Any school governors trying to influence change

[fartyface]

There may be one already but I wonder if a thread for school governors would be helpful.

I am very frustrated with the actions of the school for which I am governor who are doing their best to keep numbers of students as low as possible.

• no nursery provision
• key worker provision only if you have 2 key worker parents
• finishing a week early to have a picnic for the leaver year.
• weekly newsletters dedicated to asking parents to only send their children if they must

There is no talk of learning; set work is links from bitesize and half the school is empty.

The remainder of the governing body is high on the support, and I don't see much challenge and I am not sure if I have any allies in the governing body - (which comprises a lot of teachers).

I'm new to the governing body having only been around 3 years, the others are all more like 10...

I'd love to get some ideas how to influence change or at least raise my concerns without being completely ostracised.

And governor's are there to challenge. A governing body that doesn't welcome challenge and debate is a failing one. And good leaders /head teachers should be open to other points of view.

(a big chunk of my work is advising governing bodies and similar entities such as boards of trustees)

Yes, it has been incredibly depressing seeing so many schools and LAs losing sight of the value of education (and in some cases scaremongering about the risks of kids returning to school). Fortunately the secondary school where I am a governor has been pretty good particularly on offering high quality online learning and encouraging vulnerable kids to come into school.

"The school / education sector seems to be stuck in "how little can we get away with""

I can see this is the case for some schools but I disagree it’s across the board. The school at which I’m chair and all of the schools in the MAT at which I’m a senior leader are doing as much as possible within the guidance. All of the schools are providing home learning for those at home and all have children in from nursery, R, 1 and 6 as well as the vulnerable and KW children so it’s certainly not across the whole education sector that they’re trying to get away with as little as possible.

Exactly Irene. I dont get the whole "we weren't told to educate" thing. I would have thought it was taken as read that they should still be teaching. Just because the "curriculum was suspended" I don't think anyone expected schools to wholesale abandon teaching.

I cant decide whether to feel supported by this thread, or depressed by the level of agreement that this is position. I was hoping my school was an outlier. It was awarded outstanding last year too - and is looked to for the leadership in the town.

I am pleased that there is some good practice elsewhere, so I won't tar them with the same brush.

And I agree re the curriculum - it did seem sensible to suspend it, but now I am really wondering whether it was a good idea.

(I'm interested in the online school mentioned upthread for my own kids please)

One of the barriers to proper teaching is where there are very mixed age key worker groups. If you've got a spread of Years 2-5 in one class, it's hard to deliver much actual teaching. More perniciously though, I think there's a barrier around being 'fair' to all students. I know that at the school I know which has been doing a lot, there have been complaints from parents that it's not fair that children who are in school are getting proper teaching, while those at home aren't. Of course, it's important to provide as high quality learning as possible to those in Years 2-5 or those who are at home because they or their families are vulnerable; but I think it's a real shame if this is used as a reason not to teach those children who are in school (even if it's consolidation rather than new content).

"The school / education sector seems to be stuck in "how little can we get away with"

Honestly, the primary I am a governor of is the exact opposite, so it's possible!

We had about 70% staff in, another few coming back next week and the week after, we should have only about 4 off in the end. Every child in school is getting at least a day a week as of the 22nd (we ignored the guidelines against rotas and are very glad we did), and if the SD guidelines go to 1m we have immediate plans in place to expand. Last week for YN,R,1 and 6 we had about 70% attendance.

Obviously, not perfect - i know some people would prefer fewer years and more days per year, but we decided for our kids this was the way forward. And from the Twitter feed and drop off chat, feedback seems very positive.

Guidelines are only that, guidelines. They don't work for every school. We are lucky that we have loads of outside space, for example; few local primaries as as lucky.

@fartyface... There are a few .here is a v brief summary! All seem to cost in the region of £200-£250/MTH if you do the full curriculum. All from y4 up
Interhigh - full curriculum only (and a really good range of classes)
Netschool - full or curriculum or pick and choose
Myonlineschooling - full curriculum or pick and choose

All offer interactive online lessons, homewokr set and marked swiftly, pastoral support and clubs.

My son is at Interhigh and loves it. It is about 14 lessons a week (c40 mins long) plus homework and you can interact with lesson through chat/microphone (controlled by teacher) / group work "rooms" etc.
He really loves learning so the pace of work suits him. A more flexible school might be better if you felt they would only want to do a few subjects that way.

There is also Outschool that does more adhoc lessons- there is a huge range from preschool age and up. The science ones we have tried have been excellent

@fartyface I’ve found the white rose maths website fabulous for helping to home school my primary age kids: whiterosemaths.com/homelearning/

I agree re. the need to continue to educate. Our GB is rightly very concerned re. Welfare of our students, especially those more vulnerable, however it should not be an either or situation. We are in this for the foreseeable future so we need to figure out how to monitor progress and act on it with the awareness of mitigating circumstances around that. Just because it isn’t ideal doesn’t mean it can’t be done. Perhaps because I work in healthcare which has to keep going, I feel we need to be creative and get it done, not just say we can’t now.

And yes, as I was told on my Governor training, it’s our role to both support and ask challenging questions rather than accept the status quo or decisions already made.

I'm a co-chair
I'm actually a bit worried that the DH of a poster upthread is on our GB

Strategic vs operational
Critical vs friend
Are tough at present IMHO

I've been a governor 10 years and whilst I have no background at all in education I've learnt some things in that time and worked with a few different heads. TBH if you've just arrived maybe you might listen and learn a bit before you wade in full on challenge mode with what are often operational matters. And often personal gripes about your own kids experience (not directed at posters on this thread just from years of experience with parent governors this is often the case)

Yes the chair and often committee chairs are a bit closer to the head and are 'in on things' a bit more. They have usually earnt that through a good few years commitment. If you do chairs training you will see that the chair has a big role in supporting the head as well as challenge and they are required to have regular private meetings with the head to support them. Being a head is a very tough job and in our local area a few years ago one head killed himself due to stress. It is not always appropriate to share with the whole FGB eg the personal online abuse the head has suffered.

Also not appropriate for full FGB are the personal health issues of individual teachers and their families which might mean staffing is not sufficient for full school opening.
The head is walking a line with teachers and the unions if she tries to force everyone into work many of them may quit or go off sick. Some have already done that.

I am regularly in discussion with the head and not opening all of it out to all FGB members. That is the chairs role. Most of you do not want it. When I have tried to step down it tends to be a host of excuses are offered why everyone else is too busy. (Obviously I am not busy with my full time job, kids and sick parent). Power comes with responsibility.

I do send emails about any important decisions and invite comment. I have arranged extra FGB online meetings. Very few people actually commented in the bloody meeting despite expressing their views in emails.

Whether to open the school and to what classes is strategic and we debated that in an FGB meeting. How exactly to do it ie to what classes when, bubble size etc is operational and is for the head.

Quality of online learning is an appropriate topic for governors to seek reassurance on but exactly what content is for the head. SLT time is limited and is directed to the reopening right now and troubleshooting problems arising. In my view now is not the time to be raising issues about online.

It may look like I am too cosy with the head and not challenging her enough but with the stress she is under right now I know she has seriously considered quitting and that I do not want and I suspect no governors would.

So fine criticise if you want but go via the chair first. Ask the chair if there's a reason their tone is mainly supportive.

If you want more power to change things then put yourself forward at least for committee chair or for chair. If you don't do that then you have less right to carp from the sidelines.

I do see this as temporary firefighting still and I am optimistic we will be able to have much more normality in September and catch up learning then.

How would you propose to monitor progress in the current set up? That seems crazy. I think we could monitor engagement and satisfaction but not progress. I've been mostly focused on monitoring safety and vulnerable children.

There's a whole to tonne of re-writing history when people say 'schools have had 4 months to get a decent online offer'
-they had 3 days notice of closure

• they had no idea that it would go on so long. It was 6 weeks remember at the start. We thought back after half term for definite so why invest effort on an online platform

-there's no national or LA guidance on what 'should' be offered. There's no standard to measure against

• there's no financial provision at all for hardware or software. Teachers are just expected to use their own.

-many secondaries were already using google classroom and had issued kids laptops. This is not the case at all for primary. We had just budgeted to buy more laptops for KS2 but never for Ks1.

If online is going to continue in Sept it will be worth investing time, effort and money but if it's not then that's wasted resources.

Unlike private schools we'd need to make a huge effort to try to ensure access for all. Are we going to have cash to buy poor kids a laptop and a broadband connection so they can stop trying to online learn on mum's phone?

It's bloody hard and thankless being chair all the time. Right now it is truly so stressful. I really don't need it on top of how stressful my frontline healthcare job is, home schooling my kids (not) and worrying about my mum with cancer. Come September I am 100% quitting and some other mug can find out what it's like.

I'd disagree that bubble size is operational, since it directly impacts the strategic decisions of opening the school and for which groups. And balancing that with governmental recommendations. For example a Head insisting on bubble sizes of 6 rather than 15 should be challenged because it means two normal classes of 30 are split over 10 classrooms instead of 4.

I would expect The Head to justify that decision to governors (at least the Chair). And if you're not sure if I have the right to an opinion, I am vice-chair of an academy, current chair of multiple committees, board member of the MAT board, 11 years experience over two schools.

Your post reads as patronising WokeUpSmeltTheCoffee. And exemplifies perfectly the infuriating tone of (usually primary) Head/Chair relationships that actively discourages challenge and transparency with governors.

That stress you mention your Head is under, making her wanting to leave. It could be argued that if she cannot handle the stress that leading a school (even in challenging times) brings then she is not right for the job. She is paid, in part, to manage the difficult job and if she cant do that unless pandered to then perhaps her leaving is the right answer. Fact is, many many Heads out there can and are managing the situation, with high expectations placed on them.

Lowering the expectations you have of your Head on the basis that it's hard and stressful and she might leave, is not the answer. Maybe your school would do better with a more robust and resilient Head?

@WokeUpSmeltTheCoffee is absolutely right.
I'm a Chair and have regular one to one meetings with our Head. It is crucial that she knows they are confidential, and it is crucial that she keeps me informed about her own career plans, staffing issues, parental complaints etc etc etc.
Bear in mind that every GB needs groups of members who can sit as appeal committees, that means they can't know about certain matters in case they are needed to hear an appeal. The number of specific issues only the VC and I know about is pretty big.
All Governors are currently treading a tightrope between involvement in strategic matters and operational matters, without doubt our GB is involved far more in the operational side than is usual but we are mindful that this not become permanent, because that's not our job.
By all means challenge on plans to return more children to school but make sure you have read the DofE or your Academy Chain guidance going back to the start of the crisis first, that way you can challenge on the things that are in their control, not the things they have no say over.
Governors' meetings should go ahead as usual, we are having all of ours and specifically recording challenges.

We actually did debate the bubble size and reasons for it at an FGB meeting with written risk assessments provided in advance.

The head is usually very resilient much more so than the last one. In my view these are extraordinary times and most people are stressed.

Maybe we could get a 'better' head. I doubt it. She's regarded as very good locally and a number of other schools have tried to poach her. These super amazing resilient heads are not ten a penny as far as I can see. I know this from the last application process where weeded through a lot of dross to find her.

I was just trying to explain why I feel less challenge and more support right now is the right call from a personal perspective and yes i am seriously exasperated that people who won't take the responsibility still want all the power.

I think it's you that's patronising the little primary school chair as the big super experienced MAT chair.

She can be challenged on t he bubble size but I am not going in to measure up the class room to see how many will fit. That would be ridiculous. If she says that's how many can fit them that's the answer.

I'm a Governor at our Secondary.

At the beginning of the lockdown our MAT sent out an email basically saying that Governance in its normal sense was suspended. However compared to some it seems we have still been very active. We have 2 weekly zoom meetings with the SLT and Head.
We are still in a fairly supportive role however these meetings have been concentrated on online learning offers, re-start strategies, pupil premium support safe guarding and Y6 transition etc. Our pastoral offering has been particularly strong and I feel that's in part to our Governors challenging.

It's hard to challenge on many things though as the true answer our head can give is mainly "I'm constantly in contact with other HT and schools and the DifE but we have no directives or official guidance as yet". Which is unfortunately true.

In the background to this we are forming longer term ideas for transport, behaviour and RAPP (raising attainment and progress).

I'm quite happy with how our governors have been in constant communication with the SLT.

Have you all looked at the NGA guidance on the risk assessment and the kind of things you should be looking at and questioning. You shouldnt need to ask why its 6 not 15 pupils as the risk assessment you should have seen should make it clear and you should have the opportunity to ask about it.
Also worth remembering your duties under health and safety are to staff as well as vistors and pupils.

Yep looked at NGA guidance and went right along with that.

You'd be a very brave chair to go against NGA and LA guidance right now as you need to justify your decisions.

I know it's very unlikely but worst case scenario is a child or a member of staff dies or is seriously ill and then qs will be asked. That is on my mind.
In my day job that is on my mind too but at least I get paid and have time to do that.

I was just trying to explain why I feel less challenge and more support right now

That is exactly the exasperated point the OP is disagreeing with. You may view it as right, many (experienced governors) do not.

It boils down to the Can't-Do attitude that is becoming apparent in some schools. I cannot find any reason why lowering expectations is a good thing for our schools. We should expect better than that from the professional leaders in schools. At times when they should be raising to the challenge, they are shrinking away with a (non growth) mindset of ^I can't do this, it cant happen. Instead of problem solving and finding a way with a Can-Do attitude.

Having governors, especially Chairs of Governors, who are actively encouraging less challenge and lowering of expectations is not good for the children or the profession.

...and yes i am seriously exasperated that people who won't take the responsibility still want all the power

Like Head's with Chairs of Governors who won't hold them to account with high expectations?

Heads have all the power. It's what they are paid highly for. With that comes the responsibility to think with clarity and high expectations in challenging circumstances.

Some good advice on here.

NGA guidelines are excellent. In the first term we were in crisis mode and as chair, my role was to support the head. We have now taken governance online and we are doing the best we can in extraordinary circumstances. I find zoom meeting hard to chair and run at the same time, so I've asked for reports to go out two weeks in advance of meetings and that governors send in their questions on the reports a week ahead so that the head and SLT have time to respond. We can then really dig into the detail and data at the meeting.

One of the key things we do as governors is ask questions of the SLT and they need to appear in the minutes to evidence that we are fulfilling our role. If your clerk isn't doing this then it needs to be raised at the annual review. Governance is hard work and I suspect the parent governors are less than happy with me as chair as I hold the line on strategic and operational very hard.

Ask the questions, get the evidence, triangulate the evidence and keep asking questions but also support the head because it is a ridiculously stressful time.

Vice chair here, placemarking for later.