The Conversation. Small cliques often take control of school governor boards (original) (raw)
Related papers
School governance and neoliberal political rationality: what has democracy got to do with it?
In this paper I discuss the role of school governance in England with a particular focus on the changing responsibilities of school governors in relation to recent education policy. These issues are located through a much broader discussion of neoliberalism and its effects on public sector organisation. Here neoliberalism is defined as the incursion of market forces on public sector organisation, including the introduction of new regulatory tools (inspection, standardisation and accountabilities for example) to replace direct bureaucracy and state intervention and indirectly strengthen government control – what Bob Jessop calls ‘regulated self-regulation’. Drawing on these insights, I demonstrate how a neoliberal political rationality shapes school governance and the kinds of behaviour and orientations idealised and adopted by school governors seeking to make themselves and the schools they govern accountable. Finally, I show how school governance is wedded to mechanisms of exclusion and inclusion (a preference for ‘professionals’ over ‘amateurs’ or unskilled volunteers for example) as well as claims to expertise and specialist knowledge. This raises questions over who gets to influence school governance and what governance is for, as well as bringing into focus larger questions about the role of democratic principles of civic empowerment, participation and representation.
The Shadow of Inspection: School Governance, Accountability and Governing Practices
Since the 1980s state schools in England have been required to evidence transparency and accountability through the use of indicators and templates derived from the private sector and more recently globally circulating discourses of ‘good governance’ closely aligned with the IMF and World Bank. The idea here is that schools share characteristics which can be compared and analyzed to determine public service effectiveness and efficiency. The rise of academies and free schools (‘state-funded independent schools’) has resulted in a dispersion and concentration of these practices within schools, with direct consequences for school governors –those tasked with the responsibility of holding senior leadership to account for the financial and educational performance of the school. To complement the new powers and responsibilities devolved to schools under these arrangements, government now demand the inspection, audit and professionalization of all school governing bodies, with the aim to ensure good governance. Ofsted in particular emerges as a dominating presence under these circumstances, effecting and inscribing the conditions by which governors come to understand, know and practise their role. In this paper I draw on interview and observation data to consider 1) the role of Ofsted as a permanent ‘absent presence’, a spectre, shadow or big Other shaping and guiding meanings and practices of school governance; and 2) the impact of these trends on school governor relations and subjectivities in terms of how governors ‘make sense’ of their role, responsibility and contribution as meaningful and intelligible.
Enterprise Governance: The Role of Accountability in 21st Century British Education
Given this paper is set to be discussed in the context of a roundtable discussion I have rendered it more conversational in tone. I’m also aware that some participants in the discussion may be unfamiliar with the history of English education policy. I have therefore constructed a kind of ‘nuts and bolts’ paper for want a better description. It outlines the aims, context and data for my study as well as some of the recent developments to affect school organization and school accountability in England. Following this I draw on evidence to flesh out what it is school governors actually do and how these forms of ritual participation and their rationalization are impacted by the changing legal and power arrangements of different school setups and the encroachment of particular forms of accountability, notably finance, legal, performance and consumer. I have deliberately foregrounded the discussion around observable concrete practices, and therefore resisted engaging too much in conceptual or theoretical deliberation/engagement for the time being. However, I am keen to apply theory where it might serve to increase both awareness and intervention to affect change. Foucauldian approaches to governmentality spring to mind.
School governing bodies in England have considerable powers and responsibilities with regard to the education of pupils. This paper explores how power relations operate, within governing bodies, through struggles over which types of knowledge are claimed and valued. The paper draws on the analysis of policy and on ethnographic research in the governing bodies of four maintained schools to explore the complex interactions between lay, educational and managerial knowledge. The paper suggests that educational and managerial expertise are privileged over lay knowledge. Hence, the concept of 'lay' knowledge, which is attached to external governors, is easily co-opted by managerial knowledge as it does not have alternative expert knowledge attached to it.
This thesis aims to explore Academic Staff Governor (ASG) roles at three Outstanding Further Education colleges in England. Uniquely, the research focuses on types of ASG activities; ASGs’ professional and power status and the understanding of the role. The study draws upon relevant literature to identify concepts related to governors’ roles and activities. An interpretivist stance is used to collect predominantly qualitative data through a combined methods approach, and to engage with ASGs and external governors. During fieldwork, qualitative and quantitative evidence from six semi-structured interviews; 35 questionnaire responses, observations of 8 governance meetings and governance documents, was analysed. Findings suggest that ASGs’ insiderness; their affiliation with other groups and decision-making circumstances may influence their governing activities. Activities rooted in operational settings such as professional-information giving were highly-valued by other governors, while there were uncertainties about the benefit of having managerial staff as ASGs. The research also identified ASGs’ relatively low power status which in turn may affect their professional status. There was evidence indicating uncertainty amongst the college staff regarding the role of an ASG in the colleges’ boards. As a result of the study, to aid understanding and to conceptualise an ASG’s role in FE colleges, ‘The 3 RaPs Framework’ and ‘The Restricted Professional Model’ of an ASG have been developed. For relevant practitioners, organisations and policymakers, the research recommends clear and specific role descriptions for ASG posts; action to develop ASGs’ professionality as teachers and to allow more opportunities for ASGs to act as governors. Finally, further research opportunities are identified in order to research ASGs’ professional profiles in the FE sector; ASGs’ personality characteristics; clarity of ASG role in educational governance; the role in high performing and underperforming colleges; and the role in the wider global educational governance.