The other day I wrote about Katherine Birbalsingh’s policy of bringing her SLT in for a 7am meeting every day. Katherine had argued that people should pay attention to this policy on the basis that if someone was successful, then we would do well to learn from them. I argued in response that just because someone is successful that doesn’t mean that everything they do is right.
It’s possible, as I emphasised then, that the specific policy isn’t actually contributing to the success of the organisation, they get their results in spite of not because of the policy. However, there can be something else going on. Sometimes, the policy is contributing indirectly because it forms part of an overall approach in order to first create the specific environment that this particular organisation needs for success. If that is the case, then the same factors may not be at play where you are.
To understand that a little better, let’s have a look at the specific example again and consider what it is that Birbalsingh has achieved at Machaela School. This may not be comfortable reading fo those who don’t like Katherine and her agenda but, the track record thus far I impressive. The school has seen a lot of success, they’ve achieved outstanding GCSE and A-Level results as well as standing up well to Ofsted inspection.
However, that’s not the only success and in fact, I would argue that there was a just as important success before this which was foundational to the school’s success in its results. That success was the creation of a coherent, unique culture. The culture is one that emphasises aspiration and excellence, specifically with a philosophy that challenges the assumption that aspiration and excellence are not possible in state schools in inner city contexts.
What that kind of culture requires is that everyone buys into it. If you want the pupils to develop aspiration and excellence, then first of all you want to draw in staff that live those values. This means that you will want to make being part of Machaela as aspirational in its own right. You want to send a message that this school is unique, it’s the best and so only unique teachers will join and if you are a teacher there then you are among the best. Furthermore, you want your SLT to be seen as the crème-de-la-crème.
This isn’t something that Michaela, or others following this kind of approach have been secretive about. As another blogger observes, Katherine Birbalsingh has discussed this, citing another author, David Didau approvingly.
“This is, I think, how successful schools in disadvantaged areas operate. They create an in-group where ‘we’ are different to everyone out there. ‘We’ feel privileged to be in the in-group and appalled at the idea of what it must be like to be a member of the out-group. ‘We’ notice everything that makes us different from ‘them’ and we revel in the differences.” (From The Learning Spy)
“If you read nothing else, read this by David Didau. It is so spot-on in everything it says. It chimes with my years of experience in a variety of schools and it is for these reasons that at Michaela, we do as David says: we talk about being ‘Top of the Pyramid’. Many schools do this. It is a trick of illusion used by teachers in their classrooms and heads in their schools. “We are better than them” is the sentiment. We can behave better, work harder, strive more, and these attributes make us ‘better’. We aren’t failures like the kids who choose gang life over a life of hard work. We are better than that. At Michaela, we so believe in the sentiment that we have ‘Top of the Pyramid’ painted on the wall. We are the best. We are so damn good, we are going to give those boys at Eton who think they are the best a real run for their money. Think you are the best Eton? You haven’t met Michaela yet.” (from To Miss With Love)[1]
It is worth saying that this shows why Katheirne has pursued a strategy of courting controversy. It’s another way in which she encourages a culture where the school is seen as a distinct, unique community. If you join the school, then you are making a choice, you are one of them and that sets you apart from and in opposition to
Now, the author of the other blog article, reasonably presumes that if this is true of staff, it will also be true of students and their families too. You won’t sit an entrance exam and so your academic ability won’t be tested. However, if you go to the school then it is likely to be because your family have bought into that ethos and aspiration and excellence. We cannot underplay how significant it is to schooling to have engaged and supportive families around you. My guess is that the school will be particularly attractive to pupils and their families where the children want to do well at school and believe that this will be an environment where they will be actively encouraged to get on.
As the other writer argues, this means the success will be difficult to replicate. I agree. We should be careful about extrapolating wider conclusions from the Michaela experiment beyond that Birbalsingh has achieved what she set out to do within the parameters set her. This is not to question the success or the genuine benefits to those students who attended. What it does mean though is that we need to be cautious about presuming that their methods will work elsewhere. This is not the same thing as going into a struggling comprehensive and turning it around. It is not the same as if the school had set out to take on the most challenging and needy pupils from other schools.
Now in terms of the SLT 7am meeting policy, we can also see how this has played a part at the school. It is another signal to potential staff and leaders about what will be expected of them if they come to the school. The message is clear, if you are going to succeed at the school, then you must be passionate, loyal, driven, exceptionally hard working. The school is going to come first in your life. The policy will definitely help with that.
What this means for others is that if they want to be successful then their priority should not be to attempt to replicate Michaela, that is the route to learning the wrong lessons. Instead, their focus should be on learning from how the school went about things. In other words, they should be thinking carefully about what it is that they want to achieve and then identifying the steps towards this that will work in their context.
[1] Cited at Why Michaela can never be generalised | Stepping Back a Little (wordpress.com)
Faithroots 