Trends in Governance in Further Education

Abstract

The governance of further education colleges has two main phases since the passing of the Education Act 1944 – the period when further education colleges were under local authority control and the period from ‘vesting day’ on 1 April 1993 when colleges became incorporated and further education corporations were formed as charities. This review is primarily concerned with the landscape of college governance since 1 April 1993 and draws upon some of the very limited number of research studies into the practice of further education governance. The experience and contribution of the key governance players – chair of the corporation, governors, the principal, the senior staff, the clerk to the corporation – are discussed. Throughout the period since 1993, college governance has operated within a policy framework provided by government and, to a greater or lesser extent, the implementation of those policies by agencies of government. In simple terms, the pattern may seem to be creativity (in the early years), compliance (following some high profile college governance collapses), micro-management (through the Learning and Skills Council years) and now the most open, imaginative phase as the current government encourages the strong colleges to play a bigger part in local education provision. Perhaps now is the time when the experience of college governance to date is able to draw upon its considerable strengths and show what the accumulation of governance capital can achieve.

Key Words:

• FE corporations
• self-regulation in further education
• creative governance
• code of further education governance

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank Ian James for his wisdom and advice during the preparation of this review.

Notes

1. Further Education Funding Council (1993–2000), Learning and Skills Council (2000–2010), Skills Funding Agency (2010–present).

2. It is interesting to note from Ainley and Bailey (1997, p. 39) that a governor is quoted as believing that ‘the old larger board pre-incorporation was much more interventionist whereas the new corporate board always supported the principal’s position – this is partly due to the loss of independently minded local government representatives and the loss of expertise from LEA officers’.

3. The Articles of Government state that the clerk shall be responsible for the following functions: (a) advising the corporation with regard to the operation of its powers; (b) advising the corporation with regard to procedural matters; (c) advising the corporation with regard to the conduct of its business; and (d) advising the corporation with regard to matters of governance practice.