« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
CHAPTER 7: THE FUNCTIONS OF THE PARENT FORUM
7.1 Introduction
Chapter 7 provides an analysis of responses to questions around two areas: the list of "functions" and financial powers for a parent forum and the specific statutory duties that education authorities will be obliged to offer parent forums.
The Functions and Financial Powers of a Parent Forum
One new development in relation to the functions is for the parent forums to be freer to consult on, discuss and represent the views of parents on any and all areas of interest to the wider parent body. The intention is that they should be clearly representative of and accountable to all parents in the school. The draft Bill sets out a number of functions relating to this representative role. Questions 14 and 15 explore parental reactions to the range of functions and financial powers of a parent forum.
In question 14 respondents were asked "Do you consider these functions to be appropriate to parent forums? Would you suggest removing or adding any, or making some obligatory and others optional?"
In question 15 respondents were asked, "The Bill has been drafted to allow the parent forum to find out and report the views of parents in the school on any matters which are of interest or concern to them. Do you agree with this open-ended provision or would you suggest defining the areas of interest more restrictively?"
The draft Bill also contains proposals regarding personal liability of forum members in their entry into contracts with third parties. The Bill proposes that parent forums will be "agents" of the education authority for the purpose of dealing with third parties although this could restrict parent forum activities to those covered by the authority's insurance scheme.
Question 16 explored reactions to this and asks parents, "Do you agree that the Bill should designate parent forums as 'agents' of the education authority for the purpose of their dealings with third parties, and that the issue of insurance should be looked into further? Or do you take an alternative view?"
The Education Authority's Duties to the Parent Forum
The second area of coverage of chapter 8 relates to specific statutory duties of education authorities in support of the parent forums that have been set out in the draft Bill. In this education authorities are obliged to:
- Comply with reasonable requests for information from a parent forum
- Ensure that headteacher and school staff are available to give advice and information to the parent forum on parental involvement strategies
- Provide a reasonable level of funding for the parent forum to meet expenses for administration, training and other activities and offering services for accommodation
- Inform the parent forum about the school's arrangements for consultation between parents and teachers
- Ensure that parent forums receive replies to any representations made to the authority or headteacher.
Two questions were asked of respondents in relation to these proposals.
Question 17 asked, "Are these the appropriate obligations to place on education authorities in relation to their working with parent forums?"
Question 18 asked, "Do you agree with the provisions requiring education authorities to provide financial support or support in kind to parent forums or would you suggest alternative arrangements?"
7.2 Appropriateness of Functions
In question 14 respondents were asked, "Do you consider these functions to be appropriate to parent forums? Would you suggest removing or adding any, or making some obligatory and others optional?"
As illustrated in chart 7.1, over a quarter of respondents (27%) felt that the functions were appropriate. Only 4% considered the functions to be inappropriate.
Just over one in six (15%) stated that they were happy with the existing arrangements thereby implying that they did not feel that the new functions were necessary. A further 5% suggested that improvements could be made to existing arrangements.
Under one in ten (9%) stated that some of the functions should be obligatory such as raising standards and quality, responding to questions from the forum, seeking parents views and reporting and so on.
"The functions listed are appropriate in a freer and more flexible system. However, no provision is proposed for parental participation in good management of the school, as at present through the Board partnership. Thus, there will be no checks and balances in the way that the school is managed from the parental or community perspective. It is of considerable concern, and is viewed as regressive that, whereas the 1988 Act places a duty on Boards to raise educational standards in the school, the draft Bill only sets out that parent forums can engage in seeking to raise standards, as thought appropriate"
(School Boards)
Over a quarter (27%) of those responding made a range of other comments on the functions. These included:
- The need for more information on the practical implications for schools and clear terms of reference
- The importance of communication between parents, staff and cluster groups and the education authority
- That forums should have a wide remit with real powers and parents should have more duties and responsibilities
- There should be a predetermined list of functions and guidelines on each (provided by the education authority or the Scottish Executive which the forum can amend if required)
- The importance of involving headteachers and staff
- That some functions should be optional not obligatory
- Restrictions would be needed
- Will depend on context of each school.
Chart 7.1
Appropriateness of functions
Base: All Respondents
(Source Q14)
As might be expected a higher percentage of respondents (47%) who were in favour of the new proposals overall stated that the functions were appropriate compared with only 19% of those who were against the new system overall. Similarly, more of those against the new proposals overall (24%) stated that they were happy with the existing arrangements, compared with only 2% of those in favour of the new system.
A comparison of the various sub groups responding reveals broad consistency of response, the notable exception being amongst education authorities: a larger proportion (41%) of those responding from this category felt that the functions were appropriate and a larger proportion (13%) considered the functions inappropriate, compared with other categories of respondent.
Public Consultation Events
At the public consultation events respondents were concerned to maintain the school management role with powers to make changes. Without a management role it was feared that the parent forum would have little influence over the education authority. Suggestions were made for inter-school forums or clusters of forums.
In summary, the main findings from the analysis of question 14 are:
- The largest number of respondents felt that the functions were appropriate (27%).
- Only 4% considered the functions to be inappropriate.
- Just over one in six (15%) stated that they were happy with the existing arrangements thereby implying that they did not feel that the new functions were necessary.
- Around 9% stated that some of the functions should be obligatory.
- There was some requirement for more information/guidance.
7.3 Agreement with Open Ended Provision
In question 15 respondents were asked, " The Bill has been drafted to allow the parent forum to find out and report the views of parents in the school on any matters which are of interest or concern to them. Do you agree with this open-ended provision or would you suggest defining the areas of interest more restrictively?"
As illustrated in chart 7.2, over one third of respondents (34%) agreed with this proposal whereas under one in ten (8%) were against it. Of those in favour, respondents stated the importance of open ended provision to offer the widest possible remit with minimal restrictions.
"The wide-ranging power to consult is one of the strengths of the draft legislation, allowing the parent forum to explore any area of concern to parents. We would oppose any suggestion that this should be limited, as the School Boards were, to consultation only on the functions of the parent forum".
(Representative Body)
Nearly three in ten respondents (29%) felt that restrictions or boundaries were necessary and defined certain restrictions on the areas of interest that should be covered. One in ten (10%) respondents suggested that restrictions should be applied when dealing with confidential matters or matters relating to individuals.
"Parameters must be set on suitable areas for parent forums to address and on areas not appropriate for discussion. We do not believe that issues relating to confidentiality, the specific circumstances of individuals, pressure groups and special interest groups should fall within the remit of parent forums."
(Education Organisation)
It was also noted that some matters are better dealt with by the headteacher or education authority. Others restrictions suggested by respondents in small numbers (less than 2% of the total) included the areas of:
- School management
- Curriculum or timetabling
- Staff selection and appointment
- School hours or holidays
- Budgets.
"Some restrictions must be laid down which limit the areas into which parents can properly be allowed to engage."
(School Board)
Just over one in ten (12%) identified problems that the forum might face or made suggestions to overcome these problems. These included:
- Must watch out for minority group issues, abuse of the system or vendettas
- Ensure good communication between forum and parents
- Should retain use of formal minutes and agendas
- Increase in bureaucracy
- Need for funding.
Again, 10% stated that they were happy with the existing arrangements and it can be assumed therefore that they were not in support of proposed changes of either type. Just under one in ten (8%) suggested improvements that could be made to the existing system, as it was felt that School Boards could take on this responsibility or in some cases are already doing so.
Chart 7.2
Agreement with Open Ended Provision
Base: All Respondents
Source Q 15)
Again, as we might expect, a larger percentage of respondents (69%) in favour of the system overall agreed with this proposal compared with those who were against it (26%).
A large majority of respondents from education authorities (84%) made suggestions for restrictions.
In summary, the main findings to question 15 are:
- More respondents (34%) were in favour of the proposal than against it (8%)
- A significant minority of respondents (29%) stated that restrictions or boundaries were necessary in the areas of interest to be covered by the forums.
7.4 Insurance and Parent Forums as "Agents" of the Education Authority
In question 16 respondents were asked, "Do you agree that the Bill should designate parent forums as 'agents' of the education authority for the purpose of their dealings with third parties, and that the issue of insurance should be looked into further? Or do you take an alternative view?"
As illustrated in chart 7.3, just over a third of the respondents (36%) agreed with the proposal that parent forums should be agents of the education authority and that the issue of insurance should be looked into further and appropriate cover sought.
"There is broad agreement that parent forums should be designated as 'agents' of the authority for the purpose of dealing with third parties, etc. Very clear and specific guidance will need to be provided."
(Education Authority)
Around one in seven (14%), in contrast, stated that they disagreed with it and felt that insurance should be independent of the authority in order to avoid being restricted by their policy.
The same proportion (14%) stated that they were happy with the existing arrangements in the field of insurance.
A minority of respondents (10%) requested more information or clarification in this area and its consequences. Indeed, around 5% of respondents felt that further discussion was needed and the Forum could discuss and tailor their insurance arrangements to meet their requirements.
Some other comments in relation to this issue were raised by 7% of respondents. A small number (less than 2% of all respondents) stated that the education authority should retain some control over the area and an even smaller number (less than 1% of the total) stated that forum should not have to pay for insurance.
A small number (6%) made comments about safeguarding the type of activities usually undertaken by PTAs. For example, a small number (3%) stated that insurance would be needed if the forum would undertake fundraising and similar PTA activities and the same number (3%) noted that the issue of insurance should not be allowed to interfere with these activities.
Chart 7.3
Insurance and Parent Forums as "Agents" of the Education Authority
Base: All Respondents
(Source Q16)
Again, unsurprisingly, amongst those in favour, there were higher numbers of those who expressed support for the new system overall (53%) than those who were against (26%).
In summary, the main findings from the analysis of question 16 are:
- More than a third of the respondents agree with the proposal.
- Equal numbers (14%) disagreed or were happy with existing arrangements.
7.5 Appropriateness of Obligations
In question 17, respondents were asked, "Are these the appropriate obligations to place on education authorities in relation to their working with parent forums?"
As illustrated in chart 7.4, two in five respondents commenting on this question (40%) agreed that the obligations placed on education authorities were appropriate. Only 6% felt that they were not appropriate.
"We support the obligations on the education authority listed in the document."
(Representative Body)
Just under one in ten (9%) made suggestions for improvements to be made to the existing system.
A small number (5%) felt that further information or clarification was required in this area. An example of the type of response received was:
"The obligations all focus on the concept of 'reasonableness'. Who will determine what is a reasonable request from the parent forum?"
(School Board)
It was suggested by around 9% of respondents that these obligations already exist in the current system.
Under one in five (18%) made a range of other comments on the obligations. For example, one in twenty (5%) of all respondents stated that there should be some statutory controls or obligations or that there should be a designated person at the education authority level available to give guidance and support to the parent forums. One in twenty-five (4%) suggested that networks for communication and training should be established between forums, education authorities and schools to improve communication. Other suggestions made by respondents in small numbers (3% or less of all respondents) included:
- Provide extra funding
- Give responsibility for some or all of the obligations to headteachers and staff
- Review the views of the forum on the obligations on a regular basis
- Provide training for forum members.
A few problems were identified by small numbers of respondents (1% or less of the total) from this group:
- Lack of legal enforcement/ lines of accountability
- Increase in bureaucracy
- Doubts about education authorities' ability to take on these responsibilities.
Chart 7.4
Appropriateness of Obligations
Base: All Respondents
(Source Q17)
Again, unsurprisingly, amongst those regarding the obligations as appropriate, there were higher numbers of those who expressed support for the new system overall (62%) than those who were against (30%).
There were some differences in the proportions of respondents in agreement with the obligations. For example, 72% of respondents from the education authority group agreed that the obligations are appropriate compared with only 18% of PTA committees. Other categories of respondent were broadly consistent.
In summary, the main findings from the analysis of question 17 are:
- A large number (40%) of respondents agreed that the obligations placed on education authorities were appropriate.
- Only (6%) felt that they were not appropriate.
7.6 The Duty on Education Authorities to Provide Financial Support
In question 18, respondents were asked, "Do you agree with the provisions requiring education authorities to provide financial support or support in kind to parent forums or would you suggest alternative arrangements?"
As shown in chart 7.5 almost half (46%) of respondents question expressed agreement with the proposal that education authorities should provide financial support to parent forums.
Of those responding positively, the majority of these respondents simply agreed or welcomed the proposal while a small number (1%) included the comment that lack of financial support would have an adverse affect on parental involvement.
In contrast, just under one in ten (8%) disagreed with this proposal and just under one in five (17%) felt that existing arrangements should be retained.
The same number (17%) of respondents commenting made suggestions for specific funding needs. For example, support, either financial or in kind would be needed for:
- Training
- Administration
- IT
- School lets
- Expenses
- Setup costs
- Crèches.
A particular issue to emerge at this question was that of the paid clerk position along with related matters such as minutes and agenda, although this was highlighted by only 7% of respondents. In the words of one respondent:
"The provision of a Clerk to the School Board disappears under the new proposals. The effective running of any body without proper administrative support is another recipe for disaster especially when dealing with large numbers of parents".
(School Board)
As illustrated in the chart, just over one in six (16%) respondents made a number of further comments with regards to the issue of financial support. For example, relating financial support to the size of school or forum was mentioned by 8% of respondents, while a further 10% thought that School Board funding arrangements should be used as a model.
"Parental involvement requires resources. Currently there is not an equitable position in Scotland and financial support is dependent upon individual education authorities- and their budget allocation. Many organisations that are required to encourage user/consumer involvement experience poor responses unless they invest resources in the process. What is accepted by these organisations is that the few who do contribute are valued and investment is put into their contribution. "
(School Board)
Potential problems highlighted by a total of 5% of respondents included:
- Schools with more than one forum
- The legal status of forums
- Accountability.
Alternatives suggested included a small number (4%) of respondents who thought that funding should come from the Scottish Executive. A further 7% wished to keep the present School Board system, 2% thought the money should be used to develop School Boards and 2% cautioned that funding should not affect existing budgets.
"Financial support for parent forums is crucial, but not at the expense of other areas of the authority education budget."
(Education Authority)
Chart 7.5
The Duty on Education Authorities to Provide Financial Support
Base: All Respondents
(Source Q18)
Again, not surprisingly, high percentages (69%) of those expressing support overall were in favour of this proposal. However, so too were 40% of those who were against the proposals overall.
When we examine the sub groups responding, proportions were broadly similar across all respondent types. Across the sample as a whole just over a third of schools agreed that Education Authorities should provide financial support (39%) with a similar number of School Boards (42%) also agreeing. The proportion of PTAs agreeing with the proposal was lower (just under 30%) and the proportion of education authorities was higher (59%).
In summary the main findings from the analysis of question 18 are:
- Many respondents (46%) expressed agreement with the proposals, recognising that financial support or support in kind would be necessary.
- The main reasons given by the small number (8%) who did not support this proposal were that they preferred the status quo or that funding should be provided by the Government or Scottish Executive.
- The biggest single issue raised was the need for the paid clerk position to be retained (7%).
« Previous | Contents | Next »