Presentation to the Centre for Educational Research in Equalities, Policy and Pedagogy (CEREPP), University of Roehampton.

1. SCHOOL ACCOUNTABILITY AND
STAKEHOLDER GOVERNANCE
(SASE) (2012-2015)
Dr. Andrew Wilkins
andrew.wilkins@roehampton.ac.uk
Twitter: @andewilkins
Blog: http://saseproject.com/

2. Policy Background
1980s Thatcherism
 Local Management of Schools (LMS)
 New Public Management
 Governing through competition
 Neoliberalism (or advanced liberal governing)
 Active citizenship (citizens as consumers)
See 1988 Education Reform Act (ERA)

3. Policy Background
1990/2000s Blarism
 Neoliberalism plus post-neoliberal
governmentalities, e.g. ‘Third Way’, network
theory, communitarianism.
 Joined-up governance, co-governance of
services (voluntary, public, private)
 Governing through networks – ‘policy
communities’, new ‘policy networks’.

4. Policy Background
Schools encouraged to form...
‘foundation partnerships and federations that will
work together to raise standards but also take on
new responsibilities’. Partners might include
‘employers, volunteers and voluntary
organizations’ from the private, business, voluntary
and community sectors, in order to create ‘joined
up services’ (DfES 2004).

5. Policy Background
The shift from government to governance – governing
without government.
Governance signifies the
co-production of services
by a plurality of actors and
organizations (government
and non-government).

6. Policy Background
Roll back:
privatising public assets (declared to be unsustainable, too
expensive or producer-led) and dismantling of state-led
intermediary agencies, e.g. local authorities.
AND...
Roll out:
steering and framing governing at a distance through inspection,
audit, performance indicators, league tables, target setting,
public-private accountabilities, etc.

7. Research Aims
 To explain how school ‘governance’ operates as
a set of practices mediated by the actions,
interests and knowledge of different actors and
agencies.
 To explore the role of school governors in
enabling strategy, providing scrutiny of direction,
offering support and ensuring accountability
(stakeholder governance).

8. Governance Framings
 Impact of public, private and third sector companies (policy communities,
knowledge brokers, consultants)
 Role of school-to-school support, LEA and new economies of scale
 New middle-tier arrangements (e.g. collaborative, cooperative models)
 Implications of soft and hard federation (e.g. MAT, Umbrella)
 Roles, responsibilities, beliefs and knowledge of governing bodies
 Impact of self-evaluation, training and auditing mechanisms

9. Accountabilities
 Consumer (parents, students, choice, branding)
 Contract (competitive tendering, contracting out, efficiency)
 Performative (Ofsted, targets, testing)
 Corporate (value for money, profitability, surplus)
 Professional (training, self-evaluation, CPD)
 Moral/Ethical (student intake, inclusion, access, participation)
 Legal (LEA, DfE, liability, statutory duties)
 Network (collaboration, federation, co-governance)

10. Data Sources
 In-depth case study material taken from 8 schools in
London and Norfolk (documentation, interviews,
participant- and direct observation, archival records).
 Mixture of primary and secondary schools: local authority
maintained, free school, foundation, state boarding,
converter and sponsor academy, with some schools
operating within Collaborative, Multi-Academy and Co-
operative Trust models.

11. Data Collection
Participating
Organizations/Groups
Interviews conducted Outstanding
interviews
Meetings observed
(e.g. chairs
committee, FGB,
other)
Treefield Primary Academy 11 3 2
Airley College 12 0 4
Duncan Park High School 15 3 4
Blackhill High School 9 3 5
New Broadham High School 11 0 4
Broadley High School 7 0 4
Meadow Valley Primary
School
10 3 3
Ravenfield Academy School TBC TBC 4
Other state/non-state
organizations, LEA, cluster
governance groups
6 0 4
Total Anticipated total Total
81 90 34

12. Data Collection
Official school
documents, website
material, prospectus,
minutes, improvement
plans, achievement
levels
Mediating structures,
e.g. school-to-school
partnerships,
collaboration, local
authority, MATs, co-
operative, etc.
Government and non-
government texts, e.g.
DfE, NGA, Think Tank,
Ofsted, academic, third
sector, media, etc.
Observations of
meetings, e.g. FGB
and committee
Interviews with
governors,
headteachers, LA
officers and parent
non-governors

13. Research Method/ology
 Case study approach, multiple-case design, thick
description
 Inductive theorizing, interpretivist methodology, post-
positivist (e.g. grounded theory)
 Discourse analysis (Wetherell, Potter): language as
social action, framings for accounting for selves

14. Research Method/ology
Interpretative policy approach (Bevir 2010), e.g. historicist,
diachronic
 Situated agency – local reasoning, beliefs, historicist
explanation of actions and practices
 Contestability – change occurs contingently
 Contingency – norms as social constructs
Moves beyond a concern only with institutions, norms and
structures to a view of governance as shaped by dilemmas,
traditions and wider webs of beliefs.

15. Pathways to Impact
 Executive summary and full report for non-academic beneficiaries: Ofsted, DfE, SSAT,
NSN, NUT, NGA, schools, governors, practitioners, policy makers, brokers.
 Steering group (Francis, James, Critchley, James) and governors-only advisory group.
 International dimension: two-week trip to Stockholm, Sweden.
 Two national conferences: academic and non-academic.
 Final report to all participating schools together with dissemination event.
 Invited speaker at academic conferences/seminars.
 Book publication.