Acadamies - what went wrong?

[Mechanoid]

After sending my last child off to school and her getting settled and doing really well, I decided to get back into the world of work and considered being a TA. I volunteered at my daughter's school and found that I loved it. After a while, I signed up with an agency and have been in paid work ever since. I love it.

I'm a graduate and had considered Teaching initially, but I actually prefer being a TA - I'm very good at it and love what I do. So imagine my disappointment then, when I started applying for jobs as a TA and being told (always by academies!) that "TA's are Teachers these days!".

Interestingly, they seem happy with unqualified people Teaching, but not with paying qualified rates...how odd!

In a state school, TA are just that: TA's! But academies aren't schools and I would NEVER send my child to one. Any views?

Icimoi, I'm interested in what you say about academies 'manipulating intake' to improve results- I've heard rumours of this going on in my area, but, with catchment rules as strict as they are, I don't understand how schools would be able to do this?
Has anyone else heard of similar?

The key point is that Acadamies, like voluntary aided schools (which of course existed before academies) are their own admissions authorities.

So an LA supported Community School, which does not control its own admissions is unable to breach the admissions code, even if it were mined to do so.

Academies are not in any way exempt from obeying the law, but there have been a number of cases where they have been in breach.

See this link for more information:

www.localschoolsnetwork.org.uk/2014/07/selection-administrative-blunders-feeder-schools-and-faith-just-some-of-the-ways-in-which-schools-flout-the-admission-code/

Just for balance I should point out that it is by no means unknown for LAs to breach the Admissions Code. Indeed, some have breached the Code in the ways mentioned in the article to which nlondondad links.

The rumours of schools manipulating intake are sometimes true but are often unfounded, as with many other rumours about school admissions.

Who is overseeing whether the numerous "own admissions authority" schools are breaching the rules or not?

LAs are required to refer any admission arrangements they believe are in breach of the Admissions Code to the Schools Adjudicator. Appeal panels are also required to consider whether or not the admission arrangements are in breach of the Code and refer any breaches to the Adjudicator. It is also open to anyone to make an objection to the Adjudicator.

So are academy schools required to submit their admission arrangements to the Local Authority for approval, then?

who employs the ajudicator?
what powers do they have over sponsored academy chains ?

when sponsored academies have previously refused to get outside help after a bad ofsted visit, they did so with impunity

what is the enforcement system?

So are academy schools required to submit their admission arrangements to the Local Authority for approval, then

They are required to consult with the LA when setting their admission arrangements. And by 1st May they must send the LA a full copy of their admission arrangements for the admissions round starting that autumn. They are not required to get LA approval but at this point the LA can lodge an objection with the adjudicator.

who employs the ajudicator

The adjudicators are employed by the Office of the Schools Adjudicator which is funded by the government. Adjudicators are appointed by the Secretary of State for Education but operate independently of the DfE. They have been quite happy to take academies to task over their admission arrangements including, at times, chains that had been praised by Gove.

what powers do they have over sponsored academy chains

They can consider the admission arrangements of individual schools within the chain or, where appropriate, groups of schools or even the whole chain. If they find the arrangements do not comply with the Admissions Code and relevant law the admission authority must change the arrangements. An academy that fails to do so is in breach of its funding agreement.

when sponsored academies have previously refused to get outside help after a bad ofsted visit, they did so with impunity

A school does not have to get outside help after a poor Ofsted. They must draw up a plan for fixing the problems which gains Ofsted's approval. If they can convince Ofsted that they are able to fix their problems without outside help they will be allowed to do so.

what is the enforcement system

Decisions by the Adjudicator are binding on the admission authority and can only be challenged through judicial review. Barring such challenge decisions will be enforced by the Secretary of State if necessary. Given the state of the law and academy funding agreements the Secretary of State cannot refuse to enforce an Adjudicator decision. A school that refuses to comply risks losing its funding.

If we imagine a situation in which the decision was not enforced the school would face large numbers of successful appeals as any appeal panel would have no choice but to conclude that the admission arrangements did not comply with the Admissions Code. So even if there was no direct enforcement there would still be a very strong incentive for schools to fall in line.

Mmm. But Local Authorities have been making as many staff as possible redundant to save on costs, now that they don't have to take responsibility for so many schools. I'm not sure who is left actually to review the admission arrangements of schools that aren't really their responsibility any more?... Are they taking this role of theirs sufficiently seriously? Has it led to improvements in the methods of allocation of school places? Are parents any happier with the way the allocation process works? Is it clear and transparent to parents?

who is left actually to review the admission arrangements of schools that aren't really their responsibility any more

Every LA still has an admissions department to deal with processing applications, setting admission criteria for the schools where the LA is the admission authority and other related matters. They should be looking at the admission arrangements of academies and objecting if they aren't happy. Of course, it is open to anyone to lodge an objection.

Are they taking this role of theirs sufficiently seriously

Yes. Whilst the Adjudicator does not publish statistics, a survey of the published decisions suggests that over 50% of objections to academy admission arrangements come from LAs.

Has it led to improvements in the methods of allocation of school places

Where an academy has been found to be in breach of the Code they have altered their arrangements to comply. That is therefore an improvement in terms of meeting the Code's requirements.

Are parents any happier with the way the allocation process works

Are parents happier compared to what? The admissions process for the individual school will comply with the Code. Some parents won't agree with it and some would prefer the school to break the Code. But it will meet the Code's definition of "fair".

Is it clear and transparent to parents

One of the grounds for objecting is that the admission arrangements are not clear and transparent to parents. So the result of objections should be that they are.

So, how do school applications work, now? Do you fill out a LA form for the LA-controlled schools and send it back to the LA, and separate forms for any academy schools, and send those back to the individual academies? Do they all have to have responded by the same date? Do they have to know whether you have applied to any other schools? If you don't get places anywhere, do you then rely on the LA to help? If you think you should have got a place at a particular academy and they have made a mistake, do you appeal first to the academy, or where? And if the LA realises it needs more school places, can it put pressure on academy schools to increase them? Is it still the LA that is supposed to ensure there are enough school places for everyone?

No, single form to you own LA listing your preferences in order, irrespective of school staus.

LA then liaises with schools that are this own admissions authority, and other LAs (if schools in another county/borough are listed), and then turns the ranked information from all into a single offer per family.

Is it still the LA that is supposed to ensure there are enough school places for everyone?
Definitely not

in Southampton there is no secondary school at all in the City Centre and there is nothing the Local authority can do about it.

At the edges of the city are two academies with 900 spaces between them but they are miles and miles from where the kids who will hit year 7 next September live.

how do school applications work

The same way it has worked for years. You fill in an LA form and send it to your LA. They forward the relevant information about your application (NOT the full form) to any academies or VA schools you list as preferences. The academies and VA schools are not allowed to know what other schools (if any) you have listed nor are they allowed to know where they are on your list of preferences. The LA sorts out whether you are entitled to a place at any LA-controlled schools and gets responses back from any academies or VA schools. If there are multiple places available the LA will offer you the one from the highest choice. If there are no places available the LA will sort out a place for you which could be at any type of school. On the national offer day you will receive a single offer from your LA.

Schools can require applicants to complete supplementary information forms but the restrictions around information that can be collected mean that generally only faith schools have such forms. The only time you apply direct to an academy is if it is a brand new school that has been established too late to include it in the normal admissions round.

If you do not get your first choice school the letter from your LA will tell you how to appeal for those schools where you didn't get a place. Academies and VA schools are responsible for organising their own appeals but some subcontract that back to the LA.

An LA can ask any school to expand. Community and VC schools have little choice. The LA is required to consult with the governors but, as admission authority, it can raise the admission number if it wishes. The governors could object but their chances of success are low. Academies and VA schools are in a stronger position if they don't wish to expand (or if they want to expand but the LA doesn't want them to). They can set their own admission number and the LA cannot overrule them. If the LA believes it needs additional schools it must first seek proposals for establishing a new academy. If no acceptable proposals are forthcoming they can seek proposals for establishing a foundation or voluntary school.

Definitely not

I'm afraid that is wrong. The LA is supposed to ensure sufficient places. And, as outlined above, there is something the LA can do about it. If they believe a new school is needed in the city centre they should identify a possible site and invite proposals for establishing an academy. (Education and Inspections Act 2006 section 6A)

invite proposals for establishing an academy.
and if none come, where are the kids meant to go?
this has been a known issue for 7 years .....

if none come

They can then seek proposals for establishing a foundation or voluntary school. Councils that have been down this route have generally not had a problem getting someone to put forward a proposal. The biggest problem is usually identifying a possible site. Local councillors may not want to upset residents (voters!) who don't want to find themselves living next to a school which limits the choice of sites. That, of course, is a problem whoever is going to establish the school.

this has been a known issue for 7 years

Up until February 2012 the council had the power to set up a new community school.

And how does it work with respect to the schools that have entrance tests so as to band by ability and grammar schools that select only the top by ability? When are the tests taken? How does this affect the application process?

Up until February 2012 the council had the power to set up a new community school.
But they effectively did not

prh you quote the policy but not the operation
and there is a mahoosive difference
some LEAs risk the judgements but in the mean time leave insufficient places (Kingston)

Southampton LEA were told they could not build a secondary until there was a "need"
NEED was defined as "children leaving year 6"
FFS
who can build an 800 place school and staff it during the summer holidays

prh
the core advice you give is great and impeccable, but it seems untouched by the 35% cuts in LEA and LA resources of the last four years

what it says in the book IS NOT HAPPENING
how do parents deal with the reality

And how does it work with respect to the schools that have entrance tests

The process is essentially the same. If the test is for fair banding it will take place after the LA has informed the school who has applied and the school will use the outcome to determine who gets an offer. If the test is for selection purposes it should take place so that parents can be informed of the outcome before the closing date for applications so that they don't waste a preference on a school where their child has no chance of being admitted. If parents don't realise the need to apply early (and direct to the school) for this test the school should arrange to test their child as soon as possible after receiving the application from the LA.

TalkinPeace

I am not going to comment on the details of happenings in Southampton as I do not have direct knowledge.

The LA has at all times had power to invite proposals to set up a new school. Since 2006 it has been required to do that before making proposals of their own to set up a foundation school or a community school. It is true that the Secretary of State could set conditions to be met before the LA made proposals to set up a community school but not if they went down the foundation school route.

Yes, local government is being squeezed. Councils are having to meet the same statutory responsibilities with less money. I recognise that it is not easy. But you've been talking about the powers they have. Not having the powers to do something is different from having the powers but being unable to use them due to lack of funding or due to choosing to spend the funds available on other priorities. It is also different from having the powers but being unwilling to use them.

Provided they could identify a site there has been no legal obstacle to Southampton inviting proposals to set up a new secondary school at any stage in the last 7 years. I don't know whether they did so but found the proposals unacceptable or chose not to do so, perhaps because they were opposed to that route and only wanted to consider setting up a community school.

What's the logic behind refusing to allow effective LAs to set up community schools?

Probably the lack of a mechanism to rate as "effective" or any expectation of any particular rating to survive local elections.

But it is all down to the effectiveness of the council/borough. Some are finding creative solutions (school "expansion" onto a satellite site so far away it's a separate school by any other name), others are going over the hurdles required to demonstrate there is indeed no-one who will open a free school and so become able to do it themselves.

Other don't plan ahead, and then have to come up with the best they can. LEAs having to open 3 or 4 bulge classes per year is already not uncommon. I really hope those LEAs are identifying sites (for that is often the limitation in urban areas) that are adequate (not necessarily perfect) and working out ways to provide new schools as I doubt that reliance on bulge is sustainable. Especially in areas under pressure to increase housing stock.

New report by Sutton Trust on the ineffectiveness of many academy chains (despite success for a minority), their dependence on equivalent qualifications for the 5A-C measure and failure of of many chains on the other measures, and the need for greater transparency and oversight. 'A majority of the chains analysed still underperform the mainstream average on attainment for their disadvantaged pupils.'

The more effective chains are named in the report although one has been investigated for financial irregularities.

www.suttontrust.com/news/news/best-academy-chains-outperform-maintained-schools-for-poorer/

What's the logic behind refusing to allow effective LAs to set up community schools

Partly agree with AuntieStella. But I think the main reason is that the direction of public policy under both this government and its predecessor is away from community schools and towards other forms of organisation. This is mainly due to the view (supported by evidence from other countries) that giving schools greater independence and freeing them from LA control would improve results. That is why the last government legislated so that an LA could only set up a community school after all other routes had failed.

I don't think the evidence from Sweden (with its free schools) is very convincing as it is plummeting down the international legal tables.