Source
jarry1250•

Assuming this means the Free Schools being set up under the coalition government in the UK, "a free school is a school in England funded by taxpayers, which is free to attend, but which is not controlled by a local authority" - local authorities being normally responsible for ensuring that pupils enjoy universal education between the ages 5 and 16. In short they are controversial for two reasons:

  • The first, is that the Department for Education is funding them, and they are often new schools, and this is perceived as detrimental to either all schools generally, or detrimental to turning around failing schools in particular (failing schools are sometimes given more money to invest in better facilities or to encourage better teachers).
  • The second is about control. The government hopes free schools will prosper in their freedom from controls like the national curriculum - to attend to local needs, try new ways of teaching, and so forth. However as part of that there is necessarily a greater potential for abuse or offence - for example, religious control that wouldn't be permitted in other schools.
2
Pinwurm•

Free Schools in the United States are not the same as 'Free School' in our countries.

Free Schools may be publicly or privately funded. They are alternative education programs, they offer a different models of learning than the traditional 'seminar'. Schools are democratically run by the students. Students work with teachers to resolve conflicts, set the curriculum, etc. Students teach themselves and the teachers are there to simply assist the process. There are no 'grades'. There is a lot of evidence to support this is a superior learning model. Free School Students tend to be more independent and self-motivating than students from traditional systems. However, free-school graduates may not do as well in college, especially if they take classes that are homework-heavy or grade-dependent.

1