SATs Boycott – What Now?

So, as you no doubt now know, the NAHT and the NUT have voted to boycott the administration of Key Stage 2 SATs this year.

The NGA have come out to say they are disappointed.

So is Ed Balls. His response to governors is that they should suspend headteachers for the day of SATs if their headteacher is not willing to carry them out, and carry out their ‘statutory responsibility’ to ensure the tests go ahead.

Yet there will be many governors out there who a) agree with their head that KS2 SATs narrow the curriculum in the last years of primary and b) simply don’t want to have a face off with their headteacher about an industrial dispute.

Plus for good measure, there’s a high chance that Ed Balls won’t even be in charge of the DCSF when the boycots happen on 10th May, just four days after a general election.

So what to do? If you’re in the lucky position of not having a head who’s boycotting then all well and good. If your head is boycotting my guess is there will be no meaningful sanctions for governing bodies should the tests fail to be administered, simply because so many schools will fall into that bracket and that getting the tests organised yourself would be highly challenging.

Hopefully the NGA may provide more guidance over the next few days – but right now the issue of personal conscience has been transferred from the heads … to you!

2010 – The Education Election, Know Where You Stand

Education is always a key election battleground, but there is a combination of factors that make it even more so this year. Firstly there’s the question of where the huge required savings in public expenditure will come from, and so far most of the talk has been about how and when, rather than what. Secondly there’s the fact that education policy is one of the genuine areas of difference between the parties – certainly in rhetoric at least – and that both Balls and Gove are big hitters in their respective parties.

I’m guessing that as a school governor education policy may be more important to you than most. So where do you stand on May 6th? I’ve brought together a few links and resources to help you decide:

Education Manifestos

Want to know where the respective parties stand on key educational policies? The Guardian has compiled a helpful summary of the various main parties’ education manifestos.

They Work For You

Find out about your MP’s voting record on this useful website. Are you against academies or for sex education in all schools? Find out what your MP thinks about these things here.

Vote-picker-omatic!

Can’t be bothered with doing the reading? There are a number of questionnaires online which can pick your party for you such as Vote Match from the Telegraph.

Guest Post: Sean Whetstone on Safeguarding

When I volunteered to take over as Chair of Governors in October last year, little did I realise at the time that I would be expected to lead Safeguarding within the governing body. Initially I argued that being a parent governor would put me in a difficult position in a small school of 90 pupils, as I knew everyone.

However, it was explained to me by the Head and other members of the GB that the Chair has unique access & trust relationships with the head and the role of chair and safeguarding usually go hand in hand. I was not convinced of this argument but agreed I would try the safeguarding role for the first six months of my chairship. When speaking on child protection matters we never use the child or family name in our discussions so anonymity is protected.

Like most things in life I prepared by researching, reading, taking part in training and asking questions.

I looked up everything I could on the Internet in relation to Safeguarding including reading Every Child Matters, Sir Michael Bichard’s enquiry from Soham, and the more recent findings of Lord Lamming’s enquiry into the tragic events of Haringey.

One of my first acts was to ask that all governors have Enhanced CRB Checks; I know this is not a statutory requirement but I wanted us to lead by example from a governing body.

Safeguarding is not just about what used to be called Child Protection. Behaviour, Bullying, Health & Safety, risk assessments, race equality, whistle blowing, safe use of the internet and educational visits all form part of Safeguarding.

I quickly made up my mind I wanted to arrange a Governor monitoring visit on Safeguarding as soon as possible. I know the golden rule is that School Governors are not inspectors – well this is one area where I think you can ignore and break this rule with the prior consent of the head teacher.

A month after I took over monitoring Safeguarding I completed a Safeguarding audit using Ofsted’s new framework guidance to inspectors on judging Safeguarding. I used this Section 5 guidance document to audit the single list and ask the right questions to see the correct evidence. It can be downloaded from http://tinyurl.com/OfstedSafeGuarding

I also attended the ‘Role of the Governing Body in Safeguarding’ course and completed the Online Safer Recruitment course which is available for free at http://tinyurl.com/SaferRecruitment.

Both these events were to prove timely as 100 days after I took over the chair & safeguarding we got the call that Ofsted were inspecting us.

The Ofsted inspector grilled me on Safeguarding during my Interview; he paid particularly attention to what would happen if there was an allegation against the head teacher.

On the monitoring evidence question I gave him my report aligned to Section 5 advice for inspectors. He seemed really impressed with this and said he wished more Governing bodies took this approach.

He quizzed me on Safer Recruitment. Even though it is statutory that only one on a panel are required to complete training four of us on the Governing body have completed this training.

I completed this course the week before the inspection so was able to answer the questions he posed with ease.

In his inspectation report the Ofsted inspector judged our safeguarding to be grade 1 /Outstanding and said “Safeguarding procedures are highly effective and closely monitored by the chair of Governors.”

Safeguarding is now a limiting factor in the new Ofsted framework meaning you are highly unlikely to become an overall Outstanding School unless your Safeguarding is outstanding.

Succession Planning for Your Governing Body

About two years ago I joined the governing body of an infant school. The school in question, it was fair to say, was on its knees.

There was no chair, the school had half its complement of governors, an acting headteacher and some serious serious problems.

Yet just a few years earlier it was a poster child for the well managed primary school. A very successful head, a respected chair of governors, good results in a poor area. The school was doing great, but succession planning was its undoing.

It’s a sobering thought – as an active chair you could work your socks off, only for that hard work to be undone when there’s no-one left to carry on your legacy.

So what can you do to make sure you’ve got someone left to carry on the flame?

Part of the answer lies in distributed leadership, which we talked about in an earlier post. If you’ve already started a process where you hand down some of your responsibilities to other governors, if they’re active and involved in the school, you already have a pool of people ready to take over the day that you want to or have to move on.

I remember there was a bit of discussion around that post – what if your governors don’t want to take the responsibility on? How can you make it work? Wouldn’t it be better just doing it yourself? Succession is the ultimate reason (apart from regard to your own personal sanity!) why you can’t do all the work yourself. Because if after you’re not there all there aren’t people who want the responsibility of your role, your school is heading for trouble.

The other thing you can do is be honest with people. Be honest when you want to move on, prepare the ground, sound people out to see if they would be interested in the role. If all else fails your local governor services will always have an idea of local governors who might want to step up so you can lay your plans in plenty of time.

So without getting too morbid, have a think about what happens after you’re gone. If you get it right your school will be well set up for the future, and all your hard work will be preserved.

Who Has Responsibility for CPD in Your School?

Like it or not, budgets are going to be tight over the next few years and all the talk is of best value.

Maybe 80% of your school’s budget is spent on staffing – how do you make sure you’re getting the best value out of your staff, and that they have the skills that are necessary for your school to flourish?

Now I have a confession here – I work for a company that provides training courses to school staff – but it constantly surprises me how little interest often governing bodies take in what is the development of their key resource, their human resource.

And I’m not just talking about training courses, far from it – CPD is a massively broad church covering everything from informal shadowing and lesson observation to Masters level qualifications and in-school research projects. The potential too for improvement in school standards is massive. Studies show time and again that the best way to improve learning is not about fads or ‘setting schools free’ but to have the best teachers. You can only get these teachers two ways: you can hire them or you can grow them. And if you want to do it in a year, growing quality teachers is your only option.

Yes, to some extent CPD is a management issue, and out of the scope of a normal governing body. I’m certainly not proposing you go and tell your headteacher what Masters course Lucy should take or which school James should visit to gain a fresh perspective. Where governors have a role is in making sure the systems that establish CPD requirements, choose provision and measure its effectiveness are up to scratch.

The process of establishing CPD requirements is bound up in performance management, but as a governing body you need to be confident that it works and is directing development at the school’s priorities. Have a chat with the school’s CPD Co-ordinator and see what CPD staff are currently engaged in. Does it match with the school’s school improvement plan? Could you tell what the school’s priorities are just by looking through the CPD record?

Secondly how is provision chosen? With this you may want to take a few examples – how did so and so choose to go on this course? This is a best value question and one you’ll be used to asking for other school expenditure. Were the options researched? On what criteria did we select the final provider? Did we get best value?

And best value leads us on to our final point, about impact. CPD is only good value if it translates into the classroom, and schools absolutely must measure the impact their CPD has to truly get the most from it. Not just questionnaires the day after, but a concerted attempt to link CPD with improvements in classroom practice. Otherwise spending money on CPD, whether it’s free (and you bear the cost of cover) or paid for, is like buying a bottle of wine. Just because a wine’s expensive doesn’t mean it’s better, but because picking the best tasting wine from a supermarket shelf is tricky, it’s all too easy to fall back on the equation cost=quality. But in this case cost certainly doesn’t necessarily equal best value (and vice versa).

So if there’s no-one with responsibility for CPD one your governing body, why not grasp it? It could be one the single most important things you can do to raise standards in your school.

Should the BNP Be Banned From Governing Schools?

After all the furore about whether teachers were allowed to be members of the BNP, I stumbled across this article on a member of the BNP being made a school governor in Stoke.

What do you think – at what point does the requirements of equal opportunities for candidates for governing give way to the requirements for equal opportunities for the students and staff that are governed?

Guest Post: Developing Policies to Meet the Safeguarding Challenge

I’m very excited this week to have the return of Michele Robbins, one of the authors of Policies: A Guide for Governors and Headteachers. Michele has been doing an occassional series of posts for us on Supergovernor about a whole range of issues around setting effective school policies. This week, Safeguarding.

Our second posting focuses on safeguarding. We are all well aware of the emphasis placed on safer recruitment and ensuring that all staff, contractors and volunteers are subject to appropriate checks. However, that is just part of the story. One school I have worked with where the recruitment checks were exemplary still received a satisfactory grade for safeguarding. Let’s consider why that may have occurred.

The key sources of information are the Ofsted evaluation schedule and the supplementary guidance for inspectors, which can be found on the Ofsted website.

The latter was updated in January 2010 and includes a detailed checklist relating to the single central record.

Many of the points noted in the ‘Inspectors should evaluate section’ relate to appropriate checking of staff and visitors to the school site. The single central register is a key source of evidence for that, as are the visitors’ book, security key pads, CCTV and other systems contributing to school security.

Statutory policies and documents that are highly relevant are:

• child protection – including an appointed governor for child protection and a designated member of staff
• behaviour and anti bullying
• health and safety
• equalities policies for race, gender, disability
• risk assessments
• sex education
• attendance registers/targets

There are others that are highly relevant. These include:

• whistle blowing
• internet safety
• drug and substance abuse
• intimate care
• use of physical intervention
• providing first aid

How does your school deal with the challenging balance of ensuring that children understand their rights – including that of reporting any abusive behaviour whatever the source, and their responsibilities?

These include not making spurious, unfounded allegations and keeping themselves safe:

• when handling hazardous equipment and materials
• during outdoor activities
• when attending alternative educational or work-related provision
• when using the internet
• and if they come into contact with groups that encourage the use of violence.

Schools have a duty to protect children but they must also protect staff.

A recent survey of staff by the TES found that 25% had been the subject of an allegation of abuse. The most recent edition of the Guide to the Law includes as a statutory policy ‘Allegations of abuse against staff’. An unfounded allegation of abuse against a member of staff can have catastrophic consequences. We haven’t yet attempted to produce a policy and would be interested to know if governors would find it helpful if we did.

Does your school have a code of conduct for staff? If not you might find it useful to consider establishing one based on ‘Guidance for Safer Working Practice for Adults who work with Children in Education Settings. DCSF November 2009.

Are students, parents and carers aware of the code that staff are expected to comply with?

Do adults receive up-to-date, high-quality, appropriate training, guidance, support and supervision to undertake the effective safeguarding of pupils?

How many of your staff feel adequately trained to spot the signs of neglect, emotional, physical or sexual abuse? Do they know what to do if they have concerns?

One of the most crucial points in the evaluation schedule is that the school monitors and evaluates the effectiveness of its policies and practices

In all our model policies we offer guidance about the sort of evidence that could be considered by governors to monitor implementation and evaluate impact.

Footnote

The school outlined above had work to do the security of the site and equalities policies. A governor now has specific responsibilities for community cohesion and equalities and work is ongoing on making the site more secure.

The fourth edition of ‘Policies: A guide for school governors and headteachers’ will be on sale from this June.

Governing Body Haiku

Maybe it’s because I’m blogging past midnight while on holiday, but this seemed like a fun idea at the time…

If you’re following me on Twitter (@supergovernor) you’ll have noticed I’ve started writing governing haiku.

Why not have a go yourself? You can use the hashtag #governinghaiku

Student Voice: Rights and Wrongs

There’s been lots of comment in the past few weeks in the press and from unions about student voice. These have generally centred around a number of interview horror stories:

• Teachers being asked to sing Michael Jackson songs
• Teachers getting roles because they promise students cake every week
• Staff members being subject to an interview panel of their own family members

These stories are daft and if true show a serious lack of judgement in the leadership teams that manage these processes, but I don’t think any of them come close to discrediting student voice as a technique.

To take an example, if you were to do market research for a new product you were launching but asked pointless questions and failed to follow due process what’s at fault here? Is it market research as a concept or the researcher?

Of course it’s the researcher’s fault. Ditto with the earlier horror stories. It’s not student voice at fault, rather it’s application in those cases.

Because surely noone can deny that increased attention to student voice is important in schools? Yes, teachers are the experts but pupils as the end users (so to speak) often have an important perspective as to both the quality of their education and what can be changed to improve it.

Student voice is an important input to any decision making process, problems come when the process is not managed carefully and that the students are given the final decision.

After all, students at some schools inspect their teachers – Ofsted style – but then they are carefully trained by Ofsted themselves and operate with important safeguards in place.

In many respects student voice is a matter of culture. Many high performing schools pay close attention to the needs of their students, but if that’s not the culture in your school, if your students don’t undersand the responsibility that goes with the rights that can be a recipe for trouble.

For governing bodies student voice is crucial, and when executed well it can provide an alternative perspective to the senior leadership team on how a school is performing.

So if you’re a bit late to the party, here are some ways you can start to bring student voice into your governing body:

1) Have an annual student survey

I blogged about how to do this easily with Google Docs recently. You should have an annual survey with A core set of questions repeated each term/year so you can benchmark performance on key areas. This data is great for your SEF too, for those more ‘fluffy’ areas that are hard to pin down with hard data.

2) Have students attend your committee meetings

One of the governing bodies I’m a member of has a committee attended by the head boy and head girl. I’ve always been really impressed by the quality of their input and they certainly offer a unique perspective.

3) Set up a student focus group

This could be the school council if you have one, but often membership of the school council can be skewed towards a certain type of student. Having a focus group allows for a broader cross section. I’d always be careful making decisions based on focus group discussions, but it does allow you to get an idea of what the potential viewpoints might be.

What’s not on this list? Having students interview members of staff. Personally I feel from a HR point of view this may be highly suspect. Allowing them to interact with kids and see how they react is one thing, having them interviewed by them is another.

I’m keen to hear your views though – what work have you done with student voice in your school? What’s worked and what’s not?

Guest Post: Sean Whetstone on Governance

You Twitterers out there may already know Sean Whetstone (@schoolgoverning). A great supporter of this blog he writes a guest post today on the government’s latest report into school governance. Enjoy!

I am writing this guest blog two days after the government released its long awaited review on School Governance in the 21st century. It is perhaps unfortunate that the working group decided to release the publication on April fools day as it is no joke.

The review doesn’t contain any surprises and many of the anticipated recommendations for governance have been watered down.

The key recommendations are:

• The majority of governing bodies do a good job;

• Governing bodies need to be clear about their purpose and follow a defined set of principles for good governance of schools;

• There needs to be more clarity concerning the strategic management role of the governing body and the day to day management role of head teachers to ensure that neither party crosses over into each other’s role;

• The principle of stakeholder representation on governing bodies is essential but needs to be balanced against a requirement that all governing bodies have the necessary skills to carry out their tasks;

• Improvements to the training for governing body chairs, new governors and governing body clerks needs to be made to clarify the points above.

It is well worth a read and the full 33 page document can be found at

http://publications.teachernet.gov.uk/eOrderingDownload/DCSF-00351-2010.PDF

I am glad many of the recommendations complement what my own governing body has been trying to achieve.

When I became a School Governor just 18 short months ago we operated an old style committee structure based around six committees of Assets, Finance, Curriculum, Personnel, Communications and Eco Schools.

In my first two weeks as a governor, the full governing body attended a workshop training session for 21st century governance. The session was led by Steve Barker from VT FourS, a School Governance trainer/consultant for Surrey as well as a Chair of Governors for two schools & an Ofsted Inspector.

Following this informative training workshop, the governing body agreed to re-structure the committee work into just two formal committees.

The Resources committee deals with finance, health & safety and personnel while the Children & Learning committee deals with the curriculum, attainment and safeguarding.

Both of these new committees are very closely aligned to the SEF (Self Evaluation Form). The annual work programme for each committee sets out which strategic, informational and policy review items should be reviewed each term and what sections of the SEF they relate to. It also means we don’t get sucked into discussing “the colour of curtains” as Steve Barker calls it.

18 months later and we wouldn’t dream of returning to the old committee structure.

Another important part of 21st century School Governance highlighted in the review is training. I completely support this recommendation.

I would certainly recommend every School governor completes a blend of face to face, online and whole governing body training sessions.

In my first 18 months of being a School Governor I completed nine courses to help prepare me to give the appropriate skills to support, challenge and help lead the school.

In January this year our school received an Ofsted Inspection under the new framework and along with the whole school the Governing Body was judged to be Grade 1/Outstanding.

I hope our restructuring and focus on training led towards this judgement.

Regards

Sean Whetstone

Chair of Governors at a Surrey Infant School

Parent Governor Representative of County Council Schools & Learning Select Committee

@SchoolGoverning on twitter http://www.twitter.com/schoolgoverning