Middle class meddling for seeking comprehensive schooling? Guilty as charged

Pleased as I was to see my article in the Guardian on the experience of proposing a new free school, I was slightly taken aback by the ferocity of some of the negative comments it received on their website. My personal favourite has to be ‘you are dangerous….dont you have a job to do?’ I had anticipated that there would be some criticism from those who are philosophically opposed to free schools, but I had (perhaps naively) assumed that people would read my piece before passing judgement.

Nonetheless, there were some points raised that I feel are worth addressing. it also make me realise how important the local context is.

A number of people asked, quite fairly, why we had decided to try and set up a new school rather than focussing our energy on making the current provision better. Perhaps I ought to have been clearer in explaining that our group had started out with precisely this aim. We had no ambition to open a new school, we simply wanted the sort of schools that most people across the country would take for granted – mixed sex, non-denominational, non-selective education. A ‘bog standard comp’, to borrow a phrase. We do have a couple of very good schools that offer this type of education, but they are hugely oversubscribed and their catchment areas are shrinking rapidly. Those who can afford to move house to be close to the school.

The alternatives include selective schools, single sex schools and faith schools. We would (still) love any of these existing schools to change, but despite our efforts to encourage them to do so, there is no prospect of that happening. So we felt there was little choice…..send our kids to schools we did not want or open one that did. We found overwhelming support for this type of comprehensive schooling, from parents, local primary schools, the local authority and local community groups and businesses. Over 1200 parents supported our proposal, with over 90% of them coming from within 1.5 miles of the area. At present children leaving year 6 of our local primary schools are routinely scattered to all parts, traveling long distances to attend over 30 different secondary schools.

East Finchley is something of a black hole when it comes to secondary schools, which has been acknowledged by the local authority, who established a scrutiny panel to investigate the problem in response to our campaigning. With the population increasing over the coming years, this problem is expected to get even worse. The forecasts predict that Barent will need to find an additional 90 year 7 places in 2013 and a whopping 780 places in 2018. There is such a huge need for new secondary places that new provision is essential….but it also ought to be the type of schooling that parents say they want.

Some free schools have, as I understand it, opened in very different circumstances, without the support of local schools and politicians and have had a negative impact on other local schools. I do not believe that is likely in our area. Demand is just too great.

One further point that some commenters made was that it was bonkers for a group with little experience of running schools should be allowed to set one up. In response I would make two points:
Firstly, we are setting up the school, not running it. Much as parents who sit on the board of Governors in schools across the country, we will not be involved in the operations of the school on a day to say basis. Secondly, whatever people may think, I believe that parents have a good idea what’s right for their children. And we, as a group of parents, believe that comprehensive schooling is best. That hardly strikes me as being a particularly radical idea.

Perhaps we will not succeed with our aims. I am sure we will make mistakes along the way. But if wanting an old fashioned comprehensive education for my children makes me a ‘middle class meddler’ then so be it.


4 thoughts on “Middle class meddling for seeking comprehensive schooling? Guilty as charged

  1. Great piece Toby. My concerns about free schools have always been that they are a way of using middle class parents’ social capital to improve their childrens’ education with little thought for how other children or parents might benefit.Yours is a counter example where parents are doing something to benefit all kids in the area.I hope you can run the school in a way that also benefits the social capital of parents too (although I know that is a challenge).

  2. But Toby while I agree that much of the negativity was rabid and misdirected, it doesnt change the fact that by establishing a Free school you are supporting a policy that is aimed at undermining the comprehensive system as a whole. Read Michael Rosen’s posts below your piece and tell me why he’s wrong.I really wish you and your Archer group colleagues had put your considerable energies into challenging your borough’s educational provision, and by doing so challenge the Free school fiasco as a whole, through the courts. It strikes me that unequal provision on gender grounds alone might have made for a case. LEAs need permission to build new comprehensives, and a court case to challenge Gove’s madness might have done the trick. The other thing that troubles me is how you will select your pupils if your proposed new school is oversubscribed. How would you feel if your child missed out in a lottery? If it is not a lottery, who chooses?

  3. From the Application Policy :Founders’ childrenThe founders of the Archer Academy are those individuals who have played a major role in establishing the school, undertaking activities during the application and pre-opening stages, and will continue to play a significant role in the running of the school after opening. Approval is being sought from the Secretary of State for Education for this provision. A list of relevant founders is available on request.If this is not nepotism then what is????

  4. @Iain & @Thomas – apologies i didnt know you’d posted these comments until now…or i would’ve responded sooner.@Thomas – thanks. i hope so too. we don’t underestimate the challenge but we’re going into it with our eyes open.@Iain – our school started as a local campaign. we did try and lobby the council and the other local schools to meet our needs, but realised the only way we’d get what we wanted was by setting up a school of our own. The Council’s position was that with the Academies Act they were obliged to offer any available land or buildings that became available to free school groups before they could consider using it for a maintained school. Since we knew there were free school groups with an interest in the area, we didn’t feel we had a choice. maybe we should have pursued a legal challenge, but to be honest i don’t think we had the energy (or money or expertise) to do that. it could take years and we’re just trying to make the best of what we’ve got for and in our community.@John Malkovitch – you may see our request to secure places for our children as nepotism. that is, of course, entirely your prerogative. But from our point of view, we are dedicating a huge amount of time and energy on a voluntary basis into make the school a reality. We want to do what’s right for our community, but it would be disingenuous to say that we were not also interested in our own children’s futures.What we are asking the secretary of state for us that our children are given places at the school. I should point out that there aren’t hundreds of them – we’ve got 1-2 kids a year from our group in a school that will take 150 children each year.is that wrong? i’m prepared to say i think it’s reasonable to be honest. But maybe we just have different opinions on this, thanks for your comments

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s