- “The sharpest eyes in education”
Jeevan Vasagar - Education Editor- The Guardian - “Timely, collaborative and effective”
Social Impact Report 2012 - “The ability to get our team excited about stats!”
Social Impact Report 2012 - “Readiness to share; enthusiasm for learning and commitment to young people"
Social Impact Survey 2011 - “A remarkable way of keeping us focused on what's really important”
Nikki Coupe- City Gateway - “Fantastic support, unquestionable knowledge delivered consistently"
Matt Skaife - City Gateway - “Kindness, understanding, intelligence, honesty and openness”
Jane Chiodi- Head of Yr, St. George’s RC School - “The sharpest eyes in education”
Jeevan Vasagar - Education Editor- The Guardian - "Sophisticated understanding of the field”
Social Impact Report 2012 - "Thorough, supportive, interested and knowledgeable”
Social Impact Report 2012 - “Informed, honest, pragmatic, evidence-led & challenging, a breath of fresh air”
Social Impact Report 2012 - “Foundational to our Ofsted success”
David Howard - City Gateway - “The sharpest eyes in education”
Jeevan Vasagar - Education Editor- The Guardian - “A measurable improvement in Teaching and Learning”
Jon Skaife- City Gateway - "A strong bridge between people working on the ground and current ideas in policy”
Social Impact Survey 2011 - “Excellent education professionals who share best practice”
Social Impact Survey 2012 - “Tireless commitment”
Jane Chiodi - Head of Yr 9, St. George’s RC School - “Great staff who are incredibly friendly and know lots”
Social Impact Survey 2012 - “Adaptability and can-do attitude”
Social Impact Survey 2011
Should Schools Make Profits?
This piece initially appeared on the Policy First Blog as a response to a piece by Graeme Duncan which argued: "Here’s an idea that you’ll initially find repugnant – allow schools to make a profit."
Well - I have had the… *pleasure* of visiting a profit making school in Sweden and attending an … *enlightening* talk by the Head.
It included him showing us a slide of wads of cash saying “our goal is to MAKE MONEY” whilst rubbing his fingers. This sounds like a comic caricature but it wasn’t. It was true.
In fact, it showed in the school. Everything was geared towards getting lots of students to attend to increase the profits regardless of the impact on their education. Disturbing.
Of course, Graeme you’re right that this can be avoided if income is linked to the right outcomes as part of a well designed accountability framework (although coming up with that is hardly easy.) The crux of this though is that we know that all different types of schools can and do succeed with the right support and leadership, so why, of all the models go for a one which takes one of our most important social institutions (schools) out of the hands of the society?
I’m not someone who is so dogmatic as to believe there can never be a case for bringing in other providers. I’m pleased to see effective providers like Ark who have a strong record of taking over failing schools do so (where other attempts have failed), that’s fine. I’d prefer it to be done without taking the schools out of society’s hands but hey, the priority here is the pupils so let’s do what gets the job done quickest and most effectively. This needs to be decided on a case by case basis and we should recognise that social enterprises and charities are generally run by people with exactly the right aims and methods to provide a great solution in many cases.
However, going towards profit making is one step too far. If we can improve schools without taking public money out of the system and putting it into the hands of shareholders as well as keeping a system which is run by people with the right motives- which we know that we can, then that has to be the preferred option.
I cringed all the way through the talk by the Swedish head.
I don’t want to find myself doing that in our schools.
There’s more on this in my blog “Evidence Ping-Pong and the 3 Pillars of School Reform” (although my views have developed a bit since then)















