Heads with a non Teaching background may be employed

[somabc]

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

Edited June 19, 2008 by somabc

[SteveT]

Network Managers??????

[Ric_]

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.

[Geoff]

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.

[Dos_Box]

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?

[dhicks]

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 rather figure you want to keep your best teachers where they work best - teaching! Management shouldn't be seen as a "better" (or better paid) job than any other - a managers job should be to take care of all the stuff that needs sorting out so that the other people in the school (i.e. teachers) can do their job.

 

--

David Hicks

[penfold_99]

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.

[elsiegee40]

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.

[dave.81]

elsiegee40 which in some case's is good, although depends on the Bursar and whether their management skills are any good.

[beeswax]

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.

[elsiegee40]

elsiegee40 which in some case's is good, although depends on the Bursar and whether their management skills are any good.

 

Tell me about it. The first Bursar I worked for here was !

 

Fortunately, she retired. The current one is a huge improvement.

 

But being a teacher doesn't make you a good man-manager. A teacher could be just as bad at the top of a school!

[dave.81]

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.

[Polski]

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'!

[somabc]

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)

Edited June 19, 2008 by somabc

[Dos_Box]

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.

 

Hmmm. Why not? Are you ex forces or do you just carry the same assumption that forces management is all shouting and 'do as I say, NOW and no questions!!'?

[GrumbleDook]

It is something I have looked into as part of my long term prospects.

 

Programs such s the Certificate of School Business Management and the subsequent Diploma are geared towards preparing associate staff to be Senior Leaders in schools (equivalent of Asst Head or Dep Head). It will not be long before this is seen as commonplace rather than the exception.

 

With me out for a year we are back to one member of SLT not being a teacher ... but the emphasis is having a balance of skills across the whole team.

 

Should a Head not be a qualified teacher then they would need a strong SLT/SMT. Personally I reckon we will see a handful within the next 5 years. Some deputies that are not teachers have done their NPQH and are ready to roll ... possibly taking headship of a federated school to gain experience, possibly on one of the mentoring programs that are going around at the moment.

 

And yes ... some of these could come from a technical background in the future. There are around 20 people working at Asst Head level that I am aware of that have come from a technical background ... for some it might be a natural progression, others may have to get experience elsewhere then come back to schools.

[GrumbleDook]

Hmmm. Why not? Are you ex forces or do you just carry the same assumption that forces management is all shouting and 'do as I say, NOW and no questions!!'?

 

You mean it isn't?

 

Damn ... I knew I was doing something wrong ;-)

[somabc]

Hmmm. Why not? Are you ex forces or do you just carry the same assumption that forces management is all shouting and 'do as I say, NOW and no questions!!'?

 

I'm sure this is not fair to everyone in the Armed Forces but that is exactly how they come across when I have had to work with people just out of the forces and into a management role. When I tried to have discussion about how best to implement something or made suggestions, you could just see their fury that you were questioning their decision. Will they have the soft skills necessary?

[Dos_Box]

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.

 

This (excellent) film covers the period very well.

Quatre cents coups, Les (1959)

 

Considering almost all male adults (40 and below) had to serve in the forces it is pretty much assured that almost ALL new (and not so new) teachers served and

fought during WWII. I read over a lot of forums and most people speak of great fondness about how the best teachers they had up until the late 70's were former servicemen. Lets face it, there are a lot of bullying shouty types in teaching who have never seen a uniform or discipline in their lives currently delivering the curriculum or in senior school management positions.

Most servicemen (and women) have managed and led people in far more pressured environments than a school for many years and in all areas from instruction to finance, project management and logistics. The days of the knuckle dragging forces manager (be it office or NCO) are long gone. Yes, some do get into positions of authority they should not, but that is the same for all walks of life. Promotion in the forces is far, far harder then civilian promotion, where a set of quals and a good interview win the day every aspect of your life, both in, and out of work is taken into consideration. I know people who spent 22 years in the army and made SGT who now earn 120k+ per annum as project managers in the city such is the demand for their skills and personal abilities.

[Dos_Box]

I'm sure this is not fair to everyone in the Armed Forces but that is exactly how they come across when I have had to work with people just out of the forces and into a management role. When I tried to have discussion about how best to implement something or made suggestions, you could just see their fury that you were questioning their decision. Will they have the soft skills necessary?

 

You could ask Grumbledook and myself

[GrumbleDook]

You could ask Grumbledook and myself

 

I tend to joke with students and staff when they find out I did 3 years in the army. I point out that I originally trained as Military Police and worked as Regimental Police for 2 years before coming out due to a dodgy knee. I then explain that I used to be paid to shout loudly and be horrible to people for a living ... and I came to work in schools for a quiet life.

 

In reality, most of what happens in the army as an NCO is about ensuring that orders are understood (to some soldiers this involves a lot of instruction), ensuring that orders are followed correctly (quality assurance) and that orders are correct in the first place (project planning and management).

 

The stumbling block that some ex-forces find in schools (and life in general) is that they are used to people following orders based on the idea that the person who is in charge of you is not telling you to do something and expecting a discussion ... there are times when you should just accept that you have to do as your are told because someone else sees the bigger picture. Those good NCOs are the ones that can explain the bigger picture without having to sit you down ... so you do roll with it all.

 

In schools the general push is to allow students to understand what they are learning and why ... so that they get used to the idea of someone asking them to learn something or do something and they grasp it quickly and progress.

 

Good NCOs and very similar to good teachers. It is just a shame that there are examples of both being absolutely rubbish.

[dave.81]

Hmmm. Why not? Are you ex forces or do you just carry the same assumption that forces management is all shouting and 'do as I say, NOW and no questions!!'?

 

I'll answer this before it ends up in misunderstanding... I have dealt with ex forces who have been brilliant managers and really nice people in general but i was just using it as an example to someone who i might still work with who hasn't realised he's not in the army now and his attitude doesn't work well in everyday life.

[ChrisN-0123]

I think this is a great idea too. Maybe support staff will be more reconised then as well.

[Sylv3r]

I used to have an article that was about the first member of the support staff becoming a headteacher. I think they were a School Manager / Bursar beforehand.

 

As has been said in a lot of the previous articles a teaching degree is no longer essential to becoming a headteacher.

[Paul_L]

This is nothing new as far as I am concerned!

 

One of our local schools has for sometime had a head 'from a none teaching background'