Adacemy - what is the problem?

[Huggybear16]

I'm not clear on how an academy is different to a non-academy secondary school.

I have googled this and have found only descriptions of what academies are. The academy is state-funded but independent of the local authority. That part I understand.

However, why does this make it worse? I attended an academy for all 6 years of secondary school and did well. I wasn't aware of any difference between the schools that had "academy" in the name and those that didn't.

Can someone explain to me why an academy is thought of as worse? What problems does an academy face that others don't?

Academies have less restrictions than local authority schools but are still subject to most of the rules and regulations.
They can employ non-teachers but rarely do. As happens, that applies to all schools. Maintained schools can employ instructors or people without QTS if they haven’t been able to recruit suitable QTS staff or for specific subjects. Some might be sports coaches or swimming instructors rather than PE teachers. It might be they use an ex FE tutor to teach food technology. It’s not that those made redundant by the collapse of Woolworths are teaching A level maths. Independent schools have used highly qualified post graduates without QTS for years.
They mainly employ qualified teachers on STPCD. It’s scaremongering to suggest otherwise.
They have, in general, very robust governance systems and are held to account by RSCs who determines whether they can take on further schools.
Many schools choose to join an academy chain because there are significant benefits for the schools ( dependent on the sponsors). The university sponsored academies don’t tend to do well, for example. Some MATS bring cost savings because of procurement savings due to scale and centralised back office functions.
Some chains have very generous sponsors that invest financially in the schools for purely philanthropic reasons. Some MATs take on failing schools and turn them around when all else has failed.

Sometimes though MATs manipulate admissions and ‘game’ data going as far as asking low achieving children to transfer out or hiding less malleable children during Ofsted inspections. Rumour has it that one particularly well thought of chain is given notice of Ofsted inspections through personal connections.
Some MATs drive very hard to get academic results. This might mean it’s not the happiest chain to work for if you want an easier life but does mean children are given a good chance to succeed in life.

Cherry I have heard that about the chain here, prevalent in S London and more far beyond. They also employ consultants to ensure that the school tucks all the relevant boxes to gain an Outstanding. Chain is large enough to justify the staff full time

Thanks all for your input. What's clear from this is that there's a lot that I don't know.

I haven't started my PGDE yet. I am looking to go into secondary school teaching in either maths or science. I have a Masters degree in Pharmacy (was a pharmacist before having my son, but don't want to return to that) and also have a BSc in Maths and Statistics.

I was trying to work out how the local authority is involved with the training and how this works in academies (and non-academies) and what I need to know and look out for.

Schools may have parent representatives but they are NOT governors, and indeed MATs are renaming LGBs to local governing committees; the local school only has functions that are explicitly delegated to it under the Scheme of Delegation, which can be removed at any time. Many are well run, but I have yet to see a MAT have a well designed local accountability system that has anywhere near the depth that a traditional board of governors has. There’s less oversight; great if everything is running well, disastrous when it’s not as the checks and balances aren’t there.

The idea that a MAT of 10 odd schools ( most MATs are small) can somehow make more procurement and centralised service savings against a local authority of hundreds of schools is frankly bollocks. Some local authorities are/were a bit crap;the solution is to improve those, not put in an untried and unreliable system with so many variables in its place.

Not all academies are part of a MAT. Although, of course, it is definitely heading that way.

We are part of a MAT. We have a local advisory board. But they are not the MAT trustees, who are actually very remote from us, physically and practically. However, when Ofsted paid their recent visit, it was the local board they spoke to and referred to in the relevant section.