National Challenge School: Difference between revisions
ClemRutter (talk | contribs) /* Rationale -Criticism |
ClemRutter (talk | contribs) →Criticism: +quote |
||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
==Criticism== |
==Criticism== |
||
'Naming and Shaming' was rejected by educational professionals. The National Union of Teachers has rejected the government's rationale and the threat of closing these 638 schools - and says that these schools are often performing well in the "toughest areas". |
'Naming and Shaming' was rejected by educational professionals. The National Union of Teachers has rejected the government's rationale and the threat of closing these 638 schools - and says that these schools are often performing well in the "toughest areas". |
||
It is entirely wrong for these 638 schools to be described in the media as failing. As the government has acknowledged, many of them are on a rising tide of achievement under their existing leadership," said Dr Dunford, a representative of headteachers. |
|||
==See also== |
==See also== |
||
Revision as of 19:36, 23 November 2017
A National Challenge School was a school in the United Kingdom that had failed to conform with standards imposed by OFSTED, and rather being closed and the pupils displaced, was taken over by the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) who set an improvement agenda.
The scheme was an initiative of schools secretary Ed Balls's in June 2008,[1] during Tony Blair's Labour administration. 631 secondary schools where less than 30% of students achieved five A*-Cs in GCSEs including English and maths were named. Ed Balls said "the government would get all schools past that benchmark by 2011, and announced a £400m-plus budget". Each school was given an adviser, and encouragement to join with stronger schools, to form a trust, or become an academy. [2]
Legal detail
What is a trust school? A trust school: is a foundation school with a charitable trust. It can be primary or secondary or a special school. It is likely to be grouped with other local schools or with other schools with similar specialities. It is funded like other maintained schools but, but has legal powers to establish its own admissions policy, directly employ staff [a] and takes controls assets, land and buildings.- depriving Local Education Authrities of their traditional assets.[3]
The trust must: be set up as a charity and is not allowed to make a profit from the school. It may be the charitable arm of a single private company or body but could also have many external partners such as other companies, higher or further education institutions, charities or voluntary groups. Companies involved in gambling, alcohol, tobacco and pornography were ruled out. by the . Trusts could have multi-school and local authority membership. The trust is not obliged, or even expected, to make a financial contribution to the school(s), unlike some academy school sponsors, but have seats on the school governing body even a majority. [3]
Rationale
The government saw a benefit in bringing in outside expertise.[3]
Criticism
'Naming and Shaming' was rejected by educational professionals. The National Union of Teachers has rejected the government's rationale and the threat of closing these 638 schools - and says that these schools are often performing well in the "toughest areas". It is entirely wrong for these 638 schools to be described in the media as failing. As the government has acknowledged, many of them are on a rising tide of achievement under their existing leadership," said Dr Dunford, a representative of headteachers.
See also
References
- ^ – would be subject to School Support Staff Negotiating Body (SSSNB) agreements
- ^ "'No excuses' on school results". BBC News. 10 June 2008. Retrieved 23 November 2017.
- ^ Tobin, Lucy (24 November 2009). "National Challenge – a hindrance, not a help". The Guardian. Retrieved 23 November 2017.
- ^ a b c "Trust schools:Negotiating advice for school staff" (PDF). Unison. November 2009. Retrieved 23 November 2017.