Every school to be an academy?

[CamboricumMinor]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-35814215

Apparently this is expected in tomorrow's budget. I'm sure this isn't going to be a good move for school staff but what about the children? I'm not convinced at all.

Without QTS teachers will not have an internationally recognised qualification that the countries most English & Welsh teachers emigrate to require

QTS is being replaced by a tougher accreditation.

An accreditation that depends on a Headteacher to bestow. It's so open to abuse it's not true."You're not quite good enough to give full accreditation, but we'd like to employ you on reduced pay still!".

Fran you are spot on.

I'm confused, so no effect? How can that be possible!
So by removing QTS (I don't know what That is) our children will have a lesser qualification to others into internationally?!

QTS is Qualified Teacher Status. What you get after qualification and completing a, kind of, 'probation' year, I think. Not the children's qualification. They're talking about replacing that with what sounds like a 'chartership' system, similar to accountants, achieved over 2-5 years after qualification.

What I don't understand is the mismatch between that and academies that are not currently employing qualified teachers?

The thought occurs that accountants are paid more than teachers and are not vilified in the press and don't get the stress. Teachers are leaving, how is this going to help? Our own utterly useless professional organisation brought in Chartership in my profession, librarianship. Just turned out to be a load of useless hoops to jump through that demonstrated nothing except ability and willingness to jump through extra hoops, and gave you nothing extra. I've noticed fewer jobs (what jobs there are) are asking for it now.

So will all the good teachers want to leave England and come go Wales/Scotland or. Further afield where they don't have to do this new thing? It just seems crazy to get rid of one clear pathway that teachers can train and progress along for something that has no clear structure to be regulated across the board?!

(Thank you for explaining this to me, really helpful)

Quite possibly. When teachers are already leaving due to pressure and they're struggling to get enough people to train now. It does seem a bit bloody stupid to me. I'm no expert though and my intelligence is questionable given that I am, or was, one of the fools thinking of training up (given the demise of libraries).

I have no idea how they are getting away with this. There's gotta be some sort of protest. Surly parents don't want this?! X

I don't think QTS is an important factor tbh.
I never had it as it wasn't applicable for the PGCE I did.
In fact was still expected to teach subjects I wasn't qualified to teach at levels I wasn't qualified to teach.
There are so many teachers teaching without QTS and GCSE's too.

They're removing parental input too apparently.

Bungo

That is far more worrying than lack of QTS.
Parents are going to have no say in their children's education.

No parent governors, a closed book, parents have no say

Academies don't really seem to be accountable to anyone. There's the commissioners, but the government is trying extremely hard to avoid any mention of failing academies, let alone what to do with them.

"Private is always better than public" after all

I was at a primary academy recently. Ofsted outstanding. Last ofsteded in...the late 2000's.

The behaviour was terrible, children running out of class; rolling on each other in the carpet and constant talk. Only lsa in the morning. Apparently this is standard behaviour from them.

As it's converted to an academy after obtaining outstanding status, it only need 'risk' monitoring which could trigger an inspection if it's found lacking.

Yet there's better schools with more provision with worse ratings. The whole system is a farce.

BTW the school is not in a deprived area. It's in a affluent one with a few exceptions. The school across town in the so called deprived area is fantastic and the children thrive there regardless but it's only 'good'. Parents don't want to send their kids to the 'good' school and fight to get into the 'outstanding' one. I know which one I'd rather send mine to.

So will all the good teachers want to leave England and come go Wales/Scotland or. Further afield where they don't have to do this new thing?

I looked into teaching in Wales a few years ago, but I think you have to be a Welsh speaker. (I might have that wrong though).
I only have QTS and not a PGCE so am only qualified to teach in England and Wales, not Scotland.

I expect when this new white paper comes in-QTS is abolished and academy heads can hire their friends/family/cleaner/passer bys to be teachers (probably on low wages because they aren't graduates), they will be trapped forever in England. They won't be able to stamp their feet and threaten to leave for warmer climes (as we're all doing now as everything's so shite!) as they wont have recognised QTS!

Ofsted not giving a separate grade for teaching and learning will mean that it's not immediately obvious how awful everything is. It won't take long though!

isn't it a good idea to keep teachers in England?

homebythesea

my point is that if we are going to compare one to the other, we should at very least put everything on show (so to speak).

There is no evidence to prove that academies will level the playing field, by providing any of the points that you have put forward. (longer day, zero tolerance of low level disruption, emphasis on competitive sport etc etc) or that state schools are not providing these already under a different name.

Some academies are already reducing the provision of the less cost effective subjects (technologies, art etc.). Where grade per £ is the driving force vocational areas will suffer.

when you take a look at what actually happens in the schools across Europe that are higher up the non existent global league tables, it is different to what the government is forcing on English schools.

prh47bridge

"QTS is being replaced by a tougher accreditation."

In what way is the new accreditation tougher?
or are they just making it more rigorous by fiddling the numbers?

You have to qualify in Scotland to teach in Scotland, or take extra qualifications.

English teaching qualifications are 'not enough'.

Which is a bit of a joke, when you look at the parlous state of Scottish Education under the Curriculum for Excrementellence.

isn't it a good idea to keep teachers in England?

Surely you want them kept because they are content and have good career progression here, not because they are trapped!?

Parents are not being excluded from governance. Many parents are on the Trust Boards of Academy's and Foundation Schools, as well as Governing Boards in Community, VA and VC schools in positions other than "representative parent". They haven't been elected to their position, they've been co-opted for their skills and abilities.

The difference the White paper will make is that there won't be a requirement for a set number of governors to be elected by the body of parents; the boards will be made up of people who are best able to do the job.

Not all elected Parent Governors are up to the task. They may be popular in the playground with other parents rather than have the skills needed or willingness to learn. Being a school governor requires the commitment of between 5-10 hours a week - readings documents, participating in training/briefings, attending meetings, visiting the school.

In at least one school I know of, an elected parent governor was unable to read or write. In another, Parent Governors were subject to a suspension for breaching safeguarding policies in the school.

Under current legislation, it's not possible for an elected parent governor to be removed from their position, regardless of what they do, or don't do - as long as they turn up to a meeting every few months. That's not fair on the school, because the GBoard is weakened when that place could be taken by a parent with the skills needed, or fair on the other parents, who elected the parent in the first place to do a job.

By removing the requirement for GBoards to include elected parents, the Board is better able to ensure that the right people are around the table. Very often, that person will come from the parent body, all be it that the parent with the skills needed probably wouldn't have been elected by the other parents had there been a vote.

One of the skills all Governors need is a commitment to the school; and the pool of parents is the best place to start looking for that.

Disagree massively with pp on parental role in governance.
Of course parent governors should fully understand what will be required of them, and should be adequately trained to do that task. Everything you are saying about parent governors could be said about any voluntary board member. Parent voice needs to be present in governance and decision-making, IMO.

Parent governors are often (but not always) well-meaning but not at all challenging to schools. They also often think being a governor is about their child's experience. It isn't.