The findings of this research have implications for academy schools in other settings. However, an individual’s perception may differ depending upon the setting which introduces the notion of whether research can be value-free. I have emphasised the importance of positionality throughout the thesis to demonstrate the reasoning for decisions taken regarding the research design of the study. The research methods used in this research lend themselves to the creation of generalisations within a particular setting (Cohen et al., 2011). Generalisations occur as a result of a single observation and following that observation inferences may be drawn which in turn produce formulisations which can be extended to situations in the future (Mayring, 2007). I would concede that the findings from this research may not be applicable to all academy schools in all settings although I believe that there is much merit within the findings that should be carefully considered and valued. Conversely it could be that some of the findings are applicable to other settings and they should therefore be considered upon their own merits. It is essential that readers are fully aware of the details and setting of the research project in order that they may appreciate any generalisations and establish whether these generalisations are applicable to their setting and context (Stake, 1980). This is referred to by Myers as ‘naturalistic’ generalisation (Myers, 2000). The reader cannot value the research without the knowledge and understanding of its context to then be able to consider whether or not it is a generalisation which may apply to his or her own context. The research shows that there is a varied impact upon schools following the academisation process. Fullan argues that outcomes of change are unpredictable and thus variable upon each recipient and each organisation which is affected (National College for Teaching and Leadership, 2017). It is also debatable as to whether the changes following academisation, which have been experienced, are as a direct result of academisation or whether there are other external influences. The government and policy makers may need to reassess the system and policy as to its efficacy if early indications are to be believed in that lived experiences are very mixed, and there is no direct link between Ofsted ratings, attainment and lived experiences. If the same support is available to converter academies as that for sponsored academies, it would be reasonable to presume that the extra support for converter academies, already successful schools, will ensure the gap between sponsored and converter academies is maintained if not increased.
A great deal of money has been spent by schools, sponsors and government bodies upon the decision-making process of academisation, the practicalities and the sponsorship. There would be a dramatic financial impact upon all stakeholders if academies did not continue to develop or did not continue at all. I would argue that, to a certain extent, there is clear evidence of insufficient data to demonstrate the positive impact of academies. There is little negative data but the absence of a negative does not necessarily produce a positive. Therefore,
87
finance is perhaps the reason why academies continue to be in existence because the cost of either reverting to a pre-academies education system or creating and installing a new education system and framework would be prohibitive. There is often a dilemma presented and a conflict arising between decisions which are taken for purely financial purposes and decisions which benefit the pupils. I question which route policymakers are taking: the purely financial or the best interests of pupils (Ball, 2015), and would argue that the financial incentive is not the best reason to maintain a system. Finances are always a consideration although the education system has the best quality education at the forefront of its priorities. It is important that schools do not continue as academies or become academies simply because that is what is expected by the government and the media. If being an academy is not going to enhance the learning environment and quality of learning for pupils, then what is the purpose of the change? The implications of this research are directed at all stakeholders involved with academies: pupils (receiving education and whether they have seen an improvement), parents selecting schools for their children (will children receive a different education by attending an academy), teachers applying for jobs (their pay and conditions potentially differing from Local Authority maintained schools), school leaders (balancing education and finances) and government (is there sufficient evidence showing positive impact of academisation to justify the continuance of academies).
This research has been undertaken at a time when academies have been in existence for a number of years and there has been a steady increase in the number of converter and sponsored academies. However, not all schools have academised and a number of schools are adamant that they will not academise. Many are undecided whether to academise due to the lack of evidence available to prove whether academisation is likely to be beneficial. There is insufficient evidence to suggest whether academies are any more efficient than state maintained schools (Walford, 2014).
Previous reports commissioned (such as the House of Commons Education Committee (2015)) addressed pupil attainment as quantitative data which is unconnected to individuals and their experiences. Therefore, I have taken research on academies a step further and have conducted in-depth qualitative research on the lived experiences of those who had gone through academisation to make a new and original contribution to knowledge in this field. The claim that the academies’ programme has met its targets and produces education in a way that is value for money is a strong declaration (National Audit Office, 2010). I argue that there has in the past been insufficient research to support this claim and therefore there has been a large gap in current research. I have attempted to start to fill the gap by introducing a different dimension to the research currently available. It is apparent that the research in relation to academies is policy-based research as the policy is already in existence. A dramatic development for future wider policy making in education in the UK would be policies developed on the basis of research, that is evidence-based policies. I therefore hope that my research is a small step in this direction.
The fieldwork for this study was undertaken in 2013. The situation regarding academies in 2016/2017 has evolved over time with the change in political parties in power. The strength of my study is that it has captured something which could otherwise have been lost because the change to the school system happened so quickly. Research going forward will probably be reporting upon the current form of academies as opposed to the period of their inception. The provisions of the White Paper provide for the extension of the academies’ programme with all schools being academies by 2022. Along with this will be the introduction of new performance tables for MATs (DFE, 2016a). However, Riddell (2016a) argues that this notion dates back at least to the 2006 White Paper (House of Commons Education Committee, 2006). These performance tables can paint a variety of pictures depending upon how the data is presented. When all schools academise, as is the government’s proposal, it will no longer be possible to compare local authority schools to academies. This will reduce the opportunity to present the
88
data in such a way which shows that a school driven education system works because once all schools have academised they should be on a level playing field and have comparable data (ATL, 2016). However, based on the current general performance of academies, depending upon which version of data is analysed, the government may not feel positive about the outcome given that not all academies have been seen to be a success. Therefore, it is evident that there could be more academies which are unsuccessful and, given the large number of schools which may academise across the country, there could be a significantly high number of unsuccessful academies. I suggest that this drastic change in the education system could be the start of the collapse of the education system because if high performing schools do not have sufficient capacity or funding to support the influx of academies, then standards in the already existing high-quality academies could very possibly drop. A blanket approach is not always the most practical solution to issues and therefore perhaps academisation is not the most appropriate step for all schools in the country. Schools have had a period of seven years to consider becoming an academy up to the time of this research. Therefore, all of those schools which have chosen to remain a Local Authority school must have reached a conclusion as to why academisation was not a suitable option for them. However, it would now appear that the government is ignoring these schools which have previously made informed decisions and forcing academisation upon them (Dickens, 2016). Alternatively, following previous changes in education, the development of academisation and reduced local authority funding, Riddell (2016a) suggests that the new academy based school system may be more reliable than the current local authority system.
Under the White Paper, if most schools either join a MAT or become one then surely this is the same as being part of a local authority. I would argue that the government is trying to reinvent the wheel whereby the MAT takes over the role of the local authority. I question as to why the government’s belief is that a MAT would be a better manager than the local authority system already in place in which there are many highly skilled professionals to assist in the improvement of schools (Cultural Learning Alliance, 2016).
The White Paper promotes school excellence in every aspect in following policies which have not especially achieved the aim (ATL, 2016). Therefore, the government, by the introduction of this policy, will effectively be continuing to do more of the same which currently does not work (ATL, 2016). According to Sir Michael Wilshaw, Chief Inspector of Schools in England, MATs which are worst performing perform no better than the worst performing Local Authority maintained schools (ATL, 2016). Therefore, I question what the motive would be for changing from being a school under the local authority to being a school part of a MAT. It would be reasonable to suggest that if MATs do not play a better role than Local Authorities why would it be necessary to become part of one?
The implementation of the expansion of academies in accordance with the White Paper will potentially be a financial and administrative nightmare. Supporters of the previous government policy regarding academies do not appear to be in support of this policy extension which forces all schools to become academies by 2022. It is not always possible to fully implement previous policies, that is to say that, insufficient capacity in schools is preventing staff from effectively supporting other schools due to teacher shortages and ultimately funding shortages (Mansell, 2016b). There are academies which have been heavily criticised by Ofsted upon inspection. Therefore, it is difficult to see how academisation would benefit a pupil who is already attending a successful school. There is a danger that a successful school which is forced, under the new policy, to become an academy may have leaders being distracted by a restructure and administrative reformation thus taking their eye off the quality of education within the school. Therefore, this could result in a successful school deteriorating (Mansell, 2016b).
I suggest a period of reflection in order to analyse the findings and recommendations of my research before developing and extending the programme of academies. The perceptions of
89
stakeholders need to be considered as opposed to focusing upon numerical data. It is possible to present figures in a way which positively supports a viewpoint. However, it is interesting to note that the perception of stakeholders in this research does not demonstrate the belief of a direct correlation between academisation and school improvement which accords with Eyles et al. (2017). Therefore, before the programme is developed, further consideration should be given to stakeholders’ viewpoints in advance of creating an even bigger upheaval, both administratively and financially, to the education system.