Just as an aside and as someone that shows some commitment to your child's school, if what you are saying is you would prefer the continuation of what has gone on before, I just wondered what you might wish to happen to the 'crappy school' you are keen not to be associated with ??
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
All schools being privatised under Tories
- Thread starter Albumen
- Start date
Just as an aside and as someone that shows some commitment to your child's school, if what you are saying is you would prefer the continuation of what has gone on before, I just wondered what you might wish to happen to the 'crappy school' you are keen not to be associated with ??
Geestar
New member
There wont be enough teachers soon either way
Unfortunately, that's not possible. The local LEA has been starved of funds by central Government over the past five years or so. As a result, they've had to cut their services to the schools, possibly unnoticed by the wider population as more visible services have been spared. The LEA is now adrift, unable to provide any direction. There is no choice, except jump or be pushed.
Last edited:
Good luck in getting an answer from on that, typical nimby snobby governor.
Actually, the longer term plan is to take on failing schools, up to three maybe, but we want to establish a secure foundation from which to start.
I'm pretty sure the Tories WILL have thought of it!
So much ill informed nonsense on this thread. You can criticise the process for many things but privatisation this is not. I am staggered how many people fall for this crap. Tony Blair was not against letting schools make profit but he knew, just as every government will, that the public won't tolerate it. Anyone who is a governor knows money is tight so I don't quite see how people think loads of profit can be made.
As for that chap who is a governor of a school that has a "we're alright jack" attitude not wanting to help other "crappy schools" well that is the whole point of a school led system with collaboration between good and weaker schools. Schools where heads work closely with poor schools actually say that they also benefit. The successful chains make it their business to help failing schools. The fewer governors about saying derogatory stuff about schools the better.
As for that chap who is a governor of a school that has a "we're alright jack" attitude not wanting to help other "crappy schools" well that is the whole point of a school led system with collaboration between good and weaker schools. Schools where heads work closely with poor schools actually say that they also benefit. The successful chains make it their business to help failing schools. The fewer governors about saying derogatory stuff about schools the better.
Butch Willykins
Well-known member
Ahh shit, good point. Maybe they should hold a big vote and let the public decide who they want In charge.
Cat bothering moron.
glasfryn
cleaning up cat sick
changed for you
why oh why are you tory people so rude ...................worrying realy to leave the world to idiots like you
I have just noticed you avatar .......................and you call me a moron ..................................just how old are you 10
Stato
Well-known member
- Dec 21, 2011
- 7,382
Some food for thought:
No parental choice in this which has been the mantra of successive governments for the last three decades. Schools in Brighton & Hove that have considered Academy status have found parents to be not in favour. This choice is being removed by this policy.
Local authorities don't actually run schools. They are run by governing bodies and head teachers with the support of the LA.
If your child's school is community run and you don't like something you have recourse through the governing body and/or your local councillor. However under this proposal your elected councillor would have no say and Academy chains can scrap governing bodies should they choose too (and they have chosen too): http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-35531827. This removes a parent's recourse to any kind of accountable elected body.
Turning a school into an academy requires that the government take the land and buildings from the current owners and hand them over to the academy chain without charge. Many schools' land and buildings are not owned by local authorities but by a church diocese. This policy may involve the government seeking to take church land and hand it free of charge to private organisations in perpetuity. The government has already introduced a bill that allows this in failing schools: http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/nov/17/nicky-morgan-steal-schools-church-conservative-law
This policy has already involved the government handing over government assets to private organisations and apparently paying approx. half a billion in legal fees to do so. Former Children's laureate Michael Rosen wrote to the secretary of state to ask what happens to the assets if the academy chains fail. http://michaelrosenblog.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/who-owns-academies-have-we-been-robbed.html. No reply seems to have been forthcoming. Some of our schools now seem to be owned by companies registered in the Cayman Islands.
Some of the school property is already leased to private companies through PFI arrangements. These leases are decades long and the policy will require that the contracts currently in place between local authorities and private investors are unpicked and re-established with individual schools or an academy chain. The resulting large legal costs will have to picked up by the tax payer.
An Education Select Committee report last year found that there is no clear evidence that academies raise standards: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-30983081
The last time this policy was tried we had 'Grant Maintained Schools.' The removal of the checks and balances from local authorities allowed the opportunity for this kind of thing to happen: http://www.theguardian.com/education/2003/sep/16/schools.uk2. They did not see a rise in standards despite being given extra money not available to those that remained with the LAs: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-has-led-to-improved-funding-and-1500964.html
My personal experience has seen the type of excellent headteacher that this policy banks upon to succeed choose to leave my child's school because it became an academy. Exam results have dropped significantly. I know this because I have spoken to someone in the know. I couldn't find details online, because unlike LA & Diocese schools, academies are not required to publish their exam results. They are also not required to employ qualified teachers: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-19017544, they are also not required to meet the same standards set for LA schools regarding the size and standard of playing fields (and not selling them) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/educatio...g-fields-can-be-sold-off-ministers-admit.html
I would far rather be given a referendum vote on this proposal than on our membership of the EU, but instead this policy is to be pushed through without having appeared in the manifesto of any party standing for office at the general election.
No parental choice in this which has been the mantra of successive governments for the last three decades. Schools in Brighton & Hove that have considered Academy status have found parents to be not in favour. This choice is being removed by this policy.
Local authorities don't actually run schools. They are run by governing bodies and head teachers with the support of the LA.
If your child's school is community run and you don't like something you have recourse through the governing body and/or your local councillor. However under this proposal your elected councillor would have no say and Academy chains can scrap governing bodies should they choose too (and they have chosen too): http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-35531827. This removes a parent's recourse to any kind of accountable elected body.
Turning a school into an academy requires that the government take the land and buildings from the current owners and hand them over to the academy chain without charge. Many schools' land and buildings are not owned by local authorities but by a church diocese. This policy may involve the government seeking to take church land and hand it free of charge to private organisations in perpetuity. The government has already introduced a bill that allows this in failing schools: http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/nov/17/nicky-morgan-steal-schools-church-conservative-law
This policy has already involved the government handing over government assets to private organisations and apparently paying approx. half a billion in legal fees to do so. Former Children's laureate Michael Rosen wrote to the secretary of state to ask what happens to the assets if the academy chains fail. http://michaelrosenblog.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/who-owns-academies-have-we-been-robbed.html. No reply seems to have been forthcoming. Some of our schools now seem to be owned by companies registered in the Cayman Islands.
Some of the school property is already leased to private companies through PFI arrangements. These leases are decades long and the policy will require that the contracts currently in place between local authorities and private investors are unpicked and re-established with individual schools or an academy chain. The resulting large legal costs will have to picked up by the tax payer.
An Education Select Committee report last year found that there is no clear evidence that academies raise standards: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-30983081
The last time this policy was tried we had 'Grant Maintained Schools.' The removal of the checks and balances from local authorities allowed the opportunity for this kind of thing to happen: http://www.theguardian.com/education/2003/sep/16/schools.uk2. They did not see a rise in standards despite being given extra money not available to those that remained with the LAs: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-has-led-to-improved-funding-and-1500964.html
My personal experience has seen the type of excellent headteacher that this policy banks upon to succeed choose to leave my child's school because it became an academy. Exam results have dropped significantly. I know this because I have spoken to someone in the know. I couldn't find details online, because unlike LA & Diocese schools, academies are not required to publish their exam results. They are also not required to employ qualified teachers: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-19017544, they are also not required to meet the same standards set for LA schools regarding the size and standard of playing fields (and not selling them) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/educatio...g-fields-can-be-sold-off-ministers-admit.html
I would far rather be given a referendum vote on this proposal than on our membership of the EU, but instead this policy is to be pushed through without having appeared in the manifesto of any party standing for office at the general election.
D
Deleted member 22389
Guest
Academies are not the problem, many schools have been modernised, rebuilt because of it. It's been positive in this respect. The issue is this whole Free Schools business where there seems to be absolutely zero control, and the constant messing from the government on what and how things should be taught, as always whether it is Labour or the Tories. Leave to teachers to teach.
Diego Napier
Well-known member
- Mar 27, 2010
- 4,416
And in other news:
The prime minister said his “complete vision " was to place health, social security, housing, defence, environment, transport, business, local government & education into the hands of private enterprise rather than “bureaucrats”.
The prime minister said his “complete vision " was to place health, social security, housing, defence, environment, transport, business, local government & education into the hands of private enterprise rather than “bureaucrats”.
Hastings gull
Well-known member
- Nov 23, 2013
- 4,652
Absolutely. but whatever happens, we must not let common sense get in the way of dogma.
driller
my life my word
Fair comment
The Albion Roar
97.2FM
It's dogma that is driving this policy.
Under these proposals, all academies will end up in the hands of 'chain' by 2020, despite there being zero evidence that this will improve education standards. Additionally, there will be no accountability in the running of the schools, no obligation to set standards, employ qualified teachers, nor to tell people what standards have been achieved.
If the goals of improving education are not being sought, why are the doing this?
If that's not dogmatic, I don't know what it.
Common sense is to allow those who know what they're doing to continue with what is best, and not put it in the hands of those with a vested interest which doesn't include better education.
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
If you think a pyramid scheme is sound financial investment, I guess it has been positive.
glasfryn
cleaning up cat sick
I wonder how many people are waking up to those statements and thinking to themselves I put the cross in the wrong box.
by "bureucrats" does he mean European bureucrats has he joined Brexit