Forced Academies, the Department for Education and Haringey

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on March 4, 2012 at 12:44

And Seema, can I please suggest

(1) that the question should be about primary schools and the evidence in respect of primary academies.

(2) It should be independent warts 'n' all academic research evidence. And neither the spin/newspeak  of local councils' PR departments; nor the glossy brochures of the commercial chains and Party donors pitching for acquisitions.

(3) I'd also like to know of similar independent research studies where local education authorities have come in with no-ifs-no-buts-no-excuses plans to turn round under-performing primaries.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Seema Chandwani on March 4, 2012 at 14:44

Anti Mob? I hope you didnt include me in that!

I am actually geniunely interested. I believe that a good education, at primary stage is the foundations of a productive society. I just want to hear both sides of the arguement.

The problem in my opinon is the methods deployed by Gove is what is creating an Anti-Mob mentality, when Grieg City had become an academy it was a school decision, supported by parents/govenors. This "bullying" of removing a govenors board and name calling people Trots is hardly installing any sense into the debate.

Neville made a firm statement, despite him being a Lib Dem, I agree with him on many things he says on this forum, so I am interested in the substance behind his statement. If it is merely being part of the Anti LEA mob, then I'll move on.

Hope you are having a great Sunday Mr Hole :)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Seema Chandwani on March 4, 2012 at 16:12

Thanks Billy

If I am honest, I dont mind being called a Anti Academy Mobster, I look great in a gangsteress outfit :P. As it stands now, in the debate I am more anti than I am pro for the following reasons:

- There is no evidence that academies work, for every successful academy I can find you a less successful one. Likewise for every successful LEA school, I'm sure you can find me one that isnt so. The debate can not be simplified to this level.

- I do believe in the right to choose, as it stands right now parents/community are clearly not in support of this. Unfortunately I believe that this is partly due to method deployed by Gove but also the fact the council did not fully engage with the schools/parents/governors (from how I read the emails). I live very close to Downhills and know some parents whose kids attend, most are worried. Communication and adult discussions from those "in power" should have taken place a long time ago.

- I am worried and disagree with your point about accountability, we can see recently with LOCOG that they are not obliged to be accountable to the public, recently in a FOI request to the Head of Woodside (Academy) she refused to respond to public queries as the "laws did not apply to academies"... surely this is wrong?

- I do feel that issues around pupil funding need to be tackled, and shouldve been tackled years ago. I feel should the government have "experimented" with raising the pupil formula to need rather than geographical area we could see a different impact

- I feel the debate on quality can not be debated on system, but has to be on individual management of the school and the challenges/support. I've worked with 100s of schools across London and some are failing due to sheer arrogance of the Head.

- I am concerned how the standards of OFSTED have changed in a few months, their objectivity to remain outside the political arena is worrying for any political camp, we saw sudden changes in standards for Baby P and now again with Downhills. I do not have faith this was fair.

- I think we need to remember that Haringey have been here previously, it was not individual schools privatised but the whole LEA to a private company called CAPITA, the long term benefits of that move have not shown to have made an impact in this case(s).

- I believe when Gove decides not to have an adult conversation, but call geniunely concerned people "Trots", he is showing no faith in his own decision and no real desire to improve the school for kids but instead launch an ideological battle. I marched to defend Downhills and believe I have been very supportive, but I am not a Trot or member of the Socialist Workers Party. Likewise, I know of many Lib Dems who are also very supportive of Downhills/Anti Academies

- The move to remove the governors at Nightingale School and replace it with an interim board is for me extremely worrying, it not only shows little accountability but actually demonstrates some forms of dictatorship.

Whilst this is all being played out, we have children in a school without a Head and Teachers working under extreme stress.

Whatever your political views are Billy, Cllrs and NUT are key stakeholders in this, to dismiss their opinion merely due to them not conforming to yours is not helping either. I have found your reference to them in your post dismissive. If I am honest I have read a lot about this, not just locally but nationally and can say the Anti Alliance mob are pretty clued up on their facts and are highlighting real concerns that all of us, regardless of party loyality should be also asking. When Gove addresses any sides concerns in an adult fashion is when we all can make an informed decision.

I am generally very concerned about profit making companies taking on public service contracts, I felt that way when, Thatcher started that process, "new" Labour continued that process and now the colition are continuing it. That feeling hasnt come from my political stance as Labour Left but from my experience in commissioning and contracting for local/national gov.

I sense you want, like me to stop "lurching" from failure to failure, if so... lets remove ourselves from the Trot Vs Tories debate created to deviate our geniune concerns and explore facts on evidence.

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Seema Chandwani on March 4, 2012 at 17:12

Billy, you are cute when you're on that high horse and as long as it aint an ex police horse... its all good!!

I do not think we have disagreed on the fact failing schools are unacceptable, if you did not get that from my previous two posts, i'll state it again... they are unacceptable.

I also should've stated that regardless of academy or not, the LEA has overall responsibility of school performance (according to the current DfE guidelines). You are absolutely right to question the LEAs responsibility in performance management and I do think that debate is far more important considering we have a lot of schools that are not academies and still fully LEA controlled.

Where we do not agree:

- I dont believe removing a board and replacing it with a new one is helpful given the issues and tensions.

- I think you are giving the head of the NUT too much credit for the power she holds, if she did hold this dominance I am sure Cllr Reith and Kober would have been more vocal. I feel its fair to give the democratic structures of the Labour party a bit more credit than that.

- I can not engage in a debate, especially one where I am prepared to be educated with accusations of lies. What lies are you referring to that I or they have said?

- I think LOCOG is a great example of arms length management through private companies not having accountability to the public. Its not the issues about tickets but about answering the public query. Likewise with the Head of Woodside. For the record LOCOG are not just in charge of the tickets, they are in charge of the whole olympics project including the "legacy".

 

I have outlined why at this stage I am more anti than pro, we are in a debate and I would like/welcome your feelings why you are pro? In fact Im not sure where you stand.

- Do you feel academies are the answer?

- What would you change about the LEA performance management?

- Are you not concerned about the issues the NUT are raising?

- Dont you think I would look good in a gansteress outfit? :P

Calm down Billy, we are all on the same side including the Trots, we all want our children to have good schools and a good education. I agree this pro/anti academy debate is overshadowing the real concerns which is why I asked to look at the bigger picture. I do not have faith academies will work or that the LEA are able to raise standards... but I would rather tackle the LEA than experiment with acadmies.

So, are we ready to explore solutions or are you going to continue picking out certain groups and individuals as the problem?

Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on March 1, 2012 at 23:06

With commendable honesty, Clive, you tell us that "even after years of residence in this country ... [you] can't comment on the English education system since it's still largely a mystery to [you]".  Now you add that: "the idea of local councils controlling schooling has always struck me as odd".

Well, it would be odd of it was true. In fact the State schools in England have been subject to control by several bodies. That includes local councils. But also Central Government through statute and regulation; as well as through funding; the curriculum; and inspection by OFSTED.

Tell, you what, next time you post about Ally Pally, I'll add a post based on complete ignorance of New Zealand - with what I think the Government there should be doing.

If I can be equally honest, my "fear" of your bringing Ally Pally into every discussion is that anyone who doesn't share your enthusiasms will be put off contributing to a discussion about local schools.

And I haven't "taken fright" about discussing Stroud Green Library, former Councillor Josie Irwin and apparently secret plans at some unspecified date - possibly in the 1990s? I'm certain this is fascinating to many people. But I simply don't have the time for the reading and research the topic plainly deserves.

About Down Lane Park, we seem to agree that it was a cock-up not a conspiracy of silence. I know about it because Zena Brabazon and I were both active in the Friends Campaign to prevent the proposed land swap. As was former councillor Sheik Thompson. And Reg Rice - now a councillor - who chaired Friends of Down Lane Park at the time. (FDLP)

I never said Seamus Carey or any of us were "relaxed" about the plans. We were not. In fact we were mightily pissed-off. Especially as it became obvious that the whole plan was designed to bolster the eyesore scheme at Hale Village by driving a "green link" through Down Lane children's playground.

So we agitated, educated and organised. We gave Haringey officers a tough time at meetings. We collected signatures, and made the case strongly to Claire Kober who was left in no doubt of the local strength of feeling. Claire was happy to meet us and once we'd established that the land swap was balderdash and bunkum [add your own choice of strong language] it was a dead duck.

I said - and wrote - this at the time. Anyone interested can look at my Flickr pages here.

  Save Our Park           617 Residents say "No!"

Make Believe Village     Looming Slabs

A surrealistic bridge         Green Links

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on March 2, 2012 at 9:09

Alan I accept that you opposed the Down Lane Park building programme, never doubted that you were pissed off.

My point was that the (misguided) plans to build over much of the park went a long way before sanity was restored. By 'long way' I mean, up to and including approval in principle by the "Cabinet Executive".

We may never know the amount of waste of time and money that this particular example involved, because this waste was just lost in some overall departmental budget.

Did "officers" really think that this could just be rammed through?

How much better for all concerned, if council staff had consulted local elected representatives at an earlier stage.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by JumpingtheWaves on March 2, 2012 at 10:49

Thanks for posting this, Alan. I would like to say that I am shocked by these revelations, but, however infuriating they may be, sadly they do not surprise me much (such is the state of play in politics).

What does leave me astounded are the thoughtless and trite comments of some of the posters who've responded to you below. eg 'It could have been Wards Corner, Ally Pally or any other contentious issue that has come up in the boro.'

How can you compare secretive (and undoubtedly corrupt) negotiations over forced academies with issues such as Ally Pally and Wards Corner? I agree that the same principles generally apply (and people should rightly be angry over such issues) but the real, practical implications are vastly different. We're not talking about the selling off of public buildings and assets here, this is our children's education at stake, our children's future and the future of their children and children's children etc. In case it has escaped anyone's notice it's these same children who will be the future of our country and its  democracy??? long after those of us posting on here have gone.

As a parent from Downhills School, which is currently faced with being forced to become an academy, I happen to think it's pretty important actually what negotiations have been going on behind closed doors and would question why they've not been more open. After all, who are the biggest stakeholders in our children and what happens to them? Is it LBH, is it the DfE, is it Michael Gove and his business buddies? Our children are not 'public assets' whose future is to be meddled with without full and proper consultation on the issues involved. At the same time, the school and its very considerable buildings and land are public assets and I don't see how the prospect of them being handed over to a private sponsor for 125 years should not be the concern of the community at large.

Whatever our opinions on academies are, it is the lack of say that myself and so many other parents (not just at Downhills, but the other 'forced academies' schools too) are furious about! What really gets my goat is the way the government bangs on about the 'Big Society' and 'localism', with local parents supposedly having a voice - but only, it seems, if that 'voice' corresponds with Michael Gove's and buddy Wilshaw's own vision of the distopian future. So parents who want to set up Free Schools good, parents who protest against forced academies bad. The coalition's hypocrisy (let's not even mention greed) knows no bounds!

I have never met any parent who doesn't care about seeing their child's education and prospects improve (and this goes right across racial and cultural boundaries) but it seems to me that the current situation is as good an example of government having their cake and eating it as I've come across in a while.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on March 2, 2012 at 19:31

Thanks, Alison.

As a councillor, I feel ashamed and angry that Haringey officers conducted their secret "quiet conversations" with DfE officials behind the backs of parents. As well as the way that school governors, heads, teachers, and other school staff were kept in the dark. All of them profoundly affected by these events.

And even more so since The Hornsey Journal has chosen to present the Council's self-serving version. I can't explain why, as the journalist who covered the story is far sharper and more perceptive than that. But the newspaper casts Chief Executive Kevin Crompton as a plucky David who lost his brave battle against the Gove Goliath. Unsurprisingly, I'm told that Mr Crompton is "comfortable" with this spin.

Thanks to Cllr Stuart McNamara and the website WhatDoTheyKnow.com people can read the emails and judge for themselves. I hope that as many people as possible do so. And whether they are for or against forced academies, I suggest they try to imagine how "comfortable" they'd feel if their own children's school is targeted by Mr Gove, yet they don't find out for months.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Neville Collins on March 2, 2012 at 20:57

Alan, you argue that councillors were not informed about the situation over Downhills. But surely as a councillor yourself, should you have had put pressure on both the officers and the executive to reveal that information to the public? They should not have to rely on WhatDoTheyKnow.com or the local media to get access to it. On this, and other issues,the council continues to have a reputation of being chaotic and out of control. Do we have to wait for another scandal for anything to get done? Will the government be then forced to intervene?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on March 4, 2012 at 13:28

Neville, I think we broadly agree. Yes, I should have put more pressure on senior officers and the co-called cabinet to give information on a range of topics. And yes, it's absurd that councillors (and residents) should have to to resort to using the Freedom of Information Act to squeeze out information from our own Council. Unfortunately, right now it's the most effective tool we have.

But please let's not pretend this is a Haringey problem. Weren't you sickened and angry about the MPs' expenses scandal? And also that Heather Brooke had to fight through the courts to get the Act applied to MPs?

How about Michael Gove's continuing attempts - reported yesterday - to use the Courts to resist F.o.I. requests? The latest news is that his officials may even have deleted some of these emails. 

If you're not disgusted, why not? This is Stasiland stuff. It's not about party politics - it's civil liberties. As a LibDem activist why aren't you raising this on HoL? As citizens shouldn't we be making common cause?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Seema Chandwani on March 4, 2012 at 18:37

Reply to Billy Hole... 4/3/2012 17:30
Its not letting me reply to your last post...

 However, I agree with you, such statements from the anti academies camp are not helpful and neither is Gove fulfilling some of those fears with Woodside and Nightingale. I am also uncomfortable with some of the twitter rhetoric.

 When this FOI was released, I obtained it from the HCAA twitter with the headline "Not forced Donated academies", I read a few emails particularly the part where the deputy director said "thanks for the heads up on press attention" and I raged, admittingly it was 2:30am after a night out. The following day, I read it in more detail realising it was 5 batches and then asked them on Twitter what I am missing as what I read did not match the tweet.

 If I am honest, that has not helped the anti acadmies stance and neither as a few digs to a Cllr on Twitter either (although Im a fine one to talk, I have my daily dose of Cllr bashing on Twitter), that said maturity is a two way battle and the council done itself no favours treating parents/community like kids.

 I cant speak on behalf of the HCAA or the NUT, but there is geniune and valid concerns about the academy process which need to be heard and are being ignored not only be Gov but by the council and local politicians. Being ignored creates hostility and is not welcomed in a true democracy.
 

The truth is Billy, both me and you want raised standards you are prepared to try something new where I am not so convinced by it. I feel its a cop out that is not dealing with systematic issues of the councils education dept or addressing the fact this is four schools out of 50+ so the systematic issues are still there.

 I have seen Kober has written to all parents outlining an improvement strategy, yes it is welcomed but by the same people/system? I am not so convinced, I also feel its reactionary rather than thought through... why this was not adopted months/years back is demostrating that. Alas, I fear the council will wheel out another strategic plan full of targets, monitored by red/amber/green statuses to fulfil achievement in some pressured environment to get council officers to complete spreadsheets based upon data that is so ambigious it can mean what anyone wants it to.

 We do need to collectively, Lib Dems/Right and Left Labour and even that lonely Tory work together to get our pupil allocation up. We also need to be clear about the real problems our kids are facing, living in poverty arriving to school with no breakfast or clean clothes, being unable to read or write. I have been a teacher, much older age group (teens) and in areas like Tottenham you are required to be a parent/social worker/friend and also a teacher. Thats the real issues, and neither the academies or the LEA are fullly acknowledging or tackling this in my opinion

 I actually just want less gimmicks, more individual school needs assessments to direct resources and less penalisation of being more needy in some sports day equ of league tables.

 I was going for the gangster moll look, if I did the BWF version, no one would notice the difference looool x

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Seema Chandwani on March 5, 2012 at 23:49

I get tingles anytime I think of a fit man in swimming trunks Billy ;) x

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page