Abstract
The governing bodies of publicly funded schools in England are currently facing a number of substantive challenges of various kinds. Many of the challenges are long-standing, while others relate to the current context for governing wrought by recent education policy developments initiated by central government. A number of the challenges are immediate and intense, and may well develop over time. The challenges result from both policy imperatives and the challenge of governing effectively – procedural imperatives. The intention of this article is to analyse the challenges facing governing bodies in England. We argue that the challenges interact and synergize and could develop into ‘a perfect storm’, which could have significant implications for the security and stability of the education system and for society generally. Our thinking is shaped by the notion of interactive governance (Kooiman, 2003), which posits that the workings of the school governance network, of which school governing is a part, is best understood in terms of interactions. Following this introduction, we provide some background information for those not familiar with the school governing system in England. We then very briefly describe the three research projects in which we have been involved that form the empirical base for the article (Balarin et al., 2008; James et al., 2010, 2012, 2013). The challenges facing governing bodies are considered under the headings: school governing’s low profile; the institution and the environment; accountability; and the role and the responsibility of school governing bodies. The way these different challenges interconnect and add together is discussed in the penultimate section. In the final section, we make some concluding comments.
|
Balarin, M, Brammer, S, James, CR, McCormack, M (2008) The School Governance Study. London: Business in the Community. Google Scholar | |
|
DfE (2012) The pupil premium: What you need to know. Available at: http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/pupilsupport/premium/b0076063/pp. Google Scholar | |
|
DfES (2004) Governing the School of the Future. London: DfES. Google Scholar | |
|
James, CR (2011) Does governing body size really matter? Governing Matters (Mar/Apr): 11. Google Scholar | |
|
James, CR (2012) Trends in the governance and governing of schools in England. Local Government Studies. DOI:10.1080/03003930.2012.722839. Google Scholar | |
|
James, CR, Brammer, S, Connolly, M, Fertig, M, James, J, Jones, J (2010) The ‘Hidden Givers’: A Study of School Governing Bodies in England. Reading: CfBT. Google Scholar | |
|
James, CR, Brammer, S, Connolly, M, Fertig, M, James, J, Jones, J (2011) School governing bodies in England under pressure: The effects of socio-economic context and school performance. Educational Management, Administration and Leadership 39(4): 414−433. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
James, CR, Brammer, S, Connolly, M, Fertig, M, James, J, Jones, J (2012) A Review of the Literature on the Board Chair: What Are the Messages for Chairs of School Governing Bodies in England? Reading: CfBT Education Trust. Google Scholar | |
|
James, CR, Brammer, S, Connolly, M, Fertig, M, James, J, Jones, J (2013) The Chair of the School Governing Body in England: Roles, Responsibilities and Relationships. Reading: CfBT Education Trust. Google Scholar | |
|
Kooiman, J (2003) Governing as Governance. London: SAGE. Google Scholar | |
|
Levacic, R (2008) Financing schools: Evolving patterns of autonomy and control. Educational Management Administration and Leadership 36(2): 221–234. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | |
|
Ofsted (2002) The Work of School Governors. Report from the Office of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Schools. London: Ofsted. Google Scholar | |
|
Ofsted (2012) The Annual Report of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Education, Children’s Services and Skills. Available at: http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/about-us/annual-report. Google Scholar | |
|
Ofsted (2013) Ofsted Inspection Handbook. London: Ofsted. Google Scholar | |
|
Ranson, S (2008) The changing governance of education. Educational Management Administration and Leadership 36(2): 201−219. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals |

