Out of School Hours Learning

14. Managing improvement

Image of a girl with a tree branch

Commentary

When Out of School Hours Learning (OSHL) works it is usually because it is well managed. In effective centres, however informal, spontaneous or laissez-faire they appear on the surface, there is an underlying clear purpose, strategy and direction.

The management of an OSHL centre does not necessarily require the same processes or structures as management of a school, but the principles and skills of management are likely to be similar. Because of the voluntary nature of OSHL and the motivation of young people and tutors, management can afford to have a lighter touch and be more open and collaborative than might be possible within a compulsory framework.

This does not mitigate the need for rigour and accountability. In fact it requires a strong sense of how that can be achieved in a voluntary setting. Visible and sustained support from senior management is essential to the long-term success of OSHL, and centres will need to give thought to mechanisms for communication between management and staff directly involved in the centre.

Questions to ask

  • Who manages or co-ordinates OSHL? On what criteria was that person selected?
  • What is the freedom of decision making, status and accountability of that position?
  • Is there a person/job specification? What incentives and rewards does it carry? What procedures are there to deal with inadequate performance?
  • How does the SMT support and get involved?
  • What are the principles of management and how transparent and open to discussion are they?
  • To what extent is management and leadership shared with tutors and young people? Is there a common sense of purpose, values and direction?
  • How is OSHL embedded into whole school development planning?
  • What is the process for managing criticism and challenge? How is the self-evaluation process used for managing change?

Evidence to show

Examples of documentary evidence

  • job descriptions/person specifications
  • roles and responsibilities
  • line management structures
  • performance management
  • aims, values, policies, mission statements
  • minutes of meetings, eg with governors, SMT, stakeholders
  • evaluations, feedback, and self-assessment by co-ordinators/manager
  • letters of commendation/complaints
  • complaints procedure/responses
  • whole school development plans
  • evidence of innovation and development over time.

Testing the evidence

Examples of requests a visitor might make 

  • How would the following be dealt with:
    • lack of support from SMT?
    • dwindling attendance of young people?
    • increasing enthusiasm and demand which exceeds space or resources?
    • lack of funding?
    • request for evidence that OSHL is raising achievement?
    • concern that OSHL is becoming exclusive to certain groups?
    • young people’s dissatisfaction with the person in charge?

Emerging practice

An emerging centre may still be at an early stage of development but will recognise the crucial significance of appointing the right person to co-ordinate provision. This will include a clear job remit, accountability and support for the person or people occupying that role. It will also have a system of periodic review to ensure that performance in the job, and learning on the job, is enhanced by support and opportunities for professional development.

Key indicator

Structure, with support.

Established practice

In an established centre, management has developed beyond structure and role to become more concerned with creating and maintaining a culture of shared responsibility and collective accountability. OSHL co-ordinators or managers encourage staff and young people to take responsibility and to influence what happens in the centre. There are systems for feedback and review from the centre to the school (or schools) as well as in the other direction.

Key indicator

Shared responsibility and collective accountability.

Advanced practice

Advanced centres have a capacity to handle innovation and change. They seek new ways to become more effective through a strong sense of common purpose and shared leadership. They respond positively to internal and external review and evaluation from outside. They are self-confident enough about their purpose and quality to take risks and not to react defensively to criticism. They have a strong system of self-evaluation and evidence to hand in support of their claims.

Key indicator

A capacity for managing change.