Academies for Quakers
Nick Tyldesley believes it is time to live life adventurously
‘Academisation’ is one of those ugly, newly minted words that has entered the language and whose popularity will probably soon enter the Oxford English Dictionary.
It refers, of course, to the process of changing the oversight of schools from local authorities to private trusts. The arguments in favour are based on a general belief in the principles of autonomy, opposition to the notion of bureaucratic control from central government and allowing the freedom to be individually creative when free from the shackles of the national curriculum. Schools can thus develop different patterns for the working day and conditions of service. Senior management will have enhanced powers to lead as educational professionals. With this new sense of energy, it is anticipated that there will be a positive impact on raising achievement. Academy sponsors will bring a robust and entrepreneurial perspective to school management. So, what’s not to like?
Quakers who believe in choice and diversity will presumably see virtues in the academisation process and may want to consider whether this model could usefully be applied to the organisation of the Religious Society of Friends? Libertarian Quakers might argue that Friends House is a monument to bureaucracy and paper mountains on a par with the European Commission with a plethora of committees filled with the great and the good. Northern Friends may feel isolated from this southern powerhouse. Slow and cautious decision making militates against creative Quakerism – which is almost an oxymoron. With a few notable exceptions, there is a feeling abroad that Area Meetings continue to lack engagement with ordinary Friends. There is the ever-present worry that small Meetings struggle to fill their committees, struggle with outreach and find the financial upkeep of old Meeting houses a real financial strain. Quakers certainly talk about revitalisation but, I fear, it is rarely acted upon effectively.
So, perhaps a radical new approach could be the way forward. Why not give Local Meetings autonomy and give them the choice to remain independent or make partnerships with others outside the geographical constraints of Area Meeting catchments? Larger urban Meetings could mentor a cluster of smaller rural ones, offering financial and managerial support. Local Meetings could have the freedom to organise themselves idiosyncratically and it should be made much easier to sell Meeting houses or remodel them for multi-use by the wider community. Friends House could have a slimmed down remit with just an international focus. Quakers should develop the mindset of becoming more strategically savvy about how teams, networks and spiritual communities work effectively in practice. The core testimonies will not be affected by these organisational changes.
Of course, all these points will no doubt fall on stony ground. They will be regarded as frivolous, not in the Quaker way of doing things and against the mysterious ways of discernment. God is not a management consultant. But Friends are in danger of forgetting the radical roots of Quakerism, which challenged the authority of a national church and state with a new, inclusive way of worship that put a premium on individualism. Risk-taking, even with the ever present possibility of making mistakes, is not a sin. The Brexit argument that ‘leaving’ would empower and develop a sense of national self-confidence in making choices could be applied to a Quaker ‘movement’ towards autonomy for Meetings.
We need to learn from other organisations, understand about presentation and marketing, feel an integral part of our communities and be relaxed about interpreting the dry constitutionalism of Quaker faith & practice when appropriate. Diversity should be a priority. Academisation is still in its infancy and mistakes have been made but unless you start to question the status quo you never know what utopias can be discovered.
Do we want to live life adventurously or not?
Comments
Please login to add a comment
