Three-quarters of headteachers say that government plans for all schools to become part of a multi-academy trust (MAT) will not lead to better outcomes for pupils, new polling has revealed.
The NEU teaching union has criticised the evidence for the proposals as “badly flawed”.
On Saturday, at its annual conference in Telford, survey data by the NAHT school leaders’ union (of more than 1,000 headteachers) showed that 76 per cent of respondents either “disagreed” or “strongly disagreed” that plans for a fully trust-led system would lead to an improvement in outcomes for pupils.
The data also showed a lack of appetite among school leaders for joining academy trusts. Less than a fifth - 17 per cent - of those not already in an MAT said they expected to join one within the next four years, while 62 per cent said they did not expect their school would choose to join a MAT at any point in the future.
For those whose schools were already part of a trust, nearly six in 10 - 57 per cent - said they were “very satisfied” or “satisfied” with the experience, referring to the increased collaboration between teachers and leaders across MATs, centralised finances and human resources, and greater access to shared teaching materials as benefits of being part of a trust.
Paul Whiteman, general secretary of the NAHT school leaders’ union, said: “This new data shows that the government has a lot more work to do if it is to convince all school leaders that its plans for further structural reform will have a positive impact on pupil outcomes.
“School leaders not currently in an MAT have told us that they can see some potential advantages to being part of a trust, but they also have a number of important and legitimate concerns that the government will need to properly address if it is to make progress on the goal it has set itself in the recent White Paper.”
Heads cited concerns such as a loss of autonomy as a school leader (92 per cent) or a loss of autonomy for the governing body or trust board (74 per cent) when asked about why they might not want to join a MAT.
They were also worried about retaining the unique local context of their school (83 per cent) and concerned about the financial impact on the school (60 per cent).
School leaders said they would be more likely to join an MAT if they had greater rights to leave a trust when it was not working for their school, as well as greater protection around funding to prevent the pooling of funds by the trust.
Mr Whiteman said: “There are legitimate concerns about autonomy that the government need to consider if it wants to convince school leaders and governing bodies of the benefits of joining MATs.
“The concerns raised about retaining a school’s local context and funding arrangements are ones that are reflected by parents and schools’ local communities as well.
“Before we move any further to a fully MAT-led system, it is vital that proper consideration is given to how schools can ‘divorce’ their MAT when things aren’t working, as well as to what interventions will be made when MATs under perform.”
You need a Tes subscription to read this article
Subscribe now to read this article and get other subscriber-only content:
