“Orphan” academy school still wIting for new sponsor after 2 years

“Two years ago, Rose Hill primary on the outskirts of Oxford was branded a failing school. Ranked “inadequate” by the schools watchdog Ofsted, it was placed in special measures and staff and parents were told an academy trust would be brought in to turn around the school’s fortunes.

Two years on – and two education secretaries later – the school is still waiting.

When the Guardian visited in January 2016, morale was at rock bottom. The Ofsted report had been so devastatingly negative that the headteacher, Sue Vermes, and her team said they felt “criminalised” by the experience. A compulsory academy order was made and Vermes and her colleagues waited for their new masters to move in. Then – nothing.

Rose Hill, which serves a disadvantaged community far from Oxford’s dreaming spires, has become what is known as an “orphan” school. It is yet to be adopted by a sponsor. Though a local academy trust has shown an interest, a deal is yet to be secured. As the new education secretary, Damian Hinds, gets to grips with his brief, this small school is a reminder of the challenges the government’s academies programme faces.

“You feel unwanted,” says Vermes, sitting in her drab office. “With the day-to-day running of the school, it doesn’t have much impact. But long term, where are we going? I’ve given up trying to explain it to parents.”

Rose Hill is not alone. Estimates suggest there are around 60 orphan schools in England waiting to be taken over by a sponsor.

The government claims its academies policy – which takes schools out of local authority control and puts them in the hands of an academy trust, making them directly accountable to the Department for Education (DfE) – enables it to intervene swiftly when a school is in trouble. However, Rose Hill and others like it show this is not always a straightforward process.

And it has an impact on the children, too. After Rose Hill’s inadequate rating, one pupil asked Vermes: “If this is an inadequate school, does that mean I’m an inadequate child?” The longer the uncertainty continues, the less appealing the school looks to future pupils and their families, hence numbers drop and so does income.

The school building, which was crying out for repairs when we last visited, is just as bleak two years on. There is mould on the ceiling, the toilets smell, the paintwork is chipped, the classrooms are overheated and stuffy and the shabby corridors are chilly and unwelcoming.

It was due to be demolished and rebuilt under the last Labour government – the plans were drawn up and published in the local newspaper. When the coalition government took over in 2010, the funding disappeared overnight and Rose Hill has been struggling to keep up appearances ever since.

Since the Guardian’s last visit, the local authority has spent £200,000 on patching up the roof and replacing some windows; the DfE has set aside £1.4m for a new sponsor to spend on further repairs. But Vermes thinks a total rebuild is needed, which would cost £9m. “This is not a building that says to the children and their families that their education is crucial. It’s just saying to them, you are not worth the investment,” she says.

The building will be an ongoing issue for any sponsor. In addition, staffing costs are high: 35 different languages are spoken at the school, a third of the children have special educational needs and around half of them live in poverty. Vermes says the pressures on vulnerable families have increased as austerity continues to bite. There are two local food banks, which are well used, but some children are not getting enough to eat.

The children’s centre at the school has closed like all Oxfordshire’s children’s centres – so problems are not being picked up at an early stage. Pupils who need to attend a special school cannot always find one because of a shortage of places, so Rose Hill keeps them on roll with additional support staff.

MPs call for overhaul in oversight of England’s academy school chains
After the academy order was made, Vermes was asked to quit – but she refused. “It’s the wrong culture. It’s like football managers,” she says. She has worked as a teacher in Oxfordshire since 1985 and has taken just three days of sick leave in that time.

Last October, Ofsted returned to Rose Hill and found it much improved. The school was taken out of special measures and rated “requires improvement”, but in three categories was ranked “good”. Yet still the school is stranded without a sponsor.

More than half of all secondary schools in England are now run as academies, along with a fifth of primaries. On 17 January, MPs on parliament’s education committee called on the government to overhaul the oversight of academy chains after a string of high-profile failures.

Vermes is optimistic there will be a positive outcome for Rose Hill, hoping that the local academy chain she favours will take the school on, but the journey to this point has been long and bruising. It is, she says, a good example of the chaos of government policy surrounding academisation.

“I also think we are a symbol of the current punitive attitude towards children and families in poverty: ‘You’re poor, so your education is less important, and you can certainly put up with a substandard building,’” she says.

The Department for Education was unable to say how many “orphan” schools there currently are in England. A DfE spokesman said: “We have been working hard to achieve a positive solution for Rose Hill Primary school and to address the most urgent needs which will make the building fit for purpose.
“We are still in negotiations with River Learning Trust, which is supporting the school, and continue to work with the local authority, which remains responsible for maintaining the buildings and site at Rose Hill.”‎

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/jan/22/rose-hill-primary-oxford-an-orphan-school-at-the-sharp-end-of-academisation

“Devon schools worse off than those in London by more than £500 per pupil”

When our MPs tell us that we in Devon are receiving an extra £7.5 for education, perhaps point this out to them:

“The Government’s new national funding formula will mean an extra £7.5million for schools in Devon next year.

But they will still be left £268 per pupil short of the national average, say Devon County Council. …”

http://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/devon-schools-worse-those-london-1067723

Fair?

Primary school children made to pay to play with school equipment!

“A primary school has been accused of segregating children in the playground based on whether or not their parents contributed towards the cost of sports equipment.

Those whose parents had paid for the footballs, skipping ropes and other items were allowed to play with them at lunchtimes, while those whose parents had not were excluded from the games organised by a member of staff.

Parents launched a petition online, accusing the headteacher of Wednesbury Oak Academy, in the West Midlands, of separating the children into “paid” and “unpaid” pupils.

“This has caused outright disgust from children, parents, grandparents, staff and suchlike,” the petition read. “The parents that have paid and parents that haven’t are totally against the separation of the children as this can cause upset, bullying and social exclusion among other things.”

After coming under pressure, the school’s governors quickly scrapped the system. “We have listened to the concerns raised and will be ending the scheme with immediate effect. We are a school that believes in putting our children at the heart of everything we do,” said Elizabeth Perrin, the chair of the school governors…. “

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/jan/11/west-midlands-school-accused-of-segregating-children-in-playground

“Tories appoint man who complained about ‘ghastly inclusivity’ of school wheelchair ramps to higher education watchdog”

“The Tories today appointed writer Toby Young, who complained about the ‘ghastly inclusivity’ of wheelchair ramps in schools, to the board of their new higher education watchdog.

The Office for Students (OfS) legally come into force today with a remit to hold regulate university vice chancellors’ pay and enforce ‘free speech’ on campus.

… In a column for the Spectator in 2012, Young wrote: “Inclusive. It’s one of those ghastly, politically correct words that has survived the demise of New Labour. Schools have got to be “inclusive” these days.

“That means wheelchair ramps, the complete works of Alice Walker in the school library (though no Mark Twain) and a Special Educational Needs Department that can cope with everything from Dyslexia to Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy.

He went on to call on then-Education Secretary Michael Gove to bring back O-levels and repeal the Equality Act, because “any exam that isn’t “accessible” to a functionally illiterate troglodyte with a mental age of six will be judged to be “elitist” and therefore forbidden by [Harriet] Harman’s Law.”

University and College Union general secretary Sally Hunt said: “If this organisation was to have any credibility it needed a robust board looking out for students’ interests.

“Instead we have this announcement sneaked out at New Year with Tory cheerleader Toby Young dressed up as the voice of teachers and no proper representation from staff or students.” …”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tories-appoint-man-who-complained-11779695

Size DOES matter! Failing company kept on by government – because it is too big to fail!

“The government kept funding training company Learndirect despite it being judged ’inadequate’ because of fears over the loss of such a large provider.

That was the conclusion of a National Audit Office probe, released yesterday, into why Learndirect continued to receive substantial public money even after regulator Ofsted criticised its effectiveness.

The NAO’s report said that although the normal policy of the Education and Skills Funding Agency was to withdraw funding from providers rated as ‘inadequate’ by Ofsted, it “believed that the size of Learndirect Ltd made it an unusual case, to which special considerations should apply”.

It continued: “Specifically, ESFA concluded that continuing to fund Learndirect Ltd for the 2017-18 academic year would best meet the interests of learners, allowing the company to wind down and let learners complete their courses with minimal disruption.”

The NAO said it conducted the investigation because “Parliament and the media have questioned whether Learndirect Ltd’s performance was subject to proper scrutiny, and whether correct and timely decisions were made about its continued funding”.

Learndirect grew to be by far the largest provider of skills training, with some 70,000 people on its books.

In 2016-17, it received £121m worth of central government contracts.

Labour’s Meg Hillier, chair of the Public Accounts Committee, said the report showed: “The government backed itself into a corner by letting itself become dependent on Learndirect.

“At a time when many further education providers are struggling with funding restraint, it is disgraceful that the Department [of Education] should be continuing to spend millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money on an inadequate provider.

“I am concerned that it took Ofsted so long to investigate. It knew Learndirect was a risk from as early as Spring 2015, but the inspection took two years to arrive.”

The NAO said Ofsted inspected Learndirect in early 2017 and in March that year issued a ‘notice of serious breach’ of apprenticeships standards.

It said Ofsted identified factors contributing to its ‘inadequate’ rating including poor management of subcontractors’ performance and weak oversight of learners’ progress.

Ofsted also covered the Learndirect affair in its annual report this week.

This noted: “The case of Learndirect limited has shown that no provider is too big to fail.

“This raises a question for us and for government about failure in market regulation and whether incentives drive the right behaviour.”

It said the episode raised questions about when providers of any kind “grow too big, too fast”.

A Department for Education spokesperson said: “Our priority throughout has been the protection of learners and ensuring that they do not lose out – a point that has been acknowledged by the NAO.”

Ofsted, at the launch of its annual report, went on to warn that the new apprenticeship levy was “raising a very substantial amount of money to fund training, [which] carries the risk of attracting operators that are not committed to high-quality learning, as we saw, for example, with Train to Gain”.Learndirect has been approached for comment.”

Privatisation – the gift that keeps on giving to failed academy schools

Police have confirmed they are looking at the conduct of a multi-academy trust accused of asset stripping its schools before collapsing.

Wakefield City Academies Trust announced days into the new term in September that it would divest itself of its 21 schools because WCAT could not undertake the “rapid improvement” they needed. The Department for Education is in the process of arranging for new trusts to take over management of the schools.

In October, it was revealed that the trust had transferred millions of pounds of its schools’ reserves to centralised accounts before admitting that new sponsors would need to be found for them. …

Before its collapse, WCAT had been dogged by scandal. In October 2016, it emerged that the trust had paid almost £440,000 to IT and clerking companies owned by its then chief executive, Mike Ramsay, and his daughter. The trust insisted the contracts had represented the best value.

A draft of a DfE report on the trust’s finances, seen by TES, also raised concerns that Ramsay had been paid more than £82,000 for 15 weeks’ work, despite the fact that the trust faced a large budget deficit. …

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/dec/06/wakefield-city-academies-trust-west-yorkshire-police?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

“40,000 children trapped in ‘zombie’ academy schools”

“The government has been urged to review its policy on multi-academy trusts after it was revealed that more than 40,000 children were being educated in “zombie schools” waiting to be transferred to another academy chain.

Department for Education figures, obtained through a freedom of information request, show 64 academy schools are waiting to find a new sponsor after being abandoned by, or stripped from, the trust originally managing them. A calculation using the average number of pupils in state-funded primary and secondary schools in England – 279 and 946, respectively –suggests the 64 schools would contain more than 40,000 students.

The government has encouraged academies to join multi-academy trusts, promoting them as a support for schools that have left local authority control, although some have been criticised for financial mismanagement and a lack of oversight.

Half of the 64 “zombie schools” are waiting to be transferred from two chains: the Education Fellowship Trust and Wakefield City Academies Trust. In March the former became the first trust in England to give up control of its 12 academies – including a school in the prime minister’s Maidenhead constituency – following concerns about educational standards. In September the Wakefield trust said it would divest itself of 21 schools across Yorkshire, as it could not undertake the “rapid improvement our academies need”.

The DfE said it was in the process of securing new academy chains for the schools in both trusts.

Until a new multi-academy trust is found, the schools remain in limbo, often unable to make long-term planning decisions, hire new permanent members of staff or organise pay rises. They do not have the option to return to local authority control. Campaigners say that the government is struggling to find new chains willing and able to take on the schools, many of which have been left in a precarious financial position by their previous sponsor.

“The Tories’ fragmented education system is now creating ‘zombie schools’ caught between academy chains who are under no obligation to take them on, and a government that won’t step in to help them,” said Angela Rayner, Labour’s shadow education secretary. “Even in the prime minister’s own seat it seems there are classrooms of children not getting the education they deserve. … ”

The figures come after it was announced on Thursd

Social mobility? Forget it

“The board of the government’s Social Mobility Commission has stood down in protest at the lack of progress towards a “fairer Britain”.

Ex-Labour minister Alan Milburn, who chairs the commission, said he had “little hope” the current government could make the “necessary progress”.
Tory former cabinet minister Baroness Shephard is among three others to quit.

In a resignation letter first reported by the Observer, Mr Milburn said ministers were preoccupied with Brexit.

He said that meant the government “does not have the necessary bandwidth to ensure the rhetoric of healing social division is matched with the reality”.
Mr Milburn added: “It seems unable to commit to the future of the commission as an independent body or to give due priority to the social mobility challenge facing our nation.”

He took up his role with the commission, which monitors progress towards improving social mobility in the UK, and promotes social mobility in England, in July 2012.

‘Unable to commit’

The resignations come as Theresa May, who entered Downing Street in July 2016 promising to tackle the “burning injustices” that hold back poorer people, faces questions over the future of senior minister Damian Green – who is effectively her second in command – and is under pressure as Brexit talks continue.

In his resignation letter addressed to Mrs May, Mr Milburn said he was standing down with “much sadness” and was “deeply proud of the work the commission has done”.

He said: “All the main political parties now espouse a Britain that is less elitist and more equal, while growing numbers of employers, universities, colleges, schools and councils have developed a shared determination to create a level playing field of opportunity in our country.”

Mr Milburn added: “Individual ministers such as the secretary of state for education have shown a deep commitment to the issue.

“But it has become obvious that the government as a whole is unable to commit the same level of support…

“I do not doubt your personal belief in social justice, but I see little evidence of that being translated into meaningful action.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42212270

Newton Poppleford: £3m school sacrifices new library for a classroom

Austerity – the reality:
http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/newton-poppleford-primary-school-compromises-on-new-library-for-extra-classroom-1-5293134

“Tory flagship childcare policy a flop as just 30,000 parents out of promised 415,000 helped”

“Tory plans for tax-free childcare are in disarray, with an uptake of less than eight per cent.

The flagship policy launched in 2013 was meant to help 415,000 parents by last month but only 30,000 signed up.

That means this year the Government has only spent £37million and saved £800million.

Budget documents out last week show next year’s spending forecast is being revised down by 90 per cent.

The low response is being blamed on ministers failing to give additional funding for nurseries and childminders. More than 500 wrote to Chancellor Philip Hammond before the Budget asking for more money – but in vain. …”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tory-flagship-childcare-policy-flop-11587487

Can productivity and growth be increased outside the South East except for Hinkley C?

Our Local Enterprise Partnership’s draft economic strategy is making enormous claims about how much it will increase productivity in Devon and Somerset – its predictions outstripping those of historic precedent and some of the most productive areas of the UK. This in spite of our ageing population and the effects of austerity on skills and training (our LEP’s investment in this sector appears to be limited to training only for Hinkley C nuclear plant).

Our councillors might well examine our LEPs claims with some disquiet:

“… Cities such as Stoke, Blackburn, Mansfield and Doncaster had productivity 25% below the national average, the Centre for Cities said. Raising all parts of the UK to the national productivity average would increase the size of the economy by £203bn – equivalent to Birmingham’s output four times over.

The report showed that cities outside the greater south-east had weaker productivity because they were failing to secure the higher-skilled work of productive sectors and firms.

“Firms choose to locate their high-skilled operations in cities which can offer them access to a high-skilled workforce and other relevant businesses, and will base lower value components in places where land and labour is cheaper,” the thinktank said.

“Barclays bases its high-value banking activities in London and its low-skilled call centre in Sunderland. Similarly, clothing company Asos has a large distribution centre with low-skilled jobs in Barnsley, but its headquarters is located [in London].”

The report said another factor explaining the regional divide was that highly productive sectors and firms made up a larger shares of jobs in cities in the greater south-east than in urban areas in other regions.

On average, cities in the region had a larger proportion of workers in sectors and firms that contributed most to national productivity – in 2015, the information and communications sector made up 7% of jobs in cities in the greater south-east, compared with just 3% in other cities. The financial services industry accounted for 6% of jobs in cities in the region compared with 4% of jobs in cities elsewhere in the country. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/nov/16/poor-productivity-outside-south-east-hurting-uk-economy

Would you trust Gove on the environment?

So, Gove has a “green plan” for Brexit.

Let’s none of us forget the state in which he left education:

A primary school teacher wrote:

“The most shocking thing about Michael Gove’s reign as education secretary was that one individual was able to change the system so much for the worse, writes this primary teacher
Dear Mr Gove,

I see that you are driving yourself back into the public eye. You came back on to my radar with your scoop of an interview with Donald Trump. I noted the grin, the twinkle in your eyes (à la Nigel Farage in a gold-plated lift) as you posed for a “thumbs up” photograph with the then president-elect. Your mutual appreciation was evident and hardly surprising, given that you appear to share many of the same ideas and core beliefs.

Firstly, Michael, you and Trump both appear to share an insatiable need to be in the public eye. How else to explain Trump’s early morning tweets? How else to explain your rapid return to the spotlight after such an ignominious debacle in the days following the Brexit referendum?

Moreover, both of you share a belief in belittling the opinions of experts, whether they be civil servants or career professionals in a specialised field. We all know Trump’s views on the “swamp” of the Washington bureaucracy and his views on environmentalism, despite the accepted wisdom of a vast majority of scientists. In recent days, you have argued that your anti-expert rhetoric during the referendum has been misconstrued. However, as long as seven years ago, you were already demonstrating, by your actions, a deeply held distrust of expert educational opinion.

As you embarked on your role as education secretary, you set out to put to one side the views of civil servants within the Department of Education, to disregard the prevailing wisdom of the teaching profession, in order to oversee an overhaul of the national curriculum. The new document proved to be, to an almost fantastical degree, the personal educational manifesto of a single individual. By dint of the fact that you had been to school, by dint of the fact that you had experienced the power of an inspirational teacher or two, and by dint of the fact that you had (to your credit) a daughter in a state primary school, you had the arrogance, Michael, to believe that you alone had the expertise to design a curriculum for all.

What followed was the publication of a curriculum that included some good ideas – who could argue with the oft-quoted aim of desiring to expose children to the “great thinkers”? However, in reality it was a massive missed opportunity to deliver a truly outstanding education system for the future. Through your fundamental misunderstanding of education, you increased (or in some cases, merely reorganised) the content of the curriculum, reducing it, in the process, to what is most easily measurable. Michael, it would have been much more innovative and powerful to refocus education on principles rather than facts. What we needed was an educational system which strove to be exceptional within a rapidly globalising world; which promoted understanding rather than recall; which used everything that we have learned from educational research to optimise children’s learning; which promoted sustainability rather than short-term performance. It took over 20 years for the original national curriculum to be modified – unfortunately, we are going to have to live with your version for a long time.

A ‘damaging’ new leadership culture
What is most shocking about your reign in education, Michael, was that one individual was able to impose his own beliefs and prejudices to such an extent, virtually unimpeded. For this, David Cameron must take the bulk of the responsibility. Your appropriating of power to deliver a personal agenda, albeit on a smaller scale, cannot fail but to remind one of somebody across the pond. We can only hope that the oft-quoted “checks and balances” of the US’ political system are more effective in curbing the excesses of Trump, than Cameron was in curbing yours.

Another damaging product of your period in education, Michael, has been a change in the culture of school leadership, which corresponds to your own style of leadership. Much has been spoken of legacies in recent weeks. Well a legacy of your period of office has been a change in culture within schools, which has been at best unhelpful and at worst downright damaging. This change is characterised by a movement away from collaborative endeavour, and a corresponding movement towards autocratic decision-making – a change which reflects the political move towards greater individualism.

One of the most powerful products of the Blair government’s education policy was the focus on collaborative endeavour. Education ministers actively sought the opinions and advice of experts in the field. This was manifested through the primary strategies which sought to collate and disseminate good practice. Basically, good practice was developed by teachers and advisers, shared between schools and modified accordingly. The culture in schools was much more inclusive; headteachers were actively encouraged, through the National College of School Leadership, to use more distributive models of leadership.

Under your leadership, Michael, the culture of leadership within the Department of Education changed, and this has filtered down into schools. Heads, for example, are now expected to be seen to “lead” on everything, especially on “teaching and learning”. Modern heads feel it incumbent on themselves to be seen to be the one making decisions, to be seen to be leading from the front. This change in emphasis may seem small but it has led to a decline in interest in headship, a lowering of teacher morale (since their voices are less valued) and a subsequent increase in the numbers taking time off for stress-related illness or, even worse, leaving the profession. Such leadership affects teachers’ lives; it affects their mental wellbeing.

Cultures of leadership matter. Perhaps Obama’s greatest legacy is the culture of his leadership – a leadership characterised by honesty, dignity, humility and grace; characterised by listening and by collaboration. The culture of your leadership in education mattered, Michael – it will take a significant time before it is replaced by a more effective one.

It is also a culture that appears to be about to be repeated in Trump’s administration. No wonder, in that photo, that the two of you look so at ease with each other – a mutual admiration society. You have much in common.

David Jones”

https://www.tes.com/news/school-news/breaking-views/you-somehow-imposed-your-own-prejudices-education-one-primary

180 children in a class – yes: one hundred and eighty! – but it’s OK – it’s only PE

A school in England has a class with more than 180 pupils in it as Tory cuts hammer the education system.

Children across the UK are often taught in classes of 100 or more students a Freedom of Information request revealed.

The class of 181 was in a school in Sutton, South West London. It was unclear which subject was being taught, but it was possible it was PE or music.

Shadow Education Secretary, Angela Rayner, said she was appalled by the figures.

She said: “Everyone from the public accounts committee to the teaching unions has warned that Tory cuts will lead to large class sizes – and this admission is yet more evidence that they are right.”

A class in Sefton, Merseyside, had 141 pupils and one in Suffolk had 135. The figures were collected by counting the number of children in each class on a specific day in January this year.

They also showed 10 classes of 70 or more pupils and 52 classes with 50-plus students. At primary school level, there were 14 schools with more than 40 pupils in a class.

The largest primary school class was in Somerset, which had 60 pupils.

Head teachers are calling for more than £1billion extra for education and are linking rising class sizes to the £2.8billion real-terms cut since 2015.

The Department for Education said: “We have invested £5.8billion in the school estate, creating 735,000 places since 2010,

At Harrop Fold School in Salford, the head teacher, Drew Povey, said he had once taught 150 children in a class. “We have taught huge classes in the past, though infrequently, partly to save money on supply teachers.

“I honestly think we are going to see class sizes balloon in schools over the next few years because of the funding cuts.”

Labour made it illegal for schools to have more than 30 pupils in infant classes.

A spokesman for the Department for Education said: “We have spoken to the three schools with the largest class sizes.

“These figures relate to PE lessons and choir practice where it is not uncommon for classes to be taught together.

“The schools’ pupil-to-teacher ratios remain well below the national average.

“We also expect this is the case for many of the other schools reporting larger classes in this data.

“We have invested £5.8bn in the school estate, creating 735,000 places since 2010, and despite rising pupil numbers, the average class size has not changed. In fact, less than 1% of primary school pupils are taught in classes of 36 or more, less than in 2010.”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/180-pupils-one-class-appalling-11473734

Academy school heads – many paid £150,000-£425,000 a year

England’s highest earning academy bosses are revealed today in a Tes analysis of 121 trusts identified by the Department of Education (DfE) as paying salaries of more than £150,000.

The DfE last week named the academy trusts that paid at least one individual trustee or staff member more than £150,000 a year in 2015-16. However, it declined to name the individuals or reveal their salaries, despite saying last year that it would do so.

But Tes has used the list of trusts named by the DfE to compile a full list of the highest-paid employees, and their salaries, based on information in academy trust accounts.

Their combined salaries come to more than £21 million, with almost one in five (19 per cent) of the individuals paid at least £200,000 a year, before their pensions are taken into account.

Salaries range from at least £150,000 a year to the £420,000-£425,000 that Sir Dan Moynihan, chief executive of the Harris Federation, is paid.

Sir Dan’s overall package is approaching half a million pounds a year once his pension contributions of £50,000-55,000 are taken into account.

However, many of the academy bosses now earning more than the prime minister are from far smaller trusts, some of which run just one school.

Simon Barber, the principal of Carshalton Boys Sports College, who earns at least £195,000 a year, is one example. Another is Michael McKenzie, headteacher of Alexandra Park School in London, who earns at least £155,000, according to trust accounts.

The extent to which academy trusts are paying large six figure salaries comes amid mounting concern over the levels of remuneration of academy bosses.

Earlier this year national schools commissioner Sir David Carter told Tes that having “challenging conversations” about chief executive pay is a “very important” part of the work of the eight regional schools commissioners he oversees.

And in July this year Lord Adonis, who developed the academies policy under New Labour, told Tes, “If I had realised that academy principals or trust chief executives were going to be paid sums in excess of £150,000 when I was a minister then I would have intervened to stop it”.

One of the lower paying trusts is the Inspiration Trust, which had education minister Sir Theodore Agnew as its chair of trustees until September this year. The trust runs five primary schools, seven secondary schools and one sixth form in Norfolk and Suffolk.

Its chief executive, Dame Rachel de Souza, is at the bottom end of the top earners, on between £150,000 and £155,000 a year.

There has been a 70 per cent rise in the number of trusts paying at least one person in excess of £150,000 a year, with 121 academy trusts listed as doing so in 2015-16, up from 71 in 2014-15….”

https://www.tes.com/news/school-news/breaking-news/exclusive-top-earning-academy-bosses-revealed

“Campaigners put pressure on government to improve ‘dire’ Devon education funding at national lobby”

As yet there appears to be no similar East Devon campaign group and our two MPs simply dole out meaningless platitudes without concrete follow-up action. Swire seems more preoccupied with who to back for next PM (or maybe ex-PM!) in order to regain a foreign office ministerial post while Parish’s preoccupations remain farmers and dualling the A303.

… “Tamsin Higgs, mother-of-three from Braunton, has been leading the parent-led and non-political Fair Funding For All Schools campaign in North Devon since the beginning of this year. For more information you can visit the campaign’s Facebook page here. Tamsin has also set up a campaign group in Torrington who recently met with Torridge MP Geoffrey Cox. …

… Tamsin said she regularly meets with the central school funding campaign group in London who, alongside the National Education Union, planned the national lobby at Westminster against school funding cuts. The group decided to take part in the lobby, which attracted more than 1,000 people, to apply pressure from all constituencies on the central government to increase funding and ensure schools are not losing out. …”

http://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/campaigners-put-pressure-government-improve-700472

Academy school group allegedly strips its assets before transfer

“Wakefield City Academies Trust now stands accused of “asset stripping” after it transferred millions of pounds of the schools’ savings to its own accounts before collapsing. On 8 September it released a statement announcing it would divest itself of its 21 schools as it could not undertake the “rapid improvement our academies need”. It said that new sponsors would be found to take them over.

… Hemsworth Arts and Community Academy, a mixed secondary school in Pontefract, had £220,000 of funds, raised by volunteers at Christmas markets and other school events, transferred to the trust’s accounts earlier this year. It also saw a further £216,000, which had been held back for capital investment, moved over. “It’s not the trust’s money. It’s our money,” said a former governor at the school, who did not want to be named. “It’s money for the people in the area, their children and their grandchildren. It wasn’t for them to take.”

Heath View primary school in Wakefield had £300,000 transferred to the trust in September 2016. Another school, Wakefield City Academy, had more than £800,000 transferred towards the end of 2015. In both cases the trust told the schools’ governors that the transfer was a loan. Wakefield City Academy even received a number of small repayments. However, since the trust’s collapse both schools have been told that it no longer acknowledges the transactions as loans.

For Wakefield City Academy, the money had been held back to provide a financial cushion for when a particularly large cohort of children – born during the early 2000s baby boom – arrive in the secondary school system. “This money was our rainy day money,” said Kevin Swift, chair of the school’s local governing body. “It wasn’t just left under the mattress. It was money that we had anticipated we would have a very definite need for.”

High Crags Academy primary school in Shipley was instructed by the DfE to join the trust in April 2016 after being put into special measures the previous year. When it joined it had a surplus of £178,000, which was immediately moved to centralised accounts….

… Parents, teachers and governors say the financial problems at the Wakefield City Academies Trust had been clear for nearly a year before it collapsed. In November 2016 a draft DfE report leaked to the Times Education Supplement stated that the trust was in an “extremely vulnerable position as a result of inadequate governance, leadership and overall financial management”.

The draft raised concerns that the chief executive, Mike Ramsay, had been paid more than £82,000 for 15 weeks’ work, despite the fact that the trust was facing a large budget deficit. The DfE has so far refused freedom of information requests to see the final report.

The previous month, it had emerged that the trust had paid almost £440,000 to IT and clerking companies owned by Ramsay and his daughter. In a statement at the time, the trust said internal vetting procedures had found that the contracts represented the best value.

Although serious questions have been raised about financial managment, there is no suggestion of fraudulent activity….

While a spokesman for the Wakefield City Academies Trust declined to comment, the DfE said a failing academy trust could never profit from the transfer of its schools to new sponsors. A spokesman said: “We are working with the trust to ensure that there is minimal disruption for pupils.

“We are also working with the preferred trusts and schools to ensure they have the right support and resources they need to improve the outcomes for pupils as quickly as possible, which will include the necessary pupil funding.” … “

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/oct/21/collapsing-wakefield-city-academies-trust-asset-stripped-schools-millions-say-furious-parents

“Coasting schools”not dealt with despite government promise to do so

“No ‘coasting’ schools have been forced to become academies despite a Tory manifesto pledge two years ago, new figures show.

In the run up to the 2015 election, the Conservatives promised to take over every school not considered to be pushing its pupils hard enough.

Hundreds of schools were thought have to been in this category – but new data released under the Freedom of Information Act suggests none have become academies as a result.

The Department for Education said that forced academisation was only ever intended for ‘a small minority of cases’ …

Of the 756 schools and academies that were branded as ‘coasting’ and have not since closed, more than half – 51 per cent – were told no further action was needed, and 49 per cent were told they needed some extra support.
In only one case did Regional Schools Commissioners (RSCs) use any of their other powers – a termination warning notice was issued to the Basildon Upper Academy. …”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4957476/No-coasting-schools-forced-academies.html

The education magic money tree needs more manure and less bull****

“Schools in Devon will still be among the poorest in the country, despite the government’s new funding formula, according to figures seen by the BBC.

Last month the Conservatives, who run the county council, welcomed extra funding which they said meant Devon’s schools budget would get another £7.5m a year.

But emails obtained by the BBC said this would only improve funding by £22 per pupil, still leaving each school child with £268 a year less than the national average.”

http://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-england-devon-41433439

Students: you aren’t working hard enough or living frugally enough ex Eton and Bullingdon Club Minister says

“Students facing high living costs at university can choose to live frugally and it is not always up to parents to supplement loans, universities minister Jo Johnson [Eton and Balliol, Bullingdon Club member, former banker at Deutsche Bank, brother of Boris] has said.

Responding to questions about the pressure on parents to supplement maintenance loans, the minister conceded there may be a gap between the loans provided and the actual cost of living at university.

He said that did not mean parents had to fill the gap. Some students chose to work to supplement their loan, some saved before beginning their course and others chose to be frugal and live modestly. …

.. .The minister was taking part in a fringe event at the Conservative party conference in Manchester on Tuesday with consumer finance expert Martin Lewis, who argued that means-tested maintenance loans did not cover the cost of living and parents were struggling to fill that gap.

Lewis, who led an independent taskforce looking into student finance, said the cost of living was now the biggest problem students faced when going to university, with loans falling short of expenditure on accommodation and other living costs.

The minister said there may be a gap but added: “That does not necessarily mean it’s a gap that has to be filled by parental contributions.

“There are many other ways in which students could fill that gap. They can work, as many, many students do. They can also save, and then of course they can borrow from their parents if they wish, but it isn’t necessarily a parental contribution.”

Johnson continued: “What is also so important to bear in mind is that students have many different choices about the kind of lifestyle they want at university.

“Some students want to live very modestly and have a frugal existence, focusing on their studies. Other students may want a different lifestyle but there isn’t one cost of going to university – it’s a very specific choice that each individual will make.”

Johnson’s comments came as the Institute for Fiscal Studies thinktank (IFS) said Theresa May’s offer of loan repayment relief for graduates in England would cost the government an extra £2bn a year.”

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/oct/03/frugal-students-wont-need-help-from-their-parents-says-jo-johnson