Having read Martin Hoskin’s excellent piece for the AoC recently, I was reminded of and reflecting upon Simon Sinek’s book Start With Why. The book focuses on what Sinek calls ‘The Golden Circle’ of What, How and Why. Firstly, Sinek asserts that the most successful leaders, in all industries, start with and ensure they base their rationale and purpose around core beliefs or causes: this is the reason we are doing what we are doing, why we are all here. The ‘why’.
Once this has been established, leaders, team members and organisations as a whole, can then decide on how core aims will be achieved and should then, finally, focus on the what (the physical actions taken ‘on the ground’).
I’ve often thought about what this looks like in the context of English and maths in Further Education, with the only consistency in FE English and maths being the inconsistency. In saying this, I mean the fantastic spectrum of organisational and contextual differences in our colleges: Heads of English, Heads of maths, Heads of English and maths, Lead Practitioners, Assistant Principals with responsibility for E&M, leadership of E&M split across vocational areas – the structures are seemingly endless, even before approaching differences in strategy, class size, local challenges, student profile (and context) as well as available resources.
If Sinek pinpoints a clear and focused what, how and why as being key to a successful culture, what does this look like in FE E&M? Unlike the majority of other sectors, we tend to have the reverse challenge: the vast majority of teachers, leaders, students, parents, carers and stakeholders have a very, very firm ‘why’: to support students to improve, develop skills, embed knowledge and, ultimately, achieve success (usually in the form of progress, a qualification, progression to employment or another course or, put very simply, confidence – just ‘getting better’).
I’ve not met any teachers, leaders or students who would argue with this.
Slightly less firm, though still resolute, then, is the ‘how’. Again, a vast majority would point to great teaching, positive relationships with students, strong leadership and student engagement and continued motivation. And the evidence and research would back this up.
This leaves us with our ‘what’. What steps do we need to take to facilitate our ‘how’? What physical actions need to be taken? What do we actually need to do?
And this is where there is debate and difference in colleges across the country. In structure of department, timetabling, teaching approaches, planning etc. Not only does it differ, but it can radically change over relatively short periods: teachers embedded into department this year; back with a central Head of Dept the year after and then back into vocational areas the year after that. 3 hour lessons this year; 2 x 1.5 hours next year, and then 3 hour sessions the year after that.
It’s at this point we need to focus on what the what, how, why ‘Golden Circle’ is actually talking about: departmental and organisational culture. It’s at this point we need to ask a question which was regularly put to me when I was a Head of English and maths: does it make the boat go faster?
Essentially, if we see the academic year as a journey, a boat race, and ‘going faster’ means we’re improving, does the decision, action, strategy or innovation you’re about to embed make anything better? Does it make teaching more effective? Will it support more students to develop (whether that means in terms of progress, confidence, achievement or simply less anxious)?
How often does this question permeate into conversations about the decisions we make in departments (as teachers or leaders)? It should be key; it should be the only question we ask: will it improve things? Often, for a multitude of reasons (resources, staff recruitment and retention, class sizes etc.), it isn’t always.
So, what can we do about it? Well, thankfully, Sinek has already done the heavy lifting: we focus on the ‘why’ through a lens of that simple question: does it make the boat go faster? If the answer to that question is ever ‘no’, we’re not as effective as we could be.
We must also make sure that this question is focused on students, not necessarily on teacher wants and needs. In our role as custodians of cohorts, students must always come first: decisions in individual conversations, classrooms, departments and colleges should reflect this. Of course, this isn’t always easy, but it’s teaching – it’s not easy.
There is still, sometimes, ambiguity around what ‘works’ in FE E&M and how the ‘what’ and ‘how’ can be more fully defined. Thankfully, this bit is less ambiguous – seek out those who have had success, identify the clear steps they have taken and translate this into your own version of what works (suitable to your own context).
Jonny Kay is a former teacher and leader and now supports teachers and leaders to improve teaching and learning using innovative CPD approaches. For more information, see his website here www.thereflectiveteacher.co.uk or contact him at jonathan@thereflectiveteacher.co.uk
GCSE Resits Hub Project 