In this final section of this blog, I want to explore ways in which the we can change the education system to ensure we value all of those who work within it. I want to consider how we can make sure everyone who wants to join this profession finds the place where they feel valued and belong.

So how can we do this?

One of the recent phenomena of recent times is the rise of “cognitive science”- the idea that teachers should incorporate the findings from psychological and neuroscientific research about how we learn into their teaching. The limitations of this approach and the misconceptions that have been embedded into policy and practice are for another blog. But one thing that has always surprised me is this interest in what from we can learn psychological research has not really extended further than the classroom, into the realms of effective leadership and how to develop systems that thrive. Perhaps it is because, as the education system has become increasingly market driven, with multi-academy trusts run like businesses, economic value and business practices have become central to the concept of schools. But, how can this be ethically and morally just? Schooling is not a business – we are not buying and selling commodities; children are not data points, or units. Education is about the moral, spiritual, ethical, physical, cognitive, artistic, creative, social and environmental development of every single child in the country. We should be looking towards the research and dialogue that explores these essential characteristics of the education we want for our children.

The psychological research has much to help us with there. Not least, it tells us that the concept of a hero, with ultimate power leading an organisation is outdated and ineffective. In contrast, research, described in the excellent book The New Psychology of Leadership, edited by Haslam, Reicher and Platow , suggests that leaders need to communicate three things:

1. That they are one of us – that they share our values and our concerns and understand our experience; 

2. That they are doing it for us – that their efforts are aimed at advancing the good of the group (not themselves); 

3. That they are making us matter – that their actions and achievements are a practical expression of our shared beliefs and values. 

Leaders need to show they are working on behalf of the group; listening and learning from, with and on behalf of group to ensure that the group thrives and prospers. The group may lie within a class, a department, in phase or key stage, in a school, or a wider school community such as a MAT. Furthermore, this group may lie at an even broader level; locality, institutional and governmental levels. The work of the psychologist Bronfenbrenner described this ecosystem very well and gives us a clear base to work within.

Haslam, Reicher and Platow recognise that leadership is a social process, with communication at its heart. Rather than striding forward with bombastic, heroic, singular intent (recognise him?), an effective leader recognises that they must promote the interests of the group, helping to craft a sense of identity for the team and its unique position in the world. 

Fairness and open transparency really matter. Every voice must be valued and respected. There is strength in diversity and power in acknowledging the differing opinions of others. 

This particularly applies when using research and evidence to inform our school development. As we work to influence, the skills of persuasion and cooperation become essential. 

Let’s look at an example….

It is well evidenced, for example, that reading aloud across the curriculum is a beneficial way of supporting children to develop wider and deeper vocabulary skills. But this generic pedagogy should look, sound and feel different in every class and every classroom. 

A top-down directive issued by a hero and his leadership team instructing staff to follow a scripted model might result in some reading, but it is likely, that it might not continue once the book is finished and no one is watching anymore. An ongoing monitoring process might ensure compliance, but it will not have a lasting influence. Insisting on compliance alone will not change behaviour- teachers will do as they are told (especially if their performance is measured using this metric) and then stop when the instruction is replaced by something else.

In contrast, a careful, collaborative process, where all involved are supported to reflect on the evidence about reading aloud, to understand it and consider how it applies to their own teaching is more likely to lead to longer-term changes in practice. Time spent building understanding, respect, developing motivation and providing regular non-judgmental opportunities to explore the difficult bits ensure everyone learns from and with each other.

Another way that leaders demonstrate value to those they work is through the HR processes they use; appointing colleagues into new roles and awarding pay. It is time that the DFE, unions, representatives of MATs, governors and trustees think hard (openly and transparently) about how job appointments are made and the systems of pay awards they use, including the messages pay scales, pay rises and pay gaps give. This is not just about increasing the pay for teachers, and staff, or ensuring there is an open transparent recruitment process in place (but this is crucial). It is about ensuring that pay is fairly distributed and decisions about pay are fair and justified. We know there is a gender pay gap – women, despite being 97% of the education workforce, typically earn less. And a diversity pay gap. This is obvious at the the senior leader/MAT executive issue. Every year, the top MAT CEO earners are published by the education press. The list is mainly white, middle aged, middle class men (in grey suits)- a obvious lack of diversity and equality. And then consider the amount these CEOs are paid in comparison with other members of staff. This gap is rapidly increasing and there seems to be no attempts to change it. Supporters of the ability to pay enormous salaries claim that these pay packages help to attract and retain high value employees. I do not understand this argument. Schools are communities that rely on everyone within the community working to optimum effect. Within a school, everyone matters. This attitude that there are a group of special heroes who deserve vast salaries, hugely out of line with other employees makes no sense to me.

Or if we look at this from the policy perspective – what Bronfenbrenner would call the macrosystem – then the values and laws that are shared illustrate how leadership is still positioned and valued. The education sector still has a long way to go. I find it illuminating to listen to those who hold national positions of power and influence – CHMI, Children’s Commissioner, MAT CEOs, Regional Schools Commissioners, policy wonks who work for think tanks and charities etc etc. One thing that fascinates me is how they position themselves within a speech or a conversation. More often than not, they refer to themselves in the first person (I spoke to thousands of children; I wrote the report; I held focus groups…. etc) and position themselves as owning the organisation they represent. Hero leadership, lacking in humility, modelled by those who should know better. Of course, if you are the hero, you should take responsibility when it all goes wrong. But, we do not seem to see these heroes accepting this part of the job. How many CEOS step back from their roles at points of financial crisis, or when the majority of their leadership team resign, showing a lack of confidence in their leadership? How many politicians resign when caught in compromising positions? Or headteachers when they are found guilty of seducing students, or education wonks when they are sued? I am not aware of any resignations following the death of Ruth Perry….

Finally, and most importantly, if we are to make the education sector a place where everyone is valued, we need to become comfortable to making decisions that put children at the heart of the conversation. During my career, I have spent a lot of time working in schools that have got in to spots of trouble ( something I will come to in my next blog series). We have to accept that this happens and in many cases, for reasons that are beyond the control of those who work in the schools. However, once this happens, decisions are often made that are not made with the children in mind. A good example is paying consultants, who are considered to be Edu-Celebrities, thousands and thousands of pounds for speeches and presentations should not be happening. Education is a public enterprise, paid for through public money. In my opinion, those working in public service should not be paid more than the prime minister. If budgets are tight, then no school or school community should be paying four figures for a short speech by someone. The child-focused decisions are made at the local level, by teachers, school leaders and communities who understand the unique nature of the challenges.

Making decisions that put children first is a courageous thing to do. It often involves doing things that go against the accepted grain of the general education discourse. But that’s OK. Leadership isn’t about taking charge, or being a hero – it is about getting under the skin of the situation, finding out the detail and communicating effectively with nuance and compassion.

At the heart of this, is the need to create a community that works to ensure all are valued. In the words of Maya Angelou, no one will remember your words, your actions will become distant memories, but they will never forget how you made them feel.