Education CommitteeWritten evidence submitted by Alan Carter—Chair of Governors, Mora Primary School

Previously:

Both a Governor and Chair at Malorees Junior School

Chair of Brent Association of School Governors

A Governor and Governor representative over 26 years

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

The purpose and roles of school governing bodies varies widely with the type of school for the following reasons.

Governance of Academies is effectively an administrative forum of a legal dictatorship by the Academy Sponsor (even this varies as Academies have many variations in their constitutions as set out in funding agreements)

Governance of Foundation Schools, (With or Without a Foundation!) Trust Schools, Voluntary aided Schools, Grammar Schools, Voluntary Controlled Schools, Community Schools, and Free Schools all vary.

It is clear from this list alone that there is a serious need for the structure of State funded education to be simplified and clarified. Successive governments have added more variations and additions without any serious oversight of what they have been trying to achieve and/or how they should attempt to achieve it.

The purpose of Governance should be to ensure the best possible education for the children in the School. This is education in its broadest sense—not the narrow, mechanistic and measurable definition imposed by bureaucratic bean counters in both government and administration.

The responsibilities of Governance must include:

1.To provide an inspirational vision for the school.

2.To monitor the performance of the school and act to improve it and correct it as necessary.

3.Within the above to Hire monitor, encourage, support and if necessary fire the Headteacher.

4.Within all of the above to ensure that the children are safe, the provision is fair, the needs of all children are met, the curriculum provides a foundation for a just, inclusive, learning and civilised society.

5.To defend the school against ill considered government initiatives and unjust criticism.

6.To be accountable for the school.

the implications of recent policy developments for governing bodies and their roles

Recent policy developments have created governance models that are less inclusive and less accountable. The majority of governors in the Academy and Free School models are self appointing, self perpetuating, unbalanced, undemocratic and un-representative. These are all undesirable for obvious reasons.

recruiting and developing governors, including the quality of current training provision, and any challenges facing recruitment

Recruiting governors can be problematic—particularly when seeking to achieve a balanced and representative governing body. This could easily be improved if employers were required to give some paid time off for relevant duties (clearly needs to be capped) additional un-paid time off as necessary etc.

Developing governors requires good quality courses to be available (Some LEA’s do this well and at low cost, private providers are more variable and more expensive)

Developing governors would be assisted by the provisions for time off ( noted above) and possibly a small single payment (reward—not remuneration) for attending a pre set number of training courses.

Recruiting governors can be improved by the school making the governing body accessible, directly seeking and encouraging candidates from under-represented groups and the support and encouragement noted above.

Sustaining governing bodies could be made easier if the removal of any governor who is disruptive to the process of governance was simplified. (A simple 75% supported vote of no confidence?)

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

Governing bodies must contain a balance of interests with no group over represented.

Representatives from staff (elected), parents (elected), the local community, elected local politicians and co-opted members with safeguards to maintain the balance. Their should be no place for governance dominated by financial power or narrow self interest—including religions in state funded schools.

Skills are important—but governors are not executive and as such can obtain skilled assistance from staff and—if necessary—external sources. (An experienced clerk to governors is common) A balanced governing body with reasonable educational background can cope quite well.

the effectiveness and accountability of governing bodies

Clearly effectiveness will always be variable as governors change. (OR SHOULD CHANGE)

This is no different to any organisation and certainly should not be a reason for imposing non-representative un-democratic governance on schools. All schools should be externally monitored and this includes the governors. Poor governing bodies should be supported—dysfunctional members replaced if necessary, but not arbitrarily replaced by un-representative appointees.

Governors are individually and collectively accountable under criminal law and this should cover the most flagrant abuses. As governors are (or should be) un paid volunteers they should not be liable to penalties for poor performance. The school executive should be!

Clearly the governance model is not perfect—but like democracy—it is better than the alternatives.

whether new arrangements are required for the remuneration of governors

NO. Remuneration for non-executive governors is a bad idea.

Small rewards for attending training and possibly for outstanding achievements may work in a positive way—but they should not be sufficient to act as an incentive to stand as a governor.

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

All Governing bodies should have close links with the LEA and work to support the overall provision of educational facilities on a regional basis. Shared facilities, relevant support in a local context and economies of scale for procurement etc are essential for efficient provision of education. The policy of destroying LEA services—supported by examples of poor LEA’s—is generally ill considered. The good LEA’s worked—the bad ones needed sorting out. The system did not need centralising—where it will become remote and ineffective.

Governing bodies hire, monitor and fire school leaders. (A fairly close relationship?)

Governors should generally leave relationships with the unions to the School executive but—if the appropriate skills and knowledge are available can on occasions be supportive in this relationship. The governors role in disciplinary procedures make contact with unions almost inevitable.

All Schools (and by inference governing bodies) should seek to be a vibrant part of the communities they serve.

Academy governors are generally the chattel of the sponsor—that relationship is in-effective and un-acceptable.

whether changes should be made to current models of governance

Yes. The unaccountable and uh-democratic models should be removed and made representative and accountable. The community school model generally works.

January 2013