Who governs the governors?
Governing bodies play an important part in the life of a school. An effective governing body usually entails an effective school. Andrew Maiden advises regular reviews of governance procedures to keep standards high
Many governing bodies work in isolation. It is important for schools to take the time to review the effectiveness of their governing body. After all, just because things have been done in a particular way at the school for years doesn’t necessarily mean that it represents good practice.
The governing body that thinks it knows it all is complacent and will fail the school. Headteachers and bursars who are happy with an unquestioning body should be concerned that the school management risks being less effective than it could be. Governors who ask questions will help keep heads and bursars on their toes and prevent them from becoming complacent too.
Regular reviews
As a matter of course, it is important to regularly appraise your governing body. Some of the net benefits of a performance review are that governors can:
• develop as a team with shared goals, albeit with different skills and contributions;
• voice concerns about how they operate and resolve them;
• reflect on their joint strengths and weaknesses (and seek how to overcome the weaknesses); and
• prioritise future activities and renew their commitment to the school.
The gentle touch
Reviews can be most effective when they are regularly timetabled. Thrusting a review onto your governing body without warning can create alarm and anger. It is best to introduce the idea gently by beginning with informal reviews of each meeting. The chair should ask questions such as:
• did the agenda cover all matters?
• was each agenda item dealt with properly?
• did governors concentrate on policy decisions and avoid being drawn into management issues?
• how effective was the governing body in covering the agenda as a team? and
• were governors provided with the appropriate information prior to the meeting to help them make informed decisions?
When setting up a review, there are several key considerations:
• the review is evolutionary and should not be measured by a static checklist;
• the review process itself should also be evolutionary, reflecting the school’s character and future plans;
• the headteacher and bursar both ought to be involved in the review as the effectiveness or otherwise of the governing body impacts on both of them; and
• initial reviews should be of the governing body as a whole. Future reviews could be of individual governors, considering any areas of help they may require.
Looking forwards
Some of the objectives a typical governing body might agree include:
• improvement of background information to items on the agenda;
• introduction of new or temporary governors with a specialist background to support specific projects;
• simplification of management and financial data presented at the meeting;
• agreement of tools to measure the effectiveness of school management;
• consideration of the governance structure and, if necessary, revision of the governing instruments;
• clarification of the authorities delegated to sub-committees;
• introduction of a day away from school premises to develop long-term strategies; and
• reduction of standard running times for meetings.
Once the idea of a review has been accepted and absorbed into the running of the school, governors will respond positively as it will clarify to them their own and collective roles and, at the same time, make them feel valued.
Andrew Maiden is the editor of Funding for Independent Schools. He is the former chair of finance and parent governor of a Warwickshire school.
Return to Governance
