Muriel Tersago, Principal Consultant, Timewise
Teachers’ reasons for leaving are many and varied, and include issues around workload, wellbeing and stress. All of which could be mitigated if flexible working in schools was more widely available. Indeed, NFER research has shown that some teachers leave because they can’t access flexible working, and that many secondary school teachers who do leave subsequently reduce their hours.
It’s for this reason that we have spent the last 16 months working on a Teaching Pioneers Programme with three Trusts, across eight schools, piloting how best to champion and deliver flexible working within schools. Our findings are clear: it’s complex, but it’s not impossible, and there is a return on investment for doing so. As one deputy headteacher noted: "Find the commitment and shift in mindset, and you can tackle the operational issues.”
The challenges for schools – and how to tackle them
Introducing flexible working into teaching is less straightforward than in office-based roles, with complications including timetabling and culture, the frontline nature of the role and the intensity of the school day.
But our Teaching Pioneer Trusts (Academies Enterprise Trust, GLF Schools and The Kemnal Academies Trust) recognised that these challenges could be overcome. They agreed that flexible working could benefit schools, and saw the pilot as an opportunity to focus on how to go wider and deeper with the changes that were needed.
Our team worked closely with central HR teams and headteachers from the eight schools to explore five core areas, providing support including workshops, coaching sessions, timetabling masterclasses and train-the-trainer materials, and sharing learnings at each stage.
What we learned – and what it could mean for schools
There were a number of key learnings, which our Teaching Pioneers have already begun to implement – and which can be adopted by other schools and Academy Trusts who are keen to improve their flexible offer:
- Flexible working has to be tackled at a whole-school level
Many schools currently operate on a request-response model, in which people formally ask for reduced hours. This pigeonholes flex as something that needs to be earned, and creates an unspoken sense that there are a limited number of arrangements possible.
Far better is to take a proactive whole-school approach, which opens up opportunities for flexibility across all roles. This is facilitated by regular, open discussions about what people’s needs might be, how to create opportunities to support them, and how to build these into the timetabling and workforce planning processes.
- Schools should reframe what flexible working means
A knock-on effect of the request-response model is that flexible working in schools has become equated with part-time. However, there are many other options, such as timetabling PPA at the beginning or end of the day and allowing staff to do that work from home, or delivering CPD and meetings remotely.
Many schools trialled these approaches during lockdown, and some have continued; but what’s often missing is a strategic approach to implementation, underpinned by dialogue about when, where and how work can be done, which gives people input and control.
The point is to have open minds and discussions, and see what is possible for each role and team. As one principal noted: "We can’t guarantee the same outcomes… but the process is the same for all – open conversations, trying out different ideas and trying to make it work.”
- The headteacher’s attitude is critical
Clearly, such substantial operational and culture changes won’t succeed without strong leadership. So it’s vital that heads are committed to flexible working in principle, and driven to make it work. This is all the more powerful when they role model working flexibly themselves.
And they also need to pass on some of the responsibility to others. With a whole-school approach, the implications and execution of what’s needed and what’s possible are discussed at an individual, team and school level, rather than simply being approved or declined by the head.
The pilot also highlighted the importance of clear communication, explored solutions for the thorny timetabling issue, focused on training and empowerment of line managers and noted the positive impact on students.
The views of our Teaching Pioneers – and next steps
So what’s the impact been? Our post-pilot evaluation showed that a majority of teachers surveyed felt more confident about discussing flexible working, and that different reasons were seen as more acceptable; they also noted that their schools were increasingly supportive of flexible working.
Qualitative feedback also highlights the positive impact of the programme. Comments made include: "There is so much goodwill in return for the Trust and understanding we are given”, and "Thinking proactively is liberating… we engage more people to explore what’s possible and come up with more creative ideas that can work for both sides.”
One principal noted "Our absenteeism has dropped through the floor”, which highlights the return on investment that flex can deliver. Our own research has shown that, for a Trust with 100 teaching staff, one fewer sick day per teacher per year for three years would cover the cost of a flexible working pilot. That’s an investment worth making, on every level.
We hope that more schools and Trusts will use our findings to develop their own whole school approach to flexible working, and reap these rewards. We’ve also partnered with the Department for Education to develop a programme of insights and resources to train school leaders, with 682 schools and 103 business institutions across the country taking part. We’ll be watching to see how the educational landscape changes as a result.
You can download our Teaching Pioneers Programme report here.
CST CONFERENCE
This Blog is written in association with our workshop at CST Annual Conference 2022 with Mandy Coalter, Founder, Talent Architects.
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.
