The Confederation of School Trusts, led by their able chief Executive, Leora Cruddas, don’t often rate a mention on this blog. However, their latest attempt to cut through the Gordian knot left by Michael Gove’s half completed reform of the school system in England does at least offer an opportunity for those interested in the matter to once again state their views and why they hold them?
As an elected Councillor, Deputy Chair of an Education Scrutiny Committee, and a long-time supporter of a school system with local democratic involvement, unlike the NHS where most decisions are driven either from Whitehall or by professionals, I might be thought to be miles apart from CST’s view: we shall see.
The CST introduction to their latest survey focuses on five key areas for their White Paper:
- One system – as opposed to the current “expensive and confusing” two-tier system, one of standalone schools maintained by local authorities and one of legally autonomous schools, many operating as part of a group or school trust
- Teacher professionalism – the CST is proposing to establish a body of knowledge which supports initial teacher education, induction and post-qualifying professional development
- Curriculum – the CST proposes that school trusts have clearly articulated education philosophies and harness the best evidence on curriculum design and implementation so that every pupil is able to access an ambitious curriculum
- Funding – the CST is today launching an online tool to help schools and school trusts strategically plan, and is also publishing a paper highlighting where strategic additional investment is needed
- Accountability – the CST believes there should be a single regulator and, separately, an independent inspectorate, each with clearly understand authority, decision-making powers, legitimacy and accountability
On the first bullet point, I would add that in my view is really 3 systems, with standalone academies and free schools being different to MAT/MACs.
Can Academies and Free schools be like the voluntary school sector of the past and MAT/MACs act like diocese in relation to local authorities?
How many organisations do we need? There are 150+ local authorities of varying sizes: how many do we need at that tier, 200, 250? Certainly not the wasteful and expensive arrangements that currently exist across the country. The fact that the government has had to clamp down on top salaries in MATs, this at a time when schools are strapped for cash, makes the point more eloquently that any diatribe about CEOs pay packets.
Pupil place planning and in-year admissions are key tasks needed in a properly managed system. Someone needs to guarantee children taken into care for their own safety and moved away from the parental home can secure a new school place quickly, and also ensure in-year admissions for pupils whose parents move home are not left for long periods of time without a school place, especially if they have special needs and an EHCP.
Perhaps a national fund to help ensure rapid transfers for pupils with an EHC plan or needing SEN support might help. Local Authorities could draw on the fund without it affecting their High Needs block funding.
The CST also needs to reflect how school transport is to be managed in any changed system.
On teacher professionalism, will the CST support my view on the need for QTS to be defined more closely than anyone with QTS can teach anything to any pupil in any type of school?
If you are interested in the governance of our school system as it approaches its 150th anniversary year, do please visit https://cstuk.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Future-shape-white-paper-call-for-evidence-June-2019.pdf and complete the CST survey.
John Howson 
The CST’s ‘two tier system’ wrongly defines academies as ‘legally autonomous’. That is not so for academies in multi-academy trusts. Such academies lose the legal separate identity enjoyed by both LA-maintained schools and stand-alone academies. Academies in MATs become part of a greater legal identity: the MAT.
CST, formerly the Freedom and Autonomy for Schools National Association (FASNA), has long supported academization and has received government money to promote academy conversion. The CST describes this mass conversion as ‘reform’. Yet after nearly ten years of relentless government propaganda, 60% of English schools are still not academies. It appears that three out of five English schools prefer to remain in the stewardship of local authorities. Perhaps the ‘reform’ should be halted rather than extended with academies being able to return to the LA umbrella if teachers, parents and the local community supported this.
Janet,
This was just the sort of reasoning that I aimed for when posting the blog. Hence my definition of three system and not two. The present arrangements are wasteful of scare resources and muddled and do need reforrming. Like you, I favour local democratic accountability. But, does that mean LAs as wide apart as Rutland and Kent in size and complexity?
john
Perhaps there should be local education authorities of equal size comprising several LAs. However, this could face opposition from inhabitants of smaller LAs who may feel swamped by an education authority perceived as being more representative of a larger local authority.
Your choice of Rutland is a case in point. Rutland was once part of Leicestershire but it became a separate LA after a vigorous campaign. Attempts to incorporate Rutland into a larger education authority based, say, in Lincolnshire would likely face opposition not only because Rutlanders are fiercely independent but because Lincs is a selective county while Rutland is not.
On the other hand, the tiny LA of Knowsley, regularly panned by ministers for its poor secondary results (fueled in part by an exodus of previously-high-performing pupils over the county border at secondary level), becoming part of, say, a Greater Manchester education authority.
Janet,
I hope that Knowsley might be part of a greater Liverpool tie-up along the lines of the former police authority rahter than defecting to Manchester. I agree about the importance of independence, but do SEND pupils get a good deal in Rutland? The 1944 Act allowed for Part 2 authorities within large one so Middlesex had many Urban districts such as Tottenham that ran primary and secondary modern education, but not selective schools that were county controlled. This sort of partnership of place seems to allow for democratic accountability but not too much centralisation. As you said in your last comment, MAT/MACs are even less democratic at the school level than stand alone academies.
John