Does a headteacher’s abuse of power indicate an inherent problem with the ‘academy’ system?

It was with a mixture of cringeworthiness and amusement that I greeted the news last week that my former head teacher had been forced to resign over an alleged misuse of funds – paying for “inappropriate items – such as sex games and supplements” and horse care lessons for his son, amongst other dubious items.

Richard Gilliland (it still feels wrong to use his first name) also employed his wife, son and daughter, and used accommodation owned by the school, including a manor house and a property in France, for his family holidays.

Whilst in the private sector a school owning a French manor house might not be much of a big deal, in fact practically the norm, for a state school it seems somewhat extravagant.

The reason for this occurrence is that my former school is an academy, an example of the school system originally promoted by Tony Blair and now championed by the increasingly unpopular Education Secretary Michael Gove.

Out of this status sprung remarkable amounts of wealth for the school, which has in recent years built a swimming pool, planetarium, sports centre, horse stables and synthetic 400 metre running track.

After spending seven years subjected to the school’s rigid moral code (officially called the rather Orwellian-sounding ‘Priory Way’) it was illuminating to see its credibility shattered to pieces by this scandal.

Whilst it would be disingenuous to suggest that my time at the school didn’t serve me well (in fact there are some fantastic teachers and I had some great experiences there), I think this scandal does demonstrate one of the major problems that can arise out of the academy system. That problem is the concentration of power.

The whole ethos of the academy system is about decentralising power, supposedly to the benefit of pupils at the schools. But we should question whether it’s necessarily a good thing to take away power from local education authorities, which have a democratic mandate due to being part of the council, and putting schools in control of localised special interest groups, who are not necessarily democratic.

Many academies are sponsored by religious organisations. Whilst this needn’t be an inherently bad thing in itself, we need to consider whether it’s acceptable to hand control of young people’s learning over to a group which has an explicit agenda.

One need only look as far as Gateshead to see an academy, Emmanuel College, one of whose stated aims is to “encourage personal, moral and spiritual development within a Christian framework.” Religious involvement in schools is especially concerning given the recent incident in which Catholic Schools asked pupils to sign a petition against gay marriage.

Whilst these were primarily non-academy schools it gives us some flavour, in my opinion, of the agenda which religions seek to use education for, and should certainly give cause to consider whether a greater level of autonomy should be afforded to such schools.

Similarly, Jamie Oliver has raised concerns over the fact that academies are to be free from regulations introduced as a result of his campaign to make school meals healthier. Quite why academies ought to be exempt from these regulations, which seek to combat childhood obesity and other health problems, is beyond me.

Ultimately it would seem to me that devolving power away from the state and towards special interest groups is wrong, given their potential ability to exercise such a great influence over their pupils’ lives.