Our school has gone through a number of changes recently driven by the introduction of whole school policies. I want to take a couple of these as case studies to talk about the line between teacher autonomy versus leader autocracy.
I find it interesting that generally teachers are ‘goodies’. There’s a strong streak of law abiding nature in most teachers even if socially there are some who push against the grain. One thing I think that all teachers accept in their daily life is the need to give up some autonomy in favour of the needs of the society, culture and community that we are part of. For example most of us keep to the speed limit and know that while we may be safe to exceed that speed, everyone breaking the law in this way makes the road less safe for everyone else. A more trivial one is the ‘shopping trolley theory’ which is supposed to show how well adjusted a person is to living in society by whether they return a shopping trolley after they are done with it or whether they leave it by their vehicle. Obviously the latter is an inconvenience to others rather than life threatening but the analogy works.
In a previous blog on resetting behaviour I stressed that if there was one thing that made it work, it was consistency. It’s an areas where we have been highly successful as every teacher is fulfilling their part of the bargain. This in turn means that children in school are getting a consistent experience in terms of behaviour management and all of the grey areas and guess work have been taken out of how to conduct themselves around the site and in lessons. Where schools are less successful it is because not every teacher is sticking to the whole school policy. To take an example:
Scenario: SLT in a school decide that form time is currently under utilised and so a programme of expected activities is produced and rolled out. Each year group has a fixed activity on each day including assembly, a tutor group challenge or competition and checking equipment and so forth. After a few weeks it becomes clear that some form tutors are doing a great job while others have started to deviate, running activities on different days or skipping some altogether.
What’s the problem? Surely each tutor knows their class and is able to produce a suite of activities that is appropriate? Sadly, this isn’t the point. If the previous system was ineffective then the best way to fix it is for all staff to pull together. Every individual that does something different makes life harder for the next person. It’s like in the schools where there is a clear rule about not using the toilet during lessons without a medical note. If some teachers ignore it, it becomes that much harder for others to hold the line. Worse, students talk to one another and soon it becomes clear that the tutor times don’t actually look the same, not all of the whole school activities are being completed and at least one form group are missing out.
Scenario: Students are required to have their phones switched off and in their bag at all times. During a lesson, a student receives a notification on their phone and it makes a noise in their bag. The teacher questions the student who admits that their phone isn’t switched off and offers to switch it off there an then rather than handing it in to the teacher as per the policy. The teacher agrees.
This one’s a huge issue! On the surface it’s easy to think ‘what’s the harm?’ It’s especially difficult if the student is a good one who is rarely in trouble. The fact is, if you let this kid off, you are signaling to them and every other child in the room that you aren’t willing to follow the policy. You’re creating a hole in the net and ultimately being deeply unfair. When another teacher follows the policy and enforces the ban as they are expected to do, it’s going to look like they are being overly strict. We use the phrase compassionate consistency, and when this exact situation has come up for me I have reassured the student that I have every sympathy, but also the rule is clear. They can collect their phone at the end of the day like anyone else who gets caught.
As leaders ultimately bear responsibility for the efficacy of the school and the safety of the children, how can they ensure a consistent quality of education and safeguarding of each student when there are often individuals who can’t or won’t conform? In an ideal world it all just works anyway. The culture of the school is such that even when there are gaps or flaws in the system things generally go all right. Teachers have full autonomy to do what they as professionals deem to be best. That could be in terms of behaviour management, lesson planning and delivery, or even curriculum design. Sadly, schools are seldom so idyllic and ultimately the pressures of school life and often the sheer volume of students mean that more robust systems are necessary but a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. A teacher who goes rogue and tells the children it’s fine to wear their coats, use their phones or whatever else in their classroom automatically throws all of their colleagues under the bus.
As a professional with [some] experience, I often resent scrutiny where it’s not about improving my teaching. I don’t like feeling checked up on to make sure that I’m following a policy but I have to accept that it is a necessary evil to ensure that policies and procedures are being consistently followed and applied. We have to draw a distinction however, between leaders genuinely seeking enough compliance to generate school improvement and autocratic leaders who enjoy wielding their authority and like to investigate and probe constantly, ensuring their will is followed to the letter. The latter increases teacher stress, robs teachers of their professionalism and independence and drives a wedge between leaders and staff that only stores up problems for further down the line.
Sometimes it’s hard to find the balance between a helpful check in to ensure consistency and an overbearing presence that betrays a lack of trust but ultimately ‘trust’ is exactly the point. Leaders need to show trust in their colleagues so that when they do pop in to check how things are going as part of an observation, learning walk or other form of quality assurance it is not perceived as a hostile maneuver but a genuine opportunity to observe good practice and help staff develop in their roles. Trust helps leaders to give enough autonomy to staff that they can grow and improve while staying close enough that they can give correction or additional guidance. Autocratic leaders who constantly hover between classrooms looking for the slightest slip often fail to demonstrate that they truly trust their staff and are likely to add to teacher stress and ultimately create a teacher churn situation.
This Teacher Speaks 