Academies work. A brief analysis of this year’s results indicates that the proportion of pupils gaining five or more A*-C grades in academies has increased by an average of 7% and by 5% when English and mathematics are included. Although the national benchmarks for 2009 will not be available until league tables are published in January 2010 it is unlikely that the rate of increase will be much above the 2.1% figure for last year (0.9% including English and mathematics). Despite these undoubted successes it is still the case that the very notion of ‘independent state schools’ is too much for many Labour party members and supporters (including some MPs).
The real challenge for Labour party members and supporters is how to make education in the inner city both transformational and inspirational. It is just possible that academies may provide a means of local communities meeting these challenges. What many people overlook is that in setting up so many of these new academies in areas of significant social and economic deprivation, the government has rediscovered what many used to call ’compensating measures‘.
The truth is that for communities trapped in a cycle of educational failure and under achievement the academy programme is offering new energy, new purpose and new opportunities for young people who deserve better. It is, however, incumbent on all of us to ensure that such ambitious and expensive programmes benefit the communities that they are intended for and do not become the preserves of the middle classes.
The road to securing better educational opportunities for all is paved with good intentions and many critics of the academy programme remain understandably wary of yet another top down initiative. The reality is that virtually all of the post-war restructuring of the secondary school system in England: grammar schools; city technology colleges; grant maintained schools and even specialist schools – has mainly benefited the middle classes and not the urban poor. The advantaged and educated have always known how to ensure that their children attend the establishments that will help them become advantaged too. Many fear academies will end up doing the same – though there is little evidence that they are and much of this anxiety could be circumvented, if the government were to legislate for a fairer admissions system operated by a local authority or other outside body where no school could set its own admissions criteria.
In areas where generations have been trapped in a cycle of failure academies are now offering new energy, new purpose and new opportunities for young people who deserve better. It is beholden on us all who believe in the comprehensive ideal to ensure that such ambitious and expensive programmes benefit the communities that they are intended for. Academies are providing life-changing opportunities for thousands of some of the most disadvantaged young people. Labour should be proud of the academy programme and the sooner ordinary Labour party members learn to love and champion these schools the better.
Mike, Academies are an expensive flop
This article epitomises the dilemma in todays Labour Party. Individuals like Mike Ion, who lack ideas and like the sound of their own silent opportunistic blog
I will educate you, my friend with an educated analysis not general waffle.
Academies are not democratically accountable like many community schools. You do believe in democracy Mike. The sponsor appoints the majority of Directors not Governors(not elected) You do believe in accountablity Mike. The sponsor controls the school curriculum as well as your child and the parents also. As indepenedent schools they are outside the realms of Education Law, which means there is no rights for parents or children and no empowerment of the citizen. Ownership of the buildings and grounds are transferred to the PRIVATE sponsor or businessman. Individualism takes priority over the collective. Mike you do believe in Collectivism as a Labour supporter/ member. They break up the family of local schools as they do not co-operate with them only compete and give them excluded children they dont want, because the Funding Agreement or ED BALLS allows them to do so. Mike you do believe in another Labour value – Cohesion. What is the priority in an Academy, the Ethos, Business or Education of the child or in some cases Religion. How do Labour Values fit into the scenario Mike. Academies create more selection. They are allowed to set up there own stealth admissions through stealth interviews. If your parents are middle class you are a wiinner. “We will find a way of excluded children whose parents are unemployed and penalise the child because of Labour’s failure to protect the vulnerable. We will exclude them for a short haircut but allow Molly to wear make up because she represents the school at swimming and her father is a Director” Mike you do believe in Equality and Fairness. Academies award their own contracts without local bidding (normally contractors who know the sponsor) Government and Academy claims of improved results but cannot be verified or proven, as the schools are not covered by the Freedom of Information Act 2000. There are also less children on school meals which suggest that childrens parents are not working therefore they do not take into consideration low income families and single parents. Mike you do believe in treating individuals fairly. Free school meals in Academies are falling which suggests that stealth selection is taking place. Academies reinforce competition based on league tables concentrating more on CVA than actual certificated attainment. This divides schools into Winners and Losers and add to the segregation of children on the basis of Race, Religion, Class and Status. There is overwhelming evidence of very high exclusion rates. If the child is excluded they are the loser. The Academy is the Winner as they don’t have to pay costs of the exclusion. Local taxpyers take the hit. Is this Fair Mike? Anti social behaviour and youth crime has increases dramatically in many areas where Academies are operating particularly in Yorkshire. Academies are outside the monitored sector of schools and are not bound by education law. The cost of pupil is £1600 per pupil more than neighbouring comprehensive schools. Dont look at Exclusions of student from Academies look at Admissions from Academies into neighboring comprehensive schools to look at the full picture. There is overwhelming evidence that more parents are taking their children out of school due to Principals pressurising them. The result is they will be excluded anyway. Looks good on targets if the parents take them out. Comprehensive schools cater inclusively for the social and emotional needs of the child. Academies cater for solely disciplining the child as priority in place of managing, nurturing and guiding the child educationally in order for them to realise and fulfil their potential. Academies also set their own pay and conditions outside the normal framework. Teachers and staff have no trade union rights. Many princiipals have no teaching or managing experience only sponsor interest. They ignore problem parents who challenge their structures and processes and are unapproachable due to an overbearing hierarchal structures
The direction of the most suitable and sustainable way forward to improve standards and performance in education provision for children, has in recent times established and created much criticism and debate. Elements of many reviews have focused on discovering if the formation of New Labour’s Education policy was steered as a result of a renewed political ideological approach, that identifies with two broad philosophies in left and right wing debate, the market and the state. Many educational enquiries have been conducted into the Academies programme utilising evidenced based criteria to determine if they are successful for further expansion by establishing and utising historical facts. The evaluation of its progress has been considered by consultants such as Pricewaterhouse Coopers and academic and political opinion is continuing to be divided
The importance placed on any study of the Academy programme creates a foundation for further dialogue not only into the effects quasi markets have in education but also socio-economically within the communities they serve. Is the quest on driving up standards, diversity, choice and competition in children’s schools in disadvantaged areas successful or is it fragmenting and segregating poor families based on ability, wealth and background, thus creating a culture of a few winners alongside many losers, constituting in failure? Many opponents of the Academy programme, like Fiona Millar predominantly focus upon the reviewing the controversial Academy programme on a regular basis from the the early stages of the policy initiative until the present time
Philosophy contained within the New Labour education doctrine with regards to raising excellence in outcome in education, is perceived by academics to be the engine behind striving for such success. This philosophy, a partnership between market and state can be broadly identified as a precursor to the Academy programme. A philosophy born out of a rationale of synergising public and private sectors by re-energising a mixed economy, utilising the dynamism of the markets. (Giddens A) The understanding of service providers or quasi market approach and its relationship to education provision has been described by many researchers in simpler format, contrary to the more academic seeking prose by Giddens. Analysis suggest and offers a ground-breaking explanation that an alternative principle to public or state funded investment into education is prevalent in New Labour ideology. A number of studies and government websites reiterate that Academies were originally formed to drive up and raise standards and point out that Academy policy was introduced to break the cycle of failing inner city schools by introducing business partners to run state funded schools that were independent of local government. Little studies are available to suggest that such a policy or statement is valid or successful.
General political propaganda has been raised frequently particularly by a religious Tony Blair who attempted to challenge traditional thinking, change attitudes and convince parents and observers that such a policy is successful by indicating that a further expansion in Academies and specialist schools was imminent. Source material put forward by the Commons select education committee claimed that Academies were unproven, stating there is little evidence to suggest that the contents of Blair’s speeches back up any statement for an increase in number. A more accurate picture is described by (Gorard, S) who tested the policy of expansion by concentrating on pupils eligible for free schools meals (FSM) in order to draw a comparison between success or failure, on how poor disadvantaged children were benefiting. This particular literature provided clear proven evidence, that Academies were not taking on their fair share of deprived children, wrong schools were being selected, and mature Academies had lower free school meal pupils than adjoining schools. Gorard’s analysis would appear to give the closest indication yet that a change of student intake, was providing the benchmark for failing the pupils and communities, they were set up to serve. It is evident from these clearly defined figures that falling FSM are either as a result of high exclusions or selection by stealth. It is very difficult to locate any good research material that provide enough data to approve of expansion or condemn, due to Academies being still in their early stages of development.
Continued
A small number of reports and reviews TUC Review of the Schools Academies Programme (2007) and Anti Academy Alliance (AAA) Report on the MP’s Committee of enquiry (2007) concluded similar findings that a changing pupil population were linked to higher results at the expense of excluding disadvantaged children with FSM status. TUC Review (2007) and The Guardian Curtis, P (2008) goes further and suggest covert and overt selection helped bring about a small improvement in pupil attainment. Both reports however rely heavily on official’s statistics from Government sources, namely National Audit Office (2007) and consultants Pricewaterhouse Coopers (2006). They provided a more thorough, clear and methodical outline in addressing and assessing the impact of academies on communities and individuals. The literature available through the National Audit Office (2007) The Academies Programme, helps encapsulate a more balanced perspective on progress. The report responds overall by:
Indicating performance has improved compared to previous schools
Identifying that gaps in performance between best and worst pupils has narrowed
Focusing in on some schools that are failing Ofsted inspections.
Confirming there is little collaboration betweens schools and that overruns in finance were placing burden on taxpayers.
Primary publications by Pricewaterhouse Coopers (2007) found improvement in exam results, alongside high exclusion of youngsters from poor families. Positive confirmation that improvements in standards has taken place or proof that political pressure to perform comes with a social dilemma of fragmenting communities. PWC (2006) found that surveys prescribed that Academies were failing to work in partnership with other local schools creating a negative impact on the community. There is a suggestion contained in the TUC review that a failure to involve parents of poor excluded children is in contrast to the initial objectives of working with the community. Periodical publications appear to repeat many of the same findings in other studies. An relevant article by The Guardian Smithers, R (2006) uses league table statistics to analyse Academy performance against a benchmark for all schools to reach a 30% target of 5 A – C GSE pass rates. This article provided substantial evidence that standards were not being raised and indicated 50% such schools were among the bottom 200 worst performing schools nationally. Overall research within the articles covered appears to give alternative views on data on whether Academies are failing or in fact succeeding in addressing its original purpose found in DFES (2004)
Whitty, G (2008) in his journal focuses partly around the modernisation of comprehensive education through a diversity of service provider or sponsors. There is a perception that independent providers businesses, charities and faith organisations are able to provide a more apt provision than the state. This article accompanies earlier articles by Giddens, A (1998), Gorard, S (2003) and the TUC (2007) who all recognise that a multiple market approach ‘promotes greater diversity’ but it is unclear if any party were fully aware of the future consequences of relaxing state control on provisions like education. Whitty (2008) said that the diversity of supply and a choice of provider provides the recipe for New Labours search for excellence. Is it a surprise that the majority of Academy sponsors are faith trusts or religious foundations. Former Prime Minister Tony Blair’s newfound belief in the divine may provide future researchers a choice on whether the New Labour experiment serves the interest of the sponsor’s business, religion or more importantly children’s education. The Anti Academy Alliance prescribe in their report, that raising standards are unproven due to data being kept secret and not published fully alongside other schools. Unsurprisingly, the Freedom of Information Act (2000) does not fully apply to independent or private provisions in releasing information to the public.
In conclusion Mike, there is no clear evidence that provides material to substantiate that Academies are raising standards to the point that compliments a New Labour education success story. Official statistics and reports from NAO, TUC and PWC create a fairly reliable fact -based data resource on which Academic education specialists like Whitty and Gorard can drawn upon, when contributing to Education debate. While it is clear that Academies are in the early stages of evolution, the link between the frequently revisited FSM figures and its importance in tackling the key concept, that such a project will break the cycle of underachievement in areas of social and economic deprivation (DFES 2004), it is paramount that it continues to be studied over a longer period of time. This prolonged study may strongly indicate that a change of student/pupil intake is responsible for raising standards, if FSM figures in Academies continues to fall and not due solely to the diversity of provider. Extensive study on whether Academy investment in comparison with other inner city schools, offers value for money, would be a good area for further research.
With all due respect Mike, let me write the articles on Education and you respond to them
Sorry, no one’s yet explained to me why funding comprehensives properly isn’t as good as fixing the system to prearrange who’ll get the contracts to introduce schools free to exclude the pupils who most need help, banning Trade Union rights for staff, and injecting partial (company or religious) viewpoints into the national curriculum.
Also, here in Lancaster we have 2 grammar schools and a Church of England school that wants to be one. So the proposed academy, to be fair, wouldn’t cream off middle class kids, as we still cream 2 layers of them off anyway!
For the sake of balance Mark needs to look through his political dogma and see real achievements of some, not all, acdemies. (He also needs to use fewer and more descriptive words). He seems to have a personal axe to grind – what’s this about exclusions by the back door and favouritism to certain pupils – what is all that about? Sounds like he’s been watching too much ‘Waterloo Road’. He says Yorkshire Academies need scrutiny to see whether they are a success. Well here is one I found on the web, in Yorkshire, that is in a social priority area , with high FSM, and seems to have outperformed even the ‘leafy suburb schools’ of Doncaster. Surely that is benefitting the very needy students who live in the catchment of Thorne, near Doncaster?
According to this the particular Academy is 12% above where it should be with 54% 5 A*-C with Maths and English – the national average is 48%. Also their Sixth Form is packed – is that not a good thing? So how can he deny these children in a needy area such a chance? Mark look at this :
”The Academy also achieved the highest percentage of A*- A grades in the Local Education Authority.”
According to the BBC there are 17 schools in Doncaster and this one gets the highest %A*-A grades, also its beating most of the other schools , even those with low FSM- why are you criticising this achievement by youngsters in a social priority area?
See below from Thorne Gazette, South Yorkshire.
10 September 2009
By Stephanie Bateman
Remarkable achievements of a Thorne school have been revealed after closer inspection of this summer’s exam results.
The percentage of students from Trinity Academy achieving five GSCEs at A*-C grade with English and mathematics – regarded by many as the key indicator of success – was above the national average (49 per cent in 2008) with 54 per cent for the first time in Thorne and Moorends.
The result is around 14 per cent better than the Doncaster average per school.
Trinity, which is sponsored by Sir Peter Vardy’s Emmanuel Schools Foundation, achieved much higher grades than was expected by the Department for Children, Schools and Families.
The Academy achieved 12 percentage points above what was predicted by the DCSF for the value it adds to children’s education.
Based on this measure, Trinity adds more value to each student compared to every other school in Doncaster.
The Academy also achieved the highest percentage of A*- A grades in the Local Education Authority.
Overall results in the GCSEs saw Trinity celebrating outstanding success with 84 per cent of students achieving five or more passes at grade C or above
Before the Academy opened in 2005 the figure was just 21 per cent.
In this year’s A levels, Trinity saw a record number of students achieving the results they needed to go to university with 73 collecting A level passes, almost double the 44 of last year.
The success has also had an impact lower down the school with numbers in the Academy’s Sixth Form rising to 225.
Ian Brew, Principal of Trinity Academy, said: “Our improvement this year has been dramatic even by our own standards of 2007 when we doubled our pass rate for five A*-C grades at GCSE with English and Mathematics.
“I do not think it is an exaggeration to say that our teachers have done a remarkable job and our students have worked exceptionally hard to achieve such outstanding results.
“This year we have the evidence that Trinity is now performing on a par with the very best state schools in Doncaster after just four years and, as we have seen by the value added estimates, that we are exceeding all expectations placed upon us.
“Of course we are not complacent and recognise that there is still a lot of work to be done. But I believe that parents in Thorne and Moorends can take heart from this and be reassured that we are doing the very best we can for all of their children.”
The full article contains 424 words and appears in Thorne and District Gazette newspaper.
Principles or principals very authoratively asserted. I would like to respond to the above individual who regards himself as William Barrow, an alias I assume to protect identity. Mr Barrow is correct to suggest that facts and statistics are purely open to interpretation. I am taken aback and confused at why Mr Barrow has identified with a particular group of Academies from the North of England, particularly as previous comments were based on proven and perhaps personal experience. I am very pleased you have found my comments informative and helpful and would only hope judging by the in depth statistical response that you have not taken this personal. I am a firm believer that when the personal is contaminated with the political, spritual, economical, sociological, psychological there are always winners and losers in society. Please don’t take comments personal Mr Barrow as doubting questioning and interrogating is an excellent way to debate…and your real name is? You place the emphasia on statistics before doctrines and ethos, that is a good thing.
I have also found information on the web on Academies in Yorkshire. I will endeavour to take a more balanced view on the area you cite rather than any insular and inward looking observation on any specific Academy.
Firstly I believe that by drawing attention to this particular region of Yorkshire it has helped provide some very interesting research. Recently a speech by the Rt Hon Ed Miliband Doncaster North MP and Minister for Climate change , an individual you may or not be aware of, an individual I have begun to respect and trust, is the Parliamentary representative of the community that Trinity Academy resides. I am pleased to say that during his speech he mentioned the following
“For three years I went into a local school and I knew the kids were being failed by the system.Now because of the changes made by Ed Balls, it’s under new management by another school, and it is starting to be transformed by a change in leadership.
And if it happens to that school why not others: so our manifesto will be one which enables the most talented in the public sector to do more, not less” One would automatically assume he was talking about a Thorne school, unfortunately he was relating to Outwood Academy in Adwick which is co-sponsored by the Local Authority. In fact it is twinned with a college in Wakefield, whose ethos is based on the social and emotional aspect of childrens education and learning. There was no mention of Trinity Academy. In fact I am led to believe he has only visited the school you champion on one occasion in four and half years. That speaks for itself.
Secondly, I assume by your interest in the Progress website you are progressive and identify with Labour Values. The Academy programme is the product of Labour values and Labour Policy. You may be alarmed to find out, as well as Progress readers and Labour Party Members. that the Deputy Chairman of Trinity Academy and all Vardy schools in the North of England is none other than TORY PEER Lord Michael Bates (from the North East) the person responsible for the TORY campaign in the North of England, Tth opposition local government representative and climate change advisor, a TORY peer recommened by David Cameron and a former Deputy Chairman of the TORY party.
Thirdly, as a result of the poor popularity with DMBC Councillors, the Government and local people the Vardy Foundation were unsuccessful in attempting to cash in on another Private Finance Initiative in Doncaster
“And here’s the difference with our opponents (TORIES): we want to reform public services because we believe in them and we want maximum quality and value for money”
What do Tories do William?
Finally William, in simple easy words I wish to leave you with two quotes
“Statistics do rise as primary school rolls fall which means selection to make up the numbers”
“You can temporarily take the man away from the fight, you can lose a battle but you can never take the fight out of the man until a war is won or lost”
Manufacturing consent through statistica propaganda
may influence readers of Chomsky but I personally like Skinner.
Sadly I don’t do TORY!!!!
Excuse me I almost forget you mentioned Stephanie Bateman. I wish balance out your argument
Dad claims Trinity Academy ‘cherry picks’ best students
Thorne Gazette and Anti Academy Alliance Website
09 July 2009
By Stephanie Bateman
“A THORNE father has hit out at the way Trinity Academy is run after his son was expelled.
Colin Simpson of Highfield Crescent claims the school “cherry picks” the very best students so the grade achievements are always high, and does not offer the necessary support for those with difficulties.
Mr Simpson told the Gazette that his 12-year-old son Liam was expelled from the Academy for “being naughty, hitting out and not complying with the school rules”.
He was moved to the Gateway School in Barnby Dunn where his father says he is now doing “brilliantly”.
Mr Simpson said: “We had many meetings with Ian Brew (Trinity principal) and Sir Peter Vardy (school founder) but he still got expelled.
“They just couldn’t cope with him.
“Between January to the end of February he only spent seven days in school, and he spent eight hours a week with a special needs coordinator.”
Since leaving Trinity, Liam, who has dyslexia, has also been diagnosed with dyspraxia.
Mr Simpson added: “The school is for the people of Thorne but they cherry pick the kids so their academic grades look better.
“It’s not just about academic achievement though, it’s about helping the youth of today and getting on better.”
Ian Brew, Principal of Trinity Academy, said: “The Academy cannot discuss publicly cases involving individual students.
“Every student is VALUED at Trinity.
“Despite a great deal of effort and dedicated support, sadly some students reach a point where they make decisions that run the risk of harming themselves or others around them.”
VERY LIBERTARIAN!
PERHAPS MR BALLS WILL INVESTIGATE AS HE IS AT PRESENT CHAMPIONING SPECIAL NEEDS AND HELP FOR VULNERABLE CHILDREN?
Lets Balance the argument further with another article from a local paper, which of course I have no axe to grind
RISING COSTS COULD FORCE CLUB TO LEAVE
by Stephanie Bateman
Thorne Gazette Donacaster
2nd October 2009
A successful junior badminton club may be forced to move out of Thorne because of the rising cost of hiring courts.
For the last ten years, Badminton England Coach Brian Keefe has run Thorne Junior Babminton club firstly at the towns Grammar school and then at Trinity Academy. But escalating costs to the club mean the organisers are looking to find cheaper alternatives for training.
Mr Keefe told the Gazette that initially the hire fee at the former grammar school was dropped as most of the players attended the school. But as expected, when the move was made to Trinity the club knew there would have to be a charge for the use of the sports hall.
At the start this was £43 (£21.50 per hour) and students were charged £2.50 for the two hour session, which was seen as a reasonable amount. Mr Keefe explained “In 2008, I received a letter from Mr Brew, The Principal, explaining that due to increasing costs the hire charge would go up to £50 (£25 per hour) We put the student fee up £3. “On August 21 this year I received a letter stating that charges had been increased to £70 (£35 per hour). Inside two years the cost has gone up £50%.”
“In order for this class to function we would have to ask the students to pay £5.”
He asked “Can anyone explain why school sports halls, after school, cannot be used by school children for free? At three thirty do they cease to be school children?
“A a VOLUNTEER outsider I should not be ARGUING about FREE sports halls for the children when every day in the newspapers we are bombarded by government and by educational establishments that the youth of today need to take more exercise and volunteers should get of their backsides and organise sports clubs for children.
“My main concern is about the charges being made on school children and not just at Trinity.”Unfortunately all schools have jumped on this MONEYMAKING bandwagon. I must stress that the facilities at Trinity are second to none, in fact they are some of the best, but it is no good to our badminton club because we can’t afford”
END
Is this another example of an Academy not working in partnership and not being cohesive and understanding with the community in which it serves and placing the market and profit before well being. How does this fit into the Labour Manifesto?
Obviously the sponsors do not have a strategic plan in operation for the school in addressing the low carbon economy by having heating and lighting on in the spring and summer when there is no requirement and charging customers, which leads doubters to question what the money is used for.
Consideration should be given to communities in a poor deprived area where families can’t afford to pay their gas and electric bill never mind putting money into the pockets of businessman/sponsors to pay for their bills that one would assume should be paid for by the taxpayer.
Great promotion for the Olympic games and sport in the community. Very poor statistically.
Every child should go to a good Community school where all children of all talents and abilities are able to acheive their full potential
Can the Labour Government explain to Mr Keefe the answers to his problem?
Don’t forget to turn the lights out?
Robert – I ‘m confused this is also from a Thorne newspaper – it contradicts someone who obviously has an axe to grind.
Academy is a blessing
13 August 2009
I WOULD like to respond to your story of July 9 “Dad claims Trinity Academy cherry-picks Students”.
I am the parent of a 13-year-old child who attends Trinity Academy.
My child has a condition called Aspergers Syndrome which makes the sufferer find mixing with other people very difficult.
They struggle to understand the unwritten social rulesADVERTISEMENTwhich make us speak and act appropriately.
It requires a lot of understanding and routine to keep a sufferer calm and happy.
Since my child was very young I have battled to keep her in mainstream school.
I refused a place at a school predominantly for children with special needs and behavioural disorders as I was concerned about her academic needs.
If Trinity Academy was cherry-picking students, I can assure readers they would not have taken my child and, as I live out of the catchment area, her place was by no means guaranteed.
Her last school found it very difficult to cope with my daughter’s condition and there were various issues during her time there including threats of exclusion.
From her first day at Trinity my child has been very different.
The school has such a fantastic structure in place for all students and the discipline within the school is obvious when you walk around it.
She is now able to interact with other students, take part in activities both in and out of school time and generally enjoys her time at school, the same as every other student.
Ian Brew, the school principal, and his staff have been a revelation to my child and our family.
My daughter’s special needs have made no difference to the way she is treated and nor should they.
I have listened to many parents’ observations regarding the rights and wrongs of Trinity Academy’s rules and regulations and I believe that discipline should begin and end in the home.
If your child breaks rules they should be punished.
I thank God for Trinity Academy and think we are all lucky to have it in Thorne.
Name and address supplied.
In reading the various comments I am struck by one overwhelming thought:-
If the schools in the areas where academies have been and are being placed have been under-performing for decades. If the exisiting schools have been failing the pupils and the local communities and contributing to a culture of low expectations then surely it is morally irresponsible not to try something different. A progressive agenda for education must be about investment and reform – on what we know works and about what is best for the pupils not the teachers.
Dear Mike,
Read these weblinks
Academies are just great
http://www.furnessacademy.com/2009/06/nigel-mcquoid.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1173797/The-135-000-inspirational-superhead-affair-left-marriages-tatters.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2009/nov/08/evangelical-charity-schools
http://www.inminds.co.uk/occ-media1.html
Tony read them – they are all from left wing, gutter press anti academy sites. Read this site as an alternative- how do they do that?
http://www.emmanuelctc.org.uk/thefoundation/news/article.php?id=2631
How do they do that?
The Academy programme, like the Iraq War has been a policy based on utter deceit, deviance and with a little help from the old boys network.
Tony Blair (Tory) is cashing in now from those individuals who he championed to sponsor such provisions as Academies. Where has he got all his money from. How do I know that?
The word FOUNDATION is a clue.
How about overseas business interests
Mark’s earlier contribution provides an excellent simile/insight into Anthony Crosland’s hatred of Grammar Schools/Academies. Perhaps, this answers your question
The all seeing eye.
OK Jon – the question was How does a school with a low ability intake punch above its weight in the results like this? You seem to be answering another question – ie Where does Tony Blair get his present income , and your answer is from the people who sponsor Academies . Next questions ( read them carefully now) so where is the evidence for this? and how does a school with a low ability intake punch above its weight in the results lie this?
A school with low ability can punch above its weight by adequate provision of good teachers and facilities : just like the private schools do, and as the academies are trying to emulate (in theory). It’s a no-brainer for a school micro-manager. But when you’re running a country, and on egalitarian ideals, the RELEVANT question is “what should be the most just and fair NATIONAL policy to improve our educational achievements?” And, of course, if the government can guarantee to give the £20m handout (that it gives to each academy, on average) to EACH AND EVERY school, that’ll be fair enough. But it doesn’t. Instead the most IRRELEVANT notion of private-ownership (by such non-academic academy sponsors as the Tory carpet-selling peer Lord Harris) is peddled in order to promote neo-liberal dogma!
A school with low ability can punch above its weight when there is an unfair allocation of money given to Academies. Andy is correct in his description of inequality of handout to schools. The Prime Ministers (hope you a reading Gordon, you will be impressed with this) and the Blair doctrine of Social injustice has unlevelled the playing field. New Labour have allowed inequality in Academies to thrive only if it serves to the advantage of those in society who are least (dis)advantaged. Academies have abused the acceptance of inequalities and based their own individual target driven agendas on the self interest of the sponsor. The distribution of goods(childrens education) is infiltrated with the sponsors own sanctimonious business and religious interests. Stealth is the key. Doctrine, Ideology and a little help from the divine plays an important. The origin of the Academy provision lays at the bottem of the answer. New Academies have since 2007 have taken a much more acceptable approach to childrens learning where Gordon Brown have used a principle that is fairer and just. A maximalist equality of opportunity that is recurrent, lifelong and comprehensive:political, social and economic opportunities for all, with an abligation by Governemnt to pursue them relentlessly.
Michael Gove has given his firmest of assurances, in the event Tories are elected, schools particularly Academies whose ethos is Creationist will be shut down or taken over. All batches of Acdemies prior to 2007 will become obsolete and outdated. The result will end in closure.
We are living in a logical society not a moral one.
Dave keep your friends close and your enemies closer. Some Governing Bodies are not always what they seem
Thanks Prince and Ray. There is some sense in what you say – a fresh start and new buildings allow change to happen. But I see that some Academies are still in special measure (both pre and post 2007). So clearly it’s not about money – if failing schools were just given the money they would still be failing schools. Schools get adequate provision now and private schools succeed not because of small class sizes but because parents and students value what they get, because they pay for it (not rocket science). Apologies Ray I don’t understand your political jargon, but is it not true that wherever Local Authorities had CTC’s (the model for Academies) the other schools upped their game and overall standards in all schools in those Local Education Authorities improved? Prince what are ‘sanctimonious business and religious interests’. I went to a Catholic school and the religious interests included going to mass and waving a flag when the Pope came to town. So can you SPECIFY what are the ‘sanctimonious business and religious interests’ in these Academies and give me references to the complaints in the press from the parents that this is going on? Or have you been watching too much Waterloo Road? It’s nice to know that Michael Gove will be closing creationist Academies down. Which ones would they be? Again where is the parent/press evidence that they exist? Forgive me Prince (is that Prince Machiavelli?) but you sound like a scary bloke. In fact both of you sound so self assured and right that I hesitate to put these points to you.
Hi Duke, are you suggesting that all schools (and possibly every service, including NHS?) should be fee-paying in order for the parents and the kids (ie the end-users) to value the service and thus, and only thus, to ensure excellence??? By the way, then won’t even the Academy model (along with your other justifications for it) may seem somewhat irrelevant/superfluous? And I’d be much obliged to hear your considered views on the lack of equitable NATIONAL (not local) resource allocation that I alluded to. PS : My first name is Andy 🙂
No Andy I was not suggesting that, but I was answering your point that its small classes and better teaching that get the best for students. Our state schools have small classes for students with special needs already. Don’t let’s get bogged down in political dogma. Its common sense that if a family value education that is passed on to the children ( ie the end user). Broken legs are broken legs in private or NHS hospitals but motivation of children depends primarily on families and state schools can do nothing about that. Re equitable resources yes I agree but don’t those in most need (ie where the motivation at home is lowest) need most support in order reverse the trends and to bridge that gap that the schools selecting by post code enjoy? So is’nt the Academies programme benefitting those most in need? Re National resource allocation you have a point in that some LA’s get more per head than others. That should not be the case, but it has little to do with Academies.
Yes, family values influence school achievements, as do good (mostly well-paid) teachers and facilities (a la the private schools). So, if I (now) understand you correctly, you’re probably implying that in deprived areas, where it’s more often than not that the family-value component seems to be missing, Academies at least provide the other two factors, and as measures of urgent need to the neediest. And hence the justification of the skewed resource allocation of £20m a throw. Then all this should be logically and morally acceptable. But what, still, may not be acceptable is the DOGMATIC CON when we’re told that, for example, a Tory carpet-selling Lord without any strong academic crdentials will bring in special “ethos” to the school (as if as a substitute for family-values and as if what a dedicated and professionally qualified teaching staff group cannot provide!) and this new owner should be given the undemocratic control of the £20m!!! Hope you can see through the numerous inconsistencies within that logic itself and its unfairness. In practical terms too, it’s been flouted by the Academies themselves; and rendered invalid by many state-run schools. I’ve been a governor in two schools and have seen it happening in my borough. Hope this explanation helps.
Duke, You talk of evidence. Is there any evidence that sponsors have used their business interests by providing a carpet at 10% discount to a market which include teachers and staff. How about a free burger meal at Mcdonalds. How about a Christmas shoe box appeal that encourages poor parents of children to donate articles they can’t really afford alongside the sponsors enclosed leaflet propaganda to send to third world countries where overseas business interests can be set up and exploited. How about a 10% discount if you buy a car. If true and it could be proven it would give the Education Secretary of State the evidence to rip up the funding agreements of Academies who are infiltrated with the Tory doctrine where tax payers money has been used for self interest Correct me if I am wrong is this not an abuse of tax payers money. Further criminological and sociological study may produce some remarkable finds. If not already??? What if?? Scary. Sounds you are already brainwashed that Academies are actually working. Andy, How many Tory Lords have influence either as sponsors or Board of Directors in Academies? An excellent product of the Blair doctrine. Duke, seriously please give me hard evidence with an in depth reply that the Academy programme is actually working and what impact they have on local communities. Please look outside the box Academies use a propaganda model in the media to promote the interests of the sponsor (Norm Chomsky)
Andy my sentence was ‘ if a family value education’ which you have transmuted to talking about ‘ family values ‘amongst working class people. Forgive me but you seem to be on an agenda , no matter what any one says. Its hard to discuss when I’m constantly pointing out that you are not even misunderstanding me , but just plain word blind. I see the Tories want to make the leafy sunburb, outstanding schools in to Academies, now that is a scary misuse of resources, what happens to the dowm trodden then?
This policy debate unfortunately seems to be getting personalised and I’d rather refrain from continuing lest I unwittingly fall into that trap! So, without wishing to seek further answers from anyone in particular, I’d simply request all genuine Social Democrats to search their soul and ponder whether they firmly believe that giving away (without any local or democratic control/accountability) £20m of tax-payers’ money to a carpet-selling Tory peer (instead of to a professionally qualified and lifelong dedicated Head Teacher under a local governing body) to run an Academy is either professionally logical or socially fair or not? That’s enough.
It is if it works