Biased ministers rubbish the majority of English schools – and ask MATs to tweet it

Janet Downs's picture
 2

It’s full-speed ahead for promoting academisation at the Department for Education (DfE).  Education secretary Damian Hinds called upon more schools to become academies while schools minister Nick Gibb used publication of revised GCSE results yesterday to  do the same

Selected academy trusts were asked to tweet Damian Hinds’s announcement, Schools Week reveals today (subscribers' edition, article not yet available on line). 

But what did this tweet actually reveal?  First, ‘there are over 8,300 academies and free schools in England’.   It’s not known whether ‘free schools’ include UTCs and studio schools which are a type of free school.  It’s likely they are in this instance because that would inflate the number of non-academy schools.  However, they’re not included in free schools’ performance at GCSE – that would greatly reduce free school exam data.

Leave that possible sleight of hand aside – the number of academies and free schools is still less than half of all schools in England.  But in saying ‘thousands of pupils are benefiting from higher standards as their schools become #academies’ implies the majority of schools - the ones described sneeringly as ‘council-run schools’ – aren’t providing a similar benefit.

What kind of department and what kind of minister rubbishes the majority of schools in a system which is responsible for them all?  What does it tell us about where their priorities lie?  Not in supporting all schools – but in disparaging those schools which aren’t outsourced to companies and charities.

If the implied disdain to non-academies isn’t bad enough, the tweet contained a crass statement which widely deserves to be mocked.  That’s because it’s hailed as showing a tipping point towards mass academization.   And what was this killer statistic?

Over 50% of all pupils in state funded schools in England now attend an academy or free school.’

This has nothing to do with supposed merits of academies or free schools.  It’s because the bulge caused by a higher birth rate in the late noughties is now moving into secondary schools.  The secondary sector is heavily academized so it’s hardly surprising there will be more children in academies.

It’s demographics, stupid. 

When the DfE, ministers and their acolytes treat a birth rate boom as an indisputable  argument in favour of mass academization, the only sane response is to laugh.  MATs which are thinking of retweeting this kind of stuff would be better to distance themselves from such tosh.  And those MATs which weren't selected to take part in the smugfest should breathe a sigh of relief they weren't asked.  Joining in could make them look daft.

 

CORRECTIONS: 25 January 2019 13.59.  Two typos missed in proof reading have been corrected.

FURTHER CORRECTION 25 Janauary 2019 16.48.  I changed 'unarguable argument' in the last paragraph to 'indisputable argument'.  The former was a bit of a tongue-twister.

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook

Be notified by email of each new post.





Comments

_Peter's picture
Fri, 25/01/2019 - 09:37

Lots to take issue with in that press release!

I don’t understand how DfE can assert that non-academies are “council-run” given this hasn’t been the case for over 30 years since the Education Act 1988.

Councils’ involvement is limited to, at most, appointing an LA governor (community schools only) and intervention in event of poor performance.

It betrays a lack of understanding of the school system they apparently oversee.

And analysis by DfE civil servants should not be described as “research”!


Jane Eades's picture
Fri, 25/01/2019 - 10:25

Is it bias or is it desperation as more a more evidence appears that demonstrate that a) the academy programme does not raise standards; b) that millions is being spent on propping up academy trusts; c) that the programme is unstable with schools being handed around like clothes in a charity shop.  Unfortunately, the Government has invested too much of its reputation on the programme to be able to admit that they were wrong.

 


Add new comment

Already a member? Click here to log in before you comment. Or register with us.