advertisement


Forced Academisation of Schools

@PaulA & psi310398:

Thanks to both for helping me to understand the context - much appreciated.

The reason for the request for clarification lies in the desire to compare the state of education in the UK with that here in SA.

Here we have seen "Education" converted from a tax-funded social benefit to an issue of political expediency wherein "success" is measured in statistics that support the ruling party's agenda and wherein the students play little or no role.

There was a brief flirtation with "Outcomes-Based Education" but the outcomes were all team-based and the net effect was a drop to lowest common denominator which soon created an uproar and OBE was abandoned.

This has been exacerbated by pay scales for teachers and support staff that have lagged far behind inflation - a situation that has seen this staffing pool evaporate over time due to emigration and departure from academic life to commerce and industry. This has left schools staffed with woefully inadequate teaching capability - both in capacity and in expertise.

As a result of this, a number of exclusive private schools have sprung up - all with fee levels that put them way beyond the reach of all but the most wealthy. These private schools can (and do) afford to pay over the norm, so tend to wind up with the best of any teaching staff remaining - which further impacts the quality of education in state schools.

Meanwhile - in the interests of political expediency and "acceptable" statistics, standards have dropped to the point where few institutions still retain international "qualification recognition".

Personally, I find the blatant use of education as a tool of politics to be repugnant (and the same goes for any other achievement-based human activities such as sport). Unfortunately, there is no light at the end of the tunnel - not even a train coming...
 
DevillEars said:
This has been exacerbated by pay scales for teachers and support staff that have lagged far behind inflation - a situation that has seen this staffing pool evaporate over time due to emigration and departure from academic life to commerce and industry. This has left schools staffed with woefully inadequate teaching capability - both in capacity and in expertise.

As a result of this, a number of exclusive private schools have sprung up - all with fee levels that put them way beyond the reach of all but the most wealthy. These private schools can (and do) afford to pay over the norm, so tend to wind up with the best of any teaching staff remaining - which further impacts the quality of education in state schools.
Click to expand...

DevillEars,

Education is too much of a political football anywhere where the government is directly involved in providing it.

It is not as if it is anything special in this country, at least in the state sector. It is a booming export market in the private sector to the degree that many private schools need to cap the number of overseas pupils they admit in order to avoid killing the golden goose - if there are too many Chinese/foreign students in a school, prospective parents will question whether they will actually receive an English public school education! The national attainment stats which feed into the multinational PISA study are fatally flawed and tell us nothing very interesting, not least as they are are self-reported (and, many suspect, manipulated) on their way to the OECD.

As someone who has had the job of hiring school leavers and graduates for roles in one of the Big Four accountancy firms, I just cannot believe what the stats appear to be telling us regarding being in the top ten. I could pay top whack for starting salaries and theoretically have my pick of candidates but most candidates could not communicate accurately, although some could count. I'd be lucky to find four or five out of one hundred, and these were allegedly the cream of the crop.

On your points above, I know a fair number of teachers in both sectors and it is not just the pay and rations which attract them to private schools in the UK. They also cite respect and discipline ( and, yes, I know it is easier to teach a bunch of middle class pupils etc...) and the relative absence of education management bollocks emanating from their heads, the centre and LAs. The pay differentials are not that great between sectors here and teachers in the private system tend to work longer hours and, in boarding schools, have considerably more responsibility.

Re overhead/ideology, I am also the Chair of Governors of a state-funded school and I get a ream or so of stuff every week from the local authority, which after a cursory glance to ensure I don't miss anything goes straight into the bin. Very little of it has much to do with teaching children...and most of it a statement of bleeding obvious.

I really can't see why the state does not get out of the way. I see little added value from either centre or LA. We could rely on an internationally respected organisation to provide testing, say Oxford or the International Baccalaureate. Beyond that surely, all that is needed is a law compelling parents to have their children educated (oh, we have one already!) and an equalising grant to ensure that the poor can afford the fees. Schools could be given charitable status and left to get on with it...

And for those who say that the poor are feckless or ignorant and can't be trusted to have their children educated, what do they think happens now?

Peter
 
psi310398 said:
As someone who has had the job of hiring school leavers and graduates for roles in one of the Big Four accountancy firms, I just cannot believe what the stats appear to be telling us regarding being in the top ten. I could pay top whack for starting salaries and theoretically have my pick of candidates but most candidates could not communicate accurately, although some could count. I'd be lucky to find four or five out of one hundred, and these were allegedly the cream of the crop.
Click to expand...

After 40-odd years working for a US-based IT multinational (eventually retiring at end of Feb 2011), it became apparent from around the mid 1990s that eroding profit margins (due to commoditization) had all but eliminated corporates' appetites to recruit school leavers and invest in training or any other forms of people development.

This led to a period during which it was "open season" on poaching staff from other IT companies. The unfortunate effect of this strategy was to create "job jumpers" who would leave at the drop of a hat if the new offer was financially beneficial.

Needless to say, this sputtered and died when the packages being demanded became ridiculous.

Next came trolling for qualified and skilled people via employment agencies...

This brought with it some real problems (and not "challenges" as some would have us believe) with applicants supposedly screened by the agencies quoting qualifications to which they were not entitled (not having attended even one lecture in the curriculum) and citing work experience that would best be described as works of fiction.

We used to advertise for developers with 5 years experience in C++/VisualStudio and a bachelors degree in either Computer Science or a BCommT (IT-slanted BComm). What we got from agencies were applicants that were functionally computer-illiterate with zero experience despite certificates (some obviously forged) and references from prior engagements (also patently false).

These agencies also had the gall to demand a commission of a full year's total-cost-to-company for each applicant employed. This didn't last long either....

When I retired, the focus on recruitment was largely via referrals from staff members who were only paid a recruitment bonus after the new hire had completed 12 months employment with a positive performance review.

Now IT has long enjoyed a reputation among careers as offering good conditions and good pay, so if we were getting the dregs (as we saw them), one has to wonder about those selecting careers in education in this day and age - where conditions and pay are not as hyped...

PS: I spent 2 years running our Management & Sales Training group (1982-1984) and found it to be the most rewarding assignment in that 40 years - grooming and shaping new hires and equipping them to perform the jobs for which they had been hired. Many of those I trained remain friends to this day.

Pity about eroding margins... :(

Dave
 
psi310398 said:
DevillEars,

Education is too much of a political football anywhere where the government is directly involved in providing it.

It is not as if it is anything special in this country, at least in the state sector. It is a booming export market in the private sector to the degree that many private schools need to cap the number of overseas pupils they admit in order to avoid killing the golden goose - if there are too many Chinese/foreign students in a school, prospective parents will question whether they will actually receive an English public school education! The national attainment stats which feed into the multinational PISA study are fatally flawed and tell us nothing very interesting, not least as they are are self-reported (and, many suspect, manipulated) on their way to the OECD.

As someone who has had the job of hiring school leavers and graduates for roles in one of the Big Four accountancy firms, I just cannot believe what the stats appear to be telling us regarding being in the top ten. I could pay top whack for starting salaries and theoretically have my pick of candidates but most candidates could not communicate accurately, although some could count. I'd be lucky to find four or five out of one hundred, and these were allegedly the cream of the crop.

On your points above, I know a fair number of teachers in both sectors and it is not just the pay and rations which attract them to private schools in the UK. They also cite respect and discipline ( and, yes, I know it is easier to teach a bunch of middle class pupils etc...) and the relative absence of education management bollocks emanating from their heads, the centre and LAs. The pay differentials are not that great between sectors here and teachers in the private system tend to work longer hours and, in boarding schools, have considerably more responsibility.

Re overhead/ideology, I am also the Chair of Governors of a state-funded school and I get a ream or so of stuff every week from the local authority, which after a cursory glance to ensure I don't miss anything goes straight into the bin. Very little of it has much to do with teaching children...and most of it a statement of bleeding obvious.

I really can't see why the state does not get out of the way. I see little added value from either centre or LA. We could rely on an internationally respected organisation to provide testing, say Oxford or the International Baccalaureate. Beyond that surely, all that is needed is a law compelling parents to have their children educated (oh, we have one already!) and an equalising grant to ensure that the poor can afford the fees. Schools could be given charitable status and left to get on with it...

And for those who say that the poor are feckless or ignorant and can't be trusted to have their children educated, what do they think happens now?

Peter
Click to expand...
Interesting and valuable post, Peter.
 
psi310398 said:
It's quite complex. I'll try to describe things neutrally.

We are talking about what in the US are called public schools. In the UK public schools is a term for private schools. (Don't ask!)

Most schools are funded by the taxpayer (i.e. Central Government) and have been under the control of local authorities (roughly equal to a school district in US terms). Some are part funded by Churches and are semi-independent of this control.

The Academies policy is designed by Central Government to raise standards by removing local control and handing control to the governing body of the school direct with oversight by the central government Ministry instead. The assumption being that some local authorities do not add much value to the quality of education. This is the subject of furious debate as evidenced by the
discussion here.
Click to expand...

It's a big assumption, based on zero evidence.
You have also omitted the bit about how Gove is playing his part in the over arching Tory policy objective of transferring as much public money as possible to private business interests.

Mull
 
paul auster said:
A petition against academy status sounds to me documentary evidence not heresay .
Click to expand...
The original post was on behalf of an anonymous 'friend' (and was easily shown to be factually incorrect). Does that not qualify as 'hearsay'?

The petition against conversion needs much more work, the petitioners need to show they are not connected to the failure and that academy status would hinder improvement. As it stands asking complete strangers to sign a petition on ideological grounds doesn't look good if your main concern is the children being failed by this school.

Paul
 
For the Googly challenged.
Click to expand...
What Google query did you use?

All we have to go on is 'East Sussex', 'Academy' and 'recent American History'.

I can't be bothered to reconcile the differences between King Offa's and Heron Park, and why the predecessor schools were failing. I think it is up to you if you have a serious point to actually make it.

Paul
 
Latest government emission. They want to test 5 year olds - presumably so progress can be measured as they go through primary school. But they also announced in the same breath that any school with fewer than 65% of pupils reaching level 4 at age 11 will trigger an immediate OfSTED inspection - but why no link to the intake at 5? Schools in nice middle class areas will cruise, whereas schools with more challenging intakes will be battered.

Surely they should be saying that schools with fewer than 65% of pupils making a specified level of PROGRESS should be the ones inspected?
 
Mullardman said:
It's a big assumption, based on zero evidence.
You have also omitted the bit about how Gove is playing his part in the over arching Tory policy objective of transferring as much public money as possible to private business interests.

Mull
Click to expand...

Mull

It is a big assumption but you can hardly say zero evidence - Hackney, Islington etc - there were several really poor LAs and a lot of coasting ones. The better argument might be about improving those LAs, which appears to have happened in some cases. Interestingly outsourcing to CEA led to such an improvement that Islington is now insourcing the staff from that body again. Ten years ago I would not have put my dog into an Islington secondary.

Re shovelling money to private business interests, rather than making an assertion, please show us exactly what money goes to Academy sponsors. The DFE publishes the funding arrangements and instruments of government. I can't see where it is supposed to come from. In fact, they are not allowed to make a profit and I believe most academy trusts are actually charities. I'd imagine that most sponsors lose money if only through opportunity cost by taking on management responsibilities.
 
RichardH said:
Latest government emission. They want to test 5 year olds - presumably so progress can be measured as they go through primary school. But they also announced in the same breath that any school with fewer than 65% of pupils reaching level 4 at age 11 will trigger an immediate OfSTED inspection - but why no link to the intake at 5? Schools in nice middle class areas will cruise, whereas schools with more challenging intakes will be battered.

Surely they should be saying that schools with fewer than 65% of pupils making a specified level of PROGRESS should be the ones inspected?
Click to expand...
There's a press release at https://www.gov.uk/government/news/raising-ambitions-and-standards-for-primary-schools which states that the school fails to reach standard if both low levels of attainment and low levels of progress occur simultaneously.

Paul
 
One of the benefits of academy status is that schools are then free to cherry pick services and organise their own strategies around learning, behaviour and attendance. In our case this is a huge benefit as LA services have been very variable and sometimes dire.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top