Nicky Morgan's thread continued (MNers calling for Lucy Powell to do webchat)

[Mner]

Following on from Nicky Morgan MP's one sided "webchat" see here...

Active petitions against academisation are here:
petition.parliament.uk/petitions/124702
petition.parliament.uk/petitions/124747

Guardian article is here

You can write to your MP: www.writetothem.com/

Good luck to everyone at the demonstrations today. I can't attend

How does a "Bad" MAT wither?

In the case of LST:

1. poor performance led to them being banned from taking over more schools.
2. one of their 4 schools (Ipswich Academy) was judged inadequate, so the DfE gave it to another trust to run instead.
3. the DfE/LA "persuaded" them to give up another 2 schools which require improvement.
4. Now they only have one left.

It's just not good enough to say "Yes but some academies are good". Because a) the fact that they are good has quite probably nothing to do with the fact that they are academies and b) Since we have no evidence that being an academy makes a school better, where is the justification for spending millions of pounds turning perfectly good schools into academies?! As Wilshaw already pointed out, many academy chains are performing terribly. You can go on until you're blue in the face about the details, but ultimately there is no justifiable educational reason for doing this!

Where can people turn when they have awful experiences with LA run schools?

They can and do take it to their local councillor, who can raise the issue on their behalf. They can attend council meetings. If an Academy chain is bad, well planetarium, please tell me who you complain too?

however I can see how it's easier to "experiment" with a relatively fluid Academy-based system.
Oh goody-goody. If the 'experiment' works, well fine. If not, children are shafted.

Since we have no evidence that being an academy makes a school better, where is the justification for spending millions of pounds turning perfectly good schools into academies?!

You'll have to ask Nicky Morgan that one. I suspect her honest answer would be "no, we have no evidence that being an academy makes an individual school better, but we do have evidence that competition between schools makes individual schools better. Turning all schools into academies will enable them all to compete so the whole system will improve. At least that's the theory - we won't know till we try it".

I agree with others that trying to turn all schools into academies within the proposed timeframe is very dangerous, but given the timing of the electoral cycle I can understand her motives.

What I've noticed about "innovators" and "change managers" is that they often don't stick around long enough to take the flack for experiments gone wrong.

We have just had an example of Nicky Morgan's ability to come back and answer questions i.e. a thousand posting thread and absolutely no sign of her.

They can and do take it to their local councillor, who can raise the issue on their behalf. They can attend council meetings.

If they're lucky enough to have a local councillor who is willing to speak out against a local school on their behalf (and most wouldn't), and that councillor is able to influence their councillor colleagues sufficiently to make the required changes, then great. However, in most cases it will make no difference whatsoever. If it did, then all our maintained schools would be good by now.

If an Academy chain is bad, well planetarium, please tell me who you complain too?

Ultimately to the DfE. However one voice will have as much influence there as it will at Local Authority level. It's numbers that matter.

Less than a minute's searching tells me who my County Councillor is, their contact details, any registered interests, and brief notes about them.

I haven't been able to find who a parent should contact within the DfE within less than one minute. (Not at all, so far).

Peregrina, it took me 2 seconds to find the list of regional schools commissioners who are the Secretary of State's delegates: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/schools-commissioners-group

Of course it will take time for people to get used to new structures. I don't think that's a good reason to avoid structural change.

There may be other good reasons, but that's not one of them.

Anybody gone through what I posted? Am I wrong or right in understanding what I wrote? Any corrections?

Planetarium: I am not convinced that one person, covering 27 Local Authorities is going to have the same time to deal with an individual's queries as the two County Councillors for my town do. Both of whom are people known to me. Both of whom I know have given years of dedicated service to the Community. I haven't the foggiest who the Regional Commissioners are.

Having been through a considerable number of inevitably costly reorganisations throughout my working life, I know full well it takes time to get used to new structures - some of which have worked, and some of which have been dismal failures. What is missing from the forced conversion to Academies is any convincing evidence that this is a better change, plus the lack of accountability. Plus we are supposedly going through a period of austerity, but money will be found to be thrown at this reorganisation.

With Academy Trusts its public money being privately administered

And publicly scrutinised by the Education Funding Agency and National Audit Office.

That went well with the King's Science Academy.

www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/education-committee/news-parliament-2015/secretary-of-state-evidence-15-16/

What is missing from the forced conversion to Academies is any convincing evidence that this is a better change

Yep, I'd agree with that. As I said earlier, it's an experiment based on competition theory and market forces - but then isn't that the basis of many Conservative policies?

I am not convinced that one person, covering 27 Local Authorities is going to have the same time to deal with an individual's queries as the two County Councillors for my town do. Both of whom are people known to me. Both of whom I know have given years of dedicated service to the Community

You said you lived in an area where schools are already good. If you lived in an area where they were bad you might have a different view of your local representatives. Many people in those circumstances turn to the private sector or move house, contributing to a local brain drain and a downward spiral of underachievement in local schools. So while there may not be a problem to be solved in your area, there is a problem nationally. Unfortunately for you Nicky M presumably believes academisation has to be done on mass in order for the experiment to work.

"we do have evidence that competition between schools makes individual schools better"

Like much of the supposed 'evidence' in favour of academies this is nonsense. I've yet to see any reputable study that backs this claim up. What improves schools is good head teacher, a good team of teachers and engagement with the parents and kids. And of course money. Which is what many academies waste on expensive consultants with spread sheets and PowerPoints and overpaid executives. It seems to me the silly uniforms which inevitably go with many academies are an attempt to disguise their inability to bring about real improvement in education.

You'll have to ask Nicky Morgan that one. I suspect her honest answer would be"no, we have no evidence that being an academy makes an individual school better, but we do have evidence that competition between schools makes individual schools better. Turning all schools into academies will enable them all to compete so the whole system will improve. At least that's the theory - we won't know till we try it".

I think making schools compete with each other and treating schools like businesses are the root of most of the problems in our education system.

Yes indeed, if I lived in an area with poor schools, I might well think (or have thought) differently. Your argument seems to be that we need to replace something which is seen to be bad, with something else which is at least or more bad but if you are lucky you might just get something better. Is it really just to gamble with children's futures in this way?

Why is that an improvement? Why does it justify wholesale change?

You say there is a problem nationally, but where is your evidence?

That went well with the King's Science Academy.

Yes, it did. It closed them down.

For every story of financial mismanagement in an academy, there is also a story of financial mismanagement in a maintained school. They just don't make the headlines.

What improves schools is good head teacher, a good team of teachers and engagement with the parents and kids. And of course money.

I agree, but if there's no competition, where is the incentive for local authorities to oust less-than-good headteachers and replace them with good ones?

Which is what many academies waste on expensive consultants with spread sheets and PowerPoints

Local Authorities use the same consultants. In the past they used to employ school improvement staff directly but now they use consultants (probably a good thing too, if the ones they had on their staff weren't actually delivering improvements).

Yes, it did. It closed them down.

After no less than four critical Ofsted reports.

Why is that an improvement? Why does it justify wholesale change?

I didn't say it does. Nicky Morgan says it does. I think it's a dangerous experiment, as I said before.

You say there is a problem nationally, but where is your evidence?

Lots of schools that aren't meeting the standards that have been set for them. I think most people would agree there is a problem in some areas. It's just the solution they disagree about.

planetarium the government was forced to act on Kings Science Academy after it got massive publicity in the Yorkshire Post but the DfE sat on the evidence for months and tried to conceal it.

Apologies for coming in late but have you revealed any particular interest, like involvement in a free school?

community.tes.com/threads/executive-academy-head-yet-more-problems.735330/

I think you are being disingenuous planetarium:
So while there may not be a problem to be solved in your area, there is a problem nationally.

I don't see you mention Nicky Morgan in your statement here - it appears to be your own opinion. As before, with my previous post about LMS, when my experience didn't agree with what you stated as fact, you have qualified your post.

have you revealed any particular interest

No, my children attend an academy, and I work in schools, but not as a teacher. What's your interest?

As before, with my previous post about LMS, when my experience didn't agree with what you stated as fact, you have qualified your post.

Sorry if we're having communication issues. To be clear ... my opinion is that some academies are good and some are bad. A lot of people have heard bad things about some academies and so assume that all academies are bad - that irritates me. I think that turning all schools into academies on-mass against their will is "a bad thing".

No vested interest at all, as it happens. I no longer work in schools, my children are grown up, but future grandchildren could well be affected.

I do care about democracy, which the present government appear not to.