 |
The UK's Leading Education 'Do-Tank' |
Search |
|
The National Education Trust is an independent charitable foundation dedicated to the promotion and sharing of excellent practice and innovation in education. |
|
Independent schools are not ivory towers Bernard Trafford Click here for a print version of this article. It hasn't been said in so many words; but the writing's on the wall. If independent schools wish to be "acceptable", to bask in the favour of politicians, they would do well to sponsor an Academy. Note that I said "politicians", not government. This issue has apparently united all three parties. No longer in office, Lord Adonis nonetheless continues to preach the message of Academies as the route to raising standards. Ed Miliband is convinced, so they remain Labour policy. David Cameron says his alma mater, Eton, should run one. And even Deputy PM Nick Clegg appears able to overlook the élitism that allows Westminster-educated youngsters to sail into Cambridge - as long as such schools play their part in supporting the state sector. Final proof of that clear, if unspoken, message came in a September Academies conference at Wellington College, where Lord Adonis introduced a message from Michael Gove. Or was it the other way round? Like the humans and the pigs in Orwell's Animal Farm, politicians all look the same now. It is as if, in the eyes of all three parties, there's now something dirty about independent schools - unless we dance to their tune. We face powerful moral pressure: get stuck into the Academies programme, or endure the weighty disapproval of the political establishment. Hold on, some schools might say. Doesn't the Charity Commission expect us to concentrate on providing bursaries? It may still do so, but the political agenda has changed. We may believe independent schools broaden access to the less well-off and aid social mobility through the bursaries we offer, but politicians have decided they're irrelevant. Quite how that shift will sit with the Charity Commission's unrescinded demand for bursaries is a question yet to be addressed. Political zeal may be laudable, but such tunnel vision undervalues just how much the sector is already contributing. Independent schools are not ivory towers. Whenever schools cross sectors to work together they discover the benefits of shared experience, and learn from similarities as much as differences. It's mutually invigorating, win-win all round. We already work closely with our neighbours. We collaborate in ways that are right for our schools and for those with whom we partner, and for the children in our area. Academy sponsorship is great for some, and rightly applauded: but it cannot be imposed on all. Government would be unwise to put pressure on us to follow one required pattern in order to justify our existence in some undefined way. That kind of rhetoric has already gone too far and wilfully overlooks the difficulties inherent in sponsorship. Advocates of cross-sector Academy sponsorship characterise independent schools as the single model for success in all schools: "sharing our DNA" has become a flattering if irritating mantra. Those of us who retain a degree of scepticism(and humility) question how much we can really offer on discipline and standards in the much more difficult setting of a failing school. My school's ethos is distinctive: but the image frequently portrayed (tight discipline, smart uniforms, prefects and house systems) is not our DNA. Those are superficial, if helpful, symptoms of something much deeper - at root a viscerally liberal approach to education markedly at odds with the "tough love" frequently boasted by Academies. Moreover, government targets and simplistic Ofsted judgments are both alien and inimical to our modus operandi. Involvement is not without cost. I lose sleep about finding the capacity in my professional life, let alone my colleagues' lives, to take spare energy from my school into another. Some schools have indeed found it: in my kind of school I can see none, nor spare money either. We charge parents the lowest fee compatible with excellence. We're parsimonious, spending their money on excellent staff and facilities, to be sure, but rarely on non-core activities - nor on consultants, in sharp contrast with government. Academies are not yet popular everywhere. Just up the road from my school last autumn there were teachers striking and a community up in arms about a top-achieving comprehensive school's plans to become an Academy. It's hard to see how my high-profile independent school would be welcome wading into that highly-charged local political atmosphere. The biggest of several elephants in the room is the question of selection. The majority of independent schools are academically selective at age 11 or 13, to a greater or lesser extent. Some claim to be "fairly comprehensive", but the adverb "fairly" is significant. Few are genuinely or wholly so. What our schools do so well is mostly achieved with a relatively narrow ability range, even where we support a variety of special needs. Under David Cameron selection is no longer Tory policy, notwithstanding traditional party support for grammar schools. The change creates a gap that will be hard to bridge. With their grand talk and broad-brush vision, Academy advocates are quick to overlook this significant aspect of our DNA. But true co-operation and partnership demand honesty, not coy avoidance of the difficult topics. Our greatest strength is our independence, which government pressure threatens. If policy-makers seek the involvement of independent schools (identified by OECD as the best in the world, remember), they should woo us, not preach at us; offer real advantages rather than mere withdrawal of disapproval; and strenuously avoid constraining the independence that truly defines our DNA by prescribing an approved mode of engagement. Nonetheless, and despite my many reservations, I may yet work with a school in difficult circumstances: I may end up supporting HMC's Primary Academy Group and bringing to a maintained junior school what my school can realistically offer in a spirit of humility - though the time and resource has to be found from somewhere. If I do, shall be obliged to negotiate robustly. If I find myself pushed down a path inimical to my school, required to bend my principles or mired in bureaucracy, I shall be out of it like a shot and heading for the hills. Under such circumstances, I don't think I'll be alone. Dr Bernard Trafford is Headmaster of the Newcastle upon Tyne Royal Grammar School and a former Chairman of the Headmasters' and Headmistresses' Conference (HMC). He is a NET Leading Thinker. The views expressed here are personal. |
| Phone (44) (0)207 702 0707 |
Follow us on  |
Support NET
|
Join our mailing list |
Buy NET products online |
| Copyright © National Education Trust 2012 The National Education Trust asserts the moral right to be identified as the author of this web site. Unless otherwise specified, all material on this website may be used for non-commercial purposes, on condition that the source is acknowledged. The National Education Trust is not responsible for the content of external websites. |
|||