The governing bodies of publicly funded schools in England are currently facing a number of substantive challenges of various kinds. Many of the challenges are long-standing, while others relate to the current context for governing wrought by recent education policy developments initiated by central government. A number of the challenges are immediate and intense, and may well develop over time. The challenges result from both policy imperatives and the challenge of governing effectively – procedural imperatives. The intention of this article is to analyse the challenges facing governing bodies in England. We argue that the challenges interact and synergize and could develop into ‘a perfect storm’, which could have significant implications for the security and stability of the education system and for society generally. Our thinking is shaped by the notion of interactive governance (Kooiman, 2003), which posits that the workings of the school governance network, of which school governing is a part, is best understood in terms of interactions. Following this introduction, we provide some background information for those not familiar with the school governing system in England. We then very briefly describe the three research projects in which we have been involved that form the empirical base for the article (Balarin et al., 2008; James et al., 2010, 2012, 2013). The challenges facing governing bodies are considered under the headings: school governing’s low profile; the institution and the environment; accountability; and the role and the responsibility of school governing bodies. The way these different challenges interconnect and add together is discussed in the penultimate section. In the final section, we make some concluding comments.

The research reported here analysed the role of the chair of the school governing body in England, drawing on a national survey of governors and the study of governing in 30 schools. The role encompassed: being a governor; appointing and working with the head teacher; acting as a change agent; active participation in the school; organising the governing body; dealing with complaints; working with parents; and chairing meetings. We discuss the role and the way it is experienced and conclude that the position of chair is substantially under-played; given insufficient status; and is a significant educational and community leadership responsibility.

No abstract

This article reports research into the nature and functioning of school governing bodies in different socio-economic and performance contexts. The research analysed 5000 responses from a national questionnaire-based survey and undertook 30 case studies of school governing. The research confirmed that school governing in England is a complex and onerous responsibility that places governing bodies under considerable pressure. The socio-economic and performance contexts can be particularly demanding additional pressures. Governing bodies interact with those contexts in a complex way which we explain using the notions of governance capital and governance agency. Governance capital is the network of individuals and their capabilities, relationships and motivations that are available for the governing of a school. It is likely to be greater for schools that: are well regarded; are in high socio-economic status settings; and have high levels of pupil attainment. These effects may add and mutually reinforce creating an 'amplifier effect', which may significantly impact on the governing of a school. Governance agency is the capacity of those involved in the governing of a school to act. It is significant; can ameliorate the effects of low governance capital; and complicates the relationship between governing, performance and socio-economic context.

Ten years ago, many policymakers viewed the reform of teacher evaluation as a highly promising mechanism to improve teacher effectiveness and student achievement. Recently, that enthusiasm has dimmed as the available evidence suggests the subsequent reforms had a mixed record of implementation and efficacy. Even in districts where there was evidence of efficacy, the early promise of teacher evaluation may not sustain as these systems mature and change. This study examines the evolving design of IMPACT, the teacher evaluation system in the District of Columbia Public Schools (DCPS). We describe the recent changes to IMPACT which include higher performance standards for lower-performing teachers and a reduced emphasis on value-added test scores. Descriptive evidence on the dynamics of teacher retention and performance under this redesigned system indicate that lower-performing teachers are particularly likely to either leave or improve. Corresponding causal evidence similarly indicates that imminent dismissal threats for persistently low-performing teachers increased both teacher attrition and the performance of returning teachers. These findings suggest teacher evaluation can provide a sustained mechanism for improving the quality of teaching.