I first started working in schools in 2003: the same year that the Workforce Reform Agreement came into play. In fact, the role I moved into was as a result of the reform, taking over data and assessment from a semi-retired geography teacher in an actual tweed jacket. And as a statistician coming from industry, I was able to throw some tech at what was a paper-in-a-filing-cabinet-based system and transformed it into a dynamic database capable of tracking and analysing student data in a fraction of the time it took before.

So when GCSE results time came around and I produced a 44-page exam analysis document overnight (a shorter document had previously taken the whole of the autumn term to materialise), I was a bit taken aback to hear that the previous incumbent had been asked to come in and check over my work “from a teacher’s perspective”. It seemed that I could pass muster in a global multimillion pounds corporation, but not in the world of education. Needless to say, he very graciously gave me the nod of approval within minutes and my validity as a worthwhile employee was assured.

I sound bitter, I know. I was. I am. It annoyed me intensely. But ever since then, I’ve been on a mission to try to ensure that school staff who aren’t teachers (and much as I hate defining people by what they don’t do, I’m not happy with the architectural implications of “support staff” either) are given the professional opportunities and kudos that their skills and qualifications deserve. Of course, absolutely and unequivocally, the primary purpose and driving force of schools is teaching and learning, and everything that happens in a school must have a positive impact on children’s lives or we should not be doing it.

Untapped potential

But that does not mean that teaching staff are the only ones who contribute to that impact, or that school staff who carry out non-teaching roles (I refuse to use the word “ancillary”) are of lesser value, somehow, or don’t understand the teaching process just because they aren’t practitioners. Many office-based school staff are highly qualified, intelligent professionals choosing to work in education for a wide variety of reasons. Yet the structure of most school’s support staff means that that’s no career progression or real leadership opportunities for those professionals unless they choose the business management route, which demands a specific skill set, with finance as standard.

I believe that, as increased funding constraints hit, and as teacher workload and wellbeing continue to put pressure on an already beleaguered industry, the solution may already be in our midst. Our pastoral workers, our technicians, our administrators, our data managers, all have in-depth knowledge of working with young people and can offer significant skills in what have always been teacher-led areas. I remember being met with scorn when I suggested a non-teaching timetabler at a school once. I was told, with a large hint of condescension, that “a timetabler really needs to have an understanding of the curriculum”. Well, of course they do, but do they need to have a PGCE? Surely a basic understanding of the curriculum plan is the only real requirement here- the rest is the ability to schedule and draft. Similarly, responsibility for rewards, equality, student voice, pupil premium, attendance, admissions, appeals, even Safeguarding sit traditionally as an adjunct to a teaching post, but why not create opportunities for our best support staff to move into leadership roles by allowing them to apply for these TLR-type responsibilities when they arise? Just because there isn’t a payroll mechanism to do it, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t go ahead and do it anyway.

Many support staff middle managers want to develop and expand their responsibilities (as most teacher-hybrid CPD processes will almost certainly encourage them to do). Very many are more than capable of doing so. Yet few are the given the opportunity. Why can’t admin managers coach teaching staff, when the coaching need is around people management, organisational skills, planning or time management? Why can’t catering managers lead on healthy schools? Why can’t network managers lead on e-safety and host programming clubs? Why can’t data managers timetable and pastoral managers lead on safeguarding? It certainly isn’t because they’re not capable of doing so, so there must be another reason. Surely in an educational world that prides itself on innovation and inclusion, teachers aren’t reluctant to let non-teachers take a seat around the top table?

The teacher/non-teacher divide

The teacher/non-teacher divide. It exists, in varying degrees, all over our education system. Any school business leader will have a tale of a time when they were excluded from a leadership activity by virtue of their non-teaching status. For some SBMs, recognition is an ongoing issue. It’s very much the role of the SBM to try to ensure that support teams are included and valued, but SLT, heads and Edu-leaders have a significant role to play here too. I’m lucky that my current school has no such division - all staff are valued, respected and included, but I know from previous experience and from other school business colleagues that the teaching/non-teaching divide is still in evidence elsewhere, not only in schools, but in the wider edu-establishment, in the edu-press and, often times, on edu-Twitter.

There are many examples of articles and tweets calling for teachers to give their opinions, but very few that ask for input from other leaders who also know a great deal about our school systems, national funding issues, cyberbullying, deprivation, staff and student wellbeing - all those core aspects of education that we’re all trying to get right. I could list a dozen more examples, but I won’t, that’s not my point. It was, when I started writing, but I have redrafted this pieces several times to avoid sounding hard-done-by - that’s not my style.

Instead, I would ask school leaders to challenge their thinking a little, and to broaden their outlook to ensure that all Ed-professional voices can be heard, that all school staff are given opportunities, regardless of where those opportunities have traditionally sat, and to sense-check their thinking to ensure that support staff are not being unconsciously excluded or overlooked.

Thinking points for SBMs and school leaders

1. Be clear on the use of “staff” in communications. If a staff meeting is just for teaching staff, call it a teaching meeting. If it’s for all staff, call it an all staff meeting. If it’s one of those awful start-of-term meetings where it’s all staff for 10 minutes then the support staff shuffle out, embarrassed, while the teachers stay on for the “real” stuff, then think about reshaping it into two separate meetings, an all-staff, followed by a teach meet.
2. Don’t forget your classroom-based staff: the cover supervisors and TAs who are never really sure if they’re supposed to turn up to teaching-based events or not. Be clear on the expectations for them and their CPD. 
3. Lists and Handbooks. Remember to include all of your school community in your documentation. I once worked in a school that didn’t bother mentioning the canteen or cleaning staff on its staff list, website or handbook - it was felt that those people weren’t “relevant”. Of course, your cleaning team won’t need to read every email and receive every new policy, but they are your stakeholders and they will almost certainly want to feel included and valued in the school’s journey, its vision and its successes. Imagine how it feels to see a staff list from the place you’ve been working at for 15 years and not to see your name on it because you’re not important enough to warrant a mention.
4. Don’t assume a person’s potential by their current role. Find out about them, their skills and passions. Schools employ a large number of parents who have moved to term time roles for family reasons. Many have changed career to accommodate this, with significant skills untapped. Know your staff.
5. Consider roles: when advertising additional responsibilities, consider welcoming applications from non-teachers if the post allows. Apply the five whys.

And finally...

To the wider educational establishment, are you missing out? There are over 500,000 non-teaching staff in UK schools; that’s a very large market. If I were running an education campaign, I wouldn’t just be marketing to teachers, I’d be creating a site, product, publication that catered for all school staff, with articles and input for the whole community. After all, who wouldn’t want half-a-million new customers? 

Hilary Goldsmith is director of finance and operations at Varndean School. She tweets at @sbm365