Education CommitteeWritten evidence submitted by Clare Collins, Chair of the National Governors’ Association 2008–2011

Summary

As a governor with over twenty years’ experience in five different schools, two of which were in very challenging circumstances, as well as being chair of the National Governors’ Association from 2008 to 2011, I am of the view:

That the model of governance does not need fundamental change.

That staff, and in particular the headteacher, being governors, constitutes a conflict of interest.

That in recognition of the complexity of their role, there should be some small remuneration for governing body chairs.

That there needs to be a change in culture. Governance and accountability should be recognised by all parties as important and valuable, and that by being transparent about what schools achieve amounts to a protection rather than a threat.

1. The purpose, roles and responsibilities of school governing bodies, within the wider context of school governance and leadership

1.1 Largely the roles and responsibilities of governing bodies (GBs) have, for too long, been sorely neglected. In some ways this is understandable as schools have multiple accountabilities (to the GB, the middle tier—be it the local authority (LA) or other bodies such as diocesan boards, Ofsted, the Department for Education). However, legally it is the GB which is the accountable body and as such it should be afforded the concomitant recognition and respect.

1.2 Increasing autonomy and the risks associated with this, and the recognition by the Chief Inspector, Sir Michael Wilshaw, of the importance of effective governance and accountability in assuring school standards, has seen a step change in how school governance is perceived. Ofsted’s commitment to looking closely at the effectiveness of governance during inspections, and being prepared to make recommendations for addressing shortcomings is very welcome, as is the extension of the National College’s remit to include a training programme for GB chairs. However, this training may have only limited impact if headteachers do not acknowledge the role. The revised National Professional Qualification for Headship should play a part in ensuring that new heads are better equipped to work positively with the GB. However this does not address how incumbent heads make the cultural shift towards more transparent and meaningful accountability.

2. The implications of recent policy developments for governing bodies and their roles

2.1 The recent spotlight on governance, as outlined in 1.2 above, presents an opportunity to look at how governance can be improved.

2.2 For far too long GBs have been sidelined and seen as rather a distraction by school leaders and local authorities, and in general neither have fully accepted their role as the accountable body. The current focus on governance has opened the debate on what the roles and responsibilities of GBs are, how to get the right people to be governors, the importance of a good chair and a professional clerk, the need for relationships based on trust, the requirement to know the school through data and other sources of information, being challenging as well as being supportive, and being able to have courageous conversations in the best interests of the children. This is highlighting how much time governing bodies spend focusing on detailed policy development and compliance issues, rather than on achievement and progress and underpinning financial probity.

2.3 In focusing on achievement, progress and the state of the finances, GBs are heavily reliant on data and other information provided by the school. Too often this is presented in a format not suitable for the GB, and is not well evidenced. This needs to change. RAISEonline is too long and too detailed for the GB. There needs to be a data summary which runs to no more than four pages. Heads need to work with their GBs to find a way of presenting data including financial information which enables governors to understand and highlight the key issues in a way that does not hamper or confuse. Too often governors accept that which is given which can result in GBs being misled by headlines and an incomplete understanding of the real situation let alone what is being done to address it.

3. Recruiting and developing governors, including the quality of current training provision, and any challenges facing recruitment

3.1 The recruitment of good skilled governors remains problematic in many areas, partly because, too often, the role is not clearly defined and this discourages those with useful skills from joining a GB. I have found that issuing a role description so that volunteers know exactly what the roles and responsibilities are (in other words it’s not about having cups of tea with the head or helping with the school fair) has yielded governors with more relevant governance skills.

3.2 Training is not mandatory, and the quality and accessibility of training is very variable. Moreover there is too often not a culture where good quality training is sourced and made easy to complete. This is changing as LA funds decline, and GBs are looking beyond the usual routes to commission relevant, quality sessions, be it face to face or on line.

3.3 There is a lack of recognition for the role of the school governor. Too often governors are seen as a source of additional help, or that they can offer free expertise and pro bono contributions to the work of the school. Meetings are held at the school’s convenience and with little recognition that many governors will have done a day’s work too, and meetings are too long and repetitive. Moreover, expenses are either not paid or are frowned upon, and general appreciation and thanks is in short supply.

3.4 Finally, the head’s responsibility in ensuring good governance has not been recognised until recently. Chief executives of third sector organisations are generally very concerned that there is good governance and good trustees who understand their role. They seek to fill skills gaps and look for those with expertise who can add credibility and kudos to their organisations. Heads need to follow this example.

4. The structure and membership of governing bodies, including the balance between representation and skills

4.1 I support the notion of governance being as close to schools as possible, thus ensuring that those who have to deliver on the decisions being made are not a long way from the decision makers. I also believe that community accountability through stakeholder democracy is a laudable concept and can work well.

4.2 The new constitution arrangements give enough flexibility to ensure that there is healthy balance between representation and skills.

4.3 However, I am uncomfortable with the headteacher being a governor. The head is performance managed by the GB, of which s/he is a member. This is a conflict of interest. There is an argument that staff governors also have a conflict of interest; and in any case that they cannot be effective governors, for in challenging the head, they would in effect be challenging their boss.

5. The effectiveness and accountability of governing bodies

5.1 There is a wide range of effectiveness in GBs, and a general acceptance that governance needs to get better. Where there is good governance this needs to be championed. At present there is an assumption that good or better schools have in place good governance practices. I do not subscribe to this. In my experience it is simply that the effectiveness of the GB does not need to be examined as the school is doing well anyway. Meanwhile there are many many frustrated governors who know that their schools need to be better, but who are not being supported by the LA or other middle tier bodies to address the often tricky HR issues that inevitably arise.

6. Whether new arrangements are required for the remuneration of governors

6.1 I welcomed Chris James’s research1 which confirmed my experience that the role of the chair is particularly sensitive, time consuming and often tricky, especially if there is the recruitment of a new head to be undertaken, Ofsted or performance issues, or academisation.

6.2 As such I am of the view that GB chairs should be rewarded with a small honorarium in the region of £2,000 a year, paid from the school budget.

7. The relationships between governing bodies and other partners, including local authorities, Academy sponsors and trusts, school leaders, and unions

7.1 Governors rely heavily on middle tier support, most especially from the LA who should provide access to training, information and advice (some of it of variable quality and accessibility). Governors also rely on the LA to confirm judgements about their school’s effectiveness, and I am of the view that in this respect there have been many lost opportunities. Too often LAs are reluctant to see it how it is, let alone to tell it how it is … and then to intervene if the GB is not ensuring that issues are addressed. With more academies and the changing role of the LA, more GBs are turning to alternative sources of support, for example the National Governors’ Association, and other independent and/or private providers.

7.2 It would appear that one of the reasons that academy sponsors can address school standards more effectively than LAs is because they recognise the importance of governance and ensure that it works well. Also they are more realistic about the demands on schools to be accountable, and make it easy from them with model policies, pro forma reports, clear and transparent expectations of achievement and progress, and the will to address issues rapidly and appropriately.

7.3 Relationships with school leaders is covered in 1.2, 2.1 and 3.4, as well as the issue of conflict of interest in 4.3.

7.4 GB’s have little direct contact or relationship with unions and generally rely on their LA for guidance in such matters. The NGA has long worked closely and productively with the headteacher professional associations, NAHT and ASCL. Publicly agreeing the expectations that school leaders and GBs expect of each other in What governing bodies should expect from school leaders and what school leaders should expect from governing bodies2 was an important step forward for all parties.

8. Whether changes should be made to current models of governance

8.1 In general, apart from reconsidering the role of staff governors and some remuneration for the chair, I do not think that the model of governance needs changing.

8.2 What undoubtedly needs to change is the attitude towards the GB. It needs to be properly recognised as the accountable body, with status, training and support, and public recognition for the role.

8.3 This will afford school governance the seriousness and respect that is experienced by accountable bodies in other settings.

January 2013