Talk

Advanced search

To think there seems to be no benifits for a school becoming academy

(21 Posts)
Wineandcheases Fri 18-Mar-16 11:23:16

It seems their are no benifits to the new changes - are there any benifits to children's education ?

SaucyJack Fri 18-Mar-16 11:37:02

My DDs' failing state primary has recently changed to an outstanding academy.

Sounds great on paper, but it's the same government that sets OFSTED criteria that wants to justify selling off all schools, and I don't trust them as far as I can throw them.

It's a nice school tho, but then again we liked it before. None of the teachers (which is what really makes the difference) have changed.

Kpo58 Fri 18-Mar-16 11:45:25

I would like to see what happens when the academies go bankrupt due to mismanagement, with the playing fields sold off (and the money gone missing).

I also wonder how colleges and universities will be able to select students if every academy decides to teach what the like rather than the curriculum.

Also what will happen when the academies refuse to expand or open new branches so that there isn't actually enough spaces for all the children who need spaces.

Obviously this is the worse case scenarios, but it could happen...

AGrandUsername Fri 18-Mar-16 11:46:38

petition.parliament.uk/petitions/124747

you could sign...

Wineandcheases Fri 18-Mar-16 19:05:45

There's a lot of uncertainty

Fedup21 Fri 18-Mar-16 19:09:44

They are a business, sponsored by someone. Who is going to want to take on disruptive children or those with SEN bringing them down in the league tables?!

If there are no LEA schools, where will these children go?

winewolfhowls Fri 18-Mar-16 19:11:11

Please sign the petition.

Zaurak Fri 18-Mar-16 19:20:16

Of course people benefit.
The private concerns who are effectively given the deeds to schools. All those playing fields hanging around doing nothing. Well they can build on them, or sell them.
Religions who can now brainwash with impunity
Private ownership means someone somewhere is benefitting from taxpayers money.

The kids? Oh...well not so much.

It's a method of transferring public resources into private hands and it is absolutely disgraceful

Akire Fri 18-Mar-16 19:24:08

He's doing well. Half doctors and teachers wi move to Scotland Wales or Northern Ireland!

For a Goverment who permently likes meddling in league tables tests and exams it's very suspious to sudden say it's all over to you. Save billions, then in few years when some will no doubt fail a new Goverment w have to pick up the peices.

cingolimama Fri 18-Mar-16 19:30:42

Kpo, independent schools don't bother with the national curriculum either, and hey manage to get into elite universities just fine, in fact, do better than their state counterparts.

BTW, I'm not particularly for academisation at all, in fact I'm a bit suspicious of the move.

TheAlchemist101 Fri 18-Mar-16 19:52:11

They may be able to teach children to spell benefits correctly

airforsharon Fri 18-Mar-16 20:11:27

Being snippy about somebody's spelling make you feel good about yourself TheAlchemist?

starry0ne Fri 18-Mar-16 20:18:03

I am still at a loss as to what academies can do that LA can't...They are chained up in bureaucracy that the government have applied.. Maybe stop changing the NC every couple of years so teachers can perfect applying the latest change..

RomComPhooey Fri 18-Mar-16 20:41:45

That petition was at >66K when I just signed. I don't imagine it will take long to hit the 100K threshold.

CalleighDoodle Fri 18-Mar-16 20:47:02

Ive also wondered about the poorly behaved / underperforming children. Atm it is difficult to permenantly exclude a child. Will it be much easier to exclude once out of LEA control? Will anyone have to provide a place for those children?

Fedup21 Fri 18-Mar-16 21:00:42

Academies seem to exclude 'undesirables' or have an admissions policy that excludes them in a way that LEAs just couldn't.

TheAlchemist101 Fri 18-Mar-16 22:09:27

Sharon If you're going to post your opinion on education ...

WhoDrewOnTheWall Fri 18-Mar-16 22:53:03

Picking on the OP's spelling was a cheap shot and a bit of a dick move . Spelling isn't a measure of intelligence and has no bearing on the question asked.

DS1 has had extra support in school including SALT. The LA provides this via referral. If his school was an academy they'd have to buy this in at which point he becomes an expense and I genuinely worry about how long they will tolerate this expense before he gets written off and left to struggle.

I don't want my children to go to an academy and that choice is being removed.

Piratepete1 Fri 18-Mar-16 23:12:55

My husband is head of a college that has a pupil referral unit as part of it. The pupil referral unit has become an academy and the change has been brilliant according to my husband. Previously, all the money went to the LEA who basically gave the PRU what they thought they should have and took out payments for their services e.g. Training, pay roll etc. The LEA was very inefficient and the PRU ended up with not much money. Since they have controlled their own budget they have been able to get services much cheaper and more money has gone to the pupils. Better teachers have been employed and more classroom assistants employed. They are non profit making and would never/could never refuse to take a pupil.

Obviously this is just one example but I wanted to put forward the flipside.

tiggytape Fri 18-Mar-16 23:26:52

In theory a great big LA providing all the services for local schools should mean great efficiency, economies of scale and lower admin costs but, in reality, as Piratepete says, schools can often do just as good a job or can band together with other schools to buy services and goods at a better price leaving more money for other resources of their choosing. Best for their particular school. The LAs could be quite bloated and not always good value.

As for profits and land grabbing and business inteersts... all academies are charities. If there is land to be owned it normally remains property of the LA but is leased to the academy schools. If land is ever sold, the LA sells it (just as Labour and Conservatives have done for decades - long before academy worries). Playing fields have been sold off in the past but that's not an academy thing.
As charities, academies have no shareholders who take out any money.

Lots of areas now have no non-academy secondary schools - literally not a single LA school left to choose even if a parent really wanted one. And yet all pupils with additional needs in those areas still have places, all the responsibility for those children is the same as ever, all the laws applying to them and to admissions are the same ones as before.

And yes academies have freedom over what to teach but they tend to tweak things to suit their intake. They don't rip out whole areas of the curriculum. They aren't leaving their pupils unfit for university selection. They are still subject to all the same national tests and national exams that LA schools have always been judged on. They can offer more subjects, do more sport etc but they don't tend to do anything radical beyond that as they still have to succeed judged on the same criteria as ever.

BombadierFritz Sat 19-Mar-16 08:42:36

Oh, charities, thats fine then, nothing to see here, nice friendly charities

Charities that pay leaders up to £225000. Nice philanthropic charities

Charities whose leaders set up consultancies then consult themselves to find out what they think they should do (£800000 of advice for one small school)

Hey though, they can sell off one of those fields (yes the one they were given not leased) and reinvest the money in the school. Perhaps buying a whole new computer suite from their partners computer business

Ah, charities

(They get done for fraud too but the rest of it is all a days philanthropy. Nothing to see here. Move along)

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now