Parent Forums - what does SPTC think?

Read the response from the Scottish Parent Teacher Council to the consultation on "Making the Difference - involving parents better in schools"

Question 1: Do you agree with the placing of a new duty on education authorities to promote parental involvement?

Answer 1: Yes

. Question 2: Do you agree that education authorities should be required to prepare new Strategies for Parental Involvement (SPIs)?

Answer 2: Yes – but such strategies should be aimed at all parents, not just committees. They should be written in plain, jargon-free English that parents can easily understand.

Question 3: Do you agree that incorporating these Strategies in existing Annual Statements of Education Improvement Objectives and School Development Plans (as set out in the 2000 Act) is the right way for education authorities to set out their intentions? Or should this be done in some other way?

Answer 3: Yes; incorporating strategies for parental involvement in the Annual Statements of Education Improvement etc. as set out in the 2000 Act, will ensure that the SPIs have the same status as other Improvement Objectives. If they were dealt with separately, there would be a danger that they would be overlooked or treated as less important.

Question 4: Do you agree that the current system of parental representation i.e. School Boards should be replaced by a more flexible system of parent forum, as decided locally by the parents, in a way which best suits them and their school best?

Answer 4: Yes; we totally support the proposals for a more flexible system of representation. We have consulted with a wide range of schools and it is clear that they have very different needs. Some schools wish to continue with the present two committee model; some schools wish to go to a single committee model; some schools want the chance to involve more parents. Indeed many small schools want to involve all parents. However, it is also clear that many parents believe that all schools are like their own school. They do not appreciate the differences that exist across Scotland. Many people, if they like what they see in their own school, want this to be universal without appreciating that this would result in lots of different “universals”.

Question 5: The Bill does not prescribe the means of appointment to the new forums (elections to Boards are mandatory) but provides for parents to decide this locally. Do you agree?

Answer 5: Yes; again we totally support this proposal. The formal election process has been one of the most unattractive aspects of school boards for many parents. It is important that there is an open system of appointment that everyone can be aware of, but clearly the optimum system is likely to be very different in a large secondary school and in a small, single teacher primary school. Moreover, the appointment process can then be tailored to the format of the forum; for example if the forum were made up of year group representatives, the appointment system would be by year group; if the forum were a whole-school body, then the appointment system would be by the whole parent community.

Question 6: Do you agree that education authorities should have a new duty to promote the establishment of a parent forum in each school and to support their operation?

Answer 6: Yes; in our consultation with parents, it is clear that many are anxious to know how the forums will be set up. There is fear that maverick groups of parents might set up competing forums. Many would therefore welcome a clear lead from the local authority, with the offer of proposed formats and model constitutions for parents to consider. It would also be useful if the Scottish Executive provided exemplars (possibly on a website) with linked constitutions, making it clear that the new forums could be changed in the future should this be deemed to be desirable. However, it is important that parents retain the final say on whether they have a forum and on its format.

Question 7: Should the Bill provide for ‘composite’ parent forums where this is the preferred option of parents in each school in a combined school or cluster of schools?

Answer 7: Yes; in line with our support for local decision making, if the parents in a learning community want a single parent forum, then it should be for those parents to make that decision. This should, therefore, be allowed by the legislation. However, we would be surprised if this were ever other than a minority choice.

Question 8: Do you agree with the proposal for the involvement of education authorities to get the initial parent forum off the ground? If not, what alternative would you suggest?

Answer 8: Yes; as indicated in our reply to question 6, many parents would clearly welcome the involvement of education authorities in setting up parent forums. However, it is important that the forums do not become authority-imposed bodies with formats designed to make life easy for the authority. We would like to see parental input into designing a range of possible formats which the authorities would offer to the parents at individual schools for them to choose from. Parents are concerned that this process will be controlled by the authorities and many do not have much trust in the authority to genuinely serve the needs of parents.

Question 9: The draft Bill leaves the forum’s ‘constitution’ to be determined locally, either by the parents or initially under the education authority scheme. Do you agree with this approach? If not, what alternative would you suggest and why?

Answer 9: Yes; once again, we think it is important that parents decide on the constitution that suits their circumstances. At present most PTAs adopt this system. However, it is our experience that parents need guidance in this; they need support in understanding the function of a constitution and what it should cover; and they are helped by the provision of possible models for their consideration. The constitutions should be kept as simple as possible, written in straightforward language and not turned into some lengthy, incomprehensible legalistic document that would satisfy the authorities’ legal departments. Again, we would hope that there would be parental input into devising model constitutions, both at local authority and Scottish Executive level that would in turn be offered to school parents for their consideration. Again it would be important to highlight the option for changes in the future should these be desirable.

Question 10: Do you agree that membership of a parent forum should be confined to parents (the broad definition) of children attending the school or individuals co-opted by the parent forum? Should parents always be in the majority?

Answer 10: It is very important that the parents of children currently at the school retain control of the new forums. We recognise that outsiders can and do make a very important contribution to existing boards. However, we have also heard considerable dissatisfaction from parents about how their boards are controlled by people who have no children at the school. Some boards have come under the total control of co-optees and many parents do not know how to change the situation. Whilst there are times when people who are currently not parents can contribute very meaningfully to a school’s life and decision making, their contribution should always be within limits set and understood by the parents of current pupils at the school. We would suggest that the chairperson is always a current parent.

Question 11: Do you have a view as to how the needs of looked-after children should be addressed and catered for in the Bill?

Answer 11: This is a very difficult issue. Having formal minority views properly represented on a parent committee depends on the members of that committee being sensitive to the needs of such groups. It is not clear whether it is appropriate to have the specific needs of a particular group of children catered for on a group which is essentially about involving more parents in the life of the school. We think the needs of looked-after children are important, but they are probably best represented by the school staff.

Question 12: Do you agree that the Bill should not result in parent forum members being subject to automatic disclosure checks but that members, like any other parent, should only be checked when engaging in activities defined under the Protection of Children (Scotland) Act 2003?

Answer 12: There is no scope for “opinion” about disclosure checks; they are either required by law or not required by law. The Protection Children (Scotland) Act 2003 lays out quite clearly when disclosure checks are required. It is against other laws to request a disclosure check when it is not actually required.

Question 13: On balance, do you agree that ‘rights of attendance’ for certain non-members of a parent forum should not be a part of the new arrangements? In other words do you agree that non-members of the parent forum should attend only by invitation or do you believe the headteacher should have the right to attend, with the councillor or other individual by invitation?

Answer 13: There is considerable difference between the headteacher and the local councillor with regards to “rights of attendance”. Clearly the forum will only work effectively if it operates in partnership with the school. This would imply that the forum and the headteacher would establish a co-operative relationship which in turn would suggest that the headteacher would normally attend forum meetings. Indeed, in our experience of PTAs, PTAs normally welcome the headteacher’s attendance and non-attendance is only by the decision of the headteacher, not of the parents. (It would indicate a total break-down in the relationship if the parents were to ban the headteacher from attending). However, we can think of circumstances where it might be foolish to require that the headteacher attends (for example a planning meeting for a fundraising event). However, we recognise that there is considerable anxiety that the headteacher does not appear to have a formal role with regards to the parent forums. We therefore feel that balance is struck if the headteacher has a right to attend, but is not required to attend.
The position as regards councillors is a different matter. It is not clear that their presence sits so well with a parents’ body that will hopefully move beyond the management role of the current school boards. There are times when the presence of the local councillor can be helpful, but with proposed changes to the voting system for local authorities, it is not clear that in the future there will be a “local councillor” as at present. Moreover, it can often be difficult to determine who is the local councillor. Is it the councillor within whose ward the school sits, or the councillor who represents the school’s catchment area? We feel that, given these complexities, the solution should be for councillors to attend at the invitation of the forum, but not as a right.

Question 14: Do you consider these functions appropriate to parent forums? Would you suggest removing or adding any, or making some obligatory and others optional?

Answer 14: In general parents see the purpose of their involvement as being about building a sense of the school community and working to benefit the children. We feel that people are more likely to get involved if the reasons for their involvement make sense to them and we therefore feel that the two purposes outlined above should be identified as the key aims of the new forums. When we held a series of meetings on parent forums, many people, including board members, were totally ignorant of the board’s current powers and were amazed to learn that they currently have a duty to exercise their functions “with a view to raising standards of education in the school”. The parents we spoke to did not feel that this should be part of their specific remit. It may be a consequence of their involvement, but they did not think it should be the rationale for their involvement.

Question 15: 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?

Answer 15: We support the open-ended nature of this provision as at different schools at different times different issues will be of most importance. It is important that the forums are allowed to pursue those issues which are of interest to parents at the moment, rather than fulfil some external agenda of consultation. However, these consultations should not stray into areas of confidentiality and should be sensitive of matters that fall within the professional responsibility of the headteacher and local authority.

Question 16: 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?

Answer 16: If the forums are the agents of the authority, they never have to think about public liability insurance and it takes a great burden from them. However, it could also mean that their activities will be limited to those permitted by the local authority’s insurance scheme – whether this be through a commercial company or by self-insurance. In our experience of providing PTAs with public liability insurance, the independence of the PTAs and their separate public liability insurance has allowed PTAs to undertake activities which would be prohibited by the authority including such things as organising walking buses or selling home-made cakes. It also allows PTAs to operate freely on non-authority premises. We feel that there are, therefore, good arguments for setting up a separate insurance scheme to cover parent forums and not making them agents of the authority for the purpose of their dealings with third parties.

Question 17: Are these the appropriate obligations to place on education authorities in relation to their working with parent forums?

Answer 17: Yes; it is very important that the forums are adequately supported, whilst not being burdened by excessive paperwork from the authority. The forums need to be able to focus on things that are of concern to parents.

Question 18: 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?

Answer 18: It is important the forums are given the financial support and support in kind (i.e. administrative support) that they need to carry out their official functions without having to resort to fundraising. At a minimum the support should cover items like photocopying, postage, meeting expenses etc. and communicating with other parents at the school.

Question 19: Do you agree with the proposed duty on education authorities to provide advice and information to individual parents on request, on matters relating to the education of their children?

Answer 19: We are surprised that this is not already a duty on education authorities arising from the Freedom of Information Act. If it is not, then it clearly should be.

Question 20: Do you agree that education authorities should be enabled to replace the current system of appointing headteachers and deputy headteachers with more modern, flexible processes and procedures?

Answer 20: We understand the need to review the current process in order to ensure that the very best people are appointed to the headships of our schools. We agree that the current system is no longer adequate and so support this proposal.

Question 21: If you do not agree that the principle of parental involvement should be retained by the involvement of parent forums in the new senior appointments processes, please give your reasons.

Answer 21: We do think that there should continue to be parental involvement in senior appointments. This emerged from our meetings as being a critically important part of school boards’ current duties. However, the nature of parental involvement could be subject to change and should fit into the new scheme that may emerge from the proposed review.

Question 22: Do you agree with the proposal to require education authorities to establish complaints procedures in relation to the way they exercise their functions under the Bill?

Answer 22: Talking to PTAs, we found that many of them felt that they were invisible and totally ignored by education authorities. At present in many authorities the whole authority structure of parental links – from the appointment of school board officers to the setting up of consultative groups drawn from school boards – ignores the wider parental community. Many PTAs feel aggrieved that they work hard for their schools and yet count for so little with their authorities. Indeed many authorities are completely unaware as to which of their schools even have PTAs and have to come to us, the Scottish Parent Teacher Council, for that information. We feel that a complaints procedure would force authorities to take account of the interests and needs of all parents and, where this did not happen, allow parents to seek redress.