Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
When I first got involved in Governors I remember talking to a very senior member of a secondary school.
And he said: "Our governors are rubbish! Here they're rubbish."
I said: "Why do you say [that]? He said: "I was putting on a play last week."
We really needed someone
to help out behind the scenes."
"We needed someone to take the money."
"We needed someone to do the lighting"
"And where were the governors? "Nowhere."
And the answer is:
Many governors would like to do those sorts of things.
And if they like to do them ů
ů do them. But what they're doing there ain't governance. And that's for sure.
Successful governors is a serious job.
It needs three things.
It needs commitment.
It needs training -
so as to understand what the job is.
And it needs information.
And particularly it needs information
which is not
passed by the head teacher.
It needs independent information.
There are many excellent headteachers in this country.
There are many excellent Governing bodies.
But it's important for the Governing Body
That the information they get
has not been filtered.
Has not been chosen.
We've heard a lot - in our workshop - about selective information
from the Government.
We all select information.
And head teachers are no different.
They've got all their problems as well. So it's important
that you know if you're a governor - I'm sure there are many governors here.
If there are people who are not governors, why not?
But I'm sure there are people here Who've seen their RAISEonline.
You need to know what that's about. You need to study that.
You need to get information from the staff.
You need to invite the staff into governors' meetings.
Pupils into Governors' meetings. You need to do surveys.
You need to find out information
about the school itself which is not filtered from the head teacher.
So these are crucial elements
about how to how to be a successful governor.
Now how will academies
help with all that?
Well, the answer is - in my view -
they won't. Academies have actually got
- in my view -
virtually nothing whatsoever to do with that.
Governing bodies will have the same responsibilities as they have now,
under academies.
But their responsibilities will be
to an academy trust.
Not to the local community.
And this is a significant and important and
in many senses a worrying shift.
I actually think
that this whole academies debate
- and no one's quite said this yet so I will say it -
I don't think it's about education.
I think it's about politics.
And I think it's about three elements of politics.
First of I think it is a straightforward full frontal attack on
local authorities.
... for whatever reason and governments often have
trouble, difficulty with local authorities.
And I think this is
an undermining of local authorities.
And local educational authorities - as was -
uh... I think have a have a very very difficult future
All around the country we have seen Governors Support Units
which most local authorities - virtually every local authority had
a separate Governor Support Unit at one time.
Many of those have gone now.
Many have departed for lack of funding
So these are serious issues.
So I think first of all there's an issue about about local authorities.
The second politics I think -
which again, I don't think - I haven't heard anyone say, or at least say out loud -
is I think this is an issue about national salary negotiations.
Salary and conditions arrangements.
There's an organization which some of you may know about, called the
School Teachers Pay Review body. The S.T.R.B.
And every year my organisation gives evidence to the S.T.R.B.
We'll go along, two or three of us
And we'll sit in a room.,
And the S.T.R.B. sits in a semicircle around you.
And they ask you questions.
Every year we say things like we think the salary arrangements teachers
ought to be more straightforward.
And less complicated.
And about every other year the S.T.R.B.
make them
more complicated.
And less straightforward.
But one of the questions that they've asked us time and time time again
is whether we, as a representative governanace body
would support salary differentials
in different parts of the country.
Geographical differentials.
In other words
the absence of a National Salary and Conditions arrangement.
Every year we said we didn't think that would be a very good idea.
And so they've asked us again about two years later.
So this has been on the agenda. And it's not just
this particular government
It's been on the agenda for at least a decade now.
And I think the issue of
national salary conditions
is fundamental to this issue of academies.
And thirdly. I think
it's a blame game.
What happens if academies go wrong? Somebody was asking earlier on.
Where's the responsibility?
Does it lie with the Secretary of State?
"No. Nothing to do with me."
"It's your academy."
"I've given you the freedom."
"And now you've got the freedom
to fail."
So there's a serious issue there about an abdication of responsibility
by our nationally elected representatives.
And anyway we know
and the point has been made earlier -
very well made by a headteacher who's spoken to the conference.
What's the fundamental issue which determines the success of a school?
It says so in the Government's own White Paper
which preceded the Bill. Which preceded the Act which has just passed by Parliament.
The crucial thing is the quality of teaching. The importance of teaching.
It is not the legal structure of the school.
The previous Government's mantra was
'Standards not Structures'. Does anyone remember that?
At the same time as they said that, they created academies. And I thought
David Lammy was ... there was
a sleight of hand about that.
I appear not to be the only one.
He's not culpable because he didn't, of course, become elected
until 2000 after Bernie [Grant] died.
And academies had just come in then.
It was a hostage to fortune then.
I said so.
At the time we were talking
quite openly to Ministers. Estelle Morris was the Minister of Schools.
David Blunkett was the Secretary of State.
And I said: "It's a hostage to fortune".
But it was policy. So it's policy. Blah, blah, blah.
I think there's an issue there.
And they also came up with Trust Schools.
Does anyone remember them? Trust Schools?
It was a central plank of
the 2005 White Paper. Trust Schools. Where's it gone?
Dissapeared hasn't it? Like 'Beacon Schools'
And umpteen other daft initiatives.
They've gone ů disappeared in the ether.
So I don't think academies are going to help.
The thing that's going to improve education in this country is the quality of teaching.
Not the structure of a school.
And my final point is this.
This session is: where do we go next?
And frankly I'm not optimistic
about that in terms of this academy issue.
I think it's very difficult to see
how we're going to avoid having a very large number of schools.
There's already 1500 schools in this country that are academies.
I think it's unlikely that
anythings going to happen that's going to block that.
And the reason, of course, is that the DFE [Department for Education] are completely
and utterly behind it. Someone said that if you look at the DFE website
it looks like an advertising campaign. Well it does.
And with academies we're looking at a moving target.
Remember the Labour Party thing was:
schools in desperate circumstances; Fresh Start; blah blah blah
We've now had only outstanding schools could become academies
Then, only good and outstanding schools.
Then, only satisfactory schools with good.
Now virtually any school can become an academy.
And you don't even have to go to a chain. You can just get a 'partner'.
You don't have to have a sponsor.
You can get a partner and become an academy.
So almost any school
is being urged to become an academy.
And in the White Paper - there's no secret about this - the White Paper was
completely open about this. It said: 'we look forward to a time when
all schools should be an academy.
That was the White Paper of the elected Government.
So what's gonna happen?
I think that governance is going to become crucial for these schools.
The relationship between the government and the Trust Board - the academy board
is going to be absolutely critical.
The only glimmer of hope I can offer is this single suggestion.
We've heard a lot about the chains, in the discussion earlier on.
And personally I find some of them
very worrying indeed.
And not even the big major ones - the little local ones.
In my part of the woods in Yorkshire
there are some quite worrying developments,
with small chains that are setting up with their own agendas.
But what governors may not know
is that the process of becoming an academy
is of course a decision made by the governing body.
And instead of becoming part of a chain
the school can, of course, set up itself as an academy.
The worry is that it has to set up a trust
as well as a governing body.
Nornally the the understanding is that the Trust is three or four people
who appoint the governing body. That's the law.
But there is actually no maximum on the size of the trust
In other words, it is perfectly possible
for all the governing body to become the trust.
So the critical relationship between the governing body and the trust
can be merged into one.
And while that doesn't answer
all the problems we've heard today. Certainly not the Anti Academy Alliance agenda.
And certainly not the difficulties of the local schools.
It is, I think, a glimmer of hope
for schools who are worried about
being controlled by people who are nothing to do with their locality.
And have little or no real interest in the education of their children
Thank you very much, indeed.