An Open Letter to Andy Burnham: If We Value School Leaders, We Must Respect Their Time

Dear Mr Burnham

As you prepare to become Prime Minister, I hope there is one aspect of the relationship between government and schools that receives your immediate attention. It is not inspection, curriculum reform or accountability. It is something far more fundamental: the way in which government treats the profession.

For too long, there has been a disconnect between the Department for Education's expectations of schools and the practical realities of leading them. Nowhere has this been more evident than in the publication of major statutory and non-statutory guidance during the closing days of the summer term.

A Flurry of Significant Publications

During the final fortnight of the academic year, schools have received a succession of major publications requiring implementation from 1 September. These include:

• 6 July – updated guidance on school uniform

• 7 July – Keeping Children Safe in Education 2026

• 9 July – revised attendance guidance

• 9 July – new allergy guidance

• 13 July – the updated Early Years Foundation Stage Framework

At the time of writing, trusts are also awaiting the revised Academy Trust Handbook, another publication with potentially significant operational implications.

None of these documents are insignificant. Each carries implications for policy, practice and compliance. Each requires leaders to understand what has changed, evaluate the impact on their own context, review policies and procedures, update documentation, brief governors and trustees, organise staff training and ensure that implementation is secure from the first day of the autumn term.

This work cannot be completed overnight, nor should it be expected to be.

Consultation Cannot Mean 'Respond During Your Holiday'

Alongside this succession of major guidance documents, the Department for Education has also launched a number of important consultations, several of which run throughout the summer holiday period.

Consultation is an essential part of good policy making. Schools should have the opportunity to shape national policy and share the practical implications that may not always be apparent from Whitehall. However, meaningful consultation depends upon giving those closest to implementation sufficient time to engage thoughtfully with the proposals.

Running consultations over the summer holiday period achieves precisely the opposite. School leaders should not be placed in the position of having to choose between taking a well-earned break and fulfilling their professional responsibility to contribute to the development of national policy. Yet that is exactly the position many now find themselves in.

The timing also risks skewing the consultation process itself. Responses are likely to be fewer in number, less representative and dominated by those organisations with dedicated policy teams, rather than the school leaders who will ultimately be responsible for implementing any changes.

If government genuinely wishes to hear the voice of the profession, consultations should take place when the profession is actually at work.

Schools Are Not Waiting for September

One of the frustrations shared by many school leaders is the apparent assumption that publishing guidance in July gives schools the whole of the summer to prepare. In reality, the implementation process begins immediately.

Leaders do not simply read a document and file it away until September. They must interpret it, consider the implications for their own school, identify where existing practice requires amendment, consult colleagues, commission training and, where appropriate, communicate changes to parents and carers. Depending on the nature of the publication, this work can take many hours or even days. It is implementation, rather than publication, that creates the workload. That distinction is too often overlooked.

A Lack of Regard for the School Calendar

Perhaps most concerning is the apparent lack of awareness of school term dates. For many schools in Leicestershire, the publication of the updated Early Years Foundation Stage Framework on 13 July came after they had already broken up for the summer. Other schools across England had also finished for the academic year before some of these documents were released.

At the very least, the Department for Education should understand when schools are actually open. It is difficult to understand how guidance can be published after some schools have closed while simultaneously expecting implementation from the start of the autumn term. If government wishes schools to engage meaningfully with important national guidance, it must ensure that guidance is published when schools are still operating and leaders have a realistic opportunity to begin planning.

That feels like a very modest expectation.

Workload, Wellbeing and Leadership

For several years, the Department for Education has spoken about reducing unnecessary workload, improving wellbeing and making school leadership a more attractive profession. Those are worthy ambitions, but they sit uneasily alongside publication practices that create avoidable pressure at one of the busiest points in the school year.

July is not a quiet period for schools. Leaders are simultaneously managing staffing changes, recruitment, transition arrangements, safeguarding handovers, curriculum planning, school improvement priorities, performance management, admissions, budget planning and preparations for the new academic year. These responsibilities exist alongside sustained pressures relating to SEND, increasingly constrained budgets, recruitment challenges and rising complexity across safeguarding and inclusion.

Against that backdrop, issuing multiple major guidance documents within a matter of days is not simply inconvenient. It demonstrates little appreciation of the operational demands already facing school leaders.

Trust Is Earned Through Actions

The recent uncertainty surrounding the delayed publication of Key Stage 2 assessment outcomes added yet another layer of frustration for schools attempting to evaluate performance and plan effectively for the coming year. Individually, each issue might be dismissed as unfortunate. Collectively, however, they create an impression of a department that increasingly underestimates the practical realities of school leadership. That matters because trust between government and the profession is built not through speeches or consultation exercises, but through everyday decisions. The timing of publications, the coordination of implementation and the realism of expectations all communicate whether government genuinely understands the profession it serves.

Increasingly, many school leaders feel that understanding is being lost. I worry that, unless this changes, the Department risks losing the confidence and trust of the very profession upon which the success of every education reform ultimately depends.

A Better Way Forward

None of this is an argument against change. Schools have consistently demonstrated that they can implement significant reforms successfully. Indeed, the profession has an exceptional track record of responding positively to new statutory requirements and improving practice. What leaders ask for is not fewer expectations but better implementation.

Government should adopt a far more considered approach to implementation. Major statutory guidance should be published earlier in the academic year, significant publications should be coordinated rather than clustered together, consultation periods should avoid school holidays wherever possible, and policy timetables should take account of the differing term dates across England. These are not unreasonable requests. They are the hallmarks of a government that understands and respects the profession it serves.

An Opportunity to Reset

Mr Burnham, if your government is serious about rebuilding confidence within education, this is an opportunity to make a meaningful difference from day one. School leaders are not asking for less accountability. They are not asking for fewer responsibilities. They are asking for government to recognise that implementation takes time, that professional judgement deserves respect and that wellbeing is influenced as much by the way policy is introduced as by the policy itself.

At a time when recruitment to headship remains a significant national challenge, we should all pause and ask ourselves a simple question. If this is how we continue to treat those who lead our schools, is it really any surprise that fewer people are willing to step into the role? Respect is demonstrated through actions, not aspirations. The next government has an opportunity to show the profession that it understands the difference.