Education CommitteeWritten evidence submitted by Mark Dawe, Chief Executive of OCR Examinations
Executive Summary
The views outlined below are informed by a number of years intimately connected to a variety of educational establishments, these include:
Governor at a LA Primary School (and previously governor at a primary in special measures)
Governor at a recently converted Academy secondary school
Previously governor of an Outstanding FE college
Principal of a College working closely with my Governors
Previously a member or have chaired many not for profit/public sector boards.
This paper will cover a number of key factors which I believe the committee ought to look at. These key issues include:
The relationship between Head and Chair.
Governors and Heads role.
Governing Body Structure.
Papers.
Governors’ expertise and the right information.
Parent Governors.
When the going gets tough.
How do we get enough good governors?
Structures.
The paper also contains a set of recommendations thereafter.
Key Factors
The relationship between Head and Chair
1. In my experience for the success of any school this is the most important relationship. A well led and well governed organisation normally leads to a high performing organisation—everything else flows from this. If this relationship is dysfunctional, too much time is wasted, in particular by the Head, resulting in a negative effect on the school rather than the relationship enhancing the organisation.
Governors and Heads role
2. Dr John Carver’s model of policy governance establishes a set of firm principles that help define the ideal relationship between boards of directors thereby helping them fulfil their obligation of accountability for the organizations they govern. In my experience this model works equally well in terms of the governance of schools and colleges. In simple terms the governors delegate as much as possible to the Head (responsibility with accountability), set the strategy and identify the key measures that indicate the school/college is operating successfully. If those measures are being met, then there needn’t be any more interference. The Governors should focus on what they believe are the critical success factors and measures and let the Head deal with everything else, then if the measures aren’t being met, the governors have a right to know why and what is to be done about it. This way the Head is left to lead and manage and the Governors can focus their time on the key issues (not how many paperclips have been ordered in the year). Governors should be challenging but at the same time supportive of the Head. For difficult decisions which often relate to staff, the Head needs to know that all the Governors are 100% behind him or her, even if there are challenges from the staff, unions, LA or parents. Without this support it is nearly impossible for Heads to make difficult decisions and implement them for the good of the school.
3. I have witnessed many examples where school governance has been consumed by multiple committees, lack of strategy, as well as discussions on matters that are not relevant to governors or even the school and the vital aspects are overlooked.
Governing Body Structure
4. Through Carver (which we operated when I was Principal) we removed all sub-committees and the full governing body met on a monthly basis. Sub-committees create cliques or dispersed knowledge with no-one having the full picture, generally lead to governors interfering in the management of the school because they get into too much detail justifying the existence of the committee, and often lead to the same papers and discussion being had at the sub-committee and full Governors’ meeting. Very often some governors will have a very clear view of the school’s finances, others the curriculum and others HR with no-one seeing the complete picture. Large Governing Bodies can prevent the development of a coherent strategy, not be nimble in responding to the needs of the school, and can talk for many hours. My experience is that through Policy Governance and a good chair, meetings need not last longer than two hours and that was for a complex £35 million FE college.
Papers
5. I have witnessed many governors meetings and indeed other boards where the papers are unclear, lack consistency in presentation, certainly don’t make clear what the decision if any should be, and are often tabled at the meeting.
6. Papers should be presented in a consistent form and headed with a clear indication as to what the paper is about, why it is being presented, by who (although my belief is the paper should always come from the Head) and whether it is for information, discussion or decision. If it is a decision then details of the decision that needs to be made should be clear at the start of the paper. Papers need not be longer than two/three pages with appendices where necessary. It should be assumed that all papers have been read to avoid time wasted repeating/summarising what is in the paper during the meeting. If the paper is for information it should not be discussed. That way time is focussed on the key matters for governors. Papers should certainly not be tabled unless there is an emergency, and should be circulated at least a week in advance. Such an approach requires good discipline from those writing the paper, the governors and the Chair.
Governors’ expertise and the right information
7. From my experience one of the most vital factors is how a governor can challenge a Head if they don’t have an understanding of what the key elements of running a school are. This is made even harder when policy and Ofsted requirements change on a regular basis. A good Head will ensure that Governors are given a clear and simple explanation of what is important and what the governors should be looking at/concerned about. A weaker head, or an overly strong head, may use the lack of governor knowledge to avoid answering the difficult questions or admitting to problems or using their experience and expertise to make the governors feel confused and inadequate and thus afraid to challenge. In many cases the success of the Governors is determined by the Head’s approach. So the challenge for every school is how to find governors who already have the required expertise between them, and ensuring that the Governors are kept up to date. From experience there does need to be a good mix of governors as well—key challenges in the recruitment of governors normally appear to be around those governors who understand education and those who have a good financial understanding. It has also been my experience that sometimes governors fail to understand that they are a governor primarily to support the school. Some community governors will often look for benefits to the wider community rather than the school and this can cause tensions. I am not sure how to describe this in any other way but it is a sad truth that in general those with the most time available, or willing to give the most time, often have the least expertise to contribute. Only a minority have the magic combination and normally the end up as Chair!
8. Governors expertise is not helped by the world of education speak and acronyms. And the DfE is still the worst culprit. What is more the guidance for governors is long and confusing—see the latest DfE guide on Law for Governors which is over 200 pages long! Either the system is wrong if it needs that much explanation or we need a new guide author who is writing for the intended audience not the DfE.
Parent Governors
9. Governors who are parents are vital (student governors in a College environment)—they know what is really happening in the school and have a huge stake in the success of the school. I would suggest that a parent governor as a chair is often the best solution as well and will carry the confidence of the broader parent community.
When the going gets tough
10. When issues arise it is vital, in my experience, that Governors act decisively. To do this they need to understand their rights and responsibilities. Generally this requires a very good chair and a good Clerk. From recent experiences where a school has been required to improve, the introduction of the LA has caused yet further confusion. While the Governors have a long term responsibility for the school it would appear the LA have the right to “take over” and some have described it as bullying the governors. While extra support is always welcome, this can disenfranchise the governors and certainly not lead to a sustainable solution for the school when the LA officers pack their bags and move to another school. Law and rules about who is responsible for what are unclear at best cause great confusion and frustration. At a recent meeting the LA made clear that something was the governors’ choice, however if the choice was the wrong one in the LA’s mind, they would take over themselves!
How do we get enough good governors?
11. I certainly don’t think payment is important or needed and would probably attract the wrong type of person. Often it is time that is the rarest commodity. Encouraging large employers (and the smaller ones) to support staff to become governors (which many do) would probably have a far greater impact—if there were some incentive for employers (eg reduced Employer NIC) that would have an even greater impact and would probably transform the face of governance (not just in schools) in this country.
Structures
12. Even with this I am not sure we will get enough top class governors for all our schools. Therefore I believe that a federated model would serve schools the best. They may be many versions of this. Clearly there are large academy chains developing. But one model that feels like it would operate well is a local federation—maybe between a secondary school and its feeder primary schools, or a group of local secondary schools in an area. While a local advisory board can maintain the interests of the local institutions, it allows for a more expert group of governors to run the federation as a whole, along with the benefit of certain federated services.
Key Recommendations
13. Clear, concise and substantially reduced guidance from DfE, based on best practise.
14. Online sources available for Governors including examples of best practise in structure and ways of operating efficiently and effectively.
15. Clearly defined role for LAs and a thorough concise outline of the mechanics of interaction.
16. Employer incentives to encourage parents and others with the relevant expertise to become governors. These don’t have to be financial and could consist of some form of badge or prop (like a kite mark) that the company could use to promote itself. Similar ideas have been discussed for getting employees released to serve in the Territorial Army.
Dr John Carver is a leading thinker on distinctive concepts and systems applicable to the governing body of any enterprise. The model enables the board to focus on the larger issues, to delegate with clarity, to control management’s job without meddling, to rigorously evaluate the accomplishment of the organization; to truly lead its organization. Carver has written a number of books:
Corporate Boards That Create Value: Governing Company Performance from the Boardroom. Co-authored with Caroline Oliver. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2002. (Published in Portuguese as Conselhos de Administração que Geram Valor: Dirigindo o Desempenho da Empresa a Partir do Conselho by Editora Cultrix, São Paulo).
John Carver on Board Leadership: Selected Writings From the Creator of the World’s Most Provocative and Systematic Governance Model. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2002.
Reinventing Your Board: A Step-By-Step Guide to Implementing Policy Governance. Co-authored with Miriam Carver. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997; 2nd edition, 2006.
A New Vision for Board Leadership: Governing the Community College. Co-authored with Miriam Carver. Washington: Association of Community College Trustees, 1994.
Boards That Make a Difference: A New Design for Leadership in Nonprofit and Public Organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1990; 3rd edition, 2006.
Some Quotes from Dr John Carver
“Trustees are often little more than high-powered well-intentioned people engaged in low-level activities”;
“The well intentioned in full pursuit of the irrelevant”;
“Governance is one step down from ownership rather than one step up from management”;
“Too many boards overlook rather than oversee”
“Trust but verify”
“If the Board claim to know everything going on within the organisation, then there isn’t enough going on”.
And perhaps the most important:
“If you (the board) haven’t said how it should be, you can’t ask how it is”.