What do parents and teachers really think of school governors?

[DiggerMum]

I am a primary school governor and have a strong background in education and children's services. I feel I have some relevant support and experience to offer my school and put in a lot of hours and effort, as do lots of the other governors I know. I sometimes feel a sense of ambivalence/ defensiveness from some (not all!) teachers and similarly with some parents (again certainly not all!) - some parents for example seem to talk to me thinking I can sort an issue with the school for them (not my role!) or think I do it to advance my own child. I was in a conversation with a teacher recently (not from my school) in which she said that governors were just for decoration, didn't contribute anything and really just a waste of space - according to her, all teachers think this, and most parents, but just go along with it as the government says it is what we have to do. In my opinion Governors are very useful and are currently put under increasing pressure in terms of management and leadership in schools. I suppose I am just therefore pondering what parents and teachers really think of them/ people like me and is it worth doing what I do?

I think it is shocking how much power a headteacher has and how if he/she configures his governors just right then that power seems almost unbridled.

Unfortunately this is true in some schools and will be worse under academies.

I'm a foundation governor at my DC's school.

I'm the chair of the finance committee so I have significant input into many of the budgetary decisions. I have a lot of training and experience in the finance industry (including a professional qualification), so I think I bring something valuable to the role. The HT is very clued up on the finances, but most of the staff / other governors aren't.

I'm also a parent, so I know most of the teachers and many of the children / parents that way, but not particularly from being a governor.

I don't think I'm a very visible governor - I'm mainly active behind the scenes. If any parents want to criticise me for that, I don't care - they need to remember it's a voluntary role, and it's quite time consuming for me already (on top of a job, looking after three DC etc) - let them do it themselves if they think they can do better!

Sometimes it's a PITA, but I do it because I'm the kind of person who likes to give something back to my community (I also hold a voluntary role in the local church), and because I believe I have a valuable skill to offer.

I don't want my DC to get special treatment because I'm a governor. However, I am aware that this may happen to some (hopefully small) extent, as their teachers may feel that they don't want to piss me off. I think it can also act the other way: one of the teachers told me that my DS's Easter hat had been chosen for a prize but when the chair of governors (who was judging) saw the name on it she changed her mind as she didn't want to be accused of favouritism! (I'm not bothered by this btw. I understand where she was coming from.)

It astounds me that someone with no relevant experience in education or management can be given the responsibility of holding the head to account. Just because they are a parent!

I'd feel like a right knob walking around a school giving feedback about displays etc to qualified teachers because I went on a training course about it!

I think it helps when the school is more open about what the governors are actually doing. Our school website publishes the minutes of each meeting (minus the confidential issues of course) and lists the responsibilities of each governor.

From what I can see, the governors bring a range of different skills to the job. Some have experience in business-related areas and others are from an educational background.

The minutes always include phrases like "Governors asked for clarification about...." and "Governors questioned whether this was necessary..." so it certainly looks as though they don't just go along with whatever the HT wants.

I see them around the school from time to time, usually helping out at events. DD says that a couple of them also regularly listen to children reading. They also seem keen to introduce themselves to parents so that everyone is familiar with them.

From what i can see, they seem to be doing a good job. No idea what the teachers think though.

Jane, it doesn't work like that, no individual hold the head to account but the governing body and a whole, with its wide and varied experience does.

Parent governors, as primary stakeholders have more to personally gain than any of the others in ensuring that the school is run well. We all have relevant skills to offer and sometimes coming to the role with no pre conceived ideas of the educational system is a good thing. Fresh eyes and all that.

Think that the are very generous to do such a responsible role, unpaid

It's as good as the people doing it.

Contrary to opinions expressed above the headteacher has no input or influence over who sits on the governing body.

Ex teacher and present parent here.

I worked in a lot of inner city schools - it may be different in leafy suburbs or naice villages, where there is a community, as such, and you're drawing from it. My husband was also a (political) governor for a number of years.

Must admit where I worked there was a definite Then & Us culture. I never worked in a school where it wasn't the Head and Governors versus the Teachers.

Governors didn't help themselves by doing stuff like becoming parent governors when their child was violent/had issues, in order to ensure the child wasn't suspended or excluded. I saw that more than once. It also happened at my own comprehensive school - the biggest bully in the year's dad made sure he was a governor to make his vile son bulletproof.

There are other reasons for this culture, too. Teachers have spent 4 years at university to do their job and have constant (often intrusive and pointless) in service training on top. Some rank amateur who's been on a few little courses can't pretend to have the same professional expertise as someone who trained and daily works in the field. Governors are in a position of pwer over people who are far more qualified and experienced than themselves. It's hard to think of many professions where this would be allowed to happen. I'd done a higher degree in Education from the top university in the US, in Early Childhood Education - including lengthy courses on things like Pluralism, Parents and Education, etc. Should some local businessman who's done a brief course on (whatever) really know more about education? Where else do we take randomers in and let them make huge and expensive decisions about something so important?

I think parent governors are the worst and would have found it hard to find another teacher who wouldn't agree with that (behind the closed staffroom door).

In the years my husband was a governor for the Labour party, he was OK as he is a trained teacher/TA himself, so perfectly well qualified to do what he did. And the way schools are run changed radically over the time he was doing it.

I think the idea that being a parent = being allowed to meddle in education is analogous to having once had a headache = being a brain surgeon.

Also - they're very up themselves.

i think it's shocking how much power a headteacher has and if he/she configures his governors just right then that power seems almost unbridled

This again, I am afraid. Except for one poor governor who seemed to spend years banging her head off a brick wall whilst all the others pandered to the headteacher.

One was not only a governor, but a teacher and head of the PTA. All at the same time, in the same school. I imagine this is not disallowed, but it made a lot of parents feel very uncomfortable.

Some rank amateur who's been on a few little courses can't pretend to have the same professional expertise as someone who trained and daily works in the field

But wouldn't you agree that some governors can provide skills from other walks of life (eg HR, law, finance) which teachers themselves do not have and which can be valuable in running a school?

I think the idea that being a parent = being allowed to meddle in education is analogous to having once had a headache = being a brain surgeon.

I think the analogy is more like: suffering from a headache = being consulted, within parameters, about what treatment you would like.

Governors don't help themselves because they don't interact with parents. Most wouldn't know a governor if they passed them in the street. Most don't know what they do, apart from swerve issues with a "not my remit".
There used to be a legal requirement to hold an annual meeting. As soon as the requirement was dropped most Governors dropped the meeting. They don't help themselves by being so invisible and.

some rank amateur is that REALLY what some teachers think about governors?

Good Lord. little wonder some of them are never seen about the playground.

My sons' school came close to going into special measures and they have had Head after Head (only one was any good). The current one is a temporary interim one. The good Head was the last one - a former teacher from the actual schol; much loved by parents and actually doing a good job. (We thought - the governors thought otherwise).

My son's friend's mum is a governor so the kids get to hear the gossip before we do. And just before xmas, the kids heard that the governors were trying to manoeuvre the decent Head out and also a senior English teacher who frankly was one of the best teachers in the school. I dismissed it as rumour mill. After xmas, the teacher cleared her room and ever since, thanks to the governors, my Y9 son has had a succession of bad supplies for Engliosh - surely one of the most important subjects. Thanks to the governors.

The last Head also left, being replaced by this appalling temporary Head who seems to be sucking up to the governors and trying to get the permanent gig.

His first act was to exclude two boys, accusing them of a bizarre "crime" that, it turned out, was actually perpetrated by the kid who accused them. "# GET (HEADTEACER'S NAME) OUT" is mysteriously appearing in graffiti round the school.

I've met the man and he creeped the shit out of me. When it was uncovered that he'd acted too hastily and excluded the wrong boys, he had a friendly chat on the phone with the parent of the child who caused the entire situation - (future parent governor material) and didn't exclude him at all, even after it was proven by a load of the Y10 lads with timestamped screenshots that the 'victim' was lying. As the school serves a handful of small villages, everyone knows what happened. Head acted hastily and unfairly. Governors are at fault for putting him there.

He sends us self indulgent 20 page long weekly "Head Teacher's Letters" via email attachment - he has a crush on one boy who is a well known athlete. My son says he sidles up to the Y9 boys and asks them where x is, all the time. No interest in them at all - just the kid who brings him reflected glory.

No doubt he boasts he knows the students by name but the lads say he doesn't have a clue who they are.

The governors inflicted this Head on the school. It is tiny for a high school and traditionally every teacher has known every child's name. (For the governors upthread - why is it a proud boast you know people's names? Shouldn't you get their names? I could walk into a class of 30 kids at 9 AM and have every name by 12. I thought anyone in school could. Can't you?)

But apparently the majority of the governors - those who got the decent Head and one of the best teachers out - like him.

Governance and leadership is now a huge part of the Ofsted inspection. If some of your assumptions are correct then those schools would most definitely be found to be requiring improvement or worse.

If your school is good or outstanding then you have a good and effective governing body.

I'd like to hear more about what the governors do, for example in a newsletter every so often to see what they've been working on and the decisions made. Governor profiles, an explanation of what the governors do, and contact details on the school website might be helpful too.

UK state schools are required to have some information on Governors on their website, including names, roles, how many meetings they have attended and some brief information on things the Governing Body has been working on.

I'm a parent Governor at a primary school and totally agree with PPs that the Governing body is as good as its members. At my school there have been a lot of changes recently to make the Governing Body more effective (including lots of changes to membership) and to focus on recruiting Governors with the right skills. I put in a lot of work and have a professional background that gives me skills that some of the other governors do not have. My work has included dealing with some rather difficult and sensitive issues. As a body we challenge the head frequently and this has on many occasions lead to changes/looking for more creative solutions to problems.

However, I share Diggermum's concerns that other parents see us as somehow in it to get preferential treatment for our children. The only possible way that I can see that this is true is that I am often in school and so can easily have a quick word with the teacher/head teacher if there is any problem. But then any parent is free to speak to the teachers. I certainly don't think that I get a better deal than anyone else. I suspect that part of the problem is that there was previously a definite 'clique'.

There is also definitely a misconception over my role in that many parents seem to think that it is my role to deal with any problems that they have and represent them against the school. My school has sent a newsletter outlining who Governors are any what their role is but since this is one of many pieces of paper put on book bags I doubt many parents have read it.

This is a shame because I know how hard most Governors at my school work and I suspect that if parents knew exactly how much we really do (which is often confidential so not something that can be discussed in the playground) and how much the school would have to pay to get an external adviser to do it they would be amazed.

I'm not sure what teachers think of us- they are always very pleasant with me but I think I branded myself as a PITA before I was a parent governor as I have never been shy of going in for a chat with teachers if there is a problem.

I'd love to hear if anyone has experience of Governors getting parents on board with what they do/strengthening relations with parents.

And please stop assuming parent governors are useless. We do have jobs and careers with relevant skills!

citychick, the schools I worked in, they were never seen in the playground because they were scared shitless of the actual kids.

But wouldn't you agree that some governors can provide skills from other walks of life (eg HR, law, finance) which teachers themselves do not have and which can be valuable in running a school?

No, I don't agree. Let's leave aside that schools in the most need of help have the least access to such governors.

If you pay a law or finance specialist they are bound by professional responsibilities. They are acting within the scope of their malpractice insurance, and if you have approached KPMG for help with finance, or Pinsent-Mason for help with law, you will be getting not just the skills of the person assigned to you, but the infrastructure and advice of a large company. If the person you are dealing with leaves, their work is handed over to someone else, with a proper process. If it goes wrong there are complaints processes, regulatory oversight, the whole lot.

Someone who works as an accountant helping you as a volunteer has none of that. They may or may not have the skills (do governing bodies actually check the professional qualifications of people who present themselves as having professional qualifications) but they are, in that meeting, acting as private individuals. They are almost certainly not covered for malpractice as there is no engagement letter, there is almost certainly no formal record keeping, recording of emails, meeting notes, the rest of the stuff that accountants and lawyers do as part of being professionals.

It's like getting health advice by chatting to your mate who's a GP over coffee. They might be right, but if they aren't, good luck trying to get anything out of the MDU.

It's the amateurism of a lost age. If a school needs professional services, it should engage a professional. Relying on someone whose dayjob is roughly in the right area is fifty years out of date. You only have to look at some of he crazy employment law messes schools get themselves into to see this.

Parent governors can have skills from their jobs allowing them to pick up on things like excellent yet more expensive older teachers being harassed out of a job until they are stressed and replaced by several cheaper younger teachers. Sometimes those meddling parent governors may actually have the back of teaching staff.

Medusa, I've only seen governors turn down older and expensive teachers, in preference for NQTs.

By the time I left teaching, an NQT was £11,000 cheaper than me. Someone from a corporate background would not think me employable, compared to a kid out of college.

And I can't say I'd blame them for that decision. But no. I have never seen governors defend older, expensive teachers. I've seen them offer jobs to cheaper, less experienced ones, though.

Bolograph somewhat to my surprise, I agree with most of your post. I think maybe I'm biased by the fact that the governing body at my DC's school is mainly very good, but I do see your point about the lack of professional regulation.

However, it's not the individual governors' fault that the system is out of date. I believe that most governors are generously giving up their time to do the best they can and, as such, deserve some credit.

I'd like to think that governors were more accessible and more willing to express parents' opinions. But at all the schools I've had dealings with, they have simply been the HT's lackeys. Sad really

I have an issue with parent governors being given confidential information about children to be honest.

Just looked on our school website to see one parent is responsible for monitoring the outcomes of FSM kids. Who decided she should be given that information without parents consent? Presumably she knows which children are FSM kids and how they are doing? What qualifies her to monitor that?

Jane at my DC's school, the governors would only be given aggregated, anonymised progress data about the various groups of children (eg FSM, SEN etc).

Joff, two of my son's best teachers were NQTs. But I don't like seeing excellent older teachers bullied out of jobs because they are too expensive or all of a sudden their face doesn't fit. I don't have a background in education by the way but I'm pretty sharp at people reading and seeing the kinds of things others don't. I'm being deliberately vague but I've seen how much stress and unfair shit is piled on teachers from governors and HT in these meetings downwards. And we had a HT who was an absolute master of Buck passing to cover up his fuck ups and deceit.