Chancellor George Osborne announced plans for the government to force every school in England to become an academy. Council power over schools had been in place since the Victorian era. Academies were introduced under Tony Blair and was expanded under the Coalition in 2010. At first, only new schools could become academies, but former education secretary Michael Gove allowed existing schools to transform into academies. Schools will now be forced to become academies, whether parents or pupils want them or not.

David Cameron stated: "Every school should aspire to have independence, for the Head to be captain of the ship, to be able to make greater determination about the future of that school." However, a 2015 study carried out by the Local Government Association (LGA) found that academies did not generally outperform local authority schools. The shadow schools minister, Lucy Powell, said there was: "no evidence to suggest that academisation in and of itself leads to school improvement".

So, what is the big deal? Academies are state-funded schools and are independent of local authority control. Academies do not have to follow the national curriculum and can set their own term times, though to do so independently of other schools where siblings are taught would be foolish. They still have to follow the same rules on admissions, special educational needs and exclusions as other state schools. If anything, central government has greater control of academies.

Supporters of academies state that they have more independence from local authorities to improve and teach the way they want to. Personally, I have never found Shropshire Council to be an interfering body. Ultimately, what do I feel are the advantages of either system? Well, I feel there is very little difference, as good schools are a result of engaged students being taught be the best teachers available, with parental support, with pastoral systems to help young people cope with current demands