July 20: Wrestling with the academy conundrum at County Hall
Comments |
WHAT happens to an education authority like Kent if
most – or even all – of its schools become
academies?
I don’t know the answer but I’m
in good company: neither does KCC or Michael Gove.
Nevertheless, the question is
one which is clearly preoccupying both officers and politicians at
County Hall, who are rather dismayed at the uncertainty and
unanswered questions that the new government’s flagship education
policy is creating.
Schools
poised to become first in new generation of academies: read out
story here>>>
At the moment, the key issue is
what the financial impact on County Hall may be and whether, at
some point, the fiendishly complex arrangements set out by the
government will result in the authority being sucked dry of so much
money that it becomes unsustainable.
Read
KCC's report on the impact of academies>>>
Education officials are spending
countless hours punching figures into their calculators and trying
to keep up with various announcements by the Department for
Education.
I gather that the pace of things
is so frenetic that no sooner have they got clarity on one matter,
another crops up much to their frustration.
KCC leader Paul Carter makes a
very valid point in saying that if academies – which at least at
the outset will all be high-achieving schools – waltz off and
detach themselves from KCC, then the pot of money it will be left
with to provide vital support for others that are doing less well
will shrink – possibly by millions.
That in turn risks creating what
everyone privately (and actually increasingly publicly)
acknowledges – namely a two-tier system of independent,
high-achieving schools and the rest who will struggle to improve
without the help they might previously have received from the
education authority to lift standards.
Further ahead, one possible
outcome is that the education department will set itself up as a
much more explicitly commercial operation dedicated to selling
services to the new generation of academies, which in one sense is
a very Conservative approach.
KCC has, of course, plenty of
experience in this area already.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The possibility of a two-tier
system was also alluded to by Cllr Sarah Hohler,
KCC's cabinet member for childrens services.
But not in the context of
academies but that other headache for KCC, the cancellation of
schemes planned under the Building Schools for The
Future.
The suspension, she said, has
had the unfortunate consequence of seeing some schools in Gravesham
and Thanet lavished with money and shiny new buildings and others
who have now had the rug pulled from under them and without a
single brick being laid.
It's worth pointing out that
this 'half and half' approach was one KCC itself wanted at the time
it was developing its plans for BsF - and to be fair, when no-one
was giving much thought to the prospect of schemes being stopped in
their tracks.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
One small consolation for KCC is
that it will not be forced to inherit the debts of schools that do
become academies.
This was apparently a loophole
exploited by at least one Kent school which became an academy under
the old arrangements.
The school was not identified
when the issue surfaced at a meeting of today’s KCC’s
Childrens, Families and Education Resources And
Infrastructure Policy Overview and Scrutiny Committee,
which is a committee that could do with a new name.
I wonder which one it
was?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Not much has been heard of
Peter Gilroy, KCC’s former chief executive, since
his retirement in May. There has been much talk of the likelihood
of him becoming a consultant of some description.
I note that he took steps to set
up a company in his name while in his last year at KCC, declaring
it in the officers’ register of interests, as you can see
here.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
There’s a good analysis of David
Cameron’s "Big Society" initiative in The Independent by Andy
McSmith.
He makes the point that
Cameron’s emphasis on making people feel "free and powerful to help
themselves and their own communities" is resonant of Margaret
Thatcher’s vision – something she referred to as ‘Victorian
values.’
Maybe Cameron is a Thatcherite
after all...
Tuesday, July 20 2010
The KM Group does not moderate comments.
Please click here for our house rules.