One Page From 1995: The Ethics Code Covering Every School Worker

I mean, there's a document I want to describe to you before we even really start today. Okay, let's hear it. It is, well, it's exactly one page long. It has seven headings with just one short paragraph underneath each of those headings. Right. It was published in 1995. And if you walk down the corridors of your school right now, there is a very decent chance a copy of it is laminated on a wall somewhere in your building. Yeah, probably curling at the edges by now. Exactly. So you're talking about the Nolan Principles.

I am. The Seven Principles of Public Life. And I want to read you one single sentence from the very front of that document before you tell me what you actually think of it. Go on. Lay it out. It explicitly says the principles apply to, quote, anyone who works as a public office holder right and then it goes on to list exactly who that means it covers those elected or appointed to public office the civil service local government the police courts and probation services non -departmental public bodies and in its own exact words it applies to quote the health education social and care services this is the education commute.

And this is the first of a run of episodes where we each take a cycle of a national leadership qualification, specifically focusing on the headship one first. And, well, we're going to read the actual evidence underneath it. Right. To be clear to you listening, we are not looking at the course itself. We are looking at the foundational documents, all of which you can open yourself for absolutely nothing this evening. Exactly. Grab a coffee and pull up your chairs. I want you to imagine the physical space for this conversation today.

You're the middle leader who has just sat through the epic session. We've all been there. Right. You are looking at the paperwork and I'm sitting in the head's chair with the documents open right in front of us. We are going to look closely at what these words actually demand of us. All right. Well, if I am sitting in that session, I'll open with what I actually think. This is the core orthodoxy that this entire episode have to survive or, you know, we might as well just pack up.

Let's hear it. Here it is. Ethics is the module you skim. Yeah. It is just a poster on the wall. It is the seven words in the reception area or the values on the school website that nobody could actually name if you put them under oppression. That's entirely fair. I mean, nobody wakes up and sets out to be unethical. Yeah. So an ethics session ends up just being. An hour spent telling decent people to be decent. Right. An hour that, frankly, would be much better spent on the secondary timetable.

That is exactly the claim I expected, and it's a completely fair challenge. But I'll be completely honest with you before we dive into the text. You are going to win part of this argument today. Oh, good. But you are going to lose the part of it that you are currently the most confident about. I am perfectly willing to be proven wrong, but you are going to have to earn it. Let me push back immediately with my first question, then. Who is any of this actually aimed at?

Okay, yeah. Because when we talk about ethical frameworks, we are almost always talking about senior leaders. And that is exactly where I want to start because the actual answer surprised me when I went back to the text. You just assumed ethics is purely a leadership topic. Well, yeah. But the Nolan Principles document doesn't say this is for leaders. It specifically says it applies to everyone appointed to work in the education service. Wait, everyone? Like the entire service. My name, which means the teaching assistant sitting in the classroom, the exams officer coordinating the hall, the site team unlocking the gates, and the person in the office who does the trip's paperwork.

Wow. They are all inside the exact same seven principles as the head teacher. There is simply no version of reality where this is solely the leadership team's document. All right. I have to admit that is a much better start than I expected. Right. Expanding the scope to include the person doing the trip's paperwork completely changes the weight of the document. So if we are all bound by it, what do the seven principles actually say? Because if I am honest, I can probably name about four. off the top of my head you are definitely not alone in that most people can name selflessness and honesty and then they just sort of start guessing let me read three of them to you okay because these three carry significantly more weight than they appear to at first glance let's start with objectivity all right holders of public office quote must act and take decisions impartially fairly and on merit using the best evidence and without discrimination or bias Let's just pause right there and look at that phrasing.

Yeah. Using the best evidence is explicitly written inside the definition of objectivity. It is right there in the text. If we unpack the implications of that for a school setting, it means that choosing an intervention just because you happen to really like the training day isn't just a professional weakness. Right. According to this document, ignoring the best evidence in favor of your personal preference is fundamentally an ethical weakness. That is the exact reading of the text, yes. Let's move to the second one, which is accountability.

That language is fascinating. They must submit themselves to scrutiny. That is a very active, deliberate phrasing. Yeah, it really is. It doesn't say you just have to tolerate the scrutiny when it arrives. And it certainly doesn't say you just have to survive it. No, it essentially says you have to go out and proactively get scrutinized. You have to invite it. And then there is the seventh principle, which is leadership, which happens to be the one people almost always forget is on the list at all. It says holders of public office, quote, should exhibit these principles in their own behavior and treat others with respect.

Let me catch that last part. Yeah. Challenge poor behavior wherever it occurs. Yeah. If you read that closely, that is not a passive value statement. That is an operational instruction. That is a job. Exactly. And if you look at the full list of seven, it is the only principle that explicitly requires you to take action regarding somebody else. It forces you to step in. Fine. I see the weight of the words. Yeah. But at the end of the day, that is still a document from 1995 written for public office generally.

Sure. It wasn't written specifically for us. So what does education's own version actually say? For that, we have to look at the head teacher's standards, which were published by the Department for Education in October 2020. Okay. And the actual physical shape of that document is the single thing I would want you listening to take away, even if you forget absolutely everything else we discuss. Right. How is it laid out? It is divided into two sections. Section 2 contains the 10 standards. Let me read the first few to give you a sense of the scope.

Go ahead. There's school culture, teaching, curriculum and assessment. Right. So we are looking at the massive core operational pillars of running a school. Exactly. And the list continues. So additional and special educational needs and disabilities, professional development, organizational management. Just the sheer breadth of what a head teacher is responsible for laid out sequentially. Yeah. And it finishes with continuous school improvement, working in partnership and governance and accountability. That is the complete list of the 10 standards in Section 2. Which more or less serves as the ultimate job description for the role.

It does. But here's the critical part. Section one, which comes deliberately before all 10 of those operational standards, is purely focused on ethics and professional conduct. Oh, wow. Yeah. It explicitly states that head teachers, quote, must demonstrate consistently high standards of principled and professional conduct. OK. It demands that they uphold the seven principles of public life, that they are expected to meet the teacher's standards and. This is the fascinating part, that they are responsible for providing the conditions in which teachers can fulfill them. Wait, let's hold on that last phrase, providing the conditions.

That is a massive workload sentence hiding quietly right in the middle of an ethics section. It absolutely is. Think about the mechanism behind that. If a teacher cannot physically or practically meet a standard because of how the school week is built, the document has already cited whose problem that is. Right. It places the ethical burden of the school's operational structure. Firmly on the head teacher. Yes, exactly. Now, this is the point where I am going to ask the question you probably don't want to hear, because this is exactly the point in any ethics session where I usually lose interest entirely.

I think I know what's coming. Is any of this actually enforceable? And this is exactly where you win the argument you set out at the beginning. And I'm going to state it plainly rather than trying to dress it up for you. Right. The head teacher's standards actually say of themselves, and I'm quoting exactly here, quote. They are non -statutory and intended as guidance to be interpreted in the context of each individual head teacher and school. Non -statutory. It's non -statutory. There is no getting around it.

Nobody is inspected against Section 1. There is absolutely no regulator of ethical leadership walking around checking this. Right. The Nolan Principles are not law either. If your entire objection to this session is, this has no teeth, the documents literally concede your point before you even make it. Well, thank you for that. That is the honest version of the landscape, and I'll gladly take the win. Enjoy it, because now we reach the part of the argument you are the most confident about, and this is exactly where the entire thing flips on its head.

All right, let's hear the flip. You opened by saying that ethics is just the module you skim the values on a poster with no real consequences. I did. But the conduct expectations are not only located in the document with no teeth. Right. Part two of the teacher's standards is titled personal and professional conduct. And the teacher's standards are exactly what teachers in maintained schools are assessed against under the appraisal regulations. Wait. So the teeth aren't in the theoretical ethics document at all. You're saying they are hiding in the appraisal metrics everyone is already tied to.

Exactly. So it's in the appraisal. It is firmly in the appraisal. Yeah. And part two is remarkably concise. It is exactly five lines long. Okay. It states that teachers uphold public trust in the profession and maintain high standards of ethics and behavior within and outside school by doing the following. Let's hear them. Number one, quote, treating pupils with dignity. building relationships rooted in mutual respect, and at all times observing proper boundaries appropriate to a teacher's professional position. The language around maintaining proper boundaries is incredibly clear and actionable.

Yeah. Number two, quote, having regard for the need to safeguard pupils' well -being in accordance with statutory provisions. And there's the direct link to statutory safeguarding duties. Right. Right in the appraisal standard. Exactly. Number three. And finally, number five. Looking at those five lines, every single one of those is something you could tangibly actually be held to. Every single one of those is a thing people have historically been held to. Right. So the position we have arrived at isn't simply ethics as a poster. The reality is that the aspirational half of the framework has absolutely no teeth, but the conduct half has plenty of teeth.

And the real issue is that most staff have thoroughly read neither of them. That is a much more accurate sentence than my opening orthodoxy. Yeah. All right. Let me ask you one more thing while we have the texts open. Is there anything in this space that was actually written for schools rather than just written for public office generally? There is. And honestly, it is the most useful document of the three we are looking at. OK, what is it? It's the framework for ethical leadership in education.

It was produced by the Ethical Leadership Commission, and it was created with the support of the National Governance Association, the Association of School and College Leaders, and the Chartered College of Teaching. Got it. What it does is take those exact same seven Nolan principles, and it entirely rewrites them specifically for our sector. And the rewrite itself is the truly interesting part. Give me an example. For example, selflessness stops being defined as, quote, should act solely in terms of the public interest and instead becomes, quote, school and college leaders should act solely in the interests of children and young people.

Wow. That is a much sharper sentence. Yeah. Because if we unpack that, acting in the general public interest and acting in the specific interest of children and young people can absolutely come apart. Yes, completely. And this framework explicitly tells you which of those two interests has to win. They come apart in literally every difficult decision anyone listening to this has ever had to make. And it doesn't stop there. Alongside rewriting the principles, it also names specific personal characteristics or virtues. Like what? It lists trust, wisdom, kindness, justice, service, courage, and optimism.

Kindness? Yes. Kindness, for instance, is defined as leaders who, quote, demonstrate respect, generosity of spirit, understanding, and good temper. Justice is defined as leaders who, quote, are fair and work for the good of all children. It is genuinely striking to see kindness explicitly placed inside a formal leadership framework. In writing. In writing and sitting directly next to courage, which I firmly believe is a deliberate pairing. Kindness on its own without courage can just become compliance with a nicer face. It requires both. And just to be completely clear on the regulatory side, this specific framework is not statutory either, correct?

Correct. It is not statutory. It is not inspected. And there is no formal enforcement mechanism for it. Its entire value is that it gives you the precise words for a complex decision you are already trying to make in the building. So let's pull over for a second because I want to synthesize what has actually changed for me during this conversation. And I want to be careful not to over claim it. Go ahead. Lay it out. I came into this session stating firmly that ethics is just a poster on the wall.

Now, I still think the broader frameworks are fundamentally unenforceable. And you conceded I was right about that. I did. But what I had completely stopped noticing is that the conduct half of this equation is sitting right there in my formal appraisal. Yeah. Furthermore, I had never truly registered. That the original seven principles of public life explicitly names the entirety of the education service, not just the leadership team. Right. So my original orthodoxy survives maybe halfway. But the half of the argument it loses is exactly the half that was making me feel like I didn't need to read any of this.

Yeah. And. There is one highly usable practical thing hidden in here, which I would argue is the entire point of looking at this cycle of documents. Okay. Go back to accountability as it is written in the text. Right. If you take that seriously, the test on any decision you make in a school is not simply asking yourself, is this defensible on paper? The real test is whether you would be willing to explain that decision out loud to the exact people it lands on. Which, if you think about the daily reality of school life, is a very different and much heavier question than simply asking, is this allowed by the policy?

It is a vastly harder question, and running that test in your head takes about four seconds. Let's apply that test to the three rooms then. What does that accountability test actually sound like in the spaces where our listeners are working right now? Let's start in primary. It might be a complex decision about exactly who gets to go on the primary residential trip. The question you have to ask yourself isn't whether your internal policy technically allows the answer you've landed on. The ethical test is whether you would say the real unvarnished reason out loud to the family it lands on using exactly those words.

That makes sense for primary. But secondary schools are a different beast with entirely different pressures. How does that accountability test hold up when you're dealing with hundreds of staff and complex timetables? In secondary, it might be a difficult timetable decision, specifically deciding which group gets the specialist teacher and which group gets whoever happens to be left over on the spreadsheet. Right. Objectivity, as written in the principles, demands decisions are made, quote, on merit, using the best evidence and without discrimination or bias. Yeah. So the four second test is this.

Is the reason you would give in the staff room for that timetabling decision exactly the same as the reason you would give to the parents? That is a brutal test. objectivity. And what about when the stakes are even higher, like in a specialist setting? In a specialist setting, the decision might be implementing a shortened day or dealing with a placement that simply isn't working out. The framework's rewritten version of selflessness acting, quote, solely in the interest of children and young people, becomes incredibly uncomfortable there, precisely because the external pressures are so real and heavy.

You can't ignore them. Exactly. The test doesn't magically remove that pressure. What it does is insist that you honestly name which interest actually decided the outcome. So we find ourselves right back looking at that same poster on the wall, seven headings, laminated. 1995 it is the exact same page But this time you were looking at it knowing that it explicitly names your job, not just the head's job. Right. You know that the sharpest word on that entire page is objectivity and that it makes using the best evidence an ethical duty rather than just a professional preference.

Yeah. And you know that the one principle you are most likely to forget, leadership, explicitly asks you to challenge poor behavior wherever it occurs. And perhaps most importantly, you know that the half of this conversation with real career altering consequences. isn't printed on that poster at all. It is part two of the teacher's standards, which is something you formally signed up to. Exactly. It's the same one page, just understood entirely differently. Let's give you a stat from Seed. Okay. At break time tomorrow. Ask whoever happens to be standing nearest the kettle to name just three of the seven Nolan principles.

Once they start guessing, tell them that the education service is explicitly named in the text of the document and watch what that realization does to the conversation. I like that. It takes 10 seconds. Yeah. And it is a much better, deeper conversation than it sounds. And here is the walk -in scenario. If a governor asked you tomorrow morning how your school actively assures itself that decisions are taken, quote, on merit, using the best evidence and without discrimination or bias, which is objectivity, exactly as the document words it, could you point out one real recent decision and show them the reasoning written down?

Very challenging. If the answer is no, the fix is incredibly small. On your next significant decision, write the reason next to it before you actually announce it. And here is the cheaper, immediate fix for leadership. Section 1 of the head teacher standards and Part 2 of the teacher standards are just two very short pieces of text. Neither of them is currently sitting in most schools' induction packs. Both of them easily could be. To wrap up, here are the four things we want you to take off the drive today.

Number one, the Nolan principals name the education service, and they apply to everyone appointed to work in it, not just to leaders. Number two. The ethics section comes deliberately before the 10 head teacher standards, and it is explicitly non -statutory. That is the document's own chosen word. Number three, the half of the framework with actual consequences is part two of the teacher standards, and it is only five lines long. Make sure you read it at least once. Number four, objectivity, as written, makes using the best evidence a strict ethical requirement.

And accountability, as written, means actively submitting yourself to scrutiny rather than just surviving it. If you want one guiding question for a hard decision, it is this. Would I be willing to explain this out loud to the people it lands on? Everything we have discussed today is linked right there in the show notes. The Noling Principles, the Head Teacher Standards, the Teacher Standards, and the Framework for Ethical Leadership in Education. They are all completely free to open. Go and read them. We're just the trailer. Safe trip in.

See you at the gates.