Free schools could provide a link between school and family, giving disadvantaged children a greater chance of success
Free schools – which Michael Gove is currently pushing through parliament – are often portrayed by the media as a means by which middle-class parents will improve the lot of their own children. Where this is the case, there is likely to be little academic gain for children from poorer backgrounds, who will be left behind in poorly performing schools.
But what if there were free schools established in deprived areas to help disadvantaged communities? A bit like Labour's academies programme, but this time with more parental involvement. Schools created by parents who represent all sections of the community could bring greater accountability. Being a founding member of a new school is an opportunity to engage with the education system in a new, meaningful, positive and powerful way: a chance for parents to influence its setting up, running and management. This kind of involvement and representation should work in the interests of all children by improving morale, standards and ultimately educational achievement.
National research shows that black children are three times more likely to be excluded from school than white children; black children are often marked down in tests; and, in the main, black children are still underachieving. Labour leadership candidate Diane Abbott has raised these issues and spoken of the difficulties she faced in choosing a school for her son. But parental involvement in the creation of new schools could inspire other parents to get involved in school life and to engage meaningfully with their children's education. Research shows that where this is the case, children achieve more. These types of schools are also more likely to understand and act on the issues that matter to parents.
Where there are knowledge or skills gaps, support could be gained from schemes such as the Future Leaders programme, a charitable trust which has a team of qualified school leaders trained in new school startups. Crucially, parent-created schools will help to break down the barriers between schools and families so that parents don't feel intimidated when they walk into a school, or out of their depth in discussions with staff.
Creating a school will not compensate for inequality in achievement due to poverty: that demands extra resources. But founding members could prioritise this kind of action using the government's promised pupil premium.
Some argue that free schools could lead to elitism as only certain types of families will want their children to attend. But if a free school is deliberately set up in a deprived area to help disadvantaged kids, how can this charge hold?
Others say that these new schools will force state-funded schools to close as they "poach" their children. But surely if parents are dissatisfied with their local school, isn't it a good thing that they have choice and can vote with their feet? Only the poorly performing schools need worry about children being poached. If it's a case of not enough places being available at a local good primary school, then isn't that evidence that the creation of another school is justified?
So what of existing schools free of state control? Some charter schools based in the US are similar to free schools except that they can be run by private sponsors and, if they choose, for profit. Some have seen great gains for children in maths and reading, others have not. But the closest thing we have to this in the UK is the academy school, and results have been largely positive. Swedish free schools have seen marginal improvements in children's progress.
Maybe the concept of free schools created by diverse teams of parents and managed by a "future leader" will provide that vital link between school and family to bring a greater chance of academic success for disadvantaged children. It's only a chance, but surely a chance worth taking.