Two hopes for the future

Recently, I was commissioned to write a book titled The A–Z of MAT Leadership. Each chapter had to begin with a letter of the alphabet in sequence, and while some titles came easily, others were far more difficult to pin down. Every chapter could have warranted a book in its own right, so offering only a short reflection on each topic was, at times, a little frustrating. As the chapters took shape, I realised I was also commenting on the rather messy education system that has evolved in this country over the last century. Whilst trying to make sense of the present, I was also, perhaps foolishly, attempting to predict and suggest some ideas for the future.

At the beginning of my career, I remember being naively fascinated by the cynics in the staffroom who would say, “There’s nothing new in education. Everything comes back around,” and who believed that if you kept your head down, with a bit of luck, it might all pass you by. I can now understand why, after enough time in the sector, it can feel like Groundhog Day - not 25 years of experience, but one year’s experience repeated 25 times. Thinking and culture often swing like a pendulum, moving from one extreme to another. Ideas come and go, as do the distorted, poorly informed views of politicians who influence education policy. As a result, educators often feel at the mercy of whatever vague political ideology happens to be in fashion.

I moved into leadership determined not to become a cynic, because I believed the cynics were wrong. They didn’t appreciate just how much technology would, and has, changed the world and transformed teaching. Nor did they predict the educational and brain research that has reshaped our understanding of pedagogy. Not everything is circular, and we have every reason to remain hopeful and ambitious about the future.

My hopes for the future

When thinking about the future, I encourage you to reflect on the following questions:

• What are the most effective structures to support educational improvement?
• How will those structures mature?
• How will we adapt to new technologies and research informed practice?

My hopes stem largely from the first two questions. I am unashamedly positive about the multi-school movement as part of a hybrid system made up of many constituent parts: local authorities, single academies, teaching schools, church representation, independent, grammar and comprehensive education, to name just a few. The key benefit for leaders and advocates of the MAT system is that trusts offer a unique opportunity for deep collaboration.

Not all trusts have fully embraced these collaborative opportunities. It’s difficult, especially in secondary schools where subject specialism can present a barrier to interdependence. However, using collaboration to share, model and improve practice is something that historically didn’t happen at scale across England’s schools. Where it has been most successful, the multischool system has insisted on deep collaboration, sharing and adopting creative best practice, while reducing workload for teachers.

If we accept that some of the strongest curriculum thinking and design has come from the MAT sector, and if we believe that the curriculum can be the primary vehicle for school improvement, then policymakers would do well to support and promote this further. My first hope, then, is that the system is allowed to continue to flourish and mature. It is still young and needs the space to embed, reform and grow.

Assuming this development continues, there are key questions for trusts to consider. In Chapter 25 of my book, titled “X Factor”, I suggest that there is a risk, particularly in the current financial climate, that trusts try to do too much, failing to establish a clear culture and set of priorities.

Political ideology moved us away from the specialist school’s system, where schools were encouraged to define themselves by doing at least one thing particularly well. I advocate for developing a similar approach across the trust movement. If we did, cross-trust collaboration could have real purpose, with more intelligent design and leadership.

In our own trust, we use music as a defining feature, encouraging all children to develop their creative potential. At secondary level, we provide opportunities for pupils who have never played an instrument before, offering free instruments and heavily subsidised lessons to those who wouldn’t otherwise be able to afford them. One result of this was our Year 7 “Trailblazers” concert, in partnership with the Royal Welsh College of Music and Drama, where nearly 200 pupils performed together.

These kinds of opportunities break down barriers, build cultural capital, develop social skills and self-esteem, and can positively change the direction of a young person’s life. It’s one way of challenging the disadvantage gap, and just one example of something we do because we believe it matters. We are not there yet, far from it, but we are trying to do at least one thing really well.

So, my second hope for the future is that we mature in a way that encourages genuine interdependence, rooted in shared excellence, where trusts become vivid, not beige.

Neil Blundell is CEO of Cathedral Schools Trust, leading a multi-academy trust of 12 schools and over 6,000 students across the wider Bristol area. Formerly Headteacher at Bristol Cathedral Choir School, Neil has overseen the creation of new schools, including Cathedral Primary and Trinity Academy, and has supported regional education through roles as an NLE, CTI coach, and NPQEL facilitator.