Parent governor role to be scrapped in schools shakeup

[TomandJerry]

Parent governors are to be scrapped from school governing bodies in favour of professionals with the “right skills”, the government has announced.

Until now there have been places reserved for elected parents on school governing bodies, but under plans outlined in the education white paper published on Thursday those roles will now disappear.

The new emphasis will be on the skills an individual brings to a school governing body, rather than stakeholder representation. The government says it wants to change the way parents have a voice in the school system.

The white paper states: “We will expect all governing boards to focus on seeking people with the right skills for governance, and so we will no longer require academy trusts to reserve places for elected parents on governing boards.

 

[Bakero]

This gets worse and worse, doesn't it?

So to run an academy you don't need any experience in education. Nobody cares what the teachers think. And now parents are being sidelined.

Who voted for these twats?

 

[Igzilla]

Parent governors are to be scrapped from school governing bodies in favour of professionals with the “right skills”, the government has announced.

Until now there have been places reserved for elected parents on school governing bodies, but under plans outlined in the education white paper published on Thursday those roles will now disappear.

The new emphasis will be on the skills an individual brings to a school governing body, rather than stakeholder representation. The government says it wants to change the way parents have a voice in the school system.

The white paper states: “We will expect all governing boards to focus on seeking people with the right skills for governance, and so we will no longer require academy trusts to reserve places for elected parents on governing boards.

In effect, they are trying to remove a level of scrutiny from the Governance of Schools. Parents don't just bring a level of expertise to the Governing Body that probably doesn't exist within the staff, they also act as "Critical Friend" and ensure the voice of the children is represented. This Government presumably believe that parents don't on balance add any value to the school and that children don't deserve to have their interests protected. Just makes it easier for future privatisation, I guess, sometime between 2020 and 2025, as the Tories are assuming they will stay in Government (especially after they've gerrymandered the constituencies). Once you've removed independent people from the Governing Body, I expect there will be a rash of agencies springing up ready with a pool of people ready to offer their services to schools (for a fee). Schools will either have to rely of greater funding from Central Government (ha ha ha), cutting other school expenditure or charging fees. The best schools will be able to afford the "best" experts and charge accordingly, whilst the poorer schools get poorer. Social justice, Tory style.

 

[jonny.rainbow]

So as a parent of a child at an academy you will have no say in the headteacher (who need not have ever taught in a classroom) hiring a teacher (who need not have any professional teaching qualifications) or the standard of education that person is providing your child with.

 

[Buzzer]

This gets worse and worse, doesn't it?

So to run an academy you don't need any experience in education. Nobody cares what the teachers think. And now parents are being sidelined.

Who voted for these twats?

Yes, it's getting worse. I voted Lucas as she's an excellent local constituency MP but have supported the government pretty solidly. Not now. The attacks on education and disability benefits are the final straws.

 

[gjh1971]

This gets worse and worse, doesn't it?

So to run an academy you don't need any experience in education. Nobody cares what the teachers think. And now parents are being sidelined.

Who voted for these twats?

Very much this

 

[dejavuatbtn]

Yep, another health trust fiasco hits education. More people being employed at ridiculous rates, hopping from one governing body to another, creaming another "pay off" each time they move.

We have a general modern day problem of creating more and more support roles that need serious funding when it didn't need fixing in the first place.

If they are looking for experts, who fills the role of understanding parenting?

Rant over.

 

[Buzzer]

@The Merry Prankster hit the nail on the head a few weeks back. You have to start wondering if there is an underlying ideological battle with this lurch to the right by the Conservative Party.

These diktats, policy changes and the like directed by Central Government with little or no thought to the end stakeholder is very reminiscent of the way that Thatcher's governments dealt with Scotland, Wales and Northern England in the 80s. Take for instance IDS's premium rate DWP helpline. That's such a stupid idea that it looks malicious. Well. it does to me anyway.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

@The Merry Prankster hit the nail on the head a few weeks back. You have to start wondering if there is an underlying ideological battle with this lurch to the right by the Conservative Party.

These diktats, policy changes and the like directed by Central Government with little or no thought to the end stakeholder is very reminiscent of the way that Thatcher's governments dealt with Scotland, Wales and Northern England in the 80s. Take for instance IDS's premium rate DWP helpline. That's such a stupid idea that it looks malicious. Well. it does to me anyway.

I agree with the point about it feeling a little like the 80's. Only then, the unions still had some real power. I think the lurch to the right may well be to try to appease Tory backbenchers as the Tory majority is not that great.

 

[The Albion Roar]

I assume that these 'professionals' with the 'right skills' will be paid the exact same amount the governors are at present? It must be a very enticing opportunity for these 'professionals' to work for such a great rate.

This is of course working on the assumption that any given parents don't already have the right skills, and that an outsider with no vested interest in improving the place is willing to come in.

Jesus wept.

 

[The Albion Roar]

@The Merry Prankster hit the nail on the head a few weeks back. You have to start wondering if there is an underlying ideological battle with this lurch to the right by the Conservative Party.

These diktats, policy changes and the like directed by Central Government with little or no thought to the end stakeholder is very reminiscent of the way that Thatcher's governments dealt with Scotland, Wales and Northern England in the 80s. Take for instance IDS's premium rate DWP helpline. That's such a stupid idea that it looks malicious. Well. it does to me anyway.

I'm not even sure this a lurch to the right. How are right-wing pollitics made up of such stupid ideas? Spiteful ideas - yes, but this one is off the scale for headbutting the wall.

 

[Bold Seagull]

I'm no fan of this government, or their educational policies, but I am a school governor and a parent of 2 kids at the school, but I'm not actually a 'parent governor' but I'm formally co-opted onto the governing body.

I don't think the idea is to get rid of parents being governors, it is having the right parents with the right skills doing the job. Therefore they are looking for accountants, solicitors, architects, engineers, human resources, educational professionals etc. etc. to be on governing bodies for those reasons - your role as parent is just your motivation for offering your time.

They'll never stop having parents as governors because who else would make up the majority of the governing bodies? But rather than having a playground election and Betty gets voted on because she has the most friends, the school needs to target their skills gap and try to attract the right people, the right parents, to their governing body.

At least this is how I've understood it, and how I personally was co-opted onto our governing body.

Oh, and as far as I'm aware, governors don't get paid. You can claim travel expenses, but I would think most rarely do.

 

[Buzzer]

I agree with the point about it feeling a little like the 80's. Only then, the unions still had some real power. I think the lurch to the right may well be to try to appease Tory backbenchers as the Tory majority is not that great.

I think the Tory majority is effectively huge because there's basically no opposition what with the car crash that is Labour at the moment. But you're right about the unions. Where is the NUT leader? Who is the NUT leader? I really believe that this is the kind of issue that the teachers' union could win huge public support for. He/she should be out there on every news channel and newspaper rubbishing this latest wheeze. Say what you like about Bob Crow, he led from the front.

 

[mr sheen]

I'm no fan of this government, or their educational policies, but I am a school governor and a parent of 2 kids at the school, but I'm not actually a 'parent governor' but I'm formally co-opted onto the governing body.

I don't think the idea is to get rid of parents being governors, it is having the right parents with the right skills doing the job. Therefore they are looking for accountants, solicitors, architects, engineers, human resources, educational professionals etc. etc. to be on governing bodies for those reasons - your role as parent is just your motivation for offering your time.

They'll never stop having parents as governors because who else would make up the majority of the governing bodies? But rather than having a playground election and Betty gets voted on because she has the most friends, the school needs to target their skills gap and try to attract the right people, the right parents, to their governing body.

At least this is how I've understood it, and how I personally was co-opted onto our governing body.

Oh, and as far as I'm aware, governors don't get paid. You can claim travel expenses, but I would think most rarely do.

Tricky to get parents with those skills at schools outside the leafy suburbs though.

 

[Igzilla]

I'm no fan of this government, or their educational policies, but I am a school governor and a parent of 2 kids at the school, but I'm not actually a 'parent governor' but I'm formally co-opted onto the governing body.

I don't think the idea is to get rid of parents being governors, it is having the right parents with the right skills doing the job. Therefore they are looking for accountants, solicitors, architects, engineers, human resources, educational professionals etc. etc. to be on governing bodies for those reasons - your role as parent is just your motivation for offering your time.

They'll never stop having parents as governors because who else would make up the majority of the governing bodies? But rather than having a playground election and Betty gets voted on because she has the most friends, the school needs to target their skills gap and try to attract the right people, the right parents, to their governing body.

At least this is how I've understood it, and how I personally was co-opted onto our governing body.

But that's missing the point. The main point of Parent Governors is to represent the children. Co-opted Governors are there because they posses a skill that the current Board do not have. When I became a Parent Governor, there were 4 of us, the Head, 3 staff, an LA Governor and 2 Community Governors. We have already had to (forced) streamline down to Head, 4 Parents, 2 staff and 1 Co-opted. We had a skills audit a few months ago so see where we were lacking so we could Co-opt on an ad hoc basis. We still had a balance of staff vs non staff. To now strip out the Parents and not have to replace them with parents but anyone whose skill matches the need. Who determines the need? Well, who's left. Oh, the staff governors...

 

[The Albion Roar]

I think the Tory majority is effectively huge because there's basically no opposition what with the car crash that is Labour at the moment. But you're right about the unions. Where is the NUT leader? Who is the NUT leader? I really believe that this is the kind of issue that the teachers' union could win huge public support for. He/she should be out there on every news channel and newspaper rubbishing this latest wheeze. Say what you like about Bob Crow, he led from the front.

They're in Brighton next week.

Depending on which media outlet you tune into, you'll probably get to hear them.

At least I hope so.

 

[Buzzer]

I'm no fan of this government, or their educational policies, but I am a school governor and a parent of 2 kids at the school, but I'm not actually a 'parent governor' but I'm formally co-opted onto the governing body.

I don't think the idea is to get rid of parents being governors, it is having the right parents with the right skills doing the job. Therefore they are looking for accountants, solicitors, architects, engineers, human resources, educational professionals etc. etc. to be on governing bodies for those reasons - your role as parent is just your motivation for offering your time.

They'll never stop having parents as governors because who else would make up the majority of the governing bodies? But rather than having a playground election and Betty gets voted on because she has the most friends, the school needs to target their skills gap and try to attract the right people, the right parents, to their governing body.

At least this is how I've understood it, and how I personally was co-opted onto our governing body.

How realistic is that though that there will all of a sudden be a pool of accountants, lawyers and the like ready and willing to take up the duties of a parent-governor? I think most willing to take those positions are probably already involved. I also think that this policy might be counter-productive. There's no-one more engaged in raising funds and dealing with school issues than the parents of the children at the schools. Is the system so broken that it needs this fix?

Friends of mine who are teachers say that the constant changes to their work environment are pushing them to the brink.

 

[CHAPPERS]

I hoped when they banged on about having a mandate now they wouldn't really start taking the piss but it seems I was very wrong. Disgraceful.

 

[darkwolf666]

This gets worse and worse, doesn't it?

So to run an academy you don't need any experience in education. Nobody cares what the teachers think. And now parents are being sidelined.

Who voted for these twats?

Not me!

 

[Bold Seagull]

But that's missing the point. The main point of Parent Governors is to represent the children. Co-opted Governors are there because they posses a skill that the current Board do not have. When I became a Parent Governor, there were 4 of us, the Head, 3 staff, an LA Governor and 2 Community Governors. We have already had to (forced) streamline down to Head, 4 Parents, 2 staff and 1 Co-opted. We had a skills audit a few months ago so see where we were lacking so we could Co-opt on an ad hoc basis. We still had a balance of staff vs non staff. To now strip out the Parents and not have to replace them with parents but anyone whose skill matches the need. Who determines the need? Well, who's left. Oh, the staff governors...

You're not necessarily stripping out the parents though. We have 4 co-opted governors on our body, 2 of us happen to parents that bring a set of skills to the table. So although on paper we have 3 parents and 4 co-opted, the reality is we have 5 parents and 2 co-opted. Perhaps I'm wrong, but rather than electing a parent governor based on nothing more than them being a parent, you are still taking parents, but you're looking for that parent to bring a set of skills with them. I've always found the playground governor elections where you decide a governor based on a paragraph they write as rather pointless really.

The governing body is supposed to identify and determine its own needs as well as its own succession planning.