Religion and Worldviews: The Way Forwards?

The Commission on Religious Education Chaired by Dr. John Hall, Dean of Westminster has published its report, Religion and Worldviews: The Way Forwards. Governors would do well to reflect on its proposals, which, if adopted by the DfE would involve substantial changes to the way in which Religious Education is taught in schools and academies. I am RE link governor in a LA maintained secondary school.

In many ways the report is a solid piece of work, surveying the state of Religious Education in a fast changing educational environment. Put simply, the subject is in decline. The figures cited on p. 10 of the report tell their own story. The total number of RE GCSE entries has dropped from 425,000 in 2010 to 255,000 in 2018. In part the decline is due to the near extinction of the short course RE GCSE, for which many secondary schools used enter their students with a nod to locally agreed SACRE requirements. In 2010 there were 255,000 entries, now 26,000. The increased take up of the full course has in no way compensated for the flight from short course entries.

The life was choked out of the short course RE GCSE because the qualification barley registered on schools' Key Stage 4 performance measure tables. That was the Department for Education's doing. Neither is RE included in the EBacc group of subjects, meaning it has to jostle for students' attention alongside a plethora of diverse options in the Attainment 8 'Other Element'. The government's academisation programme hasn't helped. Academies don't feel especially bound to follow the SACRE syllabus agreed by Local Authorities. According to the report, many academies don't teach RE at Key Stages 3 or 4 (see p. 8). On that basis it is proposed that a National Entitlement to a Study of 'Religion and Worldviews' replaces the current locally-based system. 

Things have certainly changed since the 1944 Education Act mandated the teaching of Religious Instruction in all schools. And that meant the study of the Christian faith, irrespective of whether or not a school was denominational in character. The report notes that the UK has seen massive demographic changes in the period following the Second World War. Not to mention huge shifts in religious adherence and social attitudes. With this in mind, the subject has for many years taken a multi-faith approach, with Islam, Buddhism and other world religions being taught alongside Chrristianity. Now, the report argues, RE must evolve still further in order to reflect the contemporary situation. 

Note the title of the report, Religion and Worldviews. It is proposed that 'worldviews' such as  secularism and atheism, should be included in the RE syllabus alongside religious beliefs and practices. In a way this is a welcome development, underlining that secularism is not a neutral norm, but a belief system with its own set of presuppositions that should be subject to the same critical scrutiny as religious beliefs. 

But there are nevertheless concerns with the 'Religion and Worldviews' approach. One is that Religious Education is struggling for curriculum space as it is. If the subject is also to cover non-religious outlooks in some detail as well, the time devoted to studying religious faith will diminish still further. It could be argued that virtually every other subject on the curriculum is taught from a secular standpoint. Does God get a mention in Science lessons? Is History interpreted as the unfolding story of God's providential action? Do Geography teachers tell their students, 'The earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof'? Um, no. Not unless we're talking about a school with a dedicated Christian ethos. Humanists UK and the National Secular Society have welcomed the report. Well, they would, wouldn't they?

Besides, if students are going to understand life in modern Britain and where our most cherished values come from, they are going to need a solid grasp of the Christian faith. Secularism often piggy-backs on historic Christian teachings, while at the same time dissing the piggy. Ideas such as the unique value of each individual human being, and the notion of universally applicable human rights are rooted in the biblical teaching on human beings created in the image of God. Historian Tom Holland is currently working on a book that explores the Christian foundations of Western culture (see his article in the New Statesman on Why I was wrong about Christianity. Note also David Bentley Hart's Atheist Delusions: The Christian Faith and its Fashionable Enemies. Contemporary Western secularism cannot be understood unless it is set against the backdrop of a culture that has been permeated by Christianity.  

You would not have guessed this from the report, which is something of a lacuna, given that the commission that produced it was chaired by a high up Anglican ecclesiastic. I fully understand that Religious Education is not theology, which is my academic discipline. Theology proceeds from a position of faith in God's self-revelation seeking understanding. RE attempts to help schoolchildren understand various religious (and non-religious) beliefs and practices, without stipulating that any one of them is true. But that does not mean all belief systems are worthy of equal attention in terms of enabling students appreciate their own history and culture.

The commission's approach signals a move away from the stance of the Education Act 1996, which says that RE should "reflect the fact that the religious traditions in Great Britain are in the main Christian, while taking account of the teaching and practices of other principal religions represented in Great Britain." In line with that, the Agreed RE Curriculum for Wiltshire aims to develop pupils' "knowledge and understanding of, and their ability to respond to, Christianity, other principal world religions, other religious traditions and world views". That seems about right to me. 

Where Christianity is mentioned in the report, which is rarely, it tends to be in the context of the numerical decline of the faith in the UK. This is used to justify a greater emphasis being given to other faiths and worldviews. The decline of Christianity is an undeniable fact, borne out by the latest social attitudes survey (here). But the figures need a bit of unpicking. Where churches have embraced theological liberalism, attendance is dwindling. More evangelical churches that hold to traditional Christian beliefs and values are growing, albeit slowly. It is certainly not the case that the world as a whole is becoming more secular. Christianity is the world's largest faith and is continuing to advance across the world, even in Europe (here).

Christianity of an evangelical stamp is growing exponentially. In Mexico, to give one example from South America, evangelicals have grown from 2.1% of the population (800,000) in 1960 to over 8%, numbering over nine million by 2010. In China the evangelical church has grown from 2.7 million in 1975 to over 75 million in 2010. (Figures from Operation World, 2010). There is a danger with the 'Religion and Worldviews' approach that students will be given a parochial vision of religious trends that downplays the importance of Christianity as a vibrant, global faith. 

By all means teach Islam and Buddhism, secularism and agnosticism, even. But let's not neglect to inform our children of the incalculable influence of Christianity on our nation's story. Even Richard Dawkins has argued that the Bible should be taught in schools, "European history...is incomprehensible without an understanding of...Christianity" (here). The writings of William Shakespeare, Jane Austen and Thomas Hardy are full of biblical allusions that can't be grasped unless one is on nodding acquaintance with Scripture. 

It's difficult to agree that the 'Religion and Worldviews' proposals outlined here will chart the way forwards for RE. For the way forwards to be clear students need to be given a sense of where we have come from in terms of our national history and culture, and also a sense of where the world is heading in terms of global religious trends. That's not going to happen if the Christian faith is reduced to a bit part in Religious Education. 

Having said all that, many of the report's recommendations are to be welcomed, including its proposals on ensuring all schoolchildren access a high quality a 'Religion and Worldviews' syllabus that is taught by knowledgeable professionals. Emma Knights of the National Governance Association has blogged on how governors should question senior leaders in their schools on 

• How are we meeting our statutory duty to teach RE?
• How are we supporting our RE teachers and extending their subject knowledge?

Meanwhile in LA Land

No, I haven't only just watched the blockbuster Hollywood musical. Saw that ages ago. Got to keep the wife happy with an occasional chick-flick. This is about education policy. You'll get no singing and dancing here. Anyway, that's La La Land. 

'You know what's wrong with schools?' asked Michael Gove, when he was Education Secretary, 'Local Authorities that's what. Schools need to be set free from the dead hand of council bureaucrats. Give 'em autonomy.' Yes, autonomy. Good schools could opt for it. Not so good schools would have it imposed on them by being taken over. Academisation was seen as a panacea for all educational ills. 

But, somewhat inconveniently, there is little evidence that already good schools were made any better by becoming academies. Even less that forced academisation was a force for good. For a panicky moment a couple of years back, it seemed like we were all going to have to embrace academised autonomy. Not singly, but in Multi Academy Trusts. Thankfully the Educational Excellence Everywhere white paper died the death, and the moment passed. Tidy, that, as while some MATs have done well, more than a few have failed, only to be taken over by other, er, MATs. 

Such has been the impact of the National and Regional School Commissioners who oversee the academy sector, that the DfE has deprived them of some key  powers. Not exactly a vote of confidence. Forced academisation has been dropped. NSC Sir David Carter announced his retirement a couple of weeks before Damian Hinds revealed these measures in a speech to the ASCL Conference. 

Many schools didn't see the advantage in becoming a stand-alone academy when that option was flavour of the month.. Maintained Foundation Schools enjoy a good deal of autonomy in relation to the LA, anyway. Why opt to join a big academy chain, and risk losing what makes your school distinctive? There is often little enthusiasm for forming local Community MATs, either. 

I doubt many LA schools have had to fend off any zombie-fingered interfering jobsworths from the council for a while. If at all. LAs monitor and support their schools, but don't try to run them. It's a myth to say that they do. But why shouldn't schools be held accountable to locally elected representatives?

Not so long ago it was in doubt whether LAs had a future at all in the world of education. But the DfE has signaled that statutory responsibility for improving outcomes in all schools and academies continues to rest with Local Authorities. LAs also remain responsible for safeguarding and provide valuable services such as payroll, HR and governor services.

In the maintained sector, governors are still governing their schools, not simply doing a bit of stakeholder engagement on behalf of a MAT board. Their Headteachers are busy making the board's vision for the school a reality, not having to look over his or her shoulder to see what a richly enumerated CEO wants them to do. 

The point about governors still governing in maintained schools (and stand alone academies) is worth reiterating. In MATs all powers of governance rest with the overarching board of trustees. Individual schools may have what is sometimes called 'Local Governing Boards', but they don't actually have any powers of governance. Whatever low level decision-making is delegated to LGBs by the MAT board may also be unilaterally withdrawn. As may their right to exist at all. Remember that, if your school is currently being courted by a MAT. Joining could be the last big strategic decision you make. 

A recent report by the London School of Economics revealed that LA schools have more freedom than academies. So much for autonomy. With apologies to Rousseau, "Schools were born free, but in MATs they are in chains". 

I'll admit that one advantage of MATs is collaboration across schools, but a joint effort to raise standards is not the preserve of Multi Academy Trusts. Collaboration in local clusters could be better, but it is happening and outcomes are improving. Around here, anyway. In the LA secondary school where I serve as a governor, our Progress 8 score is in the top 5% when 'contextual value added' factors are taken into account. 

We now have what is called a 'mixed educational ecosystem'. Around 70% of secondaries are academies, with 30% LA maintained, and the other way around for the primary sector. Academy oversight isn't going too well and the LAs ability to support their schools is hampered by budget cuts. 

The big idea now is developing school-led systems in which schools in the maintained and academy sectors support each other to ensure all pupils achieve well. New county-wide bodies are being set up to oversee the system. The Wiltshire Education Standards Board is due to be launched soon, with a view to starting work in September. Let's hope these boards can help bring some coherence to a badly fragmented educational system. 

I shudder to think how much taxpayers' money has been spent on removing schools from LAs and making them into academies. Or the funds used on new Free Schools, some which have failed miserably. Look at this example of £9m down the drain. Countless millions of pounds could have been better spent on increasing teacher pay, maintaining a broad curriculum, improving crumbling school buildings, etc.  Thankfully, the emphasis these days is on raising standards, not changing the status of schools, or fiddling around with the structures in which they sit.

Meanwhile in LA Land... 

Let's just say, some of us are in no great rush to leave. We have nothing to lose but our freedom. 

"Fetch down some knowledge from the clouds": the pedagogy of Isaac Watts

Isaac Watts 1674-1748

Writing up a review of The Givenness of Things by Marilynne Robinson I was reminded of what she had to say on Isaac Watts's contribution to pedagogy. In her chapter on the Reformation, she reflects on the educational impulse of Protestantism, "The bookishness of the Reformation might be said to have generalized itself to become an expectation of legibility in the whole of Creation." This bookish attitude was not at all elitist.  William Tyndale famously wished that a ploughboy might be as adept at reading Scripture as a priest. Robinson explains, "This sense that revelation, scriptural and natural, was essentially available to everyone, pervades Reformation thought" (p. 23).

In line with this impulse Robinson points out that the Congregational Minister and hymnwriter Isaac Watts also authored a groundbreaking and influential work on pedagogy entitled, The Improvement of the Mind: A Supplement to the Art of Logic. Watts wanted education to be enjoyable as well as informative for children, drawing on their natural curiosity about the world. Robinson includes a quote from The Improvement of the Mind to illustrate his approach (p. 23-24), 

Fetch down some knowledge from the clouds, the stars, the sun, the moon, and the revolutions of all the planets. Dig and draw up some valuable meditations from the depths of the earth, and search them through the vast oceans of water. Extract some intellectual improvements from the minerals and metals, from the wonders of nature among the vegetables and herbs, trees and flowers. Learn some lessons from the birds, and the beasts, and the meanest insect. Read the wisdom of God, and his admirable contrivance in them all. Read his almighty power, his rich and various goodness, in all the works of his hands.

As a Dissenter Watts was not permitted to study at Oxford or Cambridge. University was only for the communicant members of the Church of England. Nonconformists devised an alternative system of education, the Dissenting Academies. They were set up to to train men for pastoral ministry and provide a the sons of Nonconformist families with a standard of higher education to rival anything Oxbridge had to offer. 

Young Isaac's earliest education was at the hands of his father, also named Isaac. At six years of age Watts was sent to a Free School at Winkle Street, Southampton. He then headed to London to study at the Nonconformist Academy at Stoke Newington Green. His biographer comments, "Watts was in an educational tradition that has enriched the life of this country. The Dissenting Academies played an important role in the development of modern education." (Isaac Watts Remembered by David Fountain, 1978, Gospel Standard Baptist Trust, p. 76).

Isaac Watts penned several works on pedagogy including a number of catechisms, a Discourse on the Education of Children, and The Improvement of the Mind Parts I & II. He championed learning in the medium of English alongside Latin, the traditional language of scholarship. The forward looking educationalist suggested the use of card games to teach grammar, astronomy and other subjects. But there were limits. The Congregationalist Minister was strongly opposed to students attending balls, gaming houses and the theatre. The ways of the world could be picked up more safely by reading the Spectator. 

In an age when strict, if not harsh, educational discipline was the norm (enough to make Michaela seem soft), Watts urged teachers to endeavour to win the hearts and minds of their pupils, 

He should have so much of a natural candour and sweetness mixed with all the improvements of learning, as might convey knowledge into the minds of his disciples with a sort of gentle insinuation and sovereign delight, and may tempt them into the highest improvements of their reason by a resistless and insensible force. 

Dr. Johnson was a great admirer of Watts's The Improvement of the Mind.

Few books have been perused by me with greater pleasure than his Improvement of the Mind, of which the radical principles may indeed be found in Locke's Conduct of the Understanding, but they are so expanded and ramified by Watts as to confer upon him the merit of a work in the highest degree useful and pleasing. Whoever has the care of instructing others, may be charged with deficiency in his duty if this work is not recommended. (Isaac Watts Remembered, p. 76). 

Marilynne Robinson worries that we are in danger of losing the educational impulse of Protestantism in Western society. She laments, "we are now living among...the ruins of the Reformation" (p. 26). As a result, "Now we are more inclined to speak of information than of learning, and to think of the means by which information is transmitted rather than of how learning might transform, and be transformed by, the atmospheres of a given mind" (p. 28). More a case of fetching information from the Cloud than scanning the clouds for glimpses of the glory of God. Robinson concludes, "The Reformation is another beautiful and worthy heritage, another stream of cultural and spiritual wealth, also deserving of advocates and interpreters" (p. 30). An apt sentiment for the year that marks the 500th anniversary of the start of the Protestant Reformation. 

Battle Hymn of the Tiger Teachers: The Michaela Way edited by Katharine Birbalsingh

John Catt Education Ltd, 2016, 309pp

This was a, 'what's all the fuss about?' read. And there's sure been a lot of fuss about this book. Cheerleaders gonna cheer and haters gonna hate. Not being especially biased either way, I wanted to give the book a decent hearing. You'll have to judge for yourselves whether or not this is in fact a fair minded review. Also, the 'hymn' bit in the title appealed to me. Most of the books I read are in the fields of theology and biblical studies, or have something to do with me being a Baptist Minister. Knowing a good hymn when I see it is part of the job. I'm also chair of governors of a LA maintained secondary school, hence my interest in the world of education. 

First up, the things that got my goat. Michella exceptionalism. You know, the 'we're the only school that does this, that and the other' bit. Even as you're thinking, 'Eh? We also do this, that and the other in our school.' Things like every day is an open day, the promotion of an ethos of hard work and kindness among students, and so on. No doubt, like all schools, Michella has its distinguishing features, but sometimes it felt a bit like me as a Baptist preacher leaning over my pulpit one Sunday morning and grandly telling my flock, 'Look, we're the only true Baptist Church in Britain, holding to the doctrine of the Trinity, baptising believers, and such.' I can imagine our longsuffering people responding, 'No we're not, silly, how about all the other ones?' Well, yes. Michaela's exceptionalist tone is alienating, where instead the school could have positioned itself as a unifying force for the new educational traditionalists on the block. Whether they find themselves in free schools, academies, MATs, or bog standard LA comps. 

Plus, a bit premature, isn't it? I mean, writing a book on how amazing your secondary school is, when you've only got a Key Stage 3. All progress measures must be based on internal assessment. No GCSE or A Level results to benchmark how you are doing against the national picture. How's your Attainment 8/Progress 8 figures/Post 16 performance measures? That's the proof of the pudding. I hope that Michaela lives up to its promise and results are up there with the top 10% of schools year in year out, but that remains to be seen. Not having a Key stage 4 also means you haven't got Year 10 & 11s coming into that 'difficult age'. That's where things can start to get complicated. More to behaviour management then than getting kids to pick up a grape without throwing a strop. May have been better to have waited until there was some hard evidence to back up the claims made here. 

Then there's the martyr complex, 'everybody hates us' thing. Look, it's not just new-fangled free schools that get dissed. Try turning around a forever RI comp and you'll have grief. Shed loads, occasionally. So what? It's all about ensuring the best outcomes for students. Worth taking a bit of negative publicity for that, isn't it? You could call it the 'Luke effect', "Woe to you when all people speak well of you, for so their fathers did to the false prophets". (Luke 6:26).

Multi-author works can often appear fragmented and lacking in coherence, which is fine if the book is a collection of essays exploring variations on a theme. Not so fine if the work is billed as an exposition and defence of a 'way'. I wasn't expecting expecting the conceptual clarity of the Definition of Chalcedon, but the title seemed to promise an orderly and systematic presentation of the Michaela 'creed' and doesn't quite deliver on that front. The book could have done with an introductory chapter that set out the 'Michaela Way' as an integrated educational vision. The following chapters could then have shown how aspects of the 'way' worked out in practice when it came to curriculum design, pedagogy, pupil discipline, and so on. As it was, I left the book a little puzzled as to where the 'Michaela Way' came from as an educational philosophy, its underlying presuppositions, and so on. That lacuna made the work seem more like a high grade how-to book than an attempt at offering a compelling and coherent educational vision. 

Despite these misgivings, I must admit that I found myself joining in with the Battle Hymn of the Tiger Teachers at many points. Even without the benefit of a 'vision thing' chapter, it is clear that the driving theme of the Michaela 'battle hymn' is that progressive education is bunk. Absolutely no truck is given to child centred learning, relativistic approaches to pupil behaviour, or pedagogy that places the acquiring of nebulous skills above that of solid knowledge.

I must 'fess up' at this point and admit that most of what I know about pedagogy has been gleaned from bits and pieces I've come across on Twitter. But from what I've seen, an increasing body of research evidence seems to show that teacher led instruction is a more effective way of conveying knowledge and enabling mastery than pupil discovery-based models. (See here and here, for Nick Gibb on this). The chapters by Joe Kirby on Knowledge, Memory and Testing and Olivia Dyer on Drill and Didactic Teaching Work Best demonstrate how Michaela has drawn upon some of the latest research in developing its curriculum and in-house teaching style.

It is arrant nonsense to say the advent of the internet means children no longer need to be taught stuff because now they can look it up on Wikipedia. Students of all backgrounds benefit hugely by being taught the best of what has been thought, said and done by teachers who are experts in their fields. Knowledge mastered and remembered is power. Aside from cultural empowerment, we also need to factor in the additional weight given to terminal exams in the new style GCSEs. A facility for Googling is of no help in the exam hall.

I also appreciated Michaela's hard-edged approach to inclusion, where all students are expected to make excellent progress, whatever the disadvantages of their background or SEN issues. To suggest otherwise is to succumb to soft bigotry of low expectations. As is making allowances for bad behaviour on the part of some pupils. At Michaela all are required to work hard, be kind and cultivate an attitude of gratitude. Similarly, when as chair of governors I speak at parents' evenings I make it clear that we expect our students to be considerate, conscientious, and courteous - all of them, at all times. Rigorous and consistently applied systems need to be in place to ensure good behaviour is appropriately rewarded and bad sanctioned.

Now for the theology bit. Aside from the 'hymn' reference in the title, the book is peppered with biblical allusions. Joe Kirby draws on 'the Matthew effect', citing Matthew 25:29. In the blurb on the back cover Michael Gove writes, ''This book is their testament and my gospel." But the 'Michaela Way' is not and does not purport to offer a Christian vision of education. Many aspects are certainly in harmony with the Christian faith such as the rejection of Rouseeau's Romantic view of children, the recognition of teachers as authority figures, and an emphasis on personal responsibility and discipline. Education at Michaela is seen as the pursuit of truth through acquiring knowledge and an exercise in character formation.

Can't argue with any of that. But a distinctively Christian vision of education would flow from the realisation that, "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom". We come into our own as homo sapiens (wise people) by understanding ourselves and the world around us in relation to God. As the Reformer John Calvin put it, "Our wisdom, in so far as it ought to be deemed true and solid Wisdom, consists almost entirely of two parts: the knowledge of God and of ourselves." (Institutes of the Christian Religion 1:1:1). It is for Christian parents with the support of the church to provide their children with a God-centred vision of education. That holds true whether they homeschool, or send their children to schools in the private or state sectors. 

In Michaela's 'us against the world' dictum I discerned a faint echo of the words of Athanasius, champion of the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity in the fourth century AD. With the support of Roman emperor the heresy of Arianism had gained acceptance in the church. Athanasius was having none of it. People tried to browbeat him into submission saying, "Do you not realise the whole world is against you?" To which the church father is reputed to have replied, "Then Athanasius is against the world." His doggedness won the day and the church was restored to its confession of one God in three persons. A similar determined resilience will be required on the part of those who set themselves against the world of progressive ideas and practices that for far too long have held back educational outcomes in England. 

That said, the trad/prog divide shouldn't be absolutised. Traditionalism at its worst is incapable of embracing necessary reform. Progressivism at its worst refuses to learn from the wisdom of the past and is therefore doomed to keep on finding new ways of repeating old mistakes. An element of creative tension is needed between preserving the best of the past and rising to the challenges of the future. We should not romanticise the 'good old days'. I well remember being bored out of my tiny mind by lessons that comprised of little more than 'dictation', punctuated only by a pause by the teacher to chuck a board rubber at daydreaming pupil. Double physics with Mr. Whatshisname, complete with bow tie, winklepicker boots and a mission to put generations of children off the wonders of science for life. Who'd want to go back to that? 

Readers won't find everything in these pages to their tastes. The Michaela approach to pupil discipline can seem a tad harsh. I think performance related pay has its place in improving the quality of teaching and raising standards. Group work isn't all bad when carried out in lessons that are predominantly teacher led. If it is, how come many Russell Group Universities use it in their science and engineering courses? The quality of the chapters is uneven. Some writers are quite didactic in style, referencing scholarly studies. Others are more 'chatty' and anecdotal. The work is characterised by a defensive stance, adopted to fend off anticipated brickbats. Reflective self-criticism can be lacking. On occasion the pride contributors have in their school seems a little self-congratulatory. Such quibbles aside, Battle Hymn of the Tiger Teachers is a thought proving read that deserves serious attention from anyone who has an interest in the future of education.

As I say, I'm a governor, so I will conclude with some thoughts on how fellow govs might find this work useful. Not that we should attempt to turn our schools into mini (or maxi) Michaelas, but there's no harm in reflecting on what might be be learned from this trailblazing school. Some questions for govs to ponder as they seek to sharpen up the strategic leadership and accountability they give their schools:

• Does your vision for the school include a commitment to academic excellence and pupil character development?  
• Is the curriculum sufficiently broad, enriching and rigorous, both in its vocational and academic elements? Or are some subjects taught simply to boost the school's standing in the Performance Tables, although they are of little benefit to students? (Like the discredited ECDL). 
• Does the in-house style of teaching help ensure the mastery and memorisation of knowledge by students, with the result that rapid and sustained progress is made by all? Is this evidenced in internal data reports and exam results, for all types of pupil? 
• Are systems of pupil behaviour and discipline implemented with rigour and consistency, leading to children being considerate, conscientious, and courteous at all times? Can this be seen when governors visit the school? What do student panels say? What do parent surveys say? What is attendance compared with the national average? What about exclusions? 
• Are school leaders burdening teaching staff with excessive workload due to systems of data collection and work scrutiny? What do staff surveys say?
• To what extent is CPD aimed at deepening teachers' subject knowledge, as well as enhancing their skills? Do governors receive reports on the CPD programme and its impact? What do staff surveys tell you about the quality and effectiveness of CPD for all teaching staff from NQT to UPS?
• Is inclusion hard-edged, with the same high expectations concerning behaviour and academic progress for all pupils? How are governors monitoring this? Are all students making at least the expected progress, given their starting points?

Enough. We've had Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother and now Battle Hymn of the Tiger Teachers. Apart from a brief foreword by the Michaela Governing Body, governance barely gets a look in here. Shame, that. Maybe the time has come for Battle Hymn of the Tiger Governors? Set to the wonderfully strident tune Rachie by Caradog Roberts. 'All together now...'

* I am grateful to the publishers for sending me this complimentary review copy. 

Building MAT-land

OK, guv'nor, so you're contemplating heading for MAT-land? Eventually, so we're told, we're all going to have to make that journey into the, if not unknown, at lest the not very well researched. That much was evident from this week's Education Committee's session on MATs.

The pace of change since the publication the Educational Excellence Everywhere white paper has caught almost everybody on the hop. Politicians, policy wonks, governors and Headteachers found themselves struggling to take in the the idea of universal academisation by 2022. With most schools in Multi Academy Trusts. Even the NGA carried on with its 'Federations First' campaign when it was obvious that MATs, not Feds are the future. 

But what does that future hold?  

A formidable panel of educational researchers was assembled to tell the Education Committee how much they don't know about MATs. Not, I hasten to add because they couldn't be bothered to find out, but because no one seems to know an awful lot about MAT-land. We'll, National Schools Commissioner  Sir David Carter and his trusty team of Regional SCs reckon they do, but they're not telling anybody. 

Now, academics never knowingly overstate their case. They're so immersed in the details of their field of expertise that they cannot help but be conscious of evidence that calls into question received wisdom, or casts doubt on common assumptions. Things are rarely as straightforward as they seem.

Which is a bit vexing if you're a dilettante amateur looking for some clear cut answers. Which is what I am in education terms.

'Any evidence that joining a MAT improves school performance?' asked committee members. 'Difficult to say. Needs more research.' replied the expert witnesses. 'What makes a successful MAT?' Ditto. 'What might be learned from similar systems  overseas, like the US Charter Schools?' Ditto. Oh, but it seems that Labour academies were good, Tory ones not so much.

Now, I'm not affecting a Gove-like disdain for experts. Maybe it's simply too early to draw hard and fast conclusions from what's happening in MAT-land. More independent research undoubtedly needs to be done as we head towards a MAT-dominated, fully academised system. The fruit of that research then needs to be absorbed by policy makers. Not to mention governors and Headteachers who are looking to join or set up MATs.

Would be quite nice to find out what kind of pre-existing MAT set-up should not be touched with a board ruler. (Do teachers still use those long board ruler things?) Or what should the MAT we may be forming look like if it's going to be highly effective as opposed to utterly shambolic and totally dysfunctional? We need to know these things.

Some issues became clear, though, as the committee quizzed the researchers. It's quality of teaching that matters above all else, not structures and governance systems. Well, yes. But surely closer collaboration  will help spread best practice when it comes to teaching and learning, CPD, etc?

It looks like collaborative clustering within smaller geographical areas might be a goer, as opposed to large chains that stretch from one end of England to another. Having a shared vision and purpose is key. However, some schools in 'clustered' MATs ain't doing so well.

More research needs to be undertaken into what makes for an effective CEO, whole MAT outcomes, MATs and the % of SEN pupils, rates of exclusions, whether in some cases improved outcomes are at the expense of a narrowed curriculum, etc.

All rather ambiguous. 

Next up to give evidence was a number of representatives of Christian education providers; RC, CofE, Oasis Trust, a chap from FASNA, and a secular bloke, who didn't appear to be involved in running any educational body, but was most concerned about Christians doing so.

This panel was a bit more forthcoming when it came to the features of a successful MAT. Among them are things like a clear vision and strategy, good leadership, governance structures appropriate for the size of MAT, and the facilitation of school-to-school support.

It was agreed that some issues needed more thought, like the role of local governance in MATs, Ofsted's ability to inspect MATs in the context of a common framework, and how LAs will function in a fully academised system.

Listening to the evidence given, a number of points began to crystallise, at least in my mind, on what may make for a successful MAT. And by that I mean one that helps form rounded and grounded students with high aspirations for themselves, as well as in terms of exam results.

1. Unity in diversity matters 

MATs must offer an overarching vision and strategy that all its schools share. But at the same time, individual schools should be allowed to maintain their own character and ethos; faith or non-denominational, sporty, or arty, or whatever. 

2. The right systems matter 

Well motivated and highly capable people will founder in an ill thought out system. MATs need Schemes of Delegation that are fit for purpose, setting out what responsibilities lie at board and local governance levels, the powers of the CEO, what decisions may be made by individual Headteachers, and so on.

3. Sharing best practice matters 

At their best MATs will allow successful schools to spread good practice when it comes to teaching and learning. But that needs to be done with sensitivity and care, as what works well in one school (a town secondary, say), may not translate to another (a rural primary). At least not without being adapted to suit. Copy and paste jobs won't work. It's vital to understand the difference between sharing best practice and imposing uniform solutions 

4. The balance between accountability and autonomy matters

MAT boards and CEOs should know their schools and be prepared to intervene rapidly if standards slip. But hyperactive micromanagement squelches innovation and growth. Earned autonomy is what's needed.

5. People matter

The optimum MAT system will fail if it's operated by a bunch of knaves and fools. Knaves who want to use a seat on the board as a nice little earner. Fools who haven't a clue what they are meant to be doing. Boards should be comprised of skilled-up stakeholders. Local people, parents etc, who have the moral purpose to make sure funds are used to raise learning outcomes, not line their own pockets. People with the right mix of skills and experience to ensure the MAT works effectively for the benefit of all schools and their pupils.

The future of education is ours to shape. 

MAT-land has not yet been covered over by hard concrete and filled with immovable brick structures.

That lack of solidity is a bit scary. But it's also an opportunity to adapt and innovate. To a certain extent it'll be up to governors, Headteachers and CEOs to make of it what we will.

Let's make sure that we build the system with care so that MAT-land becomes a place where teachers excel and children flourish.

Some thoughts on virtue, grace and character education (with a little help from John Owen)

John Owen (1616-1683)

“Education without values, as useful as it is,

 seems rather to make man a more clever devil.” 

C. S. Lewis

'Character education' is one of the Big Things in the world of schooling right now. In the private sector they've been at it for years. Former Master of Wellington College, Anthony Seldon is often regarded as the doyenne of character education. He famously introduced wellbeing or happiness classes during his time in charge of one of the UK's top private education establishments. Alongside forced (make that 'encouraged' in the light of the recent policy u-turn) academisation, character education is also a key aspect of Nicky Morgan's education policy. A lot of thought has been given to this in recent years. The Jubilee Centre for Character & Virtues, attached to Birmingham University is devoted to researching character education and has produced some useful material in the field, including its Framework for Character Education in Schools. A renewed interest in education as character formation has trickled down to the level of local schools, where you're as likely to hear headteachers speaking about the 'resilience' of their students as their Sats/GCSE/A-Level results. 

Character education goes beyond a school's 'values'; things like 'Creativity', 'Success' and 'Respect', and crosses into the territory of moral formation. The Jubilee Centre's core virtues include; Courage, Justice, Honesty, Compassion for others, Self-discipline, Gratitude and Humility. These help to give definition to what is sometimes called a 'sense of moral purpose'. I think the author C. S, Lewis, cited at the top of this post, would have approved. He was evidently worried that even in his day education was in danger of becoming a utilitarian value-free zone, where what mattered was a student's cleverness rather than his or her character. Saying that, the Jubilee Centre's work is not altogether free from utilitarian influences. They advocate a value-laded approach to education not simply because it is the right thing to do, but because it works,   'The research evidence is clear: schools that are values driven have high expectations and demonstrate academic, professional and social success.'

But what's good old John Owen got to do with it? Well, I'm currently reading through Volumes 13-16 of his collected works in preparation for contributing a paper to a 'Reading John Owen Conference' at the Evangelical Library to mark the 400th anniversary of his birth. Owen was a 17th century Puritan theologian. He is often regarded as one of England's greatest theological minds (although, as his surname suggests, he had Welsh roots). Owen found himself a marginalised Nonconformist after the Restoration of the Monarchy. He was a keen advocate of toleration for Nonconformists and argued against the imposition of Anglicanism by the State. It was in that context that Owen gave close attention to the relationship between moral virtue and grace that is of relevance here.

Of course, the Puritan theologian's religious context was very different to our own, and he was not out to address the issue of 'character education' as it is commonly understood today. There is always a danger of anachronism when we bring the views of a historical figure into dialogue with a contemporary issue. But with that qualifier duly in place, it struck me that what Owen had to say has a bearing on a the development of a distinctively Christian attitude towards character education in the 21st century.

In the late 17th century Owen engaged in controversy with Anglican apologist, Samuel Parker, penning, Truth and Innocence Vindicated: A Survey of A Discourse Concerning Ecclesiastical Polity, and the Authority of the Civil Magistrate Over the Consciences of Subjects in Matters of Religion (Works of John Owen, Volume 13, p. 343-506). Parker had argued that it was the duty of the magistrate (the civil authority) to uphold virtue. Virtue, he continued was a key aspect of Christian faith and worship. The magistrate therefore had the right to 'command anything in the worship of God that doth not tend to debauch men's practices or to disgrace the deity'. Further, that, all subordinate duties, both of morality and religious worship are equally subject to the determination of human authority.' (p. 410). 

Owen's aim was to show the Christian faith, life and worship are subject to the determination of the Lord Jesus and the rule of the Word of God, He does not deny that it was the duty of the civil authority to promote moral virtue in its citizens, but virtue is not the same as what he called 'graces'. According to Owen, Christian conduct and worship are graces, not simply virtues. Indeed, as he demonstrates, the language of 'moral virtue' used by Parker is foreign to Scripture, owing more to Aristotle than the Bible. While Owen would not ban it from Christian theology altogether, he much preferred Scriptural expressions such as 'repentance toward God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ, or the fear of God, of holiness, righteousness, living to God, walking with God, and before him.' (p. 412-413). 

As far as 'moral virtues' are concerned, Owen understands them to be 'duties of the law'. That is 'the law of nature' or 'the law of our creation', to which Paul refers in Romans 2:14-15. This law is written on the hearts of all human beings and is summarised in the Ten Commandments. Moral virtues, then 'consist in the universal observance of the requisites and precepts of the law of our creation, and dependence upon God thereby' (p. 413). Owen acknowledges that these duties 'may be performed by men in their own strength' apart from the 'assistance of the Spirit or the sanctifying grace of Christ' (p. 414). These duties may indeed be regarded as 'virtues' and Owen does not belittle their worth, 'Good they are in themselves, useful to mankind, and seldom in the providence of God go without their reward in this world' (p. 414). 

To deny the reality of these moral virtues is to descend into a morass of moral relativism, 'Thus we grant moral virtue to have been in the heathens of old, for this is that alone whereby they were distinguished amongst themselves: and he that would exclude them all from any interest in moral virtue takes away all difference between Cato and Nero...and overthrows all natural difference between good and evil' (p. 414). But that is not to say that no distinction is to be made between moral virtue and grace, or that moral virtues performed apart from gracious assistance are accepted by God. For that would be tantamount to Pelagianism. 

The difference between moral virtue and graces is not to be understood in terms of what is right and wrong in itself. The 'law of creation' or the 'light of nature' is rooted in man's creation in the image of God. Grace does not destroy nature, but rather redeems and perfects it. Spiritual graces, however, are not the product of human effort, but are the result of "the effectual working of the Spirit of God in and upon the minds and souls of believers, thereby quickening them when they were 'dead in trespasses and sins,' regenerating them, creating a new heart in them, implanting his image upon them." (p. 415-416). In other words, graces are evangelical; an effect of the life-transforming gospel of Christ. 

While the state may rightly seek to promote virtuous conduct in line with the 'light of nature', it has no power to produce gospel graces. These graces are the fruit of the gospel and go way beyond general moral duties. They include repentance from sin, faith in Christ's atoning work, seeking forgiveness, wholehearted obedience to God, self-denial, taking up the cross and the mortification of sin. Owen concludes, 'To persuade us now unto a religion, as respects to God, without those duties which arise from the consideration of sin and a Redeemer, is to persuade us to throw away our Bibles.'  (p. 420-421). 

On the relationship between virtue and grace the divine was able to say, "It is granted that wherever grace is there is virtue; for grace will produce and effect all virtues in the soul whatever. But virtue, on the other side, may exist where there is no grace; which is sufficient to prove a distinction between them." (p. 426). Had he denied that grace produces virtue, Owen would have severed the link between nature and grace, creation and new creation. Such a denial would also have been tantamount to antinomianism, given his insistence upon the link between the 'law of nature' and the Decalogue. Not all virtue, however is evangelical virtue, which is the fruit of the gospel and receives its distinctive character from the sanctifying power of Christ in the believer.  The fruit of the Spirit, delineated in Galatians 5:22-23 are no mere 'moral virtues', then, but gospel 'graces'.

But that does not mean moral virtues should be disparaged. Owen would much rather a Cato to a Nero. Reformed theology has traditionally deployed the category of 'common grace' to describe God's work in restraining sin and promoting moral virtue through the civil authorities and cultural influences. In terms of 'Two Kingdoms' theology, this is the realm of the 'common kingdom' where believers work side by side with non-believers in pursuit of the common good. Christians may have a beneficial impact on the life of the common kingdom, where they act as 'salt and light' (Matthew 5:13-16). As such, Christians will be supportive of character education in state schools and want to include moral formation in their vision for 'common kingdom' education alongside the teaching of academic and vocational knowledge and skills.

This is one of the areas where the Christian faith does not confront the culture, so much as confirm and complete it. I say 'complete it', because what character education and moral formation is aiming at; producing people who will pursue the good life, comes into its own in the gospel. Christianity teaches the moral frailty of all human beings. That does not mean we are all as bad as can be, but that however commendable may be our outward conduct in many respects, we are all sinners and that makes us morally flawed people. The unfailingly honest may sometimes be cruelly blunt. More sensitive souls may be tempted to tell a so-called 'white lie' rather than confront someone with an unpalatable truth that they need to hear. The answer to these inconsistencies is not a little more moral teaching, but a radical change of heart. No amount of character education can do that.

As Jesus said to Nicodemus, a deeply religious and moral man; "Unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God" (John 3:3). Now we are no longer in the domain of the 'common kingdom', but the 'redemptive kingdom' of grace. It is by the work of the Spirit that the heart is made new and 'graces' produced that are not merely useful to men, but pleasing to God through Christ, Romans 6:22-23. Jesus has entrusted the task of proclaiming the life-transforming message of salvation to the church. She is called to echo the words of her Master, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent and believe the gospel." (Mark 1:15).

Character education is an excellent product of common grace. Heart transformation is the amazing work of God's special grace in Christ and by the power of his Spirit. Here we are not in the realm of 'British Values', but Kingdom Beatitudes, Matthew 5:3-10.  

Education, Excellence, Everywhere - A Governor's Response

When published last Thursday Nicky Morgan's nicely alliterative White Paper, Education, Excellence, Everywhere landed landed like a hand grenade in the playground of educationalists. Its shock waves are still reverberating around schools and their governing boards. That's the case even though many of its key proposals had been long trailed by the DfE, especially governance-wise. But what makes the White Paper explosive is the shift from persuasion to compulsion. HMG has argued for some time that schools would be better off as academies, preferably grouped together in Multi Academy Trusts, but most have remained stubbornly attached to their LAs. Now almost all must become academies by 2022. Similarly, none too subtle hints have been dropped that the days of stakeholder governance were drawing to an end, but now the requirement to have parent governor posts on boards will be removed. Skills alone matter.

Many objections could be raised to the White Paper. As Chair of Governors in a 'Good' Foundation School I don't recognise the picture it paints of stultifying LA control. While supportive and providing useful services, they basically leave us to get on with it. I'm not sure that a LGB in a MAT would have the same autonomy as we have now. And why shouldn't MATs continue to be able to purchase services from the LA if that's what they want to do, such as HR, Payroll, or Governor Services? This blog doesn't profess to be the educational equivalent of moneysavingexpert.com, but I'd have thought that the LA provides its services more cost effectively than any private business. If it's doable, why don't LAs consider turning their old departments into not for profit companies?

For local governors, the vast majority of whose maintained schools are at least 'Good', it was as if the hefty, 128 page White Paper had been rolled up by the Secretary of State and used to biff them over the head as she said, "Sorry, but the days of 'mums and dads army' Home Guard Governance are over. Time to leave it to the pros". Cue reactions ranging from quiet despair, "What have we done to deserve this?" to grandstanding "over my dead body" defiance. But the thing is, whether we whinge or rage, the main provisions of the White Paper are going to become law. As such they will shape the future direction of education in England for the foreseeable. We're just going to have to deal with it.

What to do, then, govs? Rather than rage at the dying of the light, I offer some constructive proposals from a governance perspective:

1. Don't panic. 2020 is a long way off and 2022 further away still, Don't be rushed into joining a pre-existing MAT and certainly not an 'Academy Chain' by anyone. Take stock. Look around. Organise local meetings with other Chairs of Goverors and Headteachers to see if there might be ways of moving ahead together. If you've not already started to do this, get on with it. 

2. Don't delay. Yes, 2020 is a long way off and 2022 further away still, but leave it too long before you start thinking about MAT options and you may find that you have little choice other than join someone else's group on their terms on which you have had little say.

3. Secondary schools, avoid treating your primary partners as 'little schools' who can bossed into forming a MAT in which you call the shots. Do that and they may be tempted to form a local MAT on their own, leaving you high and dry. Do you really want to end up having to join E-ACT or the Education Fellowship because no one else will have you? No, then be nice to primary schools and treat them as equal partners. 

4. Governors, remember forming a MAT and on what basis isn't your Headteacher's decision, but yours. Your Head may be inclined to jump in with his or her favoured  cronies and try to coral you into making a decision with the promise that nothing will change. That's rubbish. It's your job as governors is to get the governance of the MAT right before you ask for a show of hands at a specially convened FGB. Difficult to reverse that decision once made. 'Marry in haste' and all that... 

5. With that in mind, pay careful attention to a number of matters:

a. Do the schools considering forming a MAT share a common vision for education in the area?

b. Do you have at least a semblance of a strategy, including some agreed strategic priorities? 

c. Who will serve on the MAT board that will hold all powers of governance in its gift? LGB chairs plus the CEO in the first instance? 

d. Will the board allow for equal or at least equitable representation for all member schools?

e. What will be the balance of powers between the MAT board and individual school governing boards? Pay very careful attention to the Scheme of Delegation. NGA will soon be publishing adaptable models for members to use.

f. Preserve the power of local governance by going for a DevoMax SofD on the basis of earned autonomy.

g. Agree clear intervention triggers that will make earned autonomy meaningful and ensure strong accountability. 

h. What will be the role of the CEO/Exec Headteacher in relation to the MAT board and to individual Headteachers? 

i. Adopt shared policies on Behaviour, HR, and so on to ensure consistency for all students and staff across the MAT.

j. Allow for unity in diversity that allows each individual school to maintain its own distinctive ethos and character. 

k.  Consider how savings may be made and economies of scale developed to make best use of financial resources. And before you jump in, exercise due diligence on the schools with whom you may be entering into partnership and expect them to do the same to you.
l. Don't forget that church schools (e.g. CofE VC & VA) may have stipulations concerning the % of foundation govs on the board of any MAT they join. 

6. Sorry about the above 'Alphabetti Spaghetti'. At least I stopped at 'l'. 

7. Go local. It's been shown that nation wide 'Stretchy MATs', or 'Chains' are by and large pretty poor. Right, Sir Michael? MATs will work best when member schools have a vested interest in each others' success. Secondary schools want their primary partners to do as well as possible, as they are going to receive their children. Primary schools have invested years of time and effort into getting their children to fulfill their potential. They don't want all that hard work to go to waste at secondary level. Even when it comes to relationships between primary schools in a MAT, the emphasis can move away from competition towards deeper collaboration. Especially if each school is encouraged to develop an appropriately funded specialism that will enable it to share valuable expertise with others.

8. The White Paper hasn't banned Parent Governors, just enabled us to be a bit more picky over which ones we appoint to serve on MAT and local school boards. It needn't spell the death knell for stakeholder governance. What we need is properly skilled stakeholders who are fired up enough to make a difference, yet skilled enough to know what they are doing. It's your local stakeholder who will keep things honest if the 'pros' start abusing their position to make a 'nice little earner' for themselves. Parents want the money spent on children, not PR consultancy fees to the tune of £250,000 provided by MAT board members. Yep, that's actually happened. 

9. Contact the NGA and ask them to lead a session on MATs in your area. The one they did for us last Thursday was very informative and you don't have to worry that they're just trying to get you to join their MAT gang. But try not to laugh too loudly if they mention the Federation First thing. The White Paper shot that fox. No LAs, no LA Feds. Sorry. Our NGA consultant was wise enough not to mention it.

10. Engage with a wider network of governors. Round here we have the Wiltshire Governors Association. See what others are up to and learn from their experiences. At least treat yourself to some group therapy after the shock of the White Paper. 

Above all, even while planning for life in the Promised MAT-Land, remain focused on governing your school as it is now so that it continues to provide the best possible education for your students. Keep governing on. 

Second thoughts on the great governance cake off

To recap. Emma Knights, chief executive of the National Governors' Association (no less) has argued that whatever strategic powers remain in the hands of Local Governing Bodies should be handed over to MAT trustees. That will free up longsuffering local govs from the irksome bother of strategic leadership so their LGBs can be turned into. Wait for it, focus groups. They will then be in the privileged position of having 'influence without responsibility'. Good, eh? I mean, whoever wanted to do all that vision and strategy, challenge and support stuff anyway? Apart from people who were all fired up about being school governors. And how sad is that?

According to EK, being transmogrified into focus groups will enable LGBs to 'have their cake and eat it'. Fancy, Victoria Sponges all round. I wasn't convinced, however, saying that it was more like 'having a cake and giving it to someone else to eat'. Where's the fun in that?

But there is more to this spat than a storm in a cup cake. The controversy sparked by EK's 'cake off' blog calls for a considered response and I've been having second thoughts about the whole thing. After reflecting on the matter very carefully I have to tell you that my second thoughts are much gloomer than the first ones. If they were't bad enough.

This 'give all the strategic powers to MAT boards' lark spells the total destruction of school governance as we know it. Think I'm being alarmist? Let's take a look at an actual example of what EK is proposing in action. Have a shufti at Ofsted's focused inspection letter for E-ACT. Go on, I know you want to. Focused inspections concentrate on the effectiveness of trustees in improving the outcomes of member schools. In other words, they are a judgement on a MAT's governance arrangements. But the inspection letter bears little resemblance to a judgement on governance you'd get in a standard Ofsted report.

Alright, I know, the letter covers the governance of a MAT, not a single school. Bound to be differences. And yes, there's some traditional gov stuff in there. Mention is made of vision and strategy etc, but the rest of it is like reading a cross between an Ofsted judgement on a dysfunctional Senior Management Team that has been spliced with a poorly performing LA. Yep, it's E-ACT alright. And their response to this criticism from Ofsted? You've got it, they unilaterally abolished their LGBs. They'll be sorted now, then.

Hold local governance cheap and that's what you'll get. Virtually no governance at all. Much of the work the E-ACT trustees are described as doing in the Ofsted letter barely relates to governance as defined in the DfE's Governance Handbook, or the Ofsted Inspection Handbook, or the NGA's own Framework for Governance for that matter. It's more like another tier of senior management with some old style LA work thrown in for good measure. Directors for this, that and other other. Ambassadors for whatever else. What's that all about? Local stakeholders giving their schools strong strategic leadership and robust accountability barely comes into it. Now not at all.

Seems passing strange to me that the chief executive of the NGA could regard this state of affairs as a consummation devoutly to be wished, with local GBs reduced to having 'influence without responsibility'. Or worse, 'disappeared'. It's a bit like the President of the BMA wondering out loud whether or not GPs are a good thing. Or imagine the Gen Sec of ASCL putting it out there that maybe Headteachers should be stripped of their powers of operational school leadership. Heads would be up in arms. If that doesn't paint a slightly odd picture.

The advent of MATs needn't spell the end of local governance. For example, the Harris MAT operates on a federated system, 'with powerful and authoritative local governing bodies able to hold principals to account'. That's a far healthier model than the one proposed by EK. 

After all, the NGA is meant to be 'the independent organisation for school governors and trustees.' Not just trustees. Sticking up for local governance should be its raison d'etre. The enduring value of School Governing Boards should certainly be an article of faith for the organisation's chief exec. For it's the article upon which the NGA stands or falls.