1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

Dear Stephen et al.....

Discussion in 'Governors' started by tsb32, Mar 25, 2013.

  1. tsb32

    tsb32 New commenter

    Dear Stephen,
    How important do you view NPQH in Headteacher apointments now that it's non-statutory? I'm of the opinion that it's not particularly significant but fellow governors are unsure.

    Thanks for your help.
     
  2. montiagh

    montiagh New commenter

    Check out this recent thread on NPQH

    https://community.tes.co.uk/forums/t/633826.aspx
     
  3. tsb32

    tsb32 New commenter

    Thanks for your reply.... not sure it really answers my question but thanks for taking the time to respond.
     
  4. montiagh

    montiagh New commenter

    My advice despite the recent change in requirement is that it is up to your GB to decide if it would necessary to include the requirement of NPQH, unless they are a serving headteacher. The law bit is here:-
    <u>The Education (Head Teachers&rsquo; Qualifications) (England) (Revocation) Regulations 2012</u>, coming into force 8th February 2012
    Some say it was a waste of time and the money that should be spent on the children, others will cite that it shows that an aspiring HT is prepared to go above and beyond.
     
  5. tsb32

    tsb32 New commenter

    Once again many thanks for your response, I appreciate it.
    However, I'm not sure why? It's non- statutory which suggests to me that it's not relevant or very useful prep for Headship. Controversial but most advice I've read and the removal of its statutory nature would seem to suggest that that is the case.
    I'm concerned that we may miss out on a really good candidate who doesn't have it and wouldn't if they'd followed the NCSL guidance which says only to apply to do it if 12-18 months from Headship being as its statutory status was removed 15 months ago.
    Let me give a specific example. I can't see how studying online a unit on Finance could possibly be more useful than a deputy who was responsible for school finance. I may be wrong but I can't see how.
    Again, controversially this is what concerns me about this most crucial appointment. Some governors don't realise/ understand that studying an aspect of whole leadership is not as valuable as actually doing it and being able to show impact.

    Thanks again.
     
  6. montiagh

    montiagh New commenter

    Why don't you put down NPQH as desirable then? Captures all.
     
  7. tsb32

    tsb32 New commenter

    <ol>[*]Thanks again. Advice much appreciated. I think in common with a lot of schools that's what we'll end up doing. It just worries me that he governors will fixate on it rather than seeing real experience and impact as more important..... </ol>
     
  8. montiagh

    montiagh New commenter

    Dont't let them fixate then? Appointing a head to your school is the most important decision that you can make and the probably one of the most important decisions non members of staff will ever take in their lives. NPQH is one tiny component for consideration. Your fellow governors need to concentrate on the whole picture, you owe it to your children of today and tomorrow.
     
  9. tsb32

    tsb32 New commenter

    You're absolutely right of course. Thank you for your good sense. The issue I think that governors often have is that they struggle to see though the real story being told by an application. In many cases a prospective candidate can make themselves sound great on paper but a little further research tells you that it's not quite true. When i have looked at a candidate's application and then looked at the school's they currently work at in tells the full picture. Give me a Head who knows what it means to be outstanding because they have worked in and contributed to it being excellent any day.


     
  10. You could view the NPQH as indication of intent - i.e. that the individual has undertaken and obtained the qualification and so signalled her/his commitment to headship and indeed to ongoing CPD (given that it is no longer compulsory). Given that there is a difference of opinion the sensible option might be to make it part of the desirable criteria rather than essential criteria, that way you won't deter a high-class candidate who has not achieved NPQH. You could also ask for NPQH or another management qualification (e.g. an MBA). If you make it part of the desirable criteria then in any short-listing process the essential criteria should be assessed first, which again should not work against an outstanding candidate without NPQH.
    Stephen Adamson
     
  11. tsb32

    tsb32 New commenter

    Dear Stephen,
    Thanks for advice.
     

Share This Page