Monday 6 July 2015

Time to put a cap on workload

As a profession, teachers are expected to work for too many hours. Not formally expected - in line with the mythical 1256 (directed) hours - but informally coerced, by pressures from high-stakes accountability down.
A key difficulty is that we only officially work for 39 weeks a year - which doesn't elicit a lot of sympathy from the general public and media. A year's work - maybe more! - is squeezed into 3/4 of the time; as a consequence, in those weeks, the hours worked are often unsustainable.
Not for everyone, of course. Some people live to work (& to tweet), family pressures are less for many, whilst experience can lend a hand to more efficient working and management of time. 
But what of the recruitment and retention crisis, our inability to hold on to teachers for more than the first few years, as well as the tens of thousands of experienced staff who are a drained, disillusioned, no longer enjoy many aspects of their job?

I was moved to raise the subject of time and workload by a number of related factors. The ongoing discussion in staff rooms and on Twitter regarding marking (as part of feedback) was one: What does good marking look like? What 'works'? How much time is spent on it?
Image result for school carparkThe number of cars in the car park after 6pm when I was leaving my interim RI school earlier this year was quite alarming. In spite of my attempts to encourage staff home earlier, people felt more pressured by the external expectation of marking, etc than my attempts to persuade them otherwise. It is not unusual for staff across the country to be in school into the evening and I was speaking very recently to a Deputy in the pub who had come from school after 8pm (not an unusual occurrence for him). 
And, of course, it's always been the case that teachers will work vast numbers of hours at home, whether they leave the school site early or late. To do the best for children, be 'professional' and have high expectations carries with it a moral stick to beat ourselves with and work endless hours.

Government and OFSTED will neither officially change the number of hours formally worked (and paid) to teachers, nor informally discuss a reasonable guideline to protect the well-being of  the profession. It isn't in their interests to suggest that people work less: surely that would be lowering standards?
Those Heads who are, on balance, more concerned with OFSTED than staff well-being are complicit too. Rather than setting a work-life balance expectation - even producing a policy for it - many seem 'happy' (or unaware) to set not only high, but unrealistic, expectations and have people work all hours to try and fulfil them.

The result: an overwhelming sense of failure in the profession, waning love and enthusiasm for the job, swathes of disenchanted teachers leaving the profession after only a few years in it.

Some principles and possible pointers for a workload policy:
  • Schools are, of course, all about children - but they are about adults too. The lives, education and development of adults working in schools need to be considered alongside that of children.
  • We do children no favours by 'growing' teachers who are too tired, stressed, disillusioned, dis-empowered, unhappy and lacking enthusiasm to give of their best. (In fact, how many good teachers are no longer teaching, on their way out or put off from even applying?)
  • We should be able to do a good - or better - job (by any reasonable definition) in working hours that allow a rewarding home-life, including interests beyond school.
  • As a broad guide, teachers should (as a maximum) be working between 8am and 6pm from Monday to Friday: 10 hours per day, 50 hours per week during term time.
This is subject to certain caveats:
-Teachers may choose to work earlier or later - and occasionally at weekends - as other pressures, responsibilities and interests allow.
-In some weeks, and at some times of the year, hours may vary - longer or shorter but, overall, in balance.

    Image result for pile of marking
  • Schools should seek effective ways of managing high-workload tasks (ie. report writing, exam/essay marking), including outsourcing and increased not-contact time.
  • Schools will need to better audit the use of time by teachers to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of tasks performed, particularly those which are most time intensive. 
  • If teachers are working beyond the guideline hours, we should ask: what's taking their time? is it useful & effective? could they be guided to carry out useful tasks more efficiently?
  • Teachers and schools will need to take seriously the professional responsibility of determining which priorities and tasks should take precedence within the working hours guideline.  (As an example, marking will need to be both manageable and effective, in light of contact time and the other work that is necessary).
  • To do an effective job - and feel fulfilled in doing so - teachers need to prepare well during 'non-contact weeks'. Of the 13 weeks of  'holiday', it is suggested that teachers spend up to 3 weeks  (15 days) planning and preparing, although this is for individuals to determine.

Other related questions:
  • Where does (Primary) subject leadership fit in with a teacher's priorities and use of time? Are they 'responsible' or 'accountable' for (standards in) the subject? Does this depend on pay?
  • Should those with more responsibilities/accountabilities work more hours? Is 50 hours a week a more than reasonable amount whether you are HT, SLT, TLR, NQT?
  • HTs (& SLT) enjoy the greatest flexibility to manage their time and tasks. Are they sometimes guilty of creating additional tasks for others where the time involved to carry them out may outweigh the benefit?

Tuesday 9 June 2015

How do we know (if) we're getting better?

I'm not a great runner. I guess I'm better than the average man in the street - or lying on his sofa - and I'm maybe better than the 'average runner'? I come in the top 50 of over 500 runners at Chelmsford Parkrun, I'm in the top ten in my (old) age category.

On Saturday, I nearly gave up - even on a short 5k - it was that painful, and I didn't feel I'd run a good time. However, I had, in fact, done quite well and better than expected - by some measures.
With running you can gauge your success, even progress, with times. For 5k, this wasn't my PB but it was my best 'WAVA' time - it takes age and gender into account: 71.4% falls into 'Regional Class' I'll have you know! (60+% Local Class, 80-89% National Class, 90%+ World Class)http://goo.gl/LTkdHh

So, not my PB but making progress on my age-related time?! Statistics/data can even be hard to interpret and understand for running: this is without factoring the weather, the course and other conditions, the curry and the alcohol the night before!

There are clearly echoes here with the problems that schools encounter, even some of the labels. How well are they doing? compared to other schools? compared to other schools in a similar context?

Most recently, I've encountered the question of: are we getting better? how do we know we're getting better? how much better?

As an interim Head in an RI school (with a great staff team), we were faced with a review meeting each half term at which, quite reasonably, we were expected to report on how we were doing. We are ultimately judged, of course, by how well children do and how much better they get (improvement). I personally think that tests are the least worst way of gauging this, especially as children reach Junior age and beyond.
Of course, testing has flaws and, thereby, the data arising from it. Lesson observations are, rightly, only part of the picture, a small part to those who have seen the light. Work scrutiny - and associated marking (and response to it) - has, consequently, grown to be an even more significant means of judging how well a school (and teacher) is doing.

I have to say that judging how well you are doing - and progressing - is fraught with difficulties. Manufacturing and churning out data half termly only has the point of trying to satisfy external scrutiny (including Governors). What tests/assessments you can use this frequently that equate to new, age-related standards is a huge question in itself. I also think that ongoing teacher assessment - with the intention of producing data - is so time-consuming and unreliable as to be pointless.

However, we all want to know if what we're doing is 'working' and helping the school to get 'better'.

This was brought into focus recently when I was sent an OFSTED report of a now RI school - and prospective future assignment. I include an excerpt below and invite colleagues to provide practical examples of how to answer the point made.

It is not good because:
Plans for the future do not include measures by which leaders can check on the progress of their actions. This hinders leaders’ ability to review during the year how successful the plans are.

What does the school need to do to improve further?

Improve leadership and management by: 
  • ensuring that the school’s plans to improve teaching and achievement have clear interim measures by which leaders can check if their actions have been successful 

So, 

  • How do we check that our actions have been successful?
  • How do we do this in the short to medium term (even half termly), as RI and SM schools have to do?
  • How do we know that we're heading on the right track, 'getting better'? 
  • How can we tell whether individual and groups of pupils are getting better in these timescales?
  • What are the 'clear interim measures'?

I welcome any thoughts and practical, concrete examples from colleagues, maybe from your own action plans.

And find out where your local Parkrun is: they're very inclusive! http://www.parkrun.org.uk/events/events/