Education CommitteeWritten evidence submitted by David Joyce, Chair of Governors, Winterbourne Earls CE (VC) Primary School

Introduction

1. Governors are enthusiastic amateurs. They are drawn from a wide range of professional backgrounds who volunteer their skills, experience and particular interests for the good of the school that they serve. The pool of expertise they provide does not necessarily stem from a deep knowledge of the education system, but the teaming together of the governors, the headteacher and the staff of a school should generate a resolve to ensure that every child receives the best possible education.

Accountability

2. Governors are often described as “critical friends” to the school, monitoring and challenging a school’s day-to-day operation whilst helping to develop its long-term plans to achieve and maintain the highest possible standards. Their activities are judged as part of a school’s measurable and reportable performance indicators through the Leadership and Management elements of an OFSTED inspection.

3. Governors operate within and to the law. They are subject to Criminal Records Bureau checks. They must ensure the school operates safely within the terms of the Health and Safety Act. They must ensure a Child Protection regime is in place. In overseeing accounting and financial management, and contributing to budgetary control, governors are central to that aspect of the running of the school that is, essentially, a business, paying for staff, buying in services, and rewarding performance. They observe Employment Law whilst contributing to the process that employs and dismisses staff. The headteacher’s performance will be monitored and reported on annually by governors, as a direct consequence of which, the following year’s pay of that key person will be determined.

4. As an unpaid body of volunteers, governors provide a highly effective leadership and management mechanism that costs relatively little1. They can be praised or criticised for their level of effectiveness. Governors add value, but, regardless of the needs of the school, they are neither sworn to office, nor subject to contract and, if they choose, can just walk away.

5. Though governors are required to operate in accordance with the law, there is no check and balance mechanism in place other than OFTSED and diocesan inspections that might now be at intervals as great as five yearly. Her Majesty’s Inspectors might also visit from time to time. The effectiveness of a governing body therefore relies largely on a process of self-regulation created by the mix of governors drawn from teaching and non-teaching staff, parents, local authority appointees, community appointees and, where applicable, diocesan (Foundation) appointees. Accountability, however, goes beyond the requirements of OFSTED.

6. The governance of a school relies upon developing meaningful relationships with other members of staff, parents, pupils, the local community and, in some instances, a Church or other religious body. Such accountability can lead to challenges and appeals being raised against the school which must be answered fully and in accordance with established procedures that can elevate cases to Local Authority and, subsequently, Ministerial level if required. This can exert unwelcome pressures on hard-working governors who might have higher priorities linked to work and family commitments. Such pressures can detract from the role and affect governor recruiting at a time when many schools have difficulty recruiting, sustaining and retaining a full governing body. Serious consideration must therefore be given to this issue.

Recruiting and Retention—should Governors be Paid?

7. Paying Governors. Governors give freely of their time as concerned and responsible citizens, keen to give something to the community. Parent governors will be keen to raise awareness of the wider parent community and voice ideas for improving the school’s modus operandi as it affects children. Others on the governing body will contribute for different reasons, but all must act for the common good of the school rather than any self interest. The motivation should come from such ideals rather than the possibility of financial incentive, and I would not support a direct (salary-related) payment system which would require some form of contractual obligation linked to Employment Law, etc. Great care must be taken to avoid undermining the commendable motives that governors currently have for volunteering for office, but that is not to say that some form of financial remuneration should be afforded to governors for their time and effort.

8. Flat Rate Payment. Governors could be paid an annual flat rate for holding office, but this could lead to issues surrounding regular attendance, levels of responsibility, and seniority based on position or time served.

9. Attendance Allowance. The Inquiry might usefully consider a form of Attendance Allowance based on a pro-rata system that acknowledges transport costs, printing costs (much of a governing body’s correspondence is by email and links to Local Authority or Government websites) and attendance at additional committees, appeal panels, study periods, courses or seminars. This could be based on setting a rate for an agreed number of main governing body meetings per annum (six, each lasting two hours), plus a number of sub-committee meetings (Curriculum, Finance, Premises, etc) and training. A small incentive sum might be set aside to pay to governors who attend all required meetings as an annual bonus, though

This is fine detail that could be examined during the inquiry. In summary, the governors would be repaid solely for the resources they use to deliver an important service to the community, thus ensuring that they continue to be motivated only by a genuine desire to serve.

January 2013