« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
Executive Summary
Education Appeals Committees ( EACs) hear appeals from parents against local authorities' decisions to refuse placing requests and decisions to exclude pupils from schools.
The Scottish Executive, having gathered evidence from local authorities and from a report by the Scottish Committee of the Council of Tribunals ( SCCT), identified a need to obtain the perspectives of individuals who had direct experience as users of the EACs, namely those who had used the appeals procedures.
George Street Research was commissioned in September 2004 to undertake qualitative research among parents with direct experience as users of the EACs. The main aim of this review was to obtain the parents' views and experiences of Educational Appeals Committees and in particular, to establish whether or not they perceived the appeals system to be fair and independent.
In June 2000, the SCCT published a report which suggested that the appeals procedure may not be seen to be independent by those appealing. This report made a number of recommendations. This research suggests that the recommendations of the SCCT have to some extent been achieved, but there remain some that are clearly not being implemented, such as the requirement to hold pre-hearing meetings and that appellants should, as a matter of course, be encouraged to seek professional advice.
However this research suggests that, particularly in the case of placing appeals (the vast majority of those heard), the system is already over-formalised. Our findings indicate that measures that add yet more formality to the process will not be beneficial.
The research indicates a serious imbalance of power between the local authority and appellants. However, the findings suggest that the most effective and appropriate way to redress the balance is not to attempt to empower appellants by encouraging them to adopt the same formal, quasi-judicial stance as the authority, but to encourage authorities to take a different stance. Our recommendations are made with this overall aim in mind.
The existing sort of panel, with its membership slanted towards the authority and educationists, is seen to be under an implicit pressure to be more sympathetic towards the arguments of other educationists in schools than to the parents who are apt to perceive themselves as 'the outsiders'. Panels seem to appellants to act as dispensers of justice. Parents would prefer panels to focus on making the best arrangements possible for the needs of each individual child.
Indeed, our research suggests that appeals panels are over-used as a means to resolve placement allocation issues, which are often resolved at a later date in any case. There may be much more effective and less stressful, time-consuming and confrontational ways of achieving this. Appeals should be a last resort and the end stage of the process.
For exclusions, there is a stronger case for the use of appeals hearings and a clear need for these to be rigorous and fair, necessitating a degree of formality. However, the system as it currently stands is widely perceived to be extremely unfair and unbalanced. Measures need to be taken to ensure that the playing field is levelled out between local authorities and appellants. Education Appeals Committees must be perceived to be genuinely independent and impartial if they are to have any credibility.
Recommendations
1 Consideration should be given to alternative systems for allocating places in schools, that include appeals only as a last resort.
2 Where formal appeals are used, the role of the pre-hearing meeting could be significantly enhanced, with an appointed enabler present to listen to the parent's side and try to bring about an equable solution. If the parents then wished to appeal, they could be informed of their rights and told about the workings of the appeals system.
3 The role of the panel should be re-defined so as to give it a more pro-active role in seeking to achieve a satisfactory outcome for parents, children and schools, achieving agreement, rather than passing judgement.
4 There is a clear need for better information, in advance of the hearing, about what to expect at the hearing.
5 Every measure should be taken to keep the process as short as possible, without prejudice to rights to submit evidence.
6 There is a clear need to either speed up the process for placement appeals or to begin it earlier in the year. We understand that this would mean changing legislation.
7 A leaflet, sent out before the hearing, with information about how an appeal hearing is conducted, who will be there and what their roles are would be a useful and helpful addition to the information provided to appellants. This could also be used to signpost other sources of information and advice.
8 Clearer and more accessible sources of advice and support are needed and information should be provided to appellants to ensure that they are aware of these.
9 Appeal hearings should always be allotted individual and specific times. These should be adhered to and where more than one appeal is to be heard they should be timetabled to allow sufficient length of time to hear each case. The question of what is a sufficient length of time will need to be considered and determined by authorities. There may need to be flexibility and provision for re-convening hearings that over-run.
10 Appellants' rights to privacy should be respected and hearings should always be heard individually. We understand that this would mean changing legislation.
11 Efforts should be made to ensure that hearings are arranged at times convenient to appellants and that they feel able to ask for changes if the time allotted is inconvenient.
12 Greater effort should be made to hold appeal hearings in more neutral and less formal venues to help reduce appellants' perceptions of inequity. Furthermore the use of more local venues, rather than Council head offices in town/city centres should be considered to improve convenience for appellants.
13 All those involved in hearings should be well trained as set out in the recommendations of the report on Education Appeal Committees by the Scottish Committee of the Council on Tribunals.
14 Efforts should be made to improve communication both before and during the appeal, to ensure that the roles and descriptions of all those present are clearly presented to appellants.
15 Consideration should be given to mechanisms for ensuring that panel members are drawn from a wider pool of types of people and that all panels include one or two members who are not associated with the local authority. We understand that this would mean changing legislation.
16 Guidelines should be produced to ensure that appeals are heard in an atmosphere that does not disadvantage the appellant. These should include advice and expected standards for location, room layout, seating arrangements, number and type of panel members, number and types of representation allowed to each 'side', procedures and so on.
« Previous | Contents | Next »