As a school governor and with a lifetime of experience in education I have seen many changes over the years. Some good some bad and some mad! However the latest demand that all schools should form academies really is perhaps the madest of all.

From a continuos improvement perspective I ask myself what is the problem, what is the evidence that the solution is likely to solve the problem and does the cost of the solution merit its deployment? I find it hard to see how the policy meets these simple tests.

Calling a school an academy has never been the determinant of whether a school is good or bad and the evidence that academies do better is mixed to say the least. Schools have considerable freedom at the moment including to seek academy status if it suits them (or indeed if some form of intervention is needed). Whilst I have mixed views on the efficacy of this policy at least it means choice is in the hands of local schools.

Improving education is about focusing on teaching learning supported by strong school leadership. None of these are the consequence of a particular from of governance or status. So if improving education is the purpose then forcing changes in governance is not a reliable policy tool.

But its worse than that! What it now means is that many schools and school governors now have to take the eye off the ball to worry about the forced acadamisation process. Many of these schools are already performing well. Is there not an old adage about not fixing things that are not broken?

It has been estimated that the cost of this process to the public purse will be £1/2 billion. Money that is not identified in the budget that announced the plan. In the schools I know, I would far rather see the investment in mental health services for children that is one of the most serious challenges we face. Incidentally an issue that will like lead to significant costs to the public purse if young people’s needs are not adequately met.

To find clear evidence of the failure of top down change one has to look no further than the NHS. Constant changing in governance arrangements have cost a fortune and achieved little other than fragmenting the system. Fragmented systems are not effective systems!

As some parts of central government begin to see the benefits of devolution, even if the first steps are tentative, and the jury is out as to the extent Whitehall is really prepared to give up its power. Nevertheless their are green shoots! It was noticeable that one of the more reluctant players in devolution discussions was the DfEE. Perhaps more than any other Department they still have to learn the lesson top down change does not work.