Examination of Witnesses (Questions 103-119)
COUNCILLOR LES
LAWRENCE, LORRAINE
COOPER, DECLAN
MCCAULEY
AND LYNDA
JONES
1 APRIL 2009
Chairman: Can I welcome our three new
witnesses who have been good enough to brave the rigours of G20
London to be with us. They are Lorraine Cooper, Lynda Jones and
Declan McCauley. Thank you very much for helping us with this
inquiry. I think that you got a feel for the range of questions
that we ask from the session with Councillor Lawrence. We are
very keen to understand more about School Improvement Partnerships
and Partners. That is what we will spend the next hour asking
about. We are always happy for our witnesses to say a couple of
things to open up the session, if they want to, or they can choose
to go straight into questions. We have your CVs here, so we know
where you are coming from. However, if there is anything that
you want to add before we start on questions, please do so.
Lorraine Cooper: No.
Lynda Jones: No.
Declan McCauley: No.
Q103 Chairman: You are terribly
well-behaved and good students. I will start the questions. You
have been listening to the evidence and the three of you have
a great deal of experience in terms of accountability and inspection.
What do you think are the strengths and weaknesses of the system
that we have at the moment? What would you say that you would
defend, if not quite to the death but none the less strongly,
about the accountability system we have at the moment? Lorraine?
Lorraine Cooper: I think that
the model of accountability that we have at the moment is broad.
It covers a range of areas. By and large, I think that it gives
very useful information across the board about what is going on
in terms of schools and pupils' learning. I think that the breadth
that this model offers is one of its strengths, in that we have
databased information at great depth now. That is very helpful.
We have Ofsted inspections coming in and then we have what SIPs
do, in terms of the interface with schools. All of that provides
information that is extremely useful. Sometimes, I think that
the reliability of the model is its weakness. That is where we
have to be very careful sometimes, because however good the system
is it is only as good as the reliability it can produce. On occasions
with schools we have problems, as we had this year over the testing
systems and the problems that they created for schools; we are
only just getting those problems reported now. Sometimes we have
inconsistencies in the way that Ofsted inspections may be carried
out. Admittedly, those inconsistencies occur much less frequently
now, in my experience.
Q104 Chairman: It is the quality
of the inspectors?
Lorraine Cooper: Occasionally
you can have a situation where that proves to be problematic.
However, I think there have been growing strengths in the relationship
between the people who work at the interface with schools at local
authority level and Ofsted inspections. There is a much better
dialogue, in terms of sharing information, which is helpful from
the point of view of schools. I think that there are a number
of strengths. The breadth of the model is one. However, we need
to be sure about the reliability right the way through the system.
Q105 Chairman: Lynda, what
is your view about the strengths and weaknesses of the model of
accountability? Is there anything that you really worry about,
or anything that concerns you, about the overall strengths of
the accountability system at the moment?
Lynda Jones: I just want to add
something to my colleague's point, which is about a strength in
the accountability systems that have been developed over the last
few years. The increase in data, which gives us a huge variety
of ways of looking at performance, together with schools themselves
becoming more accountable through the self-evaluation form and
Ofsted, has meant that there has been a developing partnership
between local authorities, SIPs and schools and governors. In
turn, that has meant that the partnership has improved. I would
like to add that as a strength of the system.
Q106 Chairman: Some people
are very critical of self-assessment. They see it as diluting
or weakening the inspection, by putting so much onus on self-assessment.
I see that Lorraine is shaking her head at that point. Lynda,
what do you think?
Lynda Jones: I think that it is
about the validity and reliability of the judgments that are being
made, really, and the evidence that is used to support those judgments,
whether they are being made by the school judging its own performance
or by those coming and making judgments themselves. That is the
key point, I think.
Q107 Chairman: The original
idea I had of SIPs were that they would all have to be heads.
You were a deputy head. Do you think that SIPs should be heads?
I know that you had another role as well.
Lynda Jones: I probably still
have a personal interest because I have not been a head teacher,
although I have gone through the NPQHNational Professional
Qualification for Headshipprocess, and I have been a deputy
head for seven years. I believe that my experience as a school
improvement adviser in two authorities and my experience in schools
over 31 years brings a different perspective, and I am able to
learn from head teacher colleagues who are part of the SIP process.
Chairman: Declan.
Declan McCauley: Certainly, looking
from a school's perspectivewe talked about self-evaluationschools
are much better placed now to know what is going on in school
and how it impacts on school improvement. A lot of that has come
about through the accountability processes which are in place
with the local authorities, and that then goes on to inform Ofsted
inspections. Schools are well placed in that respect. Also, regarding
the amount of school improvement that we have seen, looking at
pure statisticsthinking of where I am basedmy school
is a completely different school within the past 13 years. Children
who are there make much more progress now than they did many years
ago. That is down to the involvement of the local authority and
the accountability that is placed on schools.
Chairman: Thank you. Now that we have
warmed you up, I will hand you over to Annette.
Q108 Annette Brooke: I specifically
wanted to ask about School Improvement Partners. They seem to
have rather mixed reviews: some evaluations show how positive
they are, but there is a lot of scepticism around, I would suggest,
about them. My first question is: how well trained do you feel
that you are for this job? Were you prepared for the task ahead
with the training that was given? I do not mind who starts first.
Chairman: Lorraine?
Lorraine Cooper: I think that
Chairman: Don't let these two heads bully
you, Lynda. We will stand up for you.
Lorraine Cooper: I think it varies
enormously, because people come to the role from very different
perspectives. You have a range of people coming with a lot of
different background experience. How far the training that they
were provided with met their need might depend on their starting
point. One of the problems wasit became slicker over timethat
it was a fairly time-constrained process, with a set number of
activities that had to happen. For some people, who had been involved
in a school improvement context over a long period of time, they
found that it did not stretch their thinking very much. For other
people, who may not have had that background, it may have done
a lot more. I think it depended on where people came from, because
there is a massive breadth in the group of people who are now
performing as SIPs.
Q109 Annette Brooke: So is
the training standard?
Lorraine Cooper: It is standard.
First, there is a testing process to make sure that you can do
the basic data analysis type activities. Then there is a face-to-face
training, which is a two-day residential, and that involves a
range of different activities, including conversations that are
observed, and feedback is given on the way that you might deal
with addressing challenging situations. By its very nature, an
awful lot of the learning happens on the job, and at that interface
with other people doing the same job over a longer of time. Initial
training starts you off, but whether it could ever turn you out
as a fully fledged, all-singing and all-dancing SIP, I am not
sureit would depend where you started from.
Chairman: Lynda, do you agree with all
that?
Lynda Jones: It is worth adding
that there is a locally provided continuing professional development
programme too, which updates as far as the national agenda is
concerned, but also gives the particular local flavour. That is
carried out in conjunction with school improvement professionals,
so there is the development of a team, if you likeyou have
an evolving team who have a series of skills, knowledge and understanding.
It becomes, therefore, increasingly bespoke, in relation not only
to people's needs but to local needs and the changing national
perspective. On my needs as a school improvement professional,
I think I was pretty clued up by many of the imperatives that
were to be facilitated through the SIP programme, but I wasn't
particularly au fait with working with head teachers in this context.
For example, this afternoon I was due to go on an induction visit,
where I would shadow a head teacher colleague who was working
in that role, but I can't do it because I'm here. That is just
to give you some idea of how we manage the programme locally,
so that we can identify people's needs and plan to meet them through
the activities that we plan.
Declan McCauley: I felt that the
training was very rigorous and stressful for many people. The
pressure was on to achieve; they didn't want to go to the training
and not get through it. So there was an awful lot of rigour attached
to it, and the use of the data and the focus on challenging schools
certainly came through. I came to it from a slightly different
starting point, having been a head teacher for quite a few years
and having worked for my local authority, which asked me to take
on a couple of schools in a different role before SIPs came in.
But the training heightened my awareness of exactly how to work
with refined data, and now it is a case of translating that into
working within the local authority in Warwickshire. I am fortunate,
because I work in another authority, so I have its perspective.
My school is in Staffordshire and I work as a SIP in Birmingham,
so it gives me a breadth. It is interesting to see how it all
works.
Q110Annette Brooke: That is interesting.
Lynda and Lorraine, do you just work as a SIP within one authority?
Lorraine Cooper: Yes.
Q111 Annette Brooke: Next
question. I would really like to know from each of you, are you
a critical friend or somebody who tells tales to the local authorities?
Chairman: She means a local authority
snitch. Which is it? I shall start with you, Lynda. Which are
you? Or are you neither?
Lynda Jones: I feel somewhat ambivalent,
because I am employed by the LA for my substantive post and I
am a critical friend when I am being a SIP. It informs my work
as a school improvement professional in Warwickshire, because
it enables me to get inside a school and to appreciate how it
might be for them when you talk about bringing in changes. But
I am a critical friend when I am being a SIP.
Annette Brooke: Any other comments?
Declan McCauley: We are both.
We are that conduit between the local authority and the school.
You have to be that critical friend, because the information flows
through youboth endsand that is really important.
Lorraine Cooper: The critical
friend element is about the trust that you build up with the school
in which you work in whatever rolewhether as a local authority
person or not. You're a critical friend because of the trusting
relationship that you build up, which allows you to ask the questions
that will challenge and move things forward. My experience at
the interface is that I do not often have to worry about that.
Schools have never seemed to object to being asked the critical
questions, provided they are delivered professionally and appropriately.
I have never found that to be a conflictany more than there
seems, generally, to be too much of a conflict about them not
wanting the local authority to know certain things. There is generally
a good and trusting working relationship between the schools and
the local authority I work in, so schools generally are very happy
for there to be a triangulated discussion, and they do not seem
alarmed by it. They have plenty of opportunity to feed back to
us through the SIPs appraisal processes that we use, and that
seems to be the message: it is not a problem to them.
Chairman: Annette, I'll come back to
you. I want to bring Andy in.
Q112 Mr Slaughter: My limited
experience of SIPs suggests that, in some ways, the schools that
need them most are less good at using them. That may be a fairly
obvious thing to say, because a school that is already performing
Chairman: I was hoping you would shout
a bit. The acoustics in here are horrible, Andy.
Mr Slaughter: I'll try.
Chairman: Or lean forward into your mic.
Mr Slaughter: If a school is doing well,
it is probably less defensive and is probably quite interested
in somebody coming in and filling in the gaps, and things like
that, and it is probably better organised. Is your experience
that, actually, you may be topping up already good schools, rather
than addressing problems in schools that have more to do?
Lorraine Cooper: I think you are
absolutely right to say that there is a massive differentiation
between what schools need and how you might work with them. However,
one of the major benefits of the SIP programmethis has
been reported back to me by schoolshas been that good schools
previously felt that they lacked the opportunity to have a robust
debate with other professionals in that sort of context, on a
one-to-one basis, about their school. They may have had such a
debate about broad educational issues, but about their school
they missed it. So I believe that the SIP programme can be equally
as effective in moving good schools to outstanding and outstanding
schools to be really creative in their thinking and allowing them
to see how they might help in supporting others. I agree with
your comment that, clearly, if schools are struggling, they will
often struggle in respect of how to use the support as well. You
need a different approach with those sorts of schools.
Q113 Mr Slaughter: With struggling
or coasting schools, how much is there a whistleblowing role for
SIPs? Councillor Lawrence was saying, quite rightly, that if a
school is going into special measures that is probably the fault
of the local authority for not spotting it, but not always, because
sometimes these things can happen quite quickly, after an ill-advised
head appointment or if a governing body is suddenly thrown into
disarray. Do you think there is a whistleblowing or supporting
role for SIPs in that process?
Lorraine Cooper: Yes, I suppose
I struggle slightly with the notion of whistleblowing. Maybe that
is where I would have a problem. I see it as a professional relationship,
part of which is professional honesty. If there is a problem,
it needs to be brought to the attention of whoever can do something
about it.
Q114 Chairman: Did you say
you saw yourself as a whistleblower or not as one?
Lorraine Cooper: No, I have a
problem with the term "whistleblower", because it is
about a professional relationship.
Q115 Chairman: I was quite
stunned, though, by Councillor Lawrence's saying that if we are
going to sharpen up our act in the local authority world, the
driverI think this is what you said, Councillor Lawrenceis
how much sharper we have to be in the bit of children's services
that deals with child protection. You would have to be a whistleblower
if your job was in that area, because a child might die or be
in terrible misery. In a sense the whistleblower bit should not
be underestimated, should it?
Lorraine Cooper: If you mean by
"whistleblower", bringing to the attention of those
people who have a responsibility and an opportunity to do something
about putting something wrong right, that is fine. I see that
as part of that professional triangulation; that is what those
roles are about between the local authority, the school, the governing
body and the external bodies of accountability, like Ofsted. Together,
we have that role. It is really important that that happens.
Q116 Mr Slaughter: SIPs seem
to work well where they are accepted and where there is a creative
structure for them to go into, but I am talking about another
example. What I meant by the whistleblower role would apply in
the case of a school that is quickly getting into trouble and
deep water and where the local authority may not have picked that
up. If the SIP is on the ground and sees that, and the school
is not responding, do you not think it is important that the SIP
blows the whistle, for want of a better term?
Lorraine Cooper: Essential. Yes,
it is essential that they do.
Chairman: Declan, what do you think?
Declan McCauley: I agree, definitely.
If you are in a school, working as a SIP, the last thing you want
to be doing is saying, "Okay, this is absolutely fine"
and not feeding back that there are major issues. If you see something,
it has to be fed back, because at the end of the day, the SIP
is the person responsible. They are the conduit. A single conversation
takes place through the SIP, who passes information both ways.
If you see something that is wrong, you have to tell someone about
it.
Q117 Mr Slaughter: The other
scenario that we have examples of is where it is pretty clear
to people involved with a school that something is going on over
a period of time that the local authority ought to know about.
It might be that the school does not have a permanent head or
that it is struggling just above going into special measures.
For whatever reason, the people who are responsible are not reacting.
What does a SIP do in those circumstances?
Lynda Jones: You must go back
to the honesty and transparency underpinning all this. You would
not say one thing to a head teacher and another to the LA. The
reports that the SIPs write make it very clear what the judgments
are. We need to remember that they have only a five-day allocation
with that school. If schools have an immediate concern, the SIP
might not be the person who is best placed to pick that up. If
a school is vulnerable, the SIP will not be the only LA representative
likely to visit the school. LA personnel will visit the school
on a more regular and frequent basis. The SIP's judgment would
not be a sole judgement in that case.
Q118 Mr Slaughter: Do you
see SIPs as a permanent part of the framework for school monitoring
and improvement or are they a bolt-on extra that has some advantages
for some schools?
Lynda Jones: We have put the initiative
in place in Warwickshire with a view to it being an enduring mechanism.
The strength of the work of SIPs relies on the relationships that
are developed. Anything that causes discontinuity obviously breaks
that. Schools say to us, "We do not want changes in SIPs.
We see this as an enduring relationship." That is the spirit
in which we have gone into it. We have talked about National Challenge
schools. It might be worth mentioning that one aspect of those
schools is that the National Challenge adviser has taken over
this role with up to 20 days allocated to those schools. That
led to some dysfunction because the team had to be rearranged
so that the best people were in the best places to support those
schools. That is another element of the SIP programme. SIPs are
matched to schools and are not arbitrarily told, "You can
go there and you can go there." Some SIPs are better at supporting
schools in respect of particular needs. In summary, we do see
it as enduring. The quality of the relationships is built up over
time. Heads have said to us, "Don't change these about. You
have just got to understand our context, which we need you to
do. We don't want it to change." There has been some change
brought about by National Challenge, and the SIP within the National
Challenge adviser role has a key part to play in bringing about
improvement in National Challenge schools.
Chairman: May I call in Derek and then
come back to Andy and Annette?
Q119 Derek Twigg: First, it
is great that people like you take the time to do the work you
are doing. We have talked about process and about some individual
examples. The big question is what are the three key pieces of
evidence that justify SIPs?
Chairman: Declan, it is your turn to
lead.
Declan McCauley: That's lovelygive
me the difficult question. In all honesty, it is the working relationship
that a SIP brings to a school. They bring a level of challenge
and accountability. You have a face-to-face discussion with the
SIP sitting there with the data and you have to account for exactly
how the school is doing and what you are going to do about it.
Also, SIPs bring a level of experience to the process, which does
not necessarily come from within the local authority, but might
come from a number of schools.
|