Did Supply in a new Academy yesterday and feel sad

[gabid]

Yesterday I went into a once failing school in a deprived area that has been an Academy for a year now. The first impression was good - new buildings, great photos of children in the reception area, but at the end of the day I felt sad .

There was no ino given to me (e.g. rewards and sanctions, map of the school etc) so I felt I was sent into the classroom 'naked'. I had to ask someone in the staffroom.

In general, I felt the kids weren't motivated or interested, even the better groups, behaviour in class and around the school was very poor (shouting, swearing - just lots of noise). I entered a couple of classrooms and there was lots of rubbish on the floor (in period 4 and 5).

I spoke to some members of staff and they didn't seem to have enough textbooks to go round, I didn't see many in the classrooms either.

And in P5 I taught a bottom Y9 group who didn't know their timestables and after the lesson on the way out I had to break up a fight.

Shouldn't things change and improve with turning a school into an Academy?

So who is gaining? It doesn't seem to be the kids, that's for sure. I don't really understand how they are financed, I thought it was private investors, but it seems to be more complicated.

I assume its cheaper for the government, and if there is private money they will expect some sort of return?

Chubfuddler - it is true, most Y9 bottom sets wouldn't know their times tables, but to be honest one doesn't have to be mathematically able to learn some times tables - there are some things you just have to learn, no excuses. And if you are a solicitor, it shouldn't have been too much of an effort.

New school, new start, hm - I would have expected something a bit more organised and on top of things.

I am HoD RE too, and like Pottering you won't find textbooks in my department. I never use them. I too do revision guides for students, so lessons can focus on active learning.

I had to break up a fight today and restrain a student and we are a "good" school. Old style academies are unusual in being able to totally turn things round.

Most, if not all academies are fur coat, no knickers IME.

I don't see how textbooks equal lazy teaching. The kids at my children's selective independent each have a rucksack full every day and the teaching is excellent.

It seems to me more that no textbooks equals teachers who don't think their kids will look after them or bring them into school as required.

Amaretti - I haven't worked in a state school where textbooks are taken home. I had a book for each subject to take home when I was at school in Germany though.

As a parent (with DS in Y2 at the moment) I would consider it helpful though so you could see what they are learning - I haven't got a clue.

gabid

All of the Bliar Broon Nuu Labour Academies were "sponsored" which meant that the sponsor put in £1m in the first year and then got to run the school.
The budget share came direct from the DFEE rather than via the LEA
management charges from the companies that oversee the academy can be substantial - Oasis are currently being taken to task for spending too much on senior management and too little on teaching.

All of the Cameroon / Goove 2011/12 Academies are standard schools that have had their budget share transferred from the LEA to the Dfee

there is NO NEW MONEY
the only difference is that the school can CHOOSE whether to buy in expertise from the LEA or from a private (profit making) company

I teach two very different subjects and in both of them textbooks do not equal lazy teaching. They equal saving photocopying.

I don't understand the teachers who don't like textbooks. Are you suggesting that everything the children learn has to come out of your head in the lessons, or out of classroom discussion? Or do you mean that the children should get any additional info off the internet?

The internet wasn't even invented when I was at school, and in my favourite subjects I learned loads from the textbook, even reading the chapters that weren't in our particular exam board's curriculum.

I can see that maybe textbooks are more relevant to some subjects than others, but no text books? I just can't get my head around that idea.

Getting back to the OP, it does seem a bit depressing: Either the school became an academy because it was so good that it thought it could do even better freed from the trammels of LA control...and it has gone downhill.

Or it was rubbish and was made to convert in order to improve...and it hasn't improved.

textbooks are much better for learning than photocopies.

New academies get the full allocation direct. It used to go to the LA who took a bit of it, and gave the rest to the schools to spend. The bit kept back the LA chose where to spend. So, although all schools got some services, not all got services equal to the amount they lost. Some received very few services for the money the LA kept back.

Politically, in these circumstances, I can understand the argument not to convert. However, financially, there is no argument; the school is better off. It gets it's full allocation if it converts, it buys the services the LA provided and the rest it can spend how it wants because it is extra to what it would have received otherwise. That could be wasted but as these Academies were outstanding schools, one would hope they would divert it to very good education investment - maybe more teachers, improved facilities, maintaining TAs, keeping a decent choice of curriculum at a time when main budgets are being cut.

My DCs have textbooks. Maths is only used for Homework, Science is used for Homework and revision, French and Spanish is used in class and at home. DS used to have a History one, DD hasn't had it, I don't think it covers all the subjects in the new (more consistent) syllabus. English has set books from time to time.

Lots of schools have no textbooks
That's nothing to do with being a 'good' or 'failing' school or an academy or not. It's just some schools use them, and some schools don't.

Kez, my school is one that is outstanding that was forced to convert for financial reasons. The Tories cut our school budget massively and are promising more cuts in the future. We needed to get control of our finances so that we could have some chance of salvaging the situation.

You might like to think that we would be spending our bumper academy bonus on more teachers, improved facilities and maintaining TAs, but in fact despite becoming an academy my school has had to lay off teachers, sack TAs and like I said, my classroom is leaky and hole-ridden (we were promised a new school under the Building Schools for the Future programme which was scrapped by the Tories).

Teachers at my school are teaching more and with less support, despite being an academy. And we are looking at how we can further cut costs over the next few years as sixth form funding continues to dwindle, by cutting lesson allocation and subject availability in the sixth form.

The academy money is not a surplus, it is going towards plugging a very deep hole. And it's not enough.

The only experience I have of academies is from my own childrens "outstanding" primary, and from what I've seen I find it very worrying.

The very first (visible) thing they did was to change their admission policy to basically make it impossible for children outside catchment to get a place (by de-prioritising the sibly policy and even giving teachers children a priority). The cynic in me thinks that the reason for this is that there is a pretty large chunk of out of catchment EAL children who have now got no chance of getting a place. What's next? Maybe get rid of all the SEN kids too?

There was no consultation with parents other than a letter to say there would be no consultation as the board of governers had already decided it was in the best interests of the school.

The sats revision is crazy. My kids have missed core lessons (including games)
in order to focus on sats revision.

And the way I see it I have no-one at all to complain to;

1. the headteacher - well they're her policies so she isn't going to do anything
2. the Board of Governors - they sing from the same song sheet
3. MP - he's on the board of Governors

I may be wrong on this, but they just don't seem accountable to anyone? As far as I'm aware they are no longer governed by either the LEA or Ofsted?

Fortunately, my 2 are leaving this year but the high school they are going to is also an academy.

I fear that Academies can be dangerous when you've got a meglomaniac running the show.

northcountry
sadly I think you have defined the elephant in the room
Academies ARE accountable - to the DFEE
which has so far NO apparent systems to deal with schools that are going pear shaped
(my local academy is an Oasis so this is something I watch VERY closely)

They are still under OFSTED!

Noble- my list wasn't meant to be exhaustive. I do find the budget cut situation awful and wrong but that is beyond schools control. By being an Academy there has been, I suspect, less redundancies etc than would have been the case if they had stated LEA. So, however bad, it's still better than it would have been.

I agree leadership quality is very important with Academies.

Kez100
indeed but Ofsted DO NOT have enforcement powers.
I've spoken to them at length about this because of Cory's catchment school which is linked to mine.
Ofsted can put the school in special measures and/or give it notice to improve
but it CANNOT make them do anything
and in the case of Cory's local school, Oasis have just stuck their heads in the sand and there is NOTHING the LEA or the council can do
and the Dfes has just 'asked' them to deal
hence the fact that the huge management salaries have come to light

Can't believe Y9's (bottom or not/academy or not) don't know times tables! Some of my Y2's know up to 7's and I would be devestated if my Y6 dd didn't know hers!!! BTW she will be going to local comp and we live on a council estate! No excuse!

The SOS can certainly get involved if he wants to - he/she is allowed to be a member or director (not sure which)

Kez, I wish more people were aware of the dire budget situations in schools. The amount of people on here moaning about how their local school has become an academy, like it had any choice! No one wanted my school to become an academy, yet, a year after our head said that they had no intention of becoming an academy, there we were.

When you said that the academy money could be spent on more teachers and improved facilities, it sounded like we were diving into piles of extra cash like Scrooge McDuck! Instead we are struggling to keep our heads above water. And when provision and results go downhill as they undoubtedly will because we have fewer and more overworked teachers and TAs, people will say 'god, I thought academies were supposed to be better than comps, what are they doing?' And people will blame the school for being crap instead of placing the blame squarely where it belongs with the government.

The whole thing really pisses me off.

Bethnella, some children in bottom set (all?) are likely to have learning issues which make learning and recalling times tables rather harder than it is for the rest of us.

at DCs school the Academy bonus was £350,000 for one year
which against a budget of over £5,000,000 every year
and the fact that they have had to fiddle the insurance premiums through the dfes
AND the £80,000 per year specialisation money has stopped
makes me realise that its ALL about weakening LEAs
and burger all to do with improving education

Noble- it pisses me off too. Politically, I come from a very different angle. Resource a school properly, reduce admin burden, allow SLT to do what they are good at - teaching, not business matters. Allow teachers to do what they are good at and stop messing with initiatives and constant exam changes. Ofsted need to work with schools to draw together everyones expertise not as a scary us versus you inspectorate (now lets add to the suspense and make it no notice and try and catch you out regime). Such a waste of resources when they could come in and help. I could go on forever (probably).

However, many schools needed to convert to survive and others to maintain the status quo. If the Academy decision to convert was made as a political decision some schools would have been throwing themselves to the wolves.