Introduction

Accurate professional references play a crucial role in ensuring a secure learning environment.  

References are a crucial tool for employers to validate the skills, qualifications, and character of potential candidates as portrayed by them at interview. They also serve as crucial tool in safeguarding, to cross reference data such as employment dates vs application forms, preventing candidates who try to hide employers where they performed poorly or received misconduct warnings.  

If for any reason references contain inaccuracies (whether intentional or not), it can have far-reaching consequences not only for the individuals involved but also for the educational institutions and safety of the students they serve. 

This article explores the significance of current guidance and standards around referencing  in the education sector, examining why they happen, the broader consequences and emphasizing the need for accountability, particularly in the context of safeguarding staff and students. 

Why Do We have References in Education? 

References are an integral part of the hiring process in the education sector. They provide valuable insights into a candidate’s past experiences, teaching methodologies, interpersonal skills, and overall performance. Educational institutions rely on these references to make informed decisions about hiring, promotions, and tenure. 

Whilst obtaining references to give an understanding of past performance is important, it pales into insignificance when we look at the importance of validating the educator does not pose a risk to children in their care.  

However when we examine the current best practises around referencing in schools, it becomes apparent that insufficient scrutiny has been given to the question of who is best placed to provide references, and that the way schools and regulators think about references needs to be radically overhauled to ensure we get the answers we need to keep children safe. 

Current Referencing Practice 

Most schools issue a reference form to a potential employee’s current employer with various ‘tick’ boxes assigned to a horizontal scale ranging from, for example, weak to outstanding, relating to various elements of job performance.  

Typically other questions will relate to absence records, warnings, suitability to work with children and other relevant items. 

So far so good……… 

On receipt of the reference request, whilst the majority of school leaders act with integrity, it’s becoming impossible to ignore the almost daily stories we hear from Principals concerned at the lack of integrity of a Principal in another school regarding references.  

We’ve seen, and personally experienced in our own careers, that an unacceptable number of Principals just tick everything indicating the candidate is exceptional in every area. The prevalence of this has become such a concern, that referee integrity has become a major topic for investigation by the International Task Force on Child Protection. 

Breaking it Down – Two Types of Reference 

If we accept that references have two different purposes, to shine a light on past performance AND to validate that the prospective employer doesn’t pose a risk to children, there are clearly two different sets of questions that must be asked of very different audiences.  

A great example of the need for this, is that we can’t assume that short-tenured School Principal will have awareness of the disciplinary history of an employee. 

Sending two distinct references to a school, each addressing different facets of an employee’s professional profile, offers a comprehensive and balanced view of the candidate, enhancing the decision-making process in the hiring or promotion stages. Below are the benefits of this bifurcated approach: 

Compliance Reference – to HR: 

• Verification of Factual Data: A reference directed to HR focuses on verifying factual and procedural information such as employment dates, attendance records, sickness, and disciplinary actions. This ensures that the basic but crucial employment details are accurate and no administrative discrepancies exist. 
• Consistency and Standardization: HR departments typically have standardized procedures for managing employee files. This standardization ensures that every candidate’s background is scrutinized consistently, promoting fairness in the hiring process. 
• Legal and Regulatory Compliance: This type of reference helps in ensuring compliance with legal and regulatory requirements. By confirming that the candidate’s record is clear of serious disciplinary issues, the school can mitigate potential risks and legal liabilities. 

Performance Reference – to the Line Manager or Principal: 

• Insight into Professional Competence: Line managers are often well-placed to comment on an employee’s day-to-day performance, work ethic, and professional competencies. Their direct interaction with the employee on work-related tasks provides a clear view of the individual’s skills, strengths, and areas for improvement. 
• Contextual Evaluation: Line managers can provide context to the employee’s achievements and challenges, offering a narrative beyond what is documented in the employee file. This includes insights into the employee’s behavior, teamwork, problem-solving abilities, and adaptability to changes or challenging situations. 
• Enhanced Reliability: A reference from a line manager adds a layer of reliability and depth to the assessment of the candidate. It reflects not just the employee’s ability to fulfill their job duties but also their potential for growth, leadership, and contribution to the school’s culture and community. 

By utilizing both a compliance reference to HR and a performance reference to the line manager, schools can gain a multi-dimensional perspective of a candidate’s professional background. This holistic approach not only ensures due diligence in verifying factual employment details but also provides a nuanced understanding of the candidate’s on-the-job performance and potential fit within the school’s community.  

It’s a strategic way to enhance the quality of hiring and promotion decisions, ultimately contributing to the school’s overall effectiveness and the educational experience it provides. 

The Argument Against Senior Leader References 

Asking about performance and general conduct of a line manager, is somewhat presumptuous  

Before we get into the problems with the reference itself, lets have a look at the issues around who should be giving the reference.  

And here we face the first hurdle in referencing – that the candidate very often wants the references to come from the person they know is going to speak positively about them. And this is usually someone conflicted due to friendship, whom also is almost certainly not privy to confidential matters that may still be under investigation, or warnings held within HR records that predate the referee’s time at the school.   

For employers further back than the current, there is no explicit requirement from any regulator or accreditation body to obtain a reference directly from the school. A major flaw here is that often the Deputy Head the educator worked closest with has moved onto another school, thus this person is in no  

The recommendation by the International Task Force on Child Protection to obtain a reference from the employer of the rank of Assistant Principal or above is well-intentioned, aiming to ensure that references for school employees come from individuals with a significant level of authority and insight into the school’s operations and the employee’s performance. However, this approach presents several challenges and significant gaps in ensuring the safety and suitability of employees within the educational sector.  

Access to Comprehensive Employee Records: 

• Senior staff members like assistant heads may not have direct access to an employee’s complete file, especially detailed records of performance, behavior, or disciplinary actions, which are often managed and maintained by Human Resources (HR) departments. 
• There’s a risk that a senior staff member providing a reference may not be fully aware of all historical issues, warnings, or patterns of behavior documented in an employee’s file, particularly if these incidents occurred before their tenure or in different departments.
  
  

Short Tenure of the Referee: 

• If the referee  has had a relatively short tenure at the school, their knowledge of the employee, especially in the context of historical behavior or performance issues, could be limited. 
• This short tenure may not provide a sufficient timeframe to accurately assess and understand the employee’s capabilities, work ethic, or behavioural patterns.
  
  

Objectivity and Bias: 

• References provided by senior staff members might be subject to bias, either positive or negative, based on their personal relationship with the employee or experiences that may not fully reflect the employee’s professional history. 
• Senior staff members might feel pressured to provide favourable references due to institutional reputation concerns or personal relationships, potentially overlooking or downplaying past issues.
  
  

Consistency and Standardization of References: 

• The quality and depth of references can vary significantly depending on the individual providing them. While one School Leader may provide thorough and insightful comments, another might offer only superficial or generic feedback. 
• Without a standardized method for obtaining and evaluating references, the process can only lead to inconsistencies and gaps in the information gathered about potential employees.
  
  

Given these challenges, it is indeed prudent to consider that the safest and most comprehensive approach to obtaining references for school employees would involve requesting them directly from the holders of the employee files, typically the HR department. This approach would ensure: 

• Access to Full Records: HR departments are likely to have complete and detailed records of an employee’s history, performance, and any disciplinary actions taken. 
• Consistency: HR is more likely to have standardized procedures for providing references, which can help ensure that all requests are handled consistently and comprehensively. 
• Objectivity: HR professionals are trained to provide factual and unbiased information, reducing the risk of personal biases influencing the reference.
  
  

In advocating for enhanced child protection standards and practices within the education sector, it is crucial to emphasize the need for comprehensive, standardized, and objective reference checks. These checks should be designed to provide a full picture of an employee’s history and suitability for working in a school environment, thereby upholding the safety and well-being of students as the utmost priority. 

Impact of Inaccurate Professional References 

Inaccurate professional references can significantly disrupt the education sector. They may lead to hiring or promoting individuals who do not accurately represent their skills or backgrounds. This mismatch can cause dissatisfaction among educators, administrators, and students alike. 

Safeguarding Risks: 

• Hiring Risks: Inaccurate references can result in employing individuals who may pose risks to students and staff. If references fail to reveal a candidate’s past misconduct or disciplinary issues, it can lead to potentially dangerous individuals gaining authority over students or interacting with vulnerable adults. 

• Security Gaps: Educational institutions rely on thorough safety measures like background checks and reference verification to protect their community. Inaccurate references create vulnerabilities in these safety protocols, exposing students and staff to undue risks.
  
  

Workplace Impact: 

• Team Dynamics: Hiring based on false references can harm staff morale and well-being. Discovering a colleague’s misrepresented qualifications can undermine workplace trust, hampering teamwork and productivity.
  
  

The Need for Accountability: 

Individual Responsibility: Those who provide references must understand the gravity of their role. Providing misleading information can have far-reaching consequences. It’s crucial for educators and professionals to offer honest, accurate assessments. 

Institutional Role: Educational institutions must ensure reference accuracy. This involves setting robust reference-checking procedures and training staff involved in hiring. When inaccuracies are detected, prompt corrective actions should be taken, which may include revisiting hiring decisions or, in severe cases, terminating employment. 

Legal Considerations: 

Inaccurate references can lead to legal repercussions for educational institutions, especially if a staff member’s preventable misconduct affects student safety. Institutions may face lawsuits or regulatory actions. Similarly, individuals who suffer due to false references might seek legal redress against the institution or the individual providing the reference. 

A Forward-Thinking Solution: Continuous Referencing 

Imagine if schools adopted continuous referencing. Alongside annual performance reviews, a ‘live’ reference could be created and reviewed. This ensures transparency, with no surprises, fostering a culture of openness and continuous improvement. It’s a proactive step towards ensuring the accuracy of professional references and maintaining the highest standards in the educational sector. 

Now here is a radical thought: continuous referencing. Each year, schools carry out various performance reviews on their employees. This presents an opportunity to complete a ‘reference’ alongside the individual where everything is set out and discussed. No Surprises! 

To sum up: 

Accountability for inaccurate professional references is not only vital for maintaining the integrity of the education sector but is also a critical component of safeguarding both staff and students. By prioritizing accuracy in reference creation and during the reference-checking processes, educational institutions contribute to creating a secure learning environment where individuals with the right qualifications and ethical standards are entrusted with the responsibility of shaping the future of the next generation. 

This collective commitment to accountability ensures that decisions are based on accurate information, ultimately benefiting students, colleagues, and the institutions themselves.