Taylor (1977)

Notes on the text
Preliminary pages Membership, Preface, Contents

Chapter 1 Introduction
Chapter 2 Present arrangements for school government
Chapter 3 A new approach to school government
Chapter 4 Membership of the new governing bodies
Chapter 5 Communication and cooperation
Chapter 6 Curriculum
Chapter 7 Finance
Chapter 8 Appointments
Chapter 9 Other functions
Chapter 10 Training the new governors
Chapter 11 Procedural arrangements
Chapter 12 The government of voluntary schools
Chapter 13 Recommendations and implementation
Summary of recommendations

Notes of extension and dissent, minority report

Appendix A Evidence
Appendix B History of school managers and governors
Appendix C Visits
Appendix D Education Act 1944: selected extracts
Appendix E Administrative Memorandum No 25 (1945)
Appendix F Letter to parents
Appendix G Aims into practice

Index

Report of the Committee of Enquiry appointed jointly by the Secretary of State for Education and Science and the Secretary of State for Wales under the chairmanship of Mr Tom Taylor CBE

London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office 1977
© Crown copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland.

Chapter 11 Procedural arrangements for the new governing bodies
[pages 93 - 97]

11.1 The effectiveness of a governing body, like that of any other organisation, will be increased if the procedural arrangements for its work are efficient. We do not wish to burden governing bodies with a detailed set of standing orders. Within the general guidelines provided in this chapter, we believe that governing bodies should be free to work out their own rules and procedures.

Meetings and proceedings

11.2 The Fourth Schedule to the Education Act 1944 (Appendix C) provides that 'the quorum of the managers or governors shall not be less than three, or one third of the whole number of managers or governors, whichever is the greater'. In our view this requirement will continue to be appropriate for the new pattern of school government which we propose.

11.3 The fifth paragraph of the Fourth Schedule provides that a meeting of the governors may be convened by any two of their number. It seems to us desirable that this provision should be brought more into line with the quorum requirement. This would help to ensure that a meeting of the governing body is not convened unless there is likely to be a quorum of members present. We accordingly RECOMMEND that the provision should be amended to make it necessary for the agreement of at least one third of the members of the whole governing body to be obtained to the convening of any meeting other than one arranged by the chairman and clerk in the ordinary way.

Frequency and time of meetings

11.4 The Fourth Schedule specifies that the managers or governors shall hold a meeting once in every term.

11.5 It will be clear from what we have already said about the functions of the new governing bodies that the scale of their responsibilities and duties will be considerably greater than they are at present. We are aware of the possible manpower and financial implications of frequent meetings but it seems to us unavoidable that governing bodies will need to meet more than once a term if they are to achieve any measure of success in their new role.

11.6 We therefore RECOMMEND that the Fourth Schedule should be amended to provide for meetings to be held at least twice in each school term (1).

11.7 The time of day at which meetings of governing bodies are held is not in our view a matter on which there can be any central prescription. Attendance at meetings of school governing bodies is specifically recognised in the Employment Protection Act 1975 as a service for which employers are required to allow time off from work. Nevertheless, the personal circumstances of individual governors may make it more convenient for them to attend meetings at one time of the day rather than another. There are also other factors, such as the prior commitments of LEA advisers and senior officers, local transport problems and the availability of accommodation for meetings, which will need to be taken into account.

11.8 We accordingly RECOMMEND that the time at which meetings are held should be left for decision by the individual governing body so that they can be arranged at a time convenient for most of the members. To minimise any interference with work and to ensure maximum attendance it will be desirable to avoid, as far as possible, holding meetings of the governing body during the normal working hours of its members.

Confidentiality and the dissemination of information

11.9 We RECOMMEND that proceedings should not be confidential unless a governing body specifically so decides in regard to a particular item of its business, in which case any confidential items in the minutes should be recorded separately. We think it should be for the individual governing body to decide whether non-members, including journalists, should be admitted to its meetings.

11.10 We attach importance to the need for all those concerned in school government to be kept fully informed. We RECOMMEND that copies of all agenda, reports and minutes of proceedings of governing bodies should be sent to the local education authority and to all members of the governing body. It will not, of course, be sufficient for the governing body to use this routine procedure for the purpose of drawing the LEA's attention to any of its resolutions or recommendations which require specific consideration by the authority. Such items should be the subject of separate communications to the local education authority.

11.11 It became apparent to us during our visits that there is very little public awareness of the part assigned to governing bodies in the running of schools. It is a very important element of our new approach that the existence and accessibility of school governors should be generally recognised. We therefore RECOMMEND that information about the membership of governing bodies should be made widely available to parents and others. It would be helpful, for example, if such detail could be included in any school handbook issued to parents or in other appropriate communications sent to the home. Local education authorities will no doubt wish to consider additional ways in which suitable publicity might be given.

Chairman of the governing body

11.12 The chairman of the governing body has a particularly important part to play. The responsibilities of this post require not only that he (or she) ensures the smooth and efficient conduct of meetings but that he should be available to represent the governing body and fulfil the additional duties required. He may also, on occasions, have to take action on his own on behalf of the governing body.

11.13 The election of the chairman will normally take place at the first meeting of the governing body. We RECOMMEND that it should be open to the governing body to elect as chairman any one of its members, except those who are paid members of the staff of the school.

Clerking

11.14 The 1944 White Paper suggested that 'it would be usual for the Education Officer or his representative to be the clerk to the governing body'. The model instrument provided that 'the Clerk of the Governors shall be the Chief Education Officer or such other person as may be appointed by the local education authority'. Although it is a fairly widespread practice for the clerk to be appointed by the local education authority from its own staff ('central clerking') there are some areas where the governors have appointed as their clerk a person from the staff of the school or its locality ('local clerking'), either for practical or economic reasons or as a positive attempt to give managing and governing bodies greater independence.

11.15 Clerking arrangements were not regarded as a major issue by our witnesses. The only question of any substance concerned the relative advantages of central and local clerking. Of those who made specific reference to the subject well over half favoured the latter. They pointed to the greater independence of the governing body that has the right to appoint its own clerk; the advantage of having a clerk with local knowledge and personal interest in the school; the saving in economic terms and the relief afforded to the authority who would otherwise carry a very substantial administrative burden. It was also suggested that the presence of a representative from the local education authority office inhibits members of the governing body from speaking freely and that problems can arise because of the conflicting claims on the loyalties of an officer from the education department serving as clerk.

11.16 On our visits we found support for central clerking arrangements. It was argued that when meetings were serviced by officers of appropriate standing, a reasonable standard of proficiency and the certainty of regular meetings could be assured, authoritative answers could be given on the spot and the local education authority office be kept in better touch with the local situation. The latter point was regarded as particularly important by some local education authorities faced with the problems of maintaining communications in widely spread rural areas. Significantly, however, the Association of County Councils, basing themselves on the experience of those local education authorities that have dispensed wholly or largely with central clerking, expressed the view it was not essential to have clerking done by the staff of the local education authority.

11.17 We do not deny the force of the arguments for central clerking but on balance we consider that they are outweighed by the advantages of a local appointment. Of these, we regard the greater independence of the governing body and the personal interest of the local clerk in the activities of his 'own' school as of particular importance. In our opinion the work that is involved could, in most cases, be undertaken by the school secretary where there is one in a large school, and in a smaller school by one of the governors or by someone else living locally. Such an appointment could provide interesting part-time work without being excessively demanding.

11.18 However, the varied views that have been expressed on this subject lead us to the conclusion that the differences between urban and rural areas and between London and the provinces are so considerable that the choice of system must remain with the local education authority. We therefore RECOMMEND that the local education authority should decide in the light of the local situation the most effective, practical and economic system of clerking for its governing bodies.

Payments to members of school governing bodies

11.19 Local authorities have power, under the Local Government Act 1972, to pay allowances to their members in respect of a wide range of 'approved duties'. These duties may include, for those council or committee members asked to serve as managers and governors of schools, attendance at meetings of the managing and governing bodies. Where the authority has decided to recognise such service as an 'approved duty' (no details were available to us of the number who have done so) the individual members concerned are able to claim attendance allowance, at present up to £10 a day. Co-opted members of local authority committees (who are treated as local authority members for allowance purposes) are not entitled to receive attendance allowance but may claim financial loss allowance payable only where loss of earnings, or specific extra expenditure, can be proved for 'approved duty'. Where their service on the governing body has been recognised in this way by the local education authority, both councillors and co-opted committee members may also claim travelling and subsistence allowances.

11.20 Under the 1972 Act, arrangements may also be made for all the members of a school managing or governing body to be paid travelling, subsistence and financial loss allowance in respect of attendance at meetings of the bodies concerned. Such arrangements have however been confined to a handful of boarding schools. We understand that the government's view has been that the arrangements should be limited to those schools whose special characteristics have made it essential to have a governing body composed of other than local persons, with the result that all or nearly all the governors are involved in long journeys to meetings. The argument against any more general application has been that, by their very nature, schools are usually local institutions, and their governors usually local people whose attendance at meetings does not normally involve much in the way of expenses.

11.21 The consequence is that, whilst the majority of governors do not receive allowances of any kind, different conditions can in practice apply to individual members of the same governing body. We regard it as particularly invidious that there should be this financial discrimination in some cases between one governor and another. We recognise that there is a long established and valuable tradition of voluntary service in school government. We trust it will long continue. Nevertheless, in our view the most important consideration is that no one should be debarred from serving as a school governor because of financial considerations. So, in addition to recommending that meetings be arranged outside the normal working hours of members (paragraph 11.8), we RECOMMEND that:

i. attendance allowance should not be payable to any school governor;

ii. financial loss allowance should be payable to all governors in respect of proved loss of earnings;

iii. local education authorities should be empowered to pay travelling and incidental expenses to members of governing bodies in accordance with arrangements made by authorities with the object of securing that no individual would be debarred from membership of a governing body by reason of the cost of attending meetings of the body.

Footnote

(1) The following members disagree with this recommendation: Professor Baron, Mr Browning, Mr Currie-Jones, Councillor Hett, Miss Lynn, Miss Millett, Canon Reilly, Mr Turner. In the view of these members the frequency of meetings of governing bodies should be determined by local circumstances and needs. An increase in activity is to be expected from the new governing bodies but this could well be expressed through the work of sub-committees, specialist panels or working parties. In these circumstances, the formal requirement for the whole governing body to meet as a minimum twice a term could prove an unnecessary encumbrance. The minimum requirement for meetings of the governing body as a whole should remain once a term.