Conference

2008 Safe Internet Use

------------------

Highlights of previous SSBA conferences :-

2007 Developing a Parent Council and Encouraging Parental Involvement

2006 The Way Forward for Parental Involvement

2005 Parents in Partnership

2003 Partnerships and responsibilities

2002 SSBA is fit for the future

2001 Roadshow

2000 International
and published book
available here online

-----------------------
Workshops
-----------------------

Enabling and Maintaining Partnerships in Education - the role of parents in school governance

Abstract

The workshop will consider, through studies of contrasting schools, the variety of structures used to involve parents in school governance in non-government schools in Western Australia. The studies will consider both the formal governance structure of the school and other mechanisms by which parent involvement is promoted. They will also examine the means by which schools recruit and induct parents into governance structures and by which they provide on-going education to those involved in governance.

The Association of Independent Schools of Western Australia has 114 member schools located in metropolitan Perth and rural and remote areas of the State. Member schools cover a wide spectrum of school types from large metropolitan day and boarding schools, with enrolments in excess of 1000 to small Aboriginal community schools in some of the most remote areas of the State with enrolments of less than 50. The schools involved in the studies are:

• Perth College, a day and boarding school for girls, was founded in 1902 and is affiliated to the Anglican Church. It is located in Mount Lawley, an inner suburb of Perth, and has an enrolment of over 900 students from pre-primary (five years of age) to Year Twelve (the final year of secondary education). The governing body, the Council, has a traditional structure; that is, members are selected for their professional expertise and as representatives of parents and Old Collegians.

• Pioneer Village School, established in 1980. Founded as a very traditional Christian school by a group of Jehovah’s Witnesses, the school is located immediately adjacent to a tourist "Pioneer Village". In fact the school was established to be part of the tourist village. Over the last nineteen years, the school has become a total separate entity from the tourist venture and is a parent-controlled school.

• Peter Moyes Anglican Community School, a new school which opened in January 2000. This school is a day school and a member of the a system of low fee Anglican schools in Western Australia.

• The Aboriginal Independent Community Schools, each school in this group of fourteen schools has been established by an Aboriginal Community to offer an education that will impart the skills and knowledge necessary for participation in the wider community which is set in the context of the Aboriginal culture.

Full Presentation Paper

Enabling and Maintaining Partnerships in Education -
the Role of Parents in School Governance:

A view from the independent sector in Western Australia

Western Australia extends from the south to the north of the Australian mainland, a distance of 2,391 kilometres (1,495 miles). The State covers a vast area. The total area is 2,525,500 square kilometres (986,524 square miles) and the State has 12,500 kilometres (7812.5 miles) of coastline.

In common with other Australian States and territories, there are three sectors in school education; namely, the State Education System, the Catholic Education Sector and the Independent Sector. As will be explained later, the term independent is something of a misnomer.

Established in 1962 the Association of Independent Schools of Western Australia (AISWA) is a voluntary association of schools that represents the interests of the independent sector. Its 114 member schools are located in metropolitan Perth (84), rural (22) and remote (8) areas of the State. There are approximately 45 000 students enrolled in these schools and this represents 10% of the total school population of Western Australia.

Member schools represent a broad spectrum of schools from large metropolitan day and boarding schools with enrolments in excess of 1,000 to small Aboriginal community schools in some of the most remote areas of the State.

The Association is regarded by the Federal and State Governments and by non-government organisations linked to education as the peak body representing the interests of non-Catholic, non-government schools in Western Australia. The interests of all Catholic schools, including those that are members of the Association, are represented by the Catholic Education Office.

The Schools

The schools that will form the focus of this study are distinctly different in nature and are representative of the diversity of AISWA membership.

Perth College, a day and boarding school for girls, was founded in 1902 and is affiliated to the Anglican Church. It is located in Mount Lawley, an inner suburb of Perth, and has an enrolment of over 900 students from pre-primary (five years of age) to Year Twelve (the final year of secondary education). The governing body, the Council, has a traditional structure; that is, members are selected for their professional expertise and as representatives of parents and Old Collegians.

The College believes that one of its distinguishing features is the sense of community it develops among parents and students. The majority of Council members, while chosen for their expertise, are parents of present students and/or Old Collegians. In order to affirm and refocus the sense of community, a Strategic Planning exercise conducted in 1998 resulted in a move from the traditional 'Parents and Friends' and 'Mothers Auxiliary' structure to one in which parent groups support specific school activities such as Drama, Music or Rowing.

Pioneer Village School was established in 1980. Founded as a very traditional Christian school by a group of Jehovah's Witnesses, the school is located immediately adjacent to a tourist "Pioneer Village". In fact the school was established to be part of the tourist village. Over the last nineteen years, the school has become a separate entity from the tourist venture and is a parent-controlled school.

All parents are members of the Association and eligible to serve on the Board, which is elected at the Annual General Meeting. Teachers are also members of the Association and in 1998 the first teachers, who were not also parents of children at the school, were elected to the Board. The present Principal, appointed in 1994, has had a significant influence on the development of a stable governance structure, which still reflects the community nature of the school.

Peter Moyes Anglican Community School is the newest in a system of low-fee Anglican schools. It opened in January 2000 with students in Pre-Primary to Year 7 in the primary school and year 8, the first year of secondary school. The school is located on the edge of the northern suburbs of Perth, which is a rapidly developing area.

The Anglican Community Schools are a set of five schools managed as a system by the Anglican Schools Commission. They have been established to offer an "affordable education" to their communities and, typically, are closely associated and may share facilities with an Anglican Parish. Their location is generally in the less affluent and developing suburbs of the metropolitan area. An Anglican School in Busselton, a regional centre in the south west of the State is being planned to open in 2001.

The Aboriginal Independent Community Schools are a group of fourteen schools with a common purpose. This purpose is to offer an education that will impart the skills and knowledge necessary for participation in the broader community, which is set in the context of the Aboriginal culture. While they are as diverse in nature as any set of schools, they all have a commitment of Aboriginal control and the maintenance of the world views and values of their respective communities. No one school has been singled out in this study because, just as the Aboriginal culture is totally different from that of white Australia, so is their view of the management of their schools.

Funding

The number of non-government schools, both Catholic and non-Catholic, in Western Australia (WA) and indeed Australia, may come as a surprise. It is a result of a system of funding that, if not unique, is certainly unusual. This government funding of non-government schools is why the term "independent" may seen contradictory.

In Australia, schools access recurrent funding from three sources: Commonwealth Government per capita grants, State Government per capita grants, and fees. Both the Commonwealth and State Governments provide funding on the basis of need. Currently, the Commonwealth Government measures needs using a formula called the Education Resources Index (ERI). This formula calculates each school's level of recurrent expenditure per student and compares it with a fixed standard, the Average Government School Recurrent Cost (AGSRC). The schools are then grouped into twelve categories.

Legislation currently before Federal Parliament will change the basis for determining a school's level of funding from the ERI to an index linked to the Socio-Economic Status (SES) of the families that make up the school community. The parameters used to develop this index are obtained from the Australian Bureau of Statistics Census, which is conducted every five years. A continuum of funding will be used with a school's position determined by its SES. Funding will range from a maximum of 70% of the AGSRC to a minimum of 13.7%.

State Governments link their per capita funding models to those of the Commonwealth. Models vary from State to State. In WA, the State Government groups schools into six categories for funding. These categories are directly linked to the Commonwealth categories.

Obviously, this will need to change if the SES Index becomes the basis for Commonwealth funding.

Of the four schools considered in this paper, Perth College is in Category 3 for Commonwealth Funding and hence Category 1 for the State. Pioneer Village and Peter Moyes Anglican Community School are in Category 10 (Commonwealth) and Category 5 (State). The Aboriginal Independent Community Schools are in Category 12 (Commonwealth) and Category 6 (State). Eight of these schools are located in remote areas of the State and these schools receive 1.5 times the State Category 6 per capita grant to compensate for the additional costs associated with operating in these locations.

The third source of recurrent income is fees. Information from the Australian Parents Council indicates than on average non-government school parents contribute 44% of the annual operating costs with governments contributing the remainder. Of course, averages are made up of extremes. At Perth College, which receives the least government funding of the schools considered, the parental contribution amounts to 75% of the annual operating cost. At Peter Moyes and Pioneer Village the parental contribution is approximately 30% in the primary years and 40% in the secondary years. For the schools that form the Aboriginal Independent Community Schools group, State and Commonwealth grants provide the only source of funding.

The Structure and Role of the School Governing Body

The Governing Body

The member schools of the Association are significantly different in nature, despite any similarities that might be inferred from comparable size or enrolment pattern or fee level. Equally, the Governing Bodies (Boards) of these schools are diverse in nature with apparently similar schools having significantly different Boards.

The key factors that distinguish Boards are.

• Structure,

• Method of Appointment,

• Role and Method of Operation.

These factors can be described on a continuum and are inter-related. The Structure of the Board can be a result of the method of appointment, particularly in a parent directed/controlled school or one in which an organisation, external to the school, has the right to appoint Board Members. The Role that the Board plays in the school will be determined by its composition, which defines the expertise available and the level of connection of its members.

Structure

The "Community elected" Board will be typical of schools which are designated parent-directed or controlled or those in which all the parents, and possibly the teachers, belong to an Association. The structure of such a Board is unlikely to reflect the range of skills evident in the "Expert" Board and it is also unlikely that the term of a Board Member will be greater than one year.

At the other end of the spectrum is the "Expert" Board. In this case, at some point in the school's history, the preferred composition of the Board will have been determined and members will be appointed for their ability to provide the requisite skills. A typical Board of this sort will include an accountant, a lawyer, an architect or other building industry professional, together with representatives of the school's formal parent body and its former students. In recent years, a person with expertise in marketing has been perceived as a valuable addition to the Board.

This type of Board will almost certainly have fixed terms of service for members, perhaps defined as a series of three year terms-a maximum of three such terms being common. By establishing an expert board, a school does not necessarily limit the positions available to parents, since the parent body can be the source of the expertise.

Of the focus schools, the Aboriginal Independent Community Schools have a "Community nominated" Board. These schools are formed within an Aboriginal Community, which is managed by a Council of community members. The School Council (Board) is usually a subset of this Council. Given the social structure of the Aboriginal Community, the members of the Council may be grandparents or aunts or uncles of students, as each member of the Community has a responsibility in raising and educating the children.

Pioneer Village School also has a "Community elected" Board, but in electing the Board the Association of Parents and Teachers give consideration to the range of skills that would be of value in school governance.

The Peter Moyes Anglican Community School has an "Expert" Board with little parent involvement, but this is partly due to circumstance. It is a new school and therefore when the Board was established it had no pool of parents from which to draw. As the school becomes more established, it will no doubt follow other schools in the system and retain the "Expert" Board but find the expertise among the parent body.

This is certainly the case at Perth College, where four of the members are parents and three, including the Chair, are parents of recent former students. In addition, the parent group has formal representation through one member of Council. From a total of twelve, eight are parents or past parents.

Method of Appointment

The left hand end of the continuum, the direct election from the school community, is self- explanatory. This election usually occurs at an Annual General Meeting and, in some cases, it is possible to nominate from 'the floor' at the meeting itself.

At the other end of the spectrum, it is unusual to find a Board that is self perpetuating in the sense that, with the exception of one position which is reserved for the nominee of the parents group and one for the former students, the Board is free to appoint whom it pleases without reference to an external body.

Toward the right hand side of the spectrum, it is more usual to find Boards with some positions that can be filled by the Board, some which must be filled by reference to an external body and others that are filled by the nominees of one or more external bodies, including the parent group and former students. For schools with a Church affiliation, such as Perth College and Peter Moyes, the Archbishop of Perth, the Synod of the Anglican Church and the Diocesan Council may have the right to make direct appointments to the Board and to approve the appointment of other members. At Perth College, six of the members of the Governing Body are appointed by the Church.

Role and Method of Operation

In considering this continuum, it is necessary to draw a distinction between 'management' and 'governance'. Although the distinction between the two can be blurred on occasion, there is a difference and without an understanding of the distinction, there is significant potential for conflict.

To use a simple distinction; governance is concerned with the development of policy and management with its implementation.

At the community management end of the continuum, governance and management are combined. There is usually a Head Teacher rather than a Principal and the Board will expect not only to develop policy but also to direct the Head Teacher on the method by which the policy will be implemented. Board meetings are likely to be lengthy as policy is discussed in minute detail. Board Committees may exist but all Board Members will expect to have input to Committee recommendations, which are likely to be changed when considered by the Board as a whole.

The Board Committees will concern themselves with implementation and expect the Head Teacher to implement their recommendations. The Chair of the Board is not expected to provide leadership, but only to control the meeting. Members of this type of Board will be well known in the school community and parents will frequently voice opinions and concerns directly to Board members rather than through the Head Teacher or the Chair.

The antithesis of this model is the Board of Directors. This Board operates as would the Board of a public company. A clear distinction is drawn between governance and management with the Board concerning itself with the development of policy and leaving its implementation to the Principal. The Board will delegate authority for some policy matters to the Principal who will considered to be the Chief Executive Officer of the school. The Chair of such a Board is likely to be a leader in policy discussion rather than simply the Chair of the meeting. Board Committees will report to the Board but their recommendations are unlikely to be changed significantly by the Board as a whole. Board meetings will be shorter and more formal in nature than those of the "Community Management" board. The members of this type of Board will be viewed as 'remote' by the school community except for those members representing the parent group. It will be expected that parents will communicate with the Board rarely and that this will be done either through the Principal or the Chair.

None of the schools considered has a "Community Management" structure, although in its original form Pioneer Village School operated along these lines. The current Principal has been responsible for moving the school from this model to one which has some of the characteristics of the Board of Directors' model, particularly in regard to the development and implementation of policy, but which still provides the school community with very real involvement in the direction of the school. The Principal is active in guiding policy development but does so in a manner that involves the members of the Board rather than paying lip service to their contribution.

Perth College shows many of the characteristics of the Board of Directors' model due in part to the fact that the Principal has lead the school for 13 years. The Principal commented that the Board is less proactive in policy development than earlier in her term of office.

The Boards of the Aboriginal Independent Community Schools have a role and method of operation, which mirrors the philosophy on which they were established. The goals of language and cultural maintenance represent the primary reason for the establishment of the school. With varying degrees of emphasis, the schools seek to achieve a balance between the retention of Indigenous values and the development of skills and knowledge required to operate successfully as individuals and groups within the wider Australian society. Consequently, members of the community are actively involved in the educational programme of the school and closely monitor day-to-day operations.

Summary

The structure of the Board, the method of appointment of members and its role and method of operation are inextricably linked. There is no correct model, but to be effective each of these factors must be linked to the basic philosophy of the school. The model should be reviewed regularly and, if necessary, amended. In fact, as a school 'matures' it is likely that there will be a need to amend structure and practice. Any model will work effectively if:

• it is thoroughly understood by all involved;

• members are committed to making it work.

Involving Parents as Partners

The initial question is whether parents should be actively involved in school governance?

For those schools that are members of AISWA the answer is obviously 'yes' although the degree of that involvement may vary. The same is true for Catholic schools in the State even though they are all responsible to a central authority, the Catholic Education Commission. However, despite recent moves which encourage 'school decision making bodies' in government schools these bodies do not really have a genuine governance role. The Education Department's central office and the various district offices remain the true policy making bodies.

In all schools there can be a perception that the Board is an elite group and is therefore not accessible. School Principals and their Boards need to ensure that they are not putting barriers in the way of participation. This action is not usually intentional but happens if the Board appears to be distant from the school community. As the Principal of Peter Moyes Anglican Community School Stated "part of my role is to teach the Council (Board) and the Parent Group to know each other'.

Schools with Boards are at close to the "community elected" end of the spectrum, such as Pioneer Village and the Aboriginal Independent Community Schools, do not experience this problem. Schools with the "Expert Board" do.

The Principal of Perth College expects that Board Members will be around the school, attending significant activities and be known to the teaching staff. In this school the Board Members act as hosts at a function to welcome new parents and this provides one opportunity to establish a contact. The Chair of the Board reinforces this view but cautions that Board Members need to ensure that in developing contact with parents they observe the policy that it is the Principal's responsibility to run the school. Both the Principal and the Chair are very supportive of having a majority of parents who are chosen for their expertise, as Board members with a small number of "outsiders" to provide a balance.

As a new school, Peter Moyes Anglican Community School will need to ensure that it makes parents feel that they have a place in school governance through strategic appointments to the Board now that a parent body exists. It would seem that this will be the case since at the opening all present made a "Statement of Community Covenant".

From ancient times, communities have been gathered together, by sharing in a covenant; a binding mutual commitment to each other, to shared values, principles, and to God, who knits the whole of creation together.

In a school, the community of that covenant is made up of students, teachers, parents, administrators and the wider local community, all of whom work together for the benefit of the students.

Our covenant of learning and growth with each other is a reflection of God's Covenant to care for his people and bless them with all goodness.

I now call on this community to enter into the covenant of mutual care,

Of teaching and of teaming that underlies the principals and objectives of this School

No matter what the model of governance, these are key issues that will promote success. These are.

• an induction process,

• a set of protocols for members,

• an education process,

• strategic planning,

• an appraisal process.

Induction

It is essential that the Board develops an induction procedure for new members. This procedure should include information on:

> the regulations or laws that governing the School Boards, in particular, as well as Boards in general;

> information on the school, including any planning that is in progress (a 'warts and all' tour of the school is vital),

> a briefing on matters presently before the board;

> brief biographies of other board members.

It is tempting to assume that only the first and perhaps the last of these are needed but no matter how familiar with the school new Board Members may appear to be, their knowledge is in fact coloured by and limited to their interaction with the school up to their appointment.

New members with little Board experience need to feel confident so that they can make an effective contribution from their first meeting. On the other hand, business people who serve on a School Board need to understand that governance in a not-for-profit organisation differs dramatically from the governance of business. Traditional business experience with a constant focus on the financial 'bottom line' can lead to poor decision-making in the same way that a lack of understanding of the need for sound business practice can be disastrous.

Protocols

The overriding protocol that must apply is that once people join the Board of a school, their responsibility is to the school as a whole and not to any constituent body that they represent. Under Company Law in Australia, which derives from that in the United Kingdom, the Board Members must act in the best interest of the school, even if this may be in conflict with the position of the constituent body which they formally represent.

Each Board will develop its own set of protocols linked to its structure and preferred method of operation. Attached to this paper is a possible set of standards for members of School Boards (Appendices F and G).

Education

If Board Members are to be effective in their role they must understand the issues on which they will be asked to decide. As the issues change, the need for information grows. Board meeting agendas are usually too extensive to allow for detailed briefings on changes in regulations, the latest thinking on educational issues or changes in government policy.

It is valuable if the Board can set aside time for professional development. All the schools surveyed do so to a greater or lesser extent. Pioneer Village has an annual one day seminar for Board Members; the Aboriginal Independent Community Schools have an annual three day conference; Perth College sets aside a meeting, or part of a meeting, to consider an issue in detail and holds a biennial retreat and Peter Moyes held extensive briefings for its Board prior to the opening of the school.

It is valuable if the Association that supports School Boards can assist in this process and this is one of the roles of the Association of Independent Schools of Western Australia (AISWA). AISWA conducts a Saturday seminar each year entitled "Briefing the Board". Topics are chosen which address educational, policy and planning issues. At the 2000 Conference the topics covered were:

KEYNOTE PRESENTATIONS:

• "Schools of the Future"

• Integrating Information Technology with Learning: Obstruction or Opportunity?

WORKSHOPS:

• "Buildings from Design to Opening"

• "Capital Grants & the Low Interest Loan Scheme"

• "Copyright & Information Technology"

• "Goods & Services Tax and Schools"

• "Literacy, Numeracy and Stepping Out"

• "Maintaining Staff Quality"

• "Middle Schooling"

• "Setting Salaries - Issues in Teachers' Remuneration"

• "Special Education in Independent Schools"

• Strategic Planning

• "The Shape of Things to Come"

• "The WA Post Compulsory Review"

Strategic Planning

This is one of the main responsibilities of Board and is an activity that needs strong leadership and time. The leadership may be found from within the Board or by use of an outside facilitator. Perth College used its Board Retreat in 1998 to review the schools strategic plan. The one and a half day retreat was led by a member of the Board, not the Chair, with skills in this area. While time is needed, it does not have to be extended time as it is amazing how much can be accomplished with a focus on one issue, strategic planning, without the intrusion of the practical, on-going demands of the Board agenda.

Appraisal

Accountability is a word that has become well established in the vocabulary of those connected with schools. It is common for there to be appraisals of Principals and of Teaching Staff and of course inspection (appraisal) of the whole school occurs regularly in the United Kingdom. In Australia, it has been rare for School Boards to appraise their performance but increasingly Boards are seeing this as an essential activity.

The National Centre for Non-Profit Boards based in Washington D.C. has a well developed Appraisal process and the Perth College Board has used this to assess the strengths and weaknesses of the Board's operation and to set an agenda for future strategic planning processes. There are no doubt a number of models available but it is important to ensure that the model chosen has application to non-profit boards. As has already been noted, they are not clones of the for-profit boards, particularly in respect to the motivation for decision making.

The Board and the Principal

Much has been written on the relationship between the Board, and in particular the Chair, and the Principal. The key factors to success are.

• A proper understanding of the role of the Board and that of the Principal.

• The Board sets policy, the Principal implements policy. Individual Board Members do not become involved in specific management, personnel or curricular issues.

• An understanding of where the responsibility for policy development and decision making lies through the identification of policies that are for Board decision with advice from the Principal, policies that require shared decisions, with equal input and those policies that are for the Principal to determine with Board advice.

• A mutual trust and respect, particularly between the Board Chair and the Principal. There should be 'no surprises' and this requires effective communication.

At this point, it is appropriate to comment that while much emphasis is placed on the Board's responsibility in appointing a principal, if the structure permits this to occur, the appointment of the Board Chair is equally critical. The Chair must have a length of connection with the school that allows for a proper understanding of its culture and method of operation. Because there will be occasions on which the Chair will be required, on advice from the Principal, to make a decision or speak for the school on sensitive matters without the opportunity for prior consultation with the full Board, the Chair must have the respect and confidence of the Board so that decisions made will be affirmed and not overturned.

A metaphor for the relationship between the Board and the Principal, which is particularly apt, is that given by the Principal of Peter Moyes Anglican Community School who spoke of the Board "holding a mirror" to the Principal.

Conclusion

In viewing the role of parents in governance within the context of very different schools, it is obvious that no matter what the style of school and how its Board is structured, elected and operates, parents can be and are effective participants. What matters is mutual understanding, a commitment to making governance work and finally being therefore the right reason.

It is usually and advisedly said that people serve on School Boards. The concept of service is significant. All Board Members must work to support and promote the school's mission. They must not be there to further a personal agenda or for the status of being on the Board. All those who have served on School Boards know that they are demanding of time and commitment.

Parents should not shrink from seeking to participate in school governance. They, more than many others, have a real interest in ensuring that a school can achieve its mission, which is providing a quality education to all its students.

APPENDIX F:

Principles of Good Practice for Boards

• The Board prepares a clear statement of the School's mission and objectives.

• The Board reviews and maintains bylaws, and establishes policies and plans consistent with the mission.

• The Board is accountable for the financial well-being of the School.

• The Board selects, supports and nurtures the Head.

• The Board evaluates itself annually and establishes goals for the following year.

• The Board keeps full and accurate records of its meetings, committees and policies.

• The Board works to ensure all its members are actively involved in the work of the Board and its committees.

• The Board develops itself through the orientation of new members, on-going education and leadership succession planning.

• The Board assures compliance with applicable laws and regulations and minimises exposure to legal action.

(Adapted from NAIS Principles of Good Practice for Member Schools)

APPENDIX G:

Principles of Good Practice for Board Members

• A Board Member actively supports and promotes the School's mission.

• A Board Member is knowledgeable about the School's mission and goals as well as current operations and issues.

• A Board Member attends meetings well prepared and participates fully in all matters.

• The Board sets policy; the administration implements policy. An individual Board Member does not become involved in specific management, personnel or curricular issues.

• A Board Member accepts and supports Board decisions and respects Board confidentiality.

• A Board Member guards against conflict of interest, whether business-related or personal. The Board Member takes care to separate the interests of the School from the specific needs of a particular child or constituency.

• A Board Member has the responsibility to support the School and its Head and to demonstrate that support within the community.

• Authority is vested in the Board as a whole. A Board Member who learns of an issue has the obligation to bring it to the Head of School, or to the Board Chair and must not deal with the situation individually.

• Each Board Member, as well as the Treasurer and Finance Committee, has fiduciary responsibility to the School for sound financial management.

(Adapted from NAIS Principles of Good Practice for Member Schools)

Back to 2000 Workshop Index