NEWS FOCUS SecEd: On Your Side


Teachers mustn’t be sacked in one term Pete


AS I write this editorial, I am laid up in bed with what my dear partner is describing as “man-flu”. However, I think it could well be Bird Flu, so a day off work seemed the least precaution to take. Drugged up to the eyeballs on cold and flu remedies, I


Henshaw Editor SecEd


began to worry when I turned on the morning radio to hear our dear education secretary, Michael Gove, on Radio 5 Live. Then on the Today programme. Somehow in-between he found time to make it onto the BBC Breakfast sofa. Everywhere I turned, he seemed to be there. Maybe I was more ill than I thought. It was of course the morning that Mr Gove chose to


confirm to the world his adoption of new proposals for teacher appraisal which mean that headteachers will be able to “remove poorly performing teachers” in “about a term”. Things began to get even more surreal when the


expected happened on Radio 5 Live. A mother appeared on air to be interviewed with her 19-year-old son whose teacher from a few years earlier, we were told, had bullied and picked on him. The nerves of live radio got the better of the 19-year-old


when he was asked to explain what this teacher had done. His mother took the reins and she relayed the following incident: “There was one occasion that another child was banging his pencil and the teacher turned to Simon and said stop doing that and it was not Simon at all.” My digital radio was bought as a present for me and I


love it dearly. If I didn’t, it would have been on the pavement outside my flat after having gone out of the window. This is not my normal style of editorial, you may be


thinking. I have not yet unleashed a stream of diatribe against “insert coalition education policy here ” and told you why I think it’s wide of the mark. Well I don’t need to tell you, the professionals, that


giving headteachers the ability to dismiss teachers within one term is inappropriate. Look at what the announcement has led to in the national


media. Stories of teachers who, the media seem to imply, should be sacked in a term for mistakenly punishing an innocent student for a trivial incident involving a pencil. I don’t know if the teacher this parent and her son were


talking about is good or poor. But the point is that every teacher at some point will be accused of being rubbish by a parent and will have conflicts with some of their students. This does not mean they are poor teachers. As many, many education professionals are saying online


today, teachers all struggle at some point. It is the nature of this most unique and horribly demanding of professions. And when we struggle, we need support and guidance, not threats and intimidation. Most decent schools and most headteachers will not


change one iota of their appraisal and teacher management practices because of this new policy, which comes into force in September. However, there will be headteachers who use this policy to get rid of teachers who suffer a blip in their performance. I take this line on this issue not least because of an


event I attended recently. It was hosted under Chatham House Rules so I have been unable to report what was said. The new chief of Ofsted was speaking and a number of headteachers were there (mostly from academies). When it came to questions, a number of the heads mentioned the difficulty they had in “getting rid of teachers”. I cannot tell you the names of the heads who seemed so


angry that they could not sack these teachers with a click of their fingers. However, I can tell you that these school leaders asked


no questions about proper appraisal, support or CPD for these teachers, or mechanisms for moving them to more appropriate schools for their skills, or for supporting change into different fields of education – they just wanted rid of them. It is these headteachers who will be rubbing their hands with glee at these new proposals.


• Pete Henshaw is publisher and editor of SecEd. Email editor@sec-ed.co.uk or visit www.sec-ed.co.uk. Follow us on Twitter at www.twitter.com/SecEd_Education


No-notice fears


HEADTEACHERS AND education unions have slammed Ofsted’s plans for no-notice inspections, saying that the inspectorate risks losing the trust of the profession. It follows the announcement


by chief inspector Sir Michael Wilshaw last week that school inspections will soon take place without any prior warning – ending the current practice of giving schools two days’ notice for regular inspections. The new approach is due to


come into force from September following a public consultation – which is due to be held in the coming months. Ofsted said the changes are


necessary to drive improvements in those schools rated as “satisfactory”. Sir Michael hopes that the


new regime will stop schools preparing for inspections and show inspectors schools “as they really are in the corridors, classrooms and staffroom”. The move came days after a


national newspaper published allegations that schools were paying pupils to truant, among other practices, to try and ensure good inspection outcomes, sparking allegations of a kneejerk reaction by Ofsted. Russell Hobby, general secretary


of the National Association of Head Teachers, said: “It is disturbing to see Ofsted change its position in a matter of days and suggests the policy has been created with an eye more to the sound-bite than the evidence.” SecEd editorial board member, Brian Rossiter, who retired as


As SecEd went to press last week, news broke of Ofsted’s intention to make every inspection ‘no-notice’ from


September. Daniel White looks at the reaction to the move over the past few days


headteacher of Valley School in Worksop last year, also said the move would see teachers lose their trust for the inspectorate. He told SecEd: “Trust has


been thrown out of the window by Ofsted as they seek to ‘beat the cheats’. Where is the evidence of abuse of the system that has led to this draconian change? “The announcement of no-notice


inspections feels like an arm of coalition government hitting out again at those schools struggling to meet the good or outstanding criteria. “And where are many of those


schools? In challenging areas where the data tells only part of the story. Why are the good, outstanding and academies, i.e. the whole system, not under the same threat of inspection?” General secretary of the


Association of School and College Leaders, Brian Lightman, agreed on the issue of trust. He said: “An effective inspection


system is based on mutual trust and respect, not the premise that schools are trying to ‘cheat’ and need to be caught out. If inspection is going to lead to improvement, it needs to be


IN RESPONSE…


Open letter to Michael Gove, education minister


Having read your comments suggesting that “opponents of academies are happy with failure” (Gove academy speech an “insult to teachers”, SecEd Online, January 4, 2012), I am urged to communicate how insulted I feel by your remarks. I am a governor of a small


rural community college, which over the past few years has striven hard to ensure all of its students achieve their potential, while at the same time raising standards and achievement. I applaud the huge effort that


our staff has put in to see the college prosper and feel your comments have undermined the pride our staff have in themselves and the achievements of our students. When we appointed a new


headteacher some 18 months ago, the primary remit he was set was to take the college from its then Ofsted evaluation of “good with outstanding features” to “outstanding”. The current system


of major support from our local authority has been fundamental to helping this progress to be achieved. As a small college, we will only


ever attract ambitious young staff at a senior level looking for their first step on the headship ladder. Therefore the support from the local authority is vital in ensuring they have the opportunities to succeed themselves and by default ensure the continued success of the college. The move to academy status


across our county has been slow but now appears to be gathering momentum, with a steady erosion of the support available. I have already attended a meeting to discuss the potential role of the local authority in the future as they recognise the potential changes to come, not an edifying evening. In the more recent months, as


these changes have become more apparent, less will inevitably be seen of our head “at the coal face”, working with staff, students and parents, as more of his time has been absorbed in the “business” of running the college. As the


academies programme rolls out more and more and the role of the local authority reduces still further this will only exacerbate the problems for the head as his role is forced to change. This is not what we employed them for. As a body we have begun


to acknowledge that academy status will become inevitable, but where will it end? Why do we need to have this sweeping change towards uniformity of title? We have been through “comprehensives”, “community colleges” and now “academies”. But these changes haven’t delivered on the drive to improve standards. That doesn’t come from names and titles, it comes from sheer hard work from dedicated professionals working collaboratively to provide the best possible educational environments for our young people to succeed. Please Mr Gove, look at what


works well, listen to a wider spectrum of success, provide support and help to develop outstanding practice, allow local communities to recognise local needs, and ensure that it is the


students and not the policy that comes first.


John Crouch College governor


Dear sir, I read with interest the article Map reveals holes in library support service (SecEd 303, January 5, 2012). The new interactive map


apparently highlights the fact that “in Cumbria, the second largest county in England, there is only one (school library service) based in Carlisle”. As deputy manager of Library


Services for Schools – Cumbria County Council – I would like to assure you that we in fact cover schools and nurseries (ages three to 18) over the whole county. This includes 300-plus primary


schools and over 40 secondary schools – including academies and independent schools.


Amanda Deaville Senior school services officer Library Services for Schools Cumbria County Council


done with schools rather than used as a beating stick.” Mike Griffiths, headteacher of


Northampton School for Boys, warned the inspectorate that they cannot expect heads to always be in the office or a school to “stop and serve their needs”, if they turn up unannounced. He said: “My concern is not that


‘we might be caught on the hop’, but rather a pragmatic one. When Ofsted arrives, they want access to all sorts of things – people and paper. “If (they come) unannounced,


they cannot expect the busy and hectic life of a school to stop and serve their needs. Key personnel may be out at meetings, on courses, teaching or engaged in a whole shed- load of other planned activities.” The announcement follows


the introduction of a new Ofsted framework which concentrates on just four key areas of inspection – the achievement of pupils, quality of teaching, quality of leadership and management, and the behaviour and safety of pupils. Ofsted inspections first began


in 1992 when schools had a year’s notice to prepare for them. This


was later reduced to between eight and six-week warnings and most recently schools have had two days to prepare. Mr Hobby also argued this week


that there was little schools could do to cheat the current system. He explained: “If a school could conceal evidence of widespread failure in just two days then the whole concept of inspection is flawed and Ofsted’s protestations that it examines progress and behaviour over the long-term ring hollow. “It will reduce the school’s


ability to engage with the inspection (through a pre-inspection briefing, or setting up team meetings). It is supposed to be a joint process and a dialogue which changes the school’s thinking rather than merely criticising it. And it is this engagement which translates inspection judgements into real improvements.” A previous move to no-notice


inspections was dismissed by Ofsted because of the difficulties in collecting parental comments, but the new Parent View website is seen as solving this issue. However, Mr Hobby added:


“The Parent View questionnaire is a deeply flawed alternative. There is no way to verify that it is completed by parents or provides a representative view of opinions on the school. ” Education secretary Michael


Gove this week welcomed the move. He said: “No-notice inspections, especially where behaviour and teaching standards are of concern, will provide parents and others a true picture of schools’ performance.”


www.sec-ed.com


6


SecEd • January 19 2012


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