Academy schools

Academy schools were introduced in 2002 by New Labour. Michael Gove has continued to allow and enable state schools to be academised. What are the benefits and problems of this further privatising of the education system?

The first thing to say is that academy status does seem to produce better results at GCSE than when the schools were state run. There is a higher rate of A*-C passes with most achieving the government's minimum benchmark of 53 per cent pass rate. 

There is also an argument that the academy schools offer the chance of a longer school day with better provision for students to undertake extra-curricular activities. I have a teacher friend who has just begun a placement at an academy in East London. The school starts at 8 and there are numerous activities which go on until 530 in the evening. This keeps students from being bored and out on the streets. Their home time coincides much more with the average working day. 

In terms of the problems, however, there are many. Academy schools are heavily oversubscribed and while 30 percent of the students are eligible for free school meals, there are questions over how easy the new school structures and systems are to navigate, especially for the less educated or less pushy parents. 

There is also a problem in only partially introducing academies and that they are heavily concentrated in London. Over 60 per cent of academies are in the capital. The rural population do not have an equal opportunity to access such schools.

Another issue is that they reflect and promote a very narrow view of what education is for. They are still exam results focused and in one academy the school mantra is 'climbing the mountain to university together.' Such a statement is truly an abhorrent realization of the perverted value system we now adhere to. University should not be the single end goal of all students, but in suggesting this is the only way to success we doom some students to failure and we restrict options for other students. Not all students should go to university but neither should they be devalued for not 'climbing' that mountain. The introduction of the EBacc will only add to a narrowing of this sad vector of what subjects and careers we perceive as valuable. Ultimately it engenders the idea that lawyers, bankers and the corporate world is at the heart of what is useful. How can we hope to revitalize industry and other vocations? 

When local authorities run schools they have to make provision for the disabled and those with very special learning needs. There is no guarantee that these will be provided by the academy. The transition also breaks the links with other local authority services.

The constant changes to the way the school is governed also creates extra work for teachers. And in this final point, the government has strong-armed many schools into becoming academies with little or no consultation with teachers and staff. In fact every teaching union remains in opposition to the academy schools programme. Nevertheless Gove continues to push ahead with little consideration for those who will have to live with his decisions. 

The question of identity and values

Only 7 per cent of UK school children are taught by private education and yet their alumni continue to dominate every major institution and profession. Christopher Ray in The Telegraph suggested the Left had created a mythology about private education in which schools like Eton and Harrow (which cost £30,000 a year) are overemphasized as part of the problem, when in truth most private schools cost nearer £6000 a year and a lot of the parents earn less than £60,000 a year. But how can you deny a figure of 7 per cent? How do you figure that most parents do not earn anywhere near £60,000?

The debate over private education is one concerned with social justice, and not just for those who are excluded from access to it. A private school can afford to promote extracurricular subjects that are often vital in helping students to form decisions about their career. As I have said before and, as Helen Mirren pointed out at the BAFTAs this week, the rich privately educated kids continue to dominate the arts. The identity of students is formed and solidified in these schools; the privilege they experience at home is reinforced. Some of these students are also trapped in a system where their values are determined and alternative ways to live are denied or belittled. Can we seriously believe that a public school student would consider a career in road maintenance? Too many students are limited into what they think are appropriate careers and ways to live. 

Not only this but private schools' charitable status lowers their tax burden as institutions, but I have yet to see this translated into public good. If two-thirds of a private school's intake was made up from families where the joint income was less than 40,000 a year and where places were funded by the school or by the remaining third we might reach a more equitable system, but no independent school is going to agree to that. In truth they offer just enough bursaries to appear that they are offering support for those who need it but not enough that the privilege and identity of the school is put at risk. Charitable status should be removed and taxation should be raised off such schools unless they offer a minimum of 50 per cent assisted places for low income children. 

Having been lucky enough to get through Oxford from a state-comp background I regularly see my fellow graduates using their school networks to get job openings. Of course, the problem of inequality is reinforced by parents who bank roll their children so they can pursue careers that are already closed to others. I see my fellow graduates do all they can to get an advantage and who wouldn't, but that is why we need to offer better opportunities earlier in life. 

Envy. Undoubtedly for those excluded from the advantages of such an education, or for those who managed to succeed with fewer advantages, jealousy comes into play. But many students will be unaware of the opportunities that were denied them. Even my school, which was a good state school, didn't have the skills to articulate and prep me for Oxbridge interviews. Part of the solution is obviously to invest money in state education and offer students the services and facilities that private institutions can offer but there also needs to be radical rebalancing. Quotas should be placed on private schools for university entrants. How can you hope to have equal opportunities if 60 Westminster kids go to Oxford each year?