Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.
Don't forget to look at the how to guide.
Discussion in 'Personal' started by Aquamarina1234, Oct 18, 2018.
... except those run by Labour-leaning trusts e.g. Co-op. How's that going to work then?
Far as I can see it isn't going to work.
So just scrap the whole silly system and return it all to LA control... and then make the LAs actually effective and accountable... maybe even have the head education officer a directly elected post so they have to deliver.
What do you mean by "Labour will end academies"? All that the Labour Conference resolved was to not create any more of these things that they invented in the first place. They are not proposing to return those already in existence to LA control.
This is how it's done in Korea, works quite well.
It's a daft idea anyway! 66% of high schools are already academies, with another 1000 in the pipeline. How many would actually be left to be never taken over by a MAT?
Many academies are good/outstanding usually those not part of certain MATS.
But are they good/outstanding because they are Academies or because they are well run?
Despite all the moans and groans we hear from teachers one has to assume most schools are working well.The whole system is not rotton,just odd schols and in particualr some heads and SMT's.
I tend to take Florrans view and see the headline as incorrect.
Many LA schools are good / outstanding.
Because most schools are good / outstanding.
Academies per se have not led to an improvement in standards, which was the reason for expamding them as the Tories have done.
However, the financial shenanigans of a number of MATs, and the obscene salaries paid to too many tiers of management, along with various other dubious practices upon which these fora have commented at length means that I support Labour's initial proposal to prevent any more academies / free schools being set up - as a first step.
@lanokia I'd say because they are well run at least the ones local to me are. Most became academies because they could, they were outstanding, and many before they had no choice and I don't mean because they were failing. I have also noticed in my LA many schools are failing ofsted, more failing than before and being forced into becoming an academy.
More edubabble..................all stuff and nonsense.
There is no statistically significant difference in outcomes between the two types of school
All that money to set them up was a waste.
All the money siphoned off to salaries and related party transactions has been wasted.
The effect on recruitment and retention as been utterly disastrous beyond anything anyone could have dreamed
The effect on pay and conditions has been utterly disastrous.
Off-rolling has shot up
Everyone knows it has been a disaster of epic proportions.
Still, it's not all bad:
a few people have become rich,
a few clowns have been allowed onto MAT boards to have a go at running schools,
some inexperience teachers ave been allowed to have a go at managing large numbers of people, and some have even been allowed to call themselves CEOs
And free schools have been even worse.
One approach could be to reverse what happens now. Instead of a school being forcibly academized by its results, or an academy chain being handed to another academy chain when it fails or the financial shenanigans are found out, they could be de-academized as the experiment clearly didn't work.
Though "experiment" is euphemistic in this context as any excuse has been used to make the ideologically driven changes.
Can they be de-academized? Legally speaking I mean...
After all haven't these properties become private entities with legal protections since leaving LA control? I seem to recall that part of the cost of Academies was the lawyer fees for the transition... so will it cost even more to effectively ''renationalise'' them? Not arguing for keeping them, just wondering if this is being thought through sufficiently.
Railways, docks, steel, coal, health......
They were all once in private ownership but the best government this country ever had changed that.
Yes. Not a problem.
Yes, funny that., Been happening for years. A good way to increase the number of academies.
Not without a change in the law. Gove's academies legislation made conversion from LA school to academy a one way street. There is no legal procedure to revert to LA school once you have become an academy.
Who owns the school buildings and land differs widely but in all cases the academy trust cannot close a school and sell the land or buildings without the approval of the DfE, who can require it to revert to the government.
Which is what governments do.
Which shouldn't be a problem, especially when there is such a pressing case to do so.