management structure in primary schools question

[Bronte]

Wh at is the typical way a 2 form entry primary schools is structured regarding subject coordination and key stage management.
For example do ks1/ks2 effectively coordinate their own subjects rather than having one designated literacy coordinator.
Or does ks1 have its own leader who has to liaise with all relevant subject coordinators?
At present we have curriculum leaders just responsible for maths and english. they are both upper ks 2 practioners and have no expertise of ks1.
As a result ks1 is either handed down inappropriate policy or else just left out on a limb. we have no ks1 representative to lead us in any shape or form.
Any feedback welcome!

I am a secondary teacher but at my DC's primary there are subject co-ordinators who may teach in any key stage but above them in the hierarchy are assistant heads for each KS who will have input on curriculum policy etc as well as having responsibility for performance management for all teaching members of their key stage and leading all other aspects of data management, target-setting etc.

I taught in a 2 form entry school, but it was junior not primary. The leadership structure was Head, deputy, (who was also Lit Co,) then Num Co and Inclusion Manager on SLT.

That's a really interesting point about the policies being irrelevant. As a co-ordinator, you would expect them to have a thorough working knowledge of their subject from very early stages, all the way up to year six. How can you get the best results if you don't know what the kids are being taught in those important younger years?

I think in bigger schools, they have key stage leaders, yes.

Have you voiced your concerns to the Head or coordinators?

And can I ask how the policies are irrelevant to ks1? This has got me thinking now as I've recently re-written our school's lit policy.

We're a three-form entry primary. All of the subjects have one teacher in charge of their subject for the whole school. We used to have a separate person to do ks1 maths/English which was brilliant but because it worked so well, it was quickly removed ;)

I find that the subject leaders for maths and English (both ex y6 teachers) have not got a clue about good practice down in ks1 and constantly contradict their own (crap) advice. They also give different instructions to our phase leaders (one for each dept-early years/ks1/lower jns/upper jnrs) and to our deputy heads (one for each key stage).

A phrase too many chiefs springs to mind, but I wouldn't say that put loud for fear of being accused of being an old cynic who isn't receptive to change ;)

I've come across this situation. Yr 5/6 Lit and maths co-ords implement things that have no chance of working effectively lower down the school. Yes, you'd expect them to have a working knowledge from FS to Yr 6, but prob not. Shout louder at staff meetings is the only thing you can do!!
It's one of reasons I prefer teaching in junior schools.

Are phase leaders the norm nowadays?
Can see the sense of having separate suject coordinators for ks1 english and maths.

I'm in a 4 form entry. On SLT there is the Head, 2 Deputies (one T&L, one Assessment), Inclusion Manager (me :-), EYFS&KS1 Phase Leader, KS2 Phase Leader, MathsCo and EnglishCo.

Maths and English Cos are both KS2 bods but the EYFS/KS1 Leader keeps them in line re lower school requirements!!

Seems to all work ok.

Thank you for feedback. Interested to know the remit of phase leaders.