To ask why so many people are against schools turning into academies?

[rainydaysarebad]

Realised DD is starting school in September and I have NO IDEA about the schooling system or how a school is run.

Why are people against academies? Aren't they like private schools? (Realises this may be a stupid question).

What about grammar schools that have turned into academies? Are they still good schools?

One more question not related to thread title: Can a child from another county apply to a grammar school by sitting their 11 plus exam? Do grammar schools take children from other local counties?

I'm going to bed now, so will read replies in the morning. Don't hold back now..Cheers.

marking my place as am interested in replies

My daughter's outstanding Upper Secondary school turned into an Academy and nothing has changed.I'm sure behind the scenes it has but in terms of the day to day stuff then everything is still as it was before.

It means they can ignore union agreements about staff payscales and pay what they like, which drives down wages and quality. Among other things.

My 9 year old sons school has recently turned academy and a fair few schoolteachers are leaving this year.... Coincidence?????

I have just become governor at my son's middle school, which has just become an academy, at the same time as the other two middle schools in the town. I have got a lot to learn but my understanding so far, is that the school will argue that being released from the control of the local authority and getting their funding directly from the Department of Education gives them much more freedom to run the school in the way that produces best results for the pupils. I think. HTH.

A school local to me, but not the one my children go to, has recently made 4 teaching assistants redundant, yet rumour has it the head teacher bought all teaching staff an iPad each last year! The school became an academy a couple of years ago and as I understand it, the academy status leaves them in control of their own finances? The school my children attend has not, so far, succumbed to the temptation, despite being one of the first schools in the area to be invited to become an academy. I fully support our school's reluctance to jump on the bandwagon - why change something that works just fine?

You have just realised your child starts in September? Isn't it a bit late for that?

Does she have a place?

I see, but why would they decrease pay for teachers? Where does that extra money go? Do class sizes still remain big, and does the catchment area rule still stay in place with academies? Can they deny children places due to academic ability?

Alibaba - haar haar haar, yes she does have a place thanks; it was our first choice

I don't know. Because they don't trust the school to do the right thing and once they are an academy they can't be made to in the same way as other schools as they aren't under la control?

My son's school is an academy. I am perfectly happy with that. It was a great school that put the kids first before it was an academy and it is a great school that puts the kids first now. The only difference, as far as I can see, is that they don't have the la telling them where to put the money.

The head is dedicated, the staff are dedicated. You know, they even run after school stuff for the staff, like yoga. To de-stress them after the day's work.

Academy status is not the problem, it's really not. The attitude of the individual school is the problem. You have a crappy management team and you'll get a crappy school. Great people - great school.

From the understanding I have; academies are in charge of contracts for everything. Getting the best deal/contract becomes very very important. Head teachers and management have to spend more time thinking about things that were dealt with by the LEA. Therefore they have less time to think about children's education etc.

This is very over simplified but I know schools are busy places already without having to find (for example) the best value providers. I also worry what would happen in an emergency eg a fire as it was always the LEA that sorted put temporary buildings/kept the school running.

All of this comes with a disclaimer, I have not had any day to day contact with an academy, the reality could be very different. (these could just be the paranoid ramblings of a sleep deprived mum of a newborn.)

Academies can be good if you have excellent management but if not it leaves the school and the staff very very vulnerable.

It means you have no recourse to higher ups in case of bullying, unreasonable working conditions etc. Its also very unclear who will come in and help if the school starts failing, it used to be the LEA put in special measures but now, who knows?

All this impacts negatively on the children of course. Staff morale is very important for the children's experience of school.

I see, but why would they decrease pay for teachers? Where does that extra money go? Do class sizes still remain big, and does the catchment area rule still stay in place with academies?

The money goes where the head wants it, so an ipad for each teacher is possible. Soma academies have huge classes, think 100 pupils in a room. One teacher gives a lecture type lesson with 2-3 teacher circulating and helping students with difficulties.

acadamies can teach what the want, how they want, with qualified or unqualified teachers, they do not have abide by nutritional values for school dinners.

My main problem is with the influence of sponsors. If an evangelical chritian group sponser a school they can teach genesis and ignore evoloution.

Unforgivable, there have been enough scandals which, if put together in a scare-mongering thread, would lead a reasonable person to conclude that LEAs were totally unfit to run schools and that all Councillors were crooks who broke the rules for personal gain.

The key differences are the freedom to purchase services other than from LEA, and setting own curriculum (something which all schools did pre-Thatcher). This does not mean inherently worse, or inherently better.

" they can teach genesis and ignore evolution"

No they can't. There's been a specific ruling on this. The schools will still be inspected, and children will still be entered in ordinary public exams such as GCSE and Alevel, so there are also general limits on how far you can change the curriculum but still satisfy the syllabus.

Then that's a huge problem with the mentality of the school, leonie. My children both have autism and my eldest is at the academy and my youngest goes there in september. The school is so committed to them. There's never been any question of not wanting them.

If a school becomes an academy and uses that to refuse entry to children with sn, then that clearly says that before they were an academy, they had our children there on sufferance, and didn't want them. And if they didn't want them , I question how good they were for them and how much they actually helped them.

My children have been at schools where you can clearly see they weren't wanted. It's vile.

The I pad thing is a bit of a red herring. Compared to staffing costs it would be a small overall cost to give one to each teacher and iPads are very useful tools in the classroom and for sharing data in meetings. Most teachers have had laptops for ages.

My child goes to an academy. She went there before it was. Its a great school and Tbh little has changed.
I like that they can make their own decisions. I prefer this. I trust them with dds education. No one has left, no I pads etc.

Because I think is generally suggests a measure of desparation for a crap failing school?

At the moment they get extra funding. When the funding formula changes - April next year, I think - this will vanish. And some of the extras they have allocated money to will become unsustainable.

I am biased as the academies near me are run by absolute bastards. And academy chains have been proved to do sweet bugger all about underachievement in the long run, but they seem to be Gove's vision of the future.

I am also biased about Gove, the odious little tosspot.

Acadamies herald the break up of our state school system. Academies do get the 'freedom' to spend money as they wish - however this is leading to many vital LA services being cut eg, SEN support, EAL support etc

Also, who is running these academies? There have been quite a few stories in the media about financial shenanigans regarding academy schools - the best one (IMHO) was the academy that bought a posh place in france...and charged the kids from the school for trips there.

And then you have people with spurious motives (eg the Vardy group and their emmanuel schools) setting up academy schools.

Not all academies have sponsors though - 'outstanding' schools are allowed to 'convert' without one. My local grammar schools are a case in point.

And yes, you can apply to grammar schools if you are out of county.

Interesting, so if they choose not to teach the national curriculum then that's a bit dangerous if it's being run by idiots. In theory it sounds grand.

Hecate - does your school still teach nc? And are class sizes the same as before or bigger?

Can you find out who sponsors an academy on the school website? I'm thinking non sponsored academies that were outstanding schools would be a better option?

because head teachers aren't accountants - schools don;t seem to realised they have to pay for EVERYTHING the LEA provided such as SEN support, EWO support - they are all mainly in debt and laying off support staff left right and centre here and relying more and more on 'cover supervisors' (non qualified staff) to 'teach' to save funds

They can ignore pay scales and unions - they can treat staff badly - from what I have seen where I work they don't really have a big clue what they are doing

They are not 'free' either - they have simply handed the reins directly to central government - which I think is stupid