Managing Resources for School Improvement

Jane Martin

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2002
• ISBN:
  9781134794676
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Didattica
• Subtopic: Didattica generale

Using case studies from eighteen secondary schools the authors analyse the effectiveness of a range of management styles and offer practical advice on how to effectively manage resources within a school setting.

Part I: Linking resources to improvement

Chapter 1: Resources and improvement

Resources matter. Those who work in schools as teachers and associate staff, school premises, furniture, books and equipment all provide some of the means by which we transform our hopes and aspirations for children’s education into daily learning opportunities and experiences and, beyond that, into the longer-term outcomes of schooling. It is that link between resources and learning which is the principal concern of this book. We ask what characteristics would be expected in a school that is successful in making the link between resources and learning—the cost-effective school—and then examine how 18 secondary schools exercised their responsibilities for resource management.

The importance of resources for schools is highlighted by debate about the government’s annual decisions on public expenditure on education and its consequences for spending by schools. It is a debate which manifests genuine concern about the level of spending on education and it is a concern we share. This book, however, is not about that debate but what is, in many ways, the more challenging task of whether we use existing resources as effectively as we might. Difficulties in articulating the link between resource decisions and learning are a general problem, as identified in the annual report of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Schools:

Inspectors judged the evaluation of cost-effectiveness by governors and head teachers unfavourably in nearly two-thirds of the primary and nearly half of secondary schools. Few of the primary schools had, for example, procedures to monitor the effectiveness of their deployment of support staff; and while awareness about cost-effectiveness is increasing in secondary schools, few schools evaluate the cost of their procedures and plans …. Many schools require more rigorous methods for assessing the costs and opportunity costs of alternative plans.

(Ofsted, 1995, p.24)

On this assessment, there is clearly scope for improvement in the way we manage resources in schools and, in so doing, improve the quality of experiences provided. This book, based upon a study originally commissioned by the DFE as part of a wider international project coordinated by the Paris-based OECD, is about how schools can improve upon their management of resources.

We examine and report on resource management in 18 secondary schools originally selected as possible exemplars of good practice, their selection followed consultation with the regional offices of HMI in England. Thirteen of the schools are under local management (LMS) and five are grant maintained (GMS), so that we represent the two main forms of decentralised resource management in maintained schools in England and Wales. Drawing upon a combination of survey data and case studies, the study examined evidence related to three key questions:

• How are these secondary schools using their greater responsibilities over educational resources?
• What are the characteristics of the decision-making processes which relate resources to learning?
• How is the exercise of these responsibilities linked to the standard and quality of learning in the schools?

We show how these 18 schools have used their responsibilities over resources to undertake and support initiatives and developments in the schools. We examine how the decisions were made and how these relate to the wider context of decision making in the schools. Above all, we consider the effect of these changes on the experience of pupils in the schools.

In drawing upon the practice of resource management in schools, the book has been written for a wide audience. It is intended to be useful for governors and head teachers with the responsibility of ensuring that they are using their budgetary resources to best effect. We anticipate that the content will also be useful for inspectors and for the monitoring and support role of LEA officers. As an empirical report on radical forms of decentralised resource management the text should also be of interest to readers in those many countries embarking on policies decentralising resource management to the school level. Finally, we anticipate that it will be a useful book for students in the UK and elsewhere engaged in short and long courses in educational management.

This is a wide range of audiences and we anticipate that the book will fulfil different needs for each of them; accordingly, we set out below eight features of the book that will be of interest to the different audiences.

A DISTINCTIVE CONTRIBUTION

First, the book provides an opportunity to learn from good practice in secondary schools in a wide range of settings. The schools which we contacted were identified following discussions with HMI and LEAs, drawing upon their local knowledge across the regions of England, and following preliminary contacts by ourselves. The choice of good practice schools merits emphasis. We make no claim that this book provides a basis for generalising about decentralised management in England and Wales, an issue examined in Schools at the Centre? by Alison Bullock and Hywel Thomas (1996). We would claim, however, that this examination of good practice provides valuable insights into the practice of decentralised management in different settings.

Second, we believe that the framework used for organising our research work has potential for guiding resource management in schools. The framework introduced in Chapter 3 has been used and well received by a wide range of audiences during training sessions on school management and development planning. We have now extended this framework so that it provides a statement of the attributes of a cost-effective school. In subsequent chapters, this extended framework is used to interpret the evidence collected from schools and is used to provide guidance on the practice of resource management.

Third, we consider how the link between resources and learning can be improved. While these schools were selected on the basis that they represented good practice in resource management, we do not suggest that we consistently observed best practice. It is clear that there is potential for further development in how they exercised their new responsibilities. The changes we examine are recent and all schools are still learning how best to manage in these conditions. The evidence from the schools indicates weaknesses which can be improved upon and we consider how this might be done.

Fourth, the 18 schools include a range of types serving a diversity of communities and, in the Appendix, we provide a brief description of each school. They include 11–16 and 11–18 schools ranging from 607 to 1,765 pupils, mixed and single sex, inner city and rural. There are schools with a large proportion of pupils from ethnic minorities, others with an intake from predominantly white low income communities and yet others serving middle income communities. Seventeen of the schools were comprehensive and one selective. They were drawn from across England, a feature we were able to retain in the three schools selected for more detailed case study.

Fifth, we believe this to be the first major study of resource management which has included and compared the two main forms of decentralised resource management in England and Wales: the local management of schools (LMS) and grant maintained schools (GMS). The number of each type, 13 LM and five GM, are not proportionate to their number but fewer than five GMS seemed too few to include in a study of this kind. In undertaking our work, we asked much the same questions and used the same approaches in collecting data. The result contributes to a distinctive understanding of the differences and similarities between these two forms of decentralised management. It has also contributed to our views on how decentralisation might be developed.

Sixth, the study is distinctive in its collection of information from a wide range of people with direct interests in the schools. We interviewed and surveyed governors, head teachers and teachers, a range of support staff, parents and pupils. We also observed meetings of governors, faculties and departments, as well meetings of senior staff. It provides an unusually wide range of voices and opinions on resource management and its contribution to school improvement. In the first phase of the study, we conducted over 100 interviews. In the three case study schools we conducted more than 70 interviews, attended 26 meetings and collected survey opinions from over 300 parents of Year 9 pupils and over 500 Year 9 pupils.

Seventh, the study provided an opportunity to examine how head teachers—notably in the three case study schools—interpret their roles in this area. We report not only on a diversity of styles but on an interpretation of role that was sensitive to context, notably the state of development of their school. We consider the similarities and diversity in the interpretation of the head teacher’s role in these schools and go on to examine the implications for the professional development of head teachers.

Finally, we draw upon the study as a whole for a discussion of its implications for the internal management of schools and of the wider school system. Our purpose is to consider how changes can contribute to assuring quality in schools and make recommendations on the role of governors, head teachers, LEAs and the DFEE. While located in the context of the LMS and GMS of England and Wales, our conclusions are linked to the conceptual analysis of the cost-effective school and, therefore, are relevant to the development of decentralised systems elsewhere.

Taken together, we believe these eight factors offer insights into decentralised resource management for the several audiences we have mentioned. How we have organised the remainder of the text is set out in the following section.

THE STRUCTURE OF THE BOOK

The book contains eight further chapters organised in three main parts. Part I is called ‘Linking resources to improvement’ and contains two context-setting chapters. Chapter 2 examines the main features of locally managed schools (LMS) and grant maintained schools (GMS). By identifying those elements which are common and those which differ, the emphasis is upon providing an understanding of those aspects of the changes which relate to the management of resources. Such an approach may be of particular interest to students of resource management as well as to readers outside England and Wales less familiar with these changes.

How resources are linked to the quality of provision and to school improvement is the theme of Chapter 3. It draws upon relevant literature and proposes a framework which is used both to examine the schools in this study and to provide guidance for readers seeking ways of improving their own practice in the management of resources. It begins with a diagram intended to provide a visual expression of the link between resources and learning and is accompanied by an examination of the linkages between resources and the activities which support learning. This provides a basis for an extended analysis of the organisational attributes of cost-effective schools, by which we mean schools using their additional responsibilities over resources (costs) in ways that are educationally successful (effective). Taking account of the practice of development planning in schools, the analysis considers the pervasive uncertainty in school management, the distinction between delegation and autonomy, the nature and extent of dialogue over educational needs and the quality of data informing those dialogues. The analysis concludes with a statement of the organisational attributes we would expect to see in a cost-effective school, a specification upon which we draw in the remainder of the book.

The second part of the book is titled ‘Resourcing improvement in practice’ and draws on the data collected from the 18 secondary schools in our study. In Chapter 4 we report on the wide range of ways in which the schools have used their responsibility over resources. We also examine the decision-making processes linked to these choices and assessments of their effect on the experience on pupils. This is followed by chapters on the three schools selected for more detailed case studies. At the end of each chapter we review the evidence using our ‘model’ of the cost-effective school.

Broome School is a locally managed school in the centre of a large city and has a very high proportion of pupils from ethnic minority populations. The case study provides an account of the resource choices of the school and its decision-making processes. It includes information on decision making within departments and reports on how pupils and parents assess the changes, as well as their views of the school as a whole. The case study examines how the management and leadership of the head teacher takes account of the circumstances of the school and the experience of its staff.

Skelton School is a large comprehensive school on the suburban edge of a conurbation in the north east of England. The case study has similarities with that of Broome in that it examines choices, the decision-making processes and the assessments of parents and pupils. In its reporting, however, it describes and analyses the different nature of the head teacher’s leadership and considers this issue in the context of his length of service and the experience of the staff.

In Chapter 7 we report on Whittaker School, a large comprehensive in a town in a rural area close to a large conurbation. It is a grant maintained school. As with the other case studies, the choices made with resources, the decision-making processes and assessments of effects on pupils are all reported. The leadership of the recently appointed head teacher is examined and how her role has taken account of the specific circumstances of the school is considered.

The final part of the book is titled ‘Securing improvement’. In Chapter 8, we consider the ways and means by which improvement is assessed in schools. In drawing upon the data from the study we review the ways in which those interviewed describe the effects of changes on the learning experiences of pupils. This includes an examination of differences in perspectives among the different groups from whom information was collected—governors, head teachers and senior staff, teachers, support staff, parents, pupils and students. We review what this means for managing improvement and being or becoming a cost-effective school.

In Chapter 9 we examine what has been learnt from this study on ways and means by which schools can use their greater responsibilities over resources for managing improvement. This will consider a number of themes. It will examine the sensitivity of leadership styles to the specific contexts of schools and how this needs to be taken into account by head teachers as they begin working in a new school. We ask whether the existing forms of delegation are appropriate for all head teachers and all schools and what changes might be introduced. The chapter discusses lessons for systems of communication and the importance of forms of staff development, particularly those which ask challenging questions about existing patterns in the deployment of resources in schools. There will also be attention given to the key issue of feedback on quality, inviting schools and government (local and national) to consider the ways in which they inform themselves and others about what is taking place in schools and in classrooms. We present this as a particular and fundamental challenge to those with responsibility for the management of schools and their duty to use those responsibilities to secure improvement in classroom practice and the achievement of learners.

CONCLUSION

We recognise that resources alone are no guarantee of the quality of teaching and learning or of the nature and standard of longer term outcomes. Much depends upon the commitment of pupils and the support of their parents and community Indeed, any assessment of how well schools are doing—the debate on learning value added—must take account of these factors. Much does depend, nonetheless, upon how schools use and manage those resources that are under their control. In examining and learning from the practice of the schools in this study, our concern is to assist in improving upon the existing practice of resource management. On the basis of the comments of HM Chief Inspector cited earlier, this would not be before time.

Chapter 2: Reforming resource management

Reviewing more than a decade of its reforms to schools in England and Wales, the Department for Education (DFE) in 1992 identified ‘five great themes’ embodied in the changes:

Five great themes run through the story of educational change in England and Wales since 1979: quality, diversity, increasing parental choice, greater autonomy for schools and greater accountability.

(DFE/WO, 1992, p.2)

As might be expected, these themes are evident in the legislation of this period and, in the first main section of this chapter, it is upon that legislation that we draw to provide an account of the national context in which our study is located. It is within that context that the subsequent two sections examine specific aspects of change in resource management and their implications for school improvement. A fourth section draws attention to different ways of providing ‘greater autonomy for schools’. It is an important element in an argument which calls for sensitivity in understanding national and international differences in delegated management.

A PROGRAMME OF CHANGE

The Conservative government elected in 1979 was committed to wideranging reforms, of which education was one part. In education, the first legislative expression was the 1980 Education Act which included changes relevant to what were later identified as the ‘great themes’ of diversity, choice and accountability. Diversity and choice were encouraged by ending further moves towards non-selective secondary education and by creating a scheme which financed access to schools in the private sector, ‘enabling pupils who might not otherwise be able to do to benefit from education at independent schools’ (Section 17). Accountability was addressed by changes to the governance of schools. The Act provided that, in general, all schools should have individual governing bodies and it was made a requirement that membership must include elected parent governors and elected teacher governors. The constitution and functions of governing bodies were set out in Instruments and Articles of Government and model articles which dated back to 1944. These gave governing bodies duties in relation to the care of school premises, budgeting and the appointment and dismissal of staff. In practice...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Educational management series
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Tables
• Preface
• Acknowledgements
• Part I: Linking resources to improvement
• Part II: Resourcing improvement in practice
• Part III: Securing improvement
• Appendix: Profiles of the schools
• References