The Department of Health has created the “conditions for a market to grow and thrive”

Did you know that the Commercial Director for the Department of Health is a former senior executive of the US Healthcare business United Health? The report below is from the Financial Times

Patients are urged to embrace choice for better care.

Chan Wheeler the American former senior executive with the US healthcare group United Health, has faced tough questions since taking over as commercial director for the Department of Health. He has been grilled on donations made to the republican party and over millions of dollars worth of backdated share options he received when at UnitedHealth.

He has also inherited stalled plans to buy additional private care for NHS patients and dealt with suggestions that the Prime Minister was hesitating over how vigorously to pursue policies on choice, competition and the private sector to reform the NHS. Although a review of the procurement programme has seen the overall value of the deals shrink from £6bn to £2bn, this has been offset by plans for £1.25bn over five years for new GP surgeries and health centres open to private companies to run. This will be accompanied by full choice between private and public hospitals for routine operations by April.

He says: “What needs to be achieved is conditions where entrepreneurs and investors can look at opportunities in those markets understand how they can . . . pursue them, and get their returns.” And the department has, he insists, “created the conditions for a market to grow and thrive”. As for the backdated share options and the US Securities and Exchange Commission’s investigation into them, he says: “I have never been the subject or target of any investigation.”

In the same issue of the paper we also have the following piece. No “discrimination” will be allowed against those nice private health companies.

Code to promote use of private hospitals.

A new code allowing all hospitals to market themselves to NHS patients, coupled with measures to stop PCTs obfuscating patients rights to use them at the NHS’s expense, has been promised by Chan Wheeler, the health department’s commercial director.

Mr Wheeler also said that the time was right for a “dynamic market” in the private supply of hospital and primary care to the NHS. This is despite the cancellation of much of the second wave of independent sector treatment centres and the slow takeoff in the numbers of patients exercising choice over private hospitals.

From this April, patients will be able to choose from any private hospital that agrees to be paid NHS tariffs. In 2004, health ministers said the numbers talking this route would be up to 15%. However Mr Wheeler said the figure was less than 5%. New competition principles published late last year require PCTs to allow “any willing provider” to treat NHS patients at NHS prices.

“We will push choice in terms of raising awareness” through videos in GPs’ surgeries and libraries, he said. The planned code will allow hospitals to market more freely to NHS patients. I personally expect the independent sector providers in their self-interest to promote the fact that in their local communities they are now available for free choice as of next April,” said Mr Wheeler. Importantly, a change to the software for “choose and book” will list all hospitals in order of distance from the patient. Previously PCTs had been able to choose those that appeared on the first screen, with private hospital groups complaining that most do not put local private hospitals on it. From April, Mr Wheeler said, “that will not be allowed to occur”. There will be “a non-discriminatory view of choice” with patients able to see what is available.

Campaigning against the government’s privatisation agenda

A Swindon TUC Open Meeting

Swindon Trades Union Council - Media Release October 12th 2006Wed November 1st
7.30 p.m.
Broadgreen Centre, Salisbury Rd (off of Manchester Rd)

The November meeting of Swindon TUC will be an open meeting on the above theme. The Blair/Brown government is comprised of ‘free market fundamentalists’. They have opened up the public sector to exploitation by big business despite the evidence that it has had disastrous consequences, both for the workers and the service users.

The recent Labour conference , for the third year running, passed a resolution opposing government policy of privatising council housing, and demanded the right of councils to direct investment, including building new council houses. But the government contemptuously ignores the decisions of its own party conference.

It’s policy in the health service has been to create a ‘market’ in healthcare. It’s a rigged ‘market’ though because the government has instructed PCT’s to hand over work to the private sector, with no competition, taking money away from the NHS. The contracts for this work are also rigged. Whilst NHS hospitals are being penalised for doing ‘too much’ work, private companies are being paid for operations they have not carried out!

Locally, Swindon’s Great Western Hospital is having some of its audiology work handed over to a private company, and a private hospital will be given imaging work (MRI scans etc).

Swindon’s Tory Council is carrying out New Labour policy by proposing to create a private Academy run by a religious organisation and Honda. It is threatening to privatise council services in the pursuance of its (and the Blair government’s ) dogma.

The government has also opened the postal market up to competition, threatening the universal service obligation by which we have a standard price however far a letter has to travel. Royal Mail is making cuts in service so as to ‘shape up’ to the new market.

Speaking at the meeting will be John McDonnell the left wing Labour MP who has declared he will stand for leader of the Labour Party against the privatiser Gordon Brown. John has played a key role in drawing together the trades unions to campaign against privatisation across the public sector. (see http://www.john4leader.org.uk/ )

Also speaking will be Dave Warren a member of the CWU national executive committee, the union covering Royal Mail and the Telecomms industry.

For further information ring Martin Wicks, STUC Secretary on 07786 394593

Swindon NUT opposes Academy

Below we reproduce the submission from Swindon NUT to the consultation in relation to the proposal to replace Headlands school with a privately run Academy.

The Swindon Division of the NUT opposes the proposal to replace three democratically accountable Swindon schools with a privately owned and run Academy.We have serious concerns about the nature of the consultation process, the short term affect that the proposal would have on schools across Swindon, and the medium to long term affect that an academy would have on children in its catchment.

The Consultation
This has been based on two documents, neither of which even attempts to analyse the proposal in a balanced way. As the cover letter sent with the documents, signed by Ian Bickerton, states, “This document focuses on benefits that can be offered by an Academy”

None of the documentation indicates that the Academies programme is highly controversial nationally. Nowhere is it made clear that the education stakeholders in Swindon through the Education Partnership Board opposed the Academy plan.

DJB Consultancy does seem to have struck up something of a positive relationship with ULT nationally and has dealt with a number of consultations.

In Barnsley local papers reported a row which occurred during the consultation. The Yorkshire Post reports,“A questionnaire on plans to replace The Elmhirst School, in Barnsley, with a £25m academy found 48 per cent of people were opposed, 39 per cent in favour and 13 per cent “not sure”.
But the consultants employed to seek out local people’s views insisted last night that their questionnaire was unrepresentative.” And “Dame Jocelyn Barrow, who led the consultation exercise, said: “The questionnaire doesn’t represent large numbers of people. Large numbers of people didn’t answer it.

“The union put out material that told parents their view and came to one public meeting and were encouraging parents to say no.””Dame Jocelyn said she had taken into account public meetings and interviews with interested parties in coming to the view it should still go ahead.”” (james.reed@ypn.co.uk,12 May 2005,Yorkshire Post Today. http://www.yorkshiretoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=55&ArticleID=1023528 )Are there any examples of DJB responding to consultation by saying an Academy is not appropriate?

If the consultation documents are one sided there have also been serious problems with their distribution. This ranges from the Local authority seeing interested parties as only existing amongst the three schools directly threatened with closure to, what seems to have been, haphazard delivery of the documents even in the areas directly affected.

The Academies Programme
The background to the proposal is the Government claim that the objective of the academies programme is to turn round failing schools. Specifically Swindon council came under DfES pressure in this respect over Headlands.
The problems here are:

Ø Academies have not taken over failing schools. (see: http://www.tes.co.uk/section/story/?story_id=2142770&window_type=print. TES 07 October 2005. “Not one of the 28 schools replaced by academies was in special measures at the time of closure, despite ministers’ insistence that the £5 billion academies scheme is tackling educational failure.”
Ø Academies are not improving educational standards of their predecessor schools. (See Stephen Gorard, Professor of Education at the University of York, Journal of Education Policy Vol. 20, No. 3, May 2005, pp. 369–377.) In fact the repeated claims about improvement throw valuable light on the methods used to make the Academies take off; namely the highly partial and selective use of statistics. When the DfES uses the Bexley Business Academy as an example, stating “In its first year, the Business Academy, Bexley achieved an increase in pupils attaining 5 or more A*–C grades at GCSE from 7% in 2002 to 21% in 2003.” (DfES, 2004b) it fails to mention both the predecessor schools 24% at more than 5 A*-C grades in 1998 and OFSTED’s discovery of serious weaknesses at the school. Gorard reports similar patterns pertaining to a number of other schools.

Terry Wrigley of Edinburgh published a report which similarly challenges the claim of progress.
The Education Network (TEN) has also criticised the way in which partial and one sided presentation of information about academies is presented by the government.Much effort has gone into preventing a proper look at the Academies programme as if Swindon could exist in a bubble, with outside experiences safely ignored. Claims have also been made about ULT success at turning round failing schools. Again this should be analysed.

Ø ULT replaced Canon Williamson CE High school with its Salford Academy. OFSTED’s 1999 report of the predecessor was not that of a failing school. Eg page 9 “The results in examinations have improved each year and are now above those of similar schools.” 26% received 5 or more A*-C. 38% have entitlement to Free school meals and 37% on the SEN register. Again, “Attainment in GCSE is increasing and is above that of similar schools.”
Ø ULT’s Northampton academy replaced Lings Upper school and achieved creditable headline figures for 5 or more A*-C, but it seems this is largely due to the effect of switching students from GCSE to GNVQ courses. 18% achieved A*-C grades which included Maths and English.
Ø The Manchester Academy replaced Ducie High school in Moss Side. Ducie faced challenging circumstances and under funding. 29% EAL, 65.1% FSM, 52% on the SEN register. OFSTED’s 2005 comments on the Manchester Academy are again to directly compare. They say 29% have learning difficulties and 10% are in the early stages of learning to speak English.At the very least it needs to be said that there is no hard evidence to back the picture of failing schools being turned round through the application of dynamic methodologies. It is certainly not the case that Academy status leads to higher standards.

Admissions and exclusions
The March 2005 report of the parliamentary Education and skills select committee pointed to the high level of exclusions from a number of academies. They argued that some Academies may have improved headline results by removing children from disadvantaged backgrounds. The report specifically mentions

Ø The Kings Academy in Middlesborough which expelled more students than the seven maintained schools combined.
Ø The West London Academy which tripled its exclusions and
Ø The Trinity Academy about which parent complaints about a very strict discipline code leads them to believe it is designed to remove children who may not get good exam grades.

Many Academies have fewer children on free school meals than predecessor schools. There is strong evidence that admissions policies are cutting the number of deprived children.

Children now report, as a result of a request for information under the freedom of information act that ministers have made a deal with academies that allows them to exclude children more easily than other schools. (http://www.childrennow.co.uk/news/index.cfm?fuseaction=details&UID=db9a6555-0e7d-43cb-bef4-3dc7fe1bb39a )ULT are at present arguing that none of this applies to them. There status as a private owner of an Academy means that there can be no guarantee that their policies will not change. There is enormous pressure for results, to fulfil expectations and the easiest way for this to happen is for schools to change intake.

Governance
The ULT consultation document makes clear that: “The ultimate governance of the UCST Academies is the responsibility of the trustees of the ULT.”

The list of responsibilities written makes it clear that local governors have severely limited responsibilities.Any dispute between local governors and trustees will inevitably be settled in favour of the governors. There is no democratic control of trustees.

The handing over of schools to an unaccountable private concern in this way has unpredictable consequences. The Manchester Evening News reported that the ULT’s Manchester Academy has made an arrangement with the private William Hulme Grammar school, to teach some of its students. The head of William Hulme’s says the Academy are paying a “fair rate”. This hand out of tax payer cash to a private school was made without being passed by any democratic forum. (In fact the Grammar school has decided to cut out the middle man and become a state funded privately run academy.)

Again, in 2004 the BBC reported that the not for profit private company 3E’s which was brought in to run the Bexley Business Academy was being bought by the for profit company Global Education Management systems (Gems). This company will take over 3E’s existing work and tender for contracts in the public sector. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4025345.stm) The report doesn’t say whether parents were originally told of this possibility. The loss of a public assett to a private concern makes this possible, indeed highly likely if the NHS experience is followed.

0-19 Provision
We are told the Academy must have a sixth form to provide educational continuity and role models. It isn’t clear why this idea has only now been discovered and only applies to a new academy. It certainly doesn’t feature in previous strategic planning by the LA.The closure of two successful primary schools is a mistake and the wider provision of primary education seems the proper subject of a wider consultation.

Staff conditions
In national negotiations ULT have refused to apply the conditions outlined in the School teachers Pay and conditions document (STP&CD) and the Burgundy Book. Teachers transferring from LA employment will have these conditions but they are vulnerable in reorganisations. Also a two tier work force will exist with respect to pay and working conditions.

We are also concerned about the pressures on staff resulting from the high expectations of the academies programme. This is likely to be compounded given the marked change in structure of the school, (from 11-16 to 0 to 19), and will give rise at least to training issues.

The 2005 OFSTED report on the Manchester Academy says that most of the staff transferred over, but later says many staff are in their second or third year of teaching. (this could mean the school has employed many new teachers or that many teachers left.) The 2006 OFSTED report on The ULT’s Northampton Academy says “During its first year the academy faced significant staffing difficulties including a high turnover in teachers and changes in senior leadership. The principal and one vice principal left during the first year.” And later goes on, “The difficulties caused by the high turnover of staff have been exacerbated by considerable problems with staff recruitment. In addition, teachers with experience in just middle or upper schools had specific training requirements and needed time to familiarise themselves with new curricula.”

Funding
The Guardian newspaper reported in May that only 4 of the first 27 Academies had received all the cash from the sponsors, most falling well short. (This was later corrected to only 5.)

In the fore runner City academy programme much of the promised sponsorship proved to be payment in kind. Eg use of a personnel officer for a day would be costed and become part of a headline figure.

There is no clarity about the position of Honda in the current proposal in this respect.

It has also been reported that to make the schools more attractive for private sponsors a great deal of debt has been wiped out. It is a pity that this could not have been considered for the benefit of students in community schools.

On 20th June 2005 the Times Newspaper reported that the Government had bailed out Middlesborough’s Unity academy to the tune of £1.4million. Does this cash disappear from another part pf the education budget? What happens when the project inevitable over runs in terms of cost? Do other schools find themselves paying.

This leads to the question of planning in a situation where we already have PFI funded projects in Swindon which will have first call on funding in any future crisis caused by falling roles or other demographic changes.

Christian Ethos
It is interesting to note that the Church of England Diocese of Chelmsford lodged an official complaint against the closure of McEntee comprehensive in Walthamstow to be replaced by a ULT Academy.

The ULT is a Religious organisation with history of running private schools.
It has no place running state schools.

ULT has redefined what Christian ethos means so that, by its definition, any atheist could define themselves as Christian, but this is a marketing strategy.
If community schools are given to private sponsors, including ULT, parents will have far less say in how they are run.

The proposal is part of a development that will lead to increasing segregation in schools.

In summary
The Academy idea has little support amongst teachers as a constituency. That it has any resonance at all reflects very poor levels of schools funding. Promised new cash is frequently tied up in various schemes and, as in the health service although not as developed, much cash leaves the system to go to private companies.

We do not object to philanthropists, charities, or companies providing cash or relevant expertise. We do object to schools being given to these bodies so they can control what is taught, how it is taught, who it is taught to and the conditions of work of those who teach it.

Specifically the Academy proposed presents the prospect of destabilisation of education across Swindon, for students who will not attend the school. It is also highly probable that there would be a problematic transition for current students at the three schools directly affected.

There are education reforms that would substantially improve the learning experience of our children. We could draw on the best international experiences and apply the lessons. Unfortunately the current proposed change is part of a package which will take us in precisely the wrong direction.

Academy Meeting

A brief report of a meeting in Penhill to discuss the Academy proposal.

I attended a meeting at Penhill called to discuss the proposal for an Academy to replace Headlands school. Councillor Garry Perkins Lead member for Children’s Services was invited along to speak in favour of the proposal. The meeting was organised by Penhill Councillor Andy Harrison as a means of giving local people the opportunity to hear the arguments and express their own view. The first thing to be said is that the Council did not give the opportunity to opponents of the scheme to present their case in the public meetings which they organised. On the other hand the presence of Garry did provide the audience with an indication of how little he seems to know about some of the issues!There was a great deal of anger over the seeming incompetence of the Council. Many people present had not received the consultation documents.

It would be true to say that most people present did not engage in the debate on the concept of Academies. The trades unionists present were opposed to Academies in principle and have examined what has happened around the country in those that have been set up. But unless you have an interest in education or you have children is school it is not an issue which you would necessarily have looked at. Garry Perkins did not argue with the teaching unions on this ground, he simply said this is the only way to get a new school so take it or leave it.

Many people were perturbed to know that he did not seem to have any idea about the ‘footprint’ of the proposed new school, or the potential traffic problems. He expressed a lack of interest on the question of which organisation is putting in how much money, even though the teachers present reported that the United Learning Trust had told them that Honda was putting in the majority of the £2 million whilst Honda had told them that ULT was putting in the majority!

There was concern expressed about how far some of the children would have to travel to the proposed site at the Pinehurst People’s Centre.

ULT are making all manner of promises (such as sticking to the Local Education Authority’s admissions policy), but the question was raised as to what mechanisms there were to hold them to these promises. Hilary Pitts from the LEA had to admit that once the Academy had been set up there was nothing to prevent the new company (for that’s what the Academy would be, a private business) changing it mind.

All in all Garry was given a hard time by the local people. The situation was well summed up by one member of the audience when he said we had been given the same ‘choice’ for the hospital, the University of Bath and now the Academy – this is what you are going to get or you will get nothing! This is the government’s ‘choice’ agenda, supported by the Tory Council.

Martin Wicks

Councillors unite against Academy

This is a press release from Penhill Councillors Andy Harrison (Independent Socialist) and David Glaholm (Labour) on the proposed Academy to replace Headlands school.

Penhill’s Ward councillors, Andy Harrison and David Glaholm are taking a united stance and urging all their constituents to vote NO in Swindon Councils consultation on Academy proposals.Speaking out against the academy Councillor Harrison said the whole academy concept leaves much to be desired. There are major issues with academy schools, from their higher exclusion rates and parental concerns regarding child religious indoctrination to academy selective admission practices and the total loss of any local accountability.Sponsors gaining unaccountable control of over £25 million pounds worth of public investment without any guarantees that even one child’s education will be significantly improved certainly doesn’t sound like the Value For Money that both the government and council insist upon even when investing much smaller amounts of taxpayer’s money.

Academies are still very much an educational experiment and the pupils, parents and whole community deserve better than to have their children’s education subjected to such a further hit and miss approach. We must remember that Headland pupils have already had to endure being failed by Swindon’s education department and they deserve better than to be used further as academy guinea pigs.

Councillor Glaholm said “I have asked many times for reassurance on how the children from Penhill would be able to safely access the new school but without success.
I feel the children will take the shortest route across fields and parents should seek reassurance their children will not be at risk before supporting the proposal.

Councillor Harrison has arranged a public meeting for 6:30pm on Monday 12th June at the John Moulton Hall, Penhill, so that Penhill ward residents can hear both sides of the arguments before making their minds up on such an important issue.

Both ward councillors are increasingly finding that the promised consultation by the council, which ends on the 16th June, is not only extremely one sided but believe that Penhill ward residents are being deliberately excluded from the consultation process.

END
For further information please contact:
Councillors
Andy Harrison 07720 484540
David Glaholm 07952 862929

Parents rebel at ‘Dickensian’ school run by millionaire evangelist friend of Blair

We reproduce a Guardian article on the situation at the Trinity Academy. Whilst the organisation running this Academy is different to the one seeking to launch an Academy in Swindon, the experience at Trinity raises issues which relate to the proposal for Swindon.

Backlash over emphasis on religion as suspensions soar in ‘covert’ selectionMatthew Taylor
Tuesday May 30, 2006
The Guardian Among the parents who had gathered in the back bar of the Moorends Hotel there were tales of curious expulsions and strange practices. One mother said her daughter had been removed from school after being accused of wearing the wrong trousers, another that her son had been permanently expelled for smoking.A father claimed his son had been sent home for walking the wrong way down the corridor, another that his 16-year-old daughter was kicked out after getting a kiss from her boyfriend at the school gates. And underlying it all was a feeling that Trinity, the third state funded secondary to be run by an evangelical Christian and friend of Tony Blair, Sir Peter Vardy, was pushing an aggressive religious agenda. Cindy Denise, whose two children are both at Trinity, claimed pupils were disciplined if they did not carry the Bible on certain days and summed up the mood at the meeting, describing the school as “a complete joke”. “They are kicking children out for nothing and won’t listen to anyone who wants to know what is going on.”Trinity opened last summer next to the chicken factory in the former mining town of Thorne, near Doncaster, and is the latest school in the government’s controversial academy schools programme. In its first six months 148 children have been suspended, leading many parents to claim that it was using excessive discipline to weed out children it does not want to teach.

The 1,250-pupil school strenuously denies the charges but the parents at the Moorends Hotel insist that the school is operating a system of covert selection to get rid of difficult to teach children. They say the problems surfaced before Christmas when their children began complaining of “Dickensian-style” discipline and parents noticed an “excessive” number of students being sent home. Pauline Wood, whose daughter was excluded after being accused of having bought her school trousers from the wrong shop, decided to call a public meeting. A few weeks, and several home-made posters later, more than 200 people turned up to air their concerns.
“We thought it was just one or two cases to start with but when we talked we realised the scale of what was happening,” said Mrs Wood. “We were really surprised at the strength of feeling at that first meeting and the stories that were coming out about what was happening in the school.

“The strong feeling locally is that the school is aiming to get rid of the pupils that have problems or are considered difficult, they’ve already got a waiting list with kids from outside the area and they want to get them in so the exam results go up and they can say the school is a success. But what happens to our kids - the kids they don’t want?

Under-achievers

“When all this started we thought they were trying to get rid of the under-achievers but now we think they are getting rid of any child, regardless of academic ability, who thinks for themselves, who challenges things … I don’t care what anyone says, it’s covert selection.”
Sarah French, a spokeswoman for Sir Peter’s Emmanuel Schools Foundation, which runs the school, denies the allegations. “The idea that we are selecting pupils is a complete red herring and really quite offensive. There is no evidence whatsoever to support that claim, in fact we give priority to children with special educational needs and although we have the right to select 10% of our children by aptitude as an academy we don’t because we aim to help each child achieve its potential.”

The school says more than 200 pupils were suspended in a similar period at the school Trinity replaced. “The vast majority of parents back what we are doing and see that the measures we have in place are helping change the ethos allowing the children to work in a stable, calm environment,” said Ms French.
But parents say the figures do not reflect what they are seeing on the ground. “There was a clampdown at the old school once they knew it was going to be an academy and it has just got worse,” said Mrs Wood. “I don’t know how they are measuring it but we are certainly seeing more and more children being sent home or kicked out.”

Although the allegations of tough discipline and covert selection are the parents’ main concerns, some are also uneasy about the religious ethos behind Trinity, citing the decision to give each child a bible as proof that religion pervades every aspect of the school. “They get into trouble if they don’t have it [the Bible] with them on certain days,” said Ms Denise. “It’s not what I want my kids to be doing in school, but I don’t have a choice because this is the only school round here and they won’t listen to us.”

These concerns reflect allegations at another of Sir Peter’s state schools - Emmanuel College in Gateshead, which has been repeatedly accused of teaching pupils creationism alongside science.

Tracey Morton, a mother who successfully campaigned against a proposed Vardy academy in nearby Conisbrough in 2004, agreed that the religious nature of Vardy’s schools was a real worry for many parents. “These schools peddle a hardcore Christian message and parents don’t have any choice about whether that is what they want for their children,” she said.

Protest

The parents’ group in Thorne say they had no idea what they were letting themselves in for before the school opened and they intend to step up their campaign with a march and a protest outside the school gates. Ms Wood said: “Of course we welcome a new school, but we need it to be run by a fair system. There was only a few weeks consultation here and we weren’t told anything about what the school would really be like. We want the local education authority to get back involved because at the moment the school is not accountable to anybody. We have no one to go to when things happen - not local councillors or the MP because there is nothing they can do. The school has 100% power over us and all we can do is try and highlight what is going on.”

The school denies the claim. Last night a DfES spokesman said academies were improving results. “Quite rightly academies are putting discipline first because it is vital to help children learn, and the early signs are that behaviour is improving and the number of exclusions falling,” said a spokesman.

The history: Schools founded on discipline

Sir Peter Vardy’s Emmanuel Schools Foundation runs three schools, two in the north-east, one of which was opened by Tony Blair, and the Trinity academy in Thorne, near Doncaster. Sir Peter is a millionaire car dealer and evangelical Christian whose beliefs pervade every aspect of his schools - they all have a reputation for discipline.

Although academically successful, the schools have been dogged by controversy. Emmanuel has been repeatedly linked to the teaching of creationism - most recently in a Channel 4 documentary - and Kings was criticised for having an exclusion rate 10 times the national average.

Last year, as part of a wider investigation, the Guardian revealed that the number of children eligible for free school meals at Kings, the standard indicator of deprivation, had dropped by more than 100 compared with the school it replaced, leading to renewed claims that it was cherry-picking pupils who were easier to teach.

The foundation says that all its lessons comply with the national curriculum, and that creationism is taught in RE rather than science lessons. But according to the head of the foundation, Nigel McQuoid, “schools should teach the creation theory as literally depicted in Genesis” because creation and evolution are “faith positions”.

Both Kings academy in Middlesbrough and Emmanuel college in Gateshead have improved their GCSE results. At Emmanuel 97% of students gained five or more GCSE passes at grade A*-C in 2004 (the national average is 52%). The first set of GCSE results at King’s showed that it has more than doubled the performance at its predecessor schools, with 43% of pupils now getting five or more good GCSEs.Matthew Taylor

Academies fail to improve results, study says

Research from Edinburgh University on exam results from Academies.
Matthew Taylor, education correspondent
Monday May 22, 2006
From the Guardian: http://www.guardian.co.uk

Schools in the government’s £5bn academy programme, which aims to create 200 privately run state secondaries by 2010, have failed to improve results compared with the comprehensives they replaced, according to a report.

The study, by a senior academic at Edinburgh University, found the number of pupils getting five GCSE A*-C grades including English and maths has increased by 0.2% - equivalent to three pupils - across the first 11 academies.

Ministers have repeatedly defended the controversial programme, claiming that the schools have brought about a dramatic improvement in academic standards, particularly the number of children getting five or more good GCSEs.

But last night union leaders and opposition MPs said the government had misled the public. Sarah Teather, Liberal Democrat education spokeswoman, said: “This research pulls the rug out from under ministers who have made extravagant claims about the results academies are delivering. The truth is that their performance is much less impressive than the government has spun. Millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money is being poured into an unproven scheme.”

The government said that according to its figures, the number of youngsters reaching the benchmark five good GCSEs including English and maths at the first 11 academies had increased by just over 1%.

A spokesman for the Department for Education and Skills added that the academies’ GCSE results were “outstripping” those of their predecessor schools, adding that if English and maths were not included there had been an 8 percentage point rise in those getting five good GCSEs. “This is the true measure of academies’ success and the fact they are transforming lives for the better - that’s why they’re popular and oversubscribed.”

But last night the report’s author, Terry Wrigley, a senior lecturer at Edinburgh University and editor of the education journal Improving Schools, said that some academies were diverting children away from GCSEs to boost their standing in school league tables. The study found that many children had been switched from taking separate subjects at GCSE to the vocational GNVQ qualification, which counts as four GCSEs in government tables.

“There seems to be something important going on here,” he said. “Of course we should value vocational as well as academic learning, but false equivalents simply let down the most vulnerable young people. It may be in the school’s short term interests, and the government’s, to improve exam statistics in this way. However, as soon as an individual applies for a job or university place, they will face problems. How many employers regard a GNVQ in computing plus a C in art as equal to five good GCSEs in different subjects, especially if you include English and maths?”

According to Mr Wrigley the proportion of children taking GNVQ qualification has risen from 13% at the predecessor schools to around 52% at the academies.

He said the findings would raise concerns about the government’s plans for a new generation of trust schools - based on the academy model. “There are variations between academies; some are doing well and some have worse results than the schools they closed down,” he said. “So why is so much success being attributed to business sponsorship? This is poor evidence on which to base the entire government strategy of academies and trust schools. Government thinking appears to be based more on faith in business sponsors and privatisation than any educational evidence.”But a spokesman for the education department insisted the schools were reversing decades of educational failure in some of the country’s most deprived areas, adding that GNVQs allowed less academic children to leave school with a recognised qualification.

He said the schools were improving standards in English and maths for 14-year-olds, and that would feed through to GCSE scores in the future.

“A more reliable guide to their success in improving English and maths at GCSE in future is that there has been a 9.4 percentage point improvement rate for English and a 12.9 percentage point improvement rate for maths in tests for 14-year-olds. Achieving the required level at these key stage 3 tests is an important indicator of future success at GCSE.”

At a glance
There are 27 academy schools open and ministers hope that will rise to 200 by 2010. The schools cannot charge fees but they stand apart from the state system. Individual sponsors have a large degree of control, appointing managers and deciding the schools’ ethos and curriculum.

Sponsors were initially required to pay 20% of the school’s capital costs, but that changed to £2m, or less than 5%. The remaining capital costs (around £25m a school) are met by the taxpayer, along with subsequent running costs. So far few sponsors have handed over the full amount.
The government says academic standards are rising more quickly at academies than at the schools they replaced or at other comprehensive schools. Many of the schools have had good Ofsted reports.

Campaign against proposed Academy

More than 30 people attended an open meeting called by Swindon Trades Union Council to discuss the proposed Academy to replace Headlands school.

More than 30 people attended an open meeting organised by Swindon TUC on the issue of the Academy proposed to replace Headlands school. Phil Baker of the teaching union ATL, who spent many years teaching at Headlands spoke against the Academy. He pointed out that when the issue was discussed at the town’s Educational Partnership Board and everybody apart from Tory Councillor Gary Perkins voted against the idea. According to his information the United Learning Trust would be handed over the school for 125 years!Penhill Councillor Andy Harrison called for public investment rather than giving away public assets to an anti-union car company and a religious trust. The only people to profit from our schools should be our children.

NUT Assistant General Secretary Christine Blower talked about the national experience of Academies.

UNISON Secretary Bob Cretchley said:

“There is clearly a good cross section of people opposed to the Academy and it is all about ensuring that there is a big campaign to stop this from happening. We need to be working together because there is a good chance we can scupper this.”

The meeting agreed to set up a campaign to oppose the Academy which would involve education unions, school governors, parents and residents from the local area. Details of a meeting to organise a campaign will be circulated shortly.