Primary schools into academies

[academyblues]

Regular but name changed as my geographical area will be obvious to some and I don't want to out myself.

It looks like my dc's primary is going to be made into an academy, presumably from Sept 2012. It wasn't on Gove's original list of 200, but there seems to have been some behind the scenes negotiations with the LA.

I know that no-one knows how primary schools will function as academies as our children are the first in this particular educational and social experiment, but can someone give me some ideas of what to expect?

What exactly is the process? How are the head/sponsor appointed/decided on? Is there any mechanism for parents to have a say in the school's specialisms or to try to hold on the the aspects of the school that are good, of which there are many?

The plan is for a very sizeable proportion of our borough's (Haringey) primaries to become academies over the next couple of years, hence undermining the LA infrastructure sufficiently for the rest to be forced to convert, it would seem.

Like most parents, I just like a decent local school - is this possible with academy status.

teacher - the LEA still has to provide all the SEN support staff such as the ASD team, VI team, SALT, EP etc. It's not the SEN support that is up for discussion.

prh, that's my point. One of the schools (I don't know about the other as I don't know it) was above floor target this year, yet Gove hasn't changed his line about these schools below floor target for 5 years.

So yes, that's exactly my concern, that the school has acted on the notice to improve and achieved the desired targets and is still about to be forced into becoming an academy.

No-one knows what the long-term issues facing academies are (as they're relatively new) and I'd rather my children's education wasn't used as some sort of untested educational experiment, thanks very much.

Quite *teacher), exactly what does happen to an academy if it starts having problems or cannot fund the resources that its particular students need?

So, let me get this straight.

You're happy to send your child to a failing school, in special measures, which has failed over 40% of it's students for the last 5 years (not including the current year) - but you're not happy to send your child to an academy?

Your priorities are certainly different to mine.

choccyp1g - Perhaps I didn't explain myself well enough. Let us imagine that the government gives the LA £6500 per pupil and the LA gives schools £5500 per pupil, keeping £1000 for itself (I'm making these figures up, by the way). If the school becomes an academy the government might give the academy £6200 per pupil and the LA £300 per pupil for things the LA still has to fund such as admissions, ed psych services, etc. So the total funding that the government gives per pupil is still £6500 but it is distributed differently. The schools that remain under LA control will continue to receive £5500 per pupil after the LA has taken its cut.

So all the academy schools can receive extra out of the same size pot because the LA is receiving less.

IB, I'm not certain whether that is the case - those staff being made redundant by the LA because funding has transferred into academies include several of the staff we have used in the past to support children from particular minorities and children with particular SEN issues.

They also include e.g. Maths and Literacy advisors who used to ensure training for teachers and transfer of good practice between schools - which obviously made a difference to children's education as all got better teaching as a result...

indigo, no I'm not happy to send my child to a 'failing school, in special measures'. It's on a notice to improve. There are many, many very positive qualities to the school; tbh, getting children to pass tests is only part of what I would like from an education.

However, at the point of application this was our best option.

I am however happy to send my children to a school whose only difficulty is not getting enough children to pass enough tests (the school was just below this magical 60% a couple of years, which equates to the attainment of 2 or 3 children), who are taking steps to improve.

And no, I don't want my children's education to be the guinea pig for a new wave of forced academies, thanks.

In response to prh's point about "I don't know what years statistics are being used to determine which schools are told they must convert". That's actually one of the barmyist (sp) things I've ever heard. You don't know what statistics are being used, but as long as Gove is using some to drive fowards his ideological stance, that's okay.

The problem I see is that academy schools will get all of their funding PER PUPIL, regardless of particular need. A very large school would probably be able to spread the resources around and buy in assistance for children with special needs.

However, a smaller school (School A) may find it has higher than average numbers with special needs, so will not be able to provide the levels of support currently provided. In the meantime a nearby school ((School B) will be getting their "share" of the special needs funding, despite the fact that the pupils who need it are are at School A.

Yes, that does appear to be one of many potential problems with the funding. It creates a risk of certain parts of the community being 'managed out' as they just won't do the statistics any favours.

Is anyone able to answer my question as to what happens to academies if they run into problems eg sponsor pulling out, being failed by Ofsted etc?

They make all their staff redundant, drag the names of the headteacher and (unpaid) school governors through the mud and then close down? Or have a super-head swoop in and take them over, make all the existing staff redundant, pillory the existing school governors for doing a bad (unpaid) job, and start again? Where they will magic up all the vastly superior but affordable staff from I'm not too sure. Maybe they will keep the existing staff on by making them redundant then re-employing them on half the salary, but just get rid of the headteacher. The new super-head will attract sudden new pots of money from central government for being utterly brilliant and being willing to take on a school that cannot actually cease to exist, because the building is still there and children keep turning up each day hoping to get an education. Or alternatively they could convert the school into a young offenders institution.

Or a MacDonalds training academy?

If the government pays private institutions enough, I'm sure they'll come along and run the schools. They'll be run along the lines of the railways and utility companies - too important to actually fail. They won't quite get away with the behaviour of the banks, of course, because they won't have had that much money to muck about with in the first place.

I'd sort of like someone to come along and say 'no, neither teachers who are doing a good job nor innocent children simply wanting to be educated would suffer if an academy fucks up' but I'm not convinced that they will.

The insanity of reducing 7 years of education to a couple of numbers and applying percentages to small numbers seems to be just taken for granted by the pro-academy crew.

choccyp1g - ALL schools are funded per pupil. That is how the system works. It makes absolutely no difference whether a school is LA-controlled, an academy, a free school or a VA school. The funding is based purely on the number of pupils. You should also be aware that the LA funds ed psych, statementing and assessment of SEN, monitoring of SEN provision, individually assigned SEN resources for pupils with rare contditions and provision of Pupil Referral Units (which are not just for SEN but tend to have a disproportionate number of SEN pupils) for ALL schools, including academies.

academyblues - Most of the new academies will not have sponsors. At least one existing academy has lost its original sponsor. The academy concerned set up a charity to take over as its sponsor and has continued operating for several years.

The process if an academy is classed as a failing school is pretty much identical to that for an LA-controlled school but with the Secretary of State taking on some of the LAs responsibilities. An academy can be placed into special measures. When that happens they must come up with an improvement plan to address the issues identified by Ofsted. They will receive regular inspections. If they fail to improve the Secretary of State can appoint additional governors, stop funding the school or close it, much the same as with a maintained school.

Oh, and not knowing what years are being used is purely driven by the fact that recent boycotts of SATs by some schools has made it difficult. However, I believe they are using the 2006-2010 results.

If a maintained school messes up teachers doing a good job and innocent children will suffer. It would be nice if that didn't happen but it does. So, whilst it isn't good that this will also happen with academies, it is no different to the current situation.

2010 was the year that SATS were boycotted. Approx 3/4 schools in Haringey did. That makes a 2006-10 analysis less than accurate, whether the teacher assessments are included or not (not, I understand).

That doesn't detract from how opaque Gove has been about defining the 'worst' schools - it's hard to see any logic in not using the most current SATS results.

prh47bridgeALL schools are funded per pupil. That is how the system works. It makes absolutely no difference whether a school is LA-controlled, an academy, a free school or a VA school. The funding is based purely on the number of pupils. You should also be aware that the LA funds ed psych, statementing and assessment of SEN, monitoring of SEN provision, individually assigned SEN resources for pupils with rare contditions and provision of Pupil Referral Units (which are not just for SEN but tend to have a disproportionate number of SEN pupils) for ALL schools, including academies.
But the actual provision of services for SEN have to be provided by the academy school, out of the per-pupil funding.
Whereas at present, a child with SEN attracts a certain level of funding to the school.

But the actual provision of services for SEN have to be provided by the academy school, out of the per-pupil funding. Whereas at present, a child with SEN attracts a certain level of funding to the school.

I'm afraid that is wrong.

The LA has to provide the services for SEN pupils who need expensive tailored support regardless of whether the school involved is an academy or a maintained school.

If the LA retains funding for services for other SEN pupils (i.e. ones who don't need tailored support) the academy will receive additional funding based on the number of children registered for School Action or School Action Plus who attend the academy. In those areas maintained schools do not receive any additional funding for SEN children as the LA provides the services.

Many LAs delegate funding for services for other SEN pupils to schools. In those areas academies will be in exactly the same position as the local maintained schools. Individually assigned funding for children with statements will continue to be paid to the academy by the LA just as for maintained schools.

prh47bridge Can you point me to a specific source for the facts about SEN funding for academies please?
I am worried now, because your comment is totally contradicting what we were told on a seminar about academies for Governors. The tutor cited the examples of two real schools, one a primary school which had chosen not to go for academy status for this very reason, the second, a very large secondary school, which had opted for itfor other reasons, but felt that the SEN funding would average out over a larger school.

There seem to be a lot of misunderstandings about SEN funding for academies. The situation is set out on the DfE website here (see the section "LA services") and here. The pages seem to have been updated five days ago but both look identical to the previous version as far as I can see. Typical DfE!

www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/nov/28/us-charter-academies-free-schools

But, prh47bridge - while the LA will still be responsible for individual, tailored provision of SEN resources for severely disabled pupils - there is NO MENTION ANYWHERE (believe me, I have spent hours upon hours looking all over the web) of what it means for dc who are on SA or SA+, that right now rely on SEN provision to access education.

Some of these dc need TA's to share with others in their class - it would be entirely up to the Academy if they provided that, and the parent would no longer be able to complain to the LA - they would have to complain to the Secretary of State, who currently has a 6 month backlog on complaints. Which could well be 6 months that your dc on SA+ is unable to access the curriculum for...

HuntyCat - The information is available, mostly in the links I posted earlier. However, I accept that the position for children who do not need tailored provision is complex and the information is mainly aimed at people who already have a good understanding of school funding.

The first thing to say is that the LA remains responsible for monitoring SEN provision and ensuring that schools are meeting their responsibilities, so they are still your first port of call if you have a complaint.

The position on funding depends on what your LA does for maintained schools. Some LAs keep a budget for provision of SEN support services and schools draw on these central services as required. In those LAs an academy will receive additional funding so that it can provide its own SEN support services based on the number of SA and SA+ children it has on the roll.

Most LAs, however, delegate funding for SEN support services to schools, keeping only a small budget for provision of central SEN support services. Maintained schools in those LAs do not receive any additional funding for SA and SA+ children and are expected to fund any SEN support services they need out of their own budget. In those areas an academy will still receive some additional funding based on the number of SA and SA+ children but it will be relatively small, so they will in essence be in the same position as maintained schools.

If I knew which LA you are in I could tell you exactly how much funding a primary school academy in your area will receive for each SA and SA+ child. However, as the chances are that your LA delegates SEN funding to schools, the figure is likely to be quite small.

You need to go back to the concept of what school action and school action plus are. School action means that the special needs of that particular child can be adequately handled by the school themselves. School Action plus means that the school is now bringing a level of outside help (ed pyschs, social worker or whoever) to help establish exactly what the issue is with the pupil and then to put in appropriate resource. In my LA (and in many other LAs) all funding for SA and SA+ is devolved to the schools and an academy would receive no more and no more than they would as a corresponding community school. It is for the school to decide how best to use that funding to aid all those children in the school with special needs.
Only when the pupils has sufficient special needs that they require further help will the LA accept any responsibility and that is usually by way of a statement of special needs being agreed. That funding is held centrally by the LA but is actually part of the Delegated School Grant(DSG) and the LA have responsibility for all schools including academies and free schools. Is it going to get harder to get a statement of SEN , almost for sure yes because of the funding situation but that will true for all schools.

It is already almost impossible to get a Statement of Special Needs - I had a conversation with the HT of the Secondary school my DD attends last night where the HT was asking me if I knew of any way she could get help to challenge the LA wrt a child needing a statement because they were over 4 years behind their peers, and even the school couldn't get the LA to ASSESS for a statement...I posted the HT in the direction of IPSEA and SoS SEN - but the very fact that the HT has asked the parent of an SEN dc for advice SAYS how bad my LA is...

The thing is, parents will be able to complain to the LA still if the Academy isn't upholding the statement. They WON'T be able to complain to the LA if the school suddenly halves the amount of help it gives a dc on SA or SA+ - That complaint will have to be directed to the Secretary of State.