How important is the Headteacher to long-term performance of a primary school?

[HeadBasher2018]

I am having last minute jitters about our choice of primary school for our eldest DC.

There are lots of factors to consider, but one thing I am worried about and would love some thoughts on, is the importance of the Headteacher.

Our closest school was Outstanding until 2014 when it got downgraded to Good, a few months after a new head arrived. The parents I know there seem to still rate it really well. We would be pretty much guaranteed to get a place.

There is another school a few minutes further away. We’d have maybe a 20% chance of getting in. It’s Outstanding, and had excellent results in the recent league tables published.

To be blunt, the head of the Good school doesn’t impress me. She is not a good public speaker and seems to be a bit dithery. She doesn’t really exude authority or intelligence. At the same time I’ve noticed her be a bit dismissive of parents’ questions, and I have noticed her speaking over her teachers once or twice. Written communications have typos. She seems to be a bit deluded in saying how well the school did in the recent league tables (in the school newsletter). It did ok but not fantastic and I would have expected a bit of reflection on certain obvious areas for improvement.

Her experience seems to be with special measures schools - she has a good track record of turning them around, so another concern is that she could be resting on her laurels at the Good school as Good is ‘good enough’...

So - a question for those who work in schools - how important is the headteacher in the overall performance of a primary school?

Could a head with a disagreeable personality, or even just a lack of authority, or a lack of ambition for the school, result in good teachers leaving the school? Or not performing to their best?

Given that she doesn’t come across that well, is that likely to have negatively impacted the ofsted rating, as she won’t have been able to think on her feet answering tricky questions, talking it up, giving examples of things etc? (sounds very patronising but I can’t think of another way of putting it!) I don’t know anything about how the inspections work so please tell me if this is ridiculous.

The difference between her and the head of the other Outstanding School was so stark in the way they presented their open days - the Outstanding head was so polished, articulate, thoughtful, intelligent, prepared. On the other hand the Good head didn’t seem to care what we thought of the school. She hadn’t prepared what to talk about and spoke about random things that popped into her head, didn’t even think to introduce herself. (I attended 3 open days over the years and all the same.)

I know I am lucky to have a Good school close by. I think if we put the Outstanding School first preference and didn’t get in, I would be very happy with DC then going to the Good school. It is closer and has other redeeming qualities. But I might feel guilty if I don’t even try for the Outstanding. It’s not about the status of the schools today, I’m more thinking about what each school will be like in 5 years time.

I would appreciate any comments or experiences of schools with different personality-types of heads, from other parents or teachers.

Personally i wouldn't worry too much about OFSTED ratings - but would listen to your gut on the head. The philosophy of the school can be very driven by the head and they're a key part of what makes a school. My opinion only as a parent.

I would say arrange a meeting with the head and Chair of governors to ask questions and that will give a better view of how the school is run. IMO - governors along with heads and Snr leadership teams drive the school and its performance and reputation.

I was in a similar situation where the nearest 'outstanding' school had changed head after many years. The new head I felt had a weak leadership style and didn't really have any kudos in the local community. During reception my interactions with him were not positive and so we left after reception

Thank you both. Argh! I was hoping for replies saying it didn’t matter, as I really want DC at the Good school for other reasons.

Tomorrow I will request a meeting with the head.

I'm a teacher and would say that the Head is all important! They determine the ethos and impact on all areas of school life. We chose a primary school based on the Head - she was so passionate about all the things we are! Unfortunately she then left in the Easter of my son’s Reception year. Luckily the new Head is also fantastic but in different ways. We can see positive changes have been made under her leadership and other things which have sadly slipped or where the school has changed its focus. We are very happy though to send our second child there and he’s thrived too. I would definitely apply for the school with the stronger Head!

The headteacher swayed it for us too.

We have a 10min drive to school instead of a 2 minute walk and I wouldn't have it any other way.

The thought that kept swirling around my head was that I was unwilling to compromise dc education for the sake of my convenience.

Head over ofsted every time.
Ofsted take a very limited snapshot of the school, the head drives it daily and can sink a fantastic school over time with a weak attitude.

Many schools went from Outstanding to Good under the new Ofsted criteria. I don't think that should sway you. But in my opinion a Head does need to have a certain character and be able to lead. They are steering the school and leading the team of teachers and that takes a certain type of personality. I couldn't be doing with wishy washy, I'd rather a Head have strong views even if I disagree with some of them.

Lots and lots of schools went down a grade around 2014 as that's when the new, more difficult, Ofsted schedule came in. I would be very wary of an Outstanding school that hadn't been re-inspected since 2014 as their grading really doesn't mean much.

Outstanding is really not all that anyway. Good can be good enough- I'd much rather a Good school with happy staff, clinging onto some balance in their curriculum and focus on social and pastoral care than an Outstanding school that had become a paperwork machine and was spending all of Y2, Y5 and Y6 cramming for SATs to keep their data up.

It is, however, all about the Head. The Head sets the tone, decides on the priorities and is the source of morale- for better or worse. For a Primary school to be a happy, functional place the staff and the kids need to like and respect the Head and the Head needs to be strong, smart and human.

I agree with previous posters that a head is important. BUT I would say that a head who comes across as a bit ‘dithery’ may still be a good head in lots of important ways - just because the other head is smooth and polished and good at public speaking, those aren’t the most important qualities in a head IMO. The other head can’t really be dithery if she’s succeeded in turning around failing schools, can she? I’d be wary of going too much by appearances. Most of a head’s work is done behind the scenes. If the parents you’ve spoken to are happy with the school, that is a good indicator.

It’s not necessarily a reflection on her that the school was downgraded to Good - it’s likely that it’s harder to get Outstanding than when the school was last inspected, rather than the school has actually got worse. That’s what happened to my DC’s school.

Also, you need to be realistic here. Don’t set your heart on the other school if your DC only has a 20% chance of getting in, as you are likely to be disappointed.

The head is far more important than the ofsted. The head is more important than anything else.

The staff need to be well led, inspired and happy.

The head of my dd’s primary died suddenly and the school completely changed. The better teachers left and the whole ethos was different.

My dd is in secondary now and her amazing head starts a secondment today so we have a new head. So you also have to be careful picking a school just because of the leadership as you never know what will happen.

I agree that you can't really base your assessment of a head on how they are at public speaking. It's a lot more about how the school runs, which includes things like results, exclusion rates, rate of staff turnover etc. I also agree that the difference between good and outstanding with Ofsted is largely meaningless.

Head is most important.

Nice idea from pp about arranging a meeting with head and chair of gov, but unless it's a few paying school, I can't see them agreeing to it.

Fee not few!

Be aware that some heads are very good at "talking the talk", it doesn't mean they are good heads.

I think a school is only as good as the head and that schools can dramatically change (for better or worse) when a head changes.

Head absolutely. A new head for our school absolutely transformed our school.

Agree that anybody who thinks a Head and Chair of Governors will have individual meeting with prospective parent of a YR child doesn't actually work in a school.

My Head gives tours to families joining the school further up but there is no way she could make herself individually available for the 80+ parents applying for Reception places each year.

The head teacher makes a huge difference yes.

An excellent head will make a school excellent. An uninspiring head can get a whole school spiralling down.

In your situation I would put the slightly-further-but-better school above the other school in your preference list. This does no harm as your chances of getting a school are unaffected by your preference position - if you qualify for the school in 3rd place on your list, they can't refuse you the place just because they weren't 1st choice.

I’m only a parent. I agree that Ofsted results are less important. Some schools aim to remain ‘good’ because to be ‘outstanding’ requires more work, show innovative approaches, be an example to other schools etc.

The Head of DD’s school showed us round, and I didn’t warm to her. She didn’t take much interest in our DD (who was chatty and keen to engage) and dismissed my question about how they provide for the children who are ahead (I recognise it’s a bit of a pushy parent question, but I was unimpressed at the time).

DD is now in Y2 in that school, and I have to say that I’ve revised my opinion of the Head. The staff are happy and all have remained in the school for years, which speaks volumes in the current teacher recruitment/retention crisis. It’s a well organised school, with no last-minute letters and other annoyances. It’s stable and consistent. Other parents have said that when they’ve raised issues with the Head they have been taken seriously, eg bullying. She knows the children well (they are sent to her office frequently to show her their good work, and they love this), and writes pertinent, personal comments on reports.

Can you speak to a few people with children at the school, and find out what they feel about the Head? Has anyone had to raise a concern and was it dealt with well? Do the teachers seem happy or stressed? Have there been any incidents of bullying, and how well have they been addressed? Solid results, happy teachers and good pupil behaviour are more important than a powerful presentation style, IMO.

You’ve been to 3 open days at this one school?!

Yes the head is important, and they can change the culture of a school overnight. I would read the ofsted report carefully to see why they were downgraded, which areas have been outlined as having weaknesses.

Also, look at the results over the last 3-4 years - sometimes, you will have a 'freak' year where the results are lower because of the cohort - more children with learning difficulties, more children with English as a second language, more children that have moved to the school in year 5-6. These things do happen and it affects the overall results. Look instead at the trends.

You can also ask about the middle management, subject leaders etc. How much of an impact to they have? How much extra training?

Finally, I think that asking questions (and looking at data) about how a school deals with children at either end of the spectrum is very significant - how they manage children who are high achievers, and children that struggle academically or who have special education needs. That's a very important indicator in my mind.

I would agree with PPs about going for a school with a culture and a leader you are happy with rather than being swayed by the difference between Ofsted ‘good’ and ‘outstanding’.

However, if a school has only very recently received an Oustanding judgement, and a good set of results to boot, it is not unknown for an ambitious head to use this as a springboard to look for the next challenge and more money elsewhere, so I’d be wary of choosing a school just because of the HT under such circumstances.

I think the head is very important - but I would add the caveat that sometimes a head that is good with parents is less good with something else important, or one that is poor with parents happens to have a very good grip on something else.

Why don't you look at the governors area of the website and see the school development plan and see if the school is aware of its weaknesses.

Does the OFSTED report cover leadership and have any recommendations for it?

The head is important - would go with the one you feel matches your ethos -

BUT - you need to be aware that good heads move often.

Thank you so much for all the thoughtful comments.

I am conscious I shouldn’t over-think on the presentation style, except I know that managers at work who act/speak that way (this is me sometimes!) are not respected, unfairly or not. She must have done something right to get where she is and have been successful with the failing schools as pp have said.

Other parents rate the behaviour and happiness of the kids well. On the open days I grilled the current pupils about bullying as that’s my worst fear, and thankfully it does not seem to be a problem in either school.

When I mention the head to other parents there is a bit of eye-rolling but I’ve not heard any real complaints. One parent said they were talked at / talked over when they tried to ask questions.

I was lucky enough to be offered a chat with a senior teacher this morning about concerns.

I was reassured on the academic results front (anomalous circumstance affecting one result, also excelled in one other measure which I hadn’t picked up from the data meaning I was unfair in calling the head ‘deluded’ in the op).

She said the ofsted was unpredictable and subjective, and the criteria change frequently, so sometimes they got indications they were outstanding, other times good.

I didn’t feel I could come right out and ask about the head, but I asked about the leadership, staff morale and turnover, and she said 2 teachers left last year, out of 14 classes, and they don’t have any problems with recruitment, which sounds ok? This teacher I spoke to was great, if she was the head I wouldn’t be writing this thread!

We need to weigh up all the other significant factors (distance, on-site clubs, religion, air pollution, existing friendships) before deciding whether to switch around our first 2 preferences, but will take onboard the resounding advice that the head is, in fact, very important!

I appreciate each and every reply, thanks again.