LEADERSHIP structure in Scotland


A new career structure T


Teacher Tina Stockman on the impact of the new career


he sTrucTure of promoted posts in scottish schools has been revised since the acceptance of proposals from the Mccrone Inquiry into professional conditions of service in 2000. The report recommended a phased pay rise of more than 20 per cent – a


feature which may have dazzled many into acceptance before careful scrutiny of the associated conditions. The scottish government publication A Teaching


Profession for the 21st Century stated that the agreement provided for “an improved and simplified career structure for all teachers” based on criteria which were “fair, equitable and transparent”. Let us consider the contrast between the then


structure and that proposed in the Mccrone report. Then: head; depute; assistant heads; principal teachers (subject and guidance); senior teacher; classroom teacher. Now: head; depute/s; curriculum manager (faculty head or principal teacher); chartered teacher; classroom teachers (probationer and main-grade). In accordance with the agreement, existing posts of


principal teacher, depute head and head were subjected to a job-sizing exercise, based on things like school roll, management responsibilities, policy development and monitoring, and external liaison. Assimilation arrangements and final salary placements


for existing promoted post-holders were undertaken by a new negotiating body, the scottish Negotiating committee for Teachers, while ministers established an Implementation Group to reconcile existing conditions of service with the demands placed on the service, manage change, provide safeguards for teachers, and put in place a new framework to promote professionalism. This supported the shift in management structure


including the incorporation of individual subject departments into faculty groupings managed by the curriculum manager. These changes are an integral part of the curriculum for excellence. unfortunately, issues such as global recession,


political change and economic problems at national and local level have created pressures unforeseen in 2000.


Impact of the new promotion structure The number of promoted posts has been reduced


leading to a streamlining of the management structure. Where there might have been more than 20 principal teachers per school there can now be eight or nine, with each responsible for a group of subjects. Teachers can choose to follow one of two routes –


management or classroom. The management route features a number of


advantages. Teachers can notionally proceed from curriculum manager to depute and ultimately head. The introduction of faculties obviates the need for individual subject heads. consequently, the remuneration for the post of curriculum manager reflects the weight of the additional responsibilities. Meanwhile, the chartered teacher route also presents


a wide range of professional opportunities – not least that the programme offers the prospect of an alternative career path for those teachers who wish to remain in the classroom and develop their professional practice. The programme is provided by universities in the


form of continuously assessed modules which can be studied at the participant’s discretion. successful completion of the modules is acknowledged both financially and professionally and completing all modules leads to a Master’s degree in education and recognition as a chartered teacher.


Issues raised by the new promotion structure


In the secondary sector, the reduction in the number of management posts has created confusion and


perceived unfairness regarding payment and responsibilities. When departments are amalgamated into faculties


(and not all are, notably english and maths), there is a risk that the person appointed may have little knowledge of and sympathy for disciplines other than their own. until the new role is clearly defined and each member of the faculty fully understands its strengths and limitations, the threat of resentment, ideological clashes and obstruction to progress will remain. It may also prove difficult for a non-subject


specialist to advise on the quality of curriculum content and validity of assessment procedures for a subject with which they are unfamiliar. This in turn raises the challenge of establishing and maintaining a set of standards which are common to all subjects, yet sensitive to the individual features of each subject. In financial terms, those curriculum managers


who are managing large, heavily staffed faculties are rewarded accordingly, but those with perhaps only a single teacher for each discipline will be paid less. A difficulty arises when the single subject teachers


are those whose salaries are conserved on the former principal teacher scale meaning the financial incentive to undertake responsibility for the faculty is low. It is difficult to see where savings can be made under these circumstances unless disciplines are dispensed with. Given there may be a number of existing principal


Conclusion


The idea of revising the promotion system in scottish schools and creating opportunities for teachers to enhance their skills is not without merit, especially when we need strategies that will not only maintain standards but prove economically viable. On the face of it, the new promotion structure does


seem to provide strategies which address both these issues and, in all fairness, the system has yet to stabilise. however, as with so many new developments, the


question of their interpretation is affected at both local and national level by economic constraint, political opinion, differences in educational priorities, school buildings and location, lack of information through accessible documentation and appropriate INseT, and existing staffing levels. ultimately, there still remains a need for sympathetic


and practical support for heads and their staff in accomplishing the changes demanded of them.


SecEd •Tina Stockman works at Harlaw Academy in Aberdeen. Pupil-powering your school


Ben Arora, a director at the expert education group the 21st Century Learning Alliance, discusses pupil-powering your school in these tough financial times


T


he NuMbers just don’t add up. I am not talking about Joe from form 2b’s maths homework, but the numbers which are the lifeblood of the school. The numbers, in pounds and pence, which determine not only whether


the lights stay on but whether our children’s education is a rich, meaningful experience or an exercise in crowd control. Management teams up and down the country


are examining sparsely populated spreadsheets and working out how those numbers translate into teaching assistants, software and softballs. They are thinking about how to deploy depleted resources in a way which continues to deliver the excellent education that students deserve and need. When management teams think about resources,


most of them are thinking about teaching staff. After all, approximately 80 per cent of a secondary school’s budget is spent on staffing. Fewer schools though think strategically about another resource which is available to run the school, a resource which is available in abundance – the students.


There have been numerous examples of students


being involved in the running of a school, to differing extents and in differing ways. student councils, peer- mentoring, pupil-led learning commissions have all been tried and tested. sometimes the rationale behind such schemes has been put forward in terms of the improving student engagement with learning by giving them (some) responsibility for running the school, shaping the curriculum or supporting each other. sometimes the rationale is put forward in terms of


the benefit to pupils of developing wider skills. There are even very good examples of where the commitment to giving students a meaningful voice is genuine. That said, there is an in-built bias in public services


towards supporting existing rather than new forms of service delivery – the so-called incumbency bias. This is as true for education as it is for social care. This is one of the reasons why there are so few examples of schools that have not just philosophically committed to the integration of students into the running of the school and to the delivery of learning, but also systematically applied that commitment to every aspect of school life. In other walks of public services, professionals and policy wonks describe the approach of involving users


in the design and delivery of services as co-design and co-production. In education, to date, we talk about student voice. sectoral differences aside, education will not be exempt from the same financial pressures that are driving organisations across the public sector to radically rethink what they do and which are driving increasing numbers of them to turn to their customers/ users/students to help them in this process. Just think about what a 20 per cent budget cut


in real terms over two years would do to a school’s learning support, staff-pupil ratios, enrichment activity, not to mention equivalent cuts to the non-statutory pupil support services provided by local authorities and other public bodies. The school would survive as an institution but to what extent will high quality learning for students survive intact? Financial retrenchment may be inevitable, now.


Accepting that retrenchment automatically translates into worse outcomes for students is not. however, it will take real leadership and imagination if we are to avoid the worst-case scenarios. schools will need to rethink many aspects of the way they are currently run, the assumptions about what is possible, and who is responsible for which aspects of learning. There are two areas that schools should use as a


starting point to explore. First, there is a good evidence base for the effectiveness of even very young children as teachers and learning mentors for their peers. Not only do the students receiving support benefit but the mentors and student teachers gain real insights into the teaching and learning process and come to understand and appreciate its complexity. If every student during their school career had some responsibility for another student’s learning, as well as their own, it could


have a transformative effect on the culture of the school. second, secondary schools are organisations with a turnover of around £5 million a year with complex management issues, budgets, IT systems and contractual relations. These represent potentially fantastic learning resources for students, some of whom might just be able to generate interesting ideas for how to manage things better. real world problems motivate students, none more so than those close to home. crowd-sourcing solutions to school management issues might not generate magic solutions every time but at the very least you will have got your students engaged with complex problem-solving. Pupil-powering your school will not be easy,


not least for teaching staff as the dynamic of relationships changes from control to co-operation. but when the times are tough, it’s time to get radical.


•Benedict Arora is programme director for education at the National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts and a director of the 21st Century Learning Alliance. Visit www.nesta.org.uk


Further information


The 21st century Learning Alliance aims to provide a forum with wide representation from practitioners, government agencies and industry. With its combined knowledge, skills, experience and networks the group will debate difficult and sensitive issues in an open and honest manner to stimulate improvement and change through contributing expert, evidence- based challenge and advice at the highest level. Visit www.21stcenturylearningalliance.org


teachers who wish to remain in situ, the question of recruitment to new management posts arises. headteachers have to fill the new positions as


they arise and consequently there have been some speedy appointments from classroom teacher to faculty manager. These new appointees may find themselves in the tricky position of managing those with more management experience and subject expertise. some former principal teachers are concerned that


they may be asked to justify their conserved salary by undertaking additional management tasks. Perhaps, given the length of time former principal teachers may remain in post, a special role should be devised through amicable negotiation and clear, consistent guidance regarding workload and professional boundaries. Those who choose to pursue the chartered teacher


route might expect to have fewer departmental responsibilities. Nonetheless there remains a concern that while the curriculum manager may have overall management responsibility, those remaining in the classroom may have to undertake tasks previously performed by principal teachers. There continues to be a need for greater clarity and consistency regarding the extent of the chartered teacher’s management and administrative role. Another raised concern is that of chartered teacher


recruitment. In the long term, the chartered teacher post brings financial reward. however, in the short term, teachers choosing this route will be self-funded and consequently find it an expensive option. This may deter newly qualified staff. In contrast,


established staff in the later stages of their career may be attracted to the post to refresh their skills and enhance their final salary. From the teaching profession’s point of view, rather a short-term investment.


SecEd • October 14 2010


15


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16