This article was originally published on 6 April 2023

The government wants all schools to join a multi-academy trust (MAT) by 2030. If this plan goes ahead, it will mean thousands of teachers and senior leaders going through the process of leaving their local authority set-up and undergoing academisation.

Many will no doubt be wondering what this will be like and what might change.

Given that the journey of joining a MAT is something thousands of teachers have already been through, there are plenty of frontline experiences and insights to draw on to give others an idea of what to expect.

So, we asked seven teachers who have been through a range of MAT conversions to talk about their experiences - warts and all - and offer some insights.

Schools joining multi-academy trusts: teacher experiences

1. The ‘sceptic-turned-convert’

Aqsa Beaumont* is a middle leader in a secondary school on the South West coast of England

When the news came that we were being taken on by a MAT, I was a bit tentative. Fellow teachers had shared their experiences from working with MATs. I also had personal experience from working in a school that was part of a large MAT, and it hadn’t left the best impression.

I was particularly concerned about the possibility that the MAT might take away “teacher autonomy” in the classroom, and whether we would no longer adhere to the Burgundy Book regulations [the handbook detailing all the national conditions of service for teachers in England and Wales].

However, I did hope that it would be a good move. After all, having financial backing to make changes in the school was definitely something that seemed like a positive.

Then, when the time came for the school to join the MAT, our headteacher left. This meant we then had someone from the trust take over the role, and unfortunately she was very dictatorial in her approach. 

Things at the school became very difficult for staff due to her inflexibility. Thankfully, this didn’t last long, as she was replaced and things settled down quite quickly once a new head was appointed.

The change all worked out well, and our current senior leadership team are great. They have implemented things like a new literacy programme (funded by the trust) in the best interests of staff and children.

As for autonomy, someone visiting the school wouldn’t necessarily spot that we had been taken over.

‘The money that came from joining a MAT has definitely been appreciated’

We had already updated our logo and uniform not long before we joined the MAT, so all we did was streamline the logo to suit the MAT, and then on letterheads and policies we included the MAT symbol. You would have to look for the changes to see they were there.

There was also surface-level change: small things like job titles being swapped from “head of department” to “curriculum area leader”. A new label, but the job stayed the same.

Things that made a material difference were changes like the move to cross-trust meetings. These are like giant department meetings where, for example, all the English departments send representatives to meet and discuss what they’re doing in their separate schools. I always come away from them with new resources and lots of ideas for my own department.

The money that came from joining a MAT has definitely been appreciated. Our literacy programme, in particular, has received financial investment that has paid off in the outcomes of the students who attended it.

Since joining the trust, I now feel we’re a bit ahead of the curve in terms of implementing current educational research.

We’ve been used as a flagship school for English - lots of the other schools are told to come and speak to me about what we’re doing, and several have followed our lead with curriculum planning.

Overall, joining a MAT has brought good change.

2. The ‘choose wisely’

Adam Sutton is headteacher at Moulsecoomb Primary School, part of The Pioneer Academy

We were required to join a multi-academy trust by the Department for Education. At the start, it was a situation that did not sit easily with me, not least because there were few other heads around me to turn to for advice, insight or support, and it was a world I knew little about.

Not only did this mean I was somewhat in the dark, but also so were our parents, who had doubts about the benefits of academisation and were wary about how it would change the ethos of the school. 

However, once we spoke to The Pioneer Academy (TPA), it was clear there could be positives from joining a wider group of schools.

Their team made efforts to work alongside me, rather than take over, as they acknowledged that I knew my school and what it needed best.

The trust leadership also promised me that a benefit of joining them would be that I would be able to fully focus on delivering a top-class education to our pupils, rather than dealing with the bureaucratic distractions that can weigh you down as a school leader.

‘There are many examples of lessened workload as a result of joining the MAT’

You don’t realise until you get help with it how much of your time can be swallowed up by keeping up with new regulations and health and safety policies, when actually you just want to be in the classroom, acting as an educator, not a manager. 

There are many examples of lessened workload as a result of joining the MAT, such as the removal of non-educational tasks, including health and safety compliance; single central register checks; finance support; and building management support. 

This enables me to give more of my time to my pupils.

Finally, I also now enjoy a lot more collaboration with other headteachers in the trust, in a way that isn’t really available when you run a maintained school. 

We have daily contact, sharing practical advice or template documents that might be of use to each other. 

When one of us has held interviews for a position and found too many great candidates, we even let each other know in case someone has a slot to fill; not rocket science, but it happens consistently. 

I’m glad that Moulsecoomb found the right trust for us; when the time comes, I would urge other heads to start looking into trusts to make sure they can, too. 

3. The ‘never again’

Maisie Blackmore* was working as a head of department in maths when her school joined a MAT. She now works as a senior leader at an all-through school on the secondary team 

When the news came that we would be joining a MAT, I was concerned but not surprised. After all, we had just been inspected by Ofsted and received our second “requires improvement” in a row, and our headteacher had tendered their resignation. We all knew change was coming.

As such, despite my reservations and nervousness, I wanted to feel positive about the change as we clearly needed to improve the school, and potentially this could be a great opportunity for the children in the school.

However, the language used by the new leadership team was massively negative, and it immediately damaged the relationships between the leadership and classroom staff.

We faced constant criticism and negativity about how things had been done previously, and unfair derogatory comments about our teaching skills. The narrative became “we had been failing the students and community, and now the MAT will save us”.

This was used to justify the draconian rules that were put in place. If staff questioned the logic behind the rule, they were “encouraged to reconsider their position”.

The biggest change was the culture of trust. Any respect that we had as professionals was lost

Our staffroom was slowly closed down, and we were scolded for lunching together instead of volunteering to eat with students or walk the site. The senior leadership team brought in insidious ways to sanction staff; for example, absences were listed on a wall with reasons - even very personal ones. 

To make it worse, under the MAT policies, our workload increased. There was a marking policy of having everything in books marked. In the maths faculty, teachers were encouraged to work Sundays in the lead-up to exam season, and our working hours and contracts were frequently changed. 

Ultimately, the biggest change was the culture of trust. Any respect that we had as teachers and professionals was lost. We no longer felt as though SLT believed we were capable of working independently and for the best of our students. 

As is often the way in toxic work environments, it wasn’t bad for all staff. Life was more bearable if you were seen as “good”, but if you were perceived to be challenging SLT, then you risked being publicly chastised - often in front of students.

The breaking point for me came when I returned from maternity leave. I discovered that retention and recruitment issues meant we were so short-staffed that two classes of 32 students had been merged, and I had been timetabled to teach them in the dinner hall. The marking policy demanded I mark 64 Year 11 books a week, every week.

When I objected to the unsustainability of the set-up, I was told that “some women can’t balance motherhood and working”. 

Since leaving, I have worked in a local authority-run secondary now for eight years. I would never work in an academy again, and would be prepared to leave the profession, should we be forced.

4. The ‘double takeover’ 

Annabelle Whyatt* was working as a secondary science classroom teacher when her school joined a MAT. She now works as a deputy head at a secondary school in London

When I first heard we were joining a MAT, I was excited because the local authority was absolutely useless, especially in terms of IT. We had regular problems with the internet, the shared drive wasn’t always accessible and printing was a nightmare. I hoped changing to a MAT would help to address some of these problems. 

When the change happened, it was something of an anticlimax as the trust that was formed turned out to be just a group of local schools that decided to jump before they were pushed.

Everyone had their contracts “TUPE’d” (under Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment)) and I was surprised to find that there was no central approach to anything.

Sadly, this approach didn’t work as all the heads weren’t very good, so our school carried on pursuing silly policies, and then behaviour and teaching were very poor. It wasn’t a surprise when grades went through the floor and the MAT fell into financial disaster.

Once that happened, we had to do an enormous restructure - and that was despite having just appointed lots of additional staff only weeks before this was announced. 

At this point, the DfE stepped in and dissolved the MAT, as it was judged to be “inadequate” in all areas.

I felt as if things couldn’t get any worse - whatever happened next had to be an improvement.

“You get good MATs and bad MATs, just like you can get good LAs and bad LAs” 

Thankfully, I was right. Following the Ofsted investigation, we were put into special measures, and part of the support included being taken over by a different MAT. Fortunately, this was a completely different experience. The MAT was well-run financially and it had a good approach to behaviour. 

As time passed, all of the schools that were taken over by the second MAT improved immeasurably, and this was as a direct result of being in this second MAT.

Thinking back on how I felt at the start of the process, I can see now I had absolutely no clue. Now, I think you get good MATs and bad MATs, just like you can get good LAs and bad LAs. The difference is I feel like MATs are more accountable and so bad practice gets eradicated more quickly.

5. The ‘from little MAT to big MAT’

Helena Marsh is principal of Linton Village College in Cambridge, an 11-16 school with 830 pupils

As the executive head of the MAT, I was part of the strategic working party that raised the idea of dissolving our MAT of five schools and joining a larger trust. 

We were a lone secondary in a small MAT with four primary schools, and that set-up meant there were limited opportunities for partnership working. Joining a larger trust would give us access to greater operational support in aspects such as HR and estates management, freeing up school leaders to focus on educational matters.

However, I did have reservations. The potential loss of autonomy was an obvious concern but the biggest worries were about losing our sense of identity and control.

I didn’t want to be in a position where I was having to implement policies and decisions that were not right for our schools and our local context.

To make sure we got this right, we worked with an educational consultant specialising in this area of trusts and scoped out a shortlist of regional MATs and engaged in a “MATchmaking” process to test how aligned our core leadership values and visions were. 

We found a local MAT with schools that shared our community-focused and relational ethos, and this meant we were able to retain our identity despite being subsumed into the larger MAT.

What’s more, day-to-day decision making still happens at the school level. In fact, most of the changes have taken effect at an operational level. 

These are things that might be invisible to most teachers. For example, we’ve moved to single contractors for photocopying, compliance and finance systems. By switching, it allowed us to achieve greater efficiencies. 

We’ve also benefited from capital building projects such as emergency roof replacement and fire safety works, afforded by the MAT’s school condition allocation, rather than having to bid centrally for money from the Condition Improvement Fund. 

Trust sports centres have merged, which has led to shared systems and management of this important aspect of our wider community facility. 

‘We now have access to greater professional development and networking opportunities’ 

There are other things that are yet to change, such as switching our catering from in-house to a contractor. 

Things have changed when it comes to human resources, too. In terms of admin, we have adopted common personnel policies. For our teachers, we now have access to greater professional development and networking opportunities.

Middle and senior leaders belong to strategic improvement groups to facilitate collaboration across subjects, phases and in key improvement areas, such as equality, diversity and inclusion. 

On a personal level, I’ve benefited from peer support from being part of a group of secondary headteachers.

As a headteacher, I have still been able to have a voice and make contributions to trust policy and practice, such as the development of our curriculum blueprint. As secondary heads, we meet for coffee and catch up online every month and support each other with sharing resources and solutions.

There is a human side to our medium-sized local MAT that has enabled relationships to develop at a local level. 

6. The ‘primary-to-secondary mismatch’

Anthony Smith* is a secondary teacher of humanities at an 11-18 secondary with sixth form in the North East of England

When the plans to become a MAT were first announced, the reaction was far from enthusiastic, and almost everyone on the staff expressed their concern. 

Initially, I couldn’t fully appreciate their worries. After all, I was basing this on the fact that I had already worked in a school that was part of a MAT and it had been a positive experience. 

However, once I found out the plan for the set-up of our MAT, I, too, became concerned. The plan was for us to be joined by only primary schools.

When I had worked in a MAT it was in a group of three secondary schools where we, as the “strongest” school, supported the other two with planning and training to help improve standards. But I couldn’t see how the plan to join primaries would work.

Many more experienced staff were concerned about the future and the possible erosion of the Teachers’ Pay and Conditions Document. Not only that but we had worries that our headteacher was being swayed by the financial benefits that joining the MAT would bring - benefits we felt sure would only be short term.

‘Without enough money coming into the school, staff were threatened with redundancies’

Sure enough, the school got an initial influx of cash but over the next few years, that cash dried up and our budget then shrank. 

Without enough money coming into the school, staff were threatened with redundancies. 

As suspected, the rights we previously had under the Teachers’ Pay and Conditions Document were chipped away at and consequently, we had ongoing battles between the unions and the school. 

Furthermore, the set-up of the MAT that had caused my initial worry never resolved itself. As the sole secondary, many of our teachers found themselves having to spend afternoons at the other primary schools lending support and expertise, but we never saw any benefits of belonging to the MAT in our own school.

Lesson observations and learning walks increased, and when we questioned it the headteacher said that all the old rules no longer applied “because we’re an academy now”.

Older staff expected this, as they had seen colleagues and friends in other schools going through similar issues. Because I was young and inexperienced, it actually felt worse than I had anticipated. 

7. The ‘it all worked out for the best’ 

Samir Ahmed* is a primary senior leader and humanities specialist working at a school in the North of England

When the announcement came about the MAT takeover, I remember a feeling of dread. I was mostly scared about redundancies, and particularly worried because I was on SLT and I was concerned they would just bring in a whole new team and sack me.

I was also really worried that in the takeover we would lose our identity as a school. Would we still be “us” if we became a MAT?

As we prepared for the takeover, I became really worried about how the day-to-day would change. I still worried about losing my job, but I was also worried that we would lose autonomy as a school. I was worried about the changes that might be brought in with regard to our working hours and our working conditions. 

I was also thinking about how things might change in the classroom, and wondered if we would have a new curriculum forced on us, or prescriptive lesson formats, for example.

Within all this, I did have some optimism. I was hoping that when we joined the MAT we would receive more support (as we were a “requires improvement” school), and opportunities to network and improve.

When we actually changed over, it all felt like it happened “to us” rather than “with us”. There were lots of meetings where staff weren’t included. There were lots of formalities, such as changes to contracts and union discussions.

‘On reflection, none of my fears came to fruition’

Some change was slower, such as the new email addresses and the change in our pay date - thankfully, when this changed from the 15th to the 26th of the month, they did it slowly over a three-month period.

One notable thing was that there were lots of new faces around school, and the staff, inevitably, started to become worried about changes to leadership. These fears were partly correct, as the headteacher left, but I stayed in my role.

On reflection, none of my fears came to fruition, though.

We have been allowed to be autonomous with our curriculum design, for example. Nothing has been imposed on us, apart from quality assuring that our curriculum intent is robust, challenging and diverse. 

I think this change has come about because joining the MAT allowed for more collaboration.

Now we’re part of a larger group of schools, it means year teams can come together and meet regularly to share good practice. For middle leaders, this is really beneficial - too often you’re left alone to do your job, always a little unsure if there might be a “better way”.

And another benefit has been having trust “directors” for subjects who work across all of the schools in the MAT to help with quality assurance and provide support.

This has been a great help in our school. Through the trust, we have the opportunity for great CPD that we just wouldn’t have access to had we stayed as a school on our own.

The MAT sector response

Leora Cruddas is the CEO of the Confederation of School Trusts

As the above stories exemplify, the move towards a system where all schools are part of a trust is an emergent journey and one that it is not yet fully formed - there are fantastic areas of innovation, collaboration and improvement, and there are things that are not quite right yet.

Many schools and teachers will be facing similar journeys to join a multi-academy trust in the years ahead, and my advice to senior leaders and governors is to be on the front foot and do your due diligence to find a trust that is a good fit for your school.

It’s something that should not be rushed - but it is important that it is done proactively, as doing nothing is probably not a viable option any more.

This is not because this or that government tells us to do something - it is definitely not an ideological position - but because there are powerful educational reasons to ensure that collaboration between and among schools is purposeful, accountable and focused on advancing education.

Rather a long while ago now, I remember Steve Munby (former chief executive of the National College for School Leadership) musing that the wrong question for governors to ask themselves was “should my school become an academy?”

He posed a much better question: “How can my school best collaborate with others in a strong and resilient structure to ensure that each child is a powerful learner and that adults have the opportunities to learn and develop as teachers and leaders?”

This exemplifies how the power of a group of schools working in deep and purposeful collaboration can improve education and children’s life chances.

The sector must work hard to ensure this happens: we must build strong and resilient educational institutions that have the power to weather future perturbations, and ensure that each child is a powerful learner and that adults have the opportunities to learn and develop as teachers and leaders.

*Some names in this article have been changed to provide anonymity