Academy trusts 'no better than councils'

[sparkeh]

Following on from @Andrew_C post here: http://www.edugeek.net/forums/behind-red-door/171646-official-edugeek-eu-referendum-thread-117.html#post1479166

 

from Academy trusts 'no better than councils' - BBC News

Academy trusts are no better than local authorities at raising school standards, researchers have found.The Education Policy Institute think tank has produced a league table of academy trusts and councils in England.

David Laws, former schools minister and the institute's chairman, said successive governments had been "in denial" about failing academies.

The Local Government Association said it showed academies were no "magic bullet" for improving schools.

[Lonix]

Speaking of Govt. lies; I've just received this, on the day that an independent body found that there is NO improvement over all by Academies.

BBC report on report

But this is probably for another thread.

I saw that as well, strange thing is - im not surprised at all. Although the Gov said it was all about "raising standards" we all know that term constantly used by them for every change to education. It was never about raising standards. We've all said it.. it was about duck shoving responsibility....

This song always reminds me of the Politicians. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CtVteemLin4

Edit-

 

Thinking about it what has actually changed in Schools since going to academy status? What's changed for the kids?

They still do the same hours, same curriculum (although the Gov changes that every 2-3 years anyway).

Are the Schools better funded (even though Schools are getting cuts), is the quality of Teaching and learning better?

 

In fact what I see the only major change is, kids are expected to do more homework, revise more, more pressure to succeed and more tests. Which thinking about it has nothing to do with Secondary > Academy status.

 

Unless it's just me.

Edited July 7, 2016 by Lonix

[sparkeh]

Funnily enough I received this reply from the Government regarding the petition to stop all schools being forced to become an academy.

We have listened to feedback, and revised our plans; we will not be introducing blanket legislation but will continue to reaffirm our determination to see all schools become academies.

 

Since the launch of this petition, the Government has listened to feedback from teachers, school leaders and parents, as well as MPs. It is clear from those conversations that the impact academies have in transforming young people’s life chances is widely accepted and that more and more schools are keen to embrace academy status. As a result of these conversations the Government has decided, while reaffirming our continued determination to see all schools to become academies in the next six years, that it is not necessary to bring legislation to bring about blanket conversion of all schools to achieve this goal.

 

 

The Government will continue to require underperforming schools to convert to academy status, and to support good schools to convert and take the lead in supporting other schools as part of multi-academy trusts. In addition, the Government will bring forward legislation to convert schools in the worst performing local authority areas, and where local authorities do not have the capacity to continue maintaining their schools

 

 

As part of the Government’s commitment to deliver real social justice, our reforms have already made a remarkable difference to education in this country, with over 1.4 million more young people in good or outstanding schools than in 2010. However, there is still more to do.

 

 

In academies, the best school leaders are free to innovate and run their schools how they choose. Schools don’t have to follow a single ‘right’ way of doing things determined elsewhere; each can develop different approaches that improve outcomes for their children and scale what works. Strong schools and leaders are able to spread their influence, and those which are struggling get the help they need. For example, sponsored academies have turned around some of the most challenging schools in some of the most deprived areas of the country to improve outcomes for disadvantaged pupils.

 

 

We expect the majority of schools to join trusts or small local clusters, pupils. Multi-Academy Trusts (MATs) are a stronger form of school body than those available to maintained schools, with a single point of accountability. There are many benefits for schools in joining a MAT, including that they can spend less on administration and so invest more in teachers; there are better options for staff development, recruitment and retention; and they can be more responsive to the individual needs of pupils.

 

 

All schools becoming academies presents a fundamental shift of power from local and central government, giving responsibility to our best school leaders. It assumes they know better than government what works for their own pupils. The most successful local heads running the oversubscribed schools to which every parent wants to send their child will be able to lead the education of more children. We want to build on this success so that every school can benefit from the autonomy and strong accountability of academy status.

 

 

Like all schools, academy performance is completely transparent on Ofsted’s website and DfE’s performance tables – which have been re-designed to be easier to navigate and compare performance. We will go further and publish data on how well MATs are performing to show the value added by a MAT. Schools should be primarily accountable to parents and governing boards; to make the accountability system more useful for parents and boards, as well as teachers and leaders, we will improve how we collect and disseminate data. Furthermore, all parents need a voice, and this Government is actually increasing academies’ engagement with parents - we will require every academy to put in place arrangements for meaningful engagement with all parents, and to listen to their views and feedback.

Indeed, as Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector (HMCI) set out in the latest Ofsted annual report, academisation can lead to rapid improvements. In his letter of 10th March to the Secretary of State about inspections of academies in MATs, HMCI confirmed his belief that it is right to give more autonomy to the front line and that there are some excellent MATs that have made remarkable progress in some of the toughest areas of the country.

 

 

The vast majority of schools which have become academies are now thriving. In the minority of academies that underperform, swift action has been taken– in total, we have issued 159 formal notices to underperforming academies and free schools and have moved to change the sponsor in 144 cases of particular concern (as at 4 July).

 

 

The Education and Adoption Act ensures we have powers to hold all academies to account where they do not meet the high standards we expect and create a more consistent framework for tackling underperformance.

 

 

We will ensure the continued growth of the academy programme, empowering frontline heads and school leads and transforming even more children’s education.

[sted]

I saw that as well, strange thing is - im not surprised at all. Although the Gov said it was all about "raising standards" we all know that term constantly used by them for every change to education. It was never about raising standards. We've all said it.. it was about duck shoving responsibility....

This song always reminds me of the Politicians.

Unless it's just me.

 

id also argue its about trickle up economics so people who can afford to create these trusts can now make money on something that they couldnt before and i suspect a large percentage of these people are party donors

[2ilent8cho]

I'm much happier working under an Academy. Our LEA was incompetent , slow and just frustrating to deal with.

[speckytecky]

Sad isn't it. Common sense tells most of us that this would be the case.

 

I wonder how much money actually gets wasted with this ever constant reinventing of the Educational wheel?

 

Ministers on fact finding missions in other countries - the Scandinavian countries for example where their system seems to be the best in the world and never subject to the constant interference that th UK system is subject to. Now if they cherry picked the best ideas from those countries and produced a solid model to base the UK on that would be fair enough - but they don't do they.

 

Things seem to have become far, far worse of recent years with changes even implemented to ongoing exam syllabuses. When my youngest was in her AS year she did a heap of English Lit work that was moderated then after the moderation the powers that be decided that part of the exam was to be replaced. Infuriating.

[FN-GM]

I'm much happier working under an Academy. Our LEA was incompetent , slow and just frustrating to deal with.

 

I am as well!

 

 

To be honest it all depends on what Academy Trust and what LA. Some work better than others. An example of a primary school in our trust. 18 Months ago it was in special measures and on the brink of closure. Yesterday the SATS results where 91%. That's 38% above the national average. A well managed trust can be better than an LA. However a well managed LA can be better than a trust. For me I think trusts are better, on the whole they tend to have a smaller number of schools so can concentrate on the member schools better. LA's can have hundreds of schools to look after.

[Andrew_C]

The report does say the very best Academies are better; and the very worst, worse than LEAs.

 

18 Months ago it was in special measures and on the brink of closure.

But is that anything to do with being an Academy? Any school failing OFSTED gets a) a kicking, and b) cash to sort itself out. And often c) a new head. Edited July 7, 2016 by Andrew_C

[FN-GM]

The report does say the very best Academies are better; and the very worst, worse than LEAs.

 

But is that anything to do with being an Academy? Any school failing OFSTED gets a) a kicking, and b) cash to sort itself out. And often c) a new head.

 

It got all that before it was an Academy. Things still went down hill. The lack of support from the LA was a big issue along with all the red tape.

Edited July 7, 2016 by FN-GM

[Lonix]

I'm much happier working under an Academy. Our LEA was incompetent , slow and just frustrating to deal with.

 

The question though has been - what benefit is it to the kids/education across the nation.

 

What benefit has it done in regards to the Students Teaching and Learning. So far it seems not much. Successful trusts have done what the LEA should have done and sorted out failing Schools. Which seems to be a hot topic anyway, where Ofsted forces Schools to get their act together. In fact only major difference now compared to 10 Years ago is - you are no longer allowed to be a "coasting" School. Was that the result of Academy status or the Gov > Ofsted doing what it should have been.

 

After all the article is talking about the big picture, how many Schools have improved compared to before. Some Schools were always going to improve when taken under new leadership and changing everything, just as much as some Schools would fail with or without the changes.

 

Don't get me wrong, I agree that Schools should have more control. Let's face it though, it was never going to be that "magic wand" that drastically improved the state of our Educational system.

 

Then of course the mention of "high" earner execs sitting at the top..... and considering the Schools still have their own leadership too..

 

Plus... although I know some people who are better off as a result of trusts.. I wonder how many say that without the..... salary increase.

Edited July 7, 2016 by Lonix