System Leadership for Educational Renewal in England: The Case of Federations and Executive Heads

Abstract

Executive heads are those head teachers in England who lead two or more schools that have entered into a federation. One of the more common forms of federations involves a lead school working to improve a partner school (or schools). The executive heads of these federations, and their wider leadership teams, constitute one of an emerging set of practices in England that we refer to as system leadership, or as working for the success and welfare of students in other schools as well as one's own. There is to date only a small and emerging research literature and thus no well-developed analysis on how these roles are being organised. In contributing to this literature, this paper elaborates the concepts of support federations and system leadership in three main ways. First, it explores the historical and policy contexts out of which these roles have developed. Second, it analyses not only how such roles are being undertaken but also what forms of expertise and capacity are mobilised in the pursuit of another school's improvement. Third, it considers how these leadership roles might provide alternative solutions to problems that have traditionally been the responsibility and preserve of the central apparatus of the state. We conclude by arguing that professionally-led system leadership offers a means for self-managed schools, emerging from an era of competition, to work together for greater social equity by, among other things, taking joint responsibility for all the students in their locality. This is seen to have relevance not only for England but for Australia as well.

Strategic narrative in multi‐academy trusts in England: Principal drivers for expansion

“…These reforms increased under the Coalition Administration which came to power in 2010, giving rise to unprecedented and untested change in education in England. They are reflected in the erosion of the power of Local Education Authorities (LAs) (Lawn et al ., ), increasing curricular and financial freedoms for schools in the shape of free schools and academies (Higham & Hopkins, ) and raising the bar for inspection and regulation of schools (Baxter, ).…”

Governing collaborations: how boards engage with their communities in multi-academy trusts in England

“…Whilst these changes are confined to the English system only, (education is a devolved service in the UK), the policy has manifested in rapid and, many argue, unsustainable changes to the system, (see for example: Editorial, 2016) leading it to be anecdotally nicknamed 'the educational lab of Europe'. The reforms, publicly premised on the idea of increasing public value in education, have consisted of the removal of power from many Local Authorities (LAs), (Authors , 2016) and increasing school freedoms in the shape of free schools and academies (Higham and Hopkins 2007), whilst also raising the bar in the high stakes inspection and regulation of schools (Authors et al 2015).…”

School federation governing

“…The 2010 White Paper and Academies Act followed swiftly by the 2011 Education Act, enhanced school autonomies, encouraging more of them to convert to independent but state funded academies or free schools (DfE, 2010; Parliament, 2010, 2011a). These freedoms have been accompanied by a diminution in the role and support of Local Education Authorities, leading to an increase in schools joining together to share administrative and pedagogical support services and implying profound shifts in the ways of leadership and management of schools (Higham and Hopkins, 2007).…”

“…Within this model governors are faced with the challenges of carrying out the responsibilities of the governing body role alongside the challenges of governing all schools within the federation whilst also collaborating with any individual school advisory bodies (DfE, 2013). Whilst there is evidence that this model of leadership has substantial potential, (Chapman et al, 2011; Higham and Hopkins, 2007), recent work in this area also suggests considerable challenges inherent within this form of governing (DfE, 2013).…”