New Parent Governor Questions...

[slfk3]

Hello,

I was appointed the new parent governor at my children's primary before Christmas, so far I've attended a meeting. We have since been told the school is under action by the local authority, the second time in 4 years, for poor academic progress and poor governance. I would appreciate advice from other governors on a few things:
Are foundation governors supposed to/allowed instruct the children directly?
If the same governors who were last on notice by the LA are again the only ones reviewing the response to the LA will that be frowned upon?
Are the governors supposed to support new governors, teaching them, including them so they can learn?
If there's no committee established to review the response to the LA is there a legitimate reason not to include a new governor in that review? The other parent governor asked to be allowed to attend a meeting to review the heads response and was told the time of the meeting, he can't make it so asked if I could attend and they won't reply to his email but have since sent other emails (ie, they have access and have used email since). I had though that all governors are equal on a board and have an equal responsibility to review, respond etc., but they seem to be picking and choosing who can and can't be involved.
Given the circumstances, poor results, poor governance, dreadful behavior in school, I would have thought it would be a heads together, all hands on deck lets sort this problem out but they seem to be drawing up the shutters even within the governing body.
If a governor wants to go visit a school doing well in their key subject, to observe the way their policy is applied, so not observe teaching but try and see how the policies translate into the classroom, is it up to the governing board to decide when they discuss if they can go or should they be encouraging that sort of proactive approach? If not how is a governor supposed to identify what it will look like when our school is doing things correctly?

Thank you!

Thats a lot of questions
Yes all govrnors are equal
There is often a staff governor who teaches? Is that what you mean by intrstuct children directly?
There doesnt have to be a mentor or support from other governors - its nice if there is but they are often volunteers with no time. There should be training you can access though.
I think visiting another school could borders on operational and policies apply to a specific context so it wont necessarily help in your context.you would need to look at the impact of your policies on your cohort. There should be data and anonymised case studies of discrete groups. During visits you would speak to staff, look at displays, books, student voice.
Im less clear on the review - does the FGB minutes name some specific governors taking part in it?

If you want to do a school visit (in your own school) to investigate a particular area of, say, the curriculum, you should probably agree on a focus for the visit with the HT. It's a good idea to look at the observations and recommendations made in the school's last Ofsted report, though I imagine you could look at areas which concern the LA at the moment. I don't have any experience of that kind of situation.
As for foundation governors instructing, they might well come in as classroom volunteers, but that would be quite distinct from their role as governors.
I don't see any reason why a new governor should not be included in the sort of committee you describe. A fresh pair of eyes should be welcomed in these circumstances.

Thanks for the replies.

A foundation c of e governor introduced herself as a governor to our students on a recent trip to the cathedral, she then instructed them on prayer and had planned the entire mornings lessons on prayer. I didn't think that sort of thing was allowed. I believe the lessons are to be rolled out to other schools but ours had been chosen as her first lot of children. We were also charged for the morning as parents.

I was allowed to be the "maths" person on the board, our results are dreadful and I asked to visit a school doing very well in that. We have no maths policy, or any academic polices to be honest, and I wanted to see how in a school with them it reflected in how the children learn, what is up on display, etc.,

The meeting to review was supposed to be this morning, I was in reading with children and noticed they changed the meeting and have not informed the entire board, I can only assume it is further proof they don't want new eyes involved.

The LA think the current board aren't scrutinizing the school, that there is poor direction and leadership and a lack of ambition. When the board were informed at our last meeting that results were poor and the LA were stepping in they debated appealing as they didn't think our results were that poor, there is negative progress and below national and LA results for as far back as I can see records. There just seems to be serious denial and a serious lack of drive/ambition to even attempt to grapple with the issues.

All governors are equal, no reason why you should not be able to attend the meeting
Good practice for new govs to be allocated a ‘ buddy’ - who you can go to with questions etc. Lots of gov training available, ask what your school is signed up to and book some courses
Would suggest you have a meeting with Chair of Govs to talk it all through and raise your concerns
Join Primary School Governors Facebook Group if you do FB - super helpful and some very experienced governors who can offer advice on these sorts of situations
If you are under action as you put it, LA would typically provide you with an NLG (National Leader of Governance) to come and advise/support your governing body during this period - perhaps ask about that?

Re the Foundation governor - are they perhaps employed in some capacity by the cathedral/diocese? That may explain why they led the prayer etc. However sounds like your question here is not related to governance but rather as a parent - so I would ask the Head about it but make clear you are doing so in your capacity as parent rather than governor

I think in another thread you are seeking advice on moving your DC and I do understand you are not happy.

To try and answer your points:

I’m not sure what you mean by under notice from the LA. Has the Improvement Officer looked at your progress and outcomes and given you a poor review? We have a system where a school can be given a red warning. This is, in effect, a notice that, if Ofsted came they would find the school RI or worse. So I’m assuming your school is in this position.

Schools with worrying progress/attainment must have a school improvement plan that addresses this. Schools should check with their Improvement Officer that this is fit for purpose and Ofsted will need it to be the case. Your role as a governor should be within this framework. When you visit under the remit of Maths Governor, you must check for evidence that the Improvement Plan is having an effect.

You cannot sack individual governors so they can remain in position and oversee school improvement. If the whole GB is removed after an Ofsted inspection, that’s a different matter. It could be that the LA seek to remove this GB snd start again but that’s up to them, not the Governors themselves. The LA should be a lot more proactive in training the GB to do their job effectively.

The Head should be drawing up an Improvement Plan as discussed above and the Governors should draw up their own plan to improve. This should be lead by the Chair. If you have an ineffective one, the process will be muddled and not fit for purpose. This is another reason for the LA to step in. However as you appear to be a C of E (Aided or Controlled?) it might have to be the Diocesan Education Board that also gets involved. In a good school, you would get whole GB training on how to become effective. This could be a way forward in giving you ideas for a GB improvement plan. Roles and responsibilities should be clearly identified and also what evidence the GB want to see regarding school improvement. Setting the Heads targets is also tied into this.

I have rarely seen Governors go round to good schools. You really would not learn much. They are also busy and I don’t think it’s a great plan. It’s far far better to get trained so you can ask pertinent questions. You cannot go around criticising class teaching, because you think you have seen better elsewhere, is operational and you would be very foolish to do this.

What you must do is ensure your Head gives you robust data in terms of assessment and progress in the form of a detailed report for each year group at every meeting of FGB and any Teaching and Learning Committee or equivalent you have. You must be able to trust this data. If you don’t have robust assessment procedures then it’s very difficult for GBs. You have to ask those difficult questions! When everything is being done correctly and teaching is good, the progress improves and the attainment will come. It’s not a quick fix and it’s virtually impossible with the wrong people in post. You must have s detailed and fit for purpose improvement plan and this should spell out what success looks like, how you are going to get there and how you are going to monitor it along the way. At every meeting, the Head should update the governors on progress on every item. The items should mirror the areas where Improvement is needed and there could be a lot of them. Governors should be attached to each item. To some extent this links into subjects, SEN and PP but Govs doing fun things and not important things are wasting their time and not helping with improvement. They simply don’t understand their role.

As for the governor teaching: it’s the least of your worries, but yes they can. Vicars often do! As long as it’s in the curriculum and they are Safeguarding checked! It would be better if they concentrated on being a governor though! Strategy and challenge! Hope it gets better!

Governors are not all equal in practice! Get trained and you will be invaluable! Far more use than the others you seem lumbered with.

I definitely wouldn't go to another school - way too operational!

I would say that:

• Governors are not supposed to instruct children directly, unless they are also staff or in another legitimate capacity (e.g. sports coach).
• I can’t see that governance is likely to have improved if the same governors that were previously on notice are not involving newer governors in improvement work and all governors should be involved in the review.
• On our governing body all new governors have quite a comprehensive induction, including a one day local authority run training course and ongoing mentoring.
• All governors are equal, decisions about who is involved should really be based on relevant skills. The governing body makes corporate decisions.
• Observing in other Schools is a tricky one. A good idea in principle, but quite a delicate one to manage. I have only known it in some instances driven by the School, when they have arranged a visit to observe an initiative and invited a link governor along.

Some questions for you:

• Does your governing body have a Clerk, as they can be a wealth of information?
• Is there a Governors Code of Practice / Conduct in place?
• Is there any Local Authority governance support that you could access?
• Would the GB be receptive to an external review of governance or accessing the board development the NGA offers, in order to improve governance and get things back on a more level playing field?

Good luck with a challenging situation. Hopefully you can find a way to contribute towards driving the improvement needed.

I think that you are trying to run before you have started to walk in terms of being a governor. I recognise that you are desperately concerned about the school and you appear to have every right to be concerned from what you say. However you need some proper training on introduction to governance. The LA usually hold 2 or 3 courses a term and you need to get on one of them. Also find out whether by chance the school subscribes to modern governor or to NGA learning link- they both have lots of web-based training programs for you to look at. Based on what you have said it seems unlikely as they seem to be stumbling around in the dark.
You also do need to find out just what exactly the LA are saying about the school and the governing board. Somebody must have sent some kind of document either from the LA or from the Diocese saying what the situation is. When you know that then are others who can start to help.
Please do not try to go to another school over the maths teaching. That is totally operational. You need to be establishing if you are the maths governor who is the maths co-ordinator for the school. Then ask the chair of governors and the headteacher to be allowed to talk to the maths co-ordinator about how maths is developed in the school. That is the way forward to establishing more about what is going on in school.
If you want to send me on private mail which school and LA then I will look at your school data and give you an opinion about what it looks like in comparison to other schools.

Good practise is to have a thorough induction process with the Chair to cover all requirements and expectations. This depends on the experience of the Chair.

Foundation Governors have additional responsibilities to gain voice of the children and monitor RE provision. The Board may be Foundation heavy to ensure Christian distinctiveness. Diocese may provide training if school has bought into their services. The vicar or faith person governor may lead worship depending on their qualification.

There are new, continuing or experienced Governor but they all carry the same weight vote wise. Except the Chair who may have an additional vote sometimes.

Can I suggest all your questions and others can be answered by the experts on schoolgovernors.thekeysupport.com/
Right corner click on free trial and download and save as much as you can. There are questions for link areas that Ofsted will likely ask about. There is an induction check list you may wish to complete.

The school should have a training provider but the LA usually would provide something free to support a weak school.

Your clerk will also provide support and direct you as needed.
Your school may have access to Governorhub or similar where policies, minutes, Ofsted updates and reports can be accessed by the board.
This posted site above is one recommended by the NGA and probably should be your first point of call.
The first year is about catching up, training and finding your feet.

Having new life is fantastic but having committees that are too large can be counter productive sometimes.

Many local authorities are delegating the vast majority of their education budgets to schools. The schools then enter into purchasing arrangements for services with the LA or elsewhere. Nothing is free! LA Learning Trusts have to cover costs. The service agreement can include a lot of improvement advice, clerking services and training for governors. It is concerning that you have not mentioned induction training provided by your LA. You should also put yourself into any training courses which will help you in the short term, eg data interpretation, budgets and finance, Ofsted inspections, curriculum developments, assessment, school improvement and monitoring come immediately to mind. The big advantage of training with other governors is that you pick up tips from them. You would be able to get access to experienced trainers who would point you in the right direction. Your Chair should let you know what is available. Is there a Governors newsletter from your LA? What about a dedicated governor web site? You seem to be floundering and not being able to get basic information. What information about your role have you even given?

You should also be given info on how to benchmark. The Report you have had presumably done this or they would not be concerned about the school.

There is no legal reason that stops a governor being an instructor at a school. None at all. As I said, Vicars often do it. They are nearly always Governors in Aided schools and often in Controlled schools too. If they teach appropriately then input is often valued in their area of expertise. It’s no different to a parent governor working a few hours in school as a TA. It is allowed.

Thank you for all the replies.

It seems the concensus is that ideally I would have someone to train me, we should all be equal, I should have been given the opportunity to at least sit in on the meetings and governors can instruct. The governor in question wasn't the vicar, I believe she has a voluntary role at the cathedral developing educational outreach.

I was told to sign up for a class but that isn't till May so have tried reading up on the key and doing modules online as despite asking nothing is being given to me to help me learn.

The LA action is a "your results are so poor and your governance is so poor you have 6 weeks to have the head develop a plan and response to address these concerns and get back to us, if its not good enough we will take further actions including adding LA appt Govs". To me this feels about as serious as it can get and more of the points on their letter were regarding governance than the school itself. The governors are using the same members who were in trouble last time to review and not involving anyone else, even if I have volunteered. Meaning 3 members, one of whom is retiring at the end of this school year, are looking at what the head has come up with.

Yes I'm also looking to move my children, it is a regular, as in daily occurrence for children in the school to spend a large portion of the day screaming, kicking chairs over, hitting other children and staff, leaving the classrooms and wandering the halls unsupervised etc., in looking at other schools I've realized large portions of the national curriculum aren't even done at our school, in particular ICT, a language, Music. There is no communication from the school or teachers about what they do in school and if you speak to them about your child they use the illiterate, badly behaved ones as a sort of benchmark and tell you they are fine. Based on what I've seen of the governors and head I have little expectation things will change and expect them to get worse, the head said he thought the school would fail ofsted for behavior and with the LA intervention we are now on watch for the call.

Ok. My view (I’ll try and avoid another essay) is that you have a useless Head, useless Governors and you need immediate help from outside. The Governors do need to be replaced by more experienced Governors and I think the Head should go to.

Lots of what you describe stems from poor leadership and classroom practices. The Head and Governors should be all over their assessment data and have done something about it because THEY knew the problems. Sitting back and doing nothing isn’t good enough. Not knowing their dire state is even worse.

I think the Cathedral education governor is not an issue - that’s fine.

However I would be moving my DC. You won’t get training from Governors and schools like this. They don’t know what an effective GB looks like. The fact the Head hasn’t got an improvement plan to halt the decline and rebuild the school is a serious lack of professionalism. Have you been given an existing plan? This is vital. What data does the Head give Governors? How do you measure improvement and success? I would be close to shipping out but as a parent governor you could probably stay put. Even if DC leave, you could be co-opted into a new GB. I would let the LA take over. It cannot be worse than this. I would want the Head to go too!

You won’t just fail on behaviour, by the way. You will fail on leadership, progress and quality of teaching and most other categories from what you say. Your Head isn’t good enough.

OK, parent governor and ex teacher here.
The role of the governor is to be a critical friend. One key part of this role is to ask challenge questions.

So, in your position I would send an email to the chair and ask why you are not included on all full governor meetings, and that you would like to be in future. There may be a legitimate reason, eg our head meets with our chair regularly for various things, and we get a summary of that meeting. I go in with another governor to meet with the Pupil Premium member of staff and we present a report back to the board, etc.
I would then talk to one of the other governors and ask about data.
The key questions here (and you can start with maths as you have been given that role) is

1. why are we performing lower that national average? (the school should be identifying areas where they are weak and need to improve, areas of concern etc, and identifying if there are certain groups of children who need support eg if the results for boys are much better/worse than those for girls)
2. What steps is the school taking to change that? (there should be a plan in place directly addressing those areas identified in 1.) This should be part of a larger School Improvement Plan (SIP) which every school should have as a workign document.

This could be in a whole governor meeting, or it could be in a meeting with the maths lead. But if you meet with the maths lead, I would go with 2 governors, so you are not doing it on your own.

This should be being done for every area - including behaviour. If it isn't then you have a problem with the head not knowing what to do with his/her poorly performing school, and also a problem with the governors not holding the head to account.

That is their role, to ask the questions and then check if the head is dealing with the questions. Governors should not step over into the role of daily management.
But you cannot walk in as a new governor and put this into place, you simply don't know enough about how it works.

As to some of your other questions - induction is nice, many GB don't do it well, or have time for it.
The governor teaching on a cathedral trip - well I assume that is her job and she would do the same for any school trip that asked.
We don't visit other schools for good practice, but the teachers do, and then if they are going to implement any of that they inlcude it as part of the SIP which we oversee. So then we ask the challenge questions around what it is aiming to improve and how, and how will we test the results. (although that is usually covered by the plan)

Yes, all governors should be part of the review, but as a new person with no experience, they may fele that you simply don't know enough to be there.

Please note that I started with critical friend. Don't fall into the trap of being the criticla part without being the friend part, you are supposed to be there to support and help the school

The wording from the LA is very clear you have 6 weeks to come up with a plan to improve the situation in the school. What you describe is a situation where both the SLT and GB are apparently ignoring the reality of the situation, just as they have in the past, so I would suspect that anything that comes up as a plan will not satisfy the LA.
I would agree with Bubbles that this is a crisis situation where the LA has to act. That act should be for all governors to be removed from post (sorry OP but it is all or nothing legally). A small group of experienced governors will be put in place as an Interim Executive Board (IEB) to start to drive the school forward. Part of that move forward will be whether they have faith in the current head or not to be able to make a difference at the school.
Frankly things will get worse before they get better because that is the nature of the beast. As the IEB start to ask searching questions more issues will become apparent, so the school will be in for a bumpy ride for at least the next 12 months and probably longer. Despite what the DfE and ministers would say, these kind of situations are not easily fixed, it takes time and lots of effort by all involved.
If the LA do not take this action but just put in some extra governors then that either says the situation is not quite as bad as suggested or that the LA are "chickening out" on taking the necessary action and will probably be in the same situation in 12 months time.

I would say though, that a new head, full of enthusiasm and able to motivate staff, may well change a lot succefully quite quickly. A lot will depend on if a new head is brought in.

There may be some amazing staff, champing at the bit to be able to implement some good practice across the school.

On the other hand you may have tired and disillusioned staff who are resisitant to every change suggested.

If the school was veyr convenient to me, and my kids in KS1, and happy (friends etc) I'd probably wait it out, and supplement at home, at least long enough to see if a new head is coming.
If there was another school not far away, that had spaces, and my kids were older, I would cut my loses and move.

succefully = successfully (obviously!)

Just a quick example of how it can be done (although this was a long time ago)

School performance poor, especially in reading. Lots of staff who had been there for a long time, plus a scattering of NQT. Staff morale low, lots of low level behaviour issues across the school.

Head left, new head came in.
She quickly saw that there was a lot of poor practice wrt reading.

So, to start with she wrote a reading policy. It was very specific. Every child will do XX every day, and YY every week. Every teacher will have ZZ happening in their class, etc etc.

She introduced it to staff. Explained how it worked. Spent a load of money of various things associated with it (so shelves/books/displays/labelling etc) It wasn't rocket science, it involved hearing children read every week, sending reading books home, getting parents to sign that their kids had read, following up on kids who never read at home etc.
They spent half a term getting it sorted and slowly getting the staff to understand it. She spent time in every classroom helping to implement it. Then after half term, every class had to comply.

Some of the old teachers hated it, resisted it, and she was tough, told them it was policy, and they had to do it. Some made the changes, 2 chose to retire.
Most of the NQTs were really enthusiastic, and went above and beyond.

The reading results shot up quickly, but also there was a complete change of focus and enthusiasm across the school.

She then had to do the same itme by item with loads of stuff, make it policy so that eveyrone had to do it.
In the end it was an amazing school. We went to visit as student teachers and she explain what she had done.

I think the behaviour of children at the school worries the OP. Waiting for that to improve can seem endless and so can improving progress and attainment. She has places for 2 DC at another school. I would take them.

One new parent governor is never going to change culturally embedded poor SLT practices and governance. Any decent teacher will have gone or be in the process of going. It will be a bumpy ride.

Where I am, we dropped the “Critical Friend” description years ago. It’s not really reflective of the professional relationship between Governors and the school. It highlighted the word “friend”. Some governors took this very literally and ignored accountability and challenge. “Critical” is not a great description either. You need to be able to challenge the school and set the ethos and strategic vision. The word “critical” doesn’t describe this.

You do need to work with staff and you certainly need to be aware of their work/life balance and health, but you are accountable for this without becoming a friend. It is important that you know you are supporting the school by being a Governor and doing the job you have been asked to do. You really don’t have to do the Lady Bountiful act and bring cakes in every week. All schools welcome the support of governors at school events but you are not the “Friends” who have a different role. The term Critical Friend tended to veer into this territory and you need to be far more professional in outlook and deeds.

All Governors always receive the agenda for, and should attend, full GB meetings. All Governors should be on the various committees if you have them. If a committee is looking at School Improvement, you could have been considered for it, but it’s not a given that you are on it as you are new. It should be experience/knowledge/skill of Governor led - although that’s hard to find in your situation. It is important that any committee (or working party) established for this issue reports back to the FGB so they can be challenged by governors not on this committee. However the SLT and Governors should have mechanisms for amending their improvement plan and this should be happening now. It’s usually led by the Head as the expert in the field and it is operational. The Governors should write their own plan for improvement of governance.

I too think it best if the LA puts in an IEB. After all, this school is there to educate children and a failing school doesn’t do this. I would not hold out much hope that SLT or the GB can turn the school around.

steppemum: your story is uplifting and clearly says what a Head can do. You have said nothing about the role of Governors though.

All of the reading strategy should have been in an improvement plan. The governors would have no role in teaching it or how it was implemented within the school but they should have had regular updates on its implementation, approve any expenditure and monitor the success (or otherwise) of the Plan. This would require robust data on progress of the DC. Barriers to the success of the plan should have been identified and the plan amended to overcome them. The Governors would then be holding the school to account, ensuring DC received a good education and challenging the Head to improve the school by setting further objectives and reviewing the plan.

Hope that ties in the role of the Head and GB to give greater understanding of how the two work together.

Bubbles
I agree with you.
The story was a follow on from my comment that a committed new head, can under the right circumstances change a school round quite quickly.

I can imagine, for example, the head at my school going in to a failing school and doing that. She would put a SIP in place very quickly and be all over the data to see where the problems are. She would be able to bring the data back to the governing body as things progressed.
I was very clear in the previous post that a new head can, under right circumstances, change a lot quickly. I have seen it done in a couple of schools. But that depends on a good new head and also depends on the staff left in the school. If the head doesn't change, or is up against too many disillusioned and uncommitted staff, then it is a slow uphill climb.
I do think a good governing body makes a difference, but actually so much of it is down to the head, however good the governing body, they will struggle to make the school effective with a bad head.

If I was the OP, I would probably cut my loses and leave, especially if she has a places at another school.

Fair enough you don't like the term 'critical friend' and have dropped it, but your description of it (Lady Bountiful???) is not what I hear with that term. I used it simply as a shorthand to say you have to be both.
There is a danger that the OP, as a brand new governor, unhappy with the school goes in only negative, which isn't helpful, there needs to be an objectivity, a (as you say) professionalism. Utlimately you are there to make the school work properly.

All of your posts have been invaluable. I wasn't sure if I was over reacting/over concerned or if they were well founded. The current head is "new", just over 2 years, and the deputy head who started after him has already left. So I don't expect a new head any time soon. Since he's started it feels communications within the school have broken down from comments staff make to me, and from my own experience.
With regards to being a friend critical or otherwise. Since my eldest started I've been volunteering as a reader, done all school trips, so that I now read with 3 classes a week, am called to fill in for forest schools or if they feel like they are short help on other classes trips. Last year when my then yr 1 child had a supply teacher, followed by 3 more teachers in the year, I came in every day to read and change books to ensure the class kept ticking over as I completely appreciate the pressures schools and this school are under and feel lucky that I have the job I have that allows this. If parents have questions they seek me out to ask me, I'm happy to do it but it shouldn't be the norm as I'm not staff. When I realized how much parents didn't understand what was supposed to happen with KS1 reading, I sat down and wrote up all the key points where communication between teachers and parents was letting down the children and resulting in children reaching year 3 still unable to read through the songbirds phonics scheme. I sent it to the head a year after he had started to try, all before I was governor so as a concerned volunteer who at that point new the names of all children year 3 down and had read with most of them regularly since reception. My email was initially ignored, I happened to see him and ask about it and he claimed he hadn't received so I resent and had a meeting a few weeks later. Nothing has changed, if anything, its become worse because the parent volunteers we had have been put off by the school misinforming them about when they can come in to read, and refusing to DBS check all volunteers. There are no new volunteers coming in behind me either, which means we have approx 30% of children don't read, they don't read at home, and there's no time at school, so no progress is made.

From my time spent in school I would say the behavior problems are so big there isn't time for anything else to be addressed. I can't see how teachers can teach well or progress if they are regularly mitigating the child screaming in the corner or kicking the door in. I've read the strategic improvement plan, and a second time since reflecting on the LA letter, and am shocked given it was only last approved in 2019 that it fails to address the problems anyone who spends time in the school could rattle off. I have little expectation the same group of people who approved that will come up with anything substantially better. I think with all of your help I've realised that the problems I've seen pre and post becoming governor aren't things I can fix on my own, nor are they likely to be resolved quickly enough, if at all, with the current leadership.

Many many thanks to you all. I have put applications in and given availability of places I accept they will finish this school year where they are and move in September. Summer terms always bit of a write off where they are anyhow, and I hope to organize some time at their new school before the school year ends so hopefully it will all work out.

Just to clear up the term “Lady Bountiful” - it was used it to describe Governors who wouldn’t engage with holding the school to account and only wanted to go to the fun things like school plays and get a front row seat. They wanted to be liked so made friends with teachers and provided little extras for the staffroom. They were generous (bountiful) but none of this had any effect on DCs learning or attainment. Perhaps it’s a term that’s died a death?!

I think the Head has resented your operational interventions. He doesn’t seem to want volunteers and of course a Governor doesn’t intervene at all in this way.

I have found, having worked with a couple of outstanding Heads, that their tolerance of useless governors has changed. Most good Heads now expect to have a strong working relationship with their GB and expect to be held to account.

20 years ago many Governors certainly were not getting decent assessment info and rarely challenged the Head. There was no performance management so heads were not challenged regarding their performance. Often a GB meeting was the Head holding court because the Governirs were given a Heads report which detailed how the football team had done and how Y5 had enjoyed their day out at the local museum. This has now changed. Most GBs do understand their role and do challenge the Head. Heads give considered and detailed information to the Governors and respect them.

Your Head might be new, but it doesn’t mean he’s up to the job. It’s significant that your DC had, in effect, 5 teachers last year. Also that the DH has gone. Even if the schools drafts a good plan it’s debatable about whether they can deliver it or monitor it.

totally agree with that bubbles a good head actively wants the GB to be challenging, holding them to account and wants a strong working relationship.

The point that screams out to me is that the SIP does not reflect the school. The governors should have picked up on that.

I agree with bubbles that this head is not going to change anything.