7 Creation of free schools
Free
schools and need
175. Rob Higham of the Institute for Education told
us that:
the agenda [for free schools] has shifted and
it is quite a complicated, multiple policy agenda. Originally
we were told there would be hundreds of thousands of new schools
in order to create competition … Now it seems the discourse
is much more about need.[286]
176. The Secretary of State suggested that free schools
were unique because they provided an "opportunity to respond
to demand, whether for more places or for a different or better
kind of education than is on offer".[287]
Her comments illustrate the number of different ways in which
words like 'demand' or 'need' have come to be categorised dependent
upon the argument that the Government is trying to make when discussing
free school policy. The DfE told the PAC that:
it had looked at the need for extra places, but
that this was not the only aspect of need that it had considered.
It justified opening free schools on the basis of a wider definition
of need which included, for instance, the need for new quality
places in areas where education standards had historically been
low, the need to introduce new providers, and the need in areas
of deprivation.[288]
177. Natalie Evans of the New Schools Network added
a further element of parental need, telling us that "Any
free school that wants to set up has to have significant demand
from local parents".[289]
This in itself is a distinct change in policy from the original
vision of free school enterprises directly created and led by
parents to a model of "partnership with parents", where
most proposals come from professional groups.[290]
178. Rob Higham analysed data on free schools and
found that 35% of the first four waves of free schools were in
districts with no forecast need and 52% were in districts with
either no forecast need or only moderate need.[291]
In December 2013 the National Audit Office found that most primary
schools had opened in areas where there was a need for extra school
places, but this was not the case for secondary school and the
picture was mixed for areas of high or severe need:
Around 70 per cent of estimated primary and secondary
places from open or approved Free Schools are in districts forecasting
some need for places. Free Schools already open are expected to
provide an estimated 27,000 primary places in districts forecasting
high or severe need (87 per cent of all primary places in Free
Schools) but only 19 per cent of secondary places in Free Schools
are in such areas. […] The Department has received no applications
to open primary Free Schools in half of all districts with high
or severe forecast need.[292]
179. Natalie Evans explained that this picture had
changed more recently:
This September [2014 … ] 90% of free schools
are in areas where there is a need for primary places, so there
are primary schools setting up. In areas like London, where the
issues are really problematic, 100% of the primary schools are
in areas of need. We are also seeing free schools in areas where
there are low standards—75% of secondary schools are in
the two-thirds lowest performing areas of the country for GCSEs,
and 89% of primary schools are in areas with the two-thirds lowest
key stage 2.[293]
180. The relationship between free schools and local
authorities has been problematic in some cases, with difficulties
over sites and co-operation. London Councils told us:
Within boroughs and across London, like all regions,
engagement with academies to expand and liaison with Free School
applicants before they submit a bid to government vary significantly.
There is no systematic approach in place and many local authorities
only find out about plans to expand or create new Free Schools
once they have been approved by Government. This makes it difficult
for local authorities to be able to include these new places in
medium to long term place planning.[294]
181. Research by the Institute of Education in 2014
showed that while free schools are opening in areas of high deprivation,
as measured by the numbers of pupils eligible for free school
meals, the schools themselves did not reflect this in their intakes,
having a lower proportion of free school meals (FSM) pupils than
the area average:
the government's anticipation that free schools
would emerge in disadvantaged neighbourhoods is, on average, vindicated:
looking at the neighbourhoods of free schools, one can see that
there is a slightly higher proportion of children entitled to
FSM when compared to the rest of England: 22% compared with 17%
at secondary level, and 18% compared with 16% at primary level.
However, critics' concerns that the schools might
become socially selective are also supported. Within the neighbourhood,
fewer pupils actually attending the free schools were eligible
for FSM-only 17.5% for secondary schools and 13.5% in primary
schools.[295]
182. There was also a difference, at primary level,
in prior achievement of pupils:
In terms of prior achievement, there is a marked
difference at primary level: the free schools children have a
distinctly higher mean score (0.33) than elsewhere in the neighbourhood
and the rest of England where it is close to zero.[296]
183. The Secretary of State considered that free
schools were "part of the answer" in addressing the
shortage of school places.[297]
After our evidence session, she clarified that recent changes
had been made in the way the DfE considers need for free schools.
These are: first, to strengthen the criteria to assess whether
there is a need for a new school, drawing on "information
on school capacity […], intelligence from local authorities
about emerging need in their areas and an assessment of the standards
in other local schools"; and secondly, to change the way
basic need is assessed and to assess it on much smaller areas,
publishing a report setting out how newly approved free schools
meet basic need.[298]
Information published by the DfE now includes an impact assessment
of how new free schools will affect other schools in the area.[299]
Quality of free schools
184. By 31 March 2014, Ofsted had conducted 43 inspections
of free schools. Seven were judged outstanding, 23 good, nine
as 'requires improvement' and four were found to require special
measures. Ofsted felt that "[t]his is still a small number
of inspections, so it is too early to draw firm conclusions about
the effectiveness of these types of schools."[300]
This message was re-enforced by Mike Cladingbowl, then Director
of Schools at Ofsted, who told us that "we would not want
to use our evidence to support a view, one way or the other, that
free schools were doing a great job or not overall, as a system
change".[301]
By the time of the Annual Report on Schools 2013/14, published
in December 2014, Ofsted was still of the view that "It is
too early to judge the overall performance of free schools",
although "those inspected to date have a similar profile
of inspection judgements to other schools and our inspections
indicate that free schools succeed or fail for broadly the same
reasons as all other types of school".[302]
185. In contrast to this cautious approach, in July
2014 DfE Ministers cited Ofsted inspection figures to support
the view that free schools were more likely to be rated outstanding
than other state-funded schools.. Nick Gibb MP, the minister for
school reform, told the House of Commons:
There are currently 174 free schools up and running,
of which 40% have already had a section 5 Ofsted inspection, in
addition to their pre-opening inspection. Of those, 24% are graded
outstanding, which is a staggering achievement for a school that
has been open for just four or five terms. This represents a higher
proportion than other schools. Some 71% of free schools are graded
good or outstanding.[303]
186. The figures cited show that the number of free
schools inspected had increased to approximately 70 schools, of
which 17 schools had been graded outstanding. The following week
Lord Nash told the House of Lords that the "overwhelming
success" of the programme was "unarguable".[304]
187. Witnesses suggested that the DfE needed to be
more open about the fact that free schools were experimental and
so by their very nature risked failure. Anastasia de Waal argued
that "There is a sense that a lot is being done behind the
scenes to protect any indication of there being failure-a mistake,
to my mind, because if the idea is a project of innovation and
trying new things in the education system, then clearly it is
preferable to be very transparent about that and honest about
teething issues".[305]
Nick Weller, Executive Principal of Dixons Academies which also
runs free schools, agreed that that "the Government should
have been more up front about it being experimental".[306]
He suggested that the DfE should prepare for problems with new
free schools by granting them interim funding agreements at the
first stage, with final agreements signed off after a successful
Ofsted inspection in the first year or two of operation.[307]
Conclusions and recommendations
on free schools
188. Free schools are a flagship policy of the
Government, designed to allow experimentation, but it appears
that the policy has been altered so that these schools are also
intended to meet basic need for places. The DfE needs to be clear
and transparent about how the competition for free school funding
is decided and the relative weight it gives to each of innovation,
basic need, deprivation and parental demand, and to publish the
number and type of applications it receives, from whom and the
criteria it uses to make decisions on applications. We also recommend
that the Government examine carefully any applications for free
schools in areas where there are surplus places and a large proportion
of existing schools which are good or outstanding.
189. Free schools are unlikely to be more than
a small part of the strategic plan to create more school places
where they are most needed. This does not remove the imperative
to ensure that the body with overall responsibility for place
planning in an area is aware of plans to establish new schools
which will affect their calculations. We recommend that the DfE
ensure that local authorities are informed of any proposal to
open a free school in their area.
190. The DfE publishes impact assessments on how
it is predicted that free schools will affect schools in their
area but similar information is not published to assess what has
happened after the school has been established. We recommend that
the DfE collect and publish statistical information on the intake
of free schools, and monitor the effect of newly created schools
on the intake and attainment of neighbouring schools.
191. We agree
with Ofsted that it is too early to draw conclusions on the quality
of education provided by free schools or their broader system
impact.
286 Q641 Back
287
Q1347 Back
288
Committee of Public Accounts, Fifty-sixth Report of Session 2013-14,
Establishing free schools, HC941 Back
289
Q625 Back
290
Q84 Back
291
Q641 Back
292
NAO, Establishing free schools, HC881, Session 2013-14 Back
293
Q627 Back
294
London Councils (AFS0036) para 3.6 Back
295
Research Briefing Summary: The Social Composition of Free Schools
after Three Years, Francis Green, Rebecca Allen and Andrew Jenkins Back
296
Ibid Back
297
Q1348 Back
298
Department for Education (AFS0137) p4 Back
299
Available on gov.uk website Back
300
19 June 2014 http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/latest-official-statistics-maintained-schools-and-academies-inspections-and-outcomes Back
301
Q361 Back
302
Ofsted Annual Report on Schools 2013/14, p.6 Back
303
HC Deb, 21 July 2014, c1136 Back
304
HL Deb, 28 July 2014, c1417 Back
305
Q464 Back
306
Q465 [Nick Weller] Back
307
Q465 [Nick Weller] Back
|
