United Learning multi-academy trust has strongly criticised the new Oak National Academy quango after pulling its resources from the platform and placing them on its own new site instead.
The MAT’s new site, using the word “oak” in its title - ContinuityOak.org.uk - is due to launch tomorrow.
The announcement comes after Oak confirmed today that it will be launching as a government arm’s-length body later this month - but without any of United Learning’s resources.
The MAT has declined to hand over the intellectual property rights to the resources that it provided to the platform during the Covid crisis.
A spokesperson for United Learning said it was “wrong for government to take over the Oak resources” and “there should not be a ‘government-approved’ curriculum, nor any suggestion of one - whether presented as ‘optional’ or not”.
The MAT will continue to share its resources on its own platform, and this will be free of charge.
The move means Oak will lack resources for key stage 4 English and history, and for key stages 3 and 4 science, geography and art, until September 2023.
Oak National Academy was originally launched in April 2020 to help teachers and families access educational materials during the Covid-related school closures.
In March of this year, Tes revealed that the government planned to turn the platform into a new government arm’s-length body designed to provide free curriculum resources to schools across the UK.
Rival to Oak National Academy
In June, Tes then revealed that the Department for Education had struck a deal to pay Oak’s curriculum partners for the copyright of lesson resources that it had previously provided for free.
But, in a statement issued by the MAT today, a spokesperson said: “This was an independent, charitable activity led by schools and trusts in the national interest and supported by philanthropic funding. The partners were grateful for some government financial support, which accelerated production of video lessons. It was never a government project.
“However, we think it is wrong for government to take over the Oak resources and do not support the creation of an NDPB [non-departmental public body] to do so. There should not be a ‘government-approved’ curriculum, nor any suggestion of one - whether presented as ‘optional’ or not.
“As we do not think government should be getting involved in provision of lesson-by-lesson curriculum resources, we have declined the government’s offer of money to hand our resources to the new NDPB.”
The spokesperson added that United Learning was “conscious” that its resources were a “core and popular” part of the original Oak offer and said that these materials will continue to be shared “free of charge”.
Oak and the DfE have been contacted for comment.
