Structural integration and knowledge exchange in multi-academy trusts: comparing approaches with evidence and theory from non-educational sectors

This article analyses the ways in which leaders in Multi-Academy Trusts (MATs) in England work to develop shared improvement practices across the schools they operate. It draws on case study evidence gathered as part of a larger mixed methods study by the authors (Greany, 2018). There are now more than 1200 MATs in England, operating anywhere between two and 50+ academies within a single organizational structure, overseen by a board and Chief Executive. A key question facing MAT leaders is whether, where and how far to seek integration between member schools, especially given the argument that such integration can ensure that teaching and learning practices are being consistently applied. The research reveals varying levels of standardisation, alignment and autonomy across different aspects of practice (assessment, curriculum and pedagogy). While some MAT leaders seek to standardise and regulate most areas of practice, others emphasise more organic or co-designed approaches to building shared norms and/or allow space for local contextualisation. Drawing on research into Mergers and Acquisitions and ‘post-merger integration’ in organisational studies, we analyse the theories of action which underpin these leaders’ approaches and set out a categorisation framework and typology aimed at strengthening understanding of MAT approaches to improvement

A response to the House of Commons Education Committee report on Multi-Academy Trusts

The number of schools joining multi-academy trusts has grown over the last five years, and it is expected that this growth will continue. The House of Commons Education Committee has, as a result, looked into the performance and role of these trusts. Steven J Courtney, Ruth McGinity, Steven Jones, Robert Hindle, Stephen M Rayner and Belinda Hughes focus on four key aspects of the Committee’s report and argue that broader questions about the government’s policy remain untouched

Living improvement: a case study of a secondary school in England

Five years ago we worked on a project that focused on a change process as a plan, a practice and a lived experience at Kingswood High School. Drawing on the evaluation data gathered the paper argued that effective improvement in Kingswood is less about the implementation of external reform agendas, and is more about working for educational goals regarding learners and learning. We located this development within a wider educational project of developing the school as a place that valued research as an educational practice, and as essential to shaping a strategic agenda. In this second paper we report on this challenge through reporting on the current phase of ‘living improvement’ through a three year funded project. We began with a review of the school’s development and plans, and undertook a collection of evidence about the school’s commitment to improvement through research by interviewing members of the school leadership team, staff and students, as well as issuing questionnaires to staff, students and parents. We worked with staff and students over a period of a year to investigate their experiences, and what their aspirations are for learning. Through reporting on this phase of the school’s development we intend examining what it really means to be a researching school and we will address two questions relating to the development of school improvement strategies through internal and external funded research at Kingswood High School; What are the issues that have been generated regarding putting learning at the centre of local policymaking? Secondly how and why might primary and agenda setting research as a framework and process enable learning to develop in productive ways? Our findings support the development of a typology that identifies four main positions that may be adopted by the school within the context of developing strategies for improvement: Delivery, Agenda Following, Evaluation and Agenda Setting. This typology illustrates the difference between the remit of a project based on technical predetermined outcomes e.g. to improve tests results or to improve student attitudes to learning, and a project based on change where the aim is to understand and explain a situation as a means of transformation on a local level. On a national level the typology indicates the difference between a project determined by national policy, guidance and law requiring implementation as a means of improvement or change and one that is designed by the school with their agenda for improvement or change