Liz Robinson, CEO, Big Education
The response to those questions led to my early headship experiences, focused around the 'Every Child Matters' framework (Be healthy, Stay safe, Enjoy and Achieve, Make a positive contribution, Achieve economic wellbeing). This vision for a holistic approach to each child was supported by a range of interventions and initiatives, including Surestart, extended schools and ‘team around the child' working.
Since 2010, there has been an explicit and consistent commitment to re-focusing the questions for the sector, stripping out some of the broader aspects and doubling (tripling?) down on the academic element of school provision. The questions being asked became focused on a purer 'standards' agenda, which we all came to use as a shorthand for improved test scores in standardised tests and exams. These questions included; How can we get more 'disadvantaged' children to do better by these measures? Who is the best in the world at this kind of performance and how can we learn from them? What should schools focus more on and less on? The change in logo and branding of the DfE (goodbye to the rainbows) was symbolic of this shift in focus - the 5 outcomes of Every Child Matters became one outcome - academic success.
Experiencing this huge shift in focus as a serving head was a fascinating experience. Despite all the changes of direction and incentives in the system, I have remained committed to my values and vision for a holistic education - what we now call a 'big' education.
My own beliefs and philosophy - or if you will, the questions I am interested to ask - definitely had more in common with my early headship experience than the latter. I believed and still believe that schools are THE best chance we have to make positive change in our communities, one child and one family at a time. And I believe that whilst academic rigour is a key part of making that change, I think there are other aspects which are necessary contributors. I am driven by the question 'How do we make long term, sustainable change with our school communities?'
Politically led swings of policy lend themselves to rhetoric and snappy soundbites. We live in a 'post-truth' world, where vastly complex situations can be packaged up as 'oven-ready Brexit', to give one example. Simple, clear messages are the stuff of dreams to politicians of all hues, who think in short-term news-cycle, voter engaging headlines.
The desire for simplicity and clear messaging has also fed the desire for simple and clear metrics of success - the need to demonstrate impact. Governments of all hues have been responsible for targets and measures which have become the tail that wags the dog in the sector. The currency in the system has become rather crude and simplistic measures of school performance based on their ability to prepare pupils well for exams and testing. We all know the games that get played to this end and the perverse incentives this creates.
However, the drive for simplicity and soundbites seriously undermines the reality of running schools and the process of learning, which is inherently complex and multi-dimensional. It is of course nonsense to think that education can be neatly fitted into two opposing schools of thought, traditional and progressive, although sadly much of the debate remains within this framing.
This has manifested for me as a repeated assumption made about my work, as someone who has explicitly advocated for and created a more holistic approach - namely that I am 'weak on standards' or think academic learning is not important. This is clearly nonsense, and a symptom of the reductive and oversimplified debate. Of course it is not about one thing at the expense of another - it is not either/or - it is both/and.
That's why our mission statement at Surrey Square for many years was 'personal AND academic excellence, everyone, every day.' The ‘and’ is critical. And is it also tricky - as it moves away from a simple clear cut though message. More holistic means multidimensional - more complex. Not always easy and clear to explain. Not always the basis of a great sound bite.
Of course, the simplicity of focusing on a single outcome - academic achievement - does make the job of school leaders conceptually simpler. The incentives are clear. There are established approaches which can be used to increase exam success. Through focusing on a broader set of outcomes, we make the leadership job more complex. Trade-offs have to be made; there are decisions about curriculum, pedagogy, assessment and culture which work towards a number of different outcomes, many of which are not as easily measured as test scores. Which to prioritise and how to balance the intense high-stakes demands of our current accountability systems? This requires a sophisticated and nuanced approach from our leaders.
One model I find useful to support this thinking is from the Barratt centre values, because it shows how an organisation, and its leaders, need to operate across a wide range of levels simultaneously. Richard Barratt encourages us to be ‘full spectrum’ in our leadership - working at all the levels. I relate this to the questions we are asking at each stage - ranging from operational and viability questions at level 1, through to questions about our fundamental purpose as organisations and our role within society at levels 6 and 7. I think we have all been overly focused on level 3 on performance as defined by one narrow set of data.
At Big Education, we are working hard to rethink practice in our own schools, based on our vision - a meaningful education for every child, empowering them to make positive change with their communities, for our world and their future. This means we are asking questions and actively seeking answers to that end; working to design our approaches around the outcomes we think are important - which includes, but is not limited to, performance in exams and tests. We are developing alternative ways to evidence and demonstrate the learning and progress of our students and our schools. It is hard. And I believe it is absolutely critical.
This concept is really about integration - bringing together a diverse range of components and making them work as a whole. I think the challenge for us as a sector now is to move into a fresh debate about the purpose of our schools and empower leaders, teachers and academics within the system to work with integrated and holistic models of school and student success, working through the complex questions around metrics and performance. We need to focus on the ‘and’. We also need to urgently address the toxic accountability culture within the sector which actively inhibits leaders from asking some of these big questions.
I continue to challenge myself to keep asking the ‘big’ questions and to support my team and network to do the same. What’s your big question this year?
The CST Blog welcomes perspectives from a diverse range of guest contributors. The opinions expressed in blogs are the views of the author(s), and should not be read as CST guidance or CST’s position.
