don’t think you have any idea quite how many people’s lives are being made absolute hell by this indulged pet of Cameron.

Your use of "crown prince" and "indulged pet" cannot be construed as comments on Mr Goves stated position on Free Schools. These are personal comments reflecting a perjorative and sarcastic attack on him (and Mr Cameron for that matter).

There is also open criticism of Mr Gove by dint of him not appearing to have a MBA level qualification in Management. When did it become statutory for any MP or Minister to hold any formal qualification to be elected or hold office or be on the front benches?

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 14:14

The usual job of a Minister is to be part of the process by which policy is created, working to keep the systems and processes of the fabric of democracy of this country in order. They have a role as facilitator - they can get people together and make things happen then processes get neglected or stuck.

Michael Gove came in determined to shut down all the consultations processes and personally direct everything himself. It's deeply anti-democratic. It's like we've got a designated crown prince in charge in a dictatorship. But in most dictatorships these days princes are very highly educated and, to the best extent possible, given experience in real life.

Andy's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 14:28

You ask for evidence of your personal attacks on an individual - taking the man not the ball - I do so but you play the innocent. I repeat the evidence and you still try to dodge the issue. Talk about being disingenuous ...

Tell m,e when are planning to stand for election as an MP?

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 14:56

"Tell m,e when are planning to stand for election as an MP?"

I'm not. People keep telling my I should but I don't want to. My husband works away and three of our children are still young so I can only work part time.

Andy's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 15:09

Then do your self a favour and stop conducting your conversations as if you were.

I notice that you still haven't acknowledged your downright hypocrisy for criticising Ricky for something that you do yourself. You offer to apologise if examples can be given. They are provided and you just ignore the matter and carry on regardless.

Your credibility is completely gone - blown away by your own conceitedness

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 15:10

Sorry - what I meant to say was that I was trying to accurately describe a key feature of the way Michael Gove is behaving and to bring attention to how dangerous it is to let somebody lacking an appropriate level education, significant life experience or established personal credibility behave in that way.

I suspect I could have put it better. Perhaps you could say how you would have expressed this point Andy and they I can see the errors of my ways?

Andy's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 15:23

Just practice what you preach and if you can't then don't criticise and patronise others


Rebecca Hanson's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 15:34

Are you saying we should not be allowed to criticise our SoS for education Andy - no matter what he does?

Can patronising be done in the third person?

I don't intend to patronise by the way. I think when you know what you're talking about and somebody who's in a senior position to you doesn't your speaking at all can sound patronising. But that doesn't mean it is.

Andy's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 15:53

By all means criticise the SoS's policies and any comments he may make but, and citing your own words, don't take the man take the ball. That means no personalised sarcastic comments e.g. crown prince, indulged pet or lack of MBA.

The patronising comments I refer to are those you made about Ricky, “I’m just so annoyed because I’ve told him [Ricky] before and he really lets himself down by continuing to do it.”

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 07:12

Heavens alive:

Old Andrew tweeting this morning:
"I find, in education, the same people who advocate groupwork also advocate independent learning without seeing contradiction."

Could have come straight from Burkhard's evidence!!!! I've never heard of anyone else following that kind of logic. It's really odd.

Ricky-Tarr's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 08:06

Emma

There is a strong argument that we have been too risk averse in our public services. If you want innovation and creativity,you have to be prepared for some projects to fail. That means we need to have a different attitude to failure. Instead of looking for people to blame and imposing tight restrictions and supervision to make sure nothing goes wrong again, we need to take a more positive learning approach. In the private sector, this happens all the time. In the end, however, the use of resources nets out as more efficient than in a bureaucratic, centrally planned model. One of the mistakes New Labour made was, having set ambitious targets, then also to seek to prescribe how they were to be met. This nearly always fails. Either you prescribe the objectives, and let people use their energy and imagination to meet them; or you prescribe processes and get whatever outcome arises.

What worries me about Ofsted is that it does try to do both. What if the "ideal Ofsted lesson" turns out to be incompatible with achieving the outcomes insisted upon? Failure is more or less guaranteed.

I can see though that inspectors have to be able to comment on process. But they should take care not to be too prescriptive.

Ricky-Tarr's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 08:19

Rebecca

If you were to look back at the threads I have commented on in the past few weeks, I think you will agree that I have contributed a very great deal of detailed argument on issue, generally backed up with facts and figures. Perhaps not as many as the industrious Janet, but quite a lot nonetheless.

By contrast, you tend only to make assertions, backed up with an excessive amount of personal information. Almost every issue leads to you talking about yourself. For instance, in just the past few days you have told us who your father is, the name of the best man at his wedding, what social class your stepmother comes from, where your ex-husband went to school, where you went to university, and much else besides that is wildly off topic.

I am not trying to 'discredit' Emma (unless you think being a Labour politician is discreditable), merely reminding the forum that she has a dog in this fight...... which she admits and declares.

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 08:44

Ethnographic evidence is absolutely fine Ricky. Not all evidence comes in the form of numbers. It's absolutely justifiable to describe your own personal experience. I've invited you to do that a few times and I'm surprised you never have.

Sometimes I wonder if you were even around in the 80s at all. I know many of this current Tory bunch seem to have grown up abroad and then gone to Oxford. You sound to me a bit like the kind of person who wasn't allowed to watch Grange Hill let alone 'Tucker's Luck'. But do feel free to reply in a way which contradicts this. My aim here is not to dis. you, it's to encourage you to build your own credibility.


Meanwhile, since you're posting on this thread, are you actually intending to engage with the subject matter or are you just going to continue to post your conviction that OldAndrew is a perfectly ordinary recently retired teacher and that anyone who vaguely supports Labour should be ignored on those grounds?

Ricky-Tarr's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 10:17

Okay Rebecca, I admit it all. I grew up abroad and went to Oxford. My parents never allowed me to watch Grange Hill and I've never heard of Tucker's Luck. (There just wasn't time for any of that between directing my playmates in a performance of Lysistrata in the summer house and learning Gray's Elegy by rote.) There's my credibility established (or demolished, as you will) and that's all the 'ethonographic evidence' you're going to get.

As for Andrew Old - Having read much of his blog, I certainly wouldn't describe him as 'a perfectly ordinary retired teacher'. It's clear that he is still teaching, and from what he says about a number of subjects and his past experience, I'd put him in his late 30s or early 40s. How old is Tom Bennett (they seem to have a lot in common)?

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 10:21

"How old is Tom Bennett (they seem to have a lot in common)"
!!!!!!!!!!
Like what? !!!!!

Ricky-Tarr's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 10:55

Like a willingness to admit there is a behaviour problem.

Which of them wrote this?

You want to know what the single biggest problem in schools is these days? The thing that prevents your child from learning the most? Let me tell you: 70% of the teacher’s time is taken with 5% of the kids, because they muck about and cause trouble for everyone. Not content are they with sitting relatively still and getting on with work in a pleasant way. Oh, no, they were born for greater things; like storming out of rooms, ruining lessons, and bullying smaller kids. If someone stole something valuable form me, I’d call them a thief. When a kid does it in a classroom, by depriving others of education, they’re called troubled, or vulnerable.

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 14:53

Ooops - sorry missed that.

Could be either because it's just setting up the context for post. If you tell me what they said next it'd be obvious.

Tim Bidie's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 09:24

Very interesting piece, Emma.

Thank you very much.

Closure of my local cottage hospital was extremely unpopular locally but, no doubt, necessary for sound medical and financial reasons.

The much improved local infrastructure made possible the benefits of centralisation and scale available from the district hospital.

However the ultimate goal, surely, must be to give taxpayers the kind of public service that they want.

Thus, when and if general improvements in health from improved diet and lifestyle take place, it is to be hoped, no doubt vainly, that, with many fewer patients, small local hospitals can, once more, be provided.

So it is with education. The considered view of the coalition government is that free schools are now economically viable. They also appear to be popular with local parents.

The jury is, of course, still out on this matter but three cheers, certainly from me, for a government that dares to innovate against the backdrop of a fair degree of parental disillusionment with the previous educational status quo.

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 09:43

Can you remember a time when there hasn't been a fair degree of parental disillusionment with the educational status quo Tim?

Surely policy needs to be justified through validation and verification rather than just by there being a fair degree of parental disillusionment with the educational status quo?

I mean I'm sure you're not suggesting we should support governmental policy which innovates just for the sake of innovation are you?

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 09:48

Emma - up here in Cockermouth there is a huge amount of support for our innovations in healthcare which include the complete redesign of the cottage hospital into being a primary healthcare facility. It doesn't sound so very different to what you're experiencing but it's been very thoroughly consulted:
http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/1.258456

Tim Bidie's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 09:53

What better form of validation and verification exists than the empirical evidence now being gathered?


Rebecca Hanson's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 10:23

Empirican evidence = validation Tim. What about the verification?


Tim Bidie's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 10:55

'verification [ˌvɛrɪfɪˈkeɪʃən]
n
1. establishment of the correctness of a theory, fact, etc.
2. evidence that provides proof of an assertion, theory, etc.'

Both 1. and 2. will be derived from observance of the educational and financial performance of the new free schools.

Sometimes organisations just have to take a leap of faith in order to avoid 'analysis paralysis'.

If informed judgement considers that something looks and sounds like a good idea, there is at least a fair fair chance that it will be.

Ricky-Tarr's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 10:57

Tim Bidie

Spot on.

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 11:14

Are you trying to argue that verification and validation are the same think Tim?


Tim Bidie's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 11:53

Er....no.

val·i·date (vl-dt)
tr.v. val·i·dat·ed, val·i·dat·ing, val·i·dates
1. To declare or make legally valid.
2. To mark with an indication of official sanction.
3. To establish the soundness of; corroborate

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 12:39

In this context validation is establishing how sound the logic of the policy is. Why do we expect it to work?

Verification checking that what we expect to happen does happen.

So the validation of Gove's policies was done from the 1960s to the 1980s and it was clearly established and agreed that they would not work because local organisation creates a level of economic efficiency in systems of education with a requirement for complete coverage which would cause a substantial change in this direction to collapse and revert.

Obviously it will take a while for the data to verify that this is happening in practice to emerge but it does seem to be emerging now.

Any questions do please ask. I'm happy to go though the details again.

Tim Bidie's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 16:27

For some reason this exchange of views appears to have turned into rather a petty little squabble.

'In this context validation is establishing how sound the logic of the policy is. Why do we expect it to work?'

No.

In this context, validation is:

'To establish the soundness of; corroborate' the policy itself.

There is no better validation/corroboration (to strengthen or support with other evidence; make more certain) of a policy than to put it into practice and get your evidence of its correctness that way.

Expensive if you get it wrong, I agree, but three cheers for a government determined to move on from the previous educational status quo.

It remains to be seen how effective the new free schools are.

Verifying data available at this early stage is unlikely to be particularly helpful in that regard.

Andy's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 20:07

Rebecca: Gove's concept for Free Schools does appear to have any obvious or direct links to the research you cite. Indeed, I would also suggest that the work upon which you rely is 'research' giving rise to an opinion. It is not validation, and more to the point work done in the 60s and 80s with no direct link/correlation to Gove's Free School policy simply cannot be wheeled out a validation that specifically counterpoints the latter.

I strike me, rightly or wrongly, that the research you cite is validation of the continuance of Local Authorities with the provision of education, which is is not predicated on Free Schools. It is however a tangible basis from which to argue that the Conservative Party's goal of dismantling LAs and their direct influence in schools, is flawed if not plain wrong. That said, the counter argument would be that LAs have a part to play in monitoring, evaluating and projecting school places to enable DFE and others to plan for provision but they don't have an automatic role in the nature and type of provision. It is also true that there are other organisational structures that could place a more cohesive and joined up role in the nature and type of provision than LAs. Many of the latter have proven to less than effective. In the same way that excess centralisation (of a politicised nature) has proven counter productive.

So please do not draw on research that is 22-42 years old and not entirely relevant to the prevailing situation.

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 20:48

I was cautious of drawing on the work of E.G. West because it is 10 years since he died. So I spent a year researching to find it there's any reason to believe the conclusions don't still hold.

The world has indeed changed but I've been unable to find any reason to think that Gove's policies are coherent. Nobody has presented a coherent argument or any evidence to suggest they have. All the evidence points to Gove's policies just being a bubble of hubris in which he listened only to the people who he felt told him what he wanted to hear.

andy's picture
Thu, 19/04/2012 - 07:17

Rebecca:

You say that, "the evidence points to Gove’s policies just being a bubble of hubris in which he listened only to the people who he felt told him what he wanted to hear." What evidence? Surely you are resorting to highly personal opinion, which is fine but it is wrong to pass it off as "evidence".

That said, I acknowledge that you accept that research from the 60s and 80s was just that, research. It was not validation of anything at the time and certainly not a validation against Free Schools.

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Thu, 19/04/2012 - 08:02

Andy - I'm listening. Please lay out the logic of how the free schools policy will benefit England's children.


andy's picture
Thu, 19/04/2012 - 08:19

Rebecca:

You revert to asking a question to divert from answering the question put to you. What is the evidence you refer to/rely upon in making your statement, “the evidence points to Gove’s policies just being a bubble of hubris in which he listened only to the people who he felt told him what he wanted to hear.”?

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Thu, 19/04/2012 - 08:31

I think our posts have crossed Andy - see below (and also above in answer to your other question).


andy's picture
Thu, 19/04/2012 - 08:40

Sorry Rebecca but this discussion thread too full to navigate on the basis of above and below. If you could identify using date and time then I would have a much better chance of finding the comments to which you refer. :)


Emma Bishton's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 16:08

Ricky you say
"There is a strong argument that we have been too risk averse in our public services. If you want innovation and creativity,you have to be prepared for some projects to fail."

The problem is that we are talking about people, not 'projects'. Just as individuals and society can't afford poorer outcomes in health or the social care system (this includes, after all, mean people dying earlier than they otherwise might as well as enjoying a substantially lower quality of life than others), we can't afford to factor in failure in education - especially when this is only done to allow the model to succeed. As I'm sure is all too familiar to bloggers on this site, failure in education can determine not only people's future careers but also has a huge impact on their future health and wellbeing. And I for one don't want to live in a society where it is 'ok' for some people not to be given the opportunity to succeed.

Ben Taylor's picture
Thu, 19/04/2012 - 08:50

Why then support the existence of schools which parents and children think are failing and don't want to attend? Failure will nearly always be an event in any system. It's how we respond to the failure that is important. Two available strategies are to: improve failing schools; open alternative new schools. You can only conceive of the first whereas I can conceive of both. Why do the unions think it is alright to factor in failure with unresponsive systems of schooling?

This coalition is undoubtedly failing in some aspects as for all governments. Perhaps we should all work to improve it by joining the Conservatives or Lib Dems. I don't know why you are adpoting this dogmatic, risky and expensive approach of offering an alternative in the Labour party which could cause damage to the coalition.

Ricky-Tarr's picture
Fri, 20/04/2012 - 11:09

Emma

It seems to me that schools like the WLFS will pose far less of a risk to the life-chances of the kids that attend them than most community schools do.

As a parent, I know I would feel guilty for the rest of my life if I sent my ids to our local school. It wouldn't be as bad as child abuse, but it would certainly be a form of neglect. That's why I am so angry that a good free school proposal locally was scuppered by poisonous ideologues. (I will say this for Labour - the local MP did her best to help the free school go ahead).

Ricky-Tarr's picture
Fri, 20/04/2012 - 11:00

Ben

I agree 100%.

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Fri, 20/04/2012 - 16:01

"As a parent, I know I would feel guilty for the rest of my life if I sent my ids to our local school. It wouldn’t be as bad as child abuse, but it would certainly be a form of neglect. That’s why I am so angry that a good free school proposal locally was scuppered by poisonous ideologues. (I will say this for Labour – the local MP did her best to help the free school go ahead)."

So this is just policy for potential Tory voters at the expense of the rest then.

I'm so glad that most people I know want to raise their kids well BUT NOT at the expense of other peoples.

You might feel reassured that I have never blamed my parents for sending me to school in Longbenton. If you've got bright and loving parents everything sorts out in the end. I don't think you're alone in being scared Ricky - many people are scared by the daunting task of parenting but the more you get into it the more you realise you can't keep your kids away from all trouble and one of the most valuable things you can do with them is to help them look straight at life and to learn to cope with it and to find and cherish its unexpected pleasures.

I think it's particular hard for parents who've been to very privileged schools themselves to think of sending their kids to the local comp. Some of my friends have been in this position and have been scared. The main thing is to get on with it day to day and to watch your child and see if they are thriving or not. If not - deal with the issues. If you find you can't deal with the issues look for a different school.

But if you've got plenty of money why not just go private? Of if you've got very bright kids in London and the local schools won't stretch them they could go to selective grammars. Sometimes the right solution is different for each of your children depending on their personality.

andy's picture
Fri, 20/04/2012 - 16:47

Ignoring the clearly emotion overtones of this comment, I would ask you to evidence your bald statement, "So this is just policy for potential Tory voters at the expense of the rest then." When you say, local school are you referring to primary or secondary? I fear to ask but who are the, "poisonous ideologues" you refer to? Are they the local council and local schools with vested interests or parent groups?

Interestingly, in 2009 Ofsted rated the secondary school as good with outstanding feature and the 2011 C&D report was also good. The VA indicates there is ample room for improvement but isn't that the case in the majority of schools (even the ourtstanding ones can enrich and enhance the educational experience and opportunites for their students). Bottom line is that school seems to be going in the right direction and as with most schools well motivated and well supported kids always tend to come up trumps.

Rebecca Hanson's picture
Fri, 20/04/2012 - 19:39

I think this thread has got to complicated now. I was quoting Ricky referring to the poisonous ideologues and parts of my comments were contextual to those of others - they weren't intended to stand along.


Andy's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 16:24

Emma: I'm sure you didn't intend to say "(this includes ... mean people dying earlier ...) but it did make me smile ;D

Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Free School concept there is no significant evidence to indicate that they are failing. Indeed, without at least 3 years of performance evidence (e.g. results) there is no verifiable basis upon which to state that they are or will fail. People may question the validity of the policy/concept but Free Schools have simply not been operating long enough to verify those fears.

To simply cite that the opening of Free Schools takes pupils away from existing schools is insufficient and inadequate. After all a key strut of the concept is that where parents are unhappy with existing provision then they can come together and form a group to apply to open a Free School. Thus for existing schools where the performance is causing discontent/unhappiness they can expect to lose pupils. It is argued that in the face of this challenge existing schools will work harder to improve their performance to counter the competition. This latter comment acutally chimes well with your closing sentence, "And I for one don’t want to live in a society where it is ‘ok’ for some people not to be given the opportunity to succeed."

Janet Downs's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 16:36

The proposed establishment of a free school in Beccles is opposed not just by the head of the existing secondary school but by the Tory MP because there is already a surplus number of places.

It is unclear how schools work "harder" when there is competition. If schools are judged merely on exam results then the easiest way to improve these is to play the system or ensure that your school persuades low attaining or difficult pupils to go elsewhere. And the evidence about whether user choice in education improves outcomes is mixed (see FAQs above).

http://www.localschoolsnetwork.org.uk/2011/11/free-school-causes-problem...

Emma Bishton's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 17:14

indeed I didn't! apologies for the typo


Andy's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 17:03

Janet: My comments were not predicated on the Beccles experience rather they based on the original comments.

My apologies for implying that performance was solely about results. What I meant by results was behaviour, attendance, accessibility to parents etc but, yes, also the ultimate outturns by which school league tables have driven us to judge schools by, their examination results.

The number of school places is amost a red herring. A key strut for Free Schools is where parents are dissatisfied with the performance of existing schools, and thereby surplus places doesn't come in to it. To say that it does, is to effectively condemn pupils to attending under or poorly performing schools simply because they have the capacity. Maintaining the status quo is not a tenable option. However, where the existing schools are performing well and providing a good to high quality education and have the capacity to take all the children requiring places, then, I would agree that a Free School would be counter productive in that context unless there were mitigating circumstances (e.g. a genuine desire from parents to have single sex provision or a faith based provision where is none).

I still do not accept that at this early stage in the Free School provision that it is credible to label them as failing before they have had the opportunity to establish performance. As I said in my comment to Emma, the validity of the concept/policy may be open to question but there is no verfiable basis upon which to say it hasn't/will not produce the outcomes envisioned for it. The jury is then still out.

Emma Bishton's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 17:23

I am not implying anything specifically about failure in free schools - simply that if a new free school takes pupils and consequently funding away from an existing school which is already suffering low morale, is less popular, and/or has poorer results than might be expected, then the chances of that existing school improving in these areas is made even harder. So the establishment of a new free school, in areas where schools are already competing to have a lower surplus than each other, can only, it seems to me, result in some children being given a better chance of educational success at the clear expense of others.


Andy's picture
Wed, 18/04/2012 - 19:08

Emma: My comments were rooted in your earlier statement:

"... we can’t afford to factor in failure in education – especially when this is only done to allow the model to succeed. As I’m sure is all too familiar to bloggers on this site, failure in education can determine not only people’s future careers but also has a huge impact on their future health and wellbeing."

From, which I understood you were explicitly implying that Free Schools were failing/would fail.

There is a very real conundrum at work here in that, where existing school provision is weak/poor and the option of starting Free School is rejected in favour of improving the performance then one is forcing parents/pupils to endure unsatisfactory standards of education in the period it takes to turn the performance around. Whereas the current situation provides an opportunity for dissatisfied parent groups to say, enough is enough we will apply for a Free School and take every step to ensure - as much as anyone can - that the Free School provides a high quality performance and provision. This also takes time. Thus I do not see that the objection on the basis of impact of underperforming schools is a rational reason to sideline Free Schools.

It is also true to say that the threat of losing pupils and income is a great spur to existing schools and LAs to set about changing things. There are times when the status quo is damaging to all involved. Equally, parents are unlikely to move their child for the sake of it, so a school with long established and positive track record should have nothing to fear from a new Free School that opens nearby.

I would also argue that prior to the last general election parents moved houses, cheated on their residential addresses and were prepared to travel on a daily school run to get their child(ren) into the school of their choice/preference. So there has always been a negative impact on numbers and finance for underperforming schools. I suppose the most high profile example of this was Tony and Cherie Blair with the London Oratory School.

Hopefully, between the Free School and any existing schools that step up to the plate and demonstrate improvement no child will be left in a weak/poor school or with no place at all. What it does do is focus the attention of LAs on how they support and improve the quality of the improvision.

Pages

Add new comment

Already a member? Click here to log in before you comment. Or register with us.