Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Haringey schools to get a substantial increase in funding from 2013/14
The government today announced that Haringey will be treated as an inner London borough for the purposes of mandatory teachers pay, which will bring it in line with neighbours such as Camden, Hackney and Islington. Haringey has been legally required to pay its teachers inner London salaries even though it receives outer London funding. Our schools are now set to benefit from substantial additional funding from 2013/14. In Hackney, they receive £1500 more per pupil per year, than we do in Haringey.
More on the story from The Journal, here.
Tags for Forum Posts: fair_funding_for_haringey, schools
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by David Barry on
-
Intriguing question. (The one about the union)
I never have any dealings with the NUT at all. Consequently I am aware of no influence, except that being subject to scrutiny by a union representative would help to ensure that we followed any competency procedures correctly, and justly.
Of course one has to deal with under performing teachers from time to time, but in all our discussions in the personnel committee I dont recall a union being mentioned, other than a comment that someone has sought/is seeking advice from the union, which is regarded as proper and actually more likely to stop things getting complicated.
How significant are Governors?
Well its really a case of appointing the right Head.
And what goes with that is being willing to take decisive action if the Head is not right. Tragically, a good Head may cease to be so for all sorts of reasons. Its a really stressful, difficult job and only an exceptional person can do it This is a bad thing as that makes Heads hard to find, and fewer people are willing to do it.
The Downhills Head was highly regarded in his profession, and I have heard his fate quoted recently by an Islington Deputy Head as being a reason why she might not wish to seek promotion to Head herself...
-
-
-
The element of "Audit Function" carried out by Ofsted is a crucial part of the system, as when it works properly it provides an outside view free from the vested interests of the staff, the Governing Body and the Local Authority. However there is a repeated suspicion that from time to time OfSted verdicts are arrived at in a way convenient to the government of the day -that Ofsted is sometimes subject to political influence.
See for example
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islington_Green_School
and
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1262812/Baby-P-report-Sharo...
And of course we have the Downhills case. The facts as I understand them are that having received a notice to improve following an Ofsted inspection in January 2011, Downhills had a satisfactory monitoring visit in September 2011, where the inspector noted “a clear trend of improvement”. The Secretary of State, Michael Gove, then announced that this school, amongst others, was sufficiently unsatisfactory to require conversion to Academy Status. The school challenged this pointing out the recent history of improvement, and asked for a special OFSTED inspection which they anticipated would vindicate their judgement.
As we all know Downhills Primary School was placed in special measures following an Ofsted inspection of the school on 26th and 27th January 2012.
In fact OFSTED inspections should be as independent and seen as independent as any judicial investigation, or indeed any statutory audit under the Companies Act. In this regard recent statements by the new Head of Ofsted rather concern me.....
-
-
The point of a school going into special measures is to get it out again as soon as possible. When it went into special measures in the mid 2000s it will have had special help and assistance from Haringey. Do you happen to know if it had an IEB as well? Sometimes when a school comes out, helped by the special help it has had, there is a wobble. That might well have happened in the Downhills case, and they got their notice to improve in January last year, but in September they were visited again and the trend seemed to be in the right direction. Things could have started to go down hill again (no pun intended) but it seems odd that they could go from notice to improve, to clear signs of improvement to special measures. From signs of improvement to special measures in such a short time....possible, of course, but strange. A happy outcome for Mr Gove though.
-
-
-
When a school is put into "special measures" the Local Authority has a duty to help the school improve. Obviously it would be expected to look in detail at the report and consider the Governing Body's response to it. In a lot, but not all cases, a school that is put into special measures normally has an underperforming Head, and often, related to that, an underperforming Governing Body. Of course if the Head has only been there a short time, like the Downhills Head, they may be regarded as part of the solution and not a problem...
If the LEA thinks the Governing Body is up to the task of driving the school improvement required (which is obviously a much more onerous task than keeping a school going that is basically OK, although improvement always possible -which is where most schools really are-) then it will provide extra help and support, with for example, LEA officers attending all GB meetings and giving advice. Even drafting papers for the GB's consideration.
-
-
if the LEA does not think the Governing Body is up to the task then it is allowed, once a school is in special measures, and if it sees fit, to replace the Governing Body with and "Interim Executive Board".
This has three related characteristics, it is normally much smaller, five or six persons, they are appointed for their expertise and not their representative character, and they can be, and I believe usually are, paid. Unlike school governors who are part time volunteers who may not be paid. The LEA can only appoint an IEB with the consent of the Secretary of State. (The purpose of that provision was to protect Governing Bodies from interference by Local Authorities, by way of over enthusiastic use of this provision) Up until now IEB's were always appointed by the Local Authority but the Secretary of State has always had the power, after consulting the LEA to do it himself. The purpose of that provision would have been to insure that the LEA did not shirk its duty, for if it did the Secretary of State would step in. In the Downhills case Mr Gove has chosen to appoint the IEB himself and not leave it to Haringey which would have been the usual course of action.
-
-
The performance of an IEB is subject to inspection by OFSTED which would therefore be usually assessing the effectiveness of the IEB in turning the school around, appointing a new Headmaster if required and so forth, while not having had any role in appointing it. So the inspection independent. Whether any issues arise where you have OFSTED which is accountable to the Secretary of State assessing the performance of an IEB also appointed by, and accountable to the Secretary of State is an interesting question. Not one that usually comes up.
-
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
