Debunking the Myth of Academy Freedoms – and What It Means for Education Suppliers
In the ongoing debate about school improvement in England, two recent articles in Schools Week offer timely and thought-provoking perspectives on the academy system.
In one, Sir Alan Wood calls for an end to the long-held belief that “academy freedoms” automatically lead to better outcomes. In the other, Matt Hood argues that a trust-led system still holds huge potential—but only if we build it properly.
Together, these perspectives push us towards a more grown-up conversation about school improvement—one rooted not in ideology, but in impact. And for education suppliers and EdTech companies, this shift carries both challenges and significant opportunities.
⚖️ The Autonomy Illusion
Sir Alan Wood, former CEO of The Learning Trust and an early advocate for academies, now argues that the much-celebrated “freedoms”—autonomy over curriculum, staffing, and budget—have not lived up to their promise.
In reality:
Many academies closely follow the national curriculum.
Autonomy over staffing and budgeting has not consistently resulted in improved outcomes.
There’s little compelling evidence that freedom alone drives better performance, particularly in disadvantaged communities.
His message is clear: autonomy is not a silver bullet. True improvement depends on leadership, strategy, and strong systems of support.
👉 Read Sir Alan Wood’s article
🏛️ The Hoodinerney Model: A Better Way to Do Trusts
Matt Hood, CEO of Oak National Academy, offers a different—but aligned—view. He doesn’t argue against trusts, but against the way many of them have been built. In partnership with Laura McInerney, an education journalist and co-founder of Teacher Tapp, they developed the Hoodinerney model, a vision for how trusts can become real engines of improvement.
The model is built on the idea that MATs should not be loosely connected groups of autonomous schools. Instead, they should operate as coherent organisations focused on:
Aligned curricula and professional development
Centralised support services that free teachers to teach
Leadership development and evidence-informed school improvement
A clear educational vision that drives everything from procurement to pedagogy
It’s not about control. It’s about coherence.
👉 Read more from Laura McInerney
🛠️ What This Means for Education Suppliers and EdTech Companies
If the future is trust-led—not freedom-led—then education suppliers must adapt.
Challenges:
Decision-making is centralised. Procurement is increasingly handled by trust leadership teams, not individual schools.
Sales cycles are longer. Trusts are cautious, data-led, and often require whole-group solutions.
Differentiation is key. Trusts vary widely in strategy, pedagogy, and purchasing habits—so blanket messaging won’t work.
Opportunities:
One school win can lead to trust-wide adoption. Build relationships and prove impact at one site, and the door to wider rollout opens.
Support is the new sales. Trusts value partners who offer onboarding, CPD, and long-term implementation support—not just software.
Strategic alignment pays off. Suppliers who understand trust-level priorities—whether that’s curriculum development, CPD, or workload reduction—are much more likely to succeed.
💬 Final Thought
The academy system has always promised innovation through autonomy—but that promise hasn’t always delivered. As both Sir Alan Wood and Matt Hood argue, it’s time to move beyond myths and start building systems that genuinely support teaching, learning, and leadership at scale.
For education suppliers and EdTech companies, this means more than selling tools—it means being a strategic partner in the trust-led future of UK education.
So let’s leave the myth of autonomy behind and focus instead on coherence, collaboration, and impact.