1 / 20

Academies and Educational Reform: Governance, Leadership and Innovation

2 nd Durham Education Conference Taking Research into Practice St Aidan’s College, 20 th April, 2010. Academies and Educational Reform: Governance, Leadership and Innovation David Galloway, Durham University. d.m.galloway@durham.ac.uk

kesia
Download Presentation

Academies and Educational Reform: Governance, Leadership and Innovation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 2nd Durham Education ConferenceTaking Research into PracticeSt Aidan’s College, 20th April, 2010 Academies and Educational Reform: Governance, Leadership and Innovation David Galloway, Durham University. d.m.galloway@durham.ac.uk Elizabeth Leo, Consultant and Northumberland C of E Academy. elizabethlleo@googlemail.com Phil Hearne, Northumberland C of E Academy. prhearne@aol.com

  2. Aims. • To replace “seriously failing” schools…… • “….. take over or replace schools which are either in special measures or underachieving.” (Blunkett, 2000)

  3. Distinctive characteristics • Governance – sponsor independent of LA • New or refurbished buildings Creating opportunities for: • Leadership and: • Innovation; leading to: • rapid improvement

  4. Rationale • Sir Keith Joseph’s legacy – preoccupation with the “bottom 40%”. • Lack of unskilled jobs. • Flight of the middle class. • Hence: • Priority to raise standards where lowest.

  5. Challenge to rationale • Poverty is best predictor of attainment • Therefore, better to direct resources at reducing poverty than at reforming education system. • But:

  6. Outliers. • Dilapidated buildings serving dilapidated neighbourhoods. • Flight of the middle class. • Behaviour in school not highly correlated with students’ background. • No information on potential. • Changes in the economy.

  7. Governance Sponsors: • Entrepreneurs • Faith organisations • Other organisations • Universities and independent schools • Successful state schools • LAs • Combinations of above

  8. Governance:Questions and Problems: 1. • Recruitment of sponsors • Quality of sponsors • Consistency in approach • Coherence

  9. Governance:Questions and problems: 2. • Sponsor’s educational views clashing with principal’s. • Sponsors as neo-LAs. • Tough decisions?

  10. Buildings “There are schools where students won’t go to the toilet because they’re too afraid.” “For us the architectural concept has its roots in the educational vision.”

  11. Do buildings matter? • Cf: • Correlation studies: new buildings have little impact on educational progress. • “Turnaround” studies: new buildings play a major part in improvement.

  12. Early academies • Iconic buildings: • Contributing to regeneration of local community? • Sometimes based on untested (astigmatic?) educational vision • Difficulty in consulting end users • In some cases “not fit for purpose”

  13. Current academies • BSF / PfS • “Design and build” • Part of Local Education Plan (LEP) • Consistent with growing links with LAs • Reduction in distinctiveness.

  14. Pressure, accountability, independence and leadership. “If we had a problem, whatever it was, it became magnified because not only were you dealing with the issue within the academy, but also with any number of journalists and therefore the Department.” “You have to be able to deal with more powerful people in society than most head teachers ever meet in their lives.”

  15. “Support and challenge” • Project lead • DCSF adviser • Project Management Company’s educational advisor • SSAT • SIP • Plus: Expectations of sponsor.

  16. Issues arising from “Support and challenge” • “Beware the Greeks” • Liberating or overwhelming? (Turnover of principals.) • Tension between being member of “local family of schools” and being independent. • Rapid turnaround: (i) a failing academy • (ii) a failing department.

  17. Innovation Cf: • Centrally led innovation • Home-grown innovation Can LA schools improve as fast as the most successful academies? Yes, but change tends to be more difficult in LAs.

  18. Conclusions: Questions arising. • Membership of “local family of schools”. • More difficult for chains to provide distinctive alternative to LA model. • Tension between management of chains and strong independent principal. • Effectiveness of sponsors. • Sustainability of improvements achieved. • SEN / inclusion.

  19. Cf: • (i) Leadership required in turning round a failing or badly underachieving school. • (ii) Leadership required in maintaining and developing a successful school.

  20. 2nd Durham Education ConferenceTaking Research into PracticeSt Aidan’s College, 20th April, 2010 Academies and Educational Reform: Governance, Leadership and Innovation David Galloway, Durham University. d.m.galloway@durham.ac.uk Elizabeth Leo, Consultant and Northumberland C of E Academy elizabethlleo@googlemail.com Phil Hearne, Northumberland C of E Academy. prhearne@aol.com

More Related