Partnerships for Learning

Adding Value through

Partnerships for Learning

RM Conference29 April 2008

Dr John Dunford

General Secretary

Association of School and College Leaders

Partnerships for Learning

Adding Value through Partnerships for Learning Defining partnership The benefits of partnership The evidence Four phases of leadership Learning from other sectors Key partnerships Support federations Barriers The way forward

Partnerships for Learning

Defining partnership An arrangement between two or more schools or

colleges which has one or more of the following features:

- A constitution or clearly defined written protocol- A financial commitment or a shared budget- Shared appointment(s) or shared use of staff- Jointly commissioned or delivered activities

And is overseen by an agreed set of management arrangements, such as:

- A joint governing body or committee- A management group of heads and principals- An executive head - Another transparent supervisory arrangement

Partnerships for Learning

The benefits of partnership Economies of scale Increased efficiency Knowledge building Increased capacity Increased opportunities for students and

staff Broader curriculum Extended services

Partnerships for Learning

The evidence Improving performance(in supported and supporter schools) Improved inputs

- Professional practice and development- Leadership development

Improved outputs- Increased participation in school sport- Improved behaviour and reduced truancy - Improved learner motivation and staying on rates- Broader curriculum

Improved outcomes- Faster rates of improvement in attainment

Partnerships for Learning

The evidence

Partnership costs time and money The benefits take time to come

through

Partnerships for Learning

Four phases of leadershipPhases 1-3

Description of phase Approximate time period

Government policies

Head-centric/collaborative Up to late-1980s Local authority coordinationFew powers for governing bodiesTechnical and vocational educationinitiative

Head-centric/competitive Mid-1980s tomid-1990s

Funding through Local Managementof SchoolsGrant maintained schoolsParental choice and open enrolmentLeague tables. National testing

Distributed/competitive Early 1990s to mid-2000s

OfstedSpecialist schools (early)Expansion of popular schoolsAcademies (early)

Partnerships for Learning

Four phases of leadershipPhase 4

Description of phase Approximatetime period

Government policies

Distributed/collaborative

Early 2000s to present

London ChallengeWorkforce reform14-19Behaviour collaborativesExtended servicesSpecialist schools (later)Academies (later)Federations/Trust schoolsNational Leaders of Educationand National Support Schools

Partnerships for Learning

Learning from other sectors

Private sector NHS Police Higher education Local government

Partnerships for Learning

Key partnerships

14-19 consortia Behaviour collaboratives Extended services ICT-based partnerships Support federations

Partnerships for Learning

Support federationsThese are most effective in three phases:Early phase

clear mandate saturate with leadership and systems confront problems

Development phase build capacity strengthen curriculum leadership

Longer-term sustainability

Partnerships for Learning

Barriers Insufficient funding to pay for partnership working Too many partnership initiatives Schools and colleges funded on a differential basis Different pay and conditions frameworks for staff in

different parts of the partnerships Variable admission arrangements Need to focus on school’s own position in

performance tables Lack of recognition for partnership working in

inspection process No national system for monitoring and capturing

added value in partnerships

Partnerships for Learning

The way forward for the government Move to a culture of collaboration Fund partnerships Change accountability system Rationalise partnership programmes Produce coherent support strategy Encourage wider leadership Be patient

Partnerships for Learning

The way forward for schools Create a culture of collaboration Deal with non-collaborators Be prepared to commit funding Be rigorous about quality assurance and local

accountability Involve governors, staff, parents and students Define clear focus Embed values Develop joint CPD Distribute leadership Be patient and persistent Communicate, communicate