Search results

The professional challenge the chapter addresses is Black, Asian Minority Ethnic Chief Executive Officers (BAME CEOs) who lead Multi-academy Trusts (MATs) in England need to navigate turbulence to assure all schools within their MATs are high performing. In the investigation of this issue, the structures of MATs themselves emerge as causing turbulence. Evidence revealed the BAME CEOs with track records of improving failing schools to outstanding schools interviewed in this research are working in partnership with their communities. These BAME CEOs sustain their high achieving MATs and/or take on more schools that need improving and lead their change to outstanding schools with BAME communities, non-BAME communities and diverse communities. However, they were not given the opportunities to build capacity for high-performing schools by the current MAT structures. Rapid change to the organisation of Public Education Governance Systems has shifted power from local authority governance to public corporation governance without addressing any of the old problems in the change (Brighouse, 2017). The rapid change has led to a clash of cultures between those with the values of generic Public Governance Systems who have not been democratically elected by the public and do not require professional educational credentials, a track record of being ethical teachers, and a track record of leading ethical teachers in ethical communities in school improvement from ‘Needs Improvement’ to ‘Good’ or ‘Outstanding’. The rapid change has been hallmarked by a lack of full and free interactions and cooperation of the public in how the change in public education is being implemented. There has been no referendum on whether parents want their schools organised by their representatives they have elected in local councils or organised by public corporations financed by Private Finance Incentive (PFI) and Private Finance 2 (PF2) and operated by public corporations like Carillion.

The purpose of this paper is to present the authors’ views of university–multi academy trusts’ (MATs) opportunities for future interconnectivity that could support successful partnerships.

The authors developed a matrix of university–MATs partnerships that could help identifying potential scenarios of collaboration between universities and MATs.

Four potential scenarios of collaborations are proposed (board membership, academic supervision, recruitment support and academic support).

Scholars in the field can further investigate the four proposed scenarios in the matrix in future studies.

The matrix will be useful for universities and MATs management for potential cooperation in the future.

The study proposes four scenarios of cooperation between MATs and universities.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the role and leadership practices of executive leaders in English multi-academy trusts (MATs) considering the meaning of system-level leadership and its perceived impact on schools' improvement processes, conditions and culture.

This paper was guided by an ecological systems approach emphasizing the interactions between the micro-, meso-, macro-, exo- and chronosystems, and was used to develop context-sensitive accounts of leadership across groups of schools. It involves interview-based multi-perspective case studies using a sample of five MATs and collecting data from 31 interviews with various school and MAT leaders.

The primacy of leadership at the executive level was central to efforts for school and MAT transformation and that was evident throughout the findings of the study. System leadership was multifaceted and was understood through the multiple layers of the organizational structure of MATs. Four major domains of practice highlight the efforts of these leaders to address complex and systemic challenges. These are setting strategic directions, developing people and organizational capacity, establishing organizational infrastructure to support schools' improvement efforts and providing instructional guidance.

Findings reveal new empirical data about the role of executive leaders in English MATs and highlight the ways in which they seek to establish, manage and sustain school and MAT-wide improvement providing the research with a holistic idea of system leadership.

This chapter addresses how Black, Asian Minority Ethnic (BAME) Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) of Multi-academy Trusts (MATs) with track records of outstanding school improvement navigate turbulence when leading school improvement to optimise students’ learning. There are different ideas of what it means to have equitable access and equitable outcomes in education systems, and beyond, and how to live a good life on the journey to both. These different ideas and values’ systems have different intersectionalities of recognition by ‘the other’ in societies. Crenshaw argues, once these intersectionalities of discrimination have been identified, it will be possible to understand what Dewey calls their intrinsic nature and to seek ways to reconnect the isolated, and marginalised that are subjects of discrimination. The BAME CEOs articulate the current Public Governance of Education Systems that induces fear of forced takeovers and job insecurity creates a kind of divide and conquer approach of colonialism and intersectionalities of discrimination. The chapter identifies BAME CEOs want to create cultures where they can make a commitment to take the time to know the self, in relationship with the other, and build bridges between different groups in society for equity, renewal, trust, and peace in our time. The BAME CEOs wishing to empower others to engage in this moral training for democracy in education need to have and share the thinking tools to prevent community members from being manipulated by people who wish to rush them into new ways of thinking and doing. Change requires giving mature citizens the time and space to think things through by: asking good questions, critiquing the evidence underpinning the change, inquiring into the logic of the change and holding the moral compass of the change to check the direction steers a sure and steady ethical course with what Adler calls the primary virtues of social justice, prudently and with courage.

This chapter focusses on contradictions within existing legislation to develop an equitable and effective educational system for those with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND). It highlights tensions between the underlying aims of the legislation and the implementation of policies, specifically on admissions and exclusions with reference to the current government proposals for an increase in Alternative Provision (AP). It considers the response of Multi-Academy Trusts (MATs) to ensure an acceptable practice of inclusion while raising overall standards of attainment. It also considers the Government Green paper response to increasing pressure from parents for more appropriate levels of support for their children with SEND.

The purpose of this paper evaluates the capacity of the Cornwall Foundation Trust (CFT) of the National Health Service (NHS) to implement the UK Government’s children and young people’s mental health strategy through its school-based integrated health centre (SBIHC) delivery model.

This evaluation uses six case studies of SBIHCs to indicate the general effectiveness of this delivery model and its capacity to implement the three core proposals of the Government’s strategy. The core proposals are: to encourage all schools and colleges to identify and train a designated senior lead (DSL) for mental health; to fund new mental health support teams (MHSTs); and to develop strategies to meet the proposed four-week waiting time for access to specialist NHS mental health services.

This evaluation found that the Duchy Health Charity and CFT piloted a new delivery model in three SBIHCs from 2009 that successfully integrated health and educational services to children and adolescents, including general health and well-being and sexual and mental health and, more recently, integrated welfare services.

The main research implication is that longitudinal case studies of organisational innovations can reveal the subtleties of educational management in context and potentially inform advances elsewhere consistent with national policy developments.

The main practical implication is that the SBIHCs at Penair Community School, Budehaven Community School, Hayle Community School, Looe Community Academy, Treviglas Community Academy and Wadebridge Community School should each be recognised as a “trailblazer site” in the implementation of the Government’s children and young people’s mental health strategy.

Mandatory secondary education is the last opportunity that the UK society has to embed knowledge, skills and attitudes needed for the life-long self-management of health. The CFT’s SBIHC model trialled since 2009 has successfully integrated health and educational services to children and adolescents, including general health and well-being and sexual and mental health and, more recently, integrated welfare services.

This evaluation research is unique. It reports that the CFT’s SBIHC model is the first and only organisational innovation at a system level in the UK that has successfully integrated health and education services to children and adolescents.

This chapter presents a comparative analysis of the English, Northern Irish, Arab Israeli, Trinidad and Tobago and the US cases. The focus is what we have learned from the research about: the relationships within Education Governance Systems to navigate turbulence; building capacity for empowering senior-level leaders to deliver on their manifestos and outstanding track records for school improvement; reducing the achievement gap between dominant groups and marginalised groups in International Governance Systems. The chapter identifies that all cases require participatory multi-stakeholder action to develop and support collaborative networked learning communities in practice. Such communities of and for practice need to Empower Young Societal Innovators for Equity and Renewal (EYSIER). Policy and Education Governance Systems have the potential to synthesise the best of what has been said and done in the past, with innovative ways of working by empowering networks of knowledge building and advocacy. These networks co-create opportunities for action learners to work together to describe intersectionalities of discrimination and begin to remove fear of discrimination and marginalisation from Education Governance Systems. From this position, senior-level leaders can work with their leaders, teachers, parents and students to optimise how learning about the self, and learning how to learn improves community education for all students and EYSIER.

This chapter addresses evidence-informed teaching in the English context. The chapter makes the case for considering England as having elements of both high and low social cohesion, with an increasingly narrow role for Local Authorities (districts) alongside the growth of more powerful but smaller Multi-Academy Trusts. Within the context of a highly regulated accountability regime, this places England in the hierarchist, with elements of fatalist, quadrant of the cohesion/regulation matrix. England has a well-developed infrastructure for supporting research use, including the Education Endowment Foundation (EEF), a very well-resourced charity acting as the What Works Centre for school education. Despite this, use of research evidence amongst teachers is low, and this has changed little since the mid-2010s. The chapter draws on institutional theory to explain this finding. The following explanations are provided: a lack of resources, coupled with a strong, politicised accountability system and a hollowed out middle tier to support schools, contributing to a lack of prioritisation amongst school leaders. However, England's well-developed infrastructure has enabled the EEF to play a significant and evidence-led role in supporting schools in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The chapter concludes by suggesting a series of suggestions to improve use of research in England. These include alignment of policy with research evidence; support for school leaders; work to explicitly link research to the evidence forms and supporting research brokerage.

In this chapter, we present a critical engagement with the methodology that each research team presenting a case study in this book from England, Arab Israel, Northern Ireland, Trinidad and Tobago and the United States adopted.

Education is a cultural project that consists of history, narrative and faith. The Black, Asian Minority Ethnicity (BAME) and senior leaders representing marginalised groups that we talked to in this research all stated that their faith, and religion was central to their service as an educational leader. The faiths represented in our research are Islam, Christianity, Sikhism and no faith where a humanitarian approach is taken. The chapter presents the scientific significance of what values underpin these leaders’ behaviours, and to understand how their values align with legislation, education policy and the values found in Education Governance Systems.

A constructivist comparative analysis approach was adopted to address four research questions. First, how do the senior-level leaders describe and understand how school governance systems and school commissioners empower them to develop school communities as societal innovators for equity and renewal for peace in our time? Second, how do they describe and understand the role mentors, and/or advocates play to support their navigation through the governance systems? Third, to what extent do they believe a cultural change is required to empower them in school communities to Empower Young Societal Innovators for Equity and Renewal for peace in our time? Finally, how can the findings be theorised to generate a theory of knowledge to action through impact strategies within an international comparative analysis framework?

Each of the five international cases collected the narrative biographies of up to 15 superintendents, or chief executive officers of multi-academy trusts of colour. In the Northern Ireland case, eight religiously divided key agents of change were selected as an equivalence for the governance structures in the other five case studies. The total number of senior-level leaders participating in the five case studies was 40.

Each author read their findings through Gross’ (2014) Turbulence Theory and typology to categorise the level and the impact of the challenges the key agents of change need to navigate as they mediate between the governance systems. Gross (2014, p. 248) theory of turbulence is used as a metaphor and states that ‘turbulence can be described as “light” with little or no movement of the craft. “Moderate” with very noticeable waves. “Severe” with strong gusts that threaten control of the aircraft. “Extreme” with forces so great that control is lost and structure damage to the craft occurs’. The chapter identifies the findings were read through the theory of turbulence to reveal the state of the Education Governance Systems and their impact on empowering cosmopolitan citizens to participate fully and freely in societal interactions and cooperation between diverse groups. The authors’ chapters are subject to a comparative analysis that took place at the European Conference for Educational Research Annual Conference in two large seminars (Taysum et al., 2017) in Denmark, further developed by the editors and committed to peer-review.

This chapter explores school-to-school collaboration via Teaching School Alliances (TSAs) in one locality in England, drawing on governance theory (Bevir, 2011) – specifically hierarchy, markets and networks (Tenbensel, 2017). It focusses on three TSAs in detail, describing their individual development as ‘school-led’ networks but also how they interact with each other and with other networks in the context of wider hierarchical and market-driven pressures and opportunities. It compares these examples to the three common TSA trajectories described by Greany and Higham (2018) – exclusive, marketized, and hierarchical – showing how these trajectories overlap and interact in hybrid forms. It concludes by discussing these findings in relation to social regulation and cohesion (Chapman, 2019; Hood, 1991) and to the wider themes in this book. We argue that while collaboration between schools in the English system has been driven at the policy level by an egalitarian narrative, in reality, such activity is enacted within a hierarchical and individualist framework which can be in tension with the professional values and ethics of school leaders. We conclude with recommendations, which include a need to rethink national and local accountability structures in order to encompass a broader range of outcomes; encourage more ambitious levels of experimentation in how the needs of children and families can best be addressed; focus on place-based coherence and collaboration; and, finally, develop the skills and capacity of frontline leaders to shape productive networks.