Educational law requires that every school/academy promotes the spiritual, moral, social and cultural development of all pupils. In the spiritual component, faith schools and academies will ensure that the children learn about their distinctive religions. Non-denominational schools/academies will, teach the pupils about faiths generally and encourage tolerance of all religions and none. Good institutions, through the cross-curriculum strategy, ensure that children have access to social and cultural development as they do with moral education.
However, there is one aspect of the moral strand that vexes many. That is about telling the truth. From an early age, responsible parents and institutions encourage children to speak the truth, even if that means getting themselves into trouble. That is as it should be, especially in an age when we have a surfeit of fake news spouted on the internet by social media and leaders of some countries.
At election time, as we have seen recently, politicians seeking people's votes blast out whatever it takes to get them first past the post and into parliament. At their best, they are economical with the truth – withholding information that could be unpalatable to the electorate.
In good schools/academies, teachers warn pupils about not believing all they read and everything they are told, to be wary of people who are attractive, articulate and offering them gifts, in short, to be critical of what they see and hear. In 2018, the Commission on Fake News and the Teaching of Critical Literacy Skills run by the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Literacy and the National Literacy Trust, reported that only 2% of children and young people could judge correctly whether a news story was real or fake. Over 50% of teachers did not feel that the national curriculum was developing the literacy skills of pupils critical enough to judge whether something was true or false.
According to Ann Mroz, Editor of The Times Educational Supplement, there is "lots of examination of prepositions but less of propositions; plenty of nouns but sadly not enough nous".
Categories Character Education, Ethos and Values, Issue 75-Spring 2020, Values in Education
The new government that we have in the UK is likely to be the one we will have for the next five years. It will be a time of significant change as we exit the European Union (EU). The education team of Ministers, however, which could be reshuffled in February 2020 is comprised of the following members.
Mr Gavin Williamson – Secretary of State for Education
Mr Nick Gibb – Minister of State for School Standards
Mr Chris Skidmore – Minister of State for Universities, Science, Research and Innovation
Ms Kemi Badenoch – Minister of State for Children and Families (currently on maternity leave)
Ms Michelle Donelan – Minister for Children and Families (providing maternity cover for Ms Badenoch)
Lord Agnew – Minister for the School System
Our politicians and civil servants will be so busy recreating the machinery to propel us into a go-it-alone future, that many fear other services, with the National Health Services being an exception, could be forgotten. It is apposite, consequently, to remind ourselves of the educational promises of the prime minister, following his Boris bounce on 12 December 2019.
Categories Department for Education, Government, Issue 75-Spring 2020
I Preamble
In March 2019, The Key, the governors' organisation, interviewed Matthew Purves, the Deputy Director for Schools Inspection. In response to a question, Mr Purves said that governance would now be part of the overall judgement on leadership and management. There would not be a separate judgement or grade for the quality of the work that governors do.
He acknowledged, in broad terms, that pupils' standards of achievement had risen over the last score of years. However, he admitted that the inspectors had been too focused on data rather than the quality of education, which was at the heart of the new framework. In future, there would be "a single conversation about teaching quality and outcomes". To ensure that this was appropriately covered, he explained, inspectors would be asking the following questions.
What is it that the school/academy wants children to learn?
How does that translate into classroom practice?
How is that curriculum passed on through teaching?
How do teaching, learning and the quality of education impact on the standards children achieve?'
Ofsted will examine how well those "responsible for governance" deal with the following matters.
Understanding their role and how well they carry it out.
The school's/academy's vision, ethos, and strategic direction.
The management of resources.
The oversight of finance and ensuring that money, including the Pupil Premium Grant (PPG), is well spent.
How well governors hold the executive leaders (the headteacher or CEO, for example) to account for educational performance, the performance management of staff and the quality of education and training.
How well governors fulfil their statutory duties (like the ones placed on school/academy by the Equality Act 2010, the Prevent Strategy and Keeping Children Safe in Education).
The way governors promote the welfare of learners and ensure that the education the school/academy provides positively impacts on all pupils.
A full description of the judgement is on pages 11 to 12 of the inspection framework and page 66 to 67 of the inspection handbook.
The structure of education in England is messy, because of which there are multiple accountabilities. In schools and standalone academies, people in charge of governance are governors. In Multi-Academy Trusts (MATs), the responsibility for governance could lie with the trustees or the governors of the academies for which the trust board is responsible – or both. Ofsted is keen to ensure that inspectors hold the right people to account.
Categories Governors, Inspections, Issue 75-Spring 2020, Leadership and Management
It irks me when I hear someone say that there is considerable merit when people row with one another. My prickles rise further when they add that conflicts are good for the soul. They aren't. They frequently create win-lose situations. At its worst, the outcome of a conflict involving two or more ends up with blood on the carpet. I have observed on several occasions how destructive conflicts have been during and in between meetings of the governing board. Conflicts occur for a host of reason.
The first reason is a primeval one. Our prehistoric ancestors responded with a fight-or-flight mindset, when confronted by danger. If they fought, it was to win and for the enemy to lose. If they lost, they either took flight or suffered fatalities. It was a case of survival of the fittest.
Second, no one likes to lose and certainly not in front of spectators. In the animal kingdom, the loser slinks away. In human exchanges, often, there is nowhere to go but "to slink away". The loser feels trapped; the blood drains from the face and the conflicting encounter is followed by sleepless nights.
Conflicts are part of the human condition. So, expect clashes at meetings of the governing board on contentious issues. But they can be used to good effect. Just as a kite soars high when it is confronts a gutsy wind, so also can great decisions be made by the governing board when members disagree with one another.
Conflicts can have positive outcomes, provided that there are certain ground rules. However, if not managed carefully, they can cause ruination and chaos.
Categories Conflict Management, Governors, Issue 75-Spring 2020
Working educationally without a moral compass is tantamount to spinning away into space bereft of a steering wheel and without a clue about the destination. It is, consequently, welcome that the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL) has developed a blueprint for the ethical leadership of schools, academies and colleges. ASCL took a year to do so.
Governors together with their headteachers are very much part of schools' and academies' leadership team. Accordingly, there is merit in taking time out to read, digest and act on the framework, which sets out the characteristics of effective leaders.
I The Framework
(1) SELFLESSNESS
School, academy and college leaders should act solely in the interests of children and young people.
(2) INTEGRITY
School, academy and college leaders must avoid placing themselves under any obligation to people or organisations that might try inappropriately to influence them in their work. Before acting and taking decisions, they declare and resolve openly any perceived conflict of interests and relationships.
(3) OBJECTIVITY
School, academy and college leaders must act and take decisions impartially and fairly using the best evidence and without discrimination or bias. Leaders should be dispassionate exercising judgement and analysis for the children and young people.
(4) ACCOUNTABILITY
School, academy and college leaders are accountable to the public for their decisions and actions and must submit themselves to the scrutiny necessary to ensure this.
(5) HONESTY
School, academy and college leaders should be truthful.
(6) LEADERSHIP
School, academy and college leaders should exhibit these principles in their own behaviour. They should actively promote and robustly support the principles and be willing to challenge poor behaviour whenever it occurs. Leaders include both, those who are paid to lead in schools, academies and colleges and those who volunteer to govern them.
II Essential characteristics of good leaders
Schools, academies and colleges serve children and young people and help them grow into fulfilled and valued citizens. As role models for the young, how we behave as leaders is as important as what we do.
Leaders should show leadership through the following personal characteristics or values.
(a) TRUST
Leaders are trustworthy and reliable. We hold trust on behalf of children and should be beyond reproach. We are honest about our motivations.
(b) WISDOM
Leaders use experience, knowledge and insight. We demonstrate moderation and self-awareness. We act calmly and rationally. We serve our schools, academies and colleges with propriety and good sense.
(c) KINDNESS
Leaders demonstrate respect, generosity of spirit, understanding and good temper. We give difficult messages humanely when conflict is unavoidable.
(d) JUSTICE
Leaders are fair and work for the good of children. We seek to enable all young people to lead useful, happy and fulfilling lives.
(e) SERVICE
Leaders are conscientious and dutiful. We demonstrate humility and self-control, supporting the structures, conventions and rules which safeguard quality. Our actions protect high-quality education.
(f) COURAGE
Leaders work courageously in the best interests of children and young people. We protect their safety and their right to a broad, effective and creative education. We hold one another to account courageously.
(g) OPTIMISM
Leaders are positive and encouraging. Despite difficulties and pressures, we are developing excellent education to change the world for the better.
Categories Issue 75-Spring 2020, Leadership and Management
On 5 November 2019, the government published a new set of benchmarks for schools and academies to rate how well they are doing to promote character education. The guidance urges governors and headteachers develop, promote and assess pupils' character within their normal curriculum. They are also asked to encourage pupils to volunteer. This mirrors the benchmarks that the former Education Secretary, Damian Hinds, set out for careers education Gatsby Foundation. However, character education (unlike careers) is not statutory.
Ian Bauckham, chief executive of the Tenax School Trust, led an advisory group, which included representatives from other schools and academies, the unions and the voluntary sector, in the spring and summer of 2019 to create the benchmarks.
In the halcyon days, we would have described character education as the key component of the hidden curriculum, which is now being given a more prominent thrust. In developing character education, a school/academy needs to reflect on six overarching aspects, which are as follows.
Categories Character Education, Issue 75-Spring 2020, Pupils, Values in Education