This article assesses the impact of recent legislation designed to enhance the role and responsibilities of governing bodies for SEN, with particular reference to comprehensive schools. The first phase of the research investigation—a questionnaire survey—challenges the findings of some earlier studies, concluding that headteachers and governing bodies are working collaboratively and responding positively to the challenge. A number of priorities for the policy makers, including the future training needs of governors, are also identified. The second phase of the research inquiry—an in-depth case study—is an illustration of good practice, highlighting both the cardinal features of effective governance for SEN, as well as the managerial processes behind their creation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ACE
(1993) ‘Governors and Special Educational Needs: A Report on the ACE Survey of Training and Information Currently Provided for School Governing Bodies’, ACE Bulletin54: 4–5.
2.
Audit Commission
(1995) Lessons in Teamwork: How School Governing Bodies Can Become More Effective. London: HMSO.
3.
Baskind, S.
and Thompson, D. (1994) ‘What Role do Governors Play as Representatives of Special Needs Issues in their Own Schools?’, British Educational Research Journal20(3): 293–299.
4.
Bryk, A.
, Lee, V. and Holland, P. (1993) Catholic Schools and the Common Good. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
5.
Burgess, R.G.
(1988) ‘Conversations with a Purpose: The Ethnographic Interview in Educational Research’, in R.G. Burgess (ed.) Studies in Qualitative Methodology, vol. 1: Conducting Qualitative Research. London: Jai Press.
6.
Corrick, M.
(1996) ‘Governors: Question Time is Indispensable’, Times Educational Supplement (9 Feb.).
7.
Creese, M.
(1997) Effective Governance: The Evidence from OFSTED. Ipswich: School Management and Governance Development.
8.
Creese, M.
and Bradley, H. (1997) ‘Ways in which Governing Bodies Contribute to School Improvement: Findings from a Pilot Project’, School Leadership and Management17(1): 105–115.
9.
Deem, R.
(1994) ‘School Governing Bodies: Public Concerns and Private Interests’, in D. Scott (ed.) Accountability and Control in Educational Settings. London: Cassell.
10.
Deem, R.
and Brehony, K. (1993) ‘Consumers and Educational Professionals in the Organization and Administration of Schools: Partnership or Conflict?’, Educational Studies19(3): 339–355.
11.
Deem, R.
, Brehony, K. and Heath, S. (1995) Active Citizenship and the Governing of Schools. Buckingham: Open University Press.
12.
DFE
(1995) Governing Bodies and Effective Schools. London: DFE.
13.
DfEE
(1996a) Education Act 1996. London: HMSO.
14.
DfEE
(1996b) Guidance on Good Governance. London: DFEE.
15.
DfEE
(1996c) Self Government for Schools. London: HMSO.
16.
DfEE
(1997) Excellence for All Children: Meeting Special Educational Needs. London: HMSO.
17.
Earley, P.
(1994) School Governing Bodies: Making Progress?Slough: NFER.
18.
Earley, P.
(1997) ‘External Inspections, “Failing Schools” and the Role of Governing Bodies’, School Leadership and Management17(3): 387–400.
19.
Earley, P.
(1998) ‘Governing Bodies and School Inspection: Potential for Empowerment?’, in P. Earley (ed.) School Improvement after Inspection? School and LEA Responses. London: Paul Chapman.
20.
Esp, D.
and Saran, R. (eds) (1995) Effective Governors for Effective Schools. London: Pitman.
21.
Farrell, C.
and Law, J. (1999) ‘The Accountability of School Governing Bodies’, Educational Management & Administration27(1): 5–16.
22.
Gann, N.
(1998) Improving School Governance. London: Falmer Press.
23.
Harris, N.
and Mokal, M. (1997) The Legislative Basis for School Governance. Liverpool: Liverpool John Moores University.
24.
Hopkins, D.
(1995) ‘Unravelling the Complexities of School Improvement’, in Secondary Heads Association (ed.) Improving Secondary Schools. Bristol: H.E. Iles.
25.
Kogan, M.
, Johnson, D., Packwood, T. and Whitaker, T. (1984) School Governing Bodies. London: Heinemann.
26.
Lewis, D.
(1995) Developing Senior Managers. London: OFSTED and UBI National Education Programmes Unit (c/o Rank Xerox (UK) Ltd).
27.
O’Connor, M.
(1996) ‘The OFSTED Experience: A Governors’ Eye View’, in J. Ouston et al. (eds) OFSTED Inspections: The Early Experience.London: David Fulton.
28.
OFSTED
(1996) The Implementation of the Code of Practice for Pupils with Special Educational Needs. London: HMSO.
29.
OFSTED
(1997) Standards and Quality in Education 1995/96(The Annual Report of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Schools). London: HMSO.
30.
Patton, M.
(1980) Qualitative Evaluation Methods. London: Sage.
31.
Riley, K.
and Rowles, D. (1997) ‘Managing with Governors’, in B. Fidler et al. (eds) Choices for Self-Managing Schools. London: Paul Chapman.
32.
Roehampton Institute
(1995) Special Educational Needs: Review of Policy and Practice in Five Authorities. London: Roehampton Institute.
33.
Sallis, J.
(1995) ‘How are the New Governors Coping?’, in D. Esp and R. Saran (eds.) Effective Governors for Effective Schools. London: Pitman.
34.
Schofield, J.W.
(1993) ‘Increasing the Generalizability of Qualitative Research’, in M. Hammersley (ed.) Social Research: Philosophy, Politics and Practice. London: Sage.
35.
Scott, L.
, (1993) ‘Confused and Ill Equipped?’, British Journal of Special Education20(4): 120–122.
36.
Shearn, D.
, Broadbent, J., Laughlin, R. and Willig-Atherton, H. (1995) ‘The Changing Face of School Governor Responsibilities: A Mismatch between Government Intention and Actuality?’School Organisation15(2): 175–188.
37.
Stiles, C.
(1996) School Governors and Inspection. Coventry: AGIT.
38.
Thomas, H.
(1992) ‘School Governance and the Limits of Self-Interest’, Educational Review44(3): 327–334.
39.
Tsoukas, H.
(1989) ‘The Validity of Idiographic Research Explanations’, Academy of Management Review14(4): 551–561.
40.
Walters, J.
and Richardson, C. (1997) Governing Schools through Policy. London: Lemos & Crane.
41.
Yin, R.
(1989) Case Study Research: Design and Method. London: Sage.
