Today (Sat 30 Apr), school leaders’ union NAHT releases new data
from a survey of over 1,000 school leaders in England, showing:
- 76% of respondents either disagreed or strongly disagreed
that the government’s vision for a fully trust-led system will
lead to an improvement in pupil outcomes
- Just 17% of those not already in a Multi-Academy Trust
anticipate joining a MAT at some point within the next 4 years,
with 62% of not anticipating their school choosing to join a MAT
at any point in the future
- Of those already in a trust, 57% reported being either very
satisfied or satisfied with their experience of being in a MAT
- Those already working in trusts cited a number of advantages
to being part of a MAT structure, including: Greater
collaboration between teachers and leaders across the MAT (58%);
Centralised HR and finance functions (57%); Greater access to
shared teaching and learning resources (49%)
Paul Whiteman, NAHT general secretary, said:
“NAHT is proud to represent leaders in all different types of
schools, including those in Local Authority Maintained Schools,
standalone academies, as well as those in multi-academy trusts.
We know that excellent teaching and learning takes place in a
wide range of different contexts, and ultimately it is people,
not structures that makes the biggest difference to pupil
outcomes.
“We also know that many leaders already working in multi-academy
trusts have found benefits in doing so.
“However, this new data shows that the government has a lot more
work to do if it is to convince all school leaders that
its plans for for further structural reform will have a positive
impact on pupil outcomes.
“School leaders not currently in a MAT have told us that they can
see some potential advantages to being part of a trust, but they
also have a number of important and legitimate concerns that the
government will need to properly address if it is to make
progress on the goal it has set itself in the recent white
paper.”
- The biggest concerns about joining a MAT cited by school
leaders and governing bodies were: a loss of autonomy as a school
leader or greater centralised control (92%), a loss of autonomy
for the school’s governing body or trust board (74%), concern
about retaining a school’s unique local context (83%), and
concern about the financial impact on the school (60%).
- When asked what might make school leaders more likely to join
a MAT, the top answer selected was greater rights to leave a
trust where it is not working for the school (52%) and greater
protections around funding to limit any top-slicing or pooling of
funds by the trust (51%).
Mr Whiteman continued: “There are legitimate concerns about
autonomy that the government needs to consider if it wants to
convince school leaders and governing bodies of the benefits of
joining MATs. The concerns raised about retaining a school’s
local context and funding arrangements are ones that are
reflected by parents and schools’ local communities as well.
“Before we move any further to a fully MAT-led system, it is
vital that proper consideration is given to how schools can
‘divorce’ their MAT when things aren’t working, as well as to
what interventions will be made when MATs under perform.”
