Leadership, Governance and Partnership Development Suites Hotel – Tuesday 4th March 08 Kelvin Peel Consultant for Next Practice in System Leadership and Vice Chair CATS (Consortium of All Through Schooling) email@example.com 07816033415 Aims of the Day • To inform on national picture regarding leadership and governance • To consider the merits of partnership working • To determine local priorities for partnership working • To inform on existing and emerging models of governance and give examples of their operation • To determine relevance of such models to local circumstances • To establish next steps to be taken Leadership Challenge • More than half of the country’s headteachers are over 50 • Number taking early retirement after 55 increasing (in 2004, 58% under 60) • Number retiring estimated to rise from 2250 in 2004 to 3500 in 2009 Leadership Challenge • Recent survey revealed 43% of deputies have no desire to become headteachers • Nationally more than 30% of headteacher posts have to be re-advertised • In London and in Catholic sector re- advertisement runs at 50% Drivers for Partnership Working: • Every Child Matters agenda • Extended School agenda (full service schools) • 14-19 Curriculum developments • Develop leadership capacity to overcome shortages • Deliver multi-agency support more effectively Drivers for Partnership Working: • Delegating resources/services to ESP/Clusters/localities • Support failing schools • Share expertise • Fulfil a common goal • Maximise the use of resources Drivers for Partnership Working: • Support pupils with behavioural difficulties (inclusion/exclusion) • Deliver Sure Start Programmes • Greater opportunities to dispersed communities (demographic issues) • Support neighbourhood renewal • Improve transition and deliver all through learning TASK ONE – Partnership Working Using the cards provided, discuss the merits and relevance of each “driver” for partnership working as it pertains to your schools. On your flipchart sheet draw 3 columns entitled, “High, Medium and Low” and place the cards in the appropriate column. Next Practice in System Leadership • Joint Innovation Unit & National College for School Leadership project • 16 field trial sites (chosen from over 35 original applicants) • Determination to support new and radical approaches to leadership and governance • Capture the learning to inform others • Succession planning to ensure sustainability Established and Emerging Models of Governance Co-operation/Loose Collaboration • Informal partnership between schools focused on a shared area of interest • Professional (not legal) agreements such as shared aims or an action plan • No change to governance within the schools involved • Example – primary school benefiting from specialism of local secondary school Soft Federation/Collaboration • Formal partnership between schools where governing bodies have “contractually” agreed to work together • Executive group/Strategic committee created with delegated powers • Separate governing bodies retained • Example – Callington, Cornwall Hard Federation • Up to 9 schools (to include FE) can form a Federation • Statutorily regulated • Special, primary, secondary and FE can federate (any combination) • Single governing body • Example – Bedford Catholic Schools Management Partnerships • Two schools sharing one headteacher • Both schools remain separate • Independent governing bodies retained • Usually short term contracts with an experienced headteacher leading a failing school • Joint committee of governors oversee the Management Partnership agreement Company Limited by Guarantee • Between schools and other partners • Easy and quick to set up • Robust legal entity • Can provide a “brand” to denote the nature of the partnership working • Can be profit making or a charity Company Limited by Guarantee • Accountable for its own financial management • Can trade with other companies/organisations/institutions • Can appoint staff (on new terms and conditions of service if desirable) • Financial independence doesn’t threaten the assets of partners if it fails • Example – West Wilts (14-19 Curriculum) Academies • State-funded schools, established and managed by sponsors • Intended to break the culture of low aspiration and attainment • Sponsors – high performing schools and colleges, universities, individual philanthropists, voluntary sector, faith communities, Trusts, etc • Backed but not maintained by LA Academies (continued) • Follow Schools Admission Code • No prescribed size to GB but expectation it will be small • Follows National Curriculum • Often have specialist status • Many becoming all through (8 already but many being proposed) Academies (continued) • Government committed to creating 400 • Currently 83 in 49 local authorities • Further 50 planned for each of next 3 years Trusts • Between schools and other partners • External partners in formal governance structure • Can be small or large (town/locality-wide) • Separate Governing Bodies retained (although Trust can appoint the majority of governors) • The Trust has legal title to the land and assets • Can oversee and embrace other formal structures (eg. Federations, Company, etc.) • Can provide locality-wide strategic direction over a wide range of activities (Example – Furness) All through structures • One 3-18 school (eg Serlby Park, Northampton) • Collaboration (Callington) • Federations (Darlington) • Trusts (Hartcliffe) • Locality-wide Learning Community (proposed under a Trust in Furness) Advantages of All Through Education • Provides continuity (seamless transition) to overcome dips in performance • Focuses attention on Teaching & Learning and creates exciting opportunities for curriculum modelling/delivery • Can improve personalised learning • Provides for the development of a common ethos throughout the School/Federation Advantages of All Through Education (continued) • Consistent whole-school systems (eg teaching and learning, assessment, monitoring/tracking and care and guidance systems) aid pupil progression • Increases opportunities for early intervention • Provides benefits from economies of scale and sharing of resources (both physical and human) • Can counter under-achievement, re-energise staff and boost morale • Provides opportunities for sustaining parental/carer links and family support Advantages of All Through Education (continued) • Can improve the recruitment and retention of staff by offering greater opportunities for professional development • Provides better opportunities for continuity in multi-agency engagement with families (especially for Full-Service/Extended Schools) • Provides a platform for neighbourhood regeneration • Can enhance opportunities presented by a new build/BSF TASK TWO - Governance • Applying the information given and using the supporting documents consider which, if any, of the priorities for partnership working could be better undertaken under one or more of the governance models. • Is there a case for considering all through education within one of the models? TASK THREE - Next Steps Should you wish to move forward with any new models of governance it would be advisable to identify the key personnel to engage and establish working parties to explore possibilities. What else????