Remodelling aims to enable leaders in our schools to create a culture of change where any initiative can be implemented and embedded in practice.
What is wrong with this?
Teachers have also been given the opportunity to examine mundane and bureaucratic tasks that took up their time and consider who else could take that burden. This recognises teachers' expertise is in the planning, preparation and assessment of the learners. Has someone suggested that this aspect of their role should be delegated?
I am not suggesting that the remodelling agenda has been skilfully managed.
The Government could have dealt with remodelling better in the primary leadership programme to improve the work of primary heads. This programme's focus on standards missed an opportunity.
The National College for School Leadership (which delivered the PLP) should have adopted a more joined-up approach to explain the remodelling agenda.
And what about the other stakeholders? The local education authorities had their hands tied and were left to deliver incoherent stand-alone training about remodelling. It would have been better if the training had linked remodelling tools to the self-evaluation that inspections now demand. Isn't the point of remodelling a workforce to provide leaders with the tools to evaluate and find different ways of doing things in the interests of the children?
I am glad I didn't have the money to fund supply cover to release teachers.
That would have been simple to implement and nothing would have changed.
Instead I have embraced remodelling and built a culture of change. Not to change is not an option and embracing that constant change is the biggest challenge facing our leaders today.
26 Vicarage Street, Warminster, Wiltshire