Alex Morton: Make headteachers and teachers free yet accountable

Alex Morton is a Research Assistant to Peter Lilley MP.  However, these thoughts are entirely his own and are not connected to the Public Services Improvement Policy Group.  His mother, aunt, uncle and grandmother are all teachers. 

> Policy summary

Teachers’ wages are to be set by the head teacher of each school from a block wage grant and should be easier to remove. Head teachers pay increase is to be subject to a vote at the end of each school year by parents or the Board of Governors (with their pay coming from the block wage grant) and they are also to become easier to remove. In return, the administrative burden on head teachers and teachers would be lessened.

> Policy Explanation

There is an increasing shortage of quality teachers in certain subjects - the sciences, economics, mathematics. In some subjects there is an increasing shortage of teachers full stop.  A degree in economics is estimated to raise the lucky recipient’s lifetime earnings by an average of 25% - unless, of course, they go into teaching.

And of course it would be simplistic to reduce any subject premium to a block mentality - the alternative earnings of a good economics teacher are much higher than a bad one, so the better the teacher, the more likely they are to leave the profession overall, and the least likely they are to be found in an inner London comprehensive. 

This is an issue of ‘social justice’ in that the shortage of decent teachers in key areas is particularly affecting inner city schools, where the non-financial stresses caused by poor discipline, family breakdown and children who don’t speak English as a first language are most acutely felt.  It is a typical example of the failure of the current state model to help those at the bottom of the pile.

The Government has responded to the problem by introducing a plethora of standards, which if the teacher is assessed as having come up to allows them to receive additional increments or separate pay allowances – the Advanced Skills Teacher standards, the Excellent Teacher Standards and the Fast Track Teacher Standards.  They have also produced various Blairite gimmicks such as the “golden hellos” now given to maths teachers (who often leave after a few years having pocketed the golden hello!) 

Yet the standards frameworks are often hidebound in regulation, and still largely require adherence to set guidelines from the DfES – freedom on a tight Whitehall leash.  More importantly, head teachers are often reluctant to use these schemes because of the dogmatic opposition of the unions, and because teachers are used to being paid the same.  Union leaders have said that such schemes divide staff – but this is because such schemes so obviously go against the grain of the way teachers’ salaries are normally awarded that they mark out those who are being paid more through them as ‘special’, implying equal average pay should be the norm.   

This unhelpful anti-meritocratic culture which pervades the teaching system needs to be removed.  The idea that a small or medium enterprise would pay its staff roughly similar wages based almost exclusively on seniority is laughable - yet this is expected in our education system.  Imagine a world where accountants received the same salary as marketing staff based on how long they had been around, and imagine what it would do to private enterprise.  Yet we put up with it in education, a critical public service.

So allow head teachers to set the wages of their staff from a block wage allowance and allow supply and demand to play their usual role - you would soon see certain subjects' wages (i.e. those with shortages) being bid up and others generally stagnating.  Allow head teachers to sack staff more easily.  You would see staff who are simply not up to scratch diminish in number, while those who are already doing well and are self motivated being rewarded for their efforts. If this system was implemented head teachers would be free to continue paying identical salaries to their staff - they wouldn't be forced to change - but I would be very surprised if, over time, they didn't move to a more variable system of wages

Head teachers must become directly accountable to parents, not the DfES.  Head teachers pay and conditions should be set by local parents, rather than a complicated system which few outside Whitehall know or understand.  They would be accountable to parents if results began to drop, year after year, and should be easier to sack.  This in turn would mean head teachers were more careful about their staffing policies, not just appointing staff on personal preference but on who gets results.

The whole idea you can have specialist schools, or even make a system of school choice work without this proposal (or something like it) I would argue is false.  Specialist schools need to pay the teachers who work in the subjects that they are specialising in substantially more than surrounding schools.

School choice, without pushing bad teachers out of the system by refusing to compensate them for their poor performance simply moves the bad teachers around (and those who live in the least well off areas who are most likely to end up with them).  Choice and accountability are empty words unless you erect a meaningful framework for them to be exercised in.  At present, we simply present people with a list of schools as ‘options’ and tell them they have choice.  But given that we know there are 100 children in area A and 100 school places in area A then can we really say we have much choice in our current school system?  When you cannot reward good teachers and head teachers nor penalise or remove bad ones can we really say you have accountability?

We reformed the ‘demand’ side of education by allowing parents to state which schools they wanted their children to go to, and by making funding follow the pupil.  But without reforming the ‘supply’ side of education we will not move forwards.  Schools cannot go ‘bust’, so we are currently faced with a system which is not responsive to parents needs.  In my view, is not desirable nor possible that schools go ‘bust’.  But given that it is bad teachers and head teachers who are often at least part of the problem of poor schools, bad teachers and bad head teachers need to be both financially penalised and face the threat of being removed if we are to drive up standards and improve the quality of education our children receive, and an individual teacher's pay needs to adequately reflect the alternate earnings that teacher could receive in the private sector.

As a positive side effect this reform will halt the spiral down in difficult yet valuable subjects by increasing the quality of teaching in them - which will have major knock on effects for university courses and our competitiveness.

In return for the two reforms above, a lot of the waffle sent from the DfES could be simply binned - parents and teachers know what is best for their children, not the man in Whitehall.  However, some examinations, (and hence the necessary minimum guidelines), for the purpose of benchmarks for parents to judge performance on, must be retained.

A final point – education debates in Tory circles often simply go round and round the issues of grammar schools and or school discipline.  I am in fact a traditionalist in both these areas, but we need to branch out in education – which is why I propose this policy.  There is much else that needs to be done in our school system to improve it, but those debates can wait...

> Political Risks and Opportunities

There are a lot of teachers who might lose from this proposal.  It is a big proposal, in the sense it would be a radical departure from what has gone before, and might scare voters.  The Guardian will be furious.  But I would question how many of these people, when push comes to shove, will actually vote for us.

It also will offend well heeled liberals who dislike the idea of paying arts teachers less than maths teachers.  Again I would question how many of these people would actually vote for us, and think this could be easily neutralised by pointing out that such liberals tend not to have to suffer the consequences of their mistakes.

Cameron has done a good job in making people listen to us with an open mind - for the first time in years. But if 'compassionate conservativism' is to mean anything we need to put some policy flesh on the words.  People will want to know how we will make public services better before they trust us on this issue.  This idea dovetails market incentives, democratic accountability and social justice.  This puts power in the hands of parents rather than strengthening local bureaucrats, as "localism" sometimes ends up doing.

It is simple, but effective.  People know that not all teachers are the same - why should they be treated as such?  It shows that we are modernising by applying traditional principles to new areas, not abandoning them.  By applying conservative values to education, an area that consistently comes in the top five issues of voter concern, we are broadening our appeal.   It is something which shows we are concerned about how all schools operate, that we are not in favour of simply providing ‘an escape route’ for a privileged few, and is something that is likely to go down well with swing medium income voters who cannot afford private schooling, as well as persuading voters that we are concerned with the less privileged. 

> Questions for ConservativeHome Readers

• How could we bring on board parts of the educational establishment?
• What should the mechanism to remove a head teacher be?
• How can we judge what is useful to retain in terms of examinations and guidelines while keeping such interference to a minimum?

> Policy Costs

There would be some minimal administrative costs in the short term to set this system up.  In the long term, none, because this is changing structures and incentives not increasing spending.  The annual ballot of parents might involve some negligible cost, but you should be able to cut back on some of the DfES bureaucracy to pay for it.

Comments

[Tim Worrall]

Since it was directed at me, I'm sure I'm the only person who enjoyed the irony of a post criticising my spelling and grammar with a spelling mistake in it.

[Cardinal Pirelli]

"Since it was directed at me, I'm sure I'm the only person who enjoyed the irony of a post criticising my spelling and grammar with a spelling mistake in it."

It made me laugh anyway!

Regarding the policies being passed, I think we're getting the 'cake for breakfast/lunch/dinner and supper effect'. A raft of ideas that people desire but which are totally unbalanced and incompatible with healthy living/policy!

[Thomas Hobbes]

Tim, I laughed too. Not least because your English so much better than Alex Morton's. Now his English teacher should give back some of his/her salary.

Cardinal Pirelli - I fear that these policies and some of the posts on this site will be trotted out by our enemies and portrayed as real policies in the election.

[Richard]

"A raft of ideas that people desire but which are totally unbalanced and incompatible with healthy living/policy!"

In your opinion.

[Cardinal Pirelli]

Richard -

It is undeniable that something like this ends up with many ideas that are incompatible. People vote in differing numbers and don't have to face the consequences of how different ideas contradict.

This week the educational ideas have been conflicting and no sane government would try and put all the agreed proposals into action. One or two might be compatible but no more.

You can't have everything you want, realism enters the equation sometimes (or at least it does for most people).

[Account Deleted]

Thomas Hobbes - there is a grammatical error in your last post... good to see more serious points being made by you against this proposal.

I should have guessed that someone writing under the name 'Thomas Hobbes', a philosopher whose main political concept was an all powerful 'Leviathon' state isn't going to be very keen on giving more power to the users of public services!

I think that we should be in favour of reforms like this because we need a real alternative to the government. I accept it is a big change, and it needs refining, but one thing which you could do is have some LEA's go ahead with it and see what the results are. If the problems people state are insoluble then scrap the scheme. But the system needs reform, not just more money (regardless of whether or not more money would also be useful.)

[Richard]

Cardinal Pirelli,

My apologies, it seems I misunderstood what you meant. If you mean that the various policies being passed are contradictory then I agree with you. I initially thought you meant that certain policies you disagreed with were "unbalanced" (as in insane).

[Cardinal Pirelli]

Not to worry, I thought I was being clear but maybe not!

What would be a useful exercise is, when all has been voted on, if someone can come up with costings and we could then refine the list with reference to what was possible. Interested to see what people would be prepared to drop or fight to keep.

[David-James Sadler]

It is an interesting concept, whether or not it could practically be done is a whole other issue.

My view on education is we need to bring teaching back to the basics and start to give people a solid education again. It has become more about passing exams then it has giving people the fundamentals for life. Education should be the most important priority of any government, and clearly the Labour party have failed this country on education. I believe it has let down our poorest more than anyone else. Education, education, education my foot! I can say that having suffered it and have had to re-educate myself since.

http://davidjamessadler.com/forum/index.php?topic=7.0

[Ian]

I have no problem with making heads more accountable but a few things need to happen first.

1. It should be made much easier for Head Teachers to get rid of underperforming teachers. It is currently very hard to do and many schools that are not performing well have several poor teachers who are difficult to get rid of due to union backing.
2. Scrap all SAT testing in primary schools and remove the ridiculous foundation stage profiles. Let children be children.
3. Recognise that some children can be very talented and have the potential to be successful without being able to pass exams and allow school, particulalry secondary schools to develop these talents and celebrate them.

If we are going to allow parents to make judgements about head teachers then can we please allow this to work both ways. Schools often have to battle against parents who are inadequate and time and time again very little is done. But I don't suppose you can sack a parent?

Ian

[ian]

I have no problem with making heads more accountable but a few things need to happen first.

1. It should be made much easier for Head Teachers to get rid of under performing teachers. It is currently very hard to do and many schools that are not performing well have several poor teachers who are difficult to get rid of due to union backing.
2. Scrap all SAT testing in primary schools and remove the ridiculous foundation stage profiles. Let children be children.
3. Recognise that some children can be very talented and have the potential to be successful without being able to pass exams.

If we are going to allow parents to make judgements about head teachers then can we please allow this to work both ways. Schools often have to battle against parents who are inadequate and time and time again very little is done. But I don't suppose you can sack a parent?

Ian

[ian]

I have no problem with making heads more accountable but a few things need to happen first.

1. It should be made much easier for Head Teachers to get rid of under performing teachers. It is currently very hard to do and many schools that are not performing well have several poor teachers who are difficult to get rid of due to union backing.
2. Scrap all SAT testing in primary schools and remove the ridiculous foundation stage profiles. Let children be children.
3. Recognise that some children can be very talented and have the potential to be successful without being able to pass exams.

If we are going to allow parents to make judgements about head teachers then can we please allow this to work both ways. Schools often have to battle against parents who are inadequate and time and time again very little is done. But I don't suppose you can sack a parent?

Ian