Learning Spaces

A successful school partnership

New schools are a great opportunity for a community, but they must also be sensitive to the memories which the existing school holds for generations of users. The new Navigation Primary School is a prime example of a successful partnership between the community, local authority, designers and contractor.

Sharon Wright visited one primary school in Trafford which seems to have got the balance right between innovation and shared history.

Create an account to read this article

£7.00+ VAT

One-off purchase

Purchase and Download today

Register for free

No Credit Card required

Register for free
Access to 3 free articles
Free TeachingTimes Report every month

array(8) {
  ["distinct_key"]=>
  string(10) "post#38005"
  ["title"]=>
  string(29) "Social enterprise for schools"
  ["categories"]=>
  array(1) {
    [0]=>
    string(10) "Leadership"
  }
  ["url"]=>
  string(57) "https://www.teachingtimes.com/extended-schools-community/"
  ["post_date_timestamp"]=>
  int(1278082660)
  ["objectID"]=>
  string(12) "post-38005-0"
  ["_snippetResult"]=>
  array(2) {
    ["excerpt"]=>
    array(2) {
      ["value"]=>
      string(117) "Social enterprises can have lasting benefits for students and staff as well as the community. Neil McIntosh explains."
      ["matchLevel"]=>
      string(4) "none"
    }
    ["content"]=>
    array(2) {
      ["value"]=>
      string(400) "... modelcombines the achievement of profit andsocial gain in order to be sustainable in thelong run”local social enterprise or establishing their own socialenterprise within the school.One example of a successful social enterprise schoolpartnership is the Magic Breakfast operating in schools inLondon and Yorkshire. Magic Breakfast serves free healthybreakfasts and ..."
      ["matchLevel"]=>
      string(7) "partial"
    }
  }
  ["_highlightResult"]=>
  array(4) {
    ["title"]=>
    array(3) {
      ["value"]=>
      string(29) "Social enterprise for schools"
      ["matchLevel"]=>
      string(4) "none"
      ["matchedWords"]=>
      array(0) {
      }
    }
    ["excerpt"]=>
    array(3) {
      ["value"]=>
      string(117) "Social enterprises can have lasting benefits for students and staff as well as the community. Neil McIntosh explains."
      ["matchLevel"]=>
      string(4) "none"
      ["matchedWords"]=>
      array(0) {
      }
    }
    ["content"]=>
    array(4) {
      ["value"]=>
      string(5687) "52 Vol 2.3 n www.teachingtimes.comSchools in the Community Extended SchoolsSchool Leadership TodaySocial enterprisefor schoolsSocial enterprises can have lasting benefits for students and staff aswell as the community. Neil McIntosh explainsPupils gain work skills atBeacon Hill High School’shair salon, a socialenterprise which alsoraises funds for the school53www.teachingtimes.com n Vol 2.3Schools in the CommunityExtended SchoolsThe concept of extended schools has a long historyin the UK. It was only in 2001, though, that thegovernment made a commitment to remove thebarriers that prevented schools from reaching outto the wider community. Since then extended serviceshave been at the heart of the Every Child Matters agenda;indeed, by the end of 2010, every school in Englandshould be offering some form of extended services.The impact that extended services have on boththe well-being and educational attainment of childrenis well documented. This has been recognised by thegovernment, which has invested £1.3billion to supportthe development of extended services since 2008.However, no public money has currently been identifiedin this area beyond 2011. The question now becomes:How can schools maintain and expand their extendedservices and find ways to make them sustainable withoutfurther public money?A number of schools are already looking to socialenterprises to support and even provide extendedservices. A new report by CfBT Education Trust (ExtendedServices: EnsuringSustainability Using theSocial Enterprise Model)has looked at the roleof social enterprise inproviding extendedservices and how schoolscan take advantage ofthese opportunities.The research shows thatmany schools are alreadyenterprising and that they are using a wide variety ofmodels to operate their extended services.Social enterprises are community-based businesseswhich operate to address a social or environmental need.Meeting the needs of the community and overcomingsocial challenges are at the heart of social enterprises. Allprofit is reinvested into the community for social gain.Most importantly, for schools looking to offer extendedservices, is the fact that the social enterprise businessmodel combines the achievement of profit and social gainin order to be sustainable in the long run.Basically social enterprises occupy the middle groundbetween public and private organisations: they generaterevenue both from trading, either products or services,and grants. The social enterprise community coversa variety of sectors including health and social care,housing, regeneration, catering and education.As of 2009, government figures suggest that there are62,000 social enterprises operating across the UK with acombined turnover of at least £27billion. This is clearly astrong and growing market, and a new way to do businessfor schools.In terms of operating extended services there aretwo ways in which schools can get involved in extendedservices: working in partnership with an existing“The social enterprise business modelcombines the achievement of profit andsocial gain in order to be sustainable in thelong run”local social enterprise or establishing their own socialenterprise within the school.One example of a successful social enterprise schoolpartnership is the Magic Breakfast operating in schools inLondon and Yorkshire. Magic Breakfast serves free healthybreakfasts and offers nutrition education for parent andsocial enterprise training for school. It currently supports53 primary schools where more than half of the pupilsare on free school meals. Its strapline is ‘fuel for learning’,emphasising the link between extended hours provisionand improved school performance.Improved performanceThis service is partially funded by the work of MagicOutcomes Ltd, a training provider for blue chip companiesoffering social leadership development and partnershipprogrammes. Typically one leadership programme fundsone new breakfast club for a year.Magic Breakfast has served over a million freebreakfasts since 2002. By relieving schools of the foodcost of their breakfast clubs, it enables more parents whomay not usually be able toafford the cost of the clubsto benefit from the service.Research has continuallyshown that a good, healthybreakfast can improve theperformance of childrenand young people atschool. These breakfastclubs are therefore morethan just an extendedhours service for children whose parents work.Another example is the work done by the LondonEarly Years Foundation, which provides care andeducation for young children through 19 communitynurseries and children’s centres. They provide childcareservices with a ‘fair fee’ structure, which ensures thatparents pay what they can afford, directly helpingchildren from less wealthy backgrounds by part-subsidising their fees.However, more and more schools are setting uptheir own social enterprises and taking advantage of thefacilities, knowledge and skills readily available within theschool. Burnley Campus offers a full range of extendedservices through its own social enterprise Burnley CampusSocial Enterprise Ltd. While not all schools will havethe capacity, resource and need to conduct as large ascale programme as Burnley Campus, this serves as agood example as to what is possible when using socialenterprise to fund and provide extended services.Built under the Building Schools for the Futurescheme, Burnley Campus houses a sixth form, primaryschool, nursery and children’s centre, secondary school,religious centre and library, serving more than 1,000students. The campus is situated in a"
      ["matchLevel"]=>
      string(4) "full"
      ["fullyHighlighted"]=>
      bool(false)
      ["matchedWords"]=>
      array(3) {
        [0]=>
        string(10) "successful"
        [1]=>
        string(6) "school"
        [2]=>
        string(11) "partnership"
      }
    }
    ["categories"]=>
    array(1) {
      [0]=>
      array(3) {
        ["value"]=>
        string(10) "Leadership"
        ["matchLevel"]=>
        string(4) "none"
        ["matchedWords"]=>
        array(0) {
        }
      }
    }
  }
}

Leadership

Social enterprise for schools

2 Jul 2010

array(8) {
  ["distinct_key"]=>
  string(10) "post#60114"
  ["title"]=>
  string(63) "Making research engagement part of the life force of the school"
  ["categories"]=>
  array(2) {
    [0]=>
    string(24) "Professional Development"
    [1]=>
    string(8) "Research"
  }
  ["url"]=>
  string(94) "https://www.teachingtimes.com/making-research-engagement-part-of-the-life-force-of-the-school/"
  ["post_date_timestamp"]=>
  int(1550075700)
  ["objectID"]=>
  string(12) "post-60114-4"
  ["_snippetResult"]=>
  array(2) {
    ["excerpt"]=>
    array(2) {
      ["value"]=>
      string(164) "David Godfrey and Graham Handscomb explore the concept of the school as part of an ecosystem and the contribution of research engagement at all its levels."
      ["matchLevel"]=>
      string(7) "partial"
    }
    ["content"]=>
    array(2) {
      ["value"]=>
      string(341) "... Niesz, T., Brossman, J., Koebly, S., O’Brien, K., Loe, D., and Black, F. (2013). Creating a Third Space in the context of a university-school partnership: supporting teacher action research and the research preparation of doctoral students. Educational Action Research, 21:2, 218-236. ■ Barber, M., and Mourshed ..."
      ["matchLevel"]=>
      string(7) "partial"
    }
  }
  ["_highlightResult"]=>
  array(5) {
    ["title"]=>
    array(4) {
      ["value"]=>
      string(72) "Making research engagement part of the life force of the school"
      ["matchLevel"]=>
      string(7) "partial"
      ["fullyHighlighted"]=>
      bool(false)
      ["matchedWords"]=>
      array(1) {
        [0]=>
        string(6) "school"
      }
    }
    ["author"]=>
    array(2) {
      [0]=>
      array(3) {
        ["value"]=>
        string(13) "David Godfrey"
        ["matchLevel"]=>
        string(4) "none"
        ["matchedWords"]=>
        array(0) {
        }
      }
      [1]=>
      array(3) {
        ["value"]=>
        string(16) "Graham Handscomb"
        ["matchLevel"]=>
        string(4) "none"
        ["matchedWords"]=>
        array(0) {
        }
      }
    }
    ["excerpt"]=>
    array(4) {
      ["value"]=>
      string(164) "David Godfrey and Graham Handscomb explore the concept of the school as part of an ecosystem and the contribution of research engagement at all its levels."
      ["matchLevel"]=>
      string(7) "partial"
      ["fullyHighlighted"]=>
      bool(false)
      ["matchedWords"]=>
      array(1) {
        [0]=>
        string(6) "school"
      }
    }
    ["content"]=>
    array(4) {
      ["value"]=>
      string(5689) "This can take the form of teacher research coordinators operating across and between schools and universities (McLaughlin & Black-Hawkins, 2006), or the role of “the ‘blended professionals’ who work across institutional boundaries (HEA, 2012). Such partnerships are not always smooth sailing because of the cultural differences between schools and universities.). However, much of the literature on successful research partnerships points to a common set of conditions which include “the importance of shared leadership, shared goals, development of social and intellectual skills needed for collaborative work, and adequate time” (Arhar et al, 2013). Perhaps one of the biggest challenges is how to foster and ultilise the potential of collaboration between schools. The educational landscape has changed dramatically to that which would have been unrecognisable at the turn of the century:  “The pattern of education in England is shifting. Schools that once were islands are becoming connected. Indeed, it is increasingly rare to find outstanding schools that do not have a web of links with other schools. Competition remains, but now co-exists with collaboration and the creation of formal alliances through federations and chains” (Matthews et al, 2011). Such an environment has been uniquely termed coopetition (Muijs and Rumyantseva, 2014). Many other countries will find this a familiar picture. Within this collaborative environment the imperative is to draw upon the expertise that resides within the self-improving school system, “to learn from each other, within and between schools, to tap into the professional expertise that lies latent in the system, and to learn from what works!” (Handscomb, 2012).  However, this is no easy task because the sharing of knowledge to bring about genuine “transfer” of practice from one setting to another has always been difficult and highly problematic (Hargreaves, 1998). It is here that professional development grounded in enquiry can make a significant contribution. For this to happen there needs to be a shift in perspective in both policy and practice which sees enquiry not just as a desirable add on but as a fundamental part of the how we develop educational professionals. When considering schools as ecosystems we need to envisage the forces of collaboration, enquiry and professional learning in dynamic interplay within an intimate relationship:  “For teacher development…to occur commitment to certain kinds of collaboration is centrally important. However, collaboration without reflection and enquiry is little more than working collegially. For collaboration to influence personal growth and development it has to be premised upon enquiry and sharing” (Harris, 2002).  There is much to do to explore what this would look like in practice within collaborative research settings and a range of initiatives have begun to do this (Brown, 2017; Stoll, 2015b). It will entail asking searching questions about not only what effective research engagement across an alliance looks like but also what does being part of an alliance bring to enhance the capacity of a school to be research engaged.  NOTES1. https://www.bera.ac.uk/project/close-to-practice-research-projectReferencesArhar, J., Niesz, T., Brossman, J., Koebly, S., O’Brien, K., Loe, D., and Black, F. (2013). Creating a Third Space in the context of a university-school partnership: supporting teacher action research and the research preparation of doctoral students. Educational Action Research, 21:2, 218-236. ■ Barber, M., and Mourshed, M. (2007). How the world’s best- performing school systems come out on top. New York: McKinsey & Company. ■ Biesta, G. (2007). Why What Works Won’t Work: Evidence Based Practice and the Democratic Deficit in Educational Research. Educational Theory 57(1): 1-22. ■ Bronfenbrenner, U. (1992). Ecological systems theory. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. ■ Brown, C .(2017). How to establish Research Learning Communities. Professional Development Today Volume 19, Issue 2. ■ Brown, C. (2015). Leading the use of research and evidence in schools. London: IOE press ■ Dimmock, C. (2014). Conceptualising the research–practice–professional development nexus: mobilising schools as ‘research-engaged’professional learning communities. Professional Development in Education.1-18. ■ Durrant, J. (2014). Children See Differently from Us’– a fresh perspective on school improvement. Professional Development Today Volume 16, Issue2. ■ Dyson, A. (2001). Building research capacity. Sub-group Report chaired by Alan Dyson.  National Education Research Forum. ■ Frost, D. (2000). Teacher-led school improvement. London: Routledge ■ Furlong, J. (2014). Research and the Teaching Profession: building capacity for a self-improving education system. Final report of the BERA-RSA Inquiry into the role of research in the teaching profession, BERA. ■ Godfrey, D. (2017). What is the proposed role of research evidence in England’s ‘self-improving’ school system? Oxford Review of Education, 43:4, 433-446 ■ Godfrey, D. (2016a). Leadership of schools as research-led organisations in the English educational environment Cultivating a research-engaged school culture. Educational Management Administration & Leadership 44(2): 301-321. ■ Godfrey, D. (2016b). Exploring Cultures of Research Engagement at Eight English Secondary Schools. PhD Thesis. Institute of Education. University College"
      ["matchLevel"]=>
      string(4) "full"
      ["fullyHighlighted"]=>
      bool(false)
      ["matchedWords"]=>
      array(3) {
        [0]=>
        string(10) "successful"
        [1]=>
        string(6) "school"
        [2]=>
        string(11) "partnership"
      }
    }
    ["categories"]=>
    array(2) {
      [0]=>
      array(3) {
        ["value"]=>
        string(24) "Professional Development"
        ["matchLevel"]=>
        string(4) "none"
        ["matchedWords"]=>
        array(0) {
        }
      }
      [1]=>
      array(3) {
        ["value"]=>
        string(8) "Research"
        ["matchLevel"]=>
        string(4) "none"
        ["matchedWords"]=>
        array(0) {
        }
      }
    }
  }
}

Professional Development

Making research engagement part of the life force of the school

13 Feb 2019

array(8) {
  ["distinct_key"]=>
  string(10) "post#44129"
  ["title"]=>
  string(67) "System leadership and collaboration – a new skillset for leaders?"
  ["categories"]=>
  array(2) {
    [0]=>
    string(22) "Leadership Development"
    [1]=>
    string(24) "Professional Development"
  }
  ["url"]=>
  string(53) "https://www.teachingtimes.com/pdt193systemleadership/"
  ["post_date_timestamp"]=>
  int(1524050015)
  ["objectID"]=>
  string(12) "post-44129-2"
  ["_snippetResult"]=>
  array(2) {
    ["excerpt"]=>
    array(2) {
      ["value"]=>
      string(366) "In this article Toby Greany describes the development of school-to-school support,networks and partnerships, focussing in particular on recent developments in England.He explores the leadership practices associated with these and argues that  schoolleaders must become adept at working in an environment that incentivises collaborative competition."
      ["matchLevel"]=>
      string(7) "partial"
    }
    ["content"]=>
    array(2) {
      ["value"]=>
      string(404) "... improvement for children on free school meals (FSM) (Rea et al., 2011, 2013).  Muijs’ (2015) robust mixed methods analysis of the impact of school to school support partnerships brokered between high and low performing primary schools in one Local Authority also identified a consistent positive impact.   Growth of partnership modelsMeanwhile ..."
      ["matchLevel"]=>
      string(7) "partial"
    }
  }
  ["_highlightResult"]=>
  array(5) {
    ["title"]=>
    array(3) {
      ["value"]=>
      string(67) "System leadership and collaboration – a new skillset for leaders?"
      ["matchLevel"]=>
      string(4) "none"
      ["matchedWords"]=>
      array(0) {
      }
    }
    ["author"]=>
    array(1) {
      [0]=>
      array(3) {
        ["value"]=>
        string(11) "Toby Greany"
        ["matchLevel"]=>
        string(4) "none"
        ["matchedWords"]=>
        array(0) {
        }
      }
    }
    ["excerpt"]=>
    array(4) {
      ["value"]=>
      string(366) "In this article Toby Greany describes the development of school-to-school support,networks and partnerships, focussing in particular on recent developments in England.He explores the leadership practices associated with these and argues that  schoolleaders must become adept at working in an environment that incentivises collaborative competition."
      ["matchLevel"]=>
      string(7) "partial"
      ["fullyHighlighted"]=>
      bool(false)
      ["matchedWords"]=>
      array(1) {
        [0]=>
        string(6) "school"
      }
    }
    ["content"]=>
    array(4) {
      ["value"]=>
      string(5753) "their home schools to support the weaker schools (Earley and Weindling, 2006).  The brief for these staff was to co-design solutions with staff from the supported school, thereby enabling ‘joint practice development’ rather than imposed ‘best practices’ (Higham et al., 2009; Hargreaves, 2010; Ofsted, 2010; Ainscow, 2015).  Consultant headteachersThe ‘consultant head’ model pioneered through the London Challenge was scaled up nationally by the then National College for School Leadership through the National Leaders of Education/National Support Schools (NLE/NSS) and Local Leaders of Education (LLE) initiative.  These headteachers and their teams were designated against a clear set of criteria and then brokered to support schools deemed to be underperforming (whereas seriously failing schools tended to be closed and reopened as sponsored academies).  Importantly, the core remit of these government-designated system leaders was to provide temporary support – ‘mooring alongside’ – withdrawing once the supported school was back on its feet (Matthews and Hill, 2008, 2010).  By June 2017 there were more than 1200 NLEs designated.  Evidence to date does indicate that outcomes improve faster in NLE-supported schools than in a matched sample (NCTL, 2013) and that NLEs increase the rate of improvement for children on free school meals (FSM) (Rea et al., 2011, 2013).  Muijs’ (2015) robust mixed methods analysis of the impact of school to school support partnerships brokered between high and low performing primary schools in one Local Authority also identified a consistent positive impact.   Growth of partnership modelsMeanwhile, other strands of policy and practice were coming together to demonstrate the potential of other forms of partnership.  Federations involve a more permanent relationship between two or more schools than in the NLE/NSS model, whereby the schools effectively amalgamate under one governing body.  The model was enabled by Labour’s 2002 legislation, but it took several years before significant numbers of schools had adopted it.  Chapman et al.’s (2009, 2011) research indicated a positive federation effect on pupil outcomes over time, most significantly in the case of ‘performance federations’ (i.e. strong and weak schools together) and where an Executive Head was in place across both schools.  Academy chains, which are generally groups of sponsored and converter academies overseen by a single Multi-Academy Trust (MAT), have emerged since 2010 as the dominant structural model for school partnership (DfE, 2016).  Critically, a MAT is a single legal entity (a charity and a company), so the academies within a MAT do not have autonomy except in so far as the MAT board grants this to them (Wilkins, 2017).  The government, more recently through its Regional School Commissioners (RSCs), has played an active role in brokering underperforming schools into academy chains, generally run by successful schools.  Kee and Wespeiser (2017) report that the number of MATs has expanded significantly; from 391 in March 2011 to 1121 in November 2016.  MATs range in size from two to over 40 schools and generally charge their schools a proportion of their core funding to cover central services, including ‘back office’ services such as finance as well as aspects of school improvement.Hill’s early reports on academy chains (Hill, 2009; Hill et al., 2012) flagged some of the challenges for policy and practice in this area: most obviously the rapid pace of growth in some of the larger chains.  In a number of cases this rapid expansion led to subsequent failings, with some chains being forced to reduce the number of academies they support by the government (House of Commons Select Committee, 2017).  There have also been numerous cases of financial mismanagement and conflicts of interest in academy chains (Greany and Scott, 2014).  As a result of these issues, and as the number of MATs has increased, the government has introduced a range of reforms to tighten up practice and oversight.   Analysis by Hutchings and Francis (2017:5) indicates that whilst “a small number of chains continue to achieve impressive outcomes for their disadvantaged students… Longitudinal analysis shows that, in spite of some marginal movement… the main picture is one of a lack of transformative change over the period”.  Teaching School Alliances represent a different type of policy-driven partnership to those described above, both because the partnership remains voluntary for alliance members and because their remit is broader than just addressing underperformance.  Launched by the 2010 White Paper (DfE, 2010) Teaching Schools are ‘outstanding’ schools that play a leading role in co-ordinating initial and continuing professional development, school to school support and research and development across an alliance of partner schools (Matthews and Berwick, 2013).  By July 2017 more than 640 Teaching Schools had been designated.  The evaluation of Teaching Schools (Gu et al., 2016) concludes that they are at “the forefront of exploring the reality of what David Hargreaves described as ‘competitive collaboration’” (p180), but also acknowledges that they are seen by some non-Teaching School head teachers as part of ‘the centralised machinery of government’ (p167).  The evaluation reports considerable progress overall, but also flags a series of"
      ["matchLevel"]=>
      string(4) "full"
      ["fullyHighlighted"]=>
      bool(false)
      ["matchedWords"]=>
      array(3) {
        [0]=>
        string(10) "successful"
        [1]=>
        string(6) "school"
        [2]=>
        string(11) "partnership"
      }
    }
    ["categories"]=>
    array(2) {
      [0]=>
      array(3) {
        ["value"]=>
        string(22) "Leadership Development"
        ["matchLevel"]=>
        string(4) "none"
        ["matchedWords"]=>
        array(0) {
        }
      }
      [1]=>
      array(3) {
        ["value"]=>
        string(24) "Professional Development"
        ["matchLevel"]=>
        string(4) "none"
        ["matchedWords"]=>
        array(0) {
        }
      }
    }
  }
}

Leadership Development

System leadership and collaboration – a new skillset for leaders?

18 Apr 2018

array(8) {
  ["distinct_key"]=>
  string(10) "post#44072"
  ["title"]=>
  string(67) "System leadership and collaboration – a new skillset for leaders?"
  ["categories"]=>
  array(2) {
    [0]=>
    string(20) "Independent Learning"
    [1]=>
    string(10) "Leadership"
  }
  ["url"]=>
  string(68) "https://www.teachingtimes.com/slt85systemleadershipandcollaberation/"
  ["post_date_timestamp"]=>
  int(1523897258)
  ["objectID"]=>
  string(12) "post-44072-2"
  ["_snippetResult"]=>
  array(2) {
    ["excerpt"]=>
    array(2) {
      ["value"]=>
      string(368) "In this article, Toby Greany describes the development of school-toschool
support, networks and partnerships, focussing in particular on
recent developments in England. He explores the leadership practices
associated with these and argues that school leaders must become adept
at working in an environment that incentivises collaborative competition."
      ["matchLevel"]=>
      string(7) "partial"
    }
    ["content"]=>
    array(2) {
      ["value"]=>
      string(404) "... improvement for children on free school meals (FSM) (Rea et al., 2011; 2013).  Muijs’ (2015) robust mixed methods analysis of the impact of school-to-school support partnerships brokered between high and low performing primary schools in one Local Authority also identified a consistent positive impact.   Growth of partnership modelsMeanwhile ..."
      ["matchLevel"]=>
      string(7) "partial"
    }
  }
  ["_highlightResult"]=>
  array(5) {
    ["title"]=>
    array(3) {
      ["value"]=>
      string(67) "System leadership and collaboration – a new skillset for leaders?"
      ["matchLevel"]=>
      string(4) "none"
      ["matchedWords"]=>
      array(0) {
      }
    }
    ["author"]=>
    array(1) {
      [0]=>
      array(3) {
        ["value"]=>
        string(11) "Toby Greany"
        ["matchLevel"]=>
        string(4) "none"
        ["matchedWords"]=>
        array(0) {
        }
      }
    }
    ["excerpt"]=>
    array(4) {
      ["value"]=>
      string(368) "In this article, Toby Greany describes the development of school-toschool
support, networks and partnerships, focussing in particular on
recent developments in England. He explores the leadership practices
associated with these and argues that school leaders must become adept
at working in an environment that incentivises collaborative competition."
      ["matchLevel"]=>
      string(7) "partial"
      ["fullyHighlighted"]=>
      bool(false)
      ["matchedWords"]=>
      array(1) {
        [0]=>
        string(6) "school"
      }
    }
    ["content"]=>
    array(4) {
      ["value"]=>
      string(5752) "of the staff in their home schools to support the weaker schools (Earley and Weindling, 2006).  The brief for these staff was to co-design solutions with staff from the supported school, thereby enabling ‘joint practice development’ rather than imposed ‘best practices’ (Higham et al., 2009; Hargreaves, 2010; Ofsted, 2010; Ainscow, 2015).  Consultant headteachersThe ‘consultant head’ model pioneered through the London Challenge was scaled up nationally by the then National College for School Leadership through the National Leaders of Education/National Support Schools (NLE/NSS) and Local Leaders of Education (LLE) initiative.  These headteachers and their teams were designated against a clear set of criteria and then brokered to support schools deemed to be underperforming (whereas seriously failing schools tended to be closed and reopened as sponsored academies).  Importantly, the core remit of these government-designated system leaders was to provide temporary support – ‘mooring alongside’ – withdrawing once the supported school was back on its feet (Matthews and Hill, 2008; 2010).  By June 2017, there were more than 1,200 NLEs designated.  Evidence to date does indicate that outcomes improve faster in NLE-supported schools than in a matched sample (NCTL, 2013) and that NLEs increase the rate of improvement for children on free school meals (FSM) (Rea et al., 2011; 2013).  Muijs’ (2015) robust mixed methods analysis of the impact of school-to-school support partnerships brokered between high and low performing primary schools in one Local Authority also identified a consistent positive impact.   Growth of partnership modelsMeanwhile, other strands of policy and practice were coming together to demonstrate the potential of other forms of partnership.  Federations involve a more permanent relationship between two or more schools than in the NLE/NSS model, whereby the schools effectively amalgamate under one governing body.  The model was enabled by Labour’s 2002 legislation, but it took several years before significant numbers of schools had adopted it.  Chapman et al.’s (2009; 2011) research indicated a positive federation effect on pupil outcomes over time, most significantly in the case of ‘performance federations’ (i.e. strong and weak schools together) and where an Executive Head was in place across both schools.  Academy chains, which are generally groups of sponsored and converter academies overseen by a single Multi-Academy Trust (MAT), have emerged since 2010 as the dominant structural model for school partnership (DfE, 2016).  Critically, a MAT is a single legal entity (a charity and a company), so the academies within a MAT do not have autonomy except in so far as the MAT board grants this to them (Wilkins, 2017).  The government, more recently through its Regional School Commissioners (RSCs), has played an active role in brokering underperforming schools into academy chains, generally run by successful schools.  Kee and Wespeiser (2017) report that the number of MATs has expanded significantly; from 391 in March 2011 to 1,121 in November 2016.  MATs range in size from two to over 40 schools and generally charge their schools a proportion of their core funding to cover central services, including ‘back office’ services such as finance as well as aspects of school improvement.Hill’s early reports on academy chains (Hill, 2009; Hill et al., 2012) flagged some of the challenges for policy and practice in this area: most obviously, the rapid pace of growth in some of the larger chains.  In a number of cases, this rapid expansion led to subsequent failings, with some chains being forced to reduce the number of academies they supported by the government (House of Commons Select Committee, 2017).  There have also been numerous cases of financial mismanagement and conflicts of interest in academy chains (Greany and Scott, 2014).  As a result of these issues, and as the number of MATs has increased, the government has introduced a range of reforms to tighten up practice and oversight.   Analysis by Hutchings and Francis (2017, p.5) indicates that whilst “a small number of chains continue to achieve impressive outcomes for their disadvantaged students… Longitudinal analysis shows that, in spite of some marginal movement… the main picture is one of a lack of transformative change over the period.”  Teaching School Alliances represent a different type of policy-driven partnership to those described above, both because the partnership remains voluntary for alliance members and because their remit is broader than just addressing underperformance.  Launched by the 2010 White Paper (DfE, 2010) Teaching Schools are ‘outstanding’ schools that play a leading role in co-ordinating initial and continuing professional development, school-to-school support and research and development across an alliance of partner schools (Matthews and Berwick, 2013).  By July 2017, more than 640 Teaching Schools had been designated.  The evaluation of Teaching Schools (Gu et al., 2016) concludes that they are at “the forefront of exploring the reality of what David Hargreaves described as ‘competitive collaboration’” (Hargreaves, 2010, p.180), but also acknowledges that they are seen by some non-Teaching School head teachers as part of ‘the centralised machinery of government’ (Hargreaves, 2010, p.167).  The evaluation"
      ["matchLevel"]=>
      string(4) "full"
      ["fullyHighlighted"]=>
      bool(false)
      ["matchedWords"]=>
      array(3) {
        [0]=>
        string(10) "successful"
        [1]=>
        string(6) "school"
        [2]=>
        string(11) "partnership"
      }
    }
    ["categories"]=>
    array(2) {
      [0]=>
      array(3) {
        ["value"]=>
        string(20) "Independent Learning"
        ["matchLevel"]=>
        string(4) "none"
        ["matchedWords"]=>
        array(0) {
        }
      }
      [1]=>
      array(3) {
        ["value"]=>
        string(10) "Leadership"
        ["matchLevel"]=>
        string(4) "none"
        ["matchedWords"]=>
        array(0) {
        }
      }
    }
  }
}

Independent Learning

System leadership and collaboration – a new skillset for leaders?

16 Apr 2018