HPL at WCC: Poor Idea, Terrible Execution.

Let’s get this out of the way first: I am not saying HPL is without merit. Far from it. However, I believe it is a 're-branding' of what everyday learning is about. We are often told at Wessex County College not to worry and that we are 'already doing it' in our daily teaching. HPL is an old concept repackaged and 'sold' to those who need to promote a fancy trend to the paying customers: the parents. Teachers do not need yet another poster on their wall telling them what is what. And in that respect, it is similar to any other educational fad we have seen in the last 20 years. The lollipop sticks had the same 'buzz' for a while, albeit a bit more practical in some classroom situations. Now, most probably, you use those sticks in herb pots sitting on your window sill in your kitchen.

Principals and school leaders tend to promote something that they think would be a lasting legacy of their tenure. Training sessions are arranged and INSET days are organised where each teacher is forced to come up with different ways to implement it in the classroom. This has been the case over the years in almost all schools around the world. It is soul-destroying and mind-numbing and yet teachers get on with it and, in their usual enthusiastic way, they do it in the hope that the torture will stop shortly.

At Wessex County College, this torture was elevated to another level that even the Chinese waterboarding technique would seem a gentle massage in comparison.

Consider this, some of your most experienced and well performing teachers get absolutely destroyed and humiliated on a personal level by the would-be leaders of the school. The process itself was vague and half-baked. A job description put together in haste but heavily adorned with the flowery educational jargon that means everything and nothing. 

Have a read through some of the key requirements (taken from the school's official job advert):

Key Requirements

•    Must be in a teaching role (this includes Middle Leaders on a reduced timetable) within either the Primary or Secondary School.
•    Must have completed an initial two-year contract and have been on Pay Scale 6 for a minimum of two years.
•    Must have a track record of adhering to and going above and beyond the Wessex County College essentials, e.g.:

-    Supporting the department and/or year group with alacrity,
-    Successfully achieving all performance development targets,
-    Showing clear evidence of reinforcing Wessex County College’s core values,
-    Being actively involved in the ECA programme,
-    Undertaking break duty responsibilities regularly.
•    Must have a track record of adhering to and going above and beyond the Wessex County College Teaching and Learning essentials, e.g.:
-    Maintaining a positive relationship with students,
-    Employing a positive methodology to enhance learning,
-    Demonstrating secure and current subject and curriculum knowledge,
-    Delivering effective lessons and promote high quality learning opportunities,
-    Inspiring, motivating and challenging students at all times,
-    Ensuring that all students make appropriate progress through the year.
•    Must have achieved ‘Exceeds Expectations’ in the last two consecutive Performance Development Reviews (for the years 2016-2017 and 2017-2018).
•    Must have incorporated High Performance Learning into their day-to-day teaching practice.
•    Must share good practice with colleagues around the College.

The advert did not mention how many teachers would be awarded this role.

 The underlined lines (added for this blog), if met by the teacher, should be enough evidence of a solid educator with experience and tenacity. Most of the teachers who meet these requirements have an experience of an average of 10 years in teaching either in the UK or in an international setting.

However, to the general surprise of the teaching staff, only very few members did make it through the selection stage. It was shocking that 'one of the best schools in the country - if not in the world!' had so many experienced teachers and yet these teachers did not make it through their own school's internal process! Worthy of HIGNFY's ironical TV snippets.

What follows could easily be described as one of the best examples of a disastrous management/leadership:

• Applicants were visited DURING their lessons to be told that they were not successful;
• There were no face to face interviews;
• Human Resources Department had almost no input in the conception of the role;
• HR Dept had no say in the selection stage;
  
• There were no classroom observations or visits to see evidence of HPL practice;
  
• Applicants were sent an email with a three-bullet feedback: the third bullet point was in a different colour and font and size. (One of the issues in sending HTML emails after pasting and copying is that the code remains untidy and does not strip the content from the unused or unnecessary tags rendering the message a mix of all formats - sorry, rather technical).

 

 The last point is of significant impact. It turns out that the Principal of the school thought that the first two feedback points that were related purely to HPL were not sufficient. He added a third point that was a personal judgement on the teacher. Betrayed by the email's technical oddity, it was then ascertained that each unsuccessful applicant received the Principal's opinion (and I say opinion, not a professional, objective and well-founded view) clumsily worded and served to the unfortunate candidate.

Unsurprisingly, these 'opinions' were extremely hurtful in their content and irrelevant in the whole process.

It was reported at the time that even teachers who were successful candidates requested (or talked about requesting) they be excused from receiving this title or the salary increase. That is integrity!

The other lucky teachers (now called High Performance Teachers) eventually got paid for two years without any measurable contribution mentioned in the job advert. These teachers were not given any direction, purpose or role. 

Later after the teachers' protestation and the obvious ridicule the leadership group must have felt, the programme was dropped altogether. Ever since that day, any credibility of those who claim to be leaders has disappeared completely. Dead as a dodo. Kaput. Zilch. 

We could learn a few lessons here (and not of the Zoom nature) but I will let you draw your own conclusions. The whole thing is an obnoxious affair. However you dress this HPT folly or anything similar will be ill-fated. The trust has been broken. You need a genuinely humble and uniting leader to move the school forward and away from this fiasco. The idea of HPT was an attempt to wriggle around the fact that, a couple of years prior to this, Mr Zimmer had stood in front of all the staff in the Auditorium and promised to raise their pay. His way out of this was to save money, give to the few, divide and rule.

 

The only division achieved here is between the staff and management, between the leadership group and their own integrity.

 

HPL/HPT was really a poor idea that was terribly executed. 

P-S: So what's happened with the new 7-10 pay scale?