Skip to main content

Academies

Apparently, 45% of England's secondary schools are now academies, with the DES's financial sweeteners and propaganda campaign through social media continuing to exhort schools to detach themselves from local authorities. What we are witnessing is a gradual privatisation of the education system. It is currently illegal for schools to be run on a for-profit basis, but it won't be long before sponsored chains of schools cream off public funds for the benefit of their investors. Meanwhile schools are directly accountable to central government through Ofsted. I am struck by how all this is happening with remarkably little fuss beyond the columns if The Guardian. The Labour party, still in thrall to the Blairite competition ethic, looks like a rabbit stuck in the headlights.

Is there a case for academies? Although very recent research suggests early adopting academies in poorer areas have done a little better than equivalent community schools, it may be too soon to judge whether results will fall or rise, since so many schools have only recently converted and it will take a few years for any change in practice to make its mark. Evidence from Sweden and the USA is not promising, however.

Chains of academies do allow for the sharing of best practice, but why has it been necessary to take local authorities out of the equation to bring about cooperation? Local education authorities have encouraged a good deal of cooperation through subject leader meetings, heads' meetings, inspector advisors, online sharing of resources, school improvement partnerships and the like. Academies are experimenting with new ideas such as longer days, but there is nothing to stop community schools going beyond fossilised practices. Leadership is key and academies have no monopoly on good leadership.

The current reforms look suspiciously driven by dogma and a desire to reduce public spending in the long term. Remember: Conservatives have wanted to take power away from LEAs for years. If you want an analogy, just think of the NHS reforms. Academies have little to do with localism or freeing up teachers and leaders to be inventive. It is easy to foresee a time when the bulk of schools are run by private companies financed by shareholders. Local accountability will no longer exist, working conditions for teachers will deteriorate, salaries could be squeezed with no national bargaining, whilst executive heads earn inflated salaries.

In the meantime there is no evidence standards will rise as professional development budgets are squeezed. As formative assessment guru Dylan Wiliam argues, standards will only rise with better teachers, not new structures and systems. Michael Gove is taking a huge risk with this rapid reform. One consolation is that teachers will continue to do their jobs, whatever the school structure they work in. Achievement will probably hold its own, whilst teachers see their working conditions eroded. The privatisation of England's school system is a sign of the times. The post-war social consensus is long over.

Comments

  1. Excellent post Steve. As you say, why isn't more being made of this in the media?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Independent schools perform better than state sector counterparts, ergo all state sector schools should become independent. So does the thinking go. Only problem is it was never that simple. Gove must be either a visionary or naïve. Which do you think?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Some independents do better than state schools, but far from all. Dylan Wiliam argues that on average teachers in independent schools do worse than state school teachers, once you factor in social advantage. They give lower VA.

    Gove as visionary or naive? Neither. He is pursuing a policy Conservative governments have pursued for years. There were once direct grant schools, later foundation schools, now they are called academies. They now do it with relatively little opposition because Labour began the new policy in deprived areas with so-called failing schools. It is a way of removing power from local government which it sees as stifling and inefficient.

    My question would be: why do you need a change of status and funding mechanism to be creative and better? There are other ways of doing that without destroying local accountability.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What is the natural order hypothesis?

The natural order hypothesis states that all learners acquire the grammatical structures of a language in roughly the same order. This applies to both first and second language acquisition. This order is not dependent on the ease with which a particular language feature can be taught; in English, some features, such as third-person "-s" ("he runs") are easy to teach in a classroom setting, but are not typically fully acquired until the later stages of language acquisition. The hypothesis was based on morpheme studies by Heidi Dulay and Marina Burt, which found that certain morphemes were predictably learned before others during the course of second language acquisition. The hypothesis was picked up by Stephen Krashen who incorporated it in his very well known input model of second language learning. Furthermore, according to the natural order hypothesis, the order of acquisition remains the same regardless of the teacher's explicit instruction; in other words,

What is skill acquisition theory?

For this post, I am drawing on a section from the excellent book by Rod Ellis and Natsuko Shintani called Exploring Language Pedagogy through Second Language Acquisition Research (Routledge, 2014). Skill acquisition is one of several competing theories of how we learn new languages. It’s a theory based on the idea that skilled behaviour in any area can become routinised and even automatic under certain conditions through repeated pairing of stimuli and responses. When put like that, it looks a bit like the behaviourist view of stimulus-response learning which went out of fashion from the late 1950s. Skill acquisition draws on John Anderson’s ACT theory, which he called a cognitivist stimulus-response theory. ACT stands for Adaptive Control of Thought.  ACT theory distinguishes declarative knowledge (knowledge of facts and concepts, such as the fact that adjectives agree) from procedural knowledge (knowing how to do things in certain situations, such as understand and speak a language).

La retraite à 60 ans

Suite à mon post récent sur les acquis sociaux..... L'âge légal de la retraite est une chose. Je voudrais bien savoir à quel âge les gens prennent leur retraite en pratique - l'âge réel de la retraite, si vous voulez. J'ai entendu prétendre qu'il y a peu de différence à cet égard entre la France et le Royaume-Uni. Manifestation à Marseille en 2008 pour le maintien de la retraite à 60 ans © AFP/Michel Gangne Six Français sur dix sont d’accord avec le PS qui défend la retraite à 60 ans (BVA) Cécile Quéguiner Plus de la moitié des Français jugent que le gouvernement a " tort de vouloir aller vite dans la réforme " et estiment que le PS a " raison de défendre l’âge légal de départ en retraite à 60 ans ". Résultat d’un sondage BVA/Absoluce pour Les Échos et France Info , paru ce matin. Une majorité de Français (58%) estiment que la position du Parti socialiste , qui défend le maintien de l’âge légal de départ à la retraite à 60 ans,