Talk:Northern Education Trust

Changes to intro
The introduction has been edited to represent accurate information as per the Trust website.

Previous edits have included inaccurate historical information. Netabcd123456 (talk) 12:05, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I and others have undone that. See WP:LEDE and WP:NPOV. DMacks (talk) 08:08, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
 * And in this case WP:COI and WP:RS. WP does not consider a primary source, such as the Trust website, as a reliable source
 * As we have got past a single section, we need to look to a better structure. A section Mentions in the media- is hardly the best approach to describing a lead article, in one of serious three journals to cover education. It is obviously a high quality reliable secondary source, that covers a section of text. It is not a local paper that copies press releases verbatim.


 * If this were an article on a school WikiProject Schools/Article guidelines- we would start with a section on History, then describe the school and its ethos, objectives et cetera- we would try to describe what it taught and how, on governance-- this isn't, so we need to decide what is needed. The Guardian article is a reliable source and gives certain clues- but its function was to point out that the fact that that two schools with horrific exclusion rates are both following the management frame work of this trust that advertises that it runs an 80-20 management system. If this weren't Wikipedia we could do some WP:OR to drill down further. MATs are in the news over refactoring schools. It appears from the comments on the two sources I had to remove, that there was some of that going on here.


 * Another MAT has accidentally put its notes for governors online (copyrighted so we cannot use it) Most of the contents give very reasonable advise - I extrapolate to suggest that the NET has a similar document and it will in the main be of high quality and we could celebrate it here- but it would need an independent editor (not a trust employee- or relative- or personal friend) to write the text that goes in article space- Personally, I do think that the excluded people could still provide advice on the talk page (others may disagree). A member of the trust could help Wikipedia by providing a a fair use logo for each school, and indicate which of the photos (not those showing children or identifiable adults) on their publications were public domain- or used a free copyright license so they could be transfered to commons. ( CC-BY-SA 4.0 being the current favourite) --ClemRutter (talk) 21:20, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Content not correct
Hi, I wonder if you can help,

I'd made amendments to the list of academies to match the government's list on the gov.uk website (as cited in the current reference) but they've been removed?

I'd also added a couple of news articles and provided references for each but they are also removed?

I provided a sentence briefly describing what the Trust is and how many academies they run but this has been removed?

The only thing this page shows is a paragraph where some of the sentences aren't even referenced in the linked article? I thought the idea was to provide factual information and not content that leans toward positive or negative thought provoking?

It would be great to get some help with this.

Many Thanks Tside90 (talk) 06:36, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Unsourced statement
The Trust is ran by Rob Tarn (CEO), brother of Paul Tarn (CEO of Delta MAT). ip-user added to blank material we have had to revert several times. We have no article on Delta but it is mentioned on the page as a redlink. ClemRutter (talk) 09:07, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest
The opening paragraph of this page is in violation of Wikipedia editing policies. It expresses only negative views and directly quotes an ex-employee of the Northern Education Trust which is a Conflict of Interest.

The opening paragraph should be a factual, impartial statement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tside90 (talk • contribs) 09:01, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
 * The policy document to which you are referering is WP:COI, the paragraph in this stub is supported by . The editor who wrote the text has no connections with the school or with Niamh McIntyre who included a quote from a individual in the article, that was approved for publication and published by the Guardian. The school and trust's frustration is with the Guardian who diligently reported the news. There are many ways you can assist Wikipedia, and if you have any further suggestions or CC-BY-SA 4.0 of the buildings please continue the dialogue here on the talk page. Remember to support each statement with a WP:RS reference- that is one that is not published by trust or school, wikipedian is not interested in promotional material, paid editing etc. In this article all the reliable sources have been damning, and if you can actually find any other stories or sources we could use it would be useful. --ClemRutter (talk) 12:32, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply ClemRutter. I've looked at other Multi Academy Trust's on Wikipedia and was simply trying to present an opening paragraph of who the Trust are, where they're based, how many academies they run etc, which would be a short, impartial and factual sentence. I know there's plenty of articles that can be cited, however I don't want to disrupt the page so would it be better to send them to yourself in here? The frustration isn't with the Guardian or the author as such, it's more the fact that Wikipedia has accepted to publish only the negative paragraphs. There's no mention of "the proportion of students at Red House academy who attained a pass in English and maths had risen from 32% in 2017 to 58% this year" which is also cited in the article. It seems a conflict of interest. Why not keep the article and just remove the one sided lines of text from the opening paragraph on the page? Tside90 (talk )


 * Please, if you do have references we could use put them on this page. From the WP POV we have only recently established that MATs are notable to the satisfaction of our US colleagues and we haven't really worked out the editors guidelines to the extent that we have schools Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article guidelines. We will soon have a Infobox- (see discussions at Template talk:Infobox school district that will be more suitable. I understand totally that the lead/lede looks lopsided, but as the article grows it can be expanded to be a summary and we can have a simpler lead paragraph. As it is the article is incredibly useful already- but there is still a lot to do. I am very short of time tonight so mustn't go into too much detail. ClemRutter (talk) 16:32, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

I appreciate your help ClemRutter. I agree that implementing the editing guidelines applied for School articles should be introduced for MAT's. "School articles should be written from a neutral point of view and only contain material of encyclopaedic interest; lists should be kept to a minimum; prose with context to the individual school is preferred. Remember that Wikipedia is not a directory, a depository of news links, a host of primary source material, or a place for promotional material or advertising." Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article guidelines.

Also from the same editing guide it gives advice on writing the lead for the article, "In the first sentence give the full official name, common names, and former names of the school in bold text, and its type and location". The References section which includes news articles is 12th on the list in terms of structure, a long way down the page. I'd be happy to help create a new lead with your assistance?

Under What Not to include section, the third bullet point is: "Wikipedia articles about schools must be neutral. The purpose is not to bring shame to educational institutions. Any such additions will be removed by the School Project coordinators or any other editor. The fact that such activities may be reported in the press is no business of an encyclopedia. Persistent reinsertion of such content may result in sanctions for the editor. See: WP:NOTNEWSPAPER, WP:UNDUE, WP:NPOV,and WP:BLPCRIME" Wikipedia:WikiProject Schools/Article guidelines.

With regards to new references, I've found the following after a quick search. Manor Community Academy in Hartlepool celebrates its best ever GCSE results "The academy, which is part of the Northern Education Trust, saw 61% of students overall achieve a pass in English and maths, up 8% on last year’s results".

Delight over GCSE results for Dyke House Academy pupils "An impressive 67% of pupils at the school, one of ten academies sponsored by Northern Education Trust, achieved a pass in English and maths - an improvement on last year’s results. These results reflect the hard work and commitment of the staff and students. The year on year improvement demonstrates the ongoing quality of education and the desire of the students to succeed." Tside90 (talk) 22:35, 12 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi ClemRutter, are we able to review the lead for the article? I've found some references which I've published above in my previous post. Many Thanks Tside90 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:31, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I think so. Sorry, I got distracted by real life and an epic RAC breakdown truck ride. I recover the car this evening. I have read everything you said and read a lot of MAT articles to see if the lessons learnt here can be applied elsewhere. The lead should be a summary of the article- no more than 4 paragraphs and must totally avoid advertising content, and puff statements that promote the trust. If possible it should explain why the trust is notable- and this will include why it is in the news. Stories in the broadsheets and BBC make it notable. Local papers are rightly treated with extreme suspicion- due to the quality of the journalism and we know they just paraphrase press releases, print the quotes they are given etc. As a former governor of 4 schools and former member of the Education committee I have attended seminars on how to rwrite press releases and damage limitation!
 * My thinking is that we set up a /sandbox and work on the extra sections needed and then use them to build up a new 4 paragraph lead. I hsve made the Northern Education Trust/sandbox and copied the article over so we can start. In the mean time can you think of a neutral way was to describle the philosophy of the trust- modus operandi etc

Sorry to hear about your car, hope you managed to get it all sorted! I'll submit my take on the philosophy here so you can let me know your thoughts.
 * Sorry for the delay- I completely forgot. ClemRutter (talk) 12:39, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Existing lead and comment
The Northern Education Trust is a large multi-academy trust operating in the North of England. Benign- but missing hard facts such as the number of academies It has brought a one-size-fits-all approach to its schools, and excluding a large proportion of its students.this should only be there if there is discussion of it in a section below Questions were raised about the trust's approach to its pupils when it was revealed that they had suspended over 50% of their pupils from Red House Academy in 2017-2018  and 40% of its pupils from North Shore Academy against a national average of 2.3%. Students were given fixed term suspensions for trivial reasons such as choice of jewellery and having eyebrows that were unnaturally dark. again a section is needed. A well written lead does not need references as they are all in the article

The proportion of students at Red House academy who attained a pass in English and maths rose from 32% in 2017 to 58% in 2019.

Suggested new lead
"Northern Education Trust is a not-for-profit education charity, operating within the North East and North West of England,  It was formed in 2012 and currently sponsors 21 Academies – 11 primary and 10 secondary – making it one of the largest Multi Academy Trusts in the North of England. Its academies service some of the most deprived communities in the North.--Good put it in  It’s vision is “We constantly focus on standards as we understand outcomes are paramount. Our decision making is driven entirely by what is best for children. By doing this we enhance the life chances of the children and young people in our care”. The Trust strives to help young people overcome any barriers to learning, such as poor behaviour, and has implemented a culture of high expectations of behaviour from its students.Comments about needing a section in the article apply. We never put quotes in a well-written lead   When focusing on dealing with persistent disruptive behaviour, academies can sometimes see a temporary rise in fixed term exclusions, and the Trust has experienced media interest in this. Outcomes for students do improve though, once behaviour standards rise, and the results of the Northern Education Trust academies have consistently improved year on year from 2017." Tside90 (talk)


 * I have gone through the suggested changes and made comments- general I think we must add content and sections to the article before we try to pare down the lead.ClemRutter (talk) 13:42, 13 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi ClemRutter, thanks for replying. Could the sections be the Trust's vision and values and then one on media interest? What do you suggest? Many Thanks Tside90 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:51, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
 * As you can see looking at [] this little problem has led to a significant amount of editing and three more pages. I now know where I would like this article to go and how this would reduce the prominence of the negative criticism. I do need a lot more references. As I read it, the incident was what prompted Lord Agnews remark, and the shift in Conservative party policy. I think we can start the history section by explaining the way the trust was set up, a positive quote and some opposition. How did it change from being called Kershaw Academy to NET. Who were the founder board members etc.


 * We then need to have a paragraph about approached to expansion. References are essential here- they need to be balanced not just reporting the prevailing POV (Forming, storming, norming, performing etc) Wise AT reported the difficulties they had when they were pressurised to expand too rapidly, Leigh AT adopted a similar 80-20 approach to the new schools it took on. I am speculating, but what actually did happen? We then are in a position to report the incident in context- if indeed that was the context!  We can then tie in that experience, with HM gov policy and (POV! unrealistic underfunding). At the same time we do have Companies House Data which can be used to support certain facts. So, if you like you can build up a draft history section here on the talkpage and park any references that may be useful.


 * It may then be constructive to highlight recent successes, both due to the trusts actions, and advantages from the operation of the alliance.

I'll set up the sections. I will go into the article and change a couple of headings as an interim measure so we are prepared. ClemRutter (talk) 16:30, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Draft extended history
(see conversation above)

Parked references
(see conversation above) ClemRutter (talk) 16:30, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Help
Hi ClemRutter, have you had a chance to look over the above? Many Thanks. Tside90 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:18, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi ClemRutter, have you been able to read over the draft lead? Also, the Northern Education Trust/sandbox page seems to have been deleted? Appreciate your help. Thanks Tside90 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:39, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Is anyone able to assist with me this? Can you pick up where ClemRutter left? I don't want to just submit the new lead on the article as ClemRutter was going to evaluate it first. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tside90 (talk • contribs) 09:55, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I believe this is now addressed Mea culpa ClemRutter (talk) 12:39, 13 December 2019 (UTC)