The third Annual Report of the PriceWaterhouseCoopers’ evaluation of Academies, praised by Government today, has given concern to campaigners against these ‘independent’ but state-funded schools
Among the worrying findings of the report are:
– 4 out of 11 Academies studied were ‘performing less well than the national average’
– In some Academies ‘performance is actually deteriorating’ and in others ‘performance is improving in one subject and deteriorating in another’, ‘for one Academy, this decline was very significant.’
– ‘the rate of exclusions from Academies is significantly greater than in comparison group schools’
– only 2 of the 15 Academies studied showed evidence ‘that the wider governance arrangements for Academies are maturing and providing more tangible support to principals’
– evidence suggests that Academies with sponsors that also sponsor other Academies (‘multiple sponsors’) are ‘less likely to have engaged extensively with other schools in the local area.’
The report also notes:
– ‘Dissatisfaction with the differences in resourcing between Academies and other schools, reflected in the new Academy buildings and facilities;’
– ‘Concerns expressed by some about Academies adopting an elitist approach, and associated worries that they would not genuinely participate in wider local authority initiatives;’
– ‘Potential “creaming” by Academies of the brightest and best pupils in the local area’
BHA Education officer Andrew Copson commented:
‘This report is by no means the endorsement of the Academy approach that the Government claims it is. The factors that are highlighted as contributing to success in Academies – good leadership, investment, and resources – are the same factors as contribute to success in any school and are not unique to Academies. In fact, the report notes that “some Academies have been performing less well than the national average and other schools” and that performance has deteriorated in some Academies.
‘The report notes that ‘flexibility’ and ‘creativity’ is allowed by Academy status, but we know that some academies have been using these powers to deliver a curriculum with a religious and ideological bias. This report will not calm the fears of many that sponsors (such as religious interest groups) are receiving control of state-funded schools and the power to alter the curriculum. Where in this report is the qualitative research on the nature of the education being received?’
NOTES
Further enquiries can be addressed by email to Andrew by email on education@humanists.uk or by telephone on 020 7079 3584 or 07855 380633
The British Humanist Association represents and supports the non-religious. It is the largest such organisation in the UK campaigning for an end to religious privilege and to discrimination based on religion or belief. In education, this means an end to the expansion of faith schools and for the assimilation of those that currently exist into a system of inclusive and accommodating community schools.