What happens after special measures?

[ifeelallfloopy]

I need a rant because I'm panicking.
My kids' school suffered a bad ofsted after years of being outstanding/good. Suddenly parents started pulling their kids out of school and then things were made even worse after the head resigned and school was academised - so this trio of things has transformed a good school into a dwindling one and I don't know if it will survive. Anyway we've decided to stick with it but I'm not feeling great about it. Possibly it's just nerves at the start of the year and I'm hoping things will settle down and pick up again but I am constantly doubting myself.

Does anyone have any experience of special measures and how a school can recover? I understood that special measures = extra funding, but I've been told by staff this is not the case, so wondering how on earth it can pull itself back to where it was. I want to support it but how? Any advice appreciated, it's horrible when you are not sure if you are doing the right thing or not.

We’ve been at two schools that went into special measures. The first one a lot of the “nicer” families left, a lot of the staff left, the school struggled to recruit replacement staff and ended up either hiring less than stellar staff (who often jumped or were pushed mid year) or classes ended up with a series of medium-term supply teachers. The school was unable to get out of the downward spiral and is still a bit of a hole today. Reputational damage takes a long time to mend and without a balanced intake and enough good teachers it is very hard to claw out of the pit. We relocated for non-school reasons but are still in touch with lots of friends there and in the area.

Our second school went into special measures last year. We have seen some of the same already - children from supportive families leaving (especially girls which leaves the school rather boy-heavy). New intakes have both been much smaller than PAN and not “socially balanced”. All the other schools in town are now packed to the rafters so we get in-year admissions who are just waiting for a space at their preferred/nearby school. This increases the feeling of churn and that “everyone is leaving”. Teaching staff are relatively stable, but TAs and office staff have left and announcements are not made, so it feels secretive. Fun stuff has stopped and the relentless focus on SATs produced results below the floor standard.

We have one child left at the school and are considering our options - the school seems worse since the judgement 18mo ago and not better in any respect.

I do believe schools can recover and I know quite a few that have.

Schools have not had extra money to improve for many years now, so forget that. One of the reasons for this is that money often isn’t the answer. You can not necessarily buy a good head by throwing money at it. Schools are, however, funded on a per pupil basis. Therefore losing children is a big problem as, when the following year’s budget is calculated, there is less money and often more problems to address. It’s always the more mobile families who bail out - because they can. They are often the families that need no interventions too.

A school is Inadequate for a number of reasons. The report will list them. It’s never just one small issue. It’s a culmination of failures over a period of time. The most telling one is poor leadership. A first class Head and senior leadership team is crucial. Inadequate schools that have plummeted from Outstsnding/Good clearly have failing leadership. If the LA/Academy chain can get this right, a lot of improvement will follow. They will want the best teaching and make huge efforts to attract talented staff to make sure the children are well taught. It’s never all about Sats though. Ofsted want progress!! They also like a school with a varied curriculum, great teaching, inspired leadership and accurate assessment of progress so teaching can be targeted to address weaknesses. Knowing the weaknesses of the school are vital in improving the school. The current leadership was clearly asleep. The Governors must have oversight of school improvement and they might need replacing too.

A good Head will keep parents informed and build partnerships to ensure parents are on board. Maybe a parents forum and regular newsletters? They can share their improvement plan with parents (in a shortened form) if they really want to work with parents. It’s not a confidential document.

However I never think it’s a good idea to blindly support a school. They need to demonstrate to you and your children that they are up to the job. Any teacher who is removed is clearly a disaster. They will want to avoid that and will be desperate to keep their better teachers. They should look at the professional development of the teachers and certainly be up to speed with SEN and PP requirements regarding interventions and progress as well as using accurate assessment to inform lesson planning and differentiation. The school should retain an innovative curriculum and it should be broad and exciting.

To sum up - with the right leadership team, all is not lost. I hope that is recognised and the rot stops now.

My kids school was rated inadequate last year however at the time the parents thought the school was doing fine but with some communication problems. We had a bad new headteacher and you could clearly see that, teachers weren't happy so a lot of them left. We then got a new headteacher and that's when ofsted visited and we were rated inadequate. The new Headteacher took it upon herself to fix the problems(1 year without a sponsor), which we saw an improvement, new curriculum, happier staff etc... But a lot of children left as the school suffered some bad luck as well, they had to use agency cover as some teachers had long term illness and personal problems plus they had also received a reputable sponsor offer instantly but they dropped us for financial reasons. Some parents lost confidence in the school as we have had a meeting with the sponsor promising a bright future, basically confirming we'd join their academy. We were very disheartened when that happened as the sponsor took over another local school.

The school only now managed to get another sponsor which thankfully is reputable. We currently have the same headteacher, new uniforms, new school name and mostly same the staff with permanent placement. Although the bad rep weighting on us we feel that our children are doing well and striving. At the moment we have no intention of changing their school as the early years/ks1 are stable so I feel like they are growing with the change if that make sense.

I understand how you feel and i also doubt myself and other people opinion doesn't help either specially those who left. But i keep in mind that the sponsor wouldn't have taken us on if they didn't think they'd be able to pull the school through as their reputation is at stake. They were a single academy trust and their primary and secondary schools are rated outstanding and are always oversubscribed. It's ok to support the school if you feel that your child striving, supported and happy however it's also fine to change school if you feel that the school isn't delivering and improving. I truly hope that you find what works best for your family and wish you all best. Good luck.

I hate to tell you, but academies are in it for the money. They are there to turn failing schools around. It’s their job. You have to join an academy trust or be an academy converter. As an inadequate school, you cannot convert so a multi academy trust is often the only option. The academy chain (mat) backs itself to do a good job. However there are plenty that don’t. If they use the same poor teachers and senior leaders, they might not see much improvement. They have to use their expertise to get the improvements needed. Some fail to do this year after year.

It is not uncommon for parents to have little idea about how bad a school is. They fail to look at data on the government’s web site, they never compare their school to others and they fall into a sleepy acceptance. If parents knew the curriculum, saw the data (Ofsted start by looking at this), and made some evaluation about quality of teaching and leadership in the school, they could write half the report before Ofsted got near the place.

Lots of heads jump and pass their inadequate failing school onto a new Head and let them carry the can! They know there is a problem so they go. The new head will be disliked for changing things that are vital but some teachers are used to a cosy life without challenge, so they go too. You then take at least two years to recover. But you can!!!

I hate to tell you, but academies are in it for the money

Academies are charities, not profit making businesses.

Look at the pay at the top end of management for mats and then see if you think charitable status is deserved or is even a reasonable description of their activities. They are no different to local authorities and they are not charities. The executive heads in mats are well remunerated and way above standard heads. The money isn’t all for the children as huge amounts go into inflated salaries at the top end.

As a matter of law they are charities. Many charities also pay high salaries to senior staff. That doesn't stop them being charities. The important point is that the trustees, who govern the charity, are not paid for acting as trustees and there are strict rules about the circumstances in which they can be paid for work they do for the charity. Also any surplus the trust generates remains with the trust and is not distributed to the trustees or anyone else.

If you believe that charities that have high pay for their senior executives do not deserve charitable status a lot of well known charities would not qualify. Salaries in excess of £100k are common for the CEO or equivalent, with some well known charities paying over £300k to their highest earners.

My personal view is that the right leader makes a huge difference to an organisation. You therefore need to offer an appropriate pay package to attract the kind of leader you want.