Innovation is possible, it's just not easy: improvement, innovation and legitimacy in England's autonomous and accountable school system

This article reviews the literature and explores the institutional and systemic factors that help and/or hinder change and innovation across school systems, with a focus on evidence from England. A number of authors have argued that schools and school systems need to become more innovative and adaptive if they are to meet the needs of 21st Century societies and economies. Quasi-market models premised on school autonomy, parental choice and vertical accountability have been seen as the best way to secure innovation, but the evidence of success remains thin. The article analyses four examples of change and finds that system-wide change is possible, but requires strong and sustained political support and capacity building within a values-based framework that allows for local agency and adaptation. It concludes by drawing out three implications: the need to prioritise 'professional' as well as 'structural' autonomy; the potential for vertical accountability frameworks to condition the ways in which parents perceive and value innovation; and the need to enhance the legitimacy of innovation in the eyes of education’s key stakeholders

Multi-academy Trusts: do they make a difference to pupil outcomes?

This report is published as a supplement to the main project research report, Hierarchy, Markets and Networks: Analysing the ‘self-improving school-led system’ agenda in England and the implications for schools. The main project report analyses how schools in England have interpreted and begun to respond to the government’s ‘self-improving school-led system’ (SISS) policy agenda, an overarching narrative for schools policy since 2010 that encompasses an ensemble of reforms including academies, multi-academy trusts (MATs) and teaching school alliances (TSAs). The statistical analysis of MAT impact on pupil attainment and progress set out in this supplementary report is the first published analysis to compare schools in MATs over a three-year period with standalone academies and maintained schools with similar characteristics and levels of prior pupil attainment. The analysis set out here uses 2013–15 attainment data and 2016 data on the composition of MATs. Our finding in this paper that there is no positive impact from MAT status overall is largely consistent with other recent studies (Hutchings and Francis, 2017; Andrews, 2019). Where this report provides significant new evidence is in terms of MAT size, as we show that pupils in small and mid-sized MATs tend to perform better, on average, than their peers in comparable maintained schools in both phases and, in the primary phase, than comparable standalone academies. Conversely, secondary school pupils in larger MATs (with 16+ schools) tend to do worse compared to those in both standalone academies and maintained schools. These findings suggest that the economic drive for MAT growth promoted in contemporary policy may well be in tension with an educational argument for smaller groupings of schools

Guest editorial

19221922 (T38)

The Evidence-Informed School System in England: Where Should School Leaders Be Focusing Their Efforts?

This article examines the impetus for schools to engage in and with evidence in England’s self-improving school system. It begins with an examination of how the education policy environment has changed, shifting from predominantly top-down approaches to school improvement to the current government’s focus on schools themselves sourcing and sharing effective practice to facilitate system-level change. The article then explores some of the key factors likely to determine whether schools engage in meaningful evidence use, before analyzing survey data from 696 primary school practitioners working in 79 schools. The article concludes by highlighting where schools appear to be well- and under-prepared for a future of evidence-informed self-improvement

Hierarchy, Markets and Networks: analysing the 'self-improving school-led system' agenda in England and the implications for schools

This report analyses how schools in England have interpreted and begun to respond to the government’s ‘self-improving school-led system’ (SISS) policy agenda, an overarching narrative for schools policy since 2010 that encompasses an ensemble of reforms including academies, multi-academy trusts (MATs) and Teaching School Alliances (TSAs). Based on a large-scale, four-year, mixed-methods study, the report asks whether or not the models of co-ordination and school support emerging locally since 2010 represent a genuine basis for an equitable and inclusive ‘school-led’ system. It explores the factors that support and hinder such developments as well as the implications for schools and school leadership. The analysis draws on governance theory to evaluate the reforms, which are conceived as an attempt to mix and re-balance three overlapping approaches to co-ordinating the school system: hierarchy, markets and networks. This shows that while one popular interpretation of the SISS agenda is that it requires inter-school partnerships to ‘self-organize’ their own ‘school-led’ improvement, this is in fact a partial account that underplays the dominant influences of hierarchical and market mechanisms on the thinking and actions of schools and school leaders and the networks they are developing. The report includes important new empirical findings, for example on the impact of MATs of different sizes and on the relationship between Ofsted inspection outcomes and levels of socio-economic stratification between schools. It also combines the perspectives of multiple case study schools across four different localities to provide rich insights into leadership decision-making and agency in the context of local status hierarchies and rapid policy-driven change. As a result, while focusing on changes in England, it provides a unique set of insights into how different governance regimes interact across different local contexts to influence patterns of schooling and school-to-school collaboration – insights that will have relevance for research and practice on school system governance more widely

Evaluation of Complex Whole-School Interventions: Methodological and Practical Considerations

Evaluating the impact of complex whole-school interventions (CWSIs) is challenging. However, what evidence there is suggests that school leadership and other elements of whole-school contexts are important for pupils’ attainment (Leithwood et al., 2006), suggesting that interventions aimed at changing these have significant potential to improve pupil outcomes. Furthermore, strong leadership is likely important for the effective implementation of many interventions funded by the EEF since even class-level or targeted programmes are more likely to work best within supportive and effective settings. We therefore welcome the EEF’s commitment to exploring the issues inherent in evaluating CWSIs. Developing design and practice for evaluations of this type of intervention, focusing on the issues of complexity and managing change across a whole school, increases the scope of projects of which the EEF may confidently fund evaluations. In this document, we provide key messages for EEF evaluators on how to get the most out of evaluations of CWSIs, including considerations for both design and implementation. As far as possible, our suggestions aim to be practical steps that evaluators can implement immediately. A number of issues, and points 13 and 14 below in particular, require either further investigation or decisions from the EEF