I find the recruitment and retention of educators interesting. From training teachers and how they are assessed, the PGCE as opposed to GTP model, (and of cause Gove’s military accelerated entry??) through to recruitment and marketing of position. Next what evidence is requested, application tasks, briefing visits, to screening applications and short-listing. Then the interview process, to teach or not to teacher, student involvement (yes or no), questions and negotiations. Bypassing the career phase, I am also highly unsure that our contractual agreements best serve education.
How about the Sudbury School as an alternative model. A Sudbury school has two basic tenets: educational freedom and democratic governance. Students individually decide what to do with their time, and learn as a by-product of ordinary experience rather than adopting a descriptive educational syllabus or standardized instruction by classes following a prescriptive curriculum. One significant step further forward than our Applied Learning CPD this afternoon – (well delivered by English teacher Nicky Egan). Students have complete responsibility for their own education and the school is run by direct democracy in which students and staff are equals. That includes staff retention.
Research professor of psychology Peter Gray explains,
“no staff members at the school have tenure. All are on one-year contracts, which must be renewed each year through a secret-ballot election. As the student voters outnumber the staff by a factor of 20 to 1, the staff who survive this process and are re-elected year after year are those who are admired by the students. They are people who are kind, ethical, and competent, and who contribute significantly and positively to the school’s environment. They are adults that the students may wish in some ways to emulate.”
We are not just outlining a ‘one-off’ here, but there are now over 35 schools based on the Sudbury Model in the United States, Canada, Denmark, Israel, Japan, Netherlands, Australia, Belgium and Germany.