Not enjoying being a school governor

[Cerulean60]

I became a co-opted governor of a primary school a few months ago. I was looking for a local volunteering opportunity, thought it sounded interesting, was told it was a few hours work a month plus meetings, and that there was loads of training and support available.

What I've actually found is the role involves sitting in monthly 3 hour meetings where we discuss things I just can't get excited about - e.g. why have year 4 boys reading scores declined 0.3% compared to last year? I'm sat there thinking 'is 0.3% a statistically significant decrease and does it warrant a big discussion?' I don't know if this is the wrong attitude.

The meetings are also dominated by experienced governors who are either parents or former teachers. I get the vibe that because I haven't got children or a teaching background I can't credibly give a point of view.

I've found myself volunteering for roles/tasks without having a clue what they involve, just because I feel I need to do my share, but then stress over not knowing what to do (even when I ask, I get vague answers).

I attended one day of induction training but that was very general. There is more training I can sign up for but it doesn't necessarily map to the actual things coming up in meetings right now. I also don't have time to attend loads of training around work, FGBs, meeting prep and what feels like constant demands for school visits (on dates the school set, with little consideration that I do have a full-time job). I've been allocated a mentor but she hasn't been very friendly.

Overall it's already a very good school so governor work feels like paper shuffling and box ticking.

Does anyone have any advice?! I just want to quit really but also don't want to be flaky.

Regardless of whether you have committees or a board style GB, the function is the same. Board style tends to succeed by delegating key tasks to working parties, who report back to the FGB. Committees are just formally appointing who will look at each area ahead of time.

Yes, lougle. Delegation. Not trying to do everything at FGB meetings.

New ideas should always be backed by good practice. Chairs who just dictate are awful but you do need a GB to adopt effective methods of working. Making new suggests can work but only when others are on board with the suggestions or new governors have been recruited to make necessary changes. It can be very lonely and a thankless task to find a GB that’s poorly run and isn’t doing it’s job. It makes me wonder if they ever attended any training at all! This is so far removed from what should be happening.

Problem is when you have a sub committee with only 4 or 5 governors on it and 3 can't make a meeting say, it's not worth having the meeting. But if you have FG meeting and 3 governors can't make it, it is still worth having the meeting as you are still quorate and you can make decisions. But the members on the sub committee can be part of a working party that can fit in visits at different times to the schools

I'm a parent governor and it's really not turned out to be what I thought it would be. I feel like I dont have a clue some times and big things get dumped on me as there is no one else.

However I love the school. My child moved schools but I feel extremely passionate about the place ( it's a state SEN school).

I was involved I recruiting a new HT which I would never had any experience like this interviewing a SMT in any other role. It also makes me feel like my opinions count.

I speak out and people do listen. I have quite a unique view of SEN education as I have applied, my son is a private SEN school etc. Nothing i have said has ever been dismissed. Plus we are there not representing our professions but as lay people. So all you need is common sense really.

Give it a while, it takes over a year to get it i think

I did a couple of years in a primary school and also several years as a staff governor in a secondary school.

In both of them, I felt that it would be very difficult to effect any change, because the head and either the chair of governors (in the secondary) or the staff governors (in the primary) appeared to have an agenda that didn’t include listening to other opinions.

I undertook LA training, that I sourced myself and spent quite a lot of time on it. The final straw, which meant that several of us left, was that we were tasked with sourcing a new product for the school. We spent hours, doing research, due diligence, comparing, sending out parent questionnaires etc and in the end, the head just ignored all of it. There were staffing issues that I felt weren’t altogether fair and were skewed and issues to do with new appointments.

If there had been an Ofsted inspection, I didn’t feel that I could,in all conscience, support the school.

There's a tendancy to be comforted by detail and jargon. Challenge it. Get them to explain anything you don't understand.

It can be a very demanding role. Don't accept to do anything you don't already know about or aren't offered training for.

Being a school gov was the most frustrating experience of my life. I lasted three years and then left. I think it really depends on what your Chair, HT and other governors are like. If you don’t think you’ll be able to make a useful contribution as it’s currently set up, then go.

I’m now trustee of a local charity which is so much more rewarding and I feel I am making a much more positive contribution, largely due to the culture and expectations, my fellow trustees (inc the Chair) and our CEO.

Why would Governors source a new product for the school? I’ve never done this and it’s not ethos or strategy for the school, in my opinion. I think the governors should have delegated this to the Head as it’s operational. Therefore I would say it’s a poorly run GB that simply didn’t understand its role. That’s sad for governors who really do want to do a good job.

No governor should have to source their own training. It should be an intrinsic part of induction and an-going requirement. I do find it amazing they some schools are so bad regarding governance.

It depends on if the training provided is fit for purpose and you get recommendations from other boards. You might research your HT appraisal provider or visit other boards, share their training and find some one really good.
You might be reviewing new meal providers and research and visit other providers.
You might bring on an associate with skills in Media and IT to help assess options for new provision and what is needed and best sorts the schools needs.
It depends where you GB is.

If the HT targets include generating income you might want associate governors to review the plans, contracts and products.

It depends if the HT is employed by the Governors or not and the type of school and constitution they work under.

We have supported many schools and many GBs and they vary immensely. Some Governors do little and some do a lot. Some are slow moving and some are proactive. Usually your Chairs cluster group share good training providers and services.

Thank God I’ve never had to do any of that. Such a waste of time and not strategic. We always had staff recommend procurement. So glad my schools were LA schools and we had excellent training from our LA and our Trust provided our external adviser for Head appraisal. No wonder some schools cannot recruit and keep Governors if they ask them to do all of this. It’s too much.