Colin Harris is known as a maverick. He is also the head of one of the few schools in the country to be judged outstanding in every category twice in succession.
Ofsted praised his “superb leadership”, his drive and enthusiasm and his vision for the pupils of Warren Park primary in one of the less advantaged parts of Havant, Hampshire.
Not surprisingly, other heads wanted to learn from him, and he was asked to help a struggling primary in neighbouring Portsmouth. But it never happened because the Department for Education (DfE) told him his school would have to become an academy before he could take an advisory role.
“I find it offensive to suggest that only academy schools are qualified to help others, especially when you look at the number of failing academy schools and chains,” says Harris.
Now the government is planning to speed up its academy schools agenda by pushing local education authorities and their remaining schools even further into the background. In a speech at the De Ferrers academy in Burton upon Trent earlier this month, David Cameron said his government had a new ambition: “to make local authorities running schools a thing of the past”.
The education and adoption bill going through parliament will change the law to accelerate the transfer of schools to sponsored academy status by removing time allowed for consultation with parents, staff and governors. Schools can either voluntarily convert to academy status or be forced to become sponsored academies if under-performing.
The bill compresses the timetable. As soon as Ofsted reports that a school is inadequate, an academy order will be issued that will remove the school from local authority control, whereupon the secretary of state will appoint a sponsor from the DfE’s approved list.
There will also be a new definition of “coasting” school – one that has reasonable results but should be doing better – and they, too, will be forced to become sponsored academies.
No prizes for guessing that the list of approved sponsors includes only academies and academy chains, says Harris. “I have no problem with any system that improves education, but I haven’t seen any research that shows academies or free schools are doing that.”
But will the government be able to find enough suitable sponsors? Lord Storey, the Liberal Democrat education spokesman, thinks cutting local authorities and non-academy schools out of the school improvement process is a serious mistake. He has tabled an amendment to the bill at its report stage in the House of Lords tomorrow that would allow the secretary of state to appoint outstanding and good maintained schools or local authorities as academy sponsors.
“Under the new coasting rule we are going to see thousands of schools becoming academies if they take the present definition of coasting,” he says. “We could be talking about thousands of schools deemed inadequate or inadequate through coasting, and where are they going to find sponsors when it is already proving difficult?” Local education authorities have a huge amount of expertise centrally and among their schools that is being wasted by squeezing them out, he says.
It’s all very well identifying sponsors for schools, but will they deliver the goods? A study of official sources by Schools Week last month showed that at least 17 academy trusts had been given thousands of pounds to prepare for sponsorship but had not taken on or opened any school.
The DfE said it was because they had not found the right match. However, some have already pulled out of sponsorship. The Avec Partnership supporting schools in the north-east, for example, decided not to be a sponsor after all and repaid the £84,425 grant. New sponsors are also needed for failing academies. To date, two failing academy trusts have been terminated, 21 warning notices have been issued for under-performance and 101 pre-warning notices.
Lord Storey’s amendment is backed by the Local Government Association (LGA) representing 370 councils. Roy Perry, chairman of the LGA’s children and young people board, says the policy doesn’t make sense because only three of the 20 largest academy chains are doing well enough to take on additional schools.
Nicky Morgan, the education secretary, says the bill contains tough new measures “to turn around failing schools from day one” because the children in them have only one chance of an education. Introducing her bill in the House of Commons in June she told MPs: “In the past, such transformation could be delayed or even blocked altogether by pressure groups or unions with ideological objections to transferring power from town halls to outstanding heads and teachers.”
The LGA wants good local education authorities such as Conservative-controlled Hampshire to be able to sponsor academies. Most of Hampshire’s schools have decided not to become academies: fewer than half of its secondary schools have converted, and only about 1% of its primaries. The authority was praised by Sir Michael Wilshaw, the chief inspector, who named it last year as one of the best two local authorities for providing excellent challenge [pdf], support and intervention to bring about substantial gains in attainment in its schools. Yet the DfE will not allow it to sponsor schools deemed inadequate, even if private sponsors cannot be found. If the bill goes ahead unamended then councils such as Hampshire will be banned from helping struggling schools from the moment they are judged inadequate and an academy order is issued.
Kevin Harcombe, head of Redlands primary in Fareham, says local authorities are elected by their residents to provide education, yet the government is removing the responsibility and giving it to people who do not even know the area.
“Hampshire is a high-performing authority with a proven track record. We don’t need academy trusts coming in from elsewhere. Hampshire was chosen by the DfE to be the strategic partner to go into the Isle of Wight to help improve school standards, for example. It’s effectively running Isle of Wight schools, and yet it won’t be allowed to help its own schools once the academy orders are made. It’s all nonsense.”
Hampshire’s school improvement service is selling more work to local academies than it did when they were maintained schools, says John Clarke, Hampshire’s deputy director of children’s services.
“We are not ideologically opposed to academy schools because we want the best for our children and we have some brilliant academies here. But we have also had a bad experience with an academy chain.” Research by respected bodies such as the National Foundation for Educational Research and the Sutton Trust has found little evidence that academy status improves the education of children, he adds.
Hampshire had to stand by while the sponsor appointed by the DfE for one of its schools allowed standards to fall. After the Academies Enterprise Trust, one of the biggest in England with 68 schools, took over the John Hunt of Everest school in Basingstoke, the proportion of pupils gaining five or more GCSEs including maths and English dropped from 40% to 33%, rising to 36% this year.
The Education Funding Agency issued AET with a financial notice to improve, barring it from taking on any more schools last year after Ofsted inspected 12 of its academies and found one inadequate and five requiring improvement. Inspectors said too many pupils were not being given a good enough education and now, 18 months later, are carrying out a second inspection of the trust.
However, the DfE says becoming an academy with the help of a strong sponsor helps create the conditions for rapid and sustained improvement. “No parent should be content with their child spending a single day in a failing school,” said a spokeswoman. “All spending of sponsor capacity fund grants must be approved by us and we will seek to recoup unspent funds.”
