Keep Calm & Carry On

T

This was a smashing little book was Christmas present from my daughter: one of those spontaneous ones (the book, not Beth) that often has a relevance beyond the original intention.

There was something of a slip in the original typing of the Title: I wrote "Keep Clam and Carry On" and whereas I have no problem with marine and freshwater bi-valves, they weren't supposed to feature here...however. "Keeping Clam" = "Keep Quiet" so maybe there's something worth thinking about here, namely the choices available to us when we can opt to speak or be quiet.

How many times do we pass on unsubstantiated gossip, partial truths, delicate pieces of information that benefit no-one and can result in great harm. When this happens, our poorly judged comment or intentional hurt has a inbuilt potential to come back and hurt us or to reduce our trustworthiness in the eyes of others.

Fairness for Your Future? Don't Aim Higher: Get Real & Limit Your Ambitions

Aim Higher is an organisation that promotes access to Higher Education amongst non traditional groups. You know the ones I mean; bright young people who may have a series of factors that mean that they are less, rather than more likely to go to University. Aim Higher provides structured mentoring in their schools, access to a vast range of University experiences in years 10,11 and the sixth form and engagement with professionals who have "been there and done it." In any sane world it would be seen as a rock-solid investment in our collective futures. The government is withdrawing its funding-a paltry £78 Million.

True to form the coalition states that Universities will need to demonstrate that they are engaging with students from non-traditional backgrounds: if this is the case, the need to get their collective fingers out-Aim Higher Funding finishes in July.

It has been my privilege to work within Aim Higher's network in the West Midlands-working our way though a collective approach to Safeguarding Young People on Residential Summer Schools. There were 14 or so Universities involved meaning that learners from Coventry could go on a programme in Worcester, young people from Birmingham could experience programmes in Warwick and so on, all delivered by highly qualified University Lecturers and supported by well-trained and organised Aim Higher workers.This year, on one programme alone, somewhere in the region of 1200 young people benefited from the experience in the West Midlands and engagement in schools continues to be a major factor in motivating young people who-I restate-may come from disadvantaged backgrounds where expectations of progression into Higher Education are low.

There's an almost casual shrug to the assertion that Universities will, post Aim-Higher-need to show that they are engaging with non-traditional, disadvantaged groups. Unless there is some sharp thinking as to how they might work together to keep the collective knowledge, connections and excellent practice that exists within Aim Higher I can foresee expertise, creativity and money being wasted in the name of the pinch-faced dogma that masquerades as policy.
To conclude-the Coalitions's Spin Doctors seemed to have insisted that the words "Fair" and "Fairness" be dropped into conversations whenever possible. I'd be fascinated to hear how we match the concept of "fair" with the decimation of an organisation designed to deliver fairness to our future.

Worrying Signs and Concerning Noises

Worrying Signs and Concerning Noises

I was surprised to read the linked article-seven out of ten teachers want to quit their jobs because of badly behaved pupils http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/seven-out-of-10-teachers-want-to-quit-survey-shows-2096257.html and every bit as concerning for me is the implicit assertion that some sort of deregulation will help. Deregulate what exactly?
Statute tells us that we may use “reasonable force”, what seems to be absent from the debate is reference to criminal (case) law that gives the profession some working definition related to what “reasonable” might look like. The teaching profession, as things stand, is right to err on the side of caution-headline cases often resulting in the end of a teaching career. There’s a wider agenda running here and it’s to do with the coalition’s assertion that there is something fundamentally wrong with our state system that can be improved by throwing further confusion at an already demoralised profession-the Charter School.“ Here’s something from Michael Gove:
“He has insisted - along with other Democrat reformers like Arne Duncan, Joel Klein and Michelle Rhee – that there be more great Charter schools – the equivalent of our Academies– to drive up attainment, especially among the poorest. In New York, Charter schools – like the inspirational Knowledge is Power Programme schools - have dramatically narrowed the vast performance gap between black and white children and 91% of those benefitting are on free or reduced price meals.
With a relentless focus on traditional subjects, a culture of no excuses, tough discipline, personalised pastoral care and enthusiastic staff who work free from Government bureaucracy to help every child succeed, these schools are amazing engines of social mobility that are now sending children from ghetto areas to elite universities.” http://www.michaelgove.com/content/national_college_annual_conference
Michael Gove’s commitment to the potential of Charter Schools may well have been increased by his support of and work with Frances Lawrence, widow of the London Head Teacher, Philip Lawrence-murdered in a gang-related incident outside of his school and I personally applaud the support he has given to a process that has rewarded good citizenship and supported legislation to ban knives.
How do we as communities address the problems that exist on our streets and in our houses and family lives that contribute to the uncertainties that contribute to 70% of surveyed teachers and, at their most extreme, are in part responsible for the murder of a good man, inspirational leader and gifted headteacher?
Margaret Thatcher’s assertion that “There is no such thing as society” was part of statement that suggested that there are “individual men and women and there are families” and that the use of the term “society” had become a byword with which to explain a dependency culture: it was the government’s job to sort out problems. The same government that did almost nothing other than at its best preside over and at its worse seek to influence the factors that led to the collapse of the heavy industries that were part of the foundations that underpinned society.


So now, “society” is failing to get a fair deal from schools that are bound by bureaucracy-this from the party of government whose reforms of the late eighties and early nineties saw a disproportionate increase in form filling in the name of accountability that has seldom been replicated and the part answer if to consider a system-Charter Schools-that is succeeds in a different culture where the gap between rich and poor experienced would be unacceptable in every aspect to British Society.
In a letter to the New York Times, J.D. Merriman, Chief Executive of the Charter School Center (sic) refers to the stringent reviews of groups who wish to start Charter Schools, that they (the schools) should be held in account for achieving the outcomes promised and that this has to be underpinned (Charter Schools or otherwise) by one of New York’s great assets, a well motivated and cohort of Principles and Teachers who place achievement at the top of their agenda.
So, how does this square with the current position: where will the well motivated cohort of leaders and teachers emerge, to whom will they be accountable, how will achievement be recognised and how will high standards of behaviour be maintained?
Almost twenty years ago I accepted the Headship of a Pupil Referral Unit in Birmingham: our population was made up of three categories. Fixed Term Excluded, Permanently Excluded and Indefinitely Excluded. Indefinite Exclusions made up the larger proportion of the Centre’s population and existed largely “off the radar” of their Mainstream school-gone quietly, no fuss and the money remained with the schools.
Schools had two routes open to them. Exclude or Statement of Special Education Needs-in 1997-1998 around 12,300 (.16 of the total school population) Children and Young People were excluded from school, by 2008-2009 there had been a massive adjustment to 6550 (.09 of the total school population). During the same period, the number of Statemented Children in mainstream schools has risen.
In the late nineties and early part of this decade I headed up Behaviour Support services in two West Midlands Authorities and part of the job was to provide access to support personnel who could work within schools, with learners, their parent and teachers and, at the same time, make it more challenging for schools to exclude. This against the background noise of increased accountability and bureaucracy and increased pressure on the centralised capacity to offer the provision needed to make a major impact, the prevailing mantra to schools on a national scale seeming to be “You must cope”.
Money taken from the Centre made its way into schools budgets: it is my belief that the competing demands of providing support and discipline and of being simultaneously pro-active and reactive has significantly diluted the impact of work schools can offer to learners who challenge, fractured families who are unable to assist us and the increased realisation that there are hard, hard times to come.
The “improvement” (reduction) in permanently excluded pupils hides in my view, a substantial contributory factor to teacher stress and demoralisation and here it is. The behaviour that once resulted in exclusion has not significantly changed. It is contained differently. Increased budgetary pressure on other front line services has reduced the capacity to respond as well as we might-the pressure on Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service, Social Care and other Local Authority Support Services has increased the tensions and frustrations that surround challenging children in difficult circumstances.
The answer is not to further dismantle the capacity to deliver cohesive and coordinated responses. Neither is to be found in suggesting to interest groups that all that is needed is to set up a Charter School and within “One Leap Jack Was Free” of the constraints of State provision all will be well-this does a disservice to all concerned.
Making it “easier” for teachers to use physical intervention places us all in a difficult place-what is reasonable? When is it unreasonable? Who should be trained? And at the very time we seem to be the potential architects of a concerning tension that will encompass Safeguarding issues, I note the resignation of Jim Gamble from CEOP following the Home Secretary’s decision to incorporate it into the National Crime Agency.
The Vetting & Barring Scheme and I.S.A may well be regarded as too bureaucratic to survive in their current format at a time when careful thought should be given to who we recruit and how, should we go along the route of Charter Schools.
There’s unlikely to be a simple answer-experienced professionals require affirmation of their status, let them contribute to the debate on behavioural standards, levels and types of intervention needed and the capacity building required to increase job satisfaction and reduce the impacts created by children and young people whose challenging behaviour make their continued presence in Mainstream Education a problematic blight on outcomes, achievement and happiness for the wider school community.

Bear Trap Avoidance # 1 "Can I Just Have A Minute?"

My recent work with Middle Managers has been hugely enjoyable. Challenging, practical and pragmatic they hold high aspirations for themselves, their teams and the organisation, with a firm grip on the difficult times and challenges we all face (a substantial proportion of my work is delivered in the public sector.
One of the more common areas of discussion is centred around how to deal with challenging individuals who might be on their way to becoming Toxic Employees. Another concerns the words and phrases we can use to maintain dialogue at difficult times and how to signal “No” in a manner that is acceptable to those concerned.
Here are some of the common themes I’ve worked around over the recent past-some of what follows is tongue in cheek enough, underpinned by some serious messages.
There are some avoidable Bear Traps and the first one I’d like to raise is the balance between an “open door” policy and having your day systematically hi-jacked so that your activities become compressed into a claustrophobically small space. Open door policies are great and I think they send out clear messages of accessibility, inclusivity, respect, worth and value. I’m of the view though that they are at their most productive when everyone understands that access should no be abused-an open door is not an invitation to hi-jack precious time with trivia.
“Can I just have a couple of minutes of your time?” How often is that seemingly innocent question a coded way of asking “Any objections of I just screw up the next 45 minutes of your working day and put you off your concentration for the following hour, make you late for an appointment and miss returning a phone call?” However, because we’re generally decent people, we sometimes have a tendency to freely give our time away, giving the intruder a method of obtaining what they want; namely a legitimate reason for being away from where they need to be and doing what they should have been doing. Ironically, the desire of the “open door manager” to be accessible in order to raise performance actually complies with the undesirable intentions of others to develop a deceptively subtle work-avoidance strategy that costs them nothing.
So, at the time the question is asked, maybe an enquiry along the lines of “Is it really just a couple of minutes or do we need to book a slot” would increase our control. “I’ve got to be at X by Y, so I can give you 5 minutes” should mean just that. The temptation often exists to give of yourself without considering the messages transmitted. “I was talking to John about this and he agrees,” might not be what John was saying at all-he may well have been delivering a series of “I’m listening” messages that have been interpreted-perhaps opportunistically-as tacit approval with unwanted consequences.
Oh by the way, look out for the power of words like "just"-they're another Bear Trap for later!

So: This Is What We're Heading Towards!

There have been some interesting developments this weeks with the Secretary of State for Education, Michael Gove delivering a monumentally flawed overview of the new Academies Programme by first stating that some were safe, only to say in a later release that there had been a clerical error and some that thought they were safe weren’t. Anyway, he’s said sorry so that must be alright must it not? The corrected statement contained clerical errors too, a good/bad week for clerical errors depending on how you look at things.
A recent Times Education Supplement article pointed out that many academies were pushing up their pass rates by entering lower ability learners into non-academic subjects were passes are easier to achieve. Really? I’m shaken to the core of my being.
Research tells us that schools with a number of residual problems in lower attainment, poor facilities and low expectations have opted for academy status and I can see why. Apart from enabling a greater sense of self determination, it enables them to draw a line under the past and start again with some new and invigorating approaches to teaching and learning. Part of this approach includes curriculum developments that reach out to engage young people who might otherwise effectively “switch off” from their education and fuel a downwards spiral of poor engagement in employment, education and training.
Too many years ago now, I used to moderate courses developed and marketed by both City & Guilds and B.Tec. They were an honest attempt to change the direction of young people who were vulnerable to voting with their feet and simply not attending or creating “hot spots” in the school timetable. Overall, the level of engagement was better than might have been expected had we stayed within the more traditional curriculum.
So, academy leadership teams realise that they are about transformation and that one of the transformative strategies will be to increase the options available to the “new disaffected” (these are, I suspect, very much similar to the old ones), who are at risk of becoming NEET (Not in Education, Employment or Training) and will need a different skill set to remain engaged in the education/training process. Information tells us that at risk learners are likely to reside in poorer areas with higher risk and vulnerability factors and yes, poorer schools in terms of fabric, catchment and results at out-turn, higher exclusion and absent rates with greater teacher turn over. The Academies Programme was, at least in part, I feel at genuine and honest attempt to reverse the trend.
The newly elected coalition had a golden opportunity to state that whatever else needed to be cut and trimmed (slashed and burned?), education would remain its highest priority and would be resourced accordingly. It’s a depressing start: let’s begin to water down the strength of the Vetting and Barring Scheme (big government = very bad) and at the same time suggest to parents and other “interested groups” that they might wish to open schools in closed down shops. Then let’s move quickly and give the National Curriculum’s QCDA the coup de grace and do away with BECTA. Gove has gone on record as saying that academies should have greater freedom re qualifications (26/5/10) and then tells a substantial number of them “No, you only thought you were going to be one, now your not: clerical error-happens all the time.”
So, where are we? Sandwell, worst hit by clerical errors is one of the poorer areas in the UK and its needs unsurprisingly speak with a powerful voice about what should be in place to enable people to live better lives. Education standards need to rise: their Academies programme has been decimated and a further 90+ redundancies have been issued at Sandwell College, an innovative and eclectic organisation that meets the needs of a diverse community. Today’s news tells us the government is considering re-allocating the funding in Primary Care Trusts to GP’s. What I see here as a return to provision at the Parish Pump.
Those with money can and will buy their way out of the mess by moving to areas where there are “better” schools or, it would seem, opening one of their own. Much as the public perception of “The Successful Fee Paying School” might be about standards, it’s often a more complex social reasoning that persuades some parents to say, “I want my child to mix with people other than those who attend school x” and as long as we continue to leave school x to its own devices, it is unlikely that there will be a significant change.
One stop health shops, the bringing together of community health, access to services have their impacts most keenly felt in areas of high need and it’s a long hard slog to turn around some of the crushing social factors that have militated against progress and development: mark my words, it’s Housing next.
Some flagship decisions mooted this week will have long-lasting consequences. It’s a great life; just don’t have the wrong post-code, go to the wrong school, be unemployed, sick, old or poor.
Well done everyone: a promising start!

Fly The Flag: Stick The Sticker!

First things first, I’m Irish. I’ve lived in England almost all of my life and I like it here. Next, Ireland’s failure to get to the finals was in part down to an awful refereeing decision and the never endingly perplexing stance on 18 yard box technology generally, goal line technology particularly. Last: I shall be supporting England in the World Cup.
We in the U.K have been through some pretty challenging times and with many others I suspect that they’re far from over. A recent poll in LinedIn suggested that there was a strong belief (around 81% of respondent if I remember correctly) that things were likely to remain uncertain in the Global Economy for a while.
There hasn’t been too much to smile about over the last 20 months or so and it is clear that there are some bruising encounters ahead for people who may have previously thought their job to be secure, their future safe and subsequent plans in place. The jarring reality is that this is not, for the vast majority of us, the case.
The World Cup? A chance for people to park, just for a while, the fears and anxieties they’re dealing with and get behind the England Team. It’s been great to see the Cross of St George flying as the anticipation builds, good to read articles on how managers may wish to implement some flexible working arrangements for the period and uplifting to feel “part of the party”.
Today I read that the party has been pooped. Enterprise, the major Public Service contractor has, it would seem, informed its employees that stickers must not be stuck to or flags flown from any of its vehicles because of Health & Safety issues, stating that the Health & safety of their employees, customers and the general public is paramount. Good for them.
It would be very wrong to jeopardise the well being of the population by allowing a refuse collection lorry to fly an England flag. Do these people not realise that a sudden change in wind-speed or direction may have an adverse effect on handling and vehicle stability? In cities and rural communities, the hitherto unheard of sound of a flag, flapping on the wind of progress from a vehicle may inflict trauma on hens and hoodies alike.
Stickers in windscreens too present a hazard that is almost incalculable in its potential to cause multi vehicle pile ups from motorway to middle England as vast tracts of the driver’s vision are obliterated by massively intrusive ermmmm….stickers.
Given the hard times we’ve been through and the tough challenges ahead, I wonder if it would be alright, just for a few weeks, to let people enjoy themselves in a relatively harmless expression of national unity and purpose. I know some will take it too far and make the headlines for all the wrong reasons; life is a bit like that at Christmas and New Year too. I’m convinced though that the majority of us will enjoy the life, get involved with the competition and bring some “feel good” back into our lives generally and the workplace specifically.
I know it’s not for everyone; that shouldn’t mean that we can’t all benefit in someway from the sense of unity and hopefully pride and success that waits. Maybe, Enterprise, you might wish to reconsider your decision and do the grown up thing: issue your drivers with flags for their vehicles and a windscreen sticker that suits, together with a full set of instructions!

Emotional Intelligence, Football Managers, the Sack and the Press

Not a combination you’d probably expect to find!
Gianfranco Zola was sacked as manager of West Ham United at the beginning of this week, 10th May 2010.
A change of owners at his club would suggest that he was more rather than less likely to exit, given that the club had underperformed. Injuries to key players, others not performing to expectations and financial uncertainty in the background: factors I’m sure we’re either used to or about to become more familiar than we’d like.
“Relieved of duties”, “We thank him and wish him well”. There are no easy platitudes or euphemisms that disguise the brutal fact-sacked.
The press took themselves off to his house in Kent, and as almost always is the case, Zola emerged smiling to meet the press core. He told them that he could say nothing about his sacking –legal proceedings to follow and proceeded to pour some coffee he had made for them. “I can’t talk to you about the sack, but I can offer you some coffee”.
The press are an understandably hard nosed bunch, yet on that day at that moment all present seemed to be disarmed and charmed by a generous man who, though he could not give them what they wanted, was able to show concern and care for, not “the press core” but for other human beings with a job to do.
This investment in the well-being of others will see him in good stead, the lasting reminder of a smiling, polite and open man who, when at the bottom of a pretty deep pit, was still able to engage with others in a manner that further underpins their collective respect towards him.
We all have our bad days, sometimes we can lock ourselves away, sometimes we have to go out and put on the bravest of faces and share what is good and worthwhile whilst acknowledging that right now and at this time, we’re not in the best of places.

Cook Your Way To Social & Emotional Intelligence

Is there a link between the work I do with young people in schools and other company activities? I'd like to think so. We have built high quality working relationships with schools that purchase a service from us, delivering individual mentoring programmes to more generic support to young people, their teachers and mentors. This means that there opportunities to try something different.

I had delivered a piece of work to a group of year 8 & 9 boys. Their profiles were familiar enough-quarrelsome, poor concentration spans and a series of risk/vulnerability factors. We had talked a lot and made efforts to help them prepare to take a higher degree of responsibility for and ownership of the image they project to others.

Talk is fine but it's actions that count and with this in mind I suggested to them that they might consider choosing the ingredients for, preparing, coking and serving a Christmas Meal for some of their teachers and mentors. We had to restrict it to eight. Their invitation list included the Head Teacher, Assistant Head and two members of the Senior Management Team. Learning Mentors and a subject specialist were also invited.

We shopped, they chose and stayed within budget. We met the following day and working to a tight timescale, produced the meal-ably and enthusiastically led by a Senior Support Assistant who clearly enjoys a first class, respect led relationship with the lads.
They did it! They cooked and served a 3 course Christmas Meal. There was, I think, a considerable amount of emotion around the table: what had taken place was much bigger than the sum of its parts and at what still, in spite of financially pressed times, commercialism and cynicism, Christmas remains an important time of year every adult around the table received an unexpected gift when the Head Teacher asked the lads what they would take away from and remember about the occasion. Although all the food had been eaten, several of us swallowed very hard one one of the cooks said "Your faces when we served the meal."

How does this link to our other activities? Well, reputations get tarnished, we are all capable of huge acts of self sabotage and we sometimes need an opportunity to prove to others that there is more to us than the day to day, sometimes highly reactive exposure we have to each other. When this opportunity arises, it needs to be witnessed and affirmed by respected others who need to hear the perceived impact of "doing things better and differently". Whether as a Coach, Mediator, Teacher, Mentor, there are experiences that occur daily that mean as much in one context as they do in another. I drove away that evening with much more in my heart and soul than I had arrived with earlier or dreamed possible. For not the first time, the Coach was coached, the Teacher was taught and the Mediator was not needed when this leap of faith was taken.