« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Background overview
A Scottish Executive consultation, "Making the difference - improving parents' involvement in schools" took place between 1 March 2005 and 7 June 2005. The aim of this was to explore reactions to a draft Bill proposing to change the current system of parental representation with the introduction of parent forums. A consultation paper was issued, and a total of 1025 responses were received from a wide range of organisations and individuals with an interest in parental involvement in children's education. The consultation document was also made available on the Scottish Executive website and on the Parentzone website. A summary leaflet for parents was distributed via schools to every parent of a child currently attending an education authority school.
The consultation document set out the background to the consultation and provided links to the Bill as well as summaries of the main sections. The consultation asked for views on a range of issues; from overall impressions of the proposed changes to specific points contained within the proposed legislation. The overarching aim of the consultation was to produce a robust analysis of all responses to the consultation using both quantitative and qualitative analytical approaches. These findings will inform the draft statutory framework.
A programme of public consultation events was conducted by the Scottish Civic Forum on behalf of the Scottish Executive Education Department ( SEED) and the findings from these have been incorporated into this report. This consisted of a series of 12 events in various locations in Scotland.
Overview of Respondents
The majority (69%) responded on behalf of organisations or groups such as School Boards, education authorities and voluntary organisations, and 31% responded as individuals.
The largest number of organisational responses was received from existing School Boards which represented 63% of the total number of organisational responses and 43% of the total number of responses.
Those speaking on behalf of School Boards showed the greatest resistance to these proposals. Moreover, across the consultation there was evidence to suggest that these individuals perceived that the new proposals would result in a loss of power. However, it should be emphasised that this is only one view.
Misconceptions
We have commented on all responses given to the consultation but particular comments indicated that some respondents did not fully understand the proposals laid out in the legislation, nor the impact that they are intended to have. In particular, respondents were clearly not aware of the limitations of the current School Board Act 1988. Indeed, it was evident that respondents did not realise that in order to make any changes at all to the current system of School Boards, new primary legislation would be required.
However, the aim of a consultation exercise is to enable anyone who wishes to, to express their views. The final report is intended to reflect these views and responses as accurately as possible, even if they are founded on inaccurate perceptions or misinterpretations.
Key Findings overview
Levels of Support for Proposals Overall
One key question (Q4), which explored levels of support for a more flexible system, was used to ascertain an overall picture of the degree to which there was support for the proposals suggested in the draft Bill. In short, this demonstrates how many respondents supported the proposals outlined in the draft legislation, how many were in favour of some changes, although not those proposed in the draft legislation and how many preferred no changes. Across those responding to the consultation as a whole, data from this specific question shows that:
- 13% of respondents expressed support for the introduction of Parent forums as proposed in the consultation document and thus the introduction of primary legislation to enable this.
- 56% of respondents expressed support for some sort of changes to the existing system which again would require primary legislation, although they were not in favour of some or all of the particular proposals in the draft legislation.
- 27% stated that they did not support change of any sort and were therefore against the proposals outlined in the draft legislation.
In effect these figures indicate that most respondents on the whole (69%) either supported the draft bill or expressed support for some changes to be made and these would in essence require primary legislation to be passed. However, the majority of respondents did not support some or all of the particular proposals as outlined in the draft legislation.
A small proportion of respondents restricted their answers to expressing support for the existing School Board system at almost every question, while a similarly small proportion criticised the design and structure of the consultation.
Particular issues raised were raised in relation to the different sections of the draft legislation. The main points arising are summarised in relation to the particular proposals to which answers were given.
Duty On Education Authorities (question 1)
Most respondents (61%) were positive about the proposal to place a new duty on education authorities to promote parental involvement, recognising the benefits of parental involvement for achievement and the flaws in the current system. The 37% of respondents who did not support the proposed duty believed that the existing system of School Boards works effectively and would not be likely to result in an improvement to parental involvement.
Respondents made a range of suggestions to make the duty work effectively and these included ensuring clear communication between parents and education authorities, a consistent framework at a national level, partnership working and inclusion of all parents regardless of their background.
Strategies For Parental Involvement (questions 2 and 3)
Just over two in five (42%) respondents supported the proposal that education authorities should prepare new strategies for parental involvement, whilst just over one in five (21%) were against or stated that they were happy with the existing system of School Boards.
Almost two in five (39%) supported the proposal for incorporating these strategies into existing Annual Statements of Education Improvement Objectives and School Development Plans. Just under one in five (19%) of respondents identified issues in terms of content, presentation and dissemination of the strategies that they felt could affect their incorporation.
Prescribed Means of Appointment (question 5)
Just over one quarter (26%) were in favour of the proposal for parents to decide the means of appointment to the new forums locally or stated preference for the existing system of appointments. Just over half of all respondents (52%) did not support the proposal. Just under a quarter made requests or suggestions for safeguards, assurances or further information on the means of appointment.
Education Authorities to Promote Parent Forums (question 6)
Almost two in five respondents (39%) were in favour of the proposal that education authorities should have a new duty to promote the establishment of a parent forum in each school and to support their operation. A slightly smaller proportion (32%) were against it or happy with the existing system of School Boards. Just over a quarter identified specific potential difficulties or made suggestions to aid implementation.
Composite Parent Forums (question 7)
Just over a third of respondents (35%) were in favour of the proposal for a "composite" parent forum whilst 30% were against it. Respondents emphasised a need for the legislation to ensure flexibility such that forums can be implemented in the format requested by parents in line with their particular needs and appropriate to their area. Nonetheless, some parents felt that there could be problems with composite parent forums.
Setting Up the Parent Forums (question 8)
Almost two in five respondents (39%) were in favour of the proposal to involve education authorities in setting up the initial forum. Just over one in five (22%) disagreed or were in favour of the existing system of School Boards.
Over one in seven (14%) made suggestions for alternative approaches to setting up the forums initially. For example, schools or parents could choose whether the education authority is to be included or not; a working group or consultation could be held with the Scottish School Boards Association, parents, staff, professionals and other interested parties to assist in the setup of the forums.
Determining the Constitution (question 9)
Just over one in seven (15%) were in favour of the proposal for the constitution to be determined locally and some respondents suggested that there should be a compulsory national framework or constitutional model as a starting point which parent forums could adapt. Respondents emphasised that the legislation should ensure that parent forums should not have to start from scratch in establishing the forums and their constitutions. Almost half of respondents (45%) were against the proposal.
Membership of the Parent Forum and Rights of Attendance (questions 10 and 13)
More than half of respondents (56%) felt that membership of parent forums should be broadened to include additional members, although almost half (48%) felt that parents should be in the majority.
A majority of respondents (62%) felt that the headteacher should attend the forums, with 39% stating that headteachers should have the right to attend. Other categories of non parent members identified were teachers, other school staff, all parents and community members. A few respondents also requested the inclusion of church representatives, local authority councillors and pupils. 24% felt that councillors should have the right to attend the forums.
Looked After Children (question 11)
It was agreed by just under a third (30%) of those responding that the legislation should treat parents of looked after children in the same way as other parents. A few respondents identified particular support needs required by this group.
Automatic Disclosure Checks (question 12)
Just over one in two (52%) of respondents felt that automatic disclosure checks were not necessary while around one in seven (14%) felt that only the checks defined in the act would be necessary. Only 8% stated that the checks were necessary and should be automatic.
Functions and Financial Powers of a Parent Forum (questions 14 and15)
More than a quarter of all respondents (27%) felt that the functions outlined in the draft bill were appropriate. Some respondents (9%) felt that some functions should be obligatory (for example raising standards and quality, responding to questions from the forum, seeking parents views and reporting). Requests were made for additional functions to be identified. Some respondents expressed concern that the new parent forums would lack the same level of statutory powers and responsibilities currently enjoyed by School Boards.
Although a significant minority (34%) of respondents agreed with the proposal for open ended provision, it was also felt by 29% of respondents that some parameters would be needed in order to restrict the areas in which parents can be involved. Particular problems that the forum might face were identified by some parents including the problem of minority group issues, an increase in bureaucracy and a need for funding. There were requests for the Scottish Executive to provide more information and guidance about the functions of the forums.
Insurance and Parent Forums as "Agents" of the Education Authority (question 16)
Just over a third (39%) agreed that parent forums should be agents of the education authority and that the issue of insurance should be looked into further. Around one in seven (14%) disagreed with the proposal.
Appropriateness of Obligations (question 17)
Two in five (40%) felt that the obligations on education authorities in relation to their working with parent forums were appropriate. Only 6% felt that they were not appropriate.
The Duty on Education Authorities to Provide Financial Support (question 18)
Almost half (46%) agreed with the proposal that education authorities should provide financial support or support in kind to parent forums. Just under one in ten (8%) disagreed. Specific funding needs included training, administration, IT, school lets, expenses, set up costs and creches. The importance of maintaining the paid clerk position was emphasised here.
Four Other Proposals:
Education Authorities to Provide Advice and Information (question 19)
Just over half (55%) were in favour of the proposal that the education authority should provide advice and information to parents whilst only 6% expressed disagreement with it. Just over a quarter (26%) expressed the view that existing arrangements were sufficient or could be developed further.
The Appointment System (questions 20 and 21)
A third (33%) of respondents agreed with the proposal that education authorities should be enabled to replace the current system of appointing headteachers and deputy headteachers with more modern and flexible systems. Less than one in ten (8%) disagreed with the proposal. 12% felt that existing practices should be modernised or developed (this would in fact require primary legislation). A fifth of respondents stated that parents must be involved in the appointment process.
Those respondents who did not agree that the parent forums should be involved in the new senior appointments processes were asked to give a reason. The main response given by 26% of the total sample (which was 70% of those responding to the question) was simply to reiterate the view that parents should be involved in the process. Of the 4% who gave reasons for not involving parents in the appointment process, the main reason given was the belief that parents lack the relevant knowledge and experience.
Complaints Procedure
A majority (53%) were in favour of the proposal that education authorities should establish a procedure for handling complaints (or other representations made about the authority's exercise of its functions under the Bill) and publicise it. Only 3% disagreed with the proposal but 17% thought that the current procedures were sufficient or could be developed.
Transitional Arrangements
The final proposal was for the draft legislation to include transitional and commencement provisions to allow new arrangements for parent forums to be phased in if appropriate. No question was included in the consultation document in relation to this proposal.
BROAD THEMES EMERGING THROUGHOUT THE CONSULTATION
A number of views and themes recurred across the consultation in relation to different parts of the draft legislation. These are summarised below:
Retain and Build on the Existing System
The theme of utilising and building upon the existing system of School Boards was one that emerged throughout consultation responses and from individuals attending consultation events. The current School Board system and its statutory powers and community links were considered to be effective and a minority of respondents (10% or less at each question) argued throughout the consultation that these strengths should be maintained and built upon. For any changes to be made to the existing School Board system, primary legislation would nonetheless need to be passed.
Moreover, across the consultation, some respondents questioned what the impact of the new proposals would be and cited instances where it was felt a new system could simply maintain the status quo as at present or even lead to a decrease in parental involvement.
Small proportions of respondents specified areas of weakness in the current system of School Boards and agreed that there was a need to modernise and improve the system. The election process, "cliquishness" and poor communication were cited as areas for improvement or replacement. The feeling that many parents were put off by the formality of School Boards also emerged throughout the consultation.
Flexibility Versus Consistency
While increased flexibility was generally welcomed by respondents, this was tempered by cautions on over-flexible systems that could prove difficult to establish or maintain. There was a real fear that too much flexibility would result in a variety of systems in different local authority areas and this would be problematic in monitoring progress, ensuring consistency on a national basis and providing support and training. For example, there were mixed views on the use of composite forums. While some respondents perceived at least a degree of flexibility to be desirable (especially in rural areas), others feel that this could be detrimental.
Respondents requested national guidelines, along with possible structures which could be customised at the local level. A smaller number of responses felt there was a need for prescribed structures, frameworks, practices and a constitutional model to be utilised nationally to ensure consistency between different education authority areas.
Lack of Clarity
In some instances respondents criticised information provided in the consultation as being too vague and this could result in a lack of understanding and response on the part of some respondents. A need for more specific wording or explanations provided on the terms being used within the Bill was highlighted. Respondents also identified a need for more information regarding the proposed draft Bill to be communicated to as wide an audience as possible to ensure that all interested parties are able to make an informed decision.
Perceived Obstacles
Respondents noted a range of obstacles or difficulties with the implementation of various aspects of the Bill and these were raised repeatedly across the consultation. These included:
- parental apathy/ lack of interest in children other than their own
- lack of spare time
- new proposals perceived to be off putting to parents
- new proposals alienating those currently involved due to reduction in powers
- creation of cliques, pressure groups or interest groups
- unrealistic to expect parents to build up forums from scratch.
Lack of Resources
The perception that the proposals could impact on resources for schools and for education authorities was also noted by respondents. They stressed the need for more funding and some noted further that this should not be to the detriment of funding in other areas. There were concerns that the proposals would lead to an increase in bureaucracy and there would be a heavy demand for administration as well as time. Respondents emphasised that the new bodies should be able to appoint a paid clerk as at present.
Partnership Working
Improving partnership working with both school staff and with the wider community was strongly supported, and there was a perception that the headteacher should to be involved in any parent group. Respondents felt that it was important that a wide range of individuals were involved in whatever structure emerges. It is likely that this view reflects a recognition of the experience and knowledge that different people can bring to parent representative bodies.
Suggestions to Aid Introduction of New Legislation
Across each of the questions respondents suggested specific issues that need to be dealt with to overcome perceived difficulties or to streamline the introduction of new proposals. These included:
- a need to guard against cliques, single issue groups and other unrepresentative groups again occurred at various points in the consultation analysis.
- a need for good communication between parents, forums, education authorities, headteachers and teachers
- a need for consistency across all areas
- a need for support at the setup and transitional stages.
« Previous | Contents | Next »