What was the issue addressed?
The governing body revised the evidence required in a headteacher performance review and set new targets. This was difficult to do in one meeting with so much paperwork. Also problematic is that revising the guidelines each year means there is no opportunity to compare one year to next.
Assistance was sort from the Consortium. This was given but it was difficult to arrange a meeting where all parties could attend and there was enough time to read and discuss.
What lessons were learnt?
New headteacher targets were set but no-one was happy with how long it took to organise, arrange and sort out, also looking at this once a year is not enough. We felt a review should be made mid-point in the year to check on progress or lack of it and why.
How does your governing body go about reviewing and setting performance targets for the headteacher?
Do you think it is a good idea that progress against targets are reviewed, and possibly revised, mid-point in the school year?
Have your say… Have you had experiences similar to these? What do you think about the situation described?