Brent turns to academies and free schools to help solve school places crisis

As the video above shows the Green Party and Brent Council are united in the demand that local authorities should be given back the right to build their own new schools in areas of need.  The current Coalition requirement that bans any such new build and instead states any new schools should be academies or free schools is based on furthering the Coalition's privatisation agenda.

It has meant that local authorities have to rely on free schools or academies setting up in areas of need to provide extra places, rather than being able to plan new schools themselves. T address the places shortage Brent has resorted to bulge classes in existing schools (an extra class for one year group that then moves through the school as a 'bulge'), fitting more children into an exisiting building with subsequent loss of shared rooms such as libraries and IT suites, addditional building on the site-often reducing play space, or 'satellites' - use of buildings some distance from the existing school that come under the management of the parent school.

These solutions can sometimes work but I am concerned that they may also be storing up problems for the future in terms of overcrowded school sites, lack of play space, and over-large primary schools catering for more than 1,000 primary age pupils. When satellites are beyond walking distance from the main school it becomes difficult, if not impossible, to include all children in the special events that build a shared ethos and sense of community.

The Brent Executive will tonight consider going out to consultation on a new school places strategy  that includes the above actions but also advocates working with free school and academy providers. At a time when the DfE has barred 14 academy chains from taking on more schools because of their inadequacies LINK and there has been a furore over restraint of children at a Harris academy in Haringey LINK that approach will need very careful consideration.

The desperation of Katharine Birbalsingh's Michaela Free School revealed by it advertising in a fried chicken shop window in Bridge Road, Wembley Park, does not indicate that free schools are what parents want for their children.

The Executive document states:

Working with preferred promoters to open free schools is a means of reducing the call on council capital spend since the Education Funding Agency  will meet the cost of construction. The council’s Executive agreed in August 2012 a set of criteria for working with a free school partner. These are attached as Appendix 4. Where a site is identified as available and appropriate for a new school, a suitable promoter for a free school could be selected, using the criteria and an informal selection process used. This approach has been used in a number of London authorities, including Ealing, and can be used for the site which is definitely coming on stream in Brent, namely the Oriental City site.

 It is less clear on the academies route:

The academy presumption route whereby the council would put forward a school proposal which it could advertise and promote to potential academy sponsors. Under this route, the council would supply the site and use its own capital to build the school.

This becomes a strategy:

We should develop local capacity to sponsor or promote new schools, working with academies in the primary sector

 In the light of problems surfacing in academies and free schools this would mean the council providing the site and the cash for the building and then handing it over to a trust, charity or private company with no further control or oversight.

Obviously this is not  problem of the council's own making but the document does seem to make a virtue out of necessity, brushing over some of the issues I have discussed. In reality some school governing bodies have found themselves considering options for expansion or satellites that may provide extra places but could also impact on the quality of provision and education of chidlren currently in the school. Some have rejected requests to expand on this basis.

The report notes:

In respect of community schools only (so not for academies, foundation or voluntary aided schools), the local authority has the power to instruct schools to expand. This is not a power that this local authority has exercised hitherto

Ironically, if it were to use such a power, the council may find local authoirty schools converting to academy status in order to avoid what they see as damaging expansion.

The council lists a number of principles and then 21 strategies:

• All Brent schools should be good or outstanding

• All Brent schools should be part of a ‘family of schools’ which promotes resilience, mutual support and improvement

• The council and schools should work together to meet the challenge of providing sufficient school places

• Schools should operate in good quality, safe premises

• Children should be educated close to home

• Schools should work with their local communities

• Meeting the needs of children with special educational needs and disabilities should be central to our vision for education in Brent

• We should make efficient use of resources

Principle 1: We should only undertake expansions with good or outstanding schools where leadership is secure.

Principle 2: We should promote federations between primary schools, both to address quality issues and to address the future viability of one form of entry schools

Principle 3: We should actively consider two-site schools and 5FE schools and 5FE schools where there is leadership and management capacity

Principle 4: We should develop local capacity to sponsor or promote new schools, working with academies in the primary sector

Principle 5: We should work towards the amalgamation of separate infants and junior schools

Principle 6: We should not currently seek to develop more all-through schools

Principle 7: The local authority should establish a joint body with schools which oversees school place planning and school organisation, monitors the impact of the plans and programmes and makes recommendations to the council, diocese or DfE.

Principle 8: We should expect expanded and re-structured schools generally to meet government guidance on space standards but be prepared to consider innovative design solutions to achieve this.

Principle 9: We should seek to minimise disruption to schools during expansion and support school leaders to manage the challenges.

Principle 10: We should continue planning primary places using planning areas.

Principle 11: We should consider expanding voluntary aided schools where there is local Brent demand, working with the relevant partners.

Principle 12: We should continue planning secondary school places on a borough wide basis, with analysis of how admissions policies can be used to maximise choice and intake to Brent schools

Principle 13: We should consider how community benefits from school facilities can be maximised when we expand or build new schools

Principle 14: We should consult with local communities as part of the planning process to minimise/mitigate the impact of new school developments.

Principle 15: We should build inclusive provision into expansion and new school proposals

Principle 16: We should improve accessibility for all pupils, ensuring that all our secondary schools are physically accessible.

Principle 17: After assessing educational suitability, schemes for expansion

or new schools should be judged in terms of value for money and deliverability

Principle 18: We should identify potential sites for new schools where there is no capital cost of acquisition on the basis of suitability and location

Principle 19: Where a site is identified, we should seek a partner who could apply to the DfE under the free school route, using the criteria already agreed by the council

Principle 20: We should explicitly adopt the DfE recommended 5% surplus places to enable choice and to reduce the need for temporary accommodation

Principle 21: We should be ready with contingency plans for temporary accommodation, given the population fluctuations in Brent.

The problems outlined in this article makes it even more urgent to put on as much pressure as possible for loacal authorities to be given back the power to plan and build new schools. They are best placed to know the needs of the local area and have the resources to plan on a rational basis.

Feisty parents fight off forced academy conversion

In a victory that may have wider repercussions for schools facing forced academisation, St James' Church of England School in Gloucester have been told that it will not face academy conversion for the foreseeable future.

Parents at St James' have been campaigning vociferously over the issue. Recently Michael Gove has not be very pleased with Ofsted Inspection reports that have noted forced academisation takes schools' attention away from getting out of special measures. The problem is referred to here.

A letter from the school on February 12th stated:

Since receiving the Academy Order which was referred to in my last letter, the governing body, Local Authority and Diocese have collectively sought approval from the Department for Education (DfE) to defer the academy conversion process for the foreseeable future. I'm please to be able to tell you that yesterday we received formal notification that the request has been approved.

The specific reasons for the agreement is that the DfE have acknowledged that the school needs to prioritise coming out of special measures and would have been distracted from this by the amount of administration involved in academy conversion. In addition, the Local Authority has yet to complete its audit which determines whether additional school places may be needed in the city for 2016 and beyond.

Governors acknowledge that some parents have expressed their concerns about academy consultation. Please be assured that all parents, as well as other local stakeholders, will be fully consulted about future plans for thye school once the Local Authority have undertaken this work. 

The letter goes on to invite  parents to hear about the latest HMI monitoring report at the meeting which was to be held about academy consultation.

The letter concludes:

We do hope that as a community we can now all collectively focus on the immediate priority - to ensure that St James' moves out of 'special measures' and appoint a sunstantive headteacher with the energy and ambition to ensure that St James' is the school of choice for parents in this locality. 

The St James' Campaign  Facebook was jubilant with this heartfelt message posted about one of the leading campaigners:

You are a true inspiration to others your drive passion and fight for a cause you believe in have done you proud you are a woman to aspire too who has gone to extraordinary lengths to fight for Save St James....since September you took this on as a full time job as well as being a full time mum and all the voluntary work you do to help others...even when you were at your lowest point kicked in the teeth by the very people that are in charge of our children you never gave up hope...may your children also see you for the remarkable strong and dedicated woman that you are...a true fighter to the end!!!! so proud of you and may many children benefit from this x x

Congratulations. I hope Brent and other local authorities and governing bodies will note the importance of standing together against forced academisation and getting behind parent campaigns..

Let Gove and Wilshaw spit blood - we'll organise for an alternative

Following on from the successful West London Education Question Time last week, I attended the Anti Academies Alliance AGM, and left optimistic that at last the agenda supported by both Michael Gove and Michael Wilshaw (their squabble is more about power and ego than policy) is being challenged on a broad front.

The AAA recognised the connection between the neoliberal privatisation and austerity agendas by agreeing to affiliate to the People's Assembly. They agreed to participate in developing the education policies and actions of the PA and to support their local and national activities that accord with those of the AAA and the National Campaign for Education.

The importance of democracy and accountability highlighted by the struggles around  academisation was the subject of a motion on Parental Ballots which was agreed by the AGM.

The notion read:

The AAA notes

• that many of the schools converting to academy status - voluntarily or forced - are doing so without proper consultation of parents
• the recent decision of Barking and Dagenham Local Authority to organise ballots of parents in schools facing academy conversion

The AAA believes

• that parents should have the final say on the status of their children's schools

AAA calls

• on all governing bodies in any school consulting on academy status - whether by choice or by direction - to hold a ballot of parents
• on all Local Authorities to organise parental ballots for all schools converting to academy status

I hope that Brent Council will take note of Barking and Dagenham's policy and adopt it. But B&D have gone further winning an historic injunction, alongside governors,  in the High Court preventing the imposition of an Interim Executive Board and an Academy Order on Warren School.(1) After Warren went into special measures a year ago a partnership was established with Rober5t Clack School and Warrens's results have risen by 16%.

The Director of Children's Services at B&D had said:

I believe the Secretary of State's proposal will disrupt the progress made, and could negatively impact on children's education.

The ruling by Mr Justice Collins is itself very interesting as he not only questions the decision itself, saying. 'It appears to me this decision should never have been made' but also questions the legislation which allows such decisions to take place in the face of local demoracy and th best interests of the children concerned.

The Judge said:

This is an extraordinary piece of legislation (Academies Act 2010). The Secretary of State has wide powers to make am IEB (Interim Executive Board) and AO (Academy Order) and thereafter consult. On the face of it that is crazy. How can he be impartial by consulting thereafter?

He went on:

(It) seems from reports the present Secretary of State thinks academies are the cat's whiskers - we know of course some of them are not.

Cllr John White, cabinet minister for  children's services, and Michael Pavey's equivalent in Barking said:

This (injunction) is a victory for both common sense and the education of our children. Our position remains that the improvements at the school, and the arrangements we have in place, are having a very positive impact on outcomes for children, and as such, imposing an academy will be disruptive to children's education.

This follows on from the Snaresbrook Primary school's victory against forced academisation where an effective parental campaign was backed by the senior management team of the school, the governing body and the local authority.

Even in Hammersmith and Fulham flagship Tory borough, the decision to close top performing  Sulivan Primary School to make way for a free school, has stubled with the Scrutiny Committee's decision to call in the decision.

There seems to be the potential for a cross-party and non-party campaign to at least slow down Gove's juggernaut.  This is only a small step though because the three main parties are still wedded to neoliberal ideas of education emphasising marketisation and the producing of children who are 'fit for work' or even in the case of some academies and free schools, 'fit for military service'.

We must both win small victories to slow down Gove's reforms but also build and win support for alternative ideas about what education is for, how it is organised, and how decisions are made.

Having been elected to the National Steering Committee of the Anti Academies Alliance on Saturday I hope to make a contribution to this strategy.

(1) Acknowledgements to paper circulated at AAA AGM

Free schools in free fall - integrate them into LA system now

Three new Brent secondary free schools are due to take Year 7 pupils in September 2014, nine months away. Gateway (Wembley Central) and Gladstone (Dollis Hill) have yet to find premises and there is no sign of any work going on at Michaela's disused and derelict ex-college building next to the railway line at Wembley Park.

I have argued before on this blog that parents choosing these schools are buying a 'pig in a poke'. There are no previous Ofsted reports or examination results on which to base a choice or even current pupils to talk to. Apart from a skeleton staff there are just the worthy words of glossy brochures and websites on which to make a judgement.

It would help if there was confidence in the DfE's approval process but that is looking inadequate in the light of the update below from the Anti-Academies Alliance. Local authorities have little or no say so it is no use going to Brent Council for an opinion. This really leaves parents to do their own risk assessment so a close reading of the AAA report is recommended.

I will be moving an amendment to Green Party education policy at our Spring Conference committing the party to integrating academies and free schools into the local authority school system to ensure democratic accountability. An additional amendment will can for all children to be taught by a qualified teacher.

From the Anti-Academies website LINK (Fools' Gold - the free schools experiment unravels)

When Gove was elected in 2010 the first piece of legislation rushed through Parliament allowed for the creation of ‘Free’ Schools alongside the acceleration of the Academies programme.

From the outset education campaigners argued that this was a potentially devastating development – undermining existing schools, breaking up local democratic accountability, destroying teacher’s terms & conditions, the list goes on and on.

Now that ‘free’ schools have existed for a couple of years the gloss is starting to come off Gove’s shiny new toy. Below we look at the developments in the ‘free’ schools. We aim to keep this piece up to date. If you have information for us about developments in ‘free’ schools in your area please let us know at office@antiacademies.org.uk

Discovery New School the first to be closed.

Discovery New School (DNS) in Crawley, West Sussex, has been ordered to close its doors on April 4. It was one of the first 24 ‘free’ schools to open in 2011.

In a damning letter to the school’s chairman of governors, Chris Cook, Schools Minister Lord Nash said he was ending its funding agreement.

Discovery New School was declared failing and placed in special measures by the education watchdog Ofsted in May.

A Department for Education (DfE) spokesman said it had been monitoring the school’s progress and found it was not making the changes needed to improve standards.

Lord Nash’s letter said that during a visit to Discovery New School last month, Ofsted found that “no progress in the quality of teaching and learning had been made since the original special measures judgement in May”.

It added: “None of the school’s teachers were delivering good lessons and all were still consistently inadequate or required improvement.” LINK

Schools minister intervenes in failing Al-Madinah free school

An Ofsted report declares that the Al-Madinah Islamic school in Derby is “in chaos” and has “not been adequately monitored or supported”.

The report says teachers at the faith school are inexperienced and have not been provided with proper training.

Pupils are given the same work “regardless of their different abilities” and the governing body is “ineffective”, according to the report which was commissioned amid reports of irregularities at the school.

A letter from schools minister Lord Nash to the chair of Al-Madinah’s governing body said the school’s trustees have agreed to resign. Supervision of the school is to be handed to Barry Day, chief executive of the Greenwood Dale foundation trust, sponsor of the Greenwood academies trust, which operates 22 academies LINK

‘Free’ school headteacher with no qualifications, or teaching experience, quits

Annaliese Briggs was appointed principal of Pimlico primary in central London in March by a charity set up by a government minister. She had no teaching qualifications and little experience in running a school. The new free school is sponsored by the Future Academies charity set up by Lord Nash, a junior schools minister and one of Michael Gove‘s closest allies.

Briggs, an English literature graduate from Queen Mary, University of London, had worked as a junior member of staff at the rightwing thinktank Civitas. She had no qualifications when appointed but was reportedly trained in Wandsworth in preparation for the beginning of the school year. She said that she would ignore the national curriculum and teach lessons “inspired by the tried and tested methods of ED Hirsch Jr”, the controversial American academic behind what he calls “content-rich” learning.

She quit after 6 months. Sources close to the academy say she was finding it difficult to cope with the workload. LINK

IES Breckland head quit in November

Sherry Zand the Principal of IES Breckland School in Brandon Suffolk resigned in November. This comes weeks after Zand fired six teachers at IES Breckland who had only been appointed in September.

Since the start of the school year nearly a third of the teaching staff have left IES. Things apparently got so bad at the school that Zand herself was roped in to teach English before she went on sick leave.

IES English Schools Ltd who run IES Breckland under the only profit making agreement to run a free school currently in place have moved fast to bring in their own UK Chairman and Chief Operating Officer Peter Fyles as Acting Principal.

Fyles is quoted by BrandonSuffolk.com as saying in a letter to parents that the search for a new permanent principal is already underway and that they would be looking for an experienced principal to take the school forward.

His choice of words is interesting as Zand had never been a Head or Deputy prior to her appointment at IES. It looks like they intend to ensure her replacement has more experience. LINK

Nishkam ‘free’ school fails Ofsted

The Nishkam primary ‘free school’ in Handsworth, Birmingham’s first free school,  opened in September 2011. It claims on its website that ‘The primary purpose of the school is the drive for academic excellence. This is exceptionally important in our aspirations for pupils to exceed national standards.’

The Nishkam school failed its Ofsted inspection in July.

It rated Nishkam Primary as ‘requiring improvement’ in all of the main areas – achievement of pupils, quality of teaching, behaviour and safety of pupils, and leadership and management. The report concluded that the school needed to raise standards because ‘there is not enough teaching which is good enough to enable pupils to learn as quickly as they should’.  Inspectors were also critical of the school’s leadership, saying leaders and governors did not have a clear understanding of the school’s strengths and weaknesses. LINK

 Kings Science Academy facing fraud investigation

OFSTED has been drawn into the row over a scandal hit free school facing fraud allegations as an MP has demanded to know why a Government probe into financial irregularities there was not mentioned in an inspection report.

MP David Ward has criticised Ofsted for not mentioning the investigation into the Kings Science Academy, in Bradford, despite the education watchdog being aware of it when it inspected the school.

The free school has been in the spotlight since a leaked report revealed that the Department for Education (DfE) had found it had submitted fabricated invoices to the Government to claim just over £10,000 in public money. LINK

‘Free’ schools programme costs 3 times more that expected

The government’s flagship free school programme will cost at least three times the sum originally allocated, the public spending watchdog has found.

The National Audit Office said the scheme allowing groups to set up state-funded schools would cost £1.5bn – the original Treasury grant was £450.

The report says: “To date, the primary factor in decision-making has been opening schools at pace, rather than maximising value for money. The Department will need to exert more control over a rising cost trend.”

The report also confirms that despite intense pressure on school places in some areas, many free schools have opened in parts of the country with no places pressure.

More than a quarter of all spending on school buildings – £241m out of £950m – has been on free schools in areas with no need for extra places forecast, the report says. LINK

‘Free’ schools performing worse than other schools

According to new figures from Ofsted, free schools are actually underperforming compared to all schools inspected by the regulator.

According to an answer by Ofsted to a parliamentary question from Jim Cunningham MP, 16 per cent of free schools were rated as ‘outstanding’ compared to 20 per cent of all schools.

56 per cent of free schools were also rated as good compared to 58 per cent of all schools; and 19 per cent of free schools were rated as ‘satisfactory/requires improvement’ compared to 20 per cent of all schools.

8 per cent of free schools were rated as ‘poor’ by Ofsted, compared to just 2 per cent of all schools.

This is particularly incredible since ‘free’ schools can select their location, premises, staff and pupils. For ‘free’ schools to perform worse than existing schools is an indictment of the policy. LINK

Unqualified teachers

A recent FOI request has shown that some ‘free’ schools are employing large numbers of unqualified teachers.

Trinity School in Sevenoaks, Kent, which opened in September 2013, said seven of its nine teachers were unqualified.

At Discovery New School in Crawley, West Sussex, which was ordered to close its doors on April 4 earlier this month (DEC), five of the school’s seven teachers were unqualified, the figures showed.

Employing unqualified teachers is one of the ‘freedoms’ that Michael Gove has encouraged. LINK

‘Free’ schools – a disaster for education

In September 2011, as the first 24 ‘free’ schools opened, we published an article that included this comment:

“Because these schools are free from much of the legislation that governs our schools serious questions have to be asked about their governance. In many cases it is unclear who their financial backers are, whether the Trustees have any relevant experience running a school, and in many cases whether the Head’s have any suitable experience.”

We have been proven right. Here at the Anti Academies Alliance we have no crystal ball. But as a coalition of education trade unionists, councillors, campaigners and parents we know something about how our schools should be run, and it’s not like this.

Michael Gove and his education experiment have to go.

The Anti-Acadmies Alliance AGM will be held on Saturday 25th January 1-4pm Canterbury Halls, Cartwright Gardens, WC1H 9EE (Kings Cross tube(

Brent teachers' leader hits out at Ark Academies

Hanks Roberts, Brent Branch Secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers (ATL) has circulated a hard-hitting letter to union members at Copland Community School condemning the plans of the Interim Executive Board, supported by Brent Labour Council, and the DfE, to hand over Copland Community School to Ark Academies.

He says:

So they propose ARK, but don’t worry, there will be a 'consultation'. Really? At the meeting on Monday, to ensure no awkward questions were asked, no questions were allowed at all.

Grahame Price, Chair of the IEB, told us that there was “a strong steerage from the DfE to become an academy.” When he finally agreed to meet union reps after numerous requests in the summer term, he said that there was no choice - the school would become an academy. This was necessary, he said, to turn the school into a good school.

We pointed out Grahame Price's school had been transformed from a "failing" into a “good” school, and it was a Trust not an academy! Clearly becoming an academy is not necessary to being a good school. Equally, being an academy is no guarantee of not being in special measures – Crest academies in Neasden being our nearest example.

If Brent wanted to do something useful for the pupils and staff at the school why haven't they sought to get back any of the money taken from the school by Sir Alan Davies et al?

ARK is run by the ex-joint MD of a News International subsidiary, Lucy Heller, and a handful of multimillionaires including Stanley Fink, Treasurer of the Conservative party, and Paul Marshall, the biggest donor to the LibDems. It was founded by, among others, Arki Busson, a playboy who modestly named the initials of this "charity" after himself - Absolute Return for Kids.

The main aim in life of these hedge fund speculators is increasing their already substantial millions. Any promises from this lot are worthless. When they wanted to build an Academy on the Wembley Park sports ground they promised that local kids would still be able to use the pitches. Needless to say all pitches are now hired on a strictly business footing, with no non-commercial community provision.

ARK staff work longer hours, having to undertake at least an additional 370 directed hours each year. ARK management is even less consultative and collegiate than our present management. Overuse of learning walks is standard practice in ARK academies. Many staff have left or are leaving what was formerly Kensal Rise Primary, now ARK Franklin, because of the restrictive curriculum, expected total uniformity and no creative freedom allowed. Teachers in other ARK academies agree.

A national newspaper is currently investigating concerns over ARK's exclusions policy and admissions in general. Ironically even Ofsted agrees; in their report on Evelyn Grace Academy it states, 'the number of fixed-term exclusions is high relative to secondary schools nationally.' And this ARK academy is judged as only 'satisfactory'.

If anyone consciously supports Copland being taken over by ARK as part of Gove's academy programme they must be bARKing!

Time for concerted preemptive advice on primary forced academies

An initiative I fully support from the Education Reform website: LINK

It is time to create a concerted stand against the bulldozing DfE conversion of Primary schools to Academies.

Each school so far has had to fight its own cause with only minor support from other schools or unions.

The situation calls for forewarning advice to be sent to each school before they have a chance of a weak Ofsted inspection outcome, with DfE brokers swiftly moving in to undemocratically convert the school to an Academy.

This measure is needed - overdue in fact - for the very simple reason that democracy is being subverted or simply ignored, with the DfE selecting 'preferred' sponsors opaquely, and blatantly failing to listen to parental needs or concerns. The occasional parental consultation that they tolerate is operated mechanically, and the results effectively ignored.

I might be deemed 'an enemy of promise' by trying to stop these forced conversions, but the DfE are indeed bulldozing the educational landscape, with the title deeds of the doomed schools and their land give away for free to private businesses who often have no original background in education. There is rumour that they will be given the right to make a profit on the back of this free offering in the future.

But the real enemy is the DfE as they are the 'enemies of reason' - they literally care not one jot about the public opinion, nor the hard facts that Academies do not guarantee success. The DfE know what they want - to serve private enterprise. Why else pass the title deeds to charity-status sponsors that never need to own them in the first place?

Many Primary schools are quivering at the impending arrival of Ofsted inspectors - a stressful enough event in normal circumstance. With the threat of massive upheaval against their wishes via the long forced conversion process, the spirit of a school can be killed.

Are there any volunteers who are happy to accumulate the advice that should be sent to the primary schools? I am happy to help coordinate this effort.

Reclaiming inclusive education for all

Unite the Youth group

Michael Gove's Report Card

I was pleased to be asked to speak to the DPAC/Alliance for Inclusive Education group who delivered a demand for inclusive education to the DfE this lunchtime. This was part of the week of action which culminated this evening in a lobby of the House of Commons.

The demand for inclusive eduction was placed firmly within a social justice framework with the benefits of integration for both the disabled and non-disabled emphasised. Speakers were angry that the Coalition has put things into reverse with increased segregation, often now in private special schools, and academies and free schools making it harder for children with disabilities to receive equal access. Even mainstream local authority schools, fearing for their test and exam results and place in the league tables, are often less willing to admit such pupils.

I strongly supported this campaign which I feel is right both morally and in terms of educational benefit to all pupils. I told the crowd that we had gone from Every Child Matters to Every Test Result Matters to Only What Michael Gove Thinks Matters.

We need to return to saying Everyone Matters and ensure that the resources are provided to make sure that happens.

'Failing' Copland gets much improved A level results

The Kilburn Times LINK reports improved A Level results at Copland Community School. Copland was labelled 'Inadequate'  by Ofsted last term, its headteacher and governing body sacked, an Interim Executive Board imposed by Brent Council, forced academisation process started by the Department for Education, and the new management took competency procedures against many teachers.

Pavey: No Copland sell-off

Cllr Michael Pavey, Brent Council lead member for Children and Families has reacted to the Guest Posting below with this statement:

"Copland School will not be sold off. The site will be redeveloped, but as an improved school - not for non-educational uses. 

All the steps Brent Council have taken have the sole purpose of improving teaching and learning in the school. The recent Ofsted report found that two-thirds of teaching is inadequate or requires improvement. This is a tragedy which is desperately failing local families. 

Turning around this terrible situation requires tough actions. However there is absolutely no question of running down the school to sell it off. Quite the opposite: we are determined that Copland will become a successful school that parents are proud to send their kids to."

Copland staff fear hidden site sell-off agenda

I publish below a Guest Post from someone involved with current events at Copland Community School. The views expressed are those of the guest blogger but I publish it because I believe that the public should know what some of the staff are experiencing and thinking. I will be happy to publish any alternative perspectives.
 

An increasing number of Copland Community School staff suspect that it is Brent’s intention to let the school die. The evidence?

New Head Richard Marshall and new Deputy Head Nick John have spent their few weeks in office

·         cutting whole courses and subject areas

·         narrowing the curriculum

·         demanding that department heads nominate staff for redundancy

·         threatening any who refuse with redundancy themselves

·         reducing heads of department to tears

·         wasting Brent HR officers’ time calling them in to interview staff about legitimate and certificated sickness absence (including ones following operations and motor accidents)

·         cancelling Sports Day and another planned Activities Day at short notice

·         refusing any joint consultation with staff

·         refusing to furnish a definitive list of staff leaving in July citing ‘equal opportunities’(?)

·         adding to the 30 plus staff leaving for voluntary redundancy (sometimes under threat of future non-procedural and bogus capability action) by making working conditions for remaining staff so bad that they are desperate to leave as well

·         making the school curriculum offer to prospective Yr 7 parents, and to Year 11 students considering staying on for A levels, as unattractive as the appalling physical conditions students will work under

·         boasting about how ‘tough’ they are prepared to be in carrying out more of the above

Everyone knows how extensive and attractive the Copland site would be for developers. It certainly wasn’t lost on former Head (now awaiting trial on fraud charges) Sir Alan Davies.  Many at Copland now believe that the only explanation for the imposition of yet another clueless management regime on this long-suffering school community can be that Brent want to reduce the roll to  the point where they can declare the school unsustainable, close it down  and flog off the land to a supermarket chain and a residential developer.

Is Brent children and families department 'fit for purpose'?

The Harrow Observer's story on Copland Community School reveals that Brent Council's own action plan to tackle the school's weaknesses had been declared 'not fit for purpose' by Ofsted LINK

Education secretary Michael Gove approved the appointment of an interim executive board, taking over the functions of the governing body, on June 19.

On the same day, Ofsted wrote to the school to declare both the school's nor Brent Council's action plans, designed to address the failings found by Ofsted a month earlier, as "not fit for purpose". (sic -the paper's original wording. I assume neither were fit for purpose)

The letter reveals a quarter of the staff, including some of the senior leadership team, are taking voluntary redundancy at the end of this academic year in a bid to cut the wage bill and the school has permission to hire a maximum of seven Newly-Qualified Teachers as replacements.

In exchanges over the Copland issue Cllr Michael Pavey, lead member for children and families, had said that the local authority did not, because of cuts, have the capacity to improve the schools and to try  to do so would break it. If the local authority's children and families department and its school improvement service could not provide a viable plan it surely raises the question about what might happen with other schools that get into difficulties. Indeed, it raises the unavoidable question: Is Brent 's children and families department fit for purpose? The DfE is likely to have asked itself this question..

The former director of children and families has just retired ahead of the council's senior management restructuring and Sara Williams has taken over as interim director.  Faira Ellks, head of the school improvement service has also retired and has been temporarily replaced by Rachel Matthews. The service has been cut back and partially replaced by the Brent Schools Partnership which is at an early stage of development.

The Brent Education Commission, set up by Christine Gilbert, interim Chief Executive of Brent Council and a former head of Ofsted, is due to report in November.

There is an urgent need to restore confidence in the children and families department and its capacity to provide strong leadership and effective support for schools. When parents called for strong support for their campaign against forced academisation of Gladstone Park Primary School following its 'inadequate' Ofsted rating there were reports that the authority did not want to make a strong stand and take on Michael Gove's academy broker (former Brent director of education Jacky Griffin) for fear of incurring the attention, and the wrath, of the DfE and bringing about an inspection of the local authority.

In the present circumstance of transition and uncertaintly it may not do well if such an inspection were to take place.

The hasty imposition of an Interim Executive Board at Copland and acceptance that Gladstone Park will convert to an academy may be an attempt to 'prove' to the DfE that they are up to the job - by acquiescing  to Gove's agenda.

If the authority itself is 'failing' or 'inadequate' it will lose the confidence of schools and their governing bodies and possibly  hasten voluntary academy conversions across the borough's primary schools.

Back bench Labour councillors and the opposition must ensure that the Executive realises the extent of the problem and acts accordingly.

Parents urged to fight Copland's forced academisation

This letter is being distributed to parents of Copland students about the strike:

Dear Parents

Some people locally and nationally want to force Copland Community School to become an academy. They lie to you that this is in the interest of your children.

WHAT LIES ARE THEY TELLING YOU?

1 Results will improve. But academies do not do better in GCSEs than other schools. They actually do worse. 

2 Academies are in the interests of the children. But academies fiddle their exam results by permanently excluding more vulnerable young people, especially children from ethnic minorities, than other schools.

3 Extra funding. The days of bribes to convert to academy status are over. Under forced academisation there is no new money despite fact that the budget problems contributed to our failure by Ofsted. 

 

4 Parents should have a choice. But parents have less say in the running of academies than of other schools. Why for example was there absolutely no consultation with parents about the decision to impose an IEB on Copland?

WHAT TRUTHS ARE THEY HIDING FROM YOU?

There are many fantastic things about Copland. Many of our students get good GCSE and A Level results and progress to universities including Oxford and Cambridge. Copland should be upheld as a model of good community cohesion. At Copland we have low levels of pupil exclusion, unlike many academies. We take in more students who do not speak English than local academies. Academies would rather not have these students as they will affect their GCSE results but they fit in very well at Copland. We do loads of extra-curricular activities which really benefit the students. For example many of our students are signed up with football clubs. Raheem Sterling who now plays for Liverpool is the most famous one in recent years. Incidentally if we did become an academy it is likely that much of the land that the PE Department uses will be sold to make a profit for the academy sponsor.

WHAT DO WE NEED?

We need your support. Sign our petition and ask others in your community to sign it as well. Write to your councillor and MP. Get involved by contacting Tony Deady (parent governor) on 07952361792.

DfE's most expensive Free Schools

From Education Investor LINK

 DfE figures reveal England's most expensive free schools

The Department of Education (DfE) has given new free schools almost £60 million in extra funding to support them to the end of their first year, figures published over the weekend revealed.

 

This money is in addition to both per pupil revenue funding, and to the capital used to acquire sites for new schools.

 

The figures, published following a ruling by the Information Commissioner, cover 77 open schools, as well as 10 which were withdrawn from the programme. 

 

They show that the government spent £20 million on schools before they opened. This includes £441,000 in funding given to schools that never opened at all.

 

In addition, the government provided £40 million in "post-opening funding". The DfE said the money was required to "cover essential initial costs, such as buying books and equipment; and to meet the costs arising as the school builds up its cohorts over time".

 

The figures also showed a wide variation in the distribution of such funding. 

 

On average, each school received around £770,000. But a handful received only £25,000, while one – Reach Academy Feltham – received more than £2 million.

 

A few weeks ago the government also updated the document revealing capital spending on free schools.

 

It showed that the first 23 such schools to open had required £85.8 million to acquire sites, an average of £3.8 million per school.

 

The most expensive had been King Science Academy, which had required £10.5 million in capital funding, as well as £1.2 million in extra revenue funding. 

 

Bristol Free School, meanwhile, had also topped the £10 million mark, requiring £9.6 million in capital and £743,000 in pre- and post-opening revenue funding.

Christine Gilbert to head up Brent Education Commission as school improvement changes take place

Last week I briefly attended the farewell party for eighteen or so people who are leaving Brent's School Improvement Service, including Faira Ellks who has led the service for many years. Some had accepted early retirement, others redundancy, some have set up a consultancy and a few had been employed by Brent schools who will sell their expertise, such as Reading Recovery,  to other schools..

As I looked on I reflected on the years of experience and expertise in the group that has done so much to improve Brent schools, that will be lost as a consequence of this cull. Yes, a core service will remain but its quality is uncertain and yes, Brent headteachers have formed a Brent Schools a Brent Schools Partnership to support each other, but its quality is untested.

Interestingly these concerns were echoed by Rebecca Matthews, the new interim head of School Improvement, at the Brent Governors Conference this week. She said that the BSP raised issues that include:

• lack of clarity on aspects such as accountability and leadership
• the capacity among senior leaders of schools to undertake the tasks involved
• the threat to a school's own standards when its senior leaders are engaged on collaborative activities with other schools
• measuring and evaluating the impact of such interventions
• engaging all schools so that they looked beyond themselves

As someone said at the farewell party, 'Schools won't know what they are missing until it is gone'.

Matthews also outlined the challenge of Ofsted's new emphasis on all schools being rated Good or Outstanding and the potential of a sudden drop in the rating of schools rated 'Good' under the old Ofsted criteria when inspected under the new framework, particularly if they had been coasting or facing new pressures since the previous Ofsted.

The authority itself faces the challenge of diminishing resources both human and financial which means a reduced core School Improvement team and the challenge of dealing with the mixed economy of school categories - maintained, academy, free - with lack of powers over the latter.

Rebecca Matthews said that as a consequence of diminishing resources a new core offer to schools would be made which would include:

• A closer focus on 'need' rather than a universal offer
• A lighter touch with 'secure' schools with the bulk of support going to schools in need of improvement
• Brokering school to school support arrangements
• Regular meetings to judge and recognise progress rather than once a year meeting
• An emphasis on the speed of improvement

To address the wider challenge facing the authority a short-term Education Commission for Brent would be set up. Interestingly in the light of the appointment of Sara Williams as acting director of Children and Families, this will be headed up not by her but by the council's Interim Chief Executive, Christine Gilbert (former head of Ofsted) and Robert Hill from the University of London Institute of Education. They would look at the context of the performance of Brent schools, examine inspection evidence, visit schools and take evidence from stakeholders, including governors. They would identify the 'scope for innovative support for improvement' and work with the BSP and Teaching Schools on a sustainable shared model.

The Commission will report in November 2013.

In a way this can be interpreted as the authority attempting to claw back responsibility for  school improvement from the group that set up the BSP. With Ofsted and the DfE focusing on the role of local authority's when their area's schools are under-performing the LA has to demonstrate that it is proactive.

Cllr Michael Pavey, lead member for Children and Families, had a Q&A session,  in a candid reply to a question from me why Camden had managed to keep the maintained sector intact but Brent hadn't, said that the authority had 'allowed the best schools to walk away' and now faced losing 'our failing schools because of government legislation'.  He repeated his belief that the imposition of an Interim Excutive Board and academisation was the only viable solution for Copland High School because it was failing its pupils and the local authority did not have the resources to support it.. When asked about how Copland had been allowed by the local authority to get into that state he said, 'I can't say. That was before my remit'.

Unfortunately the situation at Copland, and precisely that last question, is likely to put Brent Council's school improvement arrangements under the Ofsted and DfE microscope. However, it also raises questions about the government policy where foundation schools, academies and free schools have autonomy with reduced powers of direct intervention by the LA whilst that at the same time they have an overall responsibility for the education and well-being of children in the borough.

Pavey agreed with a governor who said that governors had not been involved in the development of the Brent Schools Partnership despite having a strategic responsibility for school improvement, and should be better represented on the Brent Schools Partnership.  Only one place on the headteacher dominated management committee has been allocated to governors.

Interestingly,in his workshop, Luca Salice, Vice Chair of Camden Schools Forum, discussed the imposition of  IEBs by the local authority, not as a way of bringing about academisation, as in the Copland case, but as a way of the LA preventing a school academising against the wishes of teachers and parents.

Copland staff and parents issue challenge to Michael Gove and Brent Council

The teacher unions at Copland High School, Wembley, which is facing forced academisation by the DfE and an Interim Executive Board imposed by Brent Council,, have issued the following press release:

Since the very well supported strike action on 23rd May, Copland Community School staff in Wembley have set up an action group. On Thursday 13th June at a lively parents meeting at the school parents decided to also set up an action group. They will be coordinating jointly to continue their opposition to the imposition of an Interim Executive Board (IEB) and a forced academy.

Key demands are a secret ballot of all staff and parents before any decisions are made and a commitment from the Government to rebuild the appalling school buildings that the HMI said were not fit for purpose and adversely effected pupils' education.

Parents and staff, as well as the Headteacher and Chair of Governors, were very disappointed that neither Cllr Muhammed Butt, Leader of the Council and a Copland school governor, nor Cllr Michael Pavey, Lead member for Education attended the meeting despite claiming that parents views were important. No-one came from Brent Children and Families either despite claiming to support the school and its Headteacher.

It was clear that the parents remain loyal to the school and are prepared to defend it. Questions asked by Hank Roberts, ATL President in his letter to Labour Councillors at the end of May (see below) remain unanswered. 

The Unions and Action Groups have also asked to meet with Michael Gove. The letter reads:

You will be aware of the situation at Copland Community School in Brent. After a parents meeting last week to discuss the Ofsted report and its ramifications, parents set up an action group which will be co-ordinating with the staff action group.

Representatives from these action groups request an urgent meeting with you before any decisions are made about Copland's future. We are aware that you have met with representatives from Gladstone Park Primary School. We would hope and expect, therefore, that such an invitation be extended to Copland as well.

 The joint unions are looking for another day of strike action before the end of term if  they cannot get agreement from the Local Authority and the DfE that Copland will not be forced to become an academy.

Questions yet unanswered by Councillors

1) What actual educational evidence, other than Government propaganda, do you have that turning a school into an academy improves teaching and learning?
2) Why would you seek to ignore the Ofsted Report's recommendation that there be “an external review of Governance” at Copland, which is not an imposition of an IEB?
3) How do you answer the detailed points raised in the Chair of Governors letter, written on behalf of the Governing Body, explaining what had been done and crucial background information?
4) If Brent is claiming to be acting in the best interests of pupils' education then will you be asking the Governors to call a meeting of parents and carers to actually establish their views, or do you intend to have no consultation with parents?
5) As the last IEB at Copland failed to overcome the school's problems, what leads you to believe, and what evidence do you have, that it will succeed this time, especially if the staff did not want to co-operate with this imposed undemocratic body with no proper staff or parent representation?
6) Why would you and a Labour Council be acting to implement Gove's policies and do his 'dirty work' for him?

Michaela Free School fails to convince teachers or the local community

Apparently there were only about 40 people at the Michaela Free School meeting today and this included the Michaela representatives and parents with their children and members of a church group. Some were from outside of Brent, including Harrow and Islington.

Katharine Birbalsingh made a short presentation, comparing her school with Eton (!), and to people's then moved away without any Q&A session.

Cllr Michael Pavey, lead member for children and families on the Brent Council Executive, has expressed opposition to the Michaela Academy.

The Brent teacher unions have made  the following statement about the Michaela proposal:

As you know the education unions as a whole are against the 'free' school movement as they are designed to take money away from local schools and local authorities so leading to the break up of state education. There are clear proposals by this Government that such schools will be run for profit as the Breckland 'free' school already is.

We are also concerned that 'free' schools open the way for charitable foundations to profit by stealth through the payment of inflated salaries and bonuses to these who control those foundations.

The money already spent on Ms Birbalsingh's unsuccessful 'free' school proposals for south London are being kept from the public despite requests under FoI. Further public money is now being spent in Brent, again with no accountability. It is our understanding that in January 2012 a Freedom of Information request was made to the Department of Education about how long approval for the school was to be held open. The response was that normally, following approval, it would be expected that the school would open within a year i.e. January 2013 at the latest. So we do not understand how this new proposal can be linked to the first and question the propriety of the DfE and others in this case.

The details of the proposed school are still vague and contradictory and this makes it difficult to make specific responses. You have had a couple of years to put in the detail. In particular there is nothing in the information that gives us any reason to believe that you have in reality signed up to the partnership values of the Council despite saying that you have.

However, what we can say is that we are very concerned that another secondary school in this area will have a potentially detrimental effect on the local secondary schools, including the ARK academy which is just over the road from the proposed free school. There is currently, enough and in fact spare, secondary capacity. Your argument is that that is the only available building. This confirms that you are just aiming to set up a school wherever you can and have not taken into consideration the local needs. Not what we would call a 'community' decision.

The ethos of the 'private school' is not one of inclusion and is selective in its very nature. For the Michaela school to just concentrate on the purely academic is to narrow the education of children and means they will be learning through rote and over learning. It cannot call itself a community school when it will obviously only cater for one type of learner. One concern was that we were told that science would be taught in classrooms and no mention was made of laboratories which means scientific learning will be through books not practical and experimental.

Jenny Cooper, NUT Health and Safety Officer and a member of the Brent Health and Safety committees, has written to you about areas of concern which we are restating here. Regarding SEN, she makes the point that no that you will welcome applications from all persons regardless or background and ability. Oxford University also welcome these applications. It does not, of course, mean that these people get a place. Your response to with regards the curriculum was that it will be inclusive in order to suit children with SEN.

However, your website says, “traditional academic subjects .......Pupils will be required to study the five academic subjects that form the English Baccalaureate: English, Maths, Science, History/Geography and a foreign language.....In addition to these mandatory subjects, pupils will be able to choose from a range of options, including Art, Music and Drama......We believe knowledge is a prerequisite of skills development....Sport will be competitive and pupils will take Games for one afternoon per week”.

Jenny Cooper is an SEN specialist, and we agree with her that we cannot see how your proposed curriculum can be described as inclusive. Most teachers who have worked with SEN children (and indeed many parents) would agree that to be overloaded with academic subjects and to leave the creative subjects as non-mandatory, to focus on knowledge acquisition not skills development and to restrict physical education to solely competitive games occurring only once a week is a recipe for disaster.

Are you aware that Hirsch's theories on education, which you refer to in your curriculum information, were highly contentious in 1960s-70s America because of the very fact that they were considered non-inclusive? It was thought that he did not acknowledge differences in learning styles. And also, interestingly for the Brent community, he was criticised for not including the contributions of African Americans to society in the body of knowledge and culture that he decided should be taught. This attitude is simply not welcome in Brent. Brent teachers and parents are proud of our diverse community and we/they will not tolerate this kind of prejudiced narrow mindedness amongst us.

Regarding Health & Safety, Brent's policy on asbestos goes beyond that of the statutory requirements. All Brent schools are scheduled to have asbestos removed within the next few years on a rolling programme. It is no longer the policy simply to manage and cover up. The reason Brent have gone this step further is following poor management of asbestos which led to improvement notices being served after pupils and teachers were exposed. If this occurred in your school, you would be responsible for the insurance money available to pay compensation, as Brent are having to do for their ex-pupils. We noticed a van from an asbestos firm at the proposed site and would hope that their findings would be made known.

We all raised the question of lack of play area which was agreed to be inadequate. Children will be expected to study all day and then do sport but at the moment there is no agreed place for this to happen. Will parents be expected to pay for sports facilities at another school or sports centre? How else will the school afford this or is this in fact something that will either not happen or the parents will pay. All educationalist know that exercise is very important for children particularly in the teenage years yet there is to be one sports session a week. Playtime will also be very limited.

The emphasis on discipline – straight lines, standing up straight in assemblies – and the lack of creativity and exploration in the curriculum are all reminders of a Victorian system.

The admissions policy is all about taking tests and banding leaving admissions open to take just the most able pupils. 'Free' schools are able to do this as they face less scrutiny.

We are further concerned about the governors which we have been told have been self appointed. Parent governors will be 'recruited' rather than elected.

In conclusion

We think that the planning for school places has to be done in collaboration with the local community. Putting this school in the north of the borough of Brent will directly compete with our existing local schools and is not where the school place shortages are.

We believe that the evidence from ‘free’ schools has shown that they lead to increased social segregation, lower attainment and have been run for profit. Brent schools are in the top 10% of schools in the country so have a proven track record improving attainment for all children ensuring equal opportunities for pupils from all backgrounds.

We believe that all children need decent school buildings, investment in their schools and smaller class sizes. Free schools have been funded by cutting two desperately needed grants, including the BSF (Building Schools for the Future) money promised to our existing local schools. We know that the cuts to education and public services and the raising of tuition fees will harm our communities. The free school movement is Michael Gove's experimental pet project and is part of the plan to privatise our services and will worsen education for all.

Gladstone Park governors decide to pursue CfBT academisation

Gladstone Park Primary School's Chair of Governors has written to parents today to inform them that the governing body has agreed to work with the CfBT (Centre for British Teachers) Schools Trust, a charity, as their preferred academy sponsor and that the Department for Education is happy with the proposal. CfBT runs academies, free schools and private schools.

Parents and pupils reject academisation

Anne Kinderlerer, chair of governors reported that at her meeting with Michael Gove; where she was accompanied by the Governing Body's Chair of  Finance, Angus Hislop; they had 'emphasised the school's many strengths' and this was acknowledged by Gove. In turn Kinderlerer and Hislop agreed that Ofsted had identified specific weaknesses. Michael Gove ackowledged the progress made in addressing the weaknesses identified by Ofsted.

Her concluding paragraph in the Gove meeting report does not in itself imply academisation:

We also agreed that the school needs rapidly to identify a secure, robust future governance arrangement, but that the Department would work constructively with the school to take this forward.

The Parents Action Group are likely to argue that this could have been done without academisation. I agree with them.

However the Governing Body is now waiting for CfBT to undertake 'due diligence' to make sure that the school is a a financially and structurally secure state and say they will provide further information for staff and parents during this process, including meetings with CfBT and governors.

Parents and unions will be looking closely at what say they will have on academy conversion. Will they have a secret ballot including the option of non-conversion and remaining with the local authority?

Ann Kinderlerer states:

The outcome of this process, if all goes well, will be the development of a preferred option for academy conversion on which parents and staff can be consulted before the Governing Body considers any final decision to apply to the Secretary of State for an academy order - which in turn would be considered by the Secretary of State.

This seems to indicate 'consultation' which will be taken into account but not a ballot. The only option appears to be 'a preferred option for academy conversion' rather than staying with the local authority,  a federation or some other arrangement.

The focus will now be on digging a little deeper into CfBT's credentials.

The Chair of the Trustees is Philip Graf former Chief Executive of Trinity Mirror PLC and now CVhairman of the Gambling Commission and Vice Chair of CRISIS.

The Director of Education is Sir Jim Rose.This is what the CfBT website says about Rose. The spelling mistakes are CfBT's:

Jim Rose was formerly Her Majesty’s Inspector (HMI) and Director of Inspection for the Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted). He retired from Ofsted in July 1999 and has since acted as a consultant to the Department for Children, Schools and Families on nursery and primary education, and workforce training. At the request of the Secretary of State, he chaired the 1999 Independent Scrutiny of the National Assessment Tests for Primary Schools. He also led the independant Reviews of Teaching of Early Reading (2006), of the Primary Curriculum, and of Dyslexia (2009), and published an independant review of the primary curriculum in April 2009.

Before joining HMI, Jim held headships of two large, inner-city primary schools. His senior posts within HMI include Chief Inspector of Primary Education (3 to 13), responsibilities for Special Educational Needs (SEN), the education of ethnic minority pupils, and initial teacher training (ITT). He has advised several overseas governments on school inspection, and has considerable international experience of school educational systems. He is President of the National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER).

Rose has clashed with children's authors Michael Rosen and Michael MoLINK . He was one of the 'Three Wise Men' (the others were Chris Woodhead and Robin Alexander) appointed by the Conservative Government in the 1990s to report on primary schooling. John  Major used the findings to attack child-centred education and increased centralised control over teaching.
rpurgo over the teaching of phonics