Every school to become an academy

[salsa]

Of course I understand that is their position, however, what is the official version we are supposed to believe? Or haven't they even bothered to try and make it look reasonable? How patronising is that?

[Amber]

Of course I understand that is their position, however, what is the official version we are supposed to believe? Or haven't they even bothered to try and make it look reasonable? How patronising is that?

OK they start with crisis rhetoric - failing schools, falling standards etc. People don't on the whole challenge that, which is the underlying assumption and may actually not be 'true'. How do we know standards are falling, as what we measure has not remained constant - the tests are continually being changed? And how does that square with the rhetoric of both parties that standards are rising because of their interventions? What is a 'failing' school? How can we know that a school is 'failing' and what would be an effective strategy to prevent this in future?

Then once the crisis is defined as above, a solution has to be proposed. And it has to be something a politician can do. Not only that, it has to be in accord with that politician/party's broad principles (capitalism in this country, basically, aka neoliberalism). So the 'solution' to the 'crisis' in this case is 'autonomy'. There are many studies which demonstrate that giving autonomy to schools in terms of finance (which is what this is) does not at all lead to any kind of improvement; but politicians will happily stand up and say that 'evidence' demonstrates that this is a great idea. In fact the only place it has really been tried is in some states of America (charter schools) where it was a disaster. But no matter - most people aren't like you, salsa, and don't question it. It is one reason why that interview was so good - the interviewer asked for evidence and of course, there isn't any at all.

The problem is that the only effective interventions take a long time and are based on increasing equity - social justice type things. These don't make sexy headlines and no party is prepared to take a punt and go in it for the long term. So we get left with this kind of short-term nonsense which just damages morale in an already damaged profession, and leads to decreased public confidence in schools.

Yes, it is patronising and it is also downright dishonest. But it is also politics, sadly. And education is the biggest political football there is. Soon it will also be one of the most lucrative too, for those with their snouts in the trough.

[salsa]

Thank you for that detailed explanation, Amber. Truly depressing. It's okay for those who have opted for the private model, but not for the rest of us.
Does anyone know what is the incentive, at present, for a school to help another?
As a parent, the idea I had from the interview was that the better performing schools would be asked or forced to help?
Now, following a business model, I wouldn't go to a successful company and ask them to help another. They would send me packing unless there was some advantages for them.

[Proud_Dad]

To have been honest, Nick Gibb should have stood up and said, 'we are a Government which essentially doesn't believe in anything at all being in state hands, preferring to allow the market to decide which schools/hospitals/transport companies should succeed and which should fail. We will not get involved in actual provision and will let private companies run by shareholders do that; we won't tell anyone how to run their services, for we believe in freedom; but we will regulate with an iron hand, we will 'name and shame' and publish league tables to allow consumers to make a choice between providers.

All this additional choice and freedom for "consumers" all sounds rather wonderful though doesn't it? Seems like it will be a bit like choosing your energy provider or insurance company. Parents will just need to log on to http://www.Comparetheacademy.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; to find the best rated school (sorry, "academy" ) in their area and choose that one. Simples!

There's just one tiny problem I can foresee. What happens when everyone chooses the same academy? Unlike an energy provider, an academy can only provide for a limited number of consumers so how does that fit in with freedom of choice? Perhaps the better academies could introduce some sort of entrance test to ensure that only the more "deserving" children have the "choice" of going there...

[piggys]

Amber - totally with you on everything you say. 'Academisation' really means privatisation; schools becoming all about profit and spreadsheets. I taught p/t in a new academy in London for about 2 years and it was the most depressing experience of my life. I could describe many, many instances of how the school forced 'problem' children out who did not fit their profile - including disabled children - and of staff who were really not competent but cheap to employ. The culture there was dreadful; punitive, fearful and results oriented to the detriment of everything else. The Principal made it clear that union membership would be frowned upon and teachers' contracts were always kept short term so you feared for your job security. Welcome to the world of academies.

[salsa]

Amber - totally with you on everything you say. 'Academisation' really means privatisation; schools becoming all about profit and spreadsheets. I taught p/t in a new academy in London for about 2 years and it was the most depressing experience of my life. I could describe many, many instances of how the school forced 'problem' children out who did not fit their profile - including disabled children - and of staff who were really not competent but cheap to employ. The culture there was dreadful; punitive, fearful and results oriented to the detriment of everything else. The Principal made it clear that union membership would be frowned upon and teachers' contracts were always kept short term so you feared for your job security. Welcome to the world of academies.

Wow, this is an eye opener!
As most grammars are academies, does this mean this sort of behaviour goes on in them as well?

[piggys]

Salsa; I can only speak for the one I taught in, but I imagine it's not an isolated case. Look at the way this government has promoted so called free schools in recent years and look at how many of them have failed. Or the way that some of them have inculcated extreme ideologies , such as the Al-Madinah Academy in Derby. The inexorable rise of academies fills me with horror, tbh.

These schools are free from the fetters of education authority accountability. They can appoint whomever they want to teaching posts, governorship and so on. As the years roll on we will see Headteachers with no teaching experience but a business background instead. It is already happening. Small schools like the little one form entry primary my dd2 attends will vanish because where is the profit? far better to merge schools into larger superschools which are more cost effective . That piece of land that the little school occupied? it'll be sold off by the govt to private investors and will be luxury flats within five years, owned by BTL landlords, many of them overseas. This is already happening in North London where I am based. It will get worse.

[Amber]

As the years roll on we will see Headteachers with no teaching experience but a business background instead. It is already happening..

You are right. This comes from the dreadful new white paper:

Our approach gives the best leaders the opportunity to play a greater role across more schools, and to spread their success for the benefit of more children than ever. The nature of leadership roles is therefore changing, with executive heads, MAT CEOs and system leaders requiring a new and different mix of skills and experience.

You are also right on the idea of small schools going - the emphasis is on these MATs (multi-academy trusts) which schools are pretty much going to be forced to join. It sounds like a vision of H ell:

MAT leaders will often be responsible for many schools, managing larger teams of staff and budgets. Middle leaders will be able to take on more responsibility – a head of subject in a MAT could, for example, lead that subject across 30 schools. And with a view of future staffing requirements across a whole family of schools, MAT CEOs have much greater flexibility to undertake the robust succession planning and talent management which is characteristic of successful institutions, providing their aspiring leaders with the opportunity to gain experience in a variety of schools in the trust.

MAT CEOs? Do we really think there is any place in our education system for someone with the job title 'MAT CEO'?

[piggys]

Indeed Amber; Orwell himself could not have envisioned such horrors.

[wonderwoman]

I taught p/t in a new academy in London for about 2 years and it was the most depressing experience of my life.

My experience too. I'm looking for a new job and cannot wait to leave. Not the students, they are great, but the leadership and culture, so awful that I am one of the longest serving members of staff at 2 years.

It will be the most vulnerable children who will lose out. Makes me beyond furious.
Academies will be able to set their own curriculum to best suit their pupils (sounds great) - think cheap subjects - no music, no technologies etc.
Academies can employ unqualified teachers who are experts (sounds great) - doesn't happen - think young, cheap, unqualified teachers, with no experience teaching across several subjects from the day they walk through the school gates.

The sharp elbowed middle classes can organise and afford transport to their preferred school, they can top up with extra-curricular music/sport lessons, but most cannot.