Academy - State school. Opinions?

[Joop557]

What's your opinions on state (traditional) vs academy?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_(English_school)

What do you mean? They're both state schools, largely teaching the same stuff. Some academies are good some are bad, same as LA run schools.

All state schools will become academies with the new School Bill so I fear it'll be a moot point.

As PP says, there is not much point choosing a school on the basis of it being with the LA at the moment as there is every chance it will academise during the time you are using it.

What's your opinion OP?

I think that the 'business model' is relatively immaterial and there are much more important things to worry about when picking a school.

DD's school was LA controlled when DD1 started then became a convertor academy. We didn't notice any negative impacts.

I think every secondary school should be a comprehensive catchment school for all Year 7 - 9 for the children that live in that area. You live in Area A go to school A, live in B go to B etc. Whether that means funded by an academy chain or the LA I don't really know what's best.
But it would stop Academies having to 'sell' themselves to parents and therefore not having to spend precious education money on advertising and marketing and stop them being able to pick and choose their pupils (which they sometimes do but by sneaky backdoor methods).
(For GCSE years and above I think pupils should have more choice of specialism so may involve switching school)

I really don’t think it makes much difference for pupils. There may be more “freedom” around the curriculum but kids still take the same exams so you won’t get huge variance, especially in later years.

For staff, and from the perspective of a former senior leader - at the moment, most academies still follow the old “Burgundy Book” for teacher pay and conditions so although administration is not handled by the LA anymore, day-to-day life is comparable. My fear is when academies start moving away from this - it’s not like teachers are singing the profession’s praises right now.

So you think that, if the catchment school is awful, parents should still have to send their children there? That is the only way you would take away any need for schools to market themselves.

Also, whilst it is frequently alleged that academies pick and choose pupils, no proof is ever offered. There is no viable mechanism by which they can do so.

I think there is possibly something to be said for getting rid of 'aptitude' places though.

Some schools have complex admission arrangements don't they? E.g. GCHS?

Depends on the academy. Some depend heavily on over-rigid discipline as a substitute for engaging children by good teaching. Watch out in particular for places with strict uniform policies that insist on pointless things like blazers and ties.

Almost every school in our area has blazers and ties. But variable on how strongly they enforce general smartness, rolled up skirts etc. This hasn't particularly changed in our area since academies came in.

Though I agree that introducing a more formal uniform can be used by HTs to signify / pretend change.

@prh47bridge well in my imaginary utopia ALL schools would be equal and good so there would be no such thing as an awful school.
We can only dream....

That would be nice. Sadly, as humans are involved, I don't think that will ever happen.

i would go LA every time if I had a choice. I think the cross-county provision they provide is excellent here and there is more accountability. I’m coming from the perspective that the academy stuff ideological bullshit tho so a bit biased.

So you think that, if the catchment school is awful, parents should still have to send their children there? That is the only way you would take away any need for schools to market themselves.

To be fair that is how it works in Scotland!

Academies don't have any more money for marketing than LA-run schools. If schools do spend lots on marketing, it's only because they are struggling to recruit enough students. That can obviously be true of LA schools as well as academies.

@robadob if all schools were equal and everyone just went to the local one then no schools (academy or LA) would need to spend money on promoting themselves and they could spend more money on actual education and especially SEN funding.

Needmorelego, that is unrealistic, because schools are not evenly spaced among the population. Some people live very close to 3 schools, and others to none. Also, people have free chouce where to live, so many move closer to the most popular schools, making them oversubscribed.

Your utopian vision would require people and schools to be evenly spaced, grid-like, with no overlapping catchments, and quotas on how many children could live in each grid. Instead of competitively applying for a place in a school, you'd have to competitively apply for a house in the grid. It would also require abolition of private schools, faith schools, single sex schools, etc (no bad thing in many people's view, but not likely to happen any time soon).

In theory if parents who would have chosen a 'better' school send their children to the catchment school it could raise the standards. Why do you think schools are 'poor' - it's not because they have crap teachers.

A school locally had an intake of children many of whom were living in bedsits and homeless accommodation in run down Victorian houses. In the 80s the houses started being bought up by teachers, social workers and solicitors etc. - not very high income but able to buy a run down house and do it up. The standards in the school went up drastically but the teachers were the same.

On the other hand I have done some work with a school with a very deprived intake and those teachers worked so hard it was a joy to work with those children.

Of course, there are many legitimate reason why parents might chose a different school. They might choose a school near their child minding support. The bus route to a different school might be more straightforward than the one to the catchment school.

@robadob yeah it's not a great utopian plan really.
I really have no clue what's better. I live near an area where a certain academy chain has a monopoly and if you don't like that chains philosophy then there is no LA alternative....but should schools have a 'philosophy' ? Shouldn't they all just be equal and good and everyone gets a good education regardless of where they live.

I agree. I wasted many staff meetings as a teacher trying to come up with philosophies, mission statements, Visions etc. We could have been doing something more productive.

I think it would be unwise to go for an LA school where most of the other schools are academies, and similarly be very confident in an LA school if lots of other schools locally are still with the LA. Talking very generally but also my own experience working in two extremes of LA.

Poor LAs are a blight on education and the more schools they lose the worse they get, due to lack of resource etc. but this isn't as often talked about. Just as there are some poor academy chains (I've worked in one) there are also poor LAs (also worked in one, as well as two good ones that kept lots of their schools as a result).

Also worth looking back at why the school converted originally, you used to only be able to convert voluntarily if you were a good school and you got forced if you were underperforming as per Ofsted. So old news articles about why the school converted in the first place might help but it's likely to be out of date by now. Worth a quick Google though.

My kids school became an academy while my kids attended and apart from some events that were shared with the other school, there's very little difference. One of the heads became the head of the academy which may have contributed to the smooth transition but the only difference has been the academy logo on school correspondence 🤷‍♀️

Academisation is great for schools in affluent areas, well supported by parents and community, and without a huge need to access support services run by the LA. The problem is that by taking the funding for those kinds of schools out of the LA 'pot' it reduces the funding available for the schools which do need more support and input.