Education CommitteeWritten evidence submitted by National Association of Head Teachers
Introduction
1. The National Association of Head Teachers (NAHT) is delighted to be able to give evidence to the Select Committee on this important topic of school governance. As a member organisation representing approximately 28,500 serving school leaders across all phases of education, we are well placed to speak on such issues. Our members also are governors: head teachers are ex officio governors, while other members will be staff governors or part of the governing bodies of other schools. All have an interest in how the role of the governor and the governing body is changing over time.
Purpose, Roles and Responsibilities of School Governing Bodies
2. Whilst the appropriate role for governors is at a strategic not operational level, our members tell us that this is not always clearly understood. Often, it is interest in the operational that attracts members of the school community into school governance. However, developing an understanding of the strategic nature of governance amongst parents and other interested stakeholders is essential if the governing body is to operate effectively. Governors need to hold school leaders to account for the day-to-day work of the school, rather than either act as cheerleaders of the school or get involved in micro-management, thereby superseding the role of the head teacher.
3. The value of a good chair and clerk cannot be overstated. Sadly, not all schools have good chairs and clerks and we must be mindful of the potential risks presented by ineffective or ill-intentioned governors. The problems caused by rogue chairs of governors were highlighted by NAHT members at our 2012 annual conference, where a review of the role of chair was called for and, as more accountability is devolved to schools, disputes between heads and governors are a growing part of our casework. Members are keen to engage with the Select Committee to discuss further these issues.
Implications of Recent Policy Developments
4. The government’s desire to increase the autonomy of head teachers has led to some conflict with governing bodies. Decisions relating to the length of the school day, the curriculum, etc. still require governing body assent, for example. However, some governing bodies may not have the necessary skills and knowledge to assess fairly the recommendations of the head and therefore either reject outright any change to the status quo or force through inappropriate change.
5. The Academy/Free School movement has greatly increased the number of educational trusts operating in England. These trusts have responsibility for the strategic oversight of the Academy(ies) though some of these powers are delegated to the governing body. In the absence of one organisational model, the seemingly competing role of Trusts and governing bodies has given rise to an unacceptable level of confusion and, in some cases, insecurity.
6. Governors are being asked to undertake increasingly complex financial and educational decisions with the potential to permanently impact on the school’s provision in their local community. The training, preparation and support available for those governors has not kept pace and, indeed, in many instances, has decreased along with other local authority services. The reasons behind this are many but the negative effect is the same. Questions remain as to the sustainability of an entirely voluntary workforce with no mandatory training.
Recruiting and Developing Governors
7. Because of the increasingly complex demands placed on governors (as referred to above), schools frequently encounter difficulties in recruiting suitable governors with the necessary skills to support the school. It is true that some businesses already promote membership of governing bodies to their workforces and we would wish to see this replicated more widely. The importance of the role is such that it should be considered as a civic duty, similar to that of a magistrate or service in the Territorial Army, with equivalent rights to time off work.
8. The NAHT supports mandatory training for Chairs and also believes that all governors should have the right to effective training. This should be coupled with an expectation that they will undertake such training. Even where governors are well-equipped with the basic skills needed to fulfil their role, other less familiar areas, for example the quasi-employer role, demand particular skills and knowledge that need to be developed and cannot be assumed to be present within the skill set of every governing body.
Structure and Membership of Governing Bodies
9. Whilst it is important to see adequate representation of stakeholders across the governing body, it is essential that the skills necessary for challenge and support are also present. Skills to operate at a strategic level are at least as important as representation of stakeholders.
10. Although parents, the major stakeholders, need to play a significant part in the governance of the school, it is important to bear in mind that the parent body is constantly changing. As it changes, so does the level of involvement. This is normal and should be catered for in the membership arrangements. Any lessening of the level of engagement of parents with governing bodies in academies and free schools is a matter of concern to the NAHT. Consideration should be given to separating the functions of representation, via some form of council, and decision making, via an executive board. Such separation would facilitate retaining an election process for community representatives, whilst also allowing for appointments on the basis of required skills.
Effectiveness and Accountability of Governing Bodies
11. For governors to be able to hold school leaders to account, it is essential that they are able to question and probe properly, without disrupting the day-to-day running of the school. To achieve the right balance of challenge and support in order to be totally effective is difficult but represents a worthwhile aim.
12. The relevance of Ofsted’s judgement of governing body effectiveness is sometimes questionable. The overall leadership and management judgement must make clear the strengths and weaknesses of the governing body, the school leadership team and their interaction. Only in this way can schools attempt to remedy any issues raised. The blending of a single judgement for governance and operational leadership in the new framework was a backwards step in this regard.
13. As democratically elected post-holders, individual school governors cannot be removed from office, irrespective of their performance. This must be addressed if governors are to be fully accountable for their decisions, conduct and effectiveness.
Arrangements for Remuneration of Governors
14. The NAHT believes that consideration should be given to providing some level of remuneration to the Chair of governors, especially for those overseeing more than one school. This sits alongside the recommendation outlined above that being a governor is a civic role. The amount of remuneration need not be excessive but the essential work undertaken by the chair needs to be recognised in some way.
15. Similarly, the role of Clerk to the governors should be recompensed. Clerks need to be independent and well informed so that proper procedural support can be provided to the governing body. Rather than seeing this as a basic, purely administrative role, the Clerk’s role should be seen as more akin to that of a Company Secretary or Town Clerk. They need to have complete understanding of procedural matters for the governing body and also the legislation underpinning school governance, governing body responsibilities and such matters.
Governing Body Relationships with Partners
16. The number of different school structures and associated models of governance has led to a certain amount of distance being created between governing bodies and their natural allies and/or partners. It is often difficult for both sides of the relationship to understand what is needed from each other and where the boundaries lie. Clarity of roles and responsibilities would help prevent some of this.
Potential Changes to Current Models of Governance
17. There appears to be considerable concern over the size of governing bodies. However, the Association continues to maintain that, in general, size is less important than the skills present in the governing body. Although the Association would not press for major changes to models of governance in general, it is true that there does need to be a level of clarity over the structures for academies and free schools. Also, where schools collaborate informally, there can be some tension on occasions regarding where ultimate responsibility sits for joint operation between the schools concerned. It is not that there needs to be another governance model, rather, there need to be clarity across the piece.
Conclusion
18. We would welcome the opportunity to discuss these issues further with the Committee.
January 2013