I don’t know if there is any life left in this government’s ‘big society’ idea, but if there is, yet another death knell was sounded by Michael Gove this week. He said that school governors can too often be ‘local worthies’ who see their position as ‘a badge of status, not of work’. He went on to suggest that too many of them are only in the role ‘to represent some political constituency’.
This is a description that could be applied to a small number of health trust or police authority members, to a few local councillors and even, dare I say it, to the odd MP! However, Gove chose to use it for the 300,000 people in this country who give up their time for no money (not even allowances); for no status and hardly ever for any public recognition to provide governance for our children’s schools. If ever there were a group of people who epitomised the principles and practice of the ‘big society’, it’s school governors, but Michael Gove chose to describe them with barely concealed contempt.
There are many reasons why this is a damaging use of words. Let me concentrate on two – the damage it does to the incentive for people to volunteer and the way it undermines the real case for reform in school governance.
First, it portrays a real disdain for people who choose to contribute to their local community and schools by taking on the role of school governor. I have been a governor on three different governing bodies. I am currently an additional governor for a school which went into special measures. On that governing body, there are people spending 15-20 hours a month on their governor duties. Only one is a local politician – she’s not my party, but she does a good job on the governors and it’s important that she’s there. The others are parents, former parents, local business people, teachers or just interested in putting something back in their local community. They bring a range of skills and experiences, work hard and care a lot about the school’s pupils and staff. They don’t deserve the education secretary’s disdain.
Second, Michael Gove has made it more difficult to achieve the necessary reform to governing bodies which his speech was supposed to be about. He is right to say that governing bodies would benefit in many cases from being smaller, more strategic and clear about the priorities for the schools they govern and their role in holding the head to account for delivery. In my experience, it is clear focus and strong accountability which has enabled the school where I’m a governor to come quickly out of special measures. The staff are held to account by their line managers for their teaching and the progress made by their pupils. And after some pretty extensive training and development work, the governing body now hold the head to account more effectively for the quality of teaching and learning in the school.
Many governing bodies do need to change – they need to better understand the data revolution which has happened in schools, they need to work through where they add value and what their role should be, they need strong leadership from the chair of governors, and they need specialised support in carrying out this task rather than vague and unfocused training sessions. Gove has the journalist’s gift for a startling turn of phrase. However, he may be better served by building some support for reform if he’s serious about serving schools better.
—————————————————————————————
Jacqui Smith is former home secretary, writes the Monday Politics column for Progress, and tweets @smithjj62
—————————————————————————————
Gove is partly right, as there are indeed school governors who add no value to the school and who are sometimes appointed only because nobody else will take the role. But there are others who put in vast numbers of hours. The real challenge is to enable lay school governors to be (more) effective in supporting and running a professional body which is a school is. Sadly the role of education authorities in supporting school governors has been underestimated and undermined by governments who seem to assume all those appointed are fully effective from day one (and that after a period of years their effectiveness might deteriorate unless reinforced by further training).
Gove now hates Governors simply because a small number defied his plans to turn their schools into Acadamies. His solution is to take away Governors independence and make them toe the party line.
to control them all.
Gove needs to watch and heed the latest Spiderman: ‘with great power comes great responsibility’. He takes a lot of the first and little of the latter. Governors, on the hand, know that the responsibility is enormous and the power is minimal.
As both of vice-chair of governors at a local secondary school and a councillor I fear that I may be one of the ‘local worthies’ Mr Gove speaks of.
Being a councillor on a governing body, I would argue, brings many strengths. Not least, as I am sure my Head would testify to, we are used to the process of scrutiny. We understand that holding management to account, as a critical friend, is our number one priority.
In my experience it is also councillors who try very hard to leave party politics at the door when going to governor meetings in place of the practicalities of running an organisation in an imperfect world.
I have been very much part of the process of our school becoming an academy, a decision I made very reluctantly. Ultimately, although I am instinctively wary of academies, our main objective is to deliver the best outcomes for our children and in the current framework, for us, that was the best decision.
Gove is doing more to unify education than any politician or union official for 50 years- by espousing hatred, bile, bigotry and prejudice to anyone and everyone involved in education he unites us all. I no longer have time to play much of a role in my local CLP as most of my spare time is taken up by being Chair of Governors of a local junior school. I started as a parent governor five years ago; became Chair as my son left so am now a community governor; and will have a child there again come September. I’m not doing this for any personal or political gain. And it’s hard work for little thanks. We have only one local councillor (a LibDem who also does a good job) and had very little involvement with the local authority until Ofsted found us only “satisfactory” and they took more of an active interest. Since the visit from Gove’s thought police (when our community engagement which includes delivery a community wide newsletter twice a year celebrating our values and challenging myths about there being no sport, foreign languages, etc taught in junior schools; and a parent satisfaction rate of over 95% was also found to be merely satisfactory) we’ve worked very hard with the authority, other local schools and advisors to push at the right margins and get the results that will allow Ofsted to recognise us as at least good. This pressure has in itself also been interesting and rewarding but it has been hard work (although nothing compared to theextra pressure on staff) and with ever shifting goalposts still may not be enough because Gove makes it sound like whatever a state community school does it’ll never be enough.
Thousands will now be reading Gove’s latest rant and start thinking “Why do I bother?”
Just for once politicians should be outed and asked “What’s good about our schools and public services?” Gove would be stumped.
The big society need a big (or biggish) state to back it up.