Michael Wilshaw tells private schools to do more for the state sector

[muminlondon]

www.theguardian.com/teacher-network/teacher-blog/2013/oct/02/ofsted-michael-wilshaw-independent-schools

He's not afraid of being disliked, is he? He gave a speech to the heads of private schools telling them to sponsor academies in deprived areas - only 3% do so.

My favourite quotes are:

'... think less globally and more locally, "less Dubai and more Derby"'

'What might you say to parents who think that noblesse oblige is the latest perfume from Chanel?'

'Your pensions, many of the public may be surprised to learn, are subsidised by the taxpayer. Most of your teaching staff were educated at public expense. The independent sector gains 1,400 teachers from state schools every year.'

Well, Michael Wilshaw was addressing a conference of private school heads so that's why he pitched this idea at them. Maybe a few more could help. For instance, I had a debate on a local thread about how much two highly academic independents were helping local schools and they do a bit of mentoring and the odd enrichment activity for the academy next door. But the academy was still only rated grade 3 for its last Ofsted. So either that wasn't effective enough or the academy's actual sponsor wasn't helping enough. So it's a fair question to ask whether they could have gone one step further and sponsored the school.

Meanwhile, it's up to Mr Gove to give his vision for the future of academy chains. They recently published a list of schools and sponsors here but there is still secrecy over free schools. This is a route by which the lesser endowed private schools are either getting their debts written off or [she says cynically] setting up feeder schools for their senior departments.

I think this state school helping can go ine step futher.

I propose that all schools revert to locality irrespective of being super selective or not. For example Kingston as I really only know Kingston. Tiffin school is the most sort after brand name school usually oversubscribed by a few hundred students. Therefore it has a successful formula. If say one of the local comp school was to fail. Then it should be rebranded with Tiffin school and the teachers and resources shared. That way those who were unsuccessful in getting in can apply to the sister school. The fail comp will get a new lease of life. Then make the deputy Head Head of the second school.

some say Tiffin school is only successful because it admits already bright students. Then let these bright students lead the way to the not so bright.

some say its because the teaching is better...Then let these teachers help those who haven't had 'good' teachers....

O btw the old head will be sacked and any teacher that is not enthusiastic about teaching should be sacked also. New teachers.... better ones...

I wouldn't go as far as sacking heads - I am as wary of 'superheads' solving all problems singlehandedly as I am about the independent school sector leaping in to save the state sector when they have little experience of poverty, special needs, mixed ability teaching, discipline problems, resourcing limitations, non-academic careers advice (for which schools are now responsible), local community facilities, etc. And Tiffin has little experience of at least five of those issues. However, the new free school in Kingston is being sponsored by a consortium of local schools and Richmond/Kingston are setting up a joint children services board. So there are possibilities of all local schools working together and cross-LA collaboration - including whatever input is offered by the independents. This will work best where schools are not tied down to just one school or sponsor.

The headmaster of Eton does not presume he can turn around a failing comprehensive. Why should the head of Tiffin?

Some teachers at Eton (and,presumably, Tiffin) are subject experts with limited classroom management skills. They don't need them in the top sets of a selective school. Why would they suddenly succeed in a failing comprehensive?

I don't speak as a teacher. I speak as the parent of a boy who recently left Eton.

What Eton can do (and actually do) is lend facilities - and expertise in the few fields where its expertise can make a difference. Eton can help local state school pupils with Oxbridge applications. Eton send 80 boys a year to Oxbridge : they know the process, they know the courses, they know the colleges. Very few state schools have that accumulated experience.

Similarly Eton are sponsoring an academy. It's a state day/boarding school. Eton are not providing money. They are providing, primarily, boarding know-how. That makes sense. There are not that many teachers in the state boarding sector. Why not get free guidance from a school which looks after 1,200 boarders?

I really like the foundation Robert Peston has set up to bring speakers into schools. Agree that Eton and the like could help by proving advice on what they really do know about - Oxbridge, a network of inspiring alumni giving talks and advice, fantastic language and classics teaching including residential enrichment courses.

I actually think it would work place a failing school under the auspice of a brand name school.

The kids will then be mixed. Im not saying replace all the staff of the old school with the skill set to deal with the children who have problems. Yet it will give oppurtunity to those not selected to move up sets if they are bright enough.

Now everyone complains that if they were in a good school . They child will be so much better placed. With the new branding of the school it will attract those who were unable to gain entry to the original school. Taking pressure of the pressure cooker for over tutoring for the 11+...

Yes the old head will have to be sacked to make way for the deputy head of the old school. He will role the school on the original. The new students coming in will be attracted to the brand.The school becomes successful. Resources are shared and all is good.

If your brand name state school it is good as you expand your brand. If your a failing school you get a new lease of life...

although it may be good in theory. I still think each individual schools failure needs to be address by the new head.

Kenlee Dulwich College has pulled out of academy sponsorship in Kent (obviously the academy was a secondary modern - 11% high attainers). Four principals in four years - a bit like Chelsea or England's football team - did not help.

news.tes.co.uk/news_blog/b/weblog/archive/2013/10/04/leading-independent-school-pulls-out-of-academy-sponsorship.aspx

That is what i mean..it was an academy.. I mean to rename it Dulwich college (kent). Send over the deputy head of Dulwich college. Not to sponser but to take over every facet of the school. Of course a 5 year program being in place for the new head. Even Alex Ferguson needed time to turn Manchester United.

Teachers that are lacking will be moved to the original school for retraining if they fail...they are sacked. A teacher from the original school will be sent in to replace. Rotating them in and out. This will not only give good learning for the children but also teacher training for the teacher's.

I don't like the idea of sponsorships. I like the idea of failing schools being replaced. The original school takes full responsibility for its sister school. Yes super head I like that....

If you live in a rural area, choice is not what you have ! All parents really want is a top class local school. Many private schools are not rich and there are plenty of teachers in them who would never hack it in a comprehensive! Ever! So who can learn from whom? However it is probably untrue, and never tested, that there are any great number of extremely bright children residing in social housing who would be happy to go to a public school. Plenty of parents I have met don't even aspire to the best state school available. They feel out of place and think their children would be too.

The bigger problem is the poor advice given by some schools regarding A level choices which disqualify some bright young people from the best universities. If parents don't know how to advise and schools don't either is there any wonder that middle class children in the best schools do better? What Michael Wilshaw should do is analyse the worst performing schools to see whether they have given the best advice to their students. We know some will be failing schools and therefore are probably not teaching well either. There are not enough good or outstanding teachers to go round either, so the best schools get most of them! Having an independent school take over is not going to suddenly produce lots of outstanding teachers. You are robbing Peter to pay Paul ! Hope the above not too rambling.

Kenlee.... Do you really think fee paying parents will be happy for their children to be taught by failing teachers from another school??? Never, is the answer. Independent schools are a business, they could never afford to be seen to be retraining staff in this way. Also, compelling staff to move could be tricky!!! This is why few independent schools have done what Wilshaw wants. They want to keep their parents on board, and keep their businesses afloat!

What an idea! Just re-brand the school and send the head to take over. All will be well. Really?

Would love to see all Tiffin's governors being moved to Chessington C. College.

Im not talking about ptivate schools...Im talking about state schools

So would I Tiffin....So would I...

I think it will be a good shake up....Give it a try see what happens.....

Even those school which have made the attempt, don't switch staff between schools.

Dulwich is sponsor of the new academy in Sheppey and participates in the Governing Body and the curriculum committee. It doesn't run the school in a day to day sense.

I've read the comments above about Dulwich seeking to end their association with the school. I hadn't heard that before, nor seen OFSTED. But Dulwich didn't take a perfectly OK school and let it slide: it went for "the largest and most problematic of Kent secondaries" in the 4 years there, it's not solved all the problems (and wasn't the school a new amalgamation of separate failing and special measures schools before?), but the school is in the best place it's been for years.

Just think what it could have achieved if it took full control. I mean if the school fails sack the governors...Just think if the Tiffin governors took over Chessington high... placed the deputy head of Tiffin to run the school. interchange the teachers. Then voila another great school is created...

Im sure the parents at chessington would be pleased .

It just might well work. Since Kingston parents argue there isnt enough state schools in Kingston. We just find a failing one. Sack the governors and create a good one..Im sure Tiffin is up for the challenge.

I dont see why a good state school shouldnt help another state school reach its potential.

There a few things that the privates have that the state schools dont always have.

1. Committed students with zero tolerance for bad behaviour. No appeals, no 'well I am different - I want to wear earings and if you dont let me you are interferring with my human rights'

1. Small classes

1. Interested parents

So, IMHO if they could fix Point 1 they will go a long way to improving things.

Quite agree with you, handcream.

Without fully committed pupil and parents, change of governors or interchange of teachers would not work. Bringing bad performing teachers would pull even the good school down. Poor teachers need re-training or be replaced.

Hmm I was lead to believe thatall students were equal in ability. It was because of bad teaching bad schools and the such that has dragged them down. Leaving them socio economically dysfunctional. What is now being suggested is that a group of like minded children with like minded parents who want the best for their children is what makes a good school.

So why Micheal Wilshaw is basically he is just passing gas when he decided to attack private schools...

Thank goodness no one listened to him..

You have hit the nail, kenlee.

All children (or adults) do not have same level of abilities. That's we we had grammars for children who had higher level of ability than the rest. Try to teach all in one similar class has given less opportunity to the brighter children - some of whom have gone on to make Independents flourish.

That's why..... (not that's we we..........ah, no edit function)..

I like your analysis, Kenlee.

kenlee 'bad schools leave pupils socio-economically dysfunctional' - chicken and egg...

The odds are stacked up against poorer children especially those also in deprived areas/chaotic homes from birth (I wonder why? anything to do with having books in the home, well educated parents who talk to their children all the time, no stress and lots of toys?). In the admittedly controversial phonics test in Y1:

• girls did better than boys (62%/54%)
• non-FSM did better than pupils on FSM (61%/44%) and the gap was even larger for white British boys (58%/37%)
• children whose first language was not English performed just as well as those with English mother tongue (both with 58 per cent)

Amazingly, by end of Y2 all have made progress and the gap between girls and boys and between non-FSM/FSM has closed up by a couple of percentage points. Hurrah! Did the government tell state schools what a good job they had done, working hard on all those barriers to learning? No. We just keep hearing about 'bad schools'. Oh how depressing to be a teacher, with all of society's inequalities to reverse...

Now let's discuss deserving/underving poor and whether it's the fault of the children that their parents don't support them.

deserving/undeserving (also would like edit button)

Is it wealth / poverty that is the driving factor for academic success?

I rather think it's a combination of supportive parenting and good teaching. I see plenty of kids from very modest backgrounds but with supportive parents doing well. The ones making slow progress are typically ones with home issues and, shall we say, a lack of consistent parental involvement. That's why it's so sad to see a kid - the same raw material - capable, but quickly falling behind, even in nursery or reception and never catches up.