8.0 Support education leaders
Educational leaders play a pivotal role in cultivating the culture and effectiveness of schools, which, in turn, significantly impact upon the quality of education and student outcomes. For school leaders to fulfill their vital responsibilities, they must have reliable support from both the Department of Education at the central level, and from their respective regions. The elimination of unnecessary distractions and excessive administrative burdens is imperative, to enable these leaders to focus on their essential work.
8.1 Review of the state school resourcing model
The current allocation model for Queensland state schools does not adequately address the demands of 21st Century education. School leaders are at the forefront of leading their school communities, managing evolving expectations and external disruptions that are often beyond their control, all while maintaining high-quality learning experiences for all students. Over the past decade, school leaders and educators have seen additional duties and responsibilities added to their roles, extending beyond their existing job descriptions. In response to these demands, school leaders have responded to the ever-changing education landscape by developing new roles within their schools, and this requires them to “purchase” staffing using existing limited resourcing. An increase to allocations to enable schools to flexibly manage new roles and responsibilities is needed. In addition, school leaders require additional resourcing to manage the implementation of any initiatives that arise out of EB negotiations.
A comprehensive review of school resourcing, which includes the roles and responsibility components of heads of program and school leaders’ duties, is currently underway, as a result of the enterprise bargaining agreement (EBA) negotiated in 2022. The QTU has been a key stakeholder within the established governance and consultative committee structure throughout 2023, and will continue to advocate throughout 2024.
The review, which includes consideration of methodologies, procedures, and systems (including school-based kindergarten programs), has reinforced that education leaders are significantly impacted by their ever-expanding workload, due to:
- insufficient evolution of the allocative resourcing model, which is no longer relevant to the considerable developments in the landscape of expectations of state schools
- the failure of the current resourcing model to reflect the increasingly complex and expanding educational expectations of state schools and school leaders
- the ongoing impacts of ongoing teacher recruitment issues on school operations
- the ongoing impacts of sudden policy development and unsupported implementation on school operations and budgets
- the increasing demands and growing complexity of managing student and staff welfare/wellbeing, student engagement, and inclusion
- responsibilities around engagement of external stakeholders and case management expectations.
This review presents an opportunity to fundamentally reevaluate the staffing and resourcing of the state school system, ensuring that Queensland’s students receive the best educational opportunities, and school leaders receive the necessary resources, development and support to accomplish this mission. Due to the significance of the resourcing review, the QTU advocates that all recommendations should receive full funding from the Treasury.
8.2 School reviews
The Department of Education and the QTU share a commitment to collaborating on supporting continuous improvement in Queensland state schools.
To enhance the quality of education and student learning in Queensland, every state school conducts a review at least once every four years. These reviews are tailored to the unique context of each school and aim to provide valuable feedback to inform school planning processes. Principals, in collaboration with their staff and the school community, use the insights gained from these reviews to shape plans for the next phase of their school’s improvement journey.
Following each review, a written report equips schools with additional information to facilitate ongoing
improvement. The school supervisor works closely with the school to address the findings of the review,
incorporating any recommendations into the school’s four-year strategic plan. In the case of priority
support reviews, the school supervisor collaborates with the school to develop and implement a detailed action plan in response.
It is essential for review teams to consider the industrial frameworks governing teachers and education
leaders when proposing improvement strategies. Currently, many schools receive reports that place undue pressure on school leaders to effect change without additional resources, which contradicts the agreements between the Department of Education and the QTU regarding workload management. The QTU asserts that recommendations from full school, priority support, or self-determined reviews should be centrally funded and not borne by the school’s existing budgets.
8.3 School leader mobility
One outcome of the 2022 enterprise bargaining process was a comprehensive review of the teacher
transfer system and the process for relocating heads of program and school leaders. A critical aspect of
any statewide employment system is ensuring that school leaders and heads of program can return to
their preferred locations after serving in remote, regional, rural, or hard-to-staff areas, or when they have approved compassionate circumstances. The current relocation model is failing school leaders and heads of program, often leaving them unable to return to their preferred geographic location. This situation ultimately affects students attending schools in remote, regional, and difficult-to-staff locations, as education leaders are reluctant to accept positions in these areas for fear that they won’t be able to return to their preferred geographic regions through the current relocation process.
This review of the relocation process must explore innovative methods to establish an effective and
supportive relocation model. Considerations should include potential overallocation of education leaders, rising relocation expenses, the role of relocation applicants in filling temporary vacancies, and support and capability development during transitions between different school contexts.
All recommendations resulting from the review of the relocation system, along with any additional costs necessary to develop a more effective and supportive relocation model, must receive full funding.
8.4 Development of consistent aspirant and early career development models for school leaders
The QTU acknowledges the ongoing development of the Education Futures Institute (EFI) and its aim to
empower school and system leaders to build their professional expertise and wellbeing by engaging in
high-quality, targeted capability development at key career stages. It is paramount that this remains a
priority in order to support aspirant and early-career leaders. The Department of Education should:
- invest in and establish induction programs for deputy principals, incorporating in-person meetings with other new deputy principals and opportunities to build networks.
- further invest in induction programs for principals, incorporating in-person meetings with other new principals, and strengthen professional networks.
- ensure that regional aspiring leader programs are accessible to all aspiring leaders, and maintain consistency between regions to encourage recruitment for leadership positions without regional borders.
- create a process for filling temporary leadership positions that is accessible to both intra-regional and inter-regional applicants, with a priority to support school leader mobility.
Any programs developed to support consistent aspirant and early-career development models for school leaders must receive full funding.
8.5 Policy implementation at a school level
The introduction of new and updated policies and procedures has significantly affected the operations
and budgets of state schools. The lack of adequate consultation during the development of these policies has had a direct impact on the workload and decision-making responsibilities of school leaders. A notable example of this is the recent rollout of the “Away for a Day” policy, which necessitates financial support from the department to assist schools in preparing, systematising, and resourcing the policy’s implementation. Without this crucial support, schools are compelled to allocate resources for the policy’s implementation by diverting funds from previously planned projects and improvement initiatives within their schools. It is imperative that, in addition to fostering rigorous and necessary consultation when developing policies, there is a parallel focus on allocating the requisite funding and resources to support school leaders effectively.
RECOMMENDATIONS
63. Ensure that the recommendations of the review of the state school resourcing model are fully funded.
64. Ensure that any school review recommendations are developed with workload considerations in mind, are centrally funded, and do not require use of current school budget allocations.
65. Increase allocations to schools to accommodate increased hours and other enterprise bargaining outcomes for school-purchased staff.
66. Ensure that all recommendations from the review of the relocation system, including additional costs to support the development of a more effective and supportive relocation model, are fully funded.
67. Invest in the development of statewide deputy principal and principal induction programs that incorporate face-to-face meetings with other new deputy principals and principals with opportunities to develop school leader networks.
68. Ensure appropriate consultation with the QTU regarding new policy implementation at the school level, and that timeframes and resources are provided to implement them.
QTU State Budget Submission 2024-25