To not really understand academies and what effects tomorrow's budget will have?

[BoinkBoink]

It is suspected that the budget will announce all schools are to become academies..

Can someone explain in very basic terms

1. What is an academy?
2. What are the pros/cons?
3. What is stealth privatisation?
4. Do they really use 'teachers' with no qualifications?
5. What will this mean to parents and children?

Thanks

lurked101, you are not wrong there and I think there is a distinct lack of transparency about academy finances in a lot of cases. Some are very whiffy indeed.

Lucky, I think schools vary a lot anyway and changing the designation on a piece of paper doesn't magically make the teaching and learning better.

"The reservations about handing over land and property to academy chains and even the schools themselves is to some extent justified"

Except of course that this doesn't happen.

If LA owned land, then it's granted to them on a lease (normally 125 years). No part can be sold off, and any part that is surplus (or the who,e if the school is to close) must be returned to the LA.

If owned by a religious body, then will give the academy whatever licence to occupy is specified in church property regulations.

Only if it is a trust school would ownership change to the academy. But the public don't own trust schools in the first place, so it is exchanging one private owner for another.

My son's primary is an academy and I also work in a a secondary academy. I think a lot of what has been written here is uninformed scare mongering.

Schools will still have to publish their results, which for GCSEs now means a points score from each child's best 8 subjects, so they won't just offer English, maths and 1 science.

Academies are audited every year and all financial records published so they can't just spend money on whatever they like.

Academies still have governors, even though some now call them directors or boards.

Taxes will still go to pay for education because academies still receive per pupil funding from the LEA.

Boffin, your post was excellent.

Academy playing fields can be sold off

"The Government will have to revise the admissions code so that adverse selection (cherry picking) of pupils does not become rife, as it did in the early days of academies. At the moment, again, there is some scope for abuse, so there will have to be stringent checks."

You don't need to revise it. But you do need to make sure that it is properly enforced. Cherry picking is a breach if the code (which has the force of law) I think there will always be some schools who try it on. Personally, I think new free schools tend to get it wrong the most (possibly down to inexperience), but parents are ever more clued up on what is and isn't permissible in admissions and it would be difficult for abuses to become rife.

Froome, they have to publish at the moment, but it still doesn't stop the contracting out to comapnies owned by the sponsors, big consultancy fees and huge CEO salaries. Just there is noting we can democractically do about it. They can take it and we can do what?

There is some scaremongering here but there is a lot to be afraid of.

Yes, parts of academies such as playing fields can be sold off. But only if the academy is the leaseholder will it profit from the sale.

LAs also sell off playing fields.

From www.gov.uk/guidance/school-land-and-property-protection-transfer-and-disposal

Disposal of non-playing field land
The governing body, foundation body or trustees of a foundation, trust or voluntary school are also able to dispose of land and buildings they hold on trust for use by their school.

However, certain procedures need to be followed if the property was provided, acquired or enhanced at public expense.

The relevant legislation is Schedule 22 to the School Standards and Framework Act 1998 (SSFA) (as amended by both Schedule 4 to the Education and Inspections Act 2006, and Schedule 1 to the Academies Act 2010 as amended by Schedule 14 to the Education Act 2011).

The governing body, foundation body or trustees are required by Schedule 22 SSFA to give notice to the Secretary of State of their intention to dispose of their freehold interest in educational land. The Secretary of State may then decide to exercise powers under Schedule 1 to the Academies Act 2010 to direct the transfer of any part of the land to an academy or free school. Schedule 1 allows the Secretary of State to consider whether land can be used for a free school or an academy.

Trusts etc may even be entitled to compensation for land if the school; itself closes down. From the same web page:

---

Closure or discontinuance of a foundation, trust or voluntary school
When a foundation, trust or voluntary school is closed and being discontinued, those persons holding land for the purposes of the school need to apply to the Secretary of State to decide what should happen to any land used by the school that has been provided, acquired or enhanced at public expense.

This legislative requirement is contained in Part II of Schedule 22 to the School Standards and Framework Act 1998 (as amended by Schedule 4 of the Education Act 2006).

The Secretary of State’s powers enables her to:

require the land to be transferred to the school’s maintaining local authority
allow the governing body, foundation body or trustees to retain the land
or

require the land to be transferred to another maintained school
The Secretary of State also has the power to require the payment of compensation wherever this is considered appropriate. (My emphasis).

Let's try that again without the brain-in-neutral moment:

"Yes, parts of academies such as playing fields can be sold off. But only if the academy is the freeholder will it profit from the sale. Academies, unless taking on a converting trust school, are not going to be freeholders.

LAs also sell off playing fields.

Lurked we can be governors/directors and encourage all our friends to be governors/directors and only vote for what we believe to be right.

Meditrina, if a LA sells a playing field this is not a huge issue financially as the money stays in the public sector.

if a private organisation does this, the money has left the public sector.

BoffinMum I agreed with a lot of your post except for point 4.

In my school which is a bog standard comp first built as a secondary modern. I can think of at least 6 people who have timetabled lessons on a yearly basis over the past 7 years who are not qualified, not training, not planning to do any training.

They have their own classes and do parents evening, reports the lot - most parents are completely unaware they are not qualified teachers.

It is creeping in.

Froome, and that has worked so far with the academy chains has it? Its all very well buying into the rhetoric and ignoring the reality but some of us are trying to be aware of what could happen.

Oh and of course the unqualifieds, a big drain on those of us who have qualified cause they need helps with their lessons, marking etc. Paid just above what they pay cover supervisors, wow that suggests longevity in a career.

Fine and fucking dandy, tory voters hang your heads...

This is the briefing note for MPs on the academy and free schools policies.
dera.ioe.ac.uk/22724/1/SN07059.pdf

Noodle, it's sad they can't even be bothered to look out training for themselves, isn't it? I think schools should be forced to publish the qualifications of their teachers.

Sorry, wine and tiredness have got the better of me there.

The dangers of letting unqualified teachers loose on the young

They don't want to be teachers, most started as cover supervisors and have been persuaded to fill gaps in the timetable temporarily and 4 years later are still doing so.

I agree with pp above who says its a huge drain on other teachers. We have one in our department who needs hand holding every time we have to write reports (every half term and she has 3 year groups!)

Most don't even have the degree level education to even start training!

It really really bugs me. Its not fair on the students and I feel we are deceiving the parents!

I've posted this on a couple of other threads, but here is a link to a petition against the proposals petition.parliament.uk/petitions/124702

The Conservatives have been absolutely gagging to kill off local authorities since they were last in power. A petition isn't going to do a lot at this stage, I think. People would be better off pestering MPs and making a huge fuss about the mismanagement and fraud in the sector.

Noodle, what subjects are we talking about here? With the totally unqualified teaching them? (Not even a degree from the sound of it). It is supposed to be a graduate entry (or equivalent) profession and only the PGCE was negotiable.

Thank you Boffin that was an excellent post!