Do you have to be a teacher to lead?

Jon Sheridan reflects on 'the big question' that divides the education community, "Does the Head of a school have to be a qualified teacher?"

The education world has always been a 'closed system' as far as recruitment to leadership positions is concerned. That is to say, school leaders have been promoted exclusively from within the teaching fraternity.

The premise for this was sound � the Head was simply the 'first amongst equals' - the lead professional in an educational institution. Times are changing, however, and there are a number of shifts that have fundamentally changed the education landscape:

• Over the last 20 years, schools have loosened their ties with their local authority and have become increasingly autonomous organisations that make all the key decisions with regard to staff, building and resources.
• The Every Child Matters agenda is changing further the role of the school in the local community. They are becoming a local resource providing multi-agency, multi-professional services to the local community.
• Professional career paths have emerged which allow for horizontal, rather than vertical, progression (allowing certain teachers to opt to develop their careers in the classroom and not assuming management responsibilities).
• The numbers of teachers aspiring to become headteachers is falling and will fail to match the anticipated numbers of retiring headteachers over the next few years. This is a major recruitment crisis which will be with the education community for the foreseeable future.

Following the PWC report last year, The School Teachers' Pay review body has invited submissions on the subject and this has identified certain fault lines in the position of the professional associations. The NUT and the NAHT believe that Heads need to have classroom experience, whereas the ASCL believe that other school managers (e.g. bursars) could take on the leadership of a school.

The primary argument for a Head to be a teacher is that unless they have proved their professional worth in a classroom setting, they will not inspire confidence and respect of the teaching workforce. After all, the first rule of leadership is, "make sure they'll follow you!" This has much merit and would be a persuasive argument for the governing body, whose professional backgrounds are often outside education, who would be re-assured by their professional status.

However, when you look critically at the responsibilities of a school leader, the job requires leadership skills which are largely generic and could be transferable from other related working environments. Take the example of the Chief Executive of British Airways � can he fly a plane? No of course he can't, but he does have the qualities to lead a major organisation. Who recalls the rumblings of discontent when Steve Munby was appointed as CEO of the National College for School Leadership? "How could he lead the NCSL," they said, "when he has never been a headteacher himself?" I can see no evidence that this lack of specific experience has in any way impaired his ability to provide energetic leadership to the NCSL and the wider education community.

Another barrier to opening up headship to other leaders is access to the NPQH. NPQH is, rightly in my view, a pre-requisite for headship, but access to NPQH (in its current format) is very restrictive.

I know there are innovative models of leadership being developed to address these issues which are designed to better utilise the current leadership talent available.

I remain concerned, however, that unless large swathes of the teaching profession can be encouraged to aspire towards headship, the good old days of a closed system of recruitment is going to have to end � and teachers are going to have to accept their leadership from someone who does not necessarily hold Qualified Teacher Status.

What do you think? Could leaders from other sources provide leadership in schools? Are there other solutions to the present crisis? Email us your views to arete@areteleaders.com