Schools 'timebomb' as 55% of heads near retirement | News crumb | EducationGuardian.co.uk
The poll, by Mori, reported that 28% of people felt that only teachers should be promoted in the job of heads, but 65% suggested people in other professions and jobs could run schools. One in seven said business leaders would be qualified, one in 10 suggested police officers and 8% said military officers.
Oh god I can just imagine that
Last edited by somabc; 19th June 2008 at 11:43 AM.
I've been saying for a long time that this is the way forward. I can see no reason why the head of a school needs teaching experience since most of the job is non-teaching tasks. The most sensible thing to do would be to appoint a business expert with excellent managerial skills that can then work with a team of financial and teaching deputies to achieve the best academically and financially from the school.
This is in no way my way of saying a teacher is a poor manager... simply that their chosen career hasn't necessarily prepared them as project managers and keen finance managers. Likewise, I would not expect a non-teacher to know anything about the academic side of things. Hence the suggestion that teachers and non-teachers work together.
I wouldn't mind a commerical business manager coming in and running a school. Might stop the insane amount of money we waste on stupid junk.
Indeed. There is still a place for a head TEACHER to manage all aspects of T&L and teaching staff matters but these days the school needs skilled business managers with, as Ric pointed out, skills in project management, finance, planning, man management. Simply being an academic these days isn't cutting the mustard. Perhaps they should consider creaming off the best (most capable\able) teachers 15 years into the profession and sending them off on full time management degrees as a separate career path?
I think in the states they operate with a rolle split, where there is a head to run the physical school and and a head to run the teaching and learning.
Most SMT if picked up and put in a business wouldn't have a clue what to do so why should they be able to run a school with a multi million pound budget.
Do to a lack of business thinking SMT can waste a massive amount of the school budget.
If the government wanted to reduce the spending in schools, they should stipulate that there is business manager with commercial background in every school and when things are purchase people provide a business case.
I have no problem with non-teaching head teachers. Most of what they do is "business management" these days.
If you work in the independent sector, you will already be used to having a Bursar/Headteacher system where the Bursar is responsible for control of the business side of the school and the HT looks after the teaching issues. At my school the two work as a partnership and it works very well.
elsiegee40 which in some case's is good, although depends on the Bursar and whether their management skills are any good.
There used to be a time when a teacher who had reached the top of the (teaching) tree was expected to apply for a management role, and this may still exist to a lesser extent. This usually meant that your best teachers were lost from the classroom. Running a school and managing the budget, as well as seeing that the curriculum is delivered is very time consuming, and I feel that splitting the roles is a good idea.
I completely agree with the idea, schools should be run mainly by a manager not a teacher. Splitting the roles is good in principle but you still need to employ the right manager. One say who has just left the army and hasn't adjusted to civi lifestyle is not a good choice.
Oh I don't know? Maybe that would sort schools out a bit. Look on the bright side, if the ex miltary officers did not get the job, you could end up with a politician who has lost his 'seat'!
They tried that in the 1950s when demobbed from the 2nd World War, and they used teachers who could shout the loudest and use physical force to keep order. Wasn't too successful then as teachers tended to be either cruel or stupid (or both)
This (excellent) film covers the period very well.
Quatre cents coups, Les (1959)
Last edited by somabc; 19th June 2008 at 03:00 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)