Page 1


Management in Education http://mie.sagepub.com/ Book review: Nick Boddington and Adrian King, Real Health for Real Lives 15−−16 (Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes, 2010) ISBN: 978-1-4085-0248-8 Jenny Barksfield Management in Education 2011 25: 42 DOI: 10.1177/0892020610390183 The online version of this article can be found at: http://mie.sagepub.com/content/25/1/42.2.citation

Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

British Educational Leadership, Management & Administration Society

Additional services and information for Management in Education can be found at: Email Alerts: http://mie.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://mie.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

>> Version of Record - Jan 31, 2011 What is This?

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


MiE Management in Education 25(1) 42–43 ª 2011 British Educational Leadership, Management & Administration Society (BELMAS) Reprints and permission: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav mie.sagepub.com

Book reviews

Reviewed by: David Wells, Senior Lecturer, Secondary ITT ICT, University of East London Martin Fautley and Jonathan Savage Achieving QTS: Meeting the Professional Standards Framework: Secondary Education Reflective Reader (Exeter: Learning Matters, 2010) ISBN: 1844454730 DOI: 10.1177/0892020610390170

The book being reviewed here is Achieving QTS: Meeting the Professional Standards Framework: Secondary Education Reflective Reader. It is a first edition publication, published in August 2010. The book is aimed predominantly at beginning teachers. However, it is also of considerable use to practising teachers wishing to re-explore useful pedagogy and advice for reflective guidance and success in their classroom. The authors are, Martin Fautley, Professor of Education at Birmingham City University, and Jonathan Savage, a Reader in Education at the Institute of Education, Manchester Metropolitan University. Both have authored numerous books and publications designed to assist teachers with the diverse theoretical and practical approaches they can adopt to improve the learning within their classroom. There is a logical flow to the content of this publication. The chapters are structured around three key themes identified by the authors. Theme 1 centres on starting teaching, developing a teacher identity and considering subject and pedagogy; theme 2 is concerned with developing the teaching; and theme 3 concentrates on future teaching practice. Each theme contains three separate chapters allowing for a full and comprehensive development of the topics being considered. Within each chapter, many challenges for the novice teacher in developing their practice are clearly presented. There is also considerable allowance for the more experienced teacher either to revisit theory and pedagogy and place concepts they use in the classroom alongside the theorists who develop and write about them, or to re-galvanise their teaching and learning approach with theories and pedagogy that can be applied (with relative ease) in their lessons. A wide range of academic extracts are used from many different educational writers and theorists, allowing for a balanced approach to reading and the development of reflective understanding. These readings are clearly and succinctly analysed and explained by the authors. This approach perhaps lends itself to an easier and smoother transition in applying understanding of the academic extracts to a teaching and learning approach in the classroom. Furthermore, the extracts provide the reader with a very clear direction into further investigation of the chapter topic areas should they wish. What has proved particularly significant to me from reading this

publication is its consideration of the concept of professional knowledge for a teacher and the lack of pedagogy perhaps being a part of that. This is an area that is clearly fundamental in the progression of effective teaching and learning, but is all too often overlooked by the practising teacher. There is plenty to be gained from this book to challenge, motivate and encourage the use of this pedagogy. Importantly, it also provides the tools to experiment and apply concepts (that will progress teaching and learning) in the classroom for the discerning educator. However, this book is not only useful for trainee or practising teachers. For those involved in the mentoring and training of teachers, there is much to assist in these processes, and the book would prove a very practical tool in encouraging reading and understanding of theory and pedagogy from students. It also perhaps provides a very clear framework for the development of initial teacher training courses. In conclusion, this book covers many significant areas needed in developing (and reflecting on) a teacher’s expertise in their relevant learning space. It is easy to read and follow, but also challenges ways of thinking and the impact of one’s approach to learning and teaching in the classroom, thus perhaps making it ideal for the novice and beginning teacher. It provides some very useful and focused reflective exercises throughout each chapter. There is also a clear opportunity for further reading through the academic extracts used. The chapters are clearly laid out and I appreciate the way they are structured ‘as a lesson’ with clear learning objectives that are linked to the professional QTS standards. A teacher should be reflective in their approach and should encourage their pupils to be reflective in their learning. This book provides an excellent opportunity to consider how and why, while also providing some ammunition to improve the teaching and learning that takes place in the classroom.

Reviewed by: Jenny Barksfield, PSHE Education Consultant, CSN Consultancy, Esse

Nick Boddington and Adrian King, Real Health for Real Lives 15–16 (Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes, 2010) ISBN: 978-1-4085-0248-8 DOI: 10.1177/0892020610390183

Nick Boddington and Adrian King are well-placed to write the definitive text for PSHE education (PSHEe) subject leads and teachers. Nick Boddington is the PSHE Association’s

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


Book reviews

43

National Subject Lead and has over 25 years’ experience of PSHEe as teacher, coordinator and local authority adviser. He has also worked in America, Canada and as a consultant with the World Health Organisation supporting the development of ‘healthy schools’ in Russia. Adrian King is a leading authority on PSHEe, especially drug education. Currently an independent health education consultant, he has over many years advised organisations ranging from schools, local authorities and the police to the DfES and a UN committee. Real Health for Real Lives 15–16 completes a series (Real Health for Real Lives 11–12, 13–14 and 15–16) which accompany the Health for Life curriculum planning books for secondary PSHEe. This new text champions the continued importance of positioning PSHEe at the heart of the curriculum at a time when the new Coalition government promises greater autonomy for schools. While school leaders are increasingly recognising this central role that a well-planned PSHEe programme can play, not only for individual students’ well-being but also for ensuring whole-school outcomes, there are relatively few published resources to support this. The completed secondary series ensures continuity from the long-established primary Health for Life and Real Health for Real Lives books, which together represent an important and valuable contribution to the field. The factual knowledge base of PSHEe changes rapidly, so while Real Health for Real Lives 15–16 recognises that there is a body of knowledge that students need, this is not its primary focus. It adopts an active, enquiry-based approach through which the teacher facilitates a dialogue with structured questioning, which engages with the students’ own experiences. This ensures that each session starts from where the students are, builds on their prior knowledge and works within their reality, developing the skills needed to take responsibility for all aspects of their own health, from their physical and mental well-being to their economic well-being and career. The first 24 pages of Real Health for Real Lives 15–16 explain the philosophy behind the Health for Life series and the authors’ approach to PSHEe. This might seem unnecessarily detailed but given that this is a different type of

resource to most PSHEe course books and that so few teachers have received specific training in the subject, it is actually a valuable addition to the text. Particularly useful is the section explaining why the common practice of using fear arousal in PSHEe is consistently ineffective in changing behaviour. The remainder of the book comprises the ‘suggested teaching sessions’. Here the authors have addressed one possible shortcoming of the original Health for Life curriculum planner books: that while a suggested outline was given for the content of each session, only some of these ‘content boxes’ were expanded with full session notes. While Real Health for Real Lives 15–16 can easily be used independently, by filling these gaps it provides an invaluable supplement for those already using Health for Life. In keeping with the authors’ philosophy of effective practice, these are not rigid, prescriptive lesson plans. The session overviews start with notes to the teacher, followed by a section to share with the students, a focusing activity, a suggested core activity for the session and finally a reflection or plenary. In the hands of a skilled PSHEe teacher this structure will ensure that the content is relevant to the students in the group and starts from their existing knowledge and experience. However, some additional planning may be required, especially in terms of classroom management for the core activities, when to work in groups, timing of activities, ways of exploring the structuring questions and so on. Assessment in PSHE education has been a problematic and sometimes controversial area due to the nature of the subject; however, practitioners are increasingly recognising its importance and looking for guidance. Future revisions of this book would therefore benefit from suggested assessment activities and opportunities. Real Health for Real Lives 15–16 completes a series that is an important contribution to the field of PSHEe from age 4 to 16. It introduces those with little knowledge of the field, including school leaders, to a philosophy and rationale for effective practice that delivers both for individual students and in terms of whole-school outcomes. It will be a valuable support for practitioners who want a resource that will enable them to plan and deliver a PSHEe programme that is tailored to their school and their students’ needs.

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


Management in Education http://mie.sagepub.com/

Leading performance: transposing musicianship into the leadership debate Marie Bush Management in Education 2011 25: 37 DOI: 10.1177/0892020610388335 The online version of this article can be found at: http://mie.sagepub.com/content/25/1/37

Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

British Educational Leadership, Management & Administration Society

Additional services and information for Management in Education can be found at: Email Alerts: http://mie.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://mie.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations: http://mie.sagepub.com/content/25/1/37.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Jan 31, 2011 What is This?

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


MiE Leading performance: transposing musicianship into the leadership debate

Management in Education 25(1) 37–41 ª 2011 British Educational Leadership, Management & Administration Society (BELMAS) Reprints and permission: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0892020610388335 mie.sagepub.com

Marie Bush

Abstract This article reflects the personal experiences of its author: a musician, teacher and current leader in the secondary independent sector. It provides an initial exploration of the link between leadership and musicianship, pivoting on the concept of performance and how specific socialised and embedded skills and experiences developed through musical performance resonate with notions of leadership in education. The intention is to raise awareness of the positive attributes of musicianship which are sometimes lost in the mist of artistic endeavour. Setting technical mastery aside, a raft of experiences, including presentation, formality, organisation, collaboration, a blend of aesthetic and academic enrichment and emotional sensitivity equip a capable musician with skills that transpose seamlessly into the role of leadership. Many of these experiences apply to other artistic fields within education and perhaps this debate will encourage those who appoint leaders to reconsider the attributes of artistic experiences. Bourdieu’s conceptual lens provides a theoretical foundation highlighting habitus and field as useful tools to filter leadership experience in a musical context. Keywords musicianship, performance, leadership, gender, Bourdieu

Theme This article reflects the personal and professional experiences of its author. In my formative years, tutorship in music harnessed an initial awareness of gender roles and expectations. Musicianship is a performance, the practical manifestation of theoretical knowledge, technical skill and understanding. The ‘doing’ aspect of the musical performance brought into play contextual considerations including dress code, stance and body language, which, aligned with emotional content, ‘send messages’ to the audience, contributing as much to the performance as the technical mastery of the notation. These musical experiences comfortably transposed into a teaching career which has culminated in senior leadership responsibilities (currently deputy head teacher), where the ‘doing’ of leadership is ‘performed’ within a specific personal and professional context. I have chosen a musical framework for this leadership debate (theme and variations) acknowledging that everything I do professionally, broadly speaking, is influenced by my embedded, modified (variation) and ongoing musicianship, this being the most influential aspect of my personal experience and understanding. The text is structured using a theme and variations format, where each variation highlights a specific aspect of the musicianship/ leadership debate. Variation One clarifies the personal context of the study, Variation Two summarises constructions of leadership, Variation Three specifies the musical attributes linked to leadership roles and Variation Four

highlights the conceptual framework, Bourdieu’s habitus and field, to illuminate practice. The Coda reflects on the socialised aspects of musicianship and how these experiences and skills have naturally transposed into leadership. The first variation exposes the author’s socialisation of musicianship.

Variation One – personal context During my years of schooling, the relationship between women and music was particularly persuasive: composers, conductors and leaders of orchestras were predominantly men. In addition, as a student of music, I learned that theoretical aspects of musicianship were gendered too, including feminine cadences, feminine endings to phrases. The feminisation of music through gendered roles has been explored by Green who argues that historically musical performance has been packaged as a ‘feminine pastime’ (1997: 25). The association of certain roles for men and women within music embodies the central tenet of the author’s argument. Leadership in music, with gendered roles and experiences, was central to my observations of hierarchy, power and knowledge. Even so, it was my experience as a musician that empowered me to seek leadership roles when I became a secondary school teacher. Without Corresponding author: E-mail: mlb5maplewood@aol.com

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


38

Management in Education 25(1)

doubt these experiences have had an impact on my practice. My approach to the practicalities of the role has benefited from my well-honed ‘eye for detail’ which is crucial in any performance context. For example, this is evident in the many processes and measures used to support the execution of duties to a high standard. This often includes 360 degree communication with effective filtering to both teaching and non-teaching staff. However, the most significant experience is the ‘unpredictability of performance’ which requires a degree of confidence and self-belief which are highly regarded attributes in a senior educational role. It is not simply a matter of crisis management; it is distinct from this in the sense that it is about the ‘process’: how you react, how you deal with the situation and the effect this has on everyone else. Performance skills generate confidence: no two performances are the same and potentially something different can (and sometimes does) go amiss, and this has to be dealt with in situ on the platform with (usually) no warning. It is this experience which, above all else, has helped me to lead and manage more efficiently and effectively. The next variation summarises historical constructions of leadership.

Variation Two – constructions of leadership The historical gender divisions associated with musical performance, as cited earlier, resonate with historical constructions of leadership within education. It was over a hundred years ago that the ‘great head’ (male, classics, Oxbridge) template emerged (Carr & Hartnett, 1996: 115), providing a framework for headship which prevailed until the new language of ‘leadership’ eventually became synonymous with ‘being the head of a school’. The ‘leadership to’ (autocratic) style which provided the framework for headship a century ago was characterised in contemporary literary works including those by Charles Dickens. The ‘great head’ was a product of the public school, the first recipient of this title being Thomas Arnold. The expectation for pupils (and presumably teachers) was submission ‘to the authority of the head’ so that they might ‘aspire to be rulers themselves’ (Reid & Filby, 1982, cited in Carr & Hartnett, 1996: 115). During the last century, particularly the last 20 years, the necessary tools for headship has evolved into a set of generic skills (with or without a classics degree/Oxbridge education) that equip individuals to articulate the revised job description: the how, why and what of doing headship. Since the 1980s education has been framed by masculinist discourses which promote perceived masculine ways of being as explored by many academics: ‘individualistic competition, outcome, achievement, work ethic and performativity, as both the purpose and defining character of education’ (Whitehead, 2002: 51). The net outcome is the transposition of language from the world of business and employment into schools. This globalised language includes target setting, line management, performance management, market forces, customer satisfaction and

value for money, and each embodies an element of success or failure. Currently some schools are led by non-teaching ‘executives’ who have corporate experience deemed appropriate for certain educational contexts. It could be argued that the historical gender divisions associated with music, referred to at the beginning of this section, are mirrored in a leadership debate which frequently focuses on non-educational contexts ‘ . . . usually in industry and commerce, or politics and war . . . [and] understandings [of leadership in education] have . . . tended to leave women out of the leadership picture . . . ’ (Hall, 2001: 328). Debates about the dichotomy between leadership/direction as an integral function of management (in addition to the practicalities of planning, control and organisation) and leadership as a separate entity abound in relevant literature. For example, regarding the former, a perceived weakness in the NPQH qualification is ‘the distinction being made between ‘leadership’ and ‘management’ (Bush, 1998: 328). Bush refers to additional literature (Glatter, 1997, and Bolman & Deal, 1991 – cited in Bush 1998) which supports his thesis that an exclusive focus on either leadership or management ‘is controversial’ (Bush, 1998: 328). The other side of the debate highlights the distinction between leadership and management and their application as separate entities. Definitions of leadership tend to highlight ‘a sense of purpose . . . [where] . . . followers are influenced towards goal achievement’ (Fidler, 1997: 25). In this sense, leadership differs from management given ‘its more proactive orientation and ... its inspirational qualities’ (Fidler, 1997: 23). Referring to the ‘artistry of leadership’ Fidler gives an example of a musical analogy summarising the complexity and contextual emphasis of leadership: ‘composers use the same 12 note scale but the music produced can be very different’ (Krug, 1992, cited in Fidler, 1997: 35). The complexity of the leadership debate prevails leaving one commentator, Hodgkinson, to conclude that: ‘If you could burn words at the stake . . . the first word I would suggest is leadership’ (Ribbins, 1995: 256). In the next variation, the orchestra provides the context for a discussion of musical leadership skills.

Variation Three – orchestrating leadership In this section the specific aspects of musicianship that develop leadership awareness and/or skills unfold in the text as follows: collaboration, roles and power structures, contextual shifts, listening and accommodation, negotiation and interpretation. My years at school and university were dominated by my experiences as an orchestral violinist and by solo performance. I have been privileged to be appointed an orchestral leader: the Leader of the Orchestra (always a first violinist) occupies a powerful position within the orchestral ranks through their close professional association with the conductor. The conductor and leader work together to resolve issues pertaining to performance and technique. The orchestral leader is a perceived role model and ‘leads’ by example (conduct, musical excellence, etiquette). The

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


Bush

39

importance of the role of ‘leader’ is acknowledged when he/she takes a separate bow after all the other members of the orchestra are seated, just before the concert begins. Indeed, the issue of roles is significant throughout the orchestra; each section has a principal and usually a subprincipal. Each pair of seated musicians is known as a ‘desk’, and it is likely that your career development will be viewed in terms of the highest ranking desk position you occupy. In my youth, this experience highlighted a natural hierarchy and a personal desire and aspiration to lead others by ‘moving up the ranks’. The four orchestral sections – strings, woodwind, brass and percussion – each have a role to play in the performance. This role is to a large extent defined by the demands of the composition and the composer’s intentions. However, as a member of an orchestra I learned how everyone made a valuable contribution at some point. For example, in the eighteenth-century orchestral music of Mozart and Haydn, the string section dominates the orchestral sound and the other orchestral families tend to punctuate and enhance rather than routinely take the lead, without which the music would be bereft of much of its charm and character. It is the timing and placement of these interjections which count, in equal measure, to the musical content, for example timpani used to emphasise cadence points. Orchestral players are reminded of the need to listen to each other not just for intonation purposes but also in terms of phrasing and dynamics and to be aware of the role of other instruments, each player part of a large jigsaw of sound. There are times when you lead with the tune; at other times you take on an accompanying role or possibly stop playing all together. A musician’s training includes skills for interpretation: music from different eras comes with its own set of rules (see Variation 4), characteristics and stylistic features which must be communicated to the audience. Rehearsals provide an opportunity for deliberation, discussion, preparation and negotiation. Thus the orchestral conductor is a leader of musicians. The conductor does not physically produce the performance but he/she inspires others to do so by creating the appropriate conditions for this to take place. A conductor has to persuade, negotiate and resolve performance issues given that the musicians’ prior experience of this work might be significant, non-existent or somewhere in between the two. Leadership in this context is clearly about empowering others to take ownership of a specific musical interpretation and expression; the same music performed/ recorded by different orchestras often displays significant nuances between the different groups of musicians, thus emphasising how the conductor’s leadership has a significant bearing on the outcome. In addition the performance has to communicate to a paying audience that embraces a set of expectations; it assumes a level of musical competence commensurate with the context, along with the associated decorum and etiquette of the concert platform (including dress codes) – for example, it would be unusual, if not frowned upon in some circles, to see jeans and t-shirts rather than black dresses and tailcoats. From a

more general perspective, musical performance is characterised variously by precision, body stance, subtlety, technical mastery, musical awareness, etiquette, decorum and acknowledgment of praise (applause). The links between leadership and orchestral conducting have been explored in the literature. For example, within these two contexts, one study (Hall, 2001) highlights the ‘alternative way of perceiving the team leader as an integral, not separate part of the team; the followers as collaborators, not isolated individuals’ (p. 328). Moreover, ‘using a musical lens to scrutinise leading and managing in education opens up new directions for looking at the relationship between expert professional (musicians and teachers) who at different times may be leaders, collaborators or followers in the performance of their art’ (Hall, 2001: 328). I acknowledge that the link between orchestral conductor and leadership is not original in itself, but an insight from both perspectives is less common, constituting practical experience in each context. In another example (Newton, 2004), jazz improvisation is considered ‘a model for the development of improvisation in leadership’ (p. 83). Newton points out ‘that jazz and improvisation can be taught and, more importantly, it can be learned’ rather than being an ‘innate gift or talent’ (2004: 83). As with musicianship ‘theory must be integrated with practice . . . [with] . . . time for reflection on the effects of application of the theory’ (Newton, 2004: 91). In terms of specific links with leadership skills, it is argued that jazz improvisation ‘is dependent on the intellect, intuition, ensemble playing, and most importantly, preparation’ (Newton, 2004: 98). Thus literature attests that the links between musicianship and leadership, in various guises, is specific, applicable and transferable in new contexts. These specific, applicable and transferable skills are not exclusive to the domain of music; many arenas of artistic endeavour display comparable or similar traits and can be located in other practical disciplines including dance, physical education and drama. Awareness of the beneficial transposition of ‘performance’ skills into the ‘doing’ of leadership has the potential to encourage more performing arts specialists to engage in leadership roles. Given that all teaching is to some extent a ‘performance’, the application of artistic skills is both extensive and persuasive. Indeed, it is argued that interview panels could reconsider the value and significance of artistic skills in the development of leadership practice; artistic endeavour could be the focus of whole-school INSET; professional development for non-artistic practitioners could include observation of practical activities (not specifically lessons) to highlight different learning/teaching environments; pupils could be encouraged to develop their artistic skills through enrichment programmes or individual training. To summarise, the intention of this paper is to raise awareness of the positive attributes of musicianship which are sometimes lost in the mist of artistic endeavour. Setting technical mastery aside, a raft of experiences, including presentation, formality, organisation, collaboration, a blend of aesthetic and academic enrichment and emotional

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


40

Management in Education 25(1)

sensitivity equip a capable musician with skills that transpose seamlessly into the role of leadership. Many of these experiences apply to other artistic fields within education and perhaps this debate will encourage those who appoint leaders to reconsider the attributes of artistic experiences in the light of these observations. From a gender perspective, it is my experience that the feminine ‘softer’ skills of musicianship are too often perceived as a weakness rather than a strength in terms of leadership credibility and I would hope that this paper might go some way to promote the positive attributes of musicianship and artistic endeavour. At this point it would be beneficial to contextualise musicianship within a theoretical perspective and the next variation provides a conceptual framework for further reflection.

Variation Four – conceptual framework Bourdieu: habitus and field In general, Bourdieu’s concepts have been used to illuminate issues relating to inequality through social replication (Lingard & Christie, 2003). Habitus refers to the way people do things – ways of being. This includes talking, moving, interaction and attitudes and essentially defines our modus operandi. In terms of leadership, this includes individual social trajectory (past experience, both personal and professional) and how this connects to individual expectations and perceptions of oneself and success. In addition, identities are fluid (for example, mother, wife, head teacher), the latter being the focus of a study involving head teachers who were also mothers (Bradbury, 2007). Habitus involves a lengthy socialisation process. In this way, habitus is a useful tool to explore both the change and continuity of experience and has been variously referred to as providing ‘a feel for the game’ (Bourdieu, 1990, in Gunter, 2001: 13) which involves ‘regularities in social actions’ (Gunter, 2001: 13). Field is ‘socially constituted’; examples include politics and education, scientific and artistic (Lingard et al., 2003: 64). It is conceivable that they might ‘overlap’ and an individual might be forced to move within fields that are uncomfortable for them. In education, interconnecting fields include economics and politics, potentially leading to tensions given that individual ‘ways of being and knowing’ might be compromised or diminished within a different setting or context within which individuals and their social positions are located. Each field is comprised of its own ‘rules of the game’ or accepted norms (ibid.). In terms of musicianship ‘ways of being and knowing’ are embedded in the experience of performance. The musician’s habitus is the replication/modification of past musicianship which frames each new performance. The musician’s ‘feel for the game’ (habitus), referred to earlier, intimates a sense of nuance and subtlety as one negotiates current experience. The musician deftly shifts from an aesthetic ‘field’ to an educational (leadership) ‘field’ using processes (rules of the game) transposed from one context

to the other. Referring to pure art (as opposed to the arts in general) it is argued that one can ‘identify consistent dispositions and behaviours in the lives of people who identify themselves as artists’ (Webb et al., 2002: 175). Bourdieu’s own words illuminate a relevant point, namely ‘every expression is an accommodation between an expressive interest and a censorship constituted by the field in which that expression is offered’ (Bourdieu, 1993, in Webb et al., 2002: 178). The Coda reflects on these practices and roles and the perceived links between musicianship and leadership.

Coda Within the framework of theme and variations, the text has explored the personal and professional experiences of its author as a musician and leader in a secondary independent school. The theme of leadership was addressed in each variation as follows: Variation One clarified the personal context of the study; Variation Two summarised some constructions of leadership; Variation Three specified some of the musical attributes linked to leadership roles; and Variation Four framed the discussion using Bourdieu’s conceptual lens. As the member of an orchestra you learn how to work as a team, how to listen and how to ‘play your part’ within the natural hierarchy in the performance. The musical features of a specific work require technical mastery and interpretation as communicated by the orchestral conductor who unifies the whole, empowering the musicians to ‘perform’ as a single entity (orchestra) rather than as a body of capable individuals. The role of an educational leader bears more than a passing resemblance to this description. Leaders work as a team, they listen to each other at meetings, they have a role to play within the natural hierarchy and they all contribute to the educational ‘performance’. Leadership skills require mastery and understanding of educational practice, ‘interpreted’ within the specific educational context. Leaders inspire others to take ownership and ‘perform’ as a single entity. There are examples in leadership literature to support the view that musical skills and experiences transpose comfortably into the role of leadership (see Hall, 2001; Newton, 2004). This discussion raises awareness of the positive attributes and experiences of musicianship beyond what is seen and heard on the concert platform. It is more about the collaborative aspects of musicianship (exemplified by the orchestra) which foster a blend of aesthetic and academic enrichment that transpose seamlessly into the multi-faceted role of leadership. It is acknowledged that many of these experiences apply to other artistic fields within education and perhaps this debate will encourage those who appoint leaders to reconsider the attributes of the artistic experience as a means of enriching the experiences of all staff and pupils who might ‘aspire to be rulers themselves’ (Reid & Filby, 1982, in Carr & Hartnett, 1996: 15). References Bradbury, L. (2007) ‘Dialogic identities: the experiences of women who are headteachers and mothers in English primary

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


Bush

41

schools’. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 39(1), 81–95. Bush, T. (1998) ‘The National Professional Qualification for Headship: the key to effective school leadership?’ School Leadership and Management, 18(3), 321–33. Carr, W. & Hartnett, A. (1996) Education and the Struggle for Democracy. Buckingham: Open University Press. Fidler, B. (1997) ‘School leadership: some key ideas’. School Leadership and Management, 17(1), 23–37. Green, L. (1997) Music, Gender, Education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gunter, H. M. (2001) Leaders and Leadership in Education. London: Paul Chapman. Hall, V. (2001) ‘Management teams in education: an unequal music’. School Leadership and Management, 21(3), 327–41. Lingard, B. and Christie, P. (2003) ‘Leading theory: Bourdieu and the field of educational leadership’. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 6(4), 318–20. Lingard, B., Hayes, D., Mills, M. & Christie, P. (2003) Leading Learning. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Newton, P. M. (2004) ‘Leadership lessons from jazz improvisation’. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 7(1), 83–99. Ribbins, P. (1995) ‘Understanding contemporary leaders and leadership in education: values and vision’, in J. Bell & B. T. Harrison (eds), Visions and Values in Managing Education. London: David Fulton, pp. 250–62. Webb, J., Schirato, T. & Danaher, G. (2002) Understanding Bourdieu. London: Sage. Whitehead, S. M. (2002) Men and Masculinities. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Biography Marie Bush is a music graduate who has taught in the secondary sector throughout her career. She is currently a senior manager having previously held posts of head of music and director of music. She completed a masters degree (in education) some years ago and has continued her study of women leaders in the secondary independent sector.

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


Management in Education http://mie.sagepub.com/

Editorial Gillian Forrester Management in Education 2011 25: 3 DOI: 10.1177/0892020610389548 The online version of this article can be found at: http://mie.sagepub.com/content/25/1/3.citation

Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

British Educational Leadership, Management & Administration Society

Additional services and information for Management in Education can be found at: Email Alerts: http://mie.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://mie.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

>> Version of Record - Jan 31, 2011 What is This?

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


MiE Management in Education 25(1) 3–4 ª 2011 British Educational Leadership, Management & Administration Society (BELMAS) Reprints and permission: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0892020610389548 mie.sagepub.com

Editorial

This special issue of MiE takes performance management as its theme. Performance management, as a process and set of practices to measure performance, has become a politically popular idea over recent years. Performance management thus currently pervades almost every public sector organisation and, in the education sector, has become integrated with other management processes. The process of performance management in education, it was anticipated, would facilitate the development of a performance-driven culture as well as advance the raising of standards throughout the sector. As a consequence, a considerable amount of time, energy and resources have been assigned for: the setting of goals and targets; the construction of indicators and objectives; the development and clarification of strategic plans to improve performance; establishing auditing mechanisms for monitoring performance and progress; reviewing performance against various goals, targets, indicators and objectives and comparing with actual results/ outputs; the production of (sometimes selective) performance information (which is expensive to produce); and the use of performance information to reward or punish individuals or institutions. Through the drive for ‘efficiency’, ‘effectiveness’ and ‘excellence’ such increased levels of accountability have, arguably, transformed the nature of teaching and learning across the sector as well as fuelling a culture of performativity in education. The objective of this special issue, therefore, is to publish a range of articles from both practitioners and academics which are related to performance management, performance measurement and/or leadership as performance. As such, this special issue contains seven papers, the authors taking different stances, topics and aspects of education. The issue opens with my own paper (Gill Forrester) which contemplates the extent to which the education sector has embraced the performance management process. The paper suggests that policy-makers have tended to view performance management (and performance-related pay) as the solution to a number of persisting problems in education and also as a significant step towards its modernisation. However, for many working within education such developments are regarded more cautiously. The paper calls for a broader vision for reshaping education, which transcends the competitive, performance culture. A head teacher’s perspective is provided by Sam Morton who presents an account of how performance management is operating in a small rural primary school. He outlines how performance management roles are currently organised and undertaken within the school and, in doing so, depicts how performance management is operating ‘on the ground’. Performance management processes are clearly linked to his school’s quest to become ‘outstanding’. Sam

recommends that complacent performance management should be avoided and that the performance management system is integral to the organisation of the school and its development planning. The focus of Susan Graves’ paper is the higher level teaching assistant (HLTA) and she examines the precarious development of this role. Utilising data from a case study undertaken in primary schools in the North West of England she focuses on the anomalous ways HLTAs are appointed, their varied credentials for the post and their ad hoc training and continuing professional development (CPD) opportunities. Susan’s research draws attention to how HLTAs assess their own performance and also how they may be involved in the assessment of TAs’ performance through distributed performance management arrangements at the local level. Susan cautions that the Coalition government’s spending cuts will potentially further impede a coherent model of professional development for HLTAs. Jan Moreland’s paper provides a reflection of performance management within the secondary school sector. Jan puts forward a number of ideas which are related to the links between CPD, performance management and developing effective classrooms in secondary schools. She is concerned with a number of issues including training and teachers’ CPD, how teachers engage with their own learning as well as that of their students, and she proposes possible avenues where schools might take steps forward. Her overriding intention for the paper, however, is to engender debate and open up the issues she raises for wider discussion. Kim Mather and Roger Seifert take a critical stance and question the ascendancy of performance management and the somewhat ruthless application of inspection and audit regimes in education. The authors illustrate, through a review of seminal literature, how management utilises the process of performance management to resolve the enduring labour problem of low productivity in education. Focusing specifically on teachers and lecturers in secondary schools and further education colleges, they contend that resolving the ‘labour problem’ has been the main purpose of government policy in the public services in recent years. The authors explore the dialectics of performance management in order to illustrate how labourers (teachers and lecturers) are coerced and controlled by management processes and also how consent is manufactured by such processes and gained, for example, by newly conceived and enhanced notions of professionalism. Labour resistance is discussed; however, the authors conclude that by utilising such techniques of management, both government and management have exerted a more complex form of control over teachers’ and lecturers’ work situation.

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


4

Management in Education 25(1)

The next paper in the issue moves the notion of performance firmly into the leadership domain. Dave Hall, Helen Gunter and Joanna Bragg’s paper draws upon findings from the Social Practices of School Organisation in England (SPSO) project in order to examine the discursive and performative representation of distributed leadership. They argue that distributed leadership has emerged as part of a wider agenda to manage performance. They suggest distributed leadership has been ‘talked into existence’ and is widely recognised, especially among designated leaders within their case study schools. Two case study schools are presented in this paper and data from the project are utilised to illustrate different forms of distributed leadership; the first is associated with forces external to the school and the second is linked to the internal values and beliefs of practitioners within that particular school. The authors conclude that external and internal pressures of this kind contribute to the maintenance of a discursive and performative presence of distributed leadership in schools. Marie Bush considers the relationship between school leadership and musicianship/conducting an orchestra. Examining leadership and management through a musical lens Marie sets out her paper as a musical framework of theme and variations in order to explore the ‘doing’ of

leadership and management in schools as performance. Drawing on personal experiences as a musician, teacher and school leader she considers different aspects (variations) of the musicianship and leadership/management debate. For example, constructions of leadership are considered in Variation Two and the historical gender divisions associated with both musical performance and school leadership are discussed along with an acknowledgement of the dichotomy between leadership and management. Marie ‘transposes’ musical experiences with those of senior leadership and management responsibilities in order to elucidate ways in which these are ‘performed’ within a specific context. Finally, I would like to take this opportunity to thank Linda Hammersley-Fletcher for inviting me to undertake this special issue and also the various reviewers for the expertise they have brought to the process of reviewing papers in a timely and appropriate manner. Finally, I thank the authors for their respective papers, which offer illuminating insights into the management of performance in education and contribute to what I hope is a very interesting and stimulating issue of Management in Education.

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011

Gillian Forrester


Management in Education http://mie.sagepub.com/

Performance management in education: milestone or millstone? Gillian Forrester Management in Education 2011 25: 5 DOI: 10.1177/0892020610383902 The online version of this article can be found at: http://mie.sagepub.com/content/25/1/5

Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

British Educational Leadership, Management & Administration Society

Additional services and information for Management in Education can be found at: Email Alerts: http://mie.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://mie.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations: http://mie.sagepub.com/content/25/1/5.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Jan 31, 2011 What is This?

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


MiE Performance management in education: milestone or millstone?

Management in Education 25(1) 5–9 ª 2011 British Educational Leadership, Management & Administration Society (BELMAS) Reprints and permission: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0892020610383902 mie.sagepub.com

Gillian Forrester Liverpool John Moores University

Abstract The paper considers the extent to which the education sector has embraced performance management and performance-related pay. It contemplates the transfer and adaptation of performance management by the public sector as an audit mechanism for improving the performance, productivity, accountability and transparency of public services. The paper concludes by calling for a broader vision for reshaping education since it is argued that the activities of those working in schools, colleges and universities have been re-oriented by performance management techniques towards a competitive, performance culture. Keywords performance management, performance-related pay, performativity, modernisation, managerialism

Introduction A decade has passed since performance management was introduced into schools in England as a formal process (DfEE, 2000) while the implementation of a variety of performance management systems in higher education institutions dates back to 1992 (Broadbent, 2007). Performance management is a process originating in the private sector which has subsequently been adapted by the public sector into an audit mechanism for improving the performance, productivity, accountability and transparency of public services. Accordingly successive governments since the 1980s have drawn on what they perceive as businessorientated strategies from the private sector, particularly those related to aspects of financial and performance management, to remedy the perceived inadequacies of the public sector. The introduction of performance management in education has not been without controversy, particularly since it can be perceived as a form of managerial control over professional work.

The concept of ‘performance’ What is actually meant by ‘performance’ is perhaps debatable and probably regarded differently in different contexts and among different occupational groups. A dictionary definition offers the following: ‘the act or process of performing or carrying out; the execution or fulfilment of a duty; a person’s achievement under test conditions’ (Allen, 1991: 885). In one sense this refers to something accomplished: the outcomes or the outputs. However, and as Armstrong (2000: 3) argues, ‘performance is about doing the work as well as being about the results achieved’. Considered as a more holistic concept then, performance also encompasses behaviour and activity and the way individuals, teams and organisations carry out their work.

Performance, arguably, is a demonstrative act which embraces results as well as the effective use of appropriate skills, knowledge, competences and behaviours to achieve them.

Origins of performance management Performance management developed in the public services in the late 1980s in response to the realisation that a more continuous and integrated approach was needed to manage and reward performance (Armstrong & Baron, 1998). In addition, and in line with the Total Quality Management (TQM) agenda, the idea that an organisation’s performance was the responsibility of everyone, not just management, became a more prominent way of thinking. Consequently everyone in an organisation was accountable for its results and performance management systems have become quite commonplace in many organisations as part of the management of human resources. Armstrong & Murlis (1991: 195) define performance management succinctly as consisting of ‘a systematic approach to the management of people, using performance, goals, measurement, feedback and recognition as a means of motivating them to realise their maximum potential’. Murlis (1992: 65) later refined her description of performance management as ‘the process that links people and jobs to the strategy and objectives of the organization’, stating that ‘Good performance management is about operating a process which increases the likelihood of achieving performance improvements.’ In other words, performance management can be regarded as a process that translates the mission, aims and values of an organisation into individual objectives. Corresponding author: E-mail: g.forrester@ljmu.ac.uk

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


6

Management in Education 25(1)

Performance management, usually in the form of a continuous cycle, encompasses the following elements. Firstly, at the planning stage, the objectives that an individual is to achieve are agreed and set. Performance management is therefore purported to be more forwardlooking than its forerunner, performance appraisal, which had the tendency to be backward looking (Armstrong, 2006). The monitoring of an individual’s performance forms part of the second stage. In the final stage of the cycle an individual’s performance is evaluated in a performance review. The meeting of objectives over the given period is evaluated and new objectives set (see, for example, Armstrong, 2000: 21). In schools in Britain head teachers are required to ensure that teachers are appraised accordingly and annually (DfEE, 2000). Arrangements for teachers in England for example, are covered by the Education (School Teacher Performance Management) (England) Regulations 2006 which came into force in September 2007. Similar performance management mechanisms can be found elsewhere including the USA, Hong Kong and New Zealand (Bell & Stevenson, 2006). The transfer and adaptation of management concepts from the private sector to the public sector occurred in the 1980s. This process, however, was not strictly a preserve of Thatcher’s Conservative government as similar initiatives had occurred in the 1950s and 1960s (see Smith, 1972). Cutler & Waine (1994) suggest that: . . . what was different about the 1980s was the systematic introduction of managerialism, a process which drove a plethora of institutional changes . . . In a general sense, public sector managerialism is characterised by the belief that the objectives of social services such as health, education, personal social services or social security can be promoted at a lower cost when the appropriate management concepts are applied. (Cutler & Waine, 1994: x)

Managerialism can essentially be understood as a set of beliefs and practices which have been adopted and utilised in various ways in order to reshape public sector organisations and agencies, practices, culture and ideology in order to improve efficiency, cost-effectiveness and organisational performance (Zifcak, 1994). Whether conceptualised as ‘new managerialism’ (Clarke & Newman, 1997; Exworthy & Halford, 1999) or New Public Management (Newman, 2000), this mode of regulation denoted central control over strategy and local devolution of the tactics to achieve them.

Performance-related pay Essentially performance-related pay (PRP) links an individual’s pay to their performance, which is usually measured against predetermined objectives or targets. The Incomes Data Services defined PRP in the 1980s as ‘Systems providing for periodic increases in pay which are incorporated into basic salary or wages and which result from assessments of individual performance and personal value to the organization’, a definition which they still hold

as good (IDS, 2000/1). The assessment of an individual’s performance invariably takes the form of an appraisal by their manager(s) or through a performance review. As part of a general trend PRP schemes were increasingly being used by private-sector organisations and became an established reward system for managerial pay in the United States and Britain during the 1980s and 1990s. Performance-related pay, sometimes referred to as ‘merit pay’, was considered a ‘strategic tool’ to foster improved performance and was extended to other employee levels and across a wide range of occupations. The expansion of PRP was illustrative of attempts by private and later public sectors to adapt to what they saw as the more demanding and competitive environment of contemporary organisations. Within this environment employees’ pay is used as a strategic managerial tool to promote improved individual performance. The system of PRP for teachers contemplated at some length in the 1980s and 1990s during the Thatcher–Major Conservative governments was based purely on measures of pupil performance and met with some opposition from teachers (NATFHE, 1992; NUT, 1991). The School Teachers’ Review Body (STRB), an independent though government-appointed committee responsible for recommending teachers’ pay and conditions, was from 1993 successively asked by the Secretary of State for Education to consider ways in which teachers’ pay might be ‘more closely related to their performance’ (STRB, 1992: para. 61). While the STRB supported the principle of PRP for teachers it favoured a school-based approach rather than the individual teacher-based approach favoured by government. Only limited progress towards its introduction was made largely due to the difficulties of finding acceptable performance measures (Cutler & Waine, 1999) and the Conservatives’ reluctance to risk hostility with the professional teacher associations (Tomlinson, 2000). Nevertheless, the Conservatives put the foundations for a system of PRP for teachers in place and this unfinished project was taken up by the New Labour Government.

Performance management in education Performance management for schools was initially presented as both a necessity and a rational course of action by the then Secretary of State for Education – ‘the kind of system which is the norm across the public and private sectors’ (Blunkett, 1999) and which was ‘aligned with current thinking’ (Tomlinson, 2000: 297) about employee accountability and remuneration in business. Performance-related pay in the form of threshold assessment, originally introduced as part of the former New Labour government’s attempts to modernise the teaching profession, was, rather than being ‘new’ or ‘modern’, ironically harking back to the nineteenth-century system of ‘payment by results’ (Forrester, 2001). Nevertheless, policy-makers have tended to view performance management (and its sometimes associated systems of PRP) as a milestone: a significant step towards the modernisation of the public services. Indeed policy-makers have seemingly regarded PRP and

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


Forrester

7

performance management as the solution to a number of persisting problems. In education a system linking pay to performance for head teachers and deputies evolved from the revision of their pay structure in 1991 and, more specifically, from the 1995/96 and 1996/97 pay reviews (Marsden & French, 1998) as a mechanism for measuring, monitoring and rewarding performance. The extension of PRP to classroom teachers in 2000 was perceived by policy-makers as a remedy to alleviate the crisis of teacher recruitment and retention by offering greater financial rewards to teachers. It was anticipated that more graduates would be attracted to the new career structure and enter teaching as a consequence. Policy-makers regard PRP as a motivating mechanism, with the potential to ‘incentivise’ teachers to perform to higher standards in exchange for greater financial gain. The process of performance management would facilitate the development of a performance-driven culture in education, and advance the raising of standards in schools. However, many working within education regard such developments more in terms of a millstone: a heavy burden, which increases bureaucracy, intensifies surveillance and monitoring of their work and potentially erodes their working relationships. Indeed, performance management can be regarded as primarily a form of control, not for incentivising individuals (Forrester, 2001). By managing the performance of employees ‘more strategically’, translating organisational objectives into individual goals and regularly reviewing those goals, performance management provides greater control over employees’ activities. Employees are cordially required to cooperate in these processes, and the outcome of their performance review determines a pay award. Performance management relies on the processes of evaluation and self-improvement as disciplinary mechanisms of control. This allows management considerable control over what is defined as appropriate employee performance and behaviour (Kessler & Purcell, 1992). Performance management is, therefore, not just about monitoring performance, for it has the capacity to shape and reshape schools, colleges and universities. It has not been the case of those working in the education sector passively and unquestioningly adopting these government-imposed reforms for, in some instances, there has been opposition and resistance. However, despite initial hostilities towards the introduction of performance management in education, particularly around the controversial nature of measuring ‘what happens’ in education and in some cases linking pay to performance, performance management (and the performative language it embraces) appears to have become an embedded process across the sector. It brings with it a marked change in the rhetoric around ‘accountability’ and ‘performativity’ and the wholesale adoption of business language into education. Terms such as standards, targets, benchmarks, performance indictors, audits, delivery, inputs, outputs, etc. have become absorbed and embedded in such a way that it is difficult to think about and talk about education without utilising this form of language, a development aptly coined

‘edu-babble’ (Chitty, 2009). Indeed education is subsumed by ‘policy technologies’ (Ball, 2008) and by the propensity for performance management, the discourse of which purports to ‘manage’ performance. With the ascendancy of managerialism educational institutions have come to encompass surveillance, monitoring, evaluation through assessment and measurement, and judgement. A discourse of individual accountability predominates in this type of environment and promotes the processes of self-monitoring, self-management and selfregulation. Performance or performativity becomes paramount in terms of pupils’ and students’ results (test scores, examination attainment and degree classification) and the work of those who are employed in the sector is increasingly reconstituted in terms of outcomes. Lyotard argues that ‘since performitivity increases the ability to produce proof, it also increases the ability to be right’ (Lyotard, 1984: 46). Central control of education is maintained ‘at a distance’; it is ‘steered’ through the central setting of the overall educational performance framework or standards to be attained (Ball, 1994). Performativity acts as a disciplinary mechanism in the devolved (and alternative) governance of education. Steering at a distance is an alternative to coercive/ prescriptive control. Constraints are replaced by incentives. Prescription is replaced by ‘ex post’ accountability based upon quality or outcome assessments. Coercion is replaced by self-steering – the appearance of autonomy. (Ball, 1994: 54)

Providers and consumers of education are rewarded or punished according to their performance. Through the drive for ‘efficiency gains’ (alternatively perceived as ‘cuts’) and increased accountability, the nature of teaching and learning across the sector has arguably been transformed more visibly into ‘performing’ or being seen to perform. Pay and career trajectories are essentially tied to the meeting of centrally devised standards and therefore, arguably, a device to augment managerial control. Also, because PRP focuses the issue of reward of the individual, this potentially induces division among staff and impairs teachers’ capacity to organise collectively as teams.

Evaluating performance management Some key research studies investigating performance management have been undertaken in schools (e.g. Wragg et al., 2003; Mahony et al., 2004), in further education (e.g. Gleeson et al., 2009) and in higher education (e.g. Deem et al., 2007; Broadbent & Laughlin, 2006; Broad & Goddard, 2010). The academic literature mushroomed from the late 1990s until about the mid-2000s, fuelled by an increasing interest in performance management and the performance measurement process as well as by a demand for advice and information. Notably, there was an explosion of academic books and journal articles (and practitioner literature) during this time which encompass: the

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


8

Management in Education 25(1)

prescriptive ‘how to do’ performance management type texts (e.g. Tranter & Percival, 2006); issues around appropriate performance indicators and what can be measured (e.g. Kane & Staiger, 2002); experiential studies which documented how employees may, for example, subvert the process or suffer anxiety as result of the process (e.g. Wilson et al., 2004; Haynes et al., 2003); and philosophical and theoretical texts around conceptual issues of discourse and control (e.g. Ball, 2001; Jermier et al.,1994). More recently, however, the foci of scholarly activity seem to have shifted towards leaders, leading and leadership. A phenomenal amount of money running into millions of pounds has been spent on setting up and maintaining performance management in education. This has involved, for example, the training of those charged with conducting performance management, lucrative contracts to consultancies to develop models and training packages, the employment of external assessors, advisers and consultants and generally managing and overseeing the operation of the system. However, little is known of actual costs let alone the extent to which performance management has contributed to ‘improvement’, ‘efficiency’ and ‘excellence’. While not wanting to totally dismiss achievements in education over the past decade (and indeed there is much to celebrate and to be optimistic about!) a much broader understanding of what education is and what education is for is now needed. A more fundamental reshaping of the vision for education is desperately required. At the time of writing the current UK Coalition government’s vision for education is somewhat unclear. Early indications from the Secretary of State for Education signal to head teachers that a ‘key principle’ is ‘trusting professionals’ with ‘more power and control . . . to get on with the job’ (Gove, 2010). However, for the moment the performance of educational institutions will remain under scrutiny and potentially this may intensify as funding and accountability becomes even tighter in the current economic climate.

Conclusion To what extent performance management may be regarded as a milestone or a millstone largely depends on where people are positioned within or outside the education sector. What is of more concern, however, is that the origins of performance management, seen as emanating from the business sector, no longer seem to be acknowledged. Yet the activities of those working in schools, colleges and universities have been reoriented by performance management techniques towards a competitive culture, which has brought with it a ‘tick-box mentality’, a decline in trust, changing attitudes and values in education, and shifting foci and priorities. References Allen, R. E. (ed.) (1991) The Concise Oxford Dictionary, 8th edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Armstrong, M. (2000) Performance Management. Key Strategies and Practical Guidelines, 2nd edn. London: Kogan Page.

Armstrong, M. (2006) A Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice, 10th edn. London: Kogan Page. Armstrong, M. & Baron, A. (1998) Performance Management: The New Realities. London: Institute of Personnel and Development. Armstrong, M. & Murlis, H. (1991) Reward Management: A Handbook of Remuneration Strategy and Practice, 2nd edn. London: Kogan Page. Ball, S. J. (1994) Education Reform: A Critical and Poststructural Approach. Buckingham: Open University Press. Ball, S. J. (2001) ‘Performativities and fabrications in the education economy: towards a performative society’, in D. Glesson & C. Husbands (eds), The Performing School. Managing Teaching and Learning in a Performance Culture. London: RoutledgeFalmer. Ball, S. J. (2008) The Education Debate. Bristol: Policy Press. Bell, L. & Stevenson, H. (2006) Education Policy. Process, Themes and Impact. Abingdon: Routledge. Blunkett, D. (1999) ‘New teachers’ pay arrangements will cut through bureaucracy’, Association of Teachers and Lecturers’ Annual Conference, Harrogate, 30 March, DfEE Press Release 139/99, online at: http://www.dfee.gov.uk. (last accessed December 2002). Broad, M. & Goddard, A. (2010) ‘Internal performance management with UK higher education: an amorphous system?’ Measuring Business Excellence, 14(1), 60–6. Broadbent, J. (2007) Performance Management Systems in and of Higher Education Institutions in England: Professionalism, Managerialism and Management, School of Business and Social Sciences Research Papers from the School of Business and Social Sciences, Roehampton University. Broadbent, P. J. & Laughlin, R. C. (2006) Public Services: Performance Management of Higher Education: An Analysis. Final Report to the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) RES-153-25-0057. Chitty, C. (2009) ‘How ‘‘edu-babble’’ turns pupils into ‘‘customers’’’. Forum for Promoting 3–19 Comprehensive Education, 51, 395–6. Clarke, J. & Newman, J. (1997) The Managerial State. London: Sage. Cutler, T. & Waine, B. (1994) Managing the Welfare State: The Politics of Public Sector Management. Oxford: Berg. Cutler, T. & Waine, B. (1999) ‘Rewarding better teachers? Performance related pay in schools’. Educational Management and Administration, 27(1), 55–70. Deem, R, Hillyard, S. and Reed, M. (2007) Knowledge, Higher Education and the New Managerialism: The Changing Management of UK Universities. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DfEE (Department for Education and Employment) (2000) Performance Management in Schools. Performance Management Framework (Guidance: Teachers and Staffing), DfEE 0051/2000. London: DfEE Publications. Exworthy, M. & Halford, S. (eds) (1999) Professionals and the New Managerialism in the Public Sector. Buckingham: Open University Press. Forrester, G. (2001) ‘Performance related pay for teachers: an examination of the underlying objectives and its application in practice’. Public Management Review, 3(4), 617–25.

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


Forrester

9

Gleeson, D., Davies, J. & Wheeler, E. (2009) ‘On the making and taking of professionalism in the further education workplace’. In S Gerwitz, P. Mahony, I. Hextall & A. Cribb (eds) Changing Teeacher Professionalism. International Trends, Challenges and Ways Forward. Abingdon: Routledge. Gove, M. (2010) Letter (untitled) from the Secretary of State to schools, 26 May. London: DoE. Available at: http://www.education.gov.uk/*/media/Files/lacuna/news/ lettertoheadteacherscog.ashx (accessed 9 June 2010). Haynes, G., Wragg, C., Wragg, E. & Chamberlin, R. (2003) ‘Threshold assessment: the experiences of teachers who were unsuccessful in crossing the threshold’. Research Papers in Education, 18(1), 25–44. IDS (Incomes Data Services) (2000/1) ‘Performance pay’. IDS Focus, 96, Winter. Jermier, J. M., Knights, D. & Nord, W. R. (eds) (1994) Resistance and Power in Organizations. London: Routledge. Kane, T. J. & Staiger, D. O. (2002) ‘The promise and pitfalls of using imprecise school accountability measures’. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16(4), 91–114. Kessler, I. & Purcell, J. (1992) ‘Performance related pay: objectives and application’. Human Resource Management Journal, 2(3), 16–33. Lyotard, J. F. (1984) The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Mahony, P., Hextall, I. & Menter, I. (2004) ‘Building dams in Jordan, assessing teachers in England: a case study in edubusiness’. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 2(2), 277–96. Marsden, D. & French, S. (1998) What a Performance. Performance Related Pay in the Public Services. Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics and Political Science. Murlis, H. (1992) ‘Performance related pay in the context of performance management’, in H. Tomlinson (ed.), Performance-Related Pay in Education. Routledge: London.

NATFHE (National Association of Teachers in Further and Higher Education) (1992) Performance Related Pay. London: NATFHE. Newman, J. (2000) ‘Beyond the New Public Management? Modernizing public services’, in J. Clarke, S. Gewirtz & E. McLaughlin (eds), New Managerialism, New Welfare. London: Sage. NUT (National Union of Teachers) (1991) Pay Teachers Properly: The Case Against Performance Related Pay. London: NUT. Smith, T. (1972) Anti-politics. Consensus, Reform and Protest in Britain. London: Charles Knight. STRB (School Teachers’ Review Body) (1992) First Report, Cm. 1806. London: Stationary Office. Tomlinson, H. (2000) ‘Proposals for performance related pay for teachers in English schools’. School Leadership and Management, 20(3), 281–98. Tranter, S. & Percival, A. (2006) Performance Management in Schools. Unlocking your Team Potential. Harlow: Pearson Education. Wilson, D., Croxson, B. & Atkinson, A. (2004) ‘What Gets Measured Gets Done’: Headteachers’ Responses to the English Secondary School Performance Management System, CMPO Working Paper Series, No. 04/107. Available at: http:// www.bristol.ac.uk/cmpo/publications/papers/2004/wp107.pdf (accessed 23 March 2010). Wragg, E., Haynes, G., Chamberlin, R. and Wragg, C. (2003) ‘Performance-related pay: the views and experiences of 1,000 primary and secondary head teachers’. Research Papers in Education,18(1), 3–23. Zifcak, S. (1994) New Managerialism: Administrative Reforms in Whitehall and Canberra. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Biography Gillian Forrester is a Principal Lecturer and Deputy Center Leader for Education and Early Childhood Studies in the Faculty of Education, Community and Leisure at Liverpool John Moores University.

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


Management in Education http://mie.sagepub.com/

Performance or enactment? The role of the higher level teaching assistant in a remodelled school workforce in England Susan Graves Management in Education 2011 25: 15 DOI: 10.1177/0892020610387960 The online version of this article can be found at: http://mie.sagepub.com/content/25/1/15

Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

British Educational Leadership, Management & Administration Society

Additional services and information for Management in Education can be found at: Email Alerts: http://mie.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://mie.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations: http://mie.sagepub.com/content/25/1/15.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Jan 31, 2011 What is This?

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


MiE Performance or enactment? The role of the higher level teaching assistant in a remodelled school workforce in England

Management in Education 25(1) 15–20 ª 2011 British Educational Leadership, Management & Administration Society (BELMAS) Reprints and permission: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0892020610387960 mie.sagepub.com

Susan Graves Faculty of Education, Edge Hill University

Abstract This article draws on research conducted over two years in the North West of England and is located in the context of workforce remodelling. It examines how the higher level teaching assistant (HLTA) role has developed and is appraised and suggests that the anomalous nature of the role, which often relies on the enactment of observed teacher performance, and the ambiguous, localised, niche roles which have developed, render measurement of impact problematic. The performance of HLTAs is assessed using a vocational model which relies on retrospective self-assessment of competence and the article draws on Foucault’s (1988) concept of ‘technologies of the self’ to examine the implications of using this approach. The article also suggests that the use of predominantly self-assessment to measure competence is problematic and applies Kruger & Dunning’s (1999: 1122) notion of the ‘unskilled and unaware’ to argue that lack of contextualised and specialised knowledge can lead to ‘inflated self-appraisals’. Keywords HLTA, workforce remodelling, support staff, self-assessment

Introduction Under the previous Labour government, the workforce in schools in England expanded exponentially, with the biggest rise apparent in the number of support staff, for example the number of teaching assistants (TAs) which has more than trebled over the last ten years (DCSF, 2009). The introduction of the higher level teaching assistant (HLTA) role into schools in England in 2005 was part of a largescale remodelling of the school workforce (DfES, 2003), intended as part of the policy to ease teachers’ workload, to improve their work/life balance and to improve pupil performance and standards in schools. The remodelling policy required the implementation of planning, preparation and assessment (PPA) time for teachers within the school day, plus a restriction on hours to cover classes for absent colleagues. In some schools TAs/HLTAs routinely cover classes for teaching staff to enable PPA to take place, or when cover for absence is required; no limit is applied to this and it can vary from school to school. This cover for teachers, although only a small part of the occupational standards which the HLTA must demonstrate to achieve the status, has come to define the HLTA role and in some senses create a hybrid role which is something betwixt and between a teacher and a teaching assistant. In the main, the role of the HLTA is not universally understood (Dunne et al., 2008a), and although the status is nationally applied, HLTAs are employed and deployed according to local priorities and specificities. Consequently

individual HLTAs perform different functions in different contexts both within their own school and across schools within the same area, militating against the emergence of a consistent identity. The Workforce Remodelling Policy (DfES, 2003) and related policy in terms of developing a coherent and integrated Children’s Workforce (DCSF, 2008) place emphasis on shared notions of good practice and a common core of knowledge and skills. However, for HLTAs, access to professional development to achieve this outcome occurs in an ad hoc, unplanned fashion, often focused on informal observation of teacher colleagues, self-selected formal learning in areas of personal interest and the acquisition of competence-based vocational qualifications which rely on retrospective self-assessment. This presents challenges to individual career planning as roles are developed which will make transfer to other settings problematic, but also for succession planning for the school as niche roles emerge outside formalised workforce and performance management structures. In addition, if the HLTA merely enacts a role performed by teachers without the deeper subject knowledge to contextualise the enactment, and if self-assessment of competency is similarly based on a lack of metacognition, there is a question around the depth and breadth of the learning. The following sections explore this phenomenon in terms of the genesis of the HLTA role,

Corresponding author: E-mail: gravess@edgehill.ac.uk

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


16

Management in Education 25(1)

the professional learning and development for HLTAs and the management and assessment of their performance within the remodelled workforce using a case study approach with a small group of HLTAs in the North West region of England.

The case study A case-study approach was adopted focusing on a group of HLTAs who were trained to mentor TA colleagues in maintained primary and secondary schools in North West England. The data was collected using an open- and closedquestion questionnaire, face-to-face semi-structured one-toone and e-mail interviews and asynchronous online focus groups with a group of 37 HLTAs from primary, secondary and special schools in the North West of England over a two-year period (2007–9), during which schools saw a radical change to the traditional workforce composition. This produced rich descriptions of individuals’ experiences and perspectives resonant with contextual description, opinion and subjective accounts. Grounded theory techniques were used which allowed an interpretive understanding of subject meanings to emerge (Charmaz, 2006). These interpretations provided a picture of a phenomenon as it naturally occurred and allowed the data to shape the direction of the research. This was important as it relied on the voluntary participation of individuals to offer a candid view of their work situation related to a newly conceived role within the workforce.

Genesis of HLTA role Since its introduction in 2004 approximately 7,000 HLTAs have been awarded the status in the North West of England and schools have deployed them in a myriad of ways, depending on perceived local priorities. This is in line with the objectives of the Workforce Remodelling Policy which explicitly states that no national structure was intended as it was acknowledged that differential deployment was required to address the specificity of local challenges. The genesis of the TA role is rooted in unconventional recruitment of individuals, often through informal approaches by head teachers or senior managers to parents, the so-called ‘mum’s army’, that has led to a heterogeneity within this group which makes coherent professional development problematic. The following quotes from respondents in the case study (anonymised using pseudonyms) demonstrate the informality of their recruitment and precarious nature of their employment: Once I had children and the boys started school I became a dinner lady then helped in the classroom and as a governor as well . . . I originally started as parent-helper many years ago . . . I started at the school my children went to. (Jill) I have worked in school for six years, before that I had numerous jobs, factory/shop work etc. I was on the PTA of my children’s primary school and often went in to help the younger children with reading etc. I really enjoyed doing this and thought about applying for a position when one came up. (Dilys)

My youngest started at school and I was in the playground one day and the head asked, ‘What will you do in September when she starts school?’ and she offered me a job as a teaching assistant. But after a year there was a new head who sacked all the TAs; thought they weren’t needed. (Alison)

The respondents above came from a variety of work backgrounds and started as TAs in school with a variety of legacy qualifications. For example, Jill had worked in an administration role and Alison was a specialist paediatric nurse. It seems from their testimonies that their main qualification for entry into the school workforce was their role as mother of a child at the school. Indeed, the role of the TA/HLTA has evolved from the parent-helper role and, as it is predominately mothers who fulfil this role on a voluntary basis in schools, has evolved with a strong gender bias. As a consequence, any attempt to offer qualification status to this diverse workforce can only ever be retrospective as roles have developed in situ in an ad hoc fashion which has rendered planning problematic. Indeed for the school the cornucopia of skills, knowledge, experiences, values and beliefs exhibited by HLTAs can be regarded as both extremely valuable and hugely problematic to the development of a coherent role: valuable in the sense that the skills, knowledge and talents they bring can benefit schools immeasurably, but problematic in the sense that the uniqueness of their situation in terms of the specialised niche roles which often develop because of this can make positioning within the workforce difficult and may present problems in terms of succession planning for schools. For the individual HLTA it may be difficult to transfer the knowledge and skills to another setting because of the specificity of the development to fit local requirements in a particular context.

Development of the HLTA role The variability in educational level in terms of legacy qualifications and previous training presents a challenge to the development of a coherent identity and role for the HLTA. To submit for HLTA status individuals need to have gained a Level 2 maths and English qualification (equivalent to GCSE grade C), but beyond that there are no further qualification prerequisites. Only one of the HLTAs in the case study was degree-qualified before gaining HLTA status, and two others undertook Foundation Degrees postHLTA. The rest had a variety of vocational qualifications related to previous and present employment which were often disparate and self-determined. This ad hoc approach to both entry requirements and ongoing professional development has resulted in an HLTA workforce nationally that is neither coherent nor consistent. This makes the development of the role problematic as indiscriminate professional development is likely to be inappropriate in sufficient enough cases to make it untenable. It is left up to individuals to pursue opportunities within an informal, incidental and unplanned paradigm largely focused on the attainment of occupational skills (Blatchford et al., 2007). Pursuing this functional approach to their development promotes

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


Graves

17

their competence to perform routine tasks, so-called adaptive learning (Kock, 2007), but does not encourage critical engagement or reflection and the concomitant ability to adapt learning to different situations. Furthermore, access to formal learning is problematic for HLTAs, both in economic terms (funding) and opportunities to engage (release) (Woolhouse et al., 2009). The affordance and engagement (Billett, 2001) offered to HLTAs in terms of formal learning opportunity varies widely between local authorities and schools and there is no national requirement for account to be taken of career development post-HLTA. Again this leads to an uneven picture of levels of qualification nationally and to some extent locally, as it is at the level of the school that decisions concerning the permission for funding and release for individuals occur, as the quotes from HLTAs suggests: The school is extremely good when it comes to my development, and will allow me to undertake any training I feel would benefit myself or my department. (Dilys) The senior management team within the school is very progressive and allows me to be active in attending courses which I think are relevant, as well as the ones the SMT suggest. I am encouraged to work in an ever widening capacity and to develop my skills as I see necessary. (Diane)

Both of these respondents work in secondary schools and are indicating a predominantly bottom-up approach which locates the decision and responsibility for pursuing professional development at the level of the individual HLTA. This adaptation of the self to serve the needs of work resonates with Foucault’s (1988) concept of ‘technologies of the self’ in which an individual’s actions are constructed during a process of domination and coercion but for which the individual is expected to take responsibility. To this end the individual subjugates their life and time to economic exploitation, what Foucault describes as a ‘political investment of the body’ (Foucault, 1977: 25). This construction of the self to suit the needs of the workplace is evident in the quotes above and below, as is the notion of the HLTA as architect of their own professional development in both a material and often a financial sense. The respondents below, who work in primary schools, again suggest a piecemeal approach essentially driven by individuals who approach the head in terms of development opportunities: Generally the information on courses is put into the staff room and it is free for anyone to look at and if you want to go on anything you would go and see the head and if she felt that you could be released or if it was worthwhile, and I have to say she is very proactive and she believes that people should have a chance to further their careers and do CPD . . . (Doreen) If you see a course you want to do you could go to senior management and ask . . . Also the management approach the support staff to ask if they want to go on it. They do try to share it out, not just some going on all the courses, they try to share it. (Belinda)

From the examples above it is not clear how the development of those who are not so proactive is managed, but perhaps a less enthusiastic member of staff could avoid professional development almost entirely. The second comment above reveals that the decisions regarding who should undertake training is related to notions of fairness rather than development need and although the first comment suggests a level of proactivity on behalf of the head, it seems it is the individual who has to initiate the training. The HLTAs in the case study valued the informal learning they received in the workplace extremely highly and it was through this route that they felt they had achieved professional competence in the main. It has long been recognised that this informal learning in the workplace can be a crucial part of an individual’s learning journey and contribute substantially to the acquisition of professional orientations and competence (see Hodkinson & Hodkinson, 1997; Eraut, 2000; Marsick & Watkins, 1990). However, the opportunity for individuals to engage with learning in the workplace requires an acknowledgement that this is taking place and opportunities for individuals to make sense of their experiences in professional conversations with colleagues. The HLTAs in this case study describe a situation in terms of their own informal learning in the workplace which is clandestine and surreptitious in nature. Indeed, often their colleagues, whom they claim to be using as role models and learning from informally, have no idea that this is taking place. They suggest that opportunities to discuss what has been learned are not offered routinely and it is up to the individual HLTA to initiate these discussions (or not) to enable them to make sense of observed practice. In the absence of a distinct typology or pedagogy for HLTAs, the idioms of teachers are employed and so they talk about teaching pupils and teaching subjects as part of their duties, although they readily admit to not being teachers. This is problematic as this unexamined informal approach may result in unpredictable and unintended learning outcomes. Merely observing somebody else’s practice without opportunity to discern the underlying knowledge base upon which it is predicated prevents deeper understanding developing. To then make this the principal means by which HLTAs achieve their status would seem to be a very precarious situation and one at odds with the development of a coherent school workforce. HLTAs are not novices in the classroom in the same way that, for example, newly qualified or student teachers are; they have a wealth of expertise and experience often gained over numbers of years. However, there is a sense that their practical knowledge puts them in a position of what Murray and Male (2005: 135) have described when discussing the plight of teacher educators new to HE as ‘novice assumed to be expert’. Nevertheless, this practical knowing (Schultz, 2005) does need to be placed within a theoretical or conceptual framework to enable them to shift beyond mere empiricism to develop metacognition (Eraut, 1994) and to move from habitual to informed practice (Zuber-Skerritt, 1992). There is evidence in the study of a ‘common-sense’ approach to supporting learning being adopted by those who have little or no relevant qualifications – an approach

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


18

Management in Education 25(1)

which relies on a notion of a shared understanding of how things should be done, the taken-for-granted ways of doing things which formulate ‘regimes of practice’ which become self-fulfilling (Foucault, 1991: 79; Dean, 1999). The quotes below give an indication of the experiences of HLTAs in respect of their informal learning: I modelled myself on a teacher here who is wonderful. I learned from them, I observed what they did, picked it up, the ethics of the school. It wasn’t a mentoring relationship, they weren’t aware I was using them as a model. (Susan) I have picked up a lot from teachers as well, observing them ... some TAs find behaviour strategies difficult, but I have found working with teachers I have picked up things which I can use. (Jill) Informal learning from colleagues has been one of the greatest parts of my learning. Staff rooms, corridors, each other’s homes etc. have all been invaluable places for those snippets of advice for planning, behaviour management, assessment – in fact, every part of my working role is supported in this way. (Diane)

The first quote is indicative of the experiences of some respondents who suggested that teacher colleagues were often unaware that their practice was being used as a model by HLTAs for their own professional development and this has implications in terms of how best practice is shared within institutions. All of the quotes suggest an informal ‘picking up’ of practice skills, an assumption that being exposed to teachers in a variety of locations will enable a transmission process to take place. There is a danger here that this ad hoc informal approach will lead to TAs/HLTAs acquiring a morass of unexamined and untested empiricism which is uncritically applied in situ. For if reflection is only at the level of the individual it can have a self-confirming affect (Harvey & Knight, 1996), and if staff development is largely an internal matter, then practice can only ever be reproduced, not improved (Hargreaves, 2000). Furthermore, there is a level of unpredictability and lack of control which may distort anticipated outcomes (Watkins & Marsick, 1993) and may lead to further distortion of the HLTA/teacher paradigm resulting in a lack of clarity concerning roles which negates the emergence of a coherent remodelled school workforce.

Management and assessment of performance Attempts to quantify the role of the TA have focused on producing national occupational standards and standards for gaining HLTA status. However, these concentrate on gaining functional competence at the occupational level with assessment in the workplace using what is termed ‘naturally occurring evidence’. This concept of ‘naturally occurring evidence’ points to the individual using the work they already do to demonstrate competence in that role.

Opportunities to gain occupational qualifications to develop to a higher role would necessarily, using this model, be dependent upon being afforded the prospect of undertaking a higher or different role. Their qualifications can be seen as almost retrospective; applying for HLTA is similarly focused in that claims for the status are based on what the TA is already doing and their ability to demonstrate competence in the present role. Furthermore, these work-based vocational qualifications rely on selfassessment of competence which itself relies on a level of expertise in the domain in order to evaluate one’s own capabilities or that of others (Kruger & Dunning, 1999). Unless an individual has an in-depth knowledge of the area in which they are working the ability to assess performance, make accurate judgements and recognise errors is reduced. This lack of metacognition (Maki et al. 1994) or self-monitoring skills (Chi et al., 1982) renders a dual burden, according to Kruger and Dunning (1999), as not only do they ‘reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their lack of knowledge robs them of the ability to realize it’ (p. 1121). As was discussed previously, not only are HLTAs assessing their own performance and claiming competence through vocational qualifications and claims for the status, they are also using self-assessment of colleagues as their main source of induction, enculturation and training for their role – given the above this would appear problematic. In terms of performance management of TAs/HLTAs, increasingly HLTAs are being used both to manage and to support/advise in the assessment of the performance of their peers without, it would seem, any particular training as the comment below suggests: I line manage one HLTA and 10 teaching assistants and also organise class cover and supply staff requirements throughout the school. I support/advise the head teacher when he undertakes the annual performance management of our teaching assistants . . . no management training received, just good at organising people . . . (Susan)

The Career Development Framework for Support Staff (TDA, 2006) did not seem to be part of the lexicon used by HLTAs in terms of planning their own or advising colleagues – or indeed the head teacher as indicated above – regarding professional development. Even those HLTAs who suggested responsibility for line managing, team leading or performance managing other staff seemed unaware that guidelines regarding coherent professional development should be part of their own knowledge base in order to provide competent useful advice. However, one HLTA had received some team leader training provided by her local authority but had received no adjustment to her timetable: I manage the TA team . . . cover performance management meetings . . . I have no change of hours, spend the same amount in the classrooms as well as working one-to-one with SEN children, I use my own time [for work related to added team-leading duties]. (Kerry)

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


Graves

19

This respondent is describing a significant development of her role, but one for which she has no change of status or hours or pay. This resonates with research by Dunne et al. (2008b) which suggests that TAs’ increased skills in the workforce are not recognised and are in fact exploited in the present system. She talks about herself as a manager of other TAs and this indicates a hierarchy developing in a rhetorical sense but one which offers no material benefits to those at the top in terms of training or time allowance.

expenditure, that extra funding will be provided for professional development for HLTAs. Indeed funding for HLTA status has already been discontinued and funding for CPD for support staff looks uncertain in the new government’s plans. These changes, combined with the latest DISS (Deployment and Impact of Support Staff Project) report (Blatchford et al., 2009), which finds a negative impact on learning for those pupils who have high levels of TA support in the classroom, would suggest that fundamental changes to workforce composition are likely in the future.

Conclusion

References

Respondents in this small case study have presented a picture of a role which is developing outside the hegemonic discourse of rationality and performativity which exists for teachers and described a situation of locally devised, contextually contingent, organic development at odds with present policy. Their identity has a powerful gendered aspect which does influence their choices and affect their agency to some extent. Furthermore, the discourse of maternality (Acker, 1994) within which it has evolved supposes a level of self-sacrifice and conscientiousness which uses these notions as powerful self-regulating mechanisms, what Foucault (1988) terms ‘technologies of the self’. Moreover, the retrospective self-assessment of competence in the classroom and the use of informal learning from teacher colleagues present a challenge in terms of the possibility of inflated notions of competence that may result (Kruger & Dunning, 1999). The anomalous and ambiguous nature of the HLTA role and the ad hoc nature of professional development for this group also present a challenge to workforce development. If schools develop niche roles fashioned to suit the capacities of the individual staff member in a particularity of circumstances, there is a danger of both knowledge obsolescence as situations change and replacement difficulties as staff leave. Furthermore for the individual, transfer of their particular skills and knowledge to other settings becomes problematic denying opportunities for progression and resulting in a static workforce with no prospect of the natural transfer of knowledge which occurs as individuals migrate between schools. Additionally, relying on the self-sacrifice and self-motivation of individual HLTAs to develop the professional orientations, skills and knowledge required for a remodelled workforce risks exploiting the goodwill and dedication of these relatively low-paid staff. Moreover, from the teacher’s perspective, the lack of coherence in terms of the duties, experience and qualification level of HLTAs presents challenges to the way they work together day to day and may prevent a professional relationship developing. In order to appraise the efficacy of the HLTA role a more consistent and coherent deployment and employment strategy needs to be developed which takes account of the genesis and development of the role and offers broad frameworks within which the role can adapt to accommodate local requirements. It seems unlikely, given the current political climate and the Coalition government’s commitment to cuts in public

Acker, S. (1994) Gendered Education. Buckingham: Open University Press. Billett, S. (2001) ‘Learning through work: workplace affordances and individual engagement’. Journal of Workplace Learning, 13(5), 209–14. Blatchford, P., Russell, A., Bassett, P., Brown, P. & Martin, C. (2007) ‘The role and effects of teaching assistants in English primary schools (Year 4 to 6) 2000–2003. Results from the Class Size and Pupil-Adult Rations (CSPAR) KS2 Project’. British Educational Research Journal, 33, 5–26. Blatchford, P., Bassett, P., Brown, P., Martin, C., Russell, A. & Webster, R. (2009) Deployment and Impact of Support Staff Project. London: DCSF. Charmez, K. (2006) Constructing Grounded Theory. London: Sage. Chi, M. T. H., Glaser, R. & Rees, E. (1982) ‘Expertise in problem solving’, in R. Sternberg (ed.), Advances in the Psychology of Human Intelligence. Hillsdale: NJ: Erlbaum, Vol. 1, pp. 17–76. DCSF (2008) 2020 Children and Young People’s Workforce Stratergy. London: DCFS. DCSF (2009) Statistical First Release (SFR 09/2009) School Workforce in England. London: DCFS. Dean, M. (1999) Governmentality: Power and Rule in Modern Society. London: Sage. DfES (2003) Raising Standards and Tackling Workload. A National Agreement. London: HMSO. Dunne, L., Goddard, G. & Woolhouse, C. (2008a) ‘Teaching assistants’ perceptions of their professional role and their experiences of doing a Foundation Degree’. Improving Schools, 11(3), 239–49. Dunne, L., Goddard, G. & Woolhouse, C. (2008b) ‘Mapping the changes: a critical exploration into the career trajectories of teaching assistants who undertake a foundation degree’. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 60(1), 49–59. Eraut, M. (1994) Developing Professional Knowledge and Competence. London: Falmer Press. Eraut, M. (2000) ‘Non-formal learning and tacit knowledge in professional work’. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70(1), 113–36. Foucault, M. (1977) Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. London: Allen Lane. Foucault, M. (1988) ‘Technologies of the self’, in L. H. Martin, H. Gutman & P. H. Hutton (eds), Technologies of the Self: A Seminar with Michael Foucault. London: Tavistock.

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


20

Management in Education 25(1)

Foucault, M. (1991) ‘Governmentality’, in G. Burchell, C. Gordon & P. Miller (eds), The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Hargreaves, A. (2000) ‘Four ages of professionalism and professional learning’. Teachers and Teaching: History and Practice, 6(2), 151–82. Harvey, L. & Knight, P. (1996) Transforming Higher Education. Buckingham: SRHE/Open University Press. Hodkinson, H. & Hodkinson, P. (1997) ‘Micro-politics in initial teacher education: Luke’s story.’ Journal of Education for Teaching, 23(2), 119–29. Kock, H. (2007) ‘The team as a learning strategy’. Journal of Workplace Learning, 19(8), 480–96. Kruger, J. & Dunning, D. (1999) ‘Unskilled and unaware of it: how difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments’. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1121–34. Maki, R. H., Jonas, D. & Kallod, M. (1994) ‘The relationship between comprehension and metacomprehension ability’. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 1, 126–9. Marsick, V. and Watkins, K. (1990) Informal and Incidental Learning in the Workplace. London: Routledge. Murray, J. & Male, T. (2005) ‘Becoming a teacher educator: evidence from the field.’ Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 125–42.

Schultz, K. (2005) ‘Learning in complex organisations as practicing and reflecting. A model development and application from a theory of practice perspective’. Journal of Workplace Learning, 17, 493–507. TDA (2006) Developing People to Support Learning. A Skills Strategy for the Wider Workforce 2006–09. Available online at: http://www.tda.gov.uk (accessed December 2009). Watkins, K. E. & Marsick, V. J. (1993) Sculpting the Learning Organisation: Lessons in the Art and Science of Systemic Change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Woolhouse, C., Dunne, L. & Goddard, G. (2009) ‘Lifelong learning: teaching assistants’ experiences of economic, social and cultural change following completion of a foundation degree’. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 28(6), 763–76. Zuber-Skerritt, O. (1992) Action Research in Higher Education: Examples and Reflections. London: Kogan Page.

Biography Susan Graves is Principal Lecturer in the Faculty of Education at Edge Hill University. She is Programme Leader for a Foundation Degree and BA (Hons) Degree specifically developed for the wider school workforce and has research interests in school workforce remodelling and developing professional practice for support staff.

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


Management in Education http://mie.sagepub.com/

The discursive performance of leadership in schools Dave Hall, Helen M. Gunter and Joanna Bragg Management in Education 2011 25: 32 DOI: 10.1177/0892020610387756 The online version of this article can be found at: http://mie.sagepub.com/content/25/1/32

Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

British Educational Leadership, Management & Administration Society

Additional services and information for Management in Education can be found at: Email Alerts: http://mie.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://mie.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations: http://mie.sagepub.com/content/25/1/32.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Jan 31, 2011 What is This?

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


MiE Management in Education 25(1) 32–36 ª 2011 British Educational Leadership, Management & Administration Society (BELMAS) Reprints and permission: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0892020610387756 mie.sagepub.com

The discursive performance of leadership in schools Dave Hall, Helen M. Gunter, and Joanna Bragg

Abstract The Department for Children, Schools and Families (now the Department for Education) and the National College for School Leadership (now the National College for Leadership of Schools and Children’s Services) have been active participants in framing and shaping discourse in relation to leadership in schools in England. This paper is based upon findings from research funded by the UK Economic and Social Research Council (RES-000-22-3610) as part of the Distributed Leadership and the Social Practices of School Organisation in England (SPSO) project. It examines how educational practitioners have engaged with these discursive framing and shaping activities. This is conducted through a particular focus upon how distributed leadership has been talked into being as part of a wider regime which seeks to manage the performance of educational practitioners and designated educational leaders. Keywords Distributed leadership, performativity, discourse

The discursive performance of leadership in schools Distributed leadership has emerged over the last decade as a dominant discourse in school leadership in England. Reports from the OECD (2008) have highlighted the prime importance of distributed leadership in transforming schools. The National College for Leadership of Schools and Children’s Services (abbreviated to National College) has presented distributed leadership as an officially sanctioned model of good practice and has developed training materials and a website strongly advocating the adoption of this leadership model; it has also presented distributed leadership as number five in a list of ten propositions (Hopkins, 2001). The Specialist Schools and Academies Trust has strongly endorsed distributed leadership (Harris, 2005, 2008) and Leithwood et al. (2006) in their literature search for a New Labour government project have asserted as one of their Seven Strong Claims about School Leadership that school leadership has a greater influence on schools and students when it is widely distributed. These endorsements of and invocations to implement distributed leadership in schools have not gone unchallenged. There is both scepticism of the possibilities for distributed leadership in schools and a rejection of the accounts of distributed leadership as offered by its proponents. Literatures seeking to challenge normative narratives of distributed leadership typically view it largely as a fantasy masking a harsher reality in which power and control remains centralised at both local and national levels (Hartley, 2007). In this way distributed leadership acts as a sop or distraction for those disempowered by central government’s educational reform agenda. Hartley (2010)

further asserts that because of the ‘top-down’ performance management regime distributed leadership is concerned with the tactics of delegation and not strategy, and that opportunities for authentic distributed leadership based on the participation of teachers and children are strictly limited: At present, distributed leadership is not about the expressive dimension of the school; it is not about enabling social and emotional bonds of a community. It is mainly about accomplishing the organizational goals which comprise the instrumental tasks and targets set by officialdom. (Hartley, 2010: 281)

In a similar vein, Hatcher (2005) views distributed leadership as no more than a concession to participatory processes at the lower levels of a managerialist power structure and points to a central contradiction between government driven head teacher managerialism and distributed leadership. In contrast, other writers normatively seeking to promote distributed leadership within schools see real possibilities for distributed leadership and view them as providing fertile grounds for the development of distributed leadership practices. These radically different conceptions of distributed leadership are further complicated by the term ‘distributed leadership’ itself. Writers working with this concept (Bennett et al., 2003; Gronn, 2002; Harris, 2008; MacBeath, 2009; Spillane, 2006) do not necessarily

Corresponding author: Dave Hall, E-mail: dave.hall@manchester.ac.uk

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


Hall et al.

33

share the same understanding of the term. Indeed, as Hartley (2007) has pointed out, it is a slippery and elastic concept. Regardless of these conceptual difficulties and very different understandings there is compelling evidence that at a discursive level distributed leadership has emerged strongly in English schools. Penlington and Kington (2007), for example, report that all participants in all participating schools thought that leadership in their schools was distributed. This raises questions as to why as an idea it has discursively taken root within schools in England. What we mean by this is why distributed leadership has been talked into existence: thought about, talked about, designed and worked for through structural and cultural changes that relate to everyday practice about what is imagined and how what actually gets done happens. Although the research reported upon in this article seeks to offer evidence which may help to respond to such issues there are already strong explanations, the more pertinent of which are highlighted below, seeking to analyse why this concept has had such discursive purchase. The first explanation lies within the challenge distributed leadership presents to the model of the heroic transformational head teacher with the implicit and, at times, explicit recognition of the limits of an approach dependent upon the talents and energy of one influential and dominant individual (Spillane, 2006). Although widely critiqued both prior to and during its revival linked to the school improvement and effectiveness movement, the limits of the heroic transformational model of leadership became widely evident in England, in particular, as the endeavours of a small number of ‘super heads’ failed to make any significant or lasting impression upon even the measurable outcomes of schools deemed in need of improvement. In this regard distributed leadership was an obvious candidate to act as a replacement for an increasingly discredited leadership model (Gunter, 2005). Distributed leadership offered the attraction of remodelling leadership with the emphasis of leadership efforts not upon one individual but on individuals and groups more widely distributed or dispersed throughout the school. The second explanation can be discerned within ideas about the freedom and autonomy of teachers, and others positioned as followers in the heroic transformational model, in going about their work. Here one of the main appeals of distributed leadership can be found in its association with the reality of what actually goes on as well as more democratic practices in schools where teachers have greater ownership of decisions through the distribution of leadership (Gronn, 2000). Finally, distributed leadership can be seen as having the added appeal of masking or acting as a distraction from some of the harsher realities of schools organisational life (Hartley, 2007) which can be seen as arising out of the increasing centralisation of education within England and its alignment with largely economic and instrumental purposes. So, as the above explanations demonstrate, we have some understanding of the reasons for the emergence of distributed leadership and that the term is widely recognised in schools. What we know far less about is how educational practitioners have handled distributed leadership as an officially sanctioned and marshalled intervention. In

order to contribute to our understanding of this matter research has been conducted as part of an Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) project entitled Distributed Leadership and the Social Practices of School Organisation (SPSO). The SPSO project was conducted in five schools located throughout England where teachers and designated leaders were interviewed about organisational arrangements at their institutions and observed engaging in decision-making processes. Our sample was selected to include a range of school types (selective, single-sex/coeducational, size, location), positioned differently in relation to their socio-economic status and their official performance history over ten years.1 It is the purpose of this article to examine the performative aspects of distributed leadership as revealed through our research. This is because, although in all of the schools researched the term distributed leadership was, as had been anticipated, used relatively widely, most especially among designated senior leaders, a particular feature of this use of the term was performative in nature in the sense that those using it were seeking to convey particular meanings intended to discursively position both themselves and, in some cases, their institutions in relation to their understandings of distributed leadership. In making use of this performative lens through which to view distributed leadership we are seeking to build upon the work of those writers adopting more critical stances in relation to distributed leadership. As described above, such writers view distributed leadership as intimately linked to a wider climate of performativity (Ball, 2003) in which the performance of schools and those who work within them are tightly managed and controlled. Here the use of the term ‘performative is taken as meaning the following: Performativity is a technology, a culture and a mode of regulation that employs judgements, comparisons and displays as means of incentive, control, attrition and change based on rewards and sanctions (both material and symbolic). The performances (of individual subjects or organizations) serve as measures of productivity or output, or displays of ‘quality’, or ‘moments’ of promotion or inspection. As such they stand for, encapsulate or represent the worth, quality or value of an individual or organization within a field of judgement. (Ball, 2003: 216)

This discursive and performative representation of distributed leadership took on different forms in each of the schools, but a particular distinction was between performative uses of the term distributed leadership that were linked to largely external pressures and forces and those that were linked to largely internal pressures and forces. In order to illustrate both this distinction and the performative dimensions of the use of the term distributed leadership an account of leadership at two schools is provided largely from the perspective of the relevant head teachers.

Birch Tree School Birch Tree School serves a socio-economically disadvantaged inner city area. It opened as an Academy

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


34

Management in Education 25(1)

following the closure of two local schools. Since the school was created there has been a significant turnover of staff with 25 per cent of the teaching staff and 50 per cent of the support staff remaining from the predecessor schools. The proportion of students who are entitled to free school meals is well above the national average and the neighbourhood in which the school is located and in which the vast majority of students live ranks among the lowest 250 on the Indices of Multiple Deprivation2 reflecting the social and economic circumstances of its catchment area. Government initiatives in England in recent years have continued to place significant pressure on schools serving socio-economically disadvantaged communities, most especially in terms of raising levels of student attainment in national tests. This prime indicator of the success of such schools has become even stronger since the creation of the National Challenge by the former New Labour government (DCSF, 2008). This programme places any school with less than 30 per cent of pupils gaining five A*–C including Mathematics and English at Key Stage 4 at risk of closure. Although recent inspection of Birch Tree has highlighted strengths in the leadership of the school and reports good progress in raising levels of student attainment, these pressures remain intense. The Principal, Simon James, is very direct about being in control and running things his own way: I get paid a lot of money and the reason I get paid a lot of money is because the buck stops here. (Principal) Such conceptions of his role are accompanied by a strong attachment to notions of distributed leadership: Everybody in the building recognises that they are a leader and recognises their role in strategic leadership within the organisation ... Distributed leadership is everybody knowing that they’ve a place in leadership and what to do. They are guardians of the mission and ethos and that actually they are an important cog in the wheel. (Principal) Although Simon is clear that they are practising distributed leadership at Birch Tree, he is equally clear that there is a distinctive and strong hierarchy in place and readily admits to being a ‘control freak’: It is impossible for me . . . not to be a charismatic hero because I can’t do it. I can’t not go around touching people and asking questions and dominating situations and such, because I can’t do it because, actually, that’s what I am. It can be seen from the above that Simon feels able to makes claims about distributed leadership while simultaneously making reference to his ‘charismatic heroic’ approach. One explanation for this can be found in his reflections upon his career as a head teacher and a distinction, crucial in this respect for Simon, between an earlier stage of his work as a head teacher in a previous school and his current work in this role. These reflections were triggered by an Ofsted inspector who pointed out to him that he was in danger of ‘disempowering’ staff. Simon recounts this as follows:

He said I haven’t sat in a meeting, I haven’t been anywhere where I haven’t heard well Simon says Simon says, and every single meeting. I said are you telling me I’m disempowering everybody. He said no. He said I’m telling you you’re going to and you’ve got to change ... so I spent the next one and a half years that I was there trying not be a charismatic hero. It’s impossible frankly because I am one and its impossible. So I tried but what I learned from that whole experience was actually although the charismatic hero is the default position it’s an incredibly useful skill if you don’t abuse it and all you need to do is to make sure that you stand back ... what you do is you set up to stop the disempowering factor and to build in distributed leadership.

Thus Simon’s construction of distributed leadership emerged out of an intensely performative context, an Ofsted inspection, and was directly linked to a stated need to change that came from a source external to both Simon and the school. Simon’s understanding of distributed leadership in this context is intimately associated with its capacity to act as a corrective to his tendency to dominate in his role as head teacher and also as a means of responding to the concerns raised by an Ofsted inspector. For Simon his discursive construction of distributed leadership can be viewed as one which enables him to make performative claims about both his own style of leadership and leadership as it operates at Birch Tree. He understands and accepts that there can be problems with what he terms a ‘charismatic heroic’ approach to leadership, but is unwilling or, as he describes it, unable to let go of such an approach. This does not, however, act as an obstacle to his willingness to lay discursive claims to distributed leadership as a means of positioning both his own leadership practices and the school’s organisational arrangements. Interestingly at Birch Tree the view that distributed leadership was a useful means of characterising the way that leadership operated within the organisation was held not only by Simon but also by many other employees observed and interviewed during the course of our research. At least part of the tensions surrounding leadership at Birch Tree can be attributed to the externally motivated factors seemingly driving the claims to distributed leadership. While all schools in England experience various degrees of pressure in relation to the Ofsted inspection regime these can be experienced in an especially heightened manner in those schools where achieving and sustaining high levels of student attainment have for whatever reason proved more elusive. The creation of new schools like Birch Tree in such contexts in the form of relatively generously resourced Academies can be viewed as adding even further to these external pressures, especially where contracts of employment for head teachers and principals are tied to demanding performance targets linked to levels of student attainment in national tests and grades received in Ofsted inspections (Gunter, 2011). It is through such performance mechanisms that officially sanctioned discourses around distributed leadership are able to travel and be sustained.

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


Hall et al.

35

Oak Tree School Oak Tree is an 11–18 maintained grammar school. Accounts of the recent history of the school by longerserving teaching staff at Oak Tree are closely associated with the former head teacher, Andrea Williams, who is widely viewed as having transformed the school. Andrea is remembered as a charismatic and commanding head acting as a pivotal figure in the transformation of the school. Although Andrea is commonly acknowledged for her key role in this respect there is simultaneous recognition, particularly among longer-serving and more senior members of staff, that this was achieved at some cost in terms of wider involvement in decision-making. Since her appointment as head teacher Rita Charles, a former deputy head at the school, has tried to lead the school in ways that she believes are different to those experienced by teaching staff under Andrea’s tenure. Rita is strongly attached to the notion of ‘opening up’ the leadership of the school to involve a wider range of teaching staff. However, Rita also has strong beliefs about school leadership linked at least in part to her own prior experiences at the school: The school I described when I joined all those years ago there were lots of managers but they weren’t people who genuinely believed that they could inject something of themselves into it and actually make things happen that weren’t somebody else’s agenda. (Rita) Rita’s discourse here is intimately tied to her remembering a recent past where, from her perspective, managers were at a distance from their work and insufficiently personally bound up with their workplace experiences. Rita’s own values lead her to performatively invoke the need for a sense of personal ownership (‘inject something of themselves’) in management and leadership work where the relationship between leaders and their work is more intimate and personally bound. For Rita this is linked to leaders taking the initiative and assuming responsibility for work tasks, and it forms a key part of Rita’s attachment to the idea of distributed leadership, a concept which she warmly embraces: Interviewer: Can you tell me your understanding of the term distributed leadership? Rita: It’s something I’m aiming for. It’s a sense in which, well my interpretation would be, that once you’ve given somebody responsibility to take something on that you’ve actually left them to get on with it. This embracing of distributed leadership has a strong performative dimension in that Rita is clearly willing to associate both herself and her aims for the school with this concept. Rita’s interpretation of distributed leadership at Oak Tree was supported by many, although not all, teachers at the school, most especially those designated as senior and middle leaders. This was commonly explained approvingly in terms of changes in leadership enacted by Rita since she had assumed the headship of the school and, in common with Rita, stressing the importance of autonomy in being a teacher and leader.

One reading of Rita’s ideas about distributed leadership might highlight her desire to extend leadership beyond the narrow confines of herself as head teacher and perhaps a small group of trusted colleagues. In addition, it might also highlight the potentially empowering effects of distributing leadership in the manner described enabling teachers to take the initiative and lead on a variety of different projects. A more critical reading of Rita’s ideas about distributed leadership, on the other hand, might point to distributed leadership distracting from the unequal power relations inherent in the dynamic of the working context which she describes. In particular, Rita’s emphasis upon personal ownership of leadership tasks and activities might be viewed as misplaced within the context of a wider educational environment marked by top-down performance management and with little room for manoeuvre for institutions operating within this environment. Nevertheless it is our view, based upon research conducted at the school, that Rita and others at the school had strong and personal attachments to notions of what they saw as distributed leadership and that this personal and, to some extent at least, internally generated construction of this notion was an important factor in sustaining both Rita’s own sense of distributed leadership at Oak Tree and a wider organisational recognition of and support for this concept. Thus in the case of Oak Tree the performative discourse of distributed leadership can be seen as being maintained primarily by both personally generated and institutionally generated notions of distributed leadership derived at least in part from internal sources.

Conclusion As seen in the above two cases there was widespread recognition of distributed leadership within the two schools, most especially among designated leaders. Individual teachers and other employees, and most especially head teachers, participating in the research were willing to engage discursively with the notion of distributed leadership in what can be described as a performative manner. This discursive and performative representation of distributed leadership took on different forms in each of the two schools. In one school, Birch Tree, this was linked to forces external to the school, in particular satisfying the demands of an Ofsted inspection and meeting performance targets in terms of student attainments in national tests. In another school, Oak Tree, use of the term was more associated with internally generated pressures linked to individually and commonly held professional values and beliefs. In this way it can be seen that the discourse of distributed leadership has been generated and maintained both through external forces and the internal values and beliefs of practitioners in these schools. Other things remaining equal, this can be viewed as a powerful sustaining mechanism for the continued discursive and performative presence of distributed leadership in these schools that we believe has a wider significance beyond the two case study institutions. What remains far less clear is that this has been accompanied by a fundamental shift towards distributed leadership practices in schools, an issue to which future publications arising out of the SPSO project will attend.

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


36

Management in Education 25(1)

Notes 1. Phase 2 is focused on the decision-making process, and Phase 3 is a Q sort with all members of staff. The names of schools and research participants have been anonymised. 2. This dataset uses the Indices of Deprivation 2007 which provide a range of information including detailed breakdowns for small areas (Super Output Areas) and aggregate the summary statistics. In each case the Super Output Area (SOA) with a rank of 1 is the most deprived area and the area with a rank of 32,482 is the least deprived.

References Ball, S. (2003) ‘The teacher’s soul and the terrors of performativity’. Journal of Education Policy, 18(2), 215–28. Bennett, N., Harvey, J.A., Wise, C. & Woods, P.A. (2003) Desk Study Review of Distributed Leadership. Nottingham: NCSL/ CEPAM. DCSF (2008) The National Challenge: Raising Standards, Supporting Schools. London: DCSF Publications. Gronn, P. (2000) ‘Distributed properties: a new architecture for leadership’. Educational Management and Administration, 28(3), 319–38. Gronn, P. (2002) ‘Distributed leadership as a unit of analysis’. Leadership Quarterly, 13, 423–51. Gunter, H.M. (2005) Leading Teachers. London: Continuum. Gunter, H.M. (ed.) (2011) The State and Education Policy: The Academies Programme. London: Continuum. Harris, A. (2005) Crossing Boundaries and Breaking Barriers: Distributing Leadership in Schools. London: Specialist Schools Trust. Harris, A. (2008) Distributed School Leadership. London: Routledge. Hartley, D. (2007) ‘The emergence of distributed leadership in education; why now?’ British Journal of Educational Studies, 55(2), 202–14. Hartley, D. (2010) ‘Paradigms: how far does research in distributed leadership stretch?’ Education Management Administration and Leadership, 38(3), 271–85.

Hatcher, R. (2005) ‘The distribution of leadership and power in schools’. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 26(2), 253–67. Hopkins, D. (2001) ‘Think Tank’ Report to Governing Council. Nottingham: NCSL. Leithwood, K., Day, C., Sammons, P., Harris, A. & Hopkins, D. (2006) Seven Strong Claims About Successful School Leadership. Nottingham: NCSL. Macbeath, J. (2009) Distributed leadership: paradigms, policy and paradox’, in K. Leithwood, B. Mascall and T. Strauss (eds), Distributed Leadership According to the Evidence. New York: Routledge, pp. 41–57. OECD (2008) Education and Training Policy, Improving School Leadership, Volume 1: Policy and Practice, Summary in English. Paris: OECD. Penlington, C. & Kington, A. (2007) Leadership Practices and Students Outcomes: A Qualitative Perspective. Paper presented on Research into the Impact of School Leadership on Pupil Outcomes Symposium, BERA, London, September. Spillane, J.P. (2006) Distributed Leadership. San Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.

Biography Dave Hall is Senior Lecturer in Education at the University of Manchester and Principal Investigator on the ESRCfunded project ‘Distributed Leadership and the Social Practices of School Organisation’ (SPSO). E-mail: dave.hall@manchester.ac.uk Helen Gunter is Professor of Education Policy at the University of Manchester and co-investigator on the SPSO project. Joanna Bragg is an education researcher at the University of Manchester and co-investigator on the SPSO project.

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


Management in Education http://mie.sagepub.com/

Teacher, lecturer or labourer? Performance management issues in education Kim Mather and Roger Seifert Management in Education 2011 25: 26 DOI: 10.1177/0892020610388060 The online version of this article can be found at: http://mie.sagepub.com/content/25/1/26

Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

British Educational Leadership, Management & Administration Society

Additional services and information for Management in Education can be found at: Email Alerts: http://mie.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://mie.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations: http://mie.sagepub.com/content/25/1/26.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Jan 31, 2011 What is This?

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


MiE Teacher, lecturer or labourer? Performance management issues in education

Management in Education 25(1) 26–31 ª 2011 British Educational Leadership, Management & Administration Society (BELMAS) Reprints and permission: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0892020610388060 mie.sagepub.com

Kim Mather University of the West of England Roger Seifert University of Wolverhampton

Abstract Education management has increasingly been dominated by the norms and requirements of general management ideologies that focus on performance controls and target achievements. Under this regime, solving the labour problem – relatively low productivity – has taken precedence over all other forms of management. In pursuit of this objective senior managers have employed more and more Taylor-like initiatives, including close supervision of task content and its execution. As a result the professionals have resisted collectively and formally through unions, informally in the common rooms and individually through grievance, absenteeism, increased instrumentalism and dull compliance in the job. The application of tighter controls over performance turns these workers into waged labour, displacing any notions of professional self-regulation and undermining collegial high trust relations and educational autonomy that these professionals might reasonably expect. Keywords performance management, labour problem, public sector modernisation, Taylorism, further education

Introduction

Locating the debate

Performance management (PM) has been popularised in recent years as a key feature of labour management practice across the UK public services. The appeal of PM lies in its professed ability to deliver improvements in labour performance at reduced costs as a means of securing enhanced organisational performance. Much of the language and the techniques reflect particular managerial preferences about how best to secure control over labour performance. This control is crucially important in public services such as education as they are labour-intensive and staffed by practitioners who self-ascribe as professionals. As such, they prefer self-regulatory approaches to the management of their performance. The aim of this paper is to locate the PM debate firmly in management attempts to solve the longstanding labour problem, namely relatively low productivity. Our concern is with one part of this problem, staff performance. Our interest lies with the PM rubric in secondary schools and further education colleges. First we locate the debate within its broader ideological and public policy context, linking the logic of public sector modernisation with the ascendancy of PM; second we highlight the dialectical nature of PM as applied to resolving the labour problem in education; third we suggest that PM as it manifests in this sector is predicated on the twin concepts of consent from and control over labour.

The overarching theoretical and policy position with regard to the UK public services continues to be rooted in a form of neoliberalism (Chomsky, 1999). This drives the debate on both the extent of state functions and the purpose of those functions remaining in the public sector. This is apparent in the Con-Lib government’s interest in exploring the boundaries between the public, private and voluntary sectors. There is also a recognition that those services remaining in the public sector need to be more costeffective. This has become particularly acute in the context of severe budgetary pressures. Equally pressing is the need to cheapen these services without triggering a recognisable deterioration in service quality as far as citizen-users qua voters are concerned. The labour-intensive nature of these services means that changes in labour management are required to solve the labour problem. The same service managers tasked with improving productivity and efficiency endlessly complain that they are hampered by interfering politicians, overly strong unions and deadwood among the staff. The elevation of effective leadership into the holy grail of schools improvement is testimony to the limitations of professional

Corresponding author: E-mail: kim.mather@uwe.ac.uk

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


Mather and Seifert

27

collegiality in the age of austerity, as well as to the dominance of Harvard business models. This explains the drive to merge management provision as evidenced in the creation of federated schools under the control of an executive school management team and the recent interest in college mergers in the FE sector. Such Panglossian optimism is underpinned by half-baked assertions, such as ‘economic theory suggests that there may be potential for larger colleges to be more efficient’ (DIUS, 2008: 2). The consequence of such developments is to reduce accountability as the distance between the citizen-user and the management team grows wider. The logic of this general approach fitted well with the American public choice theorists (extreme localists) who took the view that politicians would not make the best decisions in the interests of citizen-users and that local managers were best placed to deliver to a local electorate (Niskanen, 1971; Dunleavy, 1991). The associated drift towards all-powerful management hierarchies is part of the notion that it is preferable for managers rather than bureaucrats and politicians to take decisions. All of this has contributed to the managerial revolution in the UK public service that has been captured within the modernisation dogma under the auspices of New Public Management (Hood, 1990, 1995; Pollit, 1993; Walsh, 1995). This has been operationalised by senior managers at the service level through the application of the ‘Three E’s’: efficiency, effectiveness and economy. This mantra has been endlessly repeated without any critical analysis of the concepts and in the absence of soundly based empirical evidence. This set of policy preferences was made explicit in the influential Gershon Review and has shaped the context within which the performance of the public services is located. The Gershon Report (2004) made explicit the need for efficiency savings but not at the expense of service improvements: ‘Efficiency is about raising productivity and enhancing value for money.’ The report went on to identify where efficiency gains could be achieved:    

reducing inputs (money, people, assets, etc.) for the same outputs; reducing prices (procurement, labour costs, etc.) for the same outputs; getting greater outputs or improved quality (extra service, productivity, etc.) for the same inputs; or getting proportionally more outputs or improved quality in return for an increase in resources.

The same policy imperative and preoccupation dominates the documents and reports within the education sector. For example, a recent DfE publication discussed the ways in which head teachers could be assisted in improving the financial management (and efficiency) of schools: All those involved in the financial management of schools recognised that they were facing tighter budgets in the coming years and would need to manage their finance more carefully than ever. For most, staffing costs were a priority as they accounted for the majority of their budgets; focus

on this was often so great that it tended to overwhelm other subjects. (DfE, 2010: 1)

In the case of further education, a sector now well used to having to do more with less, the employers’ body, the Association of Colleges (AOC), linked the need for further ‘operational’ efficiency savings and in particular efficiency drives in teaching and learning delivered by, among other things, performance management (AOC, 2009: 5). Recent case study evidence suggests that such managerial reforms have been widely introduced, but that the impact on staff performance has been largely negative (Mather et al., 2009). The performance improvement lexicon that now pervades the public services is closely aligned to the rhetoric of (parental) choice. The logic is that service improvements are leveraged upwards by league tables, competition between institutions, the achievement of targets and attendant funding rewards. Such regimes put individual schools and colleges under pressure to ‘outperform’ one another – a beggar-my-neighbour system – but a recent government report highlighted this system’s inherent flaws: We found ample evidence in that inquiry that the Government, contrary to the statement in the recent White Paper that each school was responsible for its own improvement, was trying to drive improvement through central programmes and targets, some of which had a distorting effect and were perceived as harmful. (House of Commons Children, Schools and Families Committee, 2010: 5)

Such close attention to sector and institutional performance invariably spills over into finding ways of being seen to improve the performance of those working on the front line in these services. This in part means resolving the labour problem and provides for senior managers a legitimate space within which to position PM. The refrain, therefore, that is heard most frequently is that if left alone senior managers will deliver better performance. The need is to reduce political interference (freedom from local authorities), to reduce union power (break national agreements) and to redirect staff effort (the use of carrots and sticks to control staff).

The dialectics of performance management ‘Good performance’ in schools and colleges is increasingly managerially defined, but why do educated professionals need to be performance managed? The assumption is that they do not self-regulate their own performance sufficiently well or are not trusted to self-perform well. This can be explained by reference to the indeterminate nature of the employment relationship itself, and the implicit wageeffort bargain born from inequalities in the labour market (Phelps Brown, 1959). PM is essentially rooted in Taylorite techniques based on standardising ‘good performance’ within a clearly defined division of labour. The case has been argued

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


28

Management in Education 25(1)

elsewhere that PM is a central component within the application of NPM but that this has led to perverse outcomes across many public services in general and education in particular (Worrall et al., 2010). The application of modern-day Taylorism is designed to gain control over craft workers through the separation of task conception and its execution. Hence control over task performance is removed from workers and placed in the hands of managers. As Braverman (1974) explained, the application of Taylorite principles reduced employers’ dependency on skilled labour thereby circumventing the problem of its replacement while rendering it cheaper and easier to control. The teaching profession is characterised by practitioners akin to craft workers who draw on independent knowledge and skill in the application of their teaching craft. The conundrum can be explained by reference to one side of the labour problem, that of workers who do not perform to the standard required by managers. The labour problem and commentaries on its causes and consequences are nothing new. It was identified in the late 1800s in America (Olson, 1884; Commons, 1911) and has been discussed more recently by Kaufman (1993). In this sense resolving the labour problem is the main purpose of government policy and the priority of site managers in the public services. We can characterise the government position since 1997 in relation to this problem through four overlapping policy iterations. First, there was an emphasis on the apparent empowerment of individual public sector workers through incentives and promotion opportunities. This was evident in the schools sector in the creation of a new cadre of so-called super-teachers and the notion of better pay for better workers. When this system stalled it was partly replaced by a second policy iteration involving incentives for those responsible for managing these workers. This has been seen in the higher levels of managerial pay, the emphasis on management training and development, the creation of powerful senior management teams, the general talking up of the importance of the managerial function across the education system through heroic assumptions about effective leadership, and finally by turning senior managers into the voice of government to their staff and not, as used to be the case, the voice of staff to government (Ironside & Seifert, 2004). This approach was itself partly substituted by moves to marketise forms of service delivery evident in benchmarking and the creation of multiple targets, audit and inspection regimes. The logic here was that private sector providers (real or imagined) did things more efficiently because of the assumed prowess of market forces. It was perversely assumed, therefore, that comparing actual performance with possible private sector performance would act as a challenge to current senior managers. Finally, the frustration that these three overlapping policy iterations have not delivered the gains required (in efficiency, effectiveness and economy) has triggered a fourth wave of interventions from the coalition government, dressed up in the dismal rhetoric of public choice. This is to encourage non-state provision through the voluntary sector and

mainly with the creation of Free Schools alongside more Academies. Cutting across all of these interventions has been a central preoccupation with reassuring the citizen-user that public services can provide value for money in a way that does not compromise the quality of service provision. Performance, and finding ways of protecting and enhancing performance standards, has translated into ratcheting up the performance of the staff employed. It is therefore unsurprising that in the case of education, the ideology of performance has stimulated a succession of ministerially devised frameworks to guide and manage teacher performance in schools and colleges. These have been legitimised as part of the general rhetoric about linking good teaching to good educational achievement. While this is laudable it is important to understand that both the logic and practice of PM is founded on the twin concepts of consent and coercion, or the application of familiar carrot and stick approaches. These approaches are premised on particular assumptions about how to resolve the labour problem.

Control from above: consent and coercion So the battle commences. The general proposition supported by the mass of evidence in this area (Gunter, 2001, 2009) suggests that performance management ‘improvements’ driven through by ‘effective leadership’ models are resented and resisted by the very staff intended to embrace them. This is not surprising given that they are mainly predicated upon Taylorite ‘more for less’ solutions. This means, inter alia, that the professional element of teaching is systematically and strategically replaced by non-professional tasks, and that the teachers themselves have less say over all and any aspect of their working lives. Some resist through dull acceptance and behave in accordance with the models, namely become obedient and instrumental in their working lives and thereby reduce their responsibility for the learning of students and pupils. Others resist through quitting, others cannot cope and become stressed and strained, and others seek individual and collective remedies. In all of this there must be some effort by managers and management thinkers to explain conflict, resistance and limited compliance. Largely we find this to be the missing link in the USA-style heroic approach to the management of change and effective leadership. All this is now to be incorporated within the norms and standards of government policy. An important component in the embedding of PM regimes in schools and colleges relies on the assimilation of the teaching staff within the PM logic and practice. Of note here is the crucially important role afforded the need for effective leadership of these institutions. This general approach relies on convincing the staff, for example, that ‘poorly performing workers’ are part of the problem and this is an important part of the media-driven propaganda story. Consent to the introduction and embedding of PM regimes is reliant on the notion firstly that better teacher

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


Mather and Seifert

29

performance (as defined by whatever standards have been devised and imposed) leads to improvements in service provision (however this might be measured), and secondly that there is a legitimacy attaching to the ‘weeding out’ of poor performers. In most workplaces weaker workers are protected by their workmates as part of the instinctive solidarity of the wage labourer against the management, but this does not apply with equal force among the craft professional. This may make them easier targets for transitional and transformational management strategies, but it may also create a less confident and ultimately worse performing cadre of new teachers. Unfortunately relatively less attention is given within such regimes to why there is poor performance and poor management. This raises important questions about management control systems based on a priori assumptions about the causes of poor performance that set one teacher against another in a way that is both divisive and unhelpful to notions of performance improvement. Here the blame game becomes pernicious with members of the senior management team (SMT) blaming, as we have suggested, staff and politicians, while staff blame managers and each other, and the parents blame the students and the teachers. This ronde of moral relativism creates an atmosphere of secrecy, cover-ups, false accounting and lost responsibilities in which the victims are the students. Allied to this is the cultivation of new ways of conceptualising professionalism and this creates paradoxical outcomes. We have already suggested that the whole fabric of PM is premised on not being able to trust the professionals in the classroom to self-regulate. Underlying this is the political view that over-powerful professional groupings in the public sector are self-serving and unrepresentative of the public interest (Walsh, 1995). Given the relative failures of successive policy interventions already outlined, it seems that there has been a resurgence in ideas about how to enhance teachers’ professionalism. For example: A better approach would be for the Government to place more faith in the professionalism of teachers and to support them with a simplified accountability and improvement system which challenges and which encourages good practice rather than stigmatising and undermining those who are struggling. We recommend that the Department diverts resources away from the production of guidance to the funding and dissemination of research findings to teachers in the spirit of informing local professional decisionmaking. (House of Commons Children, Schools and Families Committee, 2010: 5)

Much of the policy discourse about professionalism appears to have little to do with increasing job autonomy and self-regulation of performance. A reading of government and sector-specific documents frames professionalism within the context of continuing professional development and related job roles (for example, DIUS, 2007; TDA, 2007; STRB, 2009). This general push for professional standards and training does not equate with a diminution in management activity.

Consent is also manufactured by reference to the ethics of meeting the needs of the children and students, rooted as some would argue in a quintessentially special public service ethos (Pratchett & Wingfield, 1996). While there may be a symbolic ‘public service’ terrain associated with working in education this can be used in powerful ways by government ministers and senior managers to legitimise the strengthening of labour management controls. Therefore changes are introduced ostensibly in the interests of the children and the students but have the purpose of wresting key controls over performance from front-line professional staff to senior managers with other targets in mind. This opens the door to the most dangerous ideas that threaten the fabric of state education in the UK, the rise and rise of faith schools, freedom schools, and academies. In this way separateness is encouraged, and education itself reduced to useable and measurable cheaper outcomes. In this sense the manufacturing of consent around PM is rooted in low-level unitarist ideology about how best to resolve the labour problem. The idea is that workers are persuaded to ‘buy in’ to the me-too culture through management communications predicated on shared interests (Fox, 1980). Any opposition from teachers is considered to work against the interests of citizen-users, rendering it irrational. Teachers and lecturers may see the world rather differently. Case study evidence from the FE sector suggests that lecturers found the PM approach, associated individual target-setting exercises and indeed appraisals idiosyncratic processes. They did little that impacted positively on the student experience but they delivered rather more control over the lecturers themselves (Mather et al., 2009). Where consent is so obviously fragile then the dialects of control requires coercion. This side of management is more explicit in schools and colleges than before, and the dominant and determinant ideology of managerialism requires that those that do not ‘fit in’ are weeded out. This process is well documented with a huge increase in reported incidents of bullying of staff by managers, and a noticeable increase in the use of disciplinary actions against staff by senior managers. This can be seen as part of a wider strategy that includes the use of the promotion system to over-promote some and bypass others on the grounds of conformity to the limited vision of the newly effective educational leaders. The evidence of increased infringements of staff rights by managers goes with the evidence that union voice, and therefore by default the collective voice of staff, is also being ignored and downplayed. As the state introduces more and more unpopular policies, so it requires a more and more authoritarian regime to implement them. The democratic deficit grows, accountability reduces and standards fall. This may mean higher levels of productivity, but it does not mean better education.

Conclusions There is a dialectical power relationship at play between managers and managed. As managers seek out ways of

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


30

Management in Education 25(1)

resolving the labour problem workers will resist. Such resistance takes a variety of forms including formal collective mainly though unions, informal collective through common-room guerrilla warfare, formal individual as with grievances and informal individual as with absenteeism and quitting (Ironside & Seifert, 1995). All are on the increase across the education sector, and all will eventually impinge upon both performance improvement schemes and government policy. While educational leadership is undeniably important the agenda has been hijacked by political dogma. The increasing status of performance management systems and the oppressive use of inspection and audit regimes displaces any notion of professional self-regulation in the lecture theatre and classroom. The application of tighter controls over performance turns these workers into waged labour, undermining collegial, high trust relations and the educational autonomy that professionals at the chalk face (the point of production) might reasonably expect. Treat professional workers like labourers and they will behave like wage slaves. They defend their job territory however this is dressed up: their responses are deemed to be unreasonable and irrational, so the degradation of work intensifies and requires ever more effective and powerful leaders. As the age of modernisation is replaced by the age of austerity, the purpose of education will become increasingly focused on utilitarian outcomes for students seeking scarce employment, managers will be rewarded for running a tight ship and not a good educational establishment, and government will recreate its cherished three levels of provision. Poor quality and cheap state education for the next generation of labourers, a mixed provision of academies, faith schools, grammar schools and freedom schools for the smaller proportion of young people needed for professional tasks, and the encouragement of a larger more expensive fee-paying elite sector. Only in the state sector for the mass will the nostrums of performance management be discussed, as value for money is only of interest when it applies to the lowest rungs of the educational ladder. This layered approach will be reflected in staffing, with the ‘more for less’ dictum applied to those teachers and lecturers teaching in the state sector and subjected to ever increasing strictures of a performance management-led world of learning. References Association of Colleges (AOC) (2009) Colleges in a New Era of Public Spending – Where Can Savings Be Made?, October. Braverman, H. (1974) Labor and Monopoly Capital. New York: Monthly Review Press. Chomsky, N. (1999) Profit Over People: Neoliberalism and the Global Order. New York: Seven Stories Press. Commons, J. (1911) ‘Organized labor’s attitude toward industrial efficiency’. American Economic Review, 1, 463–74. Department for Education (DfE) (2010) Financial Efficiency in Schools, April. London: DfE.

Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills (DIUS) (2007) A Guide to the Further Education Teachers’ Qualifications (England) Regulations 2007 No.2264. Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills (DIUS) (2008) The Evidence Base on College Size in the Further Education Sector, Research Report. Dunleavy, P. (1991) Democracy, Bureaucracy and Public Choice: Economic Explanations In Political Science. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf. Fox, A. (1980) ‘The meaning of work’, in G. Esland & G. Salaman (eds), The Politics of Work. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. Gershon, P. (2004) Releasing Resources to the Front Line: Independent Review of Public Sector Efficiency. London: Stationery Office. Gunter, H. (2001) Leaders and Leadership in Education. London: Sage. Gunter, H. (2009) ‘Contesting the orthodoxy of teacher leadership’. International Journal of Educational Leadership in Education, 11(4), 331–40. Hood, C. (1990) ‘Beyond the public bureaucracy state? Public administration in the 1990s’. Inaugural Lecture, London School of Economics. Hood, C. (1995) ‘The ‘‘New Public Management’’ in the 1980s: variations on a theme’. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 2/3, 93–109. House of Commons Children, Schools and Families Committee (2010) From Baker to Balls: The Foundations of the Education System, 6 April. London: Stationery Office. Ironside, M. & Seifert, R. (1995) Industrial Relations in Schools. London: Routledge. Ironside, M. & Seifert, R. (2004) ‘The impact of privatisation and marketisation on employment conditions in the public services’. Radical Statistics, 86, 57–71. Kaufman, B. (1993) The Origins and Evolution of the Field of Industrial Relations in the United States. Ithaca, NY: ILR Press. Mather, K., Worrall, L. & Seifert, R. (2009) ‘The changing locus of workplace control in the English FE sector’. Employee Relations, 31(2), 139–57. Niskanen, W. (1971) Bureaucracy and Representative Government. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton. Olsen, O. (1884) Solution of the Labor Problem. Hornstein. Phelps Brown, H. (1959) The Growth of British Industrial Relations. London: Macmillan. Pollitt, C. (1993) Managerialism and the Public Services: Cuts or Cultural Change in the 1990s? Oxford: Blackwell. Pratchett, L. & Wingfield, M. (1996) ‘Petty bureaucracy and woolly-minded liberalism? The changing ethos of local government officers’. Public Administration, 74(4), 639–56. School Teachers’ Review Body (STRB) (2009) STRB 18th Report, Cmnd 7652. London: Stationery Office. Training and Development Agency (TDA) (2007) Professional Standards for Teachers in England from September 2007. London: TDA. Walsh, K. (1995) Public Services and Market Mechanism: Competition, Contracting and the New Public Management. London: Macmillan. Worrall, L., Mather, K. & Seifert, R. (2010) ‘Solving the labour problem among professional workers in the UK public sector:

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


Mather and Seifert

31

organisation change and performance management’. Public Organization Review, 10, 117–37.

Biography Kim Mather is a senior lecturer in HRM and Employee Relations at Bristol Business School, University of the West of England. She completed her PhD at Keele University and her research focuses on public sector Employee

Relations and changes in the labour management and labour processes of UK public sector workers. Roger Seifert completed his PhD at LSE and he has been professor of industrial relations at Keele University (1993–2008) and at Wolverhampton Business School since 2008. He specialises in public sector with books and articles on coal miners, the fire service, the NHS, education, civil service, local government, and police.

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


Management in Education http://mie.sagepub.com/

Managing performance for effective classrooms Jan Moreland Management in Education 2011 25: 21 DOI: 10.1177/0892020610388059 The online version of this article can be found at: http://mie.sagepub.com/content/25/1/21

Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

British Educational Leadership, Management & Administration Society

Additional services and information for Management in Education can be found at: Email Alerts: http://mie.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://mie.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations: http://mie.sagepub.com/content/25/1/21.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Jan 31, 2011 What is This?

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


MiE Managing performance for effective classrooms

Management in Education 25(1) 21–25 ª 2011 British Educational Leadership, Management & Administration Society (BELMAS) Reprints and permission: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0892020610388059 mie.sagepub.com

Jan Moreland

Abstract This paper takes the form of a discussion document. A number of ideas surrounding the topics of continuing professional development (CPD), performance management (PM) and effective classrooms in secondary schools are outlined. The paper draws on some of the recent literature in these areas and refers to some current trials within a UK-based context. The paper, however, is not presented as a case study nor as a traditional literature review. Rather, it is a practitioner’s reflection and the main intention is to pose some thoughts and ideas in order to generate debate and open up the issues for wider discussion. Keywords effective classrooms, continuing professional development, performance management, reflective practice, self-evaluation, school improvement

Introduction This discussion paper is organised as follows. The first part discusses the importance and centrality of effective classrooms. Then, the role of continuing professional development (CPD) is considered in relation to how it should be targeted to achieve effective classrooms. The culture of reflective practice for both teachers and students is reviewed alongside sharing best practice, which can arguably help to enhance the learning experience for all involved. The third part of the paper considers school self-evaluation forms (SEFs) and school improvement plans (SIPs) in the context of targeted support from school leaders. This includes a reflection on three aspects of support: developing an ethos of personal responsibility, fostering trust and confidence, and participatory decisionmaking. Finally, the paper contemplates to what extent the process of performance management can assist leadership teams (including middle leaders) in tying all of these preceding ideas together.

What are effective classrooms and why are they central? The introduction of performance management and performance-related pay in schools, which to some extent built upon a previous ‘teacher appraisal’ scheme, has received considerable attention in the literature, notably by Wragg et al. (1996, 2003, 2004), Hartle et al. (2001) and Poster & Poster (1993). However, research has mainly focused on the effect on classroom teachers (Haynes et al., 2003; West-Burnham et al., 2001; Tomlinson, 2000). An issue which might warrant some discussion in the literature, and would involve both school-based

practitioners and academic writers, is the role of professional development in terms of performance management planning and review. Performance management for school teachers should, arguably, be a purposeful process which ultimately enhances the learning experience of students. As Wiliam (2008) suggests, ‘an effective school is a school full of effective classrooms’. In my opinion, Ofsted has finally got it right when the focus is on learning and progress. When we discuss teacher ‘performance’ what we might be considering is: the results their students achieve in relation to their ability, whether or not they have met certain targets, how well they engage with their own professional development or – and I think this tends to be what many teachers worry about – how they ‘perform’ in the classroom. Haigh (2009: 1) writes: ‘Maybe as a profession we’re hung up on the idea of teaching as a performance skill rather than as a means of promoting learning.’ It is this focus on ‘what the teacher does’ that makes lesson observations stressful. As soon as we point out that we are focusing on what students learn, then the whole process becomes less threatening. Of course what students learn does depends on what teachers do: by way of planning, assessment and feedback. What I mean is that we are not necessarily interested in an all-singing, all-dancing lesson. We need to go beneath that surface layer and start to classify just what actions, on the part of teachers, lead to learning and progress on the part of students. As Wiliam (2009) also points out, poor teaching is a significant factor in underperformance by students. I suggest that it is possible for weak

Corresponding author: E-mail: jan.moreland@hotmail.co.uk

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


22

Management in Education 25(1)

teachers, satisfactory teachers and even good teachers to significantly improve if it is made clear that there are specific processes that enable their students to learn more effectively. According to the school SEF Guidance (2010: 11) outstanding learning is outlined as follows: The pupils acquire knowledge, develop understanding and learn and practise skills exceptionally well. Pupils demonstrate excellent concentration and are rarely off task, even in extended periods without direction from an adult. They have developed resilience when tackling challenging activities in a range of subjects. Their keenness and commitment to succeed in all aspects of school life and ability to grasp opportunities to extend and improve their learning are exceptional.

In comparison, I present the views of some Year 9 students (age 14) obtained through an informal discussion; they explained what they thought made a good lesson:     

The lesson has a clear structure. You know what you are going to learn and review what you have learned. The work is on the board for all to see. The teacher helps people individually if they need it. The atmosphere is friendly but not too relaxed.

It is interesting to compare these points from young students with the SEF guidance above. A key issue for the twenty-first century is, therefore, that our pedagogical practice, in all phases of education and training, must alter to take account of a cohort of learners who face very different problems to solve, with a very different armoury of learning tools available, as compared to what was available for their teachers. The moral aspect of all this, in my opinion, is that we need to move forwards and take account of all available information about how people learn and how we need to prepare young people for life in the twentyfirst century. In the world of our students, knowledge development may come via many sources and the teacher needs to know how to utilise these so that teaching is not so much a didactic activity as a collaborative exercise with lessons planned to facilitate learning – rather than constantly filling up and measuring.

How should CPD be targeted to achieve effective classrooms? Jackson and Temperley (2007: 45) consider this ‘knowledge-rich’ world suggesting: Characteristics of network-based knowledge and learning systems are paradigmatically different from the prevailing orthodoxies of the past.

School leaders can provide a great deal of information and guidance; groups of schools can enhance this still further. If it is true that learning systems are in the throes of a

paradigm shift, then our systems for supporting teachers to deal with this must alter in a similar fashion. One way forward in tying together continuing professional development with performance management may be to develop an in-house programme of sessions which has external accreditation, discussed and reviewed as part of the performance management process (Moreland, 2009a). In describing some trials in my own school, I seek to offer some suggestions for other practitioners. Although this description is necessarily subjective, the purpose is not to be prescriptive but to engender debate. One example of our practice is that there is a session every week, with some being part of regular in-service training time for all classroom staff and some being optional. Most of the sessions are run by our own staff with some input from external trainers and speakers. The topics are generic, but also address a wide range of needs from newly qualified teacher to those new to senior leadership. The next phase of our planning will include targeted support via coaching linked to the government guidelines (DCSF, 2005). The targeted support will work by introducing some differentiated sessions and also by employing open educational resources (OER). Writing in the New York Times Haffner (2010) cites the 16 million downloads from the Open University’s Open Learn site and the fact that 5,000 students study one of these courses before enrolling on an undergraduate or graduate programme. As beginning teachers leave university courses, they are encouraged to continue to a Master’s degree in education or teaching and learning. It is hoped that by using OER we will be able to encourage those who have been in the profession longer that they could also benefit from some more formal study. In a primary school in Sheffield, a professional development programme using concepts such as social networking supports and challenges their professional development. A member of staff recounted: We used Twitter to post photographs, thoughts and feedback. The speed and spontaneity of this method meant we gathered a range of opinions and constructive criticism within minutes; participants in the Third Space could connect with each other and extend learning to beyond face-to-face sessions. All this remained anonymous – it both supported and challenged our practice and made a big impact on the evolution of the project. (Assistant head teacher, 2010)1

Cordingley et al. (2003) reviewed 17 studies (around the world) of collaborative CPD for teachers. The authors define collaborative CPD as follows: Sustained activity with explicit learning goals for teachers working collaboratively with each other and/or advisory teacher, researcher or mentor. (Cordingley et al., 2003: 59)

They note that ‘all but two of the studies reported observable improvements in attitudes to learning for pupils’ (p. 48) and they recommend that CPD programmes should ‘take full account of the specific needs and concerns of teachers’ with ‘arrangements to develop and foster teacher

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


Moreland

23

ownership and avoid an overmanagerial approach’ (p. 63). In my opinion, reflection is innate for some, while for others it can be improved through guidance. For Moon (2005: 2) ‘reflection is a fundamental feature of a deeper approach to learning’ and it enables learners to feel that they ‘‘own’’ their knowledge because they have been part of its creation’. Perhaps the Big Question is: ‘What does a context which supports rich learning look like?’ I suggest that we need to find a way to actively encourage, stimulate, support and (perhaps most importantly though it may be the most difficult) sustain reciprocal contributions from and between teachers. It may be that social networking is the way forward. Our students have a fairly sophisticated grasp of social networking and yet teachers may be reticent – for very valid reasons. As Rheingold suggests (2007: 2), we need to move towards schools which are actually sites for real learning and ensure that our teaching employs a ‘questioning, collaborative, active, lateral rather than hierarchical pedagogy’ (Moreland 2009a, 2009b, 2010a). Jackson and Temperley (2007: 45) highlight the need for collaborative learning among teachers and the requirement for ‘openness to learning sources from outside the community’. They suggest that this is a vital aspect of developing a learning organisation. Borrowing a phrase from Kieran Osborne2 (2010), perhaps what we need to be developing is not just a learning organisation but a creative one. As Sir Ken Robinson (2006) and Lord David Puttnam (2009) suggest, creativity is very much on the agenda if we are to prepare young people to meet the needs of a much more complex world than the one we faced only ten or twenty years ago.

How should school leaders use the SIP and SEF processes to target action? When all the aspects of enhancing the learner experience are linked together, we may be some way forward in ensuring that performance management is used for the purpose of improving education, as opposed to being a means to browbeat teachers. In my view, the learner experience encompasses the context and environment of the learning, the desired and actual outcomes, the activities and engagement with them, alongside the learner’s ability to reflect and articulate their learning. Reflective learners require the guidance of reflective teachers. If, as Jackson and Temperley (2007: 48–51) suggest, networked learning is not just about learning from the network but also about contributing to the joint construction of ‘knowledge’, then, as they state, trust and communication are paramount. They refer to the Networked Learning Community (NLC) programme (ibid.: 47) which involved 1,500 schools between 2002 and 2006. They concluded that NLC schools made greater gains at Key Stage 4 (GCSE) than non-NLC schools (ibid.: 58). Clearly there would be many factors impacting on the schools’ results. However, taken alongside the fact that the NLC schools (ibid.: 57) ‘have as their immediate aim improving teaching practices and as their key outcome raising pupil achievement’ then it is reasonable to assume that CPD was closely

allied to raising attainment. Arguably, as Jackson and Temperley conclude (ibid.: 59): By aligning networked learning processes for adults and pupils, and having leadership that promotes and supports that learning, there is evidence that networks appear to succeed in their twin objectives of fostering learning community and raising pupil achievement.

Stoll and Louis (2007: 2) write that ‘you will know when one [a professional learning community] exists when you can see a group of teachers sharing and critically interrogating their practice in an ongoing, reflective, collaborative, inclusive, learning-oriented, growth-promoting way.’ They go on to ask whether or not teachers can only do this supported by school leaders, and they point out that it is not just about teachers, it is about support staff, social workers and parents, and indeed requires us to consider (ibid.: 3) ‘divergent knowledge bases’. One may wonder if there is a difference between the different phases of education in terms of building this kind of learning community. Does the small primary school have an advantage? Perhaps secondary and higher education (as Stoll and Louis, 2007: 7 also suggest) place more importance on subject knowledge than on pedagogical awareness – ‘the more cohesive the internal ties are within a group, the less likely the members are to be densely networked with people in other groups’. The first step is to decide if you want to change this attitude in your institution. The second is to determine the means to do so. One means of developing extended networks is to build on local subject networks, which hopefully include secondary, tertiary and higher phases. This can be done very successfully and relatively cheaply by hosting meetings at your school. The relationships that develop can be instrumental in extending professional learning communities beyond your own institution. If you can then extend this idea by building two or more networks together (for example, placing subject expertise alongside transition between phases), the benefits are likely to grow. Of course, social networking on the Internet can make these networks global, with obvious health warnings in place. I would suggest that the SEF should become a form of gap analysis each year and this should feed directly into the SIP, especially if each team in the school has contributed – this includes subject and pastoral teams, and all support teams, as well as governing bodies. If the SEF is focused on learning then the SIP becomes focused on improving that learning. For school leaders to fully support teachers in their professional development, they need to consider the key issues of personal responsibility, trust and confidence, and participatory decision-making. The first of these was brought home to me during an address by Sir John Rowling,3 when he asked have we got all the right people in the right places? Wrong people see themselves as having jobs, right people see themselves as having responsibilities. How important are job descriptions? What is important is focus, dedication, a sense of responsibility. It is not about league tables. It is about children, their families and celebration (Moreland, 2010b).

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


24

Management in Education 25(1)

How does performance management relate to all of this? Elsewhere I have proposed performance management as a positive process: We have performance management because we want to move the organization forward, not because we want to judge what individuals have done in the past; that means that performance management should drive the objectives and strategic direction of the organization and not the other way around. (Moreland, 2009c: 763)

Bringing this together with the concept of judging teacher ‘performance’ reinforces the idea that we should be basing performance management not on observation of teacher activity, nor solely on student results (given the numerous variables that might affect these). What we should be doing, in my view, is to base judgements on the responsibility the individual teacher takes for her/his own professional development and the learning and progress made within lessons. If a teacher can demonstrate that they have also contributed to the school self-evaluation and improvement planning processes, then this should be seen as extra evidence for her/his portfolio. In this way, we may begin to move away from the concept of performance management as a once a year, paper-chasing exercise and move towards a process of managing performance aimed at improving the classroom experience for both teachers and students alike. One way to achieve this is to ask team leaders to discuss at performance management review meetings which CPD sessions their reviewees expect to attend in the coming year. This is intended to focus the discussion on personal professional development. From experience I know that some team leaders feel that peer classroom observation is a major means of teachers developing more innovative approaches. As senior and middle leaders in schools, team leaders have the advantage of seeing a wide range of learning approaches, but find it difficult to disseminate these in a meaningful manner without evidence that they improve or enhance the student experience. These same team leaders consider that if teachers add a discussion of planned ‘drop-in’ peer observation to their performance management meetings they will begin to see the value of this shared practice and begin to develop a dialogue about it. Other suggestions include setting up a CPD directory with teachers volunteering themselves as having rooms to drop into for specific focus (such as use of technology, providing differentiation, using learning journals and so on) and developing online discussion forums.

Conclusion This paper has considered some aspects related to whether or not the process of performance management can help leadership teams (including middle leaders) to link together CPD aimed at ensuring effective classrooms for all students, self-evaluation on the part of individual teachers,

departments and schools, and strategic improvement planning. There are some aspects, however, that remain problematic and, perhaps, in need of an in-depth investigation. Is it possible to ensure that all of these activities in schools (CPD, SEF, SIP, PM) are linked together to ensure that every student is in an effective classroom every lesson of every day? Perhaps school leaders (senior and middle) could begin to develop action research based on ‘learning walks’: walking through every classroom every day. Sharing the results of these both within and across schools would almost certainly lead to improved sharing of best practice. Sharing the results with a wider professional network (even a global one via Web 2.0) might well lead to the very ‘stigmergic collaboration’ which Elliott (2007) describes working for governmental change. Similarly, classroom teachers taking the opportunity to carry out peer observations can share the ideas from these with their own networks. Research into the result of accrediting such peerto-peer work might be very fruitful for those designing CPD programmes. It might be possible to address some of these issues in a preliminary way by starting an online discussion. Comments on this discussion paper would be welcome via the above or on the blog set up for this purpose: http:// janshs-effectiveclassrooms.blogspot.com/. Notes 1. As part of an e-mail conversation with author. 2. Mr Osborne is an experienced head teacher, having held three posts in secondary schools, and also acts as a consultant for the National College of School Leadership (NCSL), as well as mentoring new head teachers. 3. Notes about Sir John Rowling may be found at: http:// www.pixl.org.uk/about-john.php.

References Cordingley, P., Bell, M., Rundell, B. & Evans, D. (2003) Research Evidence in Education Library, Version 1.1*. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education. DCSF (2005) The National Framework for Mentoring and Coaching. Online: http://nationalstrategies.standards.dcsf.gov.uk/ node/41662 (accessed August 2010). Elliott, M. (2007) ‘Stigmergic Collaboration: A Theoretical Framework for Mass Collaboration’. Unpublished PhD thesis. Online: http://mark-elliott.net and http://collabforge.com/. Haffner, K. (2010) ‘An open mind’. New York Times. Online: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/18/education/edlife/18open-t. html?scp¼1&sq¼hewlett%20foundation&st¼cse (accessed 1 June 2010). Haigh, G. (2009) ‘Five things to think about’. Online: http:// bsf.ncsl.org.uk/News.aspx?ID¼120 (accessed 2 May 2010). Hartle, F., Everall, K. & Baker, C. (2001) Getting the Best Out of Performance Management in Your School, 2nd edn. London: Kogan Page. Haynes, G., Wragg, C., Wragg, T. & Chamberlin, R. (2003) ‘Threshold assessment: the experience of teachers who were

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


Moreland

25

unsuccessful in crossing the threshold’. Research Papers in Education, 18(1), 25–44. Jackson, D. & Temperley, J. (2007) ‘From professional learning community to networked learning community’, in L. Stoll & K. S. Louis (eds), Professional Learning Communities. Berkshire: Open University Press/McGraw-Hill. Moon, J. (2005) Guide for Busy Academics No. 4: Learning Through Reflection. Higher Education Academy. Online: http:// www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/resources/ resourcedatabase/id69_guide_for_busy_academics_no4.doc Moreland, J. (2009a) ‘Using wiki technology to encourage reflective writing as part of the chartered London teacher status’. Education Today, 59 (3), 25–7. Moreland, J. (2009b) ‘Reflections on the technology timeline in education’. Online: http://h809-jm.blogspot.com/2009/02/ reflections-on-technology-timeline-in.html Moreland, J. (2009c) ‘Investigating secondary school leaders’ perceptions of performance management’. Educational Management, Administration and Leadership, 37(6), 735–65. Moreland, J. (2010a) ‘Developing reflective practice in young students’. OU Knowledge Network Online: http://kn.open.ac.uk/ public/document.cfm?docid¼12916 Moreland, J. (2010b) ‘A Celebration Speech by Sir John Rowling’. Online: http://h809-jm.blogspot.com/2010/01/celebration-speechby-sir-john-rowling.html Osborne, K. (2010) Unpublished address at the Creative Transitions Conference, Croydon, 18 May. Poster, C. & Poster, D. (1993) Teacher Appraisal: Training and Implementation. London: Routledge. Puttnam, D. (2009) ‘We are the people we’ve been waiting for’. Online: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v¼VRi8_fXz1D8& feature¼related Rheingold, H. (2007) ‘Vision of the Future’, a presentation for education.au Robinson, K. (2006) Address for TED talks ‘Do schools kill creativity?’ Online: http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid¼ -4964296663335083307#

Rowling, J. (2010) Unpublished address at CPD session, 5 January. SEF Guidance (2010) at: http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/assets/ Internet_Content/Shared_Content/Childrens/files/refguidetokssc. doc Stoll, L. & Louis, K. S. (eds) (2007) Professional Learning Communities. Berkshire: Open University Press/McGraw-Hill. Tomlinson, H. (2000) ‘Proposals for performance related pay for teachers in English schools’. School Leadership and Management, 20(3), 281–99. West-Burnham, J., Bradbury, I. & O’Neill, J. (eds) (2001) Performance Management in Schools: How to Lead and Manage Staff for School Improvement. Harlow: Pearson. Wiliam, D. (2008) ‘Taking Assessment for Learning to Scale’. OECD CERI 40th anniversary conference. Online: http:// www.oecd.org/dataoecd/26/43/40756772.pdf Wiliam, D. (2009) ‘Improving outcomes and closing achievement gaps: the role of assessment’. Address for the Belfast UCET symposium, March. Online: http://www.ucet.ac.uk/ downloads/1731.ppt Wragg, E. C., Haynes, G. S., Wragg, C.M. and Chamberlin, R.P. (2004) Performance Pay for Teachers: The Experiences of Heads and Teachers. London: RoutledgeFalmer. Wragg, E. C., Wikeley, F., Wragg, C. & Haynes, G. (1996) Teacher Appraisal Observed. London: Routledge. Wragg, T., Haynes, G., Chamberlin, R. & Wragg, C. (2003) ‘Performance-related pay: the views and experiences of 1,000 primary and secondary head teachers’. Research Papers in Education, 18(1), 3–24.

Biography Dr Jan Moreland is a deputy head teacher in a UK secondary school. She also contributes to teaching on the Open University’s MA in education and EdD programmes. Her research interests surround performance management, leadership for learning, and reflective practice for students and teachers. E-mail: jan.moreland@hotmail.co.uk

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


Management in Education http://mie.sagepub.com/

Performance management or managing performance? Supporting a vision to become outstanding Sam Morton Management in Education 2011 25: 10 DOI: 10.1177/0892020610387958 The online version of this article can be found at: http://mie.sagepub.com/content/25/1/10

Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

British Educational Leadership, Management & Administration Society

Additional services and information for Management in Education can be found at: Email Alerts: http://mie.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://mie.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations: http://mie.sagepub.com/content/25/1/10.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Jan 31, 2011 What is This?

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


MiE Performance management or managing performance? Supporting a vision to become outstanding

Management in Education 25(1) 10–14 ª 2011 British Educational Leadership, Management & Administration Society (BELMAS) Reprints and permission: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0892020610387958 mie.sagepub.com

Sam Morton St Mary & St John C.E.V.A Primary School

Abstract This paper provides an account of how performance management is operating in a rural primary school in the county of Rutland, UK, which aspires to provide an outstanding standard of education for its pupils. The paper begins by outlining the existing regulations for the operation of performance management in schools, before going on to explain how performance management roles are currently organised and undertaken within the school. The paper considers the burden of having to accommodate the constant bombardment of requests to share, impact or analyse reams of data while attempting to provide inspirational levels of teaching and learning. The paper concludes by suggesting that complacent performance management needs to be driven out and replaced with a more robust and rigorous system of ‘managing performance’. Keywords performance management, outstanding, leadership, primary schools, Leading from the Middle

Introduction Every school aspires to achieve an outstanding standard of education for its pupils, staff and school community. The recognition, whether locally or through inspectorate bodies such as Ofsted, provide this public view that the school is delivering to those ‘aspirant’ standards and positively impacting upon pupil outcomes. School environments in the twenty-first century are becoming more geared towards engaging with their communities and parental groups as a means of raising the standards across learning and teaching (DCSF, 2009). Our school is no exception to this. Our shared vision, as a whole-school community, is to be ‘Outstanding’, offering a strong Christian ethos in an ‘I can’ culture (DfES, 2007). This is supported by consistently highquality staff and the systematic development of English and Mathematics skills delivered through high-quality planning and assessment alongside inclusive targeted intervention. A key driver in achieving this within our school is excellent leadership at all levels (Gelsthorpe & West-Burnham, 2003). This primarily refers to the head teacher, although in every outstanding school it is a team effort and combines the senior leadership team and the governing body working collaboratively. Indicators of outstanding leadership, as identified by Ofsted, are that the leadership team and governors have a consistent vision and are fully committed to setting a clear direction for the success of the school (Quigley, 2009a). This vision embraces an understanding of staff roles and effective teamwork. It is within this effective teamwork that the governors rigorously challenge and evaluate the work of the school whenever it proves necessary (Ofsted, 2009).

It is then essential that the leadership team carefully analyses school data and trends and, as a result, identify priorities and implement the appropriate strategies for school improvement to ensure high standards of attainment. The school community (children, parents and partnerships) are fully informed and play an integral role in the development of the school. In progressing towards an outstanding grade, all aspects of our school leadership must be at least rated good or higher and our vehicle in moving towards this is focused on performance management.

Performance management regulations The new regulations on performance management which came into effect in autumn 2007 with revisions in September 2009 identified that staff members and leadership would meet to agree targets for the year and also the level of evidence to be collected for the cycle (Rewards and Incentives Group, 2006). The evidence would include a maximum of three hours of lesson observations, work scrutiny and the planning and delivery of staff training, to name but a few sources. Interim reviews throughout the year would enable professional dialogue to take place in which targets being exceeded or underachieved could be addressed and reflected upon, thus enabling support or further continuing professional development to be targeted. Performance management is a critical part of school improvement, and working with teachers and governors Corresponding author: E-mail: head@northluffenham.rutland.sch.uk

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


Morton

11

to develop a clear picture of their skills and capabilities is integral to the success of our school’s progress. As with every school we have a Performance Management Policy, we operate a performance management cycle and we hold interim reviews (Armstrong, 2006). The core business of these reviews within our school enables a professional discussion regarding the standards and encourages challenging targets to be set. The collaboration within this process ensures that we work together to improve the outcomes of all learners inclusive of our staff team (Reeves et al., 2002). The staff involvement in their performance management has, in comparison to previous cycles, improved due to a clear understanding that it is a discussion and that they are required to plan and prepare for their involvement in it. This understanding of preparation has been an instrumental aspect of improving the process through analytical reflection of data to personal evaluation of practice. My staff team apply the ‘so what’ criteria to their evaluations as a means of acknowledging cause and consequence in their provision in order to plan improvements. It is important to note that this is not additional work but integral to the Single Integrated Development Plan; this not only allows progress to be tracked individually but also across the school.

How do we structure our staff? The staffing structure in many schools varies depending on the size of the school and the age group of the children. In our school we have 172 pupils on roll, the equivalent of 6.9 full-time teachers, one nursery nurse, four teaching assistants and one special educational needs (SEN) support assistant. It is the organisation and effective deployment of the staff team which promotes aspirant pupil outcomes in our establishment (Stoll et al., 2006). As we have a small staff team there are many roles and responsibilities which have to be shared and therefore make up a distinct part of our performance management and managing of performance. Our team structure is set up as follows: Senior management team  Head teacher (NPQH) (National Professional Qualification for Headteachers)  Assistant head (LftM) (Leading from the Middle) Middle management  KS2 Coordinator (Timetabled School Management Team (SMT)) (LftM)  KS1 Coordinator (Timetabled SMT) (LftM)  EYFS Coordinator (Timetabled SMT) Teaching staff (inclusive of middle management)  EYFS Teacher  Year 1 Teacher  Year 2 & 3 Teacher  Year 3 & 4 Teacher  Year 4 & 5 Teacher  Year 6 Teacher

Support staff in the classroom  Teaching assistants  Nursery nurse Other staff in the school  Secretary (CSBM)  Administrative assistant  Caretaker  Librarian (volunteer) School governors  A range of governors with specialist fields in personnel management, finance, data analysis, educational standards, marketing and publicity, health and safety, project management and religious education and the arts. Involving all staff in the performance management cycle ensures that, as a school, we can effectively manage the improvements as a team and know that each aspect is contributing towards the shared vision. Continual work with the National College for the Leadership of Schools and Children’s Services, the National Association of Professional Teaching Assistants (NAPTA), Local Authority Traded Services training and the Specialist Schools and Academies Trust (SSAT) alongside consultant support services maintain the development of all staff within the team. This level of provision highlights the value of individuals’ skills which we can draw upon within our teaching and support staff in gaining greater dividends in pupil outcomes.

Managing performance In all schools the leadership of the head, senior leadership team, staff and governors is, arguably, crucial in the development of success (Gelsthorpe & West-Burnham, 2003). The governance of our school is creative and dynamic in reflecting on our performance and thus promoting effective change, and in developing strong and positive links with our local community. We follow a range of key strategies that will ultimately enable us to reach outstanding leadership across all levels within the school. Part of those key strategies is the management of our performance to ensure that we achieve the highest possible standards in all areas of the school’s work through reflective, self-critical and creative leadership. We are developing a clear vision for the school in the future so that all staff members know what they are working towards and this, in turn, supports clear strategic thinking. We share this regularly through both staff and governors meetings, while updating pupils and parents through either the school council or weekly newsletters. This constant review process and sharing of information provides a sound base for evaluating what has worked well, what needs to be improved and aspects which are now surplus to requirements (Dean, 2002). Another of our key strategies is placing a high priority on appointing quality staff, developing their skills and deploying them to best effect across the learning community. Our management of performance supports the development procedures and interventions that are effective

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


12

Management in Education 25(1)

and not bureaucratic enabling our staff team to display greater confidence in their deployment of skills. Although part of professional development, we often find the flexibility to cope with new initiatives and challenges at our school, but it must be stated that these directives often place a greater drain on our energy. Time and effort are exerted on making informed judgements as to their benefit to our overall vision. Upon establishing those benefits the staff team plan, adapt and integrate them into our school systems and procedures where appropriate, whether it be curriculum or management. Admittedly, some are discarded in favour of more robust systems already being implemented. A staff team with a greater understanding of assessing and managing data relating to pupil progress has a very positive effect on professional dialogue and also the achievement of different groups (Quigley, 2009b). In being analytical, coupled with high expectations, the staff team can engage in making a positive impact on pupil outcomes. The use of data at our school to manage performance provides a clear and open process for staff to relate to. We use average point scores for each pupil across reading, writing and mathematics, allowing us to track small changes in progress supported by Assessing Pupil Progress trackers (DfES, 2007). It is essential within the cycle to engage the staff team in supporting the knowledge, skills and understanding of their roles for achieving outstanding pupil outcomes. For our school to develop an overall outstanding provision we should be able to demonstrate at least good progress in all major respects as reflected in contextual added value measures. Our use of data should be analytical and based on progress measures rather than raw attainment. Our school standards should show that pupils across all lessons are consistently working at or near their capacity, and make and sustain comprehensive gains in their learning. These key findings from whole-school monitoring provide a very clear guide in supporting our management of and intervention in learning and teaching standards (Stoll et al., 2006) It is understood that all pupils should achieve highly and progress at a good rate in relation to their capabilities and earlier attainment (as reflected in value-added measures) (Webb, 2006). Our understanding within the context of our catchment is that we can expect at least two levels of progress achieved between Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2 in English and Maths, if not more. There are varying factors which can be discussed relating to why this may not be achieved; however, it is a national average and expectation that the measurement of two levels between Key Stages should, with outstanding provision, be attained. The SEN provision is also taken into account as this identifies starting point versus end achievement (SEN pupils moving from Level 1 to Level 3).

Managing performance in an outstanding curriculum As a relatively small successful primary school, we have been judged as providing an outstanding curriculum alongside our pastoral care. Our curriculum ensures that we

maintain a commitment to a common vision and that the staff are engaged actively in managing it (Southworth, 2004). This management occurs through staff meetings, professional conversations, performance management interviews, interim reviews, Key Stage meetings and coordinator interviews with governors. This process not only provides the school with a clear route for managing performance but also underpins a strong sense of teamwork. An outstanding curriculum, according to Ofsted judgements, will be broad, balanced and innovative, and encourage very high standards of attainment. Our school has consistently achieved a ‘significant þ’ across all areas identified within RAISEonline (Reporting and Analysis for Improvement through School Self-Evaluation).1 However, we have varying trends which, although showing a significantly higher than national average picture, also displays a declining trend in our results (Webb, 2006). As part of managing performance it is our duty to establish within our team why we have such a trend and manage effective ways of overcoming this. The first discussion would be to consider recent changes made to our curriculum map due to mixed-aged teaching and the embracing of a more creative approach to learning. Our school’s route through improving its performance has highlighted the point that, although we have an outstanding curriculum, can it be further developed and improved to support our learners and what effect will this have on our performance? We have taken a bold move to develop an imaginative and creative curriculum which will encourage high achievement using the opportunities in the ‘excellence and enjoyment’ agenda shared with team teaching and collaborative learning approaches (Quigley, 2008). Piecing the jigsaw of learning together enables knowledge, skills and understanding to be interlinked without losing their discrete nature, thus providing a wide range of connected learning activities. This journey so far has not been without uncomfortable moments and the uncertainty of change has required greater management across all levels in order to support the process (West-Burnham, 2008). Our renewed provision is being evaluated rigorously and will be carefully managed to meet changing requirements both in learning and the staff structure. It is the involvement of teaching assistants in the intervention plan and the setting of budget headings which support small group provision that we believe will also improve the aforementioned downward trend and reverse it. The curriculum and understanding the organisation of targeted support are paramount to the involvement of our support team. Their part within managing the performance (Bubb & Hoare, 2001) has also engaged them fully in sharing their aspirations for, planning, delivering and evaluating small group work across the school. This process has linked strategically into their strengths which now provide the school with a wider resource for learning while allowing intervention to be timetabled. As a result the open approach to evaluation enables us to discuss professionally at a level of common understanding how we can all work together to make the improvements necessary, without forgetting to celebrate where we have met our targets.

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


Morton

13

Managing performance – teaching and learning Teaching and learning, inclusive of the Foundation Stage, must be at least ‘good’ or above in all core areas in order to be deemed as providing an ‘outstanding’ provision. Our management of performance takes into account the creativity of individual teachers through their stimulating, enthusiastic and consistently challenging teaching styles (Quigley, 2008). The teaching staff team all share sound subject knowledge across the curriculum, how it should be delivered and most importantly how pupils learn. To receive an outstanding grade for teaching and learning, a school must ensure that lessons are taught in an inspiring and highly-effective way. (Ofsted 2009)

Pupil performance is an indicator that teaching is either effective or ineffective. A pupil is unlikely to make significant progress with an ineffective teacher unless the pupil takes responsibility for their own learning (Stoll et al., 2006). As a school we have placed a great value on building relationships with our pupils and encouraging good pupil behaviour. The impact this has had across the performance of the school has been measured primarily by the reduction in referrals of poor behaviour to either middle or senior management. As a direct result of this reduction in disruptive behaviour effective learning has taken place. Operational performance of too many initiatives or strategies can often hinder a school from making the progress required of it. The staff team find the constant bombardment of requests to share, impact or analyse reams of data extremely burdensome while desperately attempting to provide inspirational levels of teaching and learning. Our remit is to support the strategies as closely as possible where they link to our overall aims and vision and are therefore applied within the context of our school and the needs of our learners (Spillane et al., 2001). This, in essence, enables us to target our performance to common threads within our Single Integrated Development Plan and work collaboratively to achieve shared targets. It is important to note that success should be shared within a staff team at all levels but ultimately it should engage pupils to judge the success of their own work and set targets for improvement, as this underpins many of our school-based targets.

Middle management performing ‘Leading from the Middle’ (a ten-month professional development programme for middle leaders) is highlighted as a pivotal role within our school in raising standards and effectively managing performance. The teachers and school staff are under immense pressure to raise standards of pupil attainment while being highly effective in planning, delivery and assessing progress. Our middle leaders have encouraged a definite ‘I can’ culture within our school and lead this by example. There are numerous publications which state that an achievement culture or success culture

are developing and proving successful in schools making significant progress (e.g. DfES, 2007). Fleming & Amesbury (2001) believe motivating people and building a collaborative team ethos are at the core to effective management. This coupled with an ‘I can’ culture provides our school with a very strong foundation for enhanced performance. Our middle leaders, and those identified to develop these roles within our school, assume multilayered roles which provide a driving force for improvement in pupil outcomes which simultaneously lifts our school’s delivery of enhanced pupil outcomes (RAISEonline – CVA 2009 Validated). The middle managers provide an excellent sounding board for new ideas, changes and trials in our continual search for whole-school improvement. Being a middle manager enables the process of managing performance to be shared and, as an integrated approach to our underlying performance management cycle, values the contributions made by all. Finally, the drawing together of the staffing structure through these multi-layered leaders ensures our consistency in making sound judgements against tracked assessment data, the analysis of data readily informing action and the school directing its resources towards needs with greater efficiency – culminating in an effective team performance.

Conclusion Twenty-first century learning and teaching place new challenges on teaching and non-teaching staff teams which in turn demand a reflection on how individual performance, whether it be pupil or staffing, is measured. This developing role of teachers in preparing our pupils for an ever changing world requires an adaptable and flexible approach in managing (Dean, 2002). The management of performance within a school must be seen as a collaborative task, integral to the processes and systems established and continually being developed (Reeves et al., 2002). Complacent performance management needs to be driven out and replaced with a more robust and rigorous system of managing performance (Armstrong, 2006). The emphasis on words being manipulated within this context (i.e. performance management or managing performance) underlines the requirement that the process is clearly planned. Becoming an outstanding school does not happen of its own accord and does not necessarily depend on the catchment of your school; there are many factors which contribute to this and the effective management of performance is clearly one of them. The raising of pupil outcomes should be a high priority within all schools. Ensuring this happens successfully requires the performance management system to be integral to the organisation of the school and its development planning. As a result, both staff time and school resourcing can be more efficiently deployed providing a school with greater value for money in tandem with higher standards of achievement, thus ultimately achieving an outstanding provision for all. Note 1. RAISEonline (Department for Education) provides interactive analysis of school and pupil performance data. (Prior to its

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


14

Management in Education 25(1) introduction schools utilised the Ofsted Performance and Assessment (PANDA) reports and Pupil Achievement Tracker (PAT).)

References Armstrong, M. (2006) A Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice, 10th edn. London: Kogan Page. Bubb, S. & Hoare, P. (2001) Performance Management. Monitoring Teaching in the Primary School. London: David Fulton. DCSF (2009) Your Child, Your Schools, Our Future: Building a 21st Century Schools System, Cm 7588. London: TSO. Dean, J. (2002) Implementing Performance Management: A Handbook for Schools. London: RoutledgeFalmer. DfES (2007) Making Great Progress. Schools with Outstanding Rates of Progression in Key Stage 2. Nottingham: DfES Publications. Fleming, P. & Amesbury, M. (2001) The Art of Middle Management in Primary Schools: A Guide to Effective Subject, Year and Team Leadership. London: David Fulton. Gelsthorpe, T. & West-Burnham, J. (2003) Educational Leadership and the Community: Strategies for Schools Improvement. London: Pearson Education. Ofsted (2009) Characteristics of Outstanding Primary Schools in Challenging Circumstances. Available at: http://ofsted.gov.uk/ content/download/10132/116634/file/20ops_2_characteristics. pdf Quigley, C. (2008) Making Good Teaching Great. Gateshead: Chris Quigley Education.

Quigley, C. (2009a) The Complete Guide to Ofsted and SelfEvaluation Framework 2009. Gateshead: Chris Quigley Education. Quigley, C. (2009b) Inspecting Teaching, Learning and Assessment Conference. Conference handouts and notes. Reeves, J., Forde, C., O’Brien, J., Smith, P. & Tomlinson, H. (2002) Performance Management in Education: Improving Practice. London: Sage. Southworth, G. (2004) Leadership in Context. Leading Small, Medium and Large Sized Schools. London: RoutledgeFalmer. Spillane, J. P., Halverson, R. & Diamond, J. B. (2001) ‘Investigating school leadership practice: a distributed perspective’. Educational Researcher, 30(3), 23–8. Stoll, L., Bolam, R. R., McMahon, A., Thomas, S., Wallace, M., Greenwood, A. & Hawksey, K. (2006) Professional Learning Communities: Source Materials for School Leaders and Other Leaders of Professional Learning. London: Innovation Unit, NCSL, DfES and GTCe. TDA (2007) Teachers and Head Teachers Performance Management Guidance. London: TDA. Webb, R. (2006) Changing Teaching and Learning in the Primary School. Maidenhead: Open University Press. West-Burnham, J. (2008) Leadership for Personalising Learning. Nottingham: NCSL.

Biography Sam Morton is head teacher of St Mary & St John C.E.V.A. Primary School, North Luffenham, Rutland.

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


Management in Education http://mie.sagepub.com/

Book review: Martin Fautley and Jonathan Savage Achieving QTS: Meeting the Professional Standards Framework: Secondary Education Reflective Reader (Exeter: Learning Matters, 2010) ISBN: 1844454730 David Wells Management in Education 2011 25: 42 DOI: 10.1177/0892020610390170 The online version of this article can be found at: http://mie.sagepub.com/content/25/1/42.1.citation

Published by: http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

British Educational Leadership, Management & Administration Society

Additional services and information for Management in Education can be found at: Email Alerts: http://mie.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://mie.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

>> Version of Record - Jan 31, 2011 What is This?

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011


MiE Management in Education 25(1) 42–43 ª 2011 British Educational Leadership, Management & Administration Society (BELMAS) Reprints and permission: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav mie.sagepub.com

Book reviews

Reviewed by: David Wells, Senior Lecturer, Secondary ITT ICT, University of East London Martin Fautley and Jonathan Savage Achieving QTS: Meeting the Professional Standards Framework: Secondary Education Reflective Reader (Exeter: Learning Matters, 2010) ISBN: 1844454730 DOI: 10.1177/0892020610390170

The book being reviewed here is Achieving QTS: Meeting the Professional Standards Framework: Secondary Education Reflective Reader. It is a first edition publication, published in August 2010. The book is aimed predominantly at beginning teachers. However, it is also of considerable use to practising teachers wishing to re-explore useful pedagogy and advice for reflective guidance and success in their classroom. The authors are, Martin Fautley, Professor of Education at Birmingham City University, and Jonathan Savage, a Reader in Education at the Institute of Education, Manchester Metropolitan University. Both have authored numerous books and publications designed to assist teachers with the diverse theoretical and practical approaches they can adopt to improve the learning within their classroom. There is a logical flow to the content of this publication. The chapters are structured around three key themes identified by the authors. Theme 1 centres on starting teaching, developing a teacher identity and considering subject and pedagogy; theme 2 is concerned with developing the teaching; and theme 3 concentrates on future teaching practice. Each theme contains three separate chapters allowing for a full and comprehensive development of the topics being considered. Within each chapter, many challenges for the novice teacher in developing their practice are clearly presented. There is also considerable allowance for the more experienced teacher either to revisit theory and pedagogy and place concepts they use in the classroom alongside the theorists who develop and write about them, or to re-galvanise their teaching and learning approach with theories and pedagogy that can be applied (with relative ease) in their lessons. A wide range of academic extracts are used from many different educational writers and theorists, allowing for a balanced approach to reading and the development of reflective understanding. These readings are clearly and succinctly analysed and explained by the authors. This approach perhaps lends itself to an easier and smoother transition in applying understanding of the academic extracts to a teaching and learning approach in the classroom. Furthermore, the extracts provide the reader with a very clear direction into further investigation of the chapter topic areas should they wish. What has proved particularly significant to me from reading this

publication is its consideration of the concept of professional knowledge for a teacher and the lack of pedagogy perhaps being a part of that. This is an area that is clearly fundamental in the progression of effective teaching and learning, but is all too often overlooked by the practising teacher. There is plenty to be gained from this book to challenge, motivate and encourage the use of this pedagogy. Importantly, it also provides the tools to experiment and apply concepts (that will progress teaching and learning) in the classroom for the discerning educator. However, this book is not only useful for trainee or practising teachers. For those involved in the mentoring and training of teachers, there is much to assist in these processes, and the book would prove a very practical tool in encouraging reading and understanding of theory and pedagogy from students. It also perhaps provides a very clear framework for the development of initial teacher training courses. In conclusion, this book covers many significant areas needed in developing (and reflecting on) a teacher’s expertise in their relevant learning space. It is easy to read and follow, but also challenges ways of thinking and the impact of one’s approach to learning and teaching in the classroom, thus perhaps making it ideal for the novice and beginning teacher. It provides some very useful and focused reflective exercises throughout each chapter. There is also a clear opportunity for further reading through the academic extracts used. The chapters are clearly laid out and I appreciate the way they are structured ‘as a lesson’ with clear learning objectives that are linked to the professional QTS standards. A teacher should be reflective in their approach and should encourage their pupils to be reflective in their learning. This book provides an excellent opportunity to consider how and why, while also providing some ammunition to improve the teaching and learning that takes place in the classroom.

Reviewed by: Jenny Barksfield, PSHE Education Consultant, CSN Consultancy, Esse

Nick Boddington and Adrian King, Real Health for Real Lives 15–16 (Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes, 2010) ISBN: 978-1-4085-0248-8 DOI: 10.1177/0892020610390183

Nick Boddington and Adrian King are well-placed to write the definitive text for PSHE education (PSHEe) subject leads and teachers. Nick Boddington is the PSHE Association’s

Downloaded from mie.sagepub.com at HINARI on October 4, 2011

Managment in Education 2011-1 sar  

What is This? Jenny Barksfield Published by: - Jan 31, 2011VersionofRecord>> The online version of this article can be found at: On be...

Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you