Parent governor role to be scrapped in schools shakeup

[Cheshire Cat]

@The Merry Prankster hit the nail on the head a few weeks back. You have to start wondering if there is an underlying ideological battle with this lurch to the right by the Conservative Party.

These diktats, policy changes and the like directed by Central Government with little or no thought to the end stakeholder is very reminiscent of the way that Thatcher's governments dealt with Scotland, Wales and Northern England in the 80s. Take for instance IDS's premium rate DWP helpline. That's such a stupid idea that it looks malicious. Well. it does to me anyway.

Have you only just worked this out? I thought it was quite blatent over the last six years. The Lib-Dems managed to mitigate some of the stupidity under the Coailition, but it's full on f@ck-wittery from now on.

 

[ROSM]

I think people who say that parent elections run the risk of duff governors is probably doing many parents a disservice

Parents can be nominated and then there is a session with the chair or vice chair to explain about the role and the work effort and skills required / needed based on a skills audit. The initial request for nominees also carries this brief too

We have used this method for the last two elections and had many really good quality candidates. Also in both occasions the parents elected the person best suited I found


As someone else said, the role is as a critical friend and you give a parent view (not your view as as a parent)

This government is forcing an approach and where that didn't work they now have made it mandatory

They bought in a curriculum that is largely unteachable in a coherent fashion without huge creativity hoping schools would be attracted by academy status allowing opt out

Bought in assessments that are at ridiculous levels so more schools would fail (remember all schools are now expected to be above average...Think about it)

Made being a governor so restrictive and complex

Went to war on teachers pay in the hope that people see benefits of being an academy in order to set own pay scales

And that didn't cause the sea change they wanted

 

[Bold Seagull]

How realistic is that though that there will all of a sudden be a pool of accountants, lawyers and the like ready and willing to take up the duties of a parent-governor? I think most willing to take those positions are probably already involved. I also think that this policy might be counter-productive. There's no-one more engaged in raising funds and dealing with school issues than the parents of the children at the schools. Is the system so broken that it needs this fix?

Friends of mine who are teachers say that the constant changes to their work environment are pushing them to the brink.

I'm not going to pretend to know. I was under the impression that at the moment, to get a parent governor on board you advertise, and hold a ballot by other parents if necessary. The body then takes whoever is elected. So you could have an accountant (which you really need on your body), and a couple of parents on the ballot, but you end up with whoever is voted in. I've assumed this system means the governing body can take that accountant as co-opted in place of the 'parent' spot.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Tricky to get parents with those skills at schools outside the leafy suburbs though.

Well exactly. It is difficult. I'm not defending the policy as I don't know enough about the detail, but being able to target a requirement you've identified would seem to be helping the school in it's governance. Not always going to happen of course.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

Tricky to get parents with those skills at schools outside the leafy suburbs though.

This is my fear. I work in a school that is situated in a 'poor' area. There are many really great parents but we are not in a location that attracts too many professionals. This situation strikes me as a little odd in that in the last year, the government had expressed a desire to have magistrates from all walks of life as there was little representation from non professionals. The parent governor restriction seems to fly in the face of that policy.

 

[Bold Seagull]

I think people who say that parent elections run the risk of duff governors is probably doing many parents a disservice

No one has said that - certainly not me. You may have 3 accountants on your body already and you're desperate for a some other skill. If you have 4 parents wanting to be on the body and 3 are accountants and 1 is say a building contractor, you want the building contractor. No disrespect to the other parents, but the skill added to the body is obvious.

 

[GT49er]

Presumably this is intended as a way to get business involved with (ie having a business opportunity somewhere) in the school system. Does sound like spite against democracy, though.

 

[Buzzer]

I'm not going to pretend to know. I was under the impression that at the moment, to get a parent governor on board you advertise, and hold a ballot by other parents if necessary. The body then takes whoever is elected. So you could have an accountant (which you really need on your body), and a couple of parents on the ballot, but you end up with whoever is voted in. I've assumed this system means the governing body can take that accountant as co-opted in place of the 'parent' spot.

In my simple mind, the government are saying that schools really need outside expert advice on

a) finance/accountancy
b) law
c) HR advice
d) other

What I would do is give local companies tax breaks to encourage them to get involved with their local schools and to sit on governor boards in addition to the parent governors. Go to the professional bodies and draw up some general rules and indemnities and get the professionals involved that way. I certainly wouldn't look to reduce parent involvement.

 

[GT49er]

You're not necessarily stripping out the parents though. We have 4 co-opted governors on our body, 2 of us happen to parents that bring a set of skills to the table. So although on paper we have 3 parents and 4 co-opted, the reality is we have 5 parents and 2 co-opted. Perhaps I'm wrong, but rather than electing a parent governor based on nothing more than them being a parent, you are still taking parents, but you're looking for that parent to bring a set of skills with them. I've always found the playground governor elections where you decide a governor based on a paragraph they write as rather pointless really.

The governing body is supposed to identify and determine its own needs as well as its own succession planning.

The minute we start discarding the validity of having elections we are at the top of a very slippery slope.

 

[Bold Seagull]

In my simple mind, the government are saying that schools really need outside expert advice on

a) finance/accountancy
b) law
c) HR advice
d) other

What I would do is give local companies tax breaks to encourage them to get involved with their local schools and to sit on governor boards in addition to the parent governors. Go to the professional bodies and draw up some general rules and indemnities and get the professionals involved that way. I certainly wouldn't look to reduce parent involvement.

I may have read it all wrong, but isn't it just the role or title of parent governor that is changing, not necessarily reducing the number of parents involved? Changing the governor title doesn't necessarily mean you'll have less parents, you might even have more, just that they're not called parent governors.

 

[Buzzer]

I may have read it all wrong, but isn't it just the role or title of parent governor that is changing, not necessarily reducing the number of parents involved? Changing the governor title doesn't necessarily mean you'll have less parents, you might even have more, just that they're not called parent governors.

I've read it that the reserved places for parents could be replaced by experts but I'm only going on the newspaper reports.

 

[beorhthelm]

they really should introduce classes on government, then people would maybe learn that a white paper is a document for discussion, not a fixed statement of policy. an awful lot of assumptions, fear and indignation for something that is speculative.

 

[drew]

I'm no fan of this government, or their educational policies, but I am a school governor and a parent of 2 kids at the school, but I'm not actually a 'parent governor' but I'm formally co-opted onto the governing body.

I don't think the idea is to get rid of parents being governors, it is having the right parents with the right skills doing the job. Therefore they are looking for accountants, solicitors, architects, engineers, human resources, educational professionals etc. etc. to be on governing bodies for those reasons - your role as parent is just your motivation for offering your time.

They'll never stop having parents as governors because who else would make up the majority of the governing bodies? But rather than having a playground election and Betty gets voted on because she has the most friends, the school needs to target their skills gap and try to attract the right people, the right parents, to their governing body.

At least this is how I've understood it, and how I personally was co-opted onto our governing body.

Oh, and as far as I'm aware, governors don't get paid. You can claim travel expenses, but I would think most rarely do.

The point is that it is an unnecessary change. We all appreciate that those with expertise may probably be parents as well but why do they actually have to remove the requirement. What additional cost is there to have a volunteer parent on the board of governors. Probably very negligible. It's removing a potential obstacle.

 

[ROSM]

No one has said that - certainly not me. You may have 3 accountants on your body already and you're desperate for a some other skill. If you have 4 parents wanting to be on the body and 3 are accountants and 1 is say a building contractor, you want the building contractor. No disrespect to the other parents, but the skill added to the body is obvious.

And you explain when seeking nominees, what skills you are looking for and counsel all who show an interest

You can't stop someone standing if they get nominations and you can't force people how to vote, but it does work. And it's not just about single skills like accounts or law, its numerical reasoning, statistical analysis, planning etc. That's not a black and white factor based on career.

As others have said, the use of Co opted and associate governors is to fill the gaps, not the other way round.

 

[ROSM]

they really should introduce classes on government, then people would maybe learn that a white paper is a document for discussion, not a fixed statement of policy. an awful lot of assumptions, fear and indignation for something that is speculative.

This is not a consultation period, the draft bill is scheduled for 3 months time.

 

[Buzzer]

they really should introduce classes on government, then people would maybe learn that a white paper is a document for discussion, not a fixed statement of policy. an awful lot of assumptions, fear and indignation for something that is speculative.

I appreciate it's not a statement of policy but it is a statement of intent, surely and yet another controversial one. And it's messing about with education. Again.

 

[ROSM]

In my simple mind, the government are saying that schools really need outside expert advice on

a) finance/accountancy
b) law
c) HR advice
d) other

What I would do is give local companies tax breaks to encourage them to get involved with their local schools and to sit on governor boards in addition to the parent governors. Go to the professional bodies and draw up some general rules and indemnities and get the professionals involved that way. I certainly wouldn't look to reduce parent involvement.

Those areas of advice are currently supplied by the local education authority

 

[Bold Seagull]

And you explain when seeking nominees, what skills you are looking for and counsel all who show an interest

You can't stop someone standing if they get nominations and you can't force people how to vote, but it does work. And it's not just about single skills like accounts or law, its numerical reasoning, statistical analysis, planning etc. That's not a black and white factor based on career.

As others have said, the use of Co opted and associate governors is to fill the gaps, not the other way round.

I agree. There is a wealth of experience beyond just formal professions that can add to the effectiveness of a body. Various skills will help govern a school. I will be interested to read more detail into this before seemingly defending/supporting it any further.

 

[Buzzer]

Those areas of advice are currently supplied by the local education authority

Yup, you're right. I was aware of that but if the purpose of this is to get more professionals involved I'm guessing it's because it encourages innovation, it's cheaper, it's quicker and probably more specific.

 

[Bakero]

they really should introduce classes on government, then people would maybe learn that a white paper is a document for discussion, not a fixed statement of policy. an awful lot of assumptions, fear and indignation for something that is speculative.

Don't you think this government has given people reason to fear their intentions?