Cash offer explains why our schools want to break away

Published: 27th May, 2011

• GIVEN an extra £190,000 a year on offer per school, it would not be surprising to find that all primary schools in Islington are giving serious consideration to opting out of Town Hall control (Five schools set to go it alone, May 13).

That money can make a real difference. Doing the rough maths, it is equivalent to five extra teachers or an extra one-and-a-half hours of one-to-one tuition per pupil per week.

Against that promise of transformative change, it’s sad to see the Tribune quoting from the usual suspects to undermine the initiative.

The National Union of Teachers (NUT) has set out a position which places the interests of its members, or more specifically the views of a marginal left-wing group within the union, against those of parents and children. This was a union, remember, that was against school inspections and league tables. It wanted to hide failure.  

The NUT never wanted parents to know what was going on in schools. Its negative attitude towards the free schools’ initiative in Islington is consistent with that position. This time, the opposition is dressed up in terms of consultation and accountability. But the union asserts its rights over that of professional managers of a school. It also asserts its rights over those of the parent.

As for the opposition as expressed by councillors Gary Doolan and Richard Watts, I would like to see either of their positions informed by some professional engagement in education, by qualification or experience, if only just a couple of hours in a classroom.

It tells you all you need to know about education in Islington that Labour was unable to convince Tony Blair or Islington South MP Emily Thornberry of Town Hall stewardship of local schools. 

Children of these individuals have been educated out of the borough, where schools are given exactly the independence, with power vested in teachers, to pursue social and academic excellence of the type to be denied to children in Islington.
Michael Read
Milner Square, N1

• WE are very saddened to hear that primary schools in our borough are considering applying for academy status.  

The Green Party is fundamentally opposed to the introduction of academies. Does this mean we think the current system is perfect? Not at all. However, we would urge all parents and residents who are thinking of voting “yes” to reconsider their vote.  

We need a strong, locally accountable education system that considers the needs of pupils, their families and those who work in schools. Moving to an academy system such as initially proposed by Labour, and continued by the coalition government, will not achieve that.

Where academies have been introduced, there is a trail of broken promises. Parents, led to believe their children will receive a more locally responsive service, find they have less say in the running of the school as the academy sponsors are the ones who have the last say in school affairs.  

Heads, promised greater autonomy in setting budgets and spending, find that funding is directly determined either by government requirements or by sponsor considerations. 

Teachers, promised more professional autonomy, actually see constraints in what they teach and how. Communities, promised better standards in our schools and rising attainment, see the creation of a two-tier education system.

Islington is a borough deeply divided by income, and academy status in schools will only serve to strengthen that division.
Becky Wright
Islington Green Party