This week during a meeting of the Education Committee the new Ofsted Head, Sir Michael Wilshaw, stated that he thinks (some) governors should be paid.
“I think we need to spend a lot more time on governance arrangements.”
“When schools do poorly or badly, it’s not just the issue of the school leader, the head and the school leadership team, it’s the way the governors have held the leadership to account.”
“I’ve already said our new inspection arrangements will focus much more on governance and the effectiveness of governance than ever before, and there will be a subsection under leadership and management to say important things about governance.”
“My view is that when a school is doing poorly, we need to think about paid governance.”
“And my view is if a school goes into a requirement to improve category, on the first occasion, the secretary of state should intervene and think about paid governance there.”
The National Governors’ Association doesn’t share his views. A spokesperson told the BBC:
“NGA does not believe it would currently be helpful to offer payment to some or all school governors.”
“But it supports further strengthening of arrangements to ensure proper payment of expenses, and time off with pay agreed with all employers to support governors in their valuable work.”
“In the current financial climate, the NGA thinks that any additional money available for governance could be used in more effective ways, eg to fund training.”
What do you think? Should you be paid? Should all Governors be paid, or just those at struggling schools? Would paying Governors cause accountability issues, and would performance monitoring be needed?
- The National Governors’ Association
- Ofsted’s 2010/2011 Annual Report
- Watch Sir Michael’s statement to the Education Committee
- From the BBC