European Based Education Providers as Sponsors of Academy Schools in England: An Exploratory Study'. European Studies in Educational Management, 2, 16-43

The author gives permission for the article to be shared on web sites, emails and other electronic and printed media on the condition no sale is involved.

Please note citation

Gibson, M. T. (2013) 'European Based Education Providers as Sponsors of Academy Schools in England: An Exploratory Study'. European Studies in Educational Management, 2, 16-43.

The European Forum On

Educational Administration

European Studies in

Education Management

The Journal of the EFEA

www.efea-network.org

Volume 2, No 1

[spring edition]

ORIGINAL WRITING

The Journal of the EFEA

The European Forum On Educational Administration

European Studies in

Education ManagementVolume No 2. No 1

[spring 2013 edition]

Series Editors:

Peter R Taylor

John Heywood

www.efea-network.org

European Studies in Education Management [ESEM]

Series Editors:

Peter R Taylor Executive Headteacher & System Leader, Worth Primary School, UK

Professor John Heywood, Trinity College Dublin, Republic of Ireland

Editorial Board/Technical Board:

Dr. Alison Taysum, University of Leicester, UK

Professor Tony Bush, University of Warwick, UK

Dr. Ana Patricia Almeida, ISEC Lisbon, Portugal

Raymond Moorcroft, Manchester Metropolitan University, UK

Dr Yiannis Kasoulides, Cyprus Educational Administration Society, Cyprus

Prof. Olena Kovalchuck, Assistant Prof. Lutsk National Technical University, Ukraine

Pedro Navareno, Regional Inspector of Schools, Extremadura, Spain

Juan Salame Sala. Inspector and Teacher, Aragon, Spain

Zita Goette, Education Officer, City of Solingen, Germany

Dr. Verity Swan, Society for Management in Education in Ireland

Ex-officio member:

The President

© 2013 ESEM

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form or by any means—graphic, electronic or

mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping or information storage and retrieval systems—without the prior

written permission of the authors.

ISBNs:

Parent: 978-1-78237-322-3

ePub: 978-1-78237-323-0

mobi: 978-1-78237-324-7

PDF: 978-1-78237-325-4

ePublished by Original Writing Ltd., Dublin, 2013. Available at www.originalwriting.ie

Contents

EditorialPeter R Taylor 1

Leadership: A Paradigm ShiftEugene Gallagher 5

European-based education providers as sponsors of Academy Schools in EnglandMark T Gibson 16

To Coach or not to Coach in the English Primary School: A Case StudyPeter R Taylor 44

Trade-Offs in Multiple Objective (Strategy) Assessment and Learning A Retrospective and Comparative Examination of ExaminationsJohn Heywood 56

Increasing Competencies in Higher Education by Partnering Wilhelma Metzler 76

Book ReviewsGill Howland 96Pedro Navareno Pindaro 100

16

European-based Education Providers as Sponsors of Academy Schools in England:

An Exploratory Study

Mark T Gibson

AbstractThis paper is an exploratory study of two European-based education providers as sponsors of academy schools in England. The academy schools programme has allowed these two school providers to enter the state sector; the focus in the article is upon leadership, ethos, vision and culture. These providers entered the state sector as part of school diversity and innovation, both provide different philosophical approaches to education compared with mainstream schooling in England. The data was gained through three one- hour long interviews with one academy Principal and two sponsor representatives. The evidence shows the difficulties such innovators face in the English context, this varied from the necessary creation of the post of principal which is an alien concept to the philosophical approach of one provider, to the ethical dilemma of a profit-making education company running a school in England where such activity is prohibited.

It is argued that whilst there is sufficient ground to allow such experimental schools in England in order to widen choice, the larger macro socio-political context is of concern; the rush for diverse schools in England may be a Pandora’s Box that leaves many families in England with insufficient quality state education as finite resources are dispersed.

Keywords: Academies; Leadership; Ethos and Vision; Diversity; European education

European Studies in Education Management

17

IntroductionThis paper focuses on two cases of European based schooling organisations creating state funded schools in England. These were the first schools to be formed in such a way. These two schools are philosophically and pedagogically different to state maintained schools in England; they each have a unique ethos and culture that would not occur in an English state school. The emphasis in this article is on the leadership of these schools. This research is part of a larger project written about elsewhere (Gibson, 2011).

The United Kingdom has developed its education systems with little influence from main land Europe. Within the United Kingdom England and Wales have one system, Scotland another and Northern Ireland a third. Even though England and Wales are deemed as one system there are significant differences notably in the area of Welsh language speaking. This paper focuses on innovation and diversity in the schools in England.

English Education and Academy SchoolsThe government provided no fees education in England from 1870 although the majority of children did not attend school until the early 20th Century. The 1944 Education Act provided a state education system across England. Often known as the Tripartite System it consisted of three types of schools that children were allocated to on the basis of their performance on an examination at the age of 11; the 11+. The system was not followed nationally through because only a small number of technical schools were created, about 200 in number. This left a stark contrast between Grammar Schools for those that performed well at the 11+ and Secondary Modern Schools for the majority of pupils. This system was severely criticised through the 1950’s and 1960’s as creating social division. In many areas in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s the Grammar Schools were closed and non-selective Comprehensive Schools were formed. By the mid-1970’s the majority of state educated children attended Comprehensive Schools (Holt and National Foundation for Educational Research in England and Wales (NFER) 1999; Silver, 1983).

The Thatcher Government of the 1980’s created the biggest legal change in education since the 1944 Act; the 1988 Education Reform

The European Forum on Educational Administration

18

Act. This created a National Curriculum and subsequent national assessment arrangements for children at the ages of 7, 11 and 14 with published annual Performance Tables for each school. The accountability agenda also saw the instigation of the Office for Standards in Education or Ofsted which replaced Her Majesty’s Inspectorate. The philosophy became one of a free market [quasi market] that would give parents the [increased] right to choose their child’s school and that, for the government, this would be an informed choice based on outcomes in the performance tables. Secondary school education in particularly has since been dominated by the standards agenda. The Blair government of 1997 essentially continued many of the Conservative government reforms with an education policy based around the principles of competition, choice and diversity (Gillard, 2011). All secondary schools were to have educational targets expressed as outcomes of children’s performance in national tests and there were to be a range of secondary schools as part of modernising the comprehensive ideal. This included Specialist Schools and Academies. Originally Academy schools were a rebirth of a perceived failing inner city schools. They would have a new building and a Sponsor, initially a philanthropic business who provided a £2 million endowment into a Trust fund. The aim of the programme was to have a limited number, some 400 across England.

Alongside the state education system in England historically there have been two other systems, the faith-based and the fee-paying Private or Independent sectors. The faith-based schools were incorporated into the state maintained sector and are non-fee paying. These are generally Christian, either Anglican or Roman Catholic. These schools too were required to address the standards agenda. The Independent school sector has a diverse range of schools from very elitist to schools catering for children with special educational needs. However it is essentially characterised as middle class and is perceived as maintaining social class order. Within its range though has been progressive, experimental schools such as A. S. Neill’s Summerhill (Neill, 1962; Vaughan, Readhead, Brighouse and Stronach, 2006). These schools have never been successful in their longevity or proliferation. The schooling organisation in Case 1 here is of this tradition but is European in its heritage.


19

The [British] ‘coalition’ government of 2010 created more diversity in state education [in England] with an advancement of the Academies programme and the creation of Free Schools. There were to be new academy schools, this time they were to be successful [English] state schools, ones categorised by Ofsted as Outstanding. The Free Schools were to be ‘free’ of local government control, generally very small and were to be created by parents.

Sponsored, or pre-2010 Academy schools in England are independent state-funded schools that are a controversial element of the post 1997 Labour Governments. They have often been created in inner city areas where there is low achievement and often replace existing state maintained schools. Academies are “established and managed by sponsors from a wide range of backgrounds” (PriceWaterhouseCoopers (PwC), 2008 p.22)). Academies are unique in the English school system in that their governance is controlled by external Sponsors.

There is mixed information on leadership of academies. PwC cite Ofsted inspections to conclude that leadership is generally good however, there is a paradox in the Report whereby it also points out that “leadership ...was the most frequent ‘worst academy feature’ identified by staff” (PriceWaterhouseCoopers, 2008 p.14) and that “there is a high turn-over of principals in several of the early academies ..” (p.125). No discussion is held on these seemingly incongruent findings. Recent publicity is not always favourable, one newspaper article pointing out that the biggest sponsor loses over half its principals in under two years (Marley, 2009). This research is concerned with pre-2010 Act Academies, i.e. Sponsored Academies as opposed to Converted Academies.

Literature ReviewThere is a need for research into the leadership of academies. The role of sponsors and the leadership of academies are two areas where further research is suggested (Woods and Woods, 2009). There is little, if any, research in the area of schools entering the state education system in England in order to increase diversity. No research was found in a review about the organisation in Case 1 joining the state sector (Woods, Ashley and Woods,


20

2005), whilst references to Case 2 are essentially press related. Initially it is important to understand the role of sponsors in English Academy schools.

Sponsors Some academies are fully autonomous, especially those that are successful schools, but some are created by a sponsor. Sponsorship is a “key element of the Academies model for school improvement” and they have “the legal right to determine the vision and ethos of the Academy” (PriceWaterhouseCoopers, 2008 p.98). The power of an academy sponsor is considerable. This includes the right to appoint the majority of the governing body and having ownership of the estate (Curtis, Exley, Sasia, Tough and Whitty, 2008 p.6).

[Sponsored] academies are non-homogeneous; there is a typology of sponsors. Sponsorship can be classified into philanthropic sponsorship, high achieving school sponsorship, multiple academy sponsorship and group sponsorship (PriceWaterhouseCoopers, 2008). Most of the Philanthropic sponsors were in early academies, with the initial requirement being for a £2 million endowment placed into a trust fund the principle of which was subsequently abandoned.

Leadership, Ethos and VisionThere are a variety of definitions of school leadership. A good working definition is offered by Bush and Glover (2003) as

“Leadership is a process of influence leading to the achievement of desired purposes. Successful leaders develop a vision for their schools based on their personal and professional values. They articulate this vision at every opportunity and influence their staff and other stakeholders to share the vision. The philosophy, structures and activities of the school are geared towards the achievement of this shared vision” (p.5).

Vision then, is key to leadership. Vision is often linked with values, ethos, culture generation, and mission. These terms are sometimes seen as synonymous and are often not clearly defined in the literature (Hallinger and Heck, 2002; Solvason, 2005; Glover and Coleman, 2005).


21

The literature on the issues of school ethos and culture refer to its importance in school effectiveness. Hopkins (1994) believes that school culture is the vital, yet neglected, dimension in the improvement process, blaming the failure of school improvement initiatives on ignoring the culture of the school in favour of concentrating on discrete projects with measurable outcomes. There is a value in understanding a school’s ethos because it isolates the factors which are likely to foster school effectiveness (Donnelly, 2000).

Innovation and DiversityAcademies were launched by David Blunkett, the Education Secretary, in 2000. One of the three ultimate goals of the programme was to “form part of local strategies to increase choice and diversity in education. Academies have innovative approaches to one or more of governance, curriculum, staffing structures and pay, teaching and learning, structure of the school day and year using Information & Communication Technology (ICT)” (PriceWaterhouseCoopers, 2008 p.22). Furthermore, “Academies form an important element of School Diversity, through which the education system enables schools to differentiate themselves according to their individual ethos, special character and areas of specialist expertise” (PriceWaterhouseCoopers, 2008 p.70). Both of the academies in this research were to contribute to choice and diversity offering different schooling to the maintained sector. Although curriculum and ethos diversity was seen as an original goal in the academy programme, sponsors that are creating schools under this banner did not appear in previous typologies (Curtis et al., 2008; Curtis, 2009). More recent work (Leo, Galloway and Hearne, 2010) refer to innovation but not diversity. Innovation in terms of curriculum reform, attendance, and pupil’s voice but all within the context of an academy being similar in many ways to a maintained school. Leo et al. (2010) do not address the issue of innovation and diversity in terms of offering a significantly different educational experience as part of choice for parents.

The CasesBoth of the cases in this research have different pedagogical models and different leadership structures to the typical state sector school in England. Both providers have ‘chains’ of schools with similar ethos and vision. The concept of a ‘chain’ is new in the state system in England (Hill, 2010).


22

Each of the two cases will be addressed separately and then some overlapping themes drawn.

Case 1Case 1 is sponsored by the German-based Waldorf schooling system which has schools across northern Europe. It opened its first school in Stuggart in 1919 and the schools base their philosophy upon the teachings of the first school founder, the Austrian philosopher Rudolph Steiner. There are more than 900 schools worldwide that follow this practice of education, and this form of education is large across Europe, with 711 schools in 27 nations (ECSWE, 2012). There are examples of where these schools are fully funded by the state, part funded and totally private as in the UK (Avison, 2008). There are 36 schools of this type in the UK, Case 1 is the first funded by the state and is non-fee paying. The Academy in this case opened in 2008 on the site of the previously privately funded school from the same educational organisation. The school is a through-school with about 300 pupils aged 5 to 16. The school already had pupils aged 5 to 16 on its roll.

The caricature of this type of education is as idealistic ‘arty’ schools, providing rural education retreats for the “alternative, veggie-organic, sandal-clad middle classes” (Avison, 2008 p.87). A national newspaper article refers to the academy as an unconventional approach to schooling. Indicating that it is a “school where an appreciation of nature is deeply embedded in children's lives”. Work in woods is for all children and ICT is not introduced until the age of 14. There is an emphasis on teaching all subjects through music and rhythm. Under the home school agreement children are not supposed to watch TV under the age of eight. There is no uniform and the canteen serves mainly vegetarian food (Vasagar, 2012). The founder of this type of education saw education in the Latin sense of educare or ‘drawing out’ from the child. The concept of teaching becomes one of facilitating and developing the child so that they can become autonomous adults who are able to determine their own role in the world. The emphasis is on rhythm and rituals on children being creative and free thinking. Earlier research (Woods et al., 2005) describes the pedagogical phases in such a setting, ““willing” (the control of limbs and bodily movement), “feeling” (the affective domain of the aesthetic and emotional senses) and “thinking” (the


23

cognitive domain of rational thought). Willing dominates pedagogy up to age seven when learning by imitation is very important. Between 7 and 14, children learn through their aesthetic senses, whilst from 14 upwards attention is given to the rapidly awakening senses of reason” (Woods et al., 2005 p.16).

These schools contrast with the maintained state sector in England. They differ from the rest of the state sector which has an emphasis on outcomes, terminal assessment, accountability and league tables. The Academy in Case 1 has exemptions from teaching the whole of the national curriculum such as phonics and ICT in the early years due to a clash with its pedagogical philosophy. Such educators have “ never been enthusiastic advocates for testing regimes” (Burnett, 2009 p.130). Burnett refers to authentic assessment that can occur because one of the characteristics of this type of education is that the the child will be with the same teacher for eight years, from age 6 to 14 and that the teacher is in a position to develop more holistic forms of assessment.

The difference from maintained schools in England and this type of schooling extends to their leadership and management. Leadership is these schools is not hierarchical, it is fully shared responsibility of all. The role of a Principal or Headteacher is not recognised; they prefer a collegial structure. The decision making body is not the senior team but rather a college of teachers. This group not only has responsibility for managerial and leadership decisions but also the spiritual life of the school. This is in sharp contrast to maintained schools in England. It is, for Woods et al (2005), a distinctive feature of this type of schooling. One school’s handbook describes the college role as carrying out the functions of a head teacher including being “responsible for preserving and deepening the spiritual identity and impulse of the school” (Woods et al., 2005 p.99). Woods et al (2005) describe the meetings of the college as being more than just business matters. Decision making within the college is not by democratic votes but rather through consensus, this can lead to a lengthy discussion process. The founder of the educational movement is cited as stating, “The school ... will have its own management run on a republican basis and will not be managed from above. We must not lean back and rest securely on the orders of a headmaster; we must be a republic of teachers” (Woods and Woods, 2006 p.321).


24

This Academy has become a state school through the route of enlarging parental choice through diversity. It offers a fundamentally different approach to schooling, philosophically and pedagogically. The curriculum, ethos and vision for these schools is significantly different to maintained state schools. Leadership and management in these schools is markedly different to maintained schools in England. There are essentially three differences: an absence of the role of headteacher; a non-hierarchical management structure, and the collegial leadership that embodies spiritual growth for each teacher (Woods et al., 2005 p. 105).

Case 2The second case is the largest chain of independent or "free" schools in Sweden, which make up 10% of schools. They are state funded, but not state-controlled, and free for students These schools are highly personalised. Students have weekly targets but have a choice on how to meet them. The school is described as having “no timetable, no set lessons and little sense of a traditional classroom” (Curtis, 2008). All the curriculum is available on a web based portal. These schools have no corridors and are designed to use the space more appropriately for individually tailored learning (Eiken, 2011). This maximises the space for learning. Such design will bring a unique ethos, culture and vision to the school environment. The educational organisation that operates the academy is a with-profits educational company that opened its first school in 1999 and runs 34 schools in Sweden with a total roll of around 10,000 students, accounting for one-tenth of the independent secondary school market there (Alen, 2008). The company operates under a different name in England as a subsidiary which is a charitable trust in keeping with UK law of schooling. Their aim is to ensure each student maximises their potential through personalised learning and are schools “centred on the recognition of each unique individual” (Learning Schools Trust, 2012). The company has four core values. The first is that all people are different and each person has the right to a personal challenge every day. The second is that through clear requirements and challenging goals students will achieve more than they thought possible. The development of students to work in a global society, that education is for life is the third core value whilst the final one is expressed simply as ‘life is what I make it’.


25

A newspaper article describes one of the company’s schools on a visit to Sweden as a school with no bells, no timetables and few structured lessons. “Pupils decide what they learn and when. If, one afternoon, a pupil feels like doing no work, then they do no work”. The operating structure is described as that each term, “ the pupil, in discussion with parents and tutor, sets educational goals for that term. These goals are recorded in a logbook. The pupil then uses the school’s resources – from online learning programmes to libraries, lessons and lectures – to achieve these goals at their own pace” (Nixey, 2010). The co-founder of the Swedish company is quoted as describing a world where “There are no bells in our schools or a schedule that you repeat every week. We are popular in Sweden as an alternative to the teacher-led factory model of education. When you see a normal school you will find classrooms of equal sizes and a bell ringing; there is factory thinking behind that” (Curtis, 2008). These schools have a different design, one that is more open plan with spaces for individual learning. The effect of school design on learning has been well researched (Higgins, Hall, Wall, Woolner and McCaughey, 2005), the key note being that participants, teachers and learners, need to believe that the design is effective.

There has been concern expressed over the introduction of this company and its pedagogy in the English press. One journalist on a visit to one of the company’s Swedish school expresses concern over teaching methods (Orange, 2011) whilst in another a parental action group in England express concern over using an untried methodology in the teaching of GCSE examinations and ask for an independent review of its methods (Alen, 2008).

The acceptance of the Swedish company into English state schools raises the issue of profit making from schools in England. An Ipsos Mori poll conducted in April 2010 found that the general public oppose the involvement of profit-making firms in running schools (Gillie and Bolton, 2010 p.12). Presently this is prohibited, though it has advocates such as the right wing think tank, The Adam Smith Institute (Croft, 2010). There are a small number of proprietorial, or with-profit, private schools in the UK (485 nationally). These are generally small schools, average size 205 pupils. Croft (2010) believes this is an untapped model and that the focus on small margin profit


26

ensures quality educational outcomes. Tiger (2005) also celebrates the entrepreneurial spirit within a free market believing that such practice focuses on outcomes and the raising of educational achievement. Notably this stretches to teachers pay which rises with student achievement and not through extra management responsibilities as in the English maintained sector. It would be of inertest to know why a Swedish profit-making company would wish to run non-profit making schools in England?

Although the two cases here are from different European countries and a different cultural background they are similar in that the operating context in England is identical; they are entering the state education system as Academies under the brief of increasing diversity and innovation. Both educational organisations have, in effect, been invited to participate from a high level of national government office. Woods et al. (2005) commented that discussions between the school movement in Case 1 and the then Department for Education and Skills (DfES) had taken place through the Academy programme, under the DfES’ Diversity policy (DfES, 2001). The DfES believed that “a decisive advance from the outdated argument about diversity versus uniformity” (DfES, 2001 para 1.5) and new agents, such as Academies, “can benefit pupils by bringing fresh ideas and perspectives and particular skills and expertise to schools” (DfES, 2001 para 5.22). Both of these schools bring a unique pedagogy to English non- fee paying schools. However both bring concern albeit on different levels. Case 1 causes concerns over education outcomes for younger children (as measured by the English performance tables) and its collegial management structure. Woods et al. (2005) comment that the collegial leadership and management structure of [such schools] would become a challenge if they join the maintained sector and that no research was found in their review as to why this organisation had joined the state sector. Case 2, in addition to innovative pedagogy and building design, brings a different management structure, with increasing teachers’ salaries based around student achievement, and a potentially different leadership role for the Principal. In both cases the school would seemingly no longer be that type of school if significant changes were made.


27

It would be of interest to know if the leadership has changed in any way in Case 1 following entering the state sector and how much leadership freedom the Principal would gain in a state run Case 2 academy.

Research QuestionsThis literature review developed the following research questions:

1. What motivates Academy Sponsors?

2. What are the leadership roles of the Sponsor and the Principal in an Academy?

3. How are the Ethos and Vision realised in Academies?

Research Design The investigation is exploratory. It is small scale and the method uses the semi-structured interview. There were three one-hour long interviews, held face to face. The Academy Principal and a Sponsor representative in Case 1 were participants, whilst in Case 2 a Sponsor representative was the sole interviewee. It is notable that the sponsor representatives in both cases were individuals operating at a senior level of the organisation. It is a qualitative study. The interviews were transcribed and then analysed using a Constant Comparative method of analysis (Thomas, 2009). Themes emerged through the respondents’ responses. A comparison of the themes across the different interviewees to seek answers to the research questions was then undertaken.

FindingsThe research questions focus around the leadership aspects of ethos and vision and specifically concentrate on the role of the sponsor. It is of interest to know how the academies vision and ethos were generated, what were the motivations of the sponsors, and how the realisation of the ethos and vision were to be undertaken. Each of the following tables summarise the themes that emerged in answer to the research questions.


28

Table 1 What motivates an Academy Sponsor?Emergent Theme Evidence

Bringing educational philosophy to wider audience

[Our] School Movement UK have been working on this for decades, on and off. How [do we] find a way of accessing the wider educational discourse of this country. And that issues like recognition, equivalence and finding a voice Principal Case1

another main driver is that I think that in this country it’s sort of traditional to think of [our] School’s as being private schools .And of course that means that you have to pay. And so that means they are elitist. So that means various other connotations. But for [our] Schools they have never really come at it from that angle. Principal Case1

there is this strong...current within [our] education about social access as well. And making it available for those people that want it. Not just those people who can pay for it. So this journey towards State funding, towards dialogue with the Government has been a long time in coming. Principal Case1

started pretty much after the ‘Tony Blair’ Government stepped into office .. think there had been some talks with Labour in opposition and David Blunket but at that time said, ‘well , keep us in touch, and if we do get in, we might be able to help you.’ So of course they were elected in ’97.... the [our] School movement went back to him and said, ‘You said you could help us?’ and he said, ‘yes, fair enough. Okay.’..Principal Case1

whole model is based around a very clear ethos and vision. Sponsor Case 2

Validation. You know, validates what we do here It underpins this by public funding and that’s important to us. We believe in this curriculum) and it’s taught worldwide... Sponsor Case 1

Inclusion main motivations were around inclusion That privately funded education, never, no matter how committed it is to inclusion, it can never be truly inclusive Sponsor Case 1

Sustainability sustainability. Errm ...You know, just to sustain a privately funded school that does not believe in being privately funded...ends up with being very vulnerable to economic fluctuations. Economically half of the privately funded schools already operate on a shoe-string Sponsor Case 1

Diversity/ Choice it does particularly suit children who have found it hard to flourish in mainstream. Sponsor Case 1

Commercial We are a professional for profit commercial schools managements business Which is what we do in Sweden. We run 32 schools with 10,000 kids in Sweden.... we are not doing this for philanthropic reason at all. You know, we are a business and so our reasons for sponsoring academies in the UK was to establish a ....errm...shop window for what [our] school might look like in somewhere other than Sweden... And there are two reasons for doing that. One is that we think that the UK is an interesting proposition in the longer term. We think there are openings for companies like ours to do what we do. And the second is because the UK is a good base point for us to demonstrate this to the rest of the world.... we feel having something in England, ... in the English language which is globally accessible, is an interesting place to have a showcase of our capability. So we made the decision for, you know, straight forward commercial decisions to create a [our] school here in the UK. Sponsor Case 2

We weren’t allowed to run it as a business because the DfE rules don’t allow you to run them as a business. So we agreed to sponsor 5 academies here on a complete not-for-profit basis, as a way of establishing ourselves in the UK.... Sponsor Case 2


29

our approach to the Department to do that, was welcomed by Andrew Adonis, largely because of our education model which is quite unlike anything else operating in the UK. Errm...and unlike anything operating in Sweden, for that matter. You know, it’s very personalised model of education. And Andrew was always keen to use the academies programme to get more diversity into the supply side of education Sponsor Case 2

we’re certainly looking at opportunities in the UK and elsewhere in Europe and we’ve just opened our first school in Manhattan and we have a Charter school in Manhattan And we are talking to countries all over the world. I mean, people will..we had the Australians in last week and the Dutch and so on Sponsor Case 2

Table 2 How do the Sponsor and the Principal see their roles in the realisation of the Ethos and Vision?Emergent Theme EvidenceHierarchal leadership That whole model, if you like, errm....how would you describe it? Visible,

structural leadership is largely absent in [our] Schools in this country. If you go to Scandinavia and the Netherlands you would find quite different models Yeah. Certainly here it was a new thing. (To actually name somebody Principal and recruit them...Principal Case 1

Sponsor lead Pre-opening was a significant period... The role of the sponsor leads in negotiating particular exemptions so that we can fit within the State sector Sponsor Case 1

The benefit of having a sponsor like [ours] is that there is no doubt the school we want you to run...Sponsor Case 2

And as part of the recruitment process we took the short-listed candidates, the final 3 in each case, to Sweden for a day And on the flight home said, ‘if you don’t want to run a school that looks like this, then don’t join. Sponsor Case 2

So we don’t have any conflict really around the vision.... They have partner schools in Sweden... Sponsor Case 2

So it’s more about the implementation rather than the vision Sponsor Case 2

Joint leadership The reason being is that there’s been an awful lot of cross-over [in the school leadership] in this particular project..Principal Case 1

this was the Project for the [our] Schools movement PrincipalCase 1therefore there is a demarcation and yet we are often working on something together Principal Case 1

For example the ‘ Bew Review’ into SATS. I went along as Principal of this academy and gave a presentation to Lord Bew. [The Sponsor] went along to represent the [our] School movement, nationally Principal Case 1

[The Sponsor Representative] primary role is talking to Government and trying to get other [our] Schools State funded.., the day-to-day level, all of those issues and everything else ..is... my work. And for [the sponsor] it would be primarily that lobbying. That errm... you know, that continuing to talk to Governmentwe have quite a close working relationship and we don’t agree on everything . We are very good though at arguing with each other. Principal Case 1


30

Conflict / Resolution I think the lines are fairly clear and she does not try to trample on operational things and we sort of... I guess we see ourselves as working for the same thing beyond this school Principal Case 1

she understands that she can’t run the school Principal Case 1

a lot of the issues that we are working on are shared in a sense but from different perspectives. I don’t know how it would work with another Chair of Governors She’s the first one and I’m the first one.. Principal Case1

Non-negotiables I suppose it’s the principles that would be not exactly non-negotiable, but they would be like the core essential elements. And then the application of those principles, that has to keep changing those principles are enduring Principal Case 1

we are exempt from ICT in the national curriculum .. all the stuff about E-Learning and ICT, it was all, if you like, errm...loaded at the end. So ICT, Teaching and Learning comes in here, ...wait for it....when the children are 13Principal Case 1

So that you could walk into this school or any other school.... or actually, anywhere in the world, and you’ll go, ‘I know I’m in [our] school.’ It would strike you as very distinctive about it .....there’s very definite context for anyone in a senior management team to work within And that context is sort of non-negotiable really. It’s there. It’s very defined slight variations. But they are the detail rather than the context And in that sense I would say that we’ve got it quite easy so long as we can find the right people We’re not battling with being confused by what our ethos is and having to go back to the drawing board and check. There’s a good clear map there. Sponsor Case 1

the schools, 3 schools within the Trust, operate within that pedagogic and organisational framework. So the Head teachers of those schools don’t have a complete freedom about what curriculum they offer or how they run their schools. They have an ideal model of what we expect the school to look like and their job is in interpreting that in their setting Sponsor Case 2

Accountability So we are constantly having to remind and refresh people’s minds about the agreement that we struck with the Government about Key Stage 1 being set aside entirely. About Key Stage 2, the tests will be administered . But they could be administered later in the game. This was a letter from David Miliband when he was Schools Minister, and of course the essential deal at the end is that at 16 students will take 5 GCSE’s or accredited equivalence. They would leave with that accountability measure . Principal Case 1

We don’t teach the Key Stages of the National Curriculum. But we have a requirement to do the tests So..errm...that’s a very tricky one actually because we do, do the tests... ‘Why does [our school] always come at the bottom of the league tables? The Government flagship academy, worse performing school in the country, what’s all that about? Principal Case 1

Conflict with principles Two parental boycotts where we’ve had a kind of stand-off with the parents....[who felt we were no longer sticking to our principles] is one of the difficulties...because the Principal, i.e. me... , is seen as being the arm of the State. And he’s obviously sold out. He’s even an agent of the


31

department! Principal Case 1

[our] schools are managed by the teachers. There is no concept of a senior management team. To shift from that position to a position where we could actually draw up a job description for a Principal was quite an extraordinary process . That was about values and about the ethos meeting with resistance and hanging onto a tradition. We don’t do it like that . So finding a way in which we could do it took a lot of..... discussion to move on from there . And it’s still something...an area that hasn’t entirely been resolved Sponsor Case 1if you wind the clock back 10 years... there was no management capacity other than what was provided by their teachers and their colleagues of teachers... so all those who were engaged in the classroom also had to find time to do the management. Admittedly there was much less management where you were not having to conform to the requirements of the publically funded sector Sponsor Case 1

Principal as Sponsor I was actually working alongside [the sponsor’s representative] a few years ago...[part of school movement] working for the Executive group for [our] schools movement Principal Case 1

Table 3 How are the Ethos and Vision realised in an Academy?Emergent Theme EvidenceVision of academy related to sponsor vision

vision is firstly to....make [our school’s] education here as ....good as it possibly can be, with the resources we’ve got Principal Case 1

it has to be part of the vision that this one has to work. And it has to work in this context. This context being, dealing with all those things we’ve just been talking about. Coming in, if you like, to the system and that trying to preserve and even enhance the ...what you might call the identity of the system. So when this was opened it was widely acknowledged by the Labour Ministers that it wasn’t coming in because it was a failing school and neither was it in an area of social deprivation. And neither was it kind of urban project Stuck in a field in the middle of Herefordshire a little independent school that OFSTED didn’t really fuss about one way or the other. it’s just doing its own thing. So the only reason it came in was on the ticket of a distinctivecurriculum Principal Case 1

Child development To become free thinking, considerate adults in a complicated and fast changing world. I suppose in rhetorical terms, it would see a lot of what modern society is doing and is trying to speed up childhood altogether So it’s just (clicks fingers) gone in a flash. And then you are left with a situation where adolescence goes on for decades, because we can’t make sense of anything). We don’t know who we are. We can’t really cope very much with a variety of very, very difficult problems. So we end up with where we are all very kind of zappy. We all know what the latest gizmo’s are, but behind all that there’s a lot of questioning about, ‘who am I? What can I do? Where do I fit? What is the world?’ And those deeper questions. And I suppose the approach would be to try and get children through childhood and adolescence to a place where they are still a little bit awake. Principal Case 1

fundamentally a lot of [our] schools have this tag of being rather ‘old fashioned’ really Quaint maybe? Stuck in the past. Hippie. You know organic, wholefoods... counterculture , that whole thing. (laugh) I suppose these days they’re viewed more for being sustainable, ecological. That kind of thing. (laugh) but everyone is these days (laugh) Principal Case 1

Sponsor values The ethos and vision is supported by 4 core values... The first is that everyone’s different. Every student who comes to the school has different starting points, different learning styles, different aspirations, different


32

parental and home back grounds and so on. And the school’s responsibility is to offer an education the meets their needs not provide a standard model of education and force them to fit within itThe second is that, young people aren’t naturally effective learners who are clear what good learning and good behaviour looks like. So it’s a responsibility of the adults who run the school to set clear requirements and challengeable behaviour.Our third principle is that education is for lifeAnd the fourth one, which in some ways is the most important, is that ‘life is what I make it.’ Sponsor Case 2

essentially a stage not age curriculum. We facilitate all that by having a very, very flexible timetable and by having a building which has a big variety of different spaces. From Open Plan Learning to arenas to small study spaces that students can chose to use for their learning depending what their strategies are Sponsor Case 2

It’s a highly managed model in which students have a lot of responsibility and autonomy So it’s a radically different way of running a school from a traditional model And we’ve been running it in our schools in Sweden for 10 or 11 years now and get great results. Sponsor Case 2


33

It is clear from the data that both academies have a clear ethos and vision and that they are significantly different to maintained schools in England. They are both very child centred and focus on the individual, however in a significantly different way. Case 1 has a fundamental objection to the use of ICT, it is not formally introduced until age 13, and the Academy is specifically exempt from compulsory teaching of ICT prior to that. In Case 2 however ICT is at the heart of its pedagogy.

There were common themes in the motivations for sponsorship such as bringing a different educational philosophy to a wider audience with comments from interviewees surrounding the concepts of diversity and choice. There are common themes too around the roles of the Principal and the Sponsor; in both academies there is a lack of manoeuvre for the Principal in terms of pedagogy as the schools will no longer be these types of schools were significant changes to be made. The realisation of the ethos and vision in both schools is led by their value beliefs. These issues and differences between the two cases will be explored further in the discussion section.

DiscussionThe motivations for both sponsors were similar for both cases with one exception; case two has a clear commercial motivation. The idea of bringing a different educational experience to children in England was referred to frequently, “[Our] School Movement UK have been working on this for decades, on and off. How [do we] find a way of accessing the wider educational discourse of this country. And that issues like recognition, equivalence and finding a voice” Principal Case1 and...[we were] welcomed by Andrew Adonis [Lord Adonis the architect of the academies programme], largely because of our education model which is quite unlike anything else operating in the UK. ...Andrew was always keen to use the academies programme to get more diversity into the supply side of education...and he saw this as a real opportunity to bring in some ...erm...a very different model of education into a group of academies” Sponsor Case2.

All the interviewees spoke passionately about their educational philosophy and how it may be more appropriate for some children. Although a long quote, the following summarises the principal’s


34

beliefs about the educational movement in Case 1. When asked about how his academy differs from mainstream schools then he explained referring to what they were attempting to achieve with childhood and subsequently an adult’s place in the world:

To become free thinking, considerate adults in a complicated and fast changing world. I suppose in rhetorical terms, it would see a lot of what modern society is doing and is trying to speed up childhood altogether So it’s just (clicks fingers) gone in a flash. And then you are left with a situation where adolescence goes on for decades, because we can’t make sense of anything). We don’t know who we are. We can’t really cope very much with a variety of very, very difficult problems. So we end up with where we are all very kind of zappy. We all know what the latest gizmo’s are, but behind all that there’s a lot of questioning about, ‘who am I? What can I do? Where do I fit? What is the world?’ And those deeper questions. And I suppose the approach would be to try and get children through childhood and adolescence to a place where they are still a little bit awake.

Principal Case 1

Here motivations are to do with changing adults in society, it is fundamentally counter culture. The motivations for schooling become at a higher level, thinking longer term and are spiritual, though not religious. Although the curriculum and its pedagogy differ to mainstream schools, Case 1 is also offering a different experience of education itself. This contrasts to Case 2 which is about pedagogy as a means to success. How individualised, personalised learning can help youngsters learn more. It is essentially a stage not age curriculum with students progressing at their own rate not at the rate of their peers.

One overlapping theme though is how both cases believe their style of education will suit some children who may be disaffected in mainstream schools. Case 2 offers a flexible approach to learning, as the sponsor says, “So if little ‘Johnny’ needs to spend 3 days doing Maths, and only actually learns after lunch, because in the morning


35

he’s too tired, because he stayed up late the night before, what does a traditional school do? Well it makes him learn Maths for one hour in the morning when everybody else is doing Maths because that’s what you allow them to do. And that is fundamentally not appropriate for little ‘Johnny’. Yeah. Little ‘Johnny’ needs to be doing 3 hours of Maths every day after lunch” (Sponsor Case 2). Whilst Case 1 has seen an increase in admission requests since becoming a free state paid for academy the Principal said “ the local people that wake up to the fact that, ‘they’re really doing it differently and it seems to work. My child’s not enjoying it much where he or she is, let’s go and have a look there’” (Principal Case 1). The contribution that diversity can bring is offering a different experience to those children who may not be accessing mainstream education for whatever reason.

The concept of validation, of an official governmental approval, to run state schools in England was also important for both organisations. It allowed them to be able to not only bring their style of schooling to a wider audience but also to be able to use it in the marketplace. In Case1 this is other independent schools in England and internationally and potentially further state schools. For Case 2 this validation has a more significant role, it allows for further advertising of their product; in commercial terms it is a lost leader.

Case 2 is a profit-making company, it exists to pay dividends to share holders, “we are not doing this for philanthropic reason at all. You know, we are a business and so our reasons for sponsoring academies in the UK was to establish a ....errm...shop window for what a [our type of] school might look like in somewhere other than Sweden” (Sponsor Case 2). The motivations for being in the Academy programme now become clearer. He continues, “ because the UK is a good base point for us to demonstrate this to the rest of the world.... we feel having something in England, ... in the English language which is globally accessible, is an interesting place to have a showcase of our capability. So we made the decision for, you know, straight forward commercial decisions to create a [our] school here in the UK”. (Sponsor Case 2). The commercial motivation is that the status acquired by formal validation to run a state financed school in England is a ticket to sales internationally. It is used to promote their product. The sponsor continues, “we’re


36

certainly looking at opportunities in the UK and elsewhere in Europe and we’ve just opened our first school in Manhattan. And we are talking to countries all over the world. I mean, people will...we had the Australians in last week and the Dutch and so on” (Sponsor Case 2).

The roles of the Principal and Sponsor are similar here in that the academies are clearly Sponsor led. There are opportunities for the Principal to lead and affect change, however this cannot be fundamental to the ethos and vision of the academies; the unique ethos and vision they bring to the state system is the raison-d’etre of their existence in this context. They have joined the state school system in order to increase diversity in the family of schools, fundamental change would mean they may no longer be the type of school that belongs to their organisation. In Case 2 the role of the Principal becomes a conduit for the sponsors; it is about ensuring that the concept of education they offer is instigated then maintained. This has involved visiting the company’s schools in Sweden and having a period of induction to ensure they are aware what the sponsor’s requirements are. The sponsor is unequivocal here, “The benefit of having a sponsor like [ours] is that there is no doubt the school we want you to run...And as part of the recruitment process we took the short-listed candidates, the final 3 in each case, to Sweden for a day And on the flight home said, ‘if you don’t want to run a school that looks like this, then don’t join. ....So we don’t have any conflict really around the vision.... They have partner schools in Sweden” and “So it’s more about the implementation rather than the vision” Sponsor Case 2.

The creation of the post of Principal in Case 1 was a significant event in itself. As shown in the literature review this type of educational movement does not have such a role in their schools, but have leadership and management through a collegial college. The role of Principal is a state school requirement. The Sponsor recalls, “[our] schools are managed by the teachers. There is no concept of a senior management team. To shift from that position to a position where we could actually draw up a job description for a Principal was quite an extraordinary process. That was about values and about the ethos meeting with resistance and hanging onto a tradition.


37

We don’t do it like that. So finding a way in which we could do it took a lot of..... discussion to move on from there. And it’s still something...an area that hasn’t entirely been resolved.” Sponsor Case 1. The appointee would also need to be an entrusted individual who knew this type of schooling and could be accepted, “I was actually working alongside [the sponsor’s representative] a few years ago...[part of school movement] working for the Executive group for [our] schools movement” Principal Case 1. In effect the Principal was actually one of the sponsors. By becoming part of the state this caused tensions with parents and staff, “...is one of the difficulties...because the Principal, i.e. me, ..., is seen as being the arm of the State... And he’s obviously sold out ... He’s even an agent of the department!” Principal Case 1. Although this post has potential for conflict there are numerous quotes where the Principal and sponsors have worked together with little or no conflict as they perceive themselves fundamentally as part of the movement.

The academy in Case 1 has further developed its management structure away from the collegial college. It now has a Deputy Principal and middle management posts which is noted in their Ofsted Report, “The introduction of a leadership structure is at a relatively early stage and represents a change from the previous collegiate structure...the need to increase capacity in the leadership team to sustain improvements in behaviour, teaching and learning. To this end, a ‘middle’ management group of phase coordinators has been appointed” (Office for Standards in Education, 2011). Clearly the demands upon the Academy in joining the state sector have required a move away from the collegial structure, it is a moot point whether this fundamentally affects the nature of the school.

These two cases were at different starting points in order to realise their vision within the new Academy. In Case 1 the Academy is on the same site as the previous private fee-paying school from the same educational movement, the school was already populated. In joining in the state sector it had a name change, management structure and financial security. This enabled it to gain access to new funding that allowed for a building extension. The ethos of the school was already there it became more of moving it to another stage and cultural maintenance as opposed to instigation. The Academies in


38

Case 2 will replace existing state schools. They are to operate in the predecessor schools’ buildings until their new-build schools open. These buildings will enable the sponsor’s vision of personalised independent learning, schools to be better designed to enable their ethos and learning culture.

Both of these schooling organisations bring with them a clear educational vision which is based around a specific value set. This emphasis on values predetermines the realisation of the new Academies’ ethos; they are both vision and value driven. There is a clear blueprint of pedagogy in these academies, to divert from this would fundamentally change the institution. Even the buildings reflect their ethos, one predominately made of natural materials such as wood with computers hidden behind wooden cupboards the other a school with no corridors, no traditional classrooms but rather large lecture theatres and small individual working areas.

This investigation is in a little researched area, further work needs to be undertaken. It is a small scale study with only three interviews held. It would be of interest to hear different voices, those of parents on why they have chosen the school, of children on their perception of the ethos and vision and of teachers as opposed to leaders. This would particularly be true for Case 1 with the move from a collegial to a tiered leadership structure.

ConclusionThe two cases in this exploratory study are European-based education providers who have joined the state education system in England under the auspices of the Academies programme. They have joined specifically to increase diversity and innovation. Both of the providers have a clear ethos and vision which is significantly different to the typical state maintained school in England. Both of the schools have joined the state system after considerable discussion at national ministerial level. There have been adaptations to their education in placing it within an English state context.

The Academy in Case 1 has been required to change its managerial structure to create a senior and middle management structure in order to cope with the demands of the state’s highly accountable system.


39

Further research would be useful to see if the academy has stayed faithful to the educational philosophy of its founder. The voice of teaching staff, parents and students would be a useful counter to the principal and sponsor. Is the experience of the child in the classroom different? Do teachers still feel they have a leadership role and voice?

It may well be possible for the sponsoring organisation for the academies in Case 2 to promote learning in a different way to mainstreamed schools be successful for their intake. However there are ethical issues. First, is the inclusion of such educational companies in running state schools in England just a precursor for such organisations to eventually be allowed to be profit making? Second, the company believes that the use of a school in England is a showcase in a global market; should the English tax payer fund this service?

There is an interesting development since this research was undertaken. These schools were brought into the state system in order to increase diversity and create more innovation. This is welcome in the pursuit of choice and catering for a range of children and their needs, one common size school does not fit all. However this was in the mid 2000’s when the range of schools was tightly managed, this is not the case within the Coalition Government of 2010. Under the leadership of Education Secretary of State Michael Gove there has been a move towards more Academy Schools and the introduction of Free Schools. The Local Authorities which previously managed local schooling services have become increasingly marginalised. There are now a host of different schools with seemingly greater choice for parents. However, diversity and choice are not intrinsically worthwhile. The new era is less managed and appears to be a free market with the concept that ‘poor schools’ will wither and die due to lack of community confidence. Funding follows the child. There are a plethora of school archipelagos seemingly with little unified strategic management: a Pandorean Gove’s Box. Too much diversity may reduce quality as a whole when finance is finite. The dispersion of resources, creating a larger number of small schools, may only serve to make a quality service difficult as schools become economically unviable.


40

AcknowledgementThis research was sponsored by the British Educational Leadership, Management and Administration Society (BELMAS) Structural Reform project.

Mark T [email protected]

ReferencesAlen, J. (2008) 'We need independent review of Kunskapsskolan model'. Richmond and Twickenham Times 30/10/2008 http://www.richmondandtwickenhamtimes.co.uk /yoursay / l e t te rs / 3806673._We_ need_ independent_ rev iew_ of_Kunskapsskolan_model_/ accessed 1/8/2012.

Avison, K. (2008) 'Why a Steiner Academy?'. Forum - For Promoting 3-19 Comprehensive Education, 50,(1), 85-97.

Burnett, J. (2009) 'Authentic assessment in the first Steiner Academy'. Management in Education, 23,(3), 130-134.

Bush, T. & Glover, D. (2003) School Leadership: Concepts and Evidence., Nottingham: National College for School Leadership.

Croft, J. (2010) 'Profit-Making Free Schools: Unlocking the Potential of England's Proprietorial School Sector'. Adam Smith Research Trust http://www.adamsmith.org/sites/default/files/resources/ASI_ProfitMaking_Free_ Schools_ 2011.pdf accessed 1/8/2012.

Curtis, A. (2009) 'Academies and school diversity'. Management in Education, 23,(3), 113-117.

Curtis, A., Exley, S., Sasia, A., Tough, S. & Whitty, G. (2008) 'The Academies Programme: Progress, problems and possibilities'. London, Report for The Sutton Trust. Institute of Education. University of London.

Curtis, P. (2008) 'More like university than school: the Swedish academies coming to England. The Guardian Monday 14 April 2008 http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/apr/14/schools.newschools Accessed 1/12/2012'.


41

Dfes (2001) White Paper Schools - Achieving Success, London: DfES.

Donnelly, C. (2000) 'In Pursuit of School Ethos'. British Journal of Educational Studies, 48,(2), 134-155.

Ecswe (2012) European Council for Steiner Waldorf Education. http://www.steinerwaldorfeurope.org/ accessed 17/11/2012.

Eiken, O. (2011) The Kunskapsskolan ("the knowledge school"): a personalised approach to education: OECD http://www.oecd.org/education/educationeconomyandsociety/ centreforeffectivelearningenvironmentscele/47211890.pdf accessed 7/7/2012.

Gibson, M. T. (2011) 'Leadership of Academy Schools in England: Sponsors and the realisation of the Ethos and Vision'. In Ecclestone, K. & Curran, S. (Eds.) Curiosity-driven or improving policy and practice. What's the point of university research in an age of austerity? Papers from the School of Education Research Conference 19th November 2011. University of Birmingham.

Gillard, D. (2011) Education in England: a brief history www.educationengland.org.uk/history accessed 8/11/2012.

Gillie, C. & Bolton, P. (2010) 'The Academies Bill. Research Paper 10/48 '. House of Commons Library www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/RP10-48.pdf accessed 1/8/2012.

Glover, D. & Coleman, M. (2005) 'School culture, climate and ethos: interchangeable or distinctive concepts?'. Professional Development in Education, 31,(2), 251-273.

Hallinger, P. & Heck, R. H. (2002) What do you Call People with Visions? The Role of Vision, Mission and Goals in School Leadership and Improvement. In Leithwood, K. & Hallinger, P. (Eds.) The Second International Handbook of Educational Leadership and Administration. London, Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Higgins, S., Hall, E., Wall, K., Woolner, P. & Mccaughey, C. (2005) The Impact of School Environments: A literature review, Newcastle. UK: Design Council/ University of Newcastle.


42

Hill, R. (2010) Chain reactions: a thinkpiece on the development of chains of schools in the English school system, Nottingham: National College.

Holt, G. & National Foundation for Educational Research in England and Wales (NFER). (1999) Education in England, Wales and Northern Ireland : A Guide to the System, Slough: National Foundation for Educational Research.

Hopkins, D. (1994) School Improvement in an ERA of Change. In Ribbins, P. & Burridge, E. (Eds.) Improving Education: Promoting Quality in Schools London, Cassell.

Learning Schools Trust (2012) Our Vision and Values http://www.lea r n i ngs chool s t r u s t .org .u k / l ea r n i ngs chool s t r u s t .4 . e754 c9812a f37de0768000577.html [accessed 10/8/12].

Leo, E., Galloway, D. & Hearne, P. (2010) Academies and Educational Reform: Governance, Leadership and Strategy, Bristol, England: Multilingual matters.

Marley, D. (2009) Biggest academy sponsor loses over half its heads in under 2 years. The Times Educational Supplement 24/4/09. London.

Neill, A. S. (1962) Summerhill : a radical approach to education London: Victor Gollancz.

Nixey, C. (2010) 'Kunskapsskolan: A Swedish blueprint for our schools?'. The Telegraph 9/3/2010 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/secondaryeducation/7405630/Kunskapsskolan-A-Swedish-blueprint-for-our-schools.html accessed 10/7/12.

Office for Standards in Education (2011) The Steiner Academy, Hereford. Inspection Report, Ofsted.

Orange, R. (2011) Doubts grow over the success of Sweden's free schools experiment. The Guardian 10/9/2011 http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/sep/10/sweden-free-schools-experiment accessed 1/8/2012.

Pricewaterhousecoopers (2008) Academies Evaluation Fifth Annual Report, Nottingham: DCSF.


43

Silver, H. (1983) Education as History: Interpreting Nineteenth and Twentieth Century Education, London: Methuen.

Solvason, C. (2005) 'Investigating specialist school ethos ... or do you mean culture?'. Educational Studies 31,(1), 85-95.

Thomas, G. (2009) How to do your Research Project: A Guide for Students in Education and Applied Ssocial Sciences London: Sage Publications.

Tiger, K. (2005) Kunskapsskolan – An Entrepreneurial Success Story http://www.fcpp.org/images/publications/FB035Kunskapsskolan.pdf. accesssed 1/8/12.

Vasagar, J. (2012) A different class: the expansion of Steiner schools. The Guardian 25/5/2012 http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/may/25/steiner-state-funded-free-schools accessed 1/8/2012.

Vaughan, M., Readhead, Z. N., Brighouse, T. & Stronach, I. (2006) Summerhill and A.S. Neill Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Woods, G. & Woods, P. (2009) 'Day of dialogue. Research priorities from the Researching Academies Conference'. Management in Education, 23,(3), 96-99.

Woods, P. A., Ashley, M. & Woods, G. J. (2005) Steiner Schools in England, London: DfES.

Woods, P. A. & Woods, G. J. (2006) 'In Harmony with the Child: the Steiner teacher as co-leader in a pedagogical community'. Forum - For Promoting 3-19 Comprehensive Education, 48,(3), 317-329.

Documents

European Based Education Providers as Sponsors of Academy Schools in England: An Exploratory Study'. European Studies in Educational Management, 2, 16-43