Questionable value of school executive roles

I couldn’t agree more with the City of York councillor Jonny Crawshaw (Letters, 16 April). The explosion of corporate-style executive roles in schools is an outrage and a tragic betrayal of the students and teachers at those institutions. While I was headteacher of a local authority secondary school, at least two heads of neighbouring schools acquired single-academy trust status for their schools, persuaded their governors to promote them to the new position of “executive head” on an increased salary, appointed a “head of school” on a lower salary to run the school, and effectively sat back. Suddenly, and for no discernible benefit to students, the cost of headship had doubled. Meanwhile, as Crawshaw documents, multi-academy trusts (Mats) spawn even more newly created, costly and superfluous positions, sucking in more and more schools to enhance and justify the inflated executive pay. And, inevitably, the services provided by the local authority diminish for everyone else as schools leave to become academies. The principal losers, of course, are the young people these schools are meant to serve – but also all those demoralised teachers who are not motivated by the same venal values and who struggle on with larger class sizes and fewer support services. CEO and executive headteacher roles in schools are non-jobs. Each school needs a headteacher who is passionate about the education and wellbeing of students in that school, supported by adequate funding and good support services. They do not need corporate managers. Name and address supplied • The academy system for schools is sucking the life and finances out of our education system. I have knowledge, from a family member, of a high school becoming part of a multi-academy trust. They saw changes that were supposed to be of benefit to the children, but actually are more like benefits for the senior leadership. One example is trips abroad, requiring long-haul flights, by senior school staff to “observe” overseas teaching methods. Another example is senior leadership meetings taking place in expensive settings, with expensive catering. These privileges do not extend to support staff, who are expected to bring their own teabags to school and even provide cups of tea for visitors and interviewees out of their own supply. This might just about be acceptable, on the grounds of using every penny of funding directly for the children and if making savings applied to all staff across the board, but it doesn’t. Support staff, on minimum wage, have even had to take on the roles of speech therapists and educational psychologists due to funding shortages. Tellingly, the job title of “school bursar” has become “business manager”. A school should be a centre for learning, not a business. From what I can gather, financial accountability is not what it used to be. The reasons for the funding shortages need to be looked at more closely. Caroline Tollemache London • Jonny Crawshaw’s letter highlights a problem also seen in primary school multi-academy trusts, even small ones. CEOs, CFOs and other middle management staff (with salaries ranging from £110,000 to £140,000) can drain away precious resources that should have been used for teaching assistants and teachers in schools with strained budgets. The services provided cost significantly more than the ones provided by the local authority. For a Mat of eight schools, £500,000 is a lot of money to divert from education, especially in view of the fact that schools are being forced to make teachers and teaching assistants redundant to avoid going into deficit. It is about time that the Department for Education audited the use of general annual grant money by Mats. Ofsted or DfE inspection of Mats would also be welcome. Lia Campos Cambridge • Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.