Goodrich: Academy proposals

[Gubodge]

As all Goodrich parents should by now know, the governors have voted to move towards academy status, in a soft federation with an as yet unknown outstanding school. There are meetings to be held to discuss the proposals next week, but I can't be the only one who is concerned that the consultation so far has been minimal, with very little information given about the pros and cons, or on what basis the governors' decision has been made.

I know that there are a lot of parents who are confused about what this proposal may actually mean for the school, so have started this thread as a place for it to be discussed and information shared.

[Fuschia]

Oh no

Bye bye community school

[bodsier]

This is a concern, lots of schools are being forced into becoming academies in an attempt to oust the LEA. Not only this but it diminishes job security for teachers, and all in all in some way privatizes schools in my opinion. It gives the schools carte blanche to set their own criteria etc. Whilst talking to a teacher friend last night who is also in the same position, I was told that if you don't become an academy, the government will force it upon you, and you wi9ll also select a sponsor for the school. McDonalds sponsoring schools? Is that where it's heading? All in keeping with the Tory policy PRIVATISATION BY STEALTH.

[Dulwich_ Park_ Fairy]

..

[Fuschia]

Dpf if that is true, it really is disgraceful

There are so many additional responsibilities that fall to an academy in terms of hr, finance etc ... Let alOne the effects of casting loose from the family of schools and the lea services... It won't be governors who have to pick up all those pieces

And a real cost/benefit analysis of grant gained versus free services lost, clearly hasn't been done

It's very sad to see a school which should be at thd centre of our community ready to tSke the money and run - the additional funds offered (for now) come from the pockets of other local schools, in effect

[Monkey]

Don't have a pb with academy status and certainly no problem with goodrich teaming up with an outstanding school. Goodrich is now below national and Southwark average so something needs to be done.

[Bigmacca]

It may be the right thing for Goodrich, it may not be the right thing, an open debate is needed, this is an extremely complex decision for a community with diverse needs.

If you look at the recommendations of schools who have successfully converted to academies, they all, without fail, state that consultation with staff and parents in order to carry the whole community with you is the prerequisite for a successful transition. What an extraordinary home goal to send out a letter stating application has already been made without consulting the parents and teachers. Is it just arrogance of a few who think the speak for the whole school or the government creating panic around the summer funding deadline in order to railroad their political ideology through?

[suzza22]

Posting removed. My choice.

[DaveR]

I have also just come back from the meeting; I have a slightly different take on it. I was astonished by the level of uninformed hostility amongst parents, egged on by members of staff who in truth have quite different interests at heart.

The starting point, surely, is (as Monkey observed above) that Goodrich's record of pupil attainment is poor. I went to the meetings earlier this year when the schools' leadership team and reps from the LEA produced stats showing below average performance and no improvement over the last three years. I cannot understand, against that background, why anybody would reject out of hand the opportunity for Goodrich to work in partnership with one or more local schools that are rated outstanding.

The other point which was made but largely ignored was that Southwark are making massive cuts to their budget for educational support; ruthlessly, now is the right time to look at academy status for financial reasons as well.

Finally, I'm genuinely astonished that there is a pervasive assumption that making any change means losing something unique and special, and particularly that there is an automatic trade-off between high academic standards and other positive features. I just don't buy this. Like most parents, I went to visit a number of local schools before my child started reception, including (more in hope than expectation) Fairlawn. I would advise anybody who thinks that Goodrich is 'amazing' to go and have a look at a genuinely outstanding school, and try and find any significant weakness.

[dulwichbloke]

For my part I was rather astounded by the level of uninformed governor statements at the meeting.

First of all, I have to ask myself how the Chair of governors (and apparently all of the governors?) thought that statute required a resolution in favour of an academy conversion BEFORE it was permissible to enter into consultation - when there is plainly no such requirement (which is frankly hardly surprising as that would be counterintuitive).

One or two noisy characters (apparently supporting academy conversion) were loudly making the point that people should read the DFE website and inform themselves. Well, I agree, but SURELY the same should apply in spades to the actual governors??? A cursory look at the DFE site makes clear what the process is and it clearly refers to consultation taking place BEFORE a resolution. To make things simple for governors and others the DFE have even produced a flowchart of the process...

http://media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/flowchart%20on%20conversion%20to%20academy%20status.ppt

This took me 2 minutes to find in the section on "Academies - how to become an academy - steps". I would have hoped (and expected) that the chair of governors/governing body charged with such an important decision/process would at least have got that very basic legal/procedural/common sense point right. That they haven't done so gave me no confidence at all.

There were several fundamental respects in which the decision making process appeared to be flawed - I was particularly concerned that the gentleman who was introduced as being the 'finance man' appeared to be advancing a seriously flawed/illogical argument on funding and ignoring some pretty basic realities/concepts that have a material effect on the pros and cons of such a move.

I should say that I went to the meeting broadly in support of a conversion to an academy (or at least I would say that I had a positive open mind). I came away thinking it was ill thought through and concerned that those who appeared to have pushed it through to this point, didn't know what they were doing/weren't very competent (with the exception of the parent governonr doing most of the talking, who appeared at least to be taking points on board - I hope he was). The 'finance' guy just seemed quite defensive and abrupt - I got the impression (rightly or wrongly) that he wasn't too keen on any real consultation. If wrongly, then I would apologise - it was just my impression from the way he presented.

All in all, I was quite taken aback.

[barts]

Perhaps your child is at the wrong school then! I was at the meeting you speak of and thought that standards are rising. Wasn't that an ofsted inspector leading it too? I thought the teachers were pretty quiet at tonights meeting. We need to think about what being an academy means, I am not sure the governors present had much of an idea. I have researched this and academy's are not to receive more funding than state schools. I still think governors should act with the professionals not against them. Why not wait and see how ofsted goes, isn't an inspection due soon? Then we have time to find out more.

[Pickle]

Irrespective of whether becoming an academy is the best for Goodrich or not (I'm undecided if I'm honest, I need to do some more reading on the subject), I thought the major downfall at the meeting was the way in which the governors approached it. To me it was very a much a "this is what we're doing, we'll listen to your feedback, but it makes no difference to what we're doing" approach, which was a shame.

If they had approached it with a more constructive, open-minded, discussional approach I feel they would have gained the support of a lot more parents.

I'll be attending the future meetings with interest.

[James Barber]

The Academy concept was dreamt up by Labour and the Tories have taken it up several notches in terms of pressure and scope. It's clear from government rhetoric that all schools are being encouraged to become academies. Personally I think it a real shame that schools will no longer have local democratic accountability but report to central government.

Joining Goodrich to a secondary level school COULD result in preferred admissions. I realise steps to go through but that could be one useful outcome. Secondary schools admissions is an increasing problem so this could really help famalies aoid a lot of future heartache.

But what's critical is the school being federated to and its ethos and whether that matches the ethos Goodrich parents want.

I know Harris federation were keen and Kingsdale have expressed an interest in joining with Goodrich. Both are gresat in different ways. Very different schools/federations.

[Pickle]

At the meeting we were told that preferred admissions only result when it's a "hard federation" model, which is not what's being proposed for Goodrich, so not sure this would apply. No names of schools being approached were provided to parents, so probably best to avoid speculation at this point.

[Gubodge]

That's what I see as one of the issues of how this 'consultation' has been carried out so far. The governors don't know what school they might federate with, but that information is vital to the majority of parents, and it would be hoped it would be to the governors as well. They can't expect parents to make an informed choice without that information.

I was at the meeting last night, and did not see any 'egging on' by the teachers, and would dispute that they have different interest at heart. Yes, they are concerned by possible changes to their pay and conditions. But so am I and so should you be. There is evidence (That the deputy chair of governors did not dispute.) that experienced staff leave when a school transfers to become an academy and that as a result the numbers of newly qualified teachers increases. There are some absolutely fantastic teachers at Goodrich and my children and yours can only lose out if they move on.

[snowboarder]

Goodness - links with a senior school? Would that not make thinks even worse for the non goodrich chldren?!?

Sorry I'm completely not up to speed about what being an academy means - but if it does go ahead what would that mean for the reception age admissions procedure? Would Goodrich not be part of the Southwark admissions process? (Sorry if this is a really stupid question).

[Gubodge]

The governing body is the admissions authority for the academies, rather than the Local Authority. I'm not sure how that would work though. The point was raised (but left unanswered) last night that perhaps consultation should take place with the wider community, after all, this proposal will have far more effect on the the local pre-school children than it will on current yr 5 and 6 children.

[DaveR]

I should clarify that I also thought the meeting was not well-handled by the governors present, and that they could have been a lot more up front about why they had put a resolution to the governors before having any consultation, even though the resolution does not actually commit the school to any final decision.

I suspect the reason for that was that the current leadership team would be expected to be lukewarm, at best, about the idea. A 'satisfactory' school deciding to go into a federation with an 'outstanding school' inevitably implies an admission by the weaker school that they need support from their peers to improve - not easy for a head teacher to swallow, but sometimes necessary. In those circumstances formal approval by the governing body was probably a necessary step to getting the leadership team on board at all. That's also why you can't always 'act with the professionals' - if, as a governing body, you think this may be the best way, you have to explore it.

Re finance, it is clear that the school receives more direct funding, but then has to meet costs that were previously met directly by the LEA. The school will come out ahead if, broadly, they can achieve the same economies of scale but reduce financial management costs. There is also greater freedom to prioritise spending to suit the needs of the school rather than as determined by the LEA. There is clearly some work to be done on this, but it shouldn't be a deal breaker.

As to the attainment stats, the school and the LEA were very clear about the fact that there was no evidence of improvement, although they said that they expected KS1 and KS2 results at the end of this year to show progress. No idea whether those are now available. Of course, stats don't show the whole picture, and for the record there is a lot about Goodrich that I like a lot (and have said so on this forum before), but I don't think there is any place for a school to say 'we're average and that's good enough'. Whilst no-one associated with the school has come out and said this, the apparent resistance to change is such that I suspect that's where we have ended up.

[DaveR]

"I was at the meeting last night, and did not see any 'egging on' by the teachers, and would dispute that they have different interest at heart"

Where I was sitting I was essentially surrounded by teachers and other school staff who kept up a constant flow of hostile comments for pretty much the whole of the meeting. I also note that a letter apparently produced by the NUT openly advocating opposition was circulated to pupils - one appeared at my house, at least, along with the regular school letters.

The overt comments of the staff last night were IIRC entirely confined to issues about terms and conditions, implications for the head and other senior staff, and complaints about communication; not one of them mentioned standards in the school or the need for improvement, which is my primary interest as a parent. I also thought the presence of so many staff actually inhibited the debate.

[Gubodge]

The NUT letter was offered to parents outside as they picked children up on Friday. Presumably children who make their own way home may have taken them as well. I for one was pleased. I had e-mailed the chair of governors to express my concerns that the only correspondence about the proposals was overwhelmingly positive, with no mention that there were other sides to the argument. I asked for the opportunity to communicate some of the evidence against academies to parents, given that not all have the time or resources to attend the meetings or research the issue themselves. I was told no, that the governors had looked at all the evidence, made the right decision and that if I had any queries I should go to the meeting.

It was, to be honest, a rather patronising reply, and that was the feeling I came away with yesterday. Despite their references to the two way flow of infomation I got the impression that, no matter the expertise, evidence or experience of those at the meeting, as far as they were concerned, they were the experts and they'd do it their way.

[barts]

I was handed the NUT letter in question by a teacher outside the school gates who encouraged me to come to last night's meeting because it was important, to the best of my knowledge children were not given any such letters.

I'd like to say that I'm really happy with my child's report and with the progress she has made this year: her happiness means more to me than where Goodrich appears in league tables - or whatever they're called now - and she's happy because she's been taught well and valued as a person for what she is good at and not a figure on a school data record.

Dave R is your child not doing so well?

I thought the meeting wasn't supposed to be about stats but we have been given a lot of information this year at Goodrich. Friends in other schools across London report that they are not kept nearly so well informed!

[Dulwich_ Park_ Fairy]

mm

[DaveR]

"Dave R is your child not doing so well?"

Obviously I'm not going to answer that, and the implication is unhelpful, to say the least - suffice to say that, both from my own experience of the school and conversations with lots of other parents over the course of the last few years, it is clear that there are significant weaknesses and these should not be obscured by the fact that the school is strong in some areas.

barts, why do you think that your child is less likely to be happy if the school were a bit more rigorous about raising standards of attainment? That's the implication of your post, and I've already alluded to the fact that this almost subconscious attitude seems to be prevalent with Goodrich.

I stand by what I said at the beginning - the knee jerk hostility to the proposal at the meeting was extraordinary and did not seem to me to have any rational basis. The advantages in principle of an academy federation with one or more local outstanding schools are clear, and I don't see any inherent disadvantages, at least from a parent's perspective. At the detailed level that assessment may change - in particular when the nature of any proposed federation is clear, and when there has been a robust assessment of the financial implications - so the sensible thing is to keep an open mind. I didn't think last night's meeting was conducive to that.

[Fuschia]

People might like to note that the current Difficulties Locally for secondary places arise directly from the lack of lea secondary schools

Thd various academies have admissions policies which do not 'join up' - hence something of a black hole locally

I don't see that primaries going the same way would have any advantages at all

It's the la who has coordinated and resourced the various bulge classes, for eg

[Dorothy]

I was sorry to see the level of hostility shown towards the governors last night. Who are, after all, hardly doing the job for fun. I have tried hard to imagine a scenario in which a governor at the school could gain something personally, for themselves or their child (if they are a parent-g), which would cause them to push for this conversion as opposed to leaving the status quo. In the absence of any proof of personal benefit to the governors then I have to believe that this process has been started with their genuine collective belief that this is a positive move for the school.

I agree that it is unfortunate that this needs to be consulted upon right now, as the general unrest at the school in recent months is doubtless clouding the issue. I think the academy v non-academy debate is separate to anything that needs to be said about teaching and learning at the school. A friend who is a parent governor at an "Outstanding" school in Southwark tells me their school is going through the same process right now.