Making the difference – involving parents better in schools

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 ?

"1”, “No"

"2”, “No"

"3”, “No - present Act to be amended to be more inclusive"

"4”, “Not clear cut.  Parents can attend meetings, but they don't tend to.  Why would they attend new forum?  At least with current system dedicated members attend and are involved."

"5”, “No"

"6”, “Yes - School Board too formal - often inhibiting to parental involvement"

"7”, “No - it wouldn't work in areas such as ours therefore we feel we would lose out and that the status quo is the fairest way to continue"

"8”, “Yes"

"9”, “No"

"10”, “We feel the present system works well and suits our school."

"11”, “No - School Boards are now well established with statutory rights and duties, and in general work well.  There seems no good reason for changing them to a vague organisation that could easily be hijacked by a group of parents unrepresentative of the whole parent body."

"12”, “"

"13”, “Yes, as long as there is a statement ensuring a quorum of representatives"

"14”, “No, do not replace the 1988 Act but improve on it."

"15”, “No"

"16”, “Yes, but with some staff representation and some regulations of conduct"

"17”, “Not replaced but School Boards should be allowed greater flexibility to decide systems which suit them and their school best"

"18”, “No -not replaced but School Boards should be allowed greater flexibility to adopt systems which suit them and their school best"

"19”, “No"

"20”, “No - the formalised nature of the Board could be tweaked to allow for local flexibility"

"21”, “Yes"

"22”, “I feel that the basic structure and function of the School Boards should remain and be incorporated into a Parent Forum, the structure and function of which should be standardised with a basic framework for each individual Board/Forum to build upon/adapt.  There should be some uniformity/consistency to the general format"

"23”, “Some changes e.g. elections should be abolished but the School Board should remain - more flexibility would be fine e.g. PTA/School Board involvement"

"24”, “"

"25”, “Yes - most Boards work well but flexibility in time served on the Board and Education back-up"

"26”, “No there is a good balance of representation offered by the existing scheme"

"27”, “No"

"28”, “"

"29”, “Community co-opted members have proved a huge asses to School Board - hope that this would continue.  The ""formality"" of School Boards tends to discourage some parents from being involved so a more flexible system was welcomed.  We felt that a Parents Forum should be based on the best of School  Board and PTA"

"30”, “No"

"31”, “"

"32”, “No"

"33”, “No"

"34”, “I do not agree with this"

"35”, “No I do not - most vigorously!"

"36”, “No - but information should be from the local authority instead of so much the whole of Scotland"

"37”, “No"

"38”, “We think there should be a more flexible School Board system"

"39”, “"

"40”, “Yes"

"41”, “Unless the elected body is retained one suspects that the so-called parent forum would rapidly deteriorate into a clique which would represent the views of the few rather than the many!"

"42”, “No.  However we do believe that there is scope to amend the structure of School Boards to make them more flexible in their membership and to encourage the setting up of sub-groups/working parties"

"43”, “No"

"44”, “No"

"45”, “Board agrees that a more flexible system would be a good idea.  However, feels strongly that the Scottish Executive should provide a standardised set of minimum structure/ requirements/ form of constitution which must be adhered to by all parent forums"

"46”, “Greater flexibility would be of value given the great variety of schools involved - but there must be some agreed form of formal structure"

"47”, “Yes"

"48”, “Yes"

"49”, “"

"50”, “"

"51”, “No - best practice model country wide must be put forward and new model not left to chance."

"52”, “No - the current system does not need to be replaced.  It does need to be modernised.  More local flexibility regarding membership and co-options to allow greater inclusion of parents and wider powers to deal with any locally relevant issues are needed.  If the ultimate aim is to promote ambitious and excellent schools then parents need a robust system that is democratic, accountable and openly representative that allows parents to get timeous responses and achieve effective solutions for their schools in partnership with head teachers and education managers"

"53”, “No - not at all.  parental involvement needs structure otherwise these forums will turn into 'greeting meetings'!  Forums are too loose - who leads, attends, makes decisions?"

"54”, “"

"55”, “No - we don't.  We think the present structure works well.  Parents have easy access to Board members and are invited to all Board meetings."

"56”, “No"

"57”, “No it will lead to a hiatus during which nothing is done"

"58”, “No - but we do believe the system could be made more flexible to allow more parents to participate.  It would probably be good to combine the resources of the PTA and the School Board.  We think it may be merely the title ""School Board"" that is off putting to parents and this should be changed.  However, we think there needs to be a lot more structured and guidance than suggested - i.e. record keeping, limited terms of office etc"

"59”, “No - the following questions are therefore irrelevant."

"60”, “No"

"61”, “We do not accept the need for abolition of School Boards.  While there may be a need for improvements these can be made within the current structure.  A system which is too flexible could be open to abuse by vested interests and difficult to manage"

"62”, “"

"63”, “PTA added on or affiliated to existing School Boards would allow for more flexibility"

"64”, “No"

"65”, “"

"66”, “"

"67”, “In general, we do not agree with the proposal that School Boards need to be replaced by parent forums with ill-defined duties and responsibilities.  We take the view that, as present constituted, School Boards provide a valuable means of monitoring and scrutinising the management of the school as well as offering practical support for its efforts to improve the quality of children's learning.  We accept that there might be room for greater flexibility than allowed under the current legislation with regard to the size of Boards required in smaller schools"

"68”, “Absolutely not.  There would never be enough interested parties to lead to a meaningful decision"

"69”, “No - we are clear in our commitment to the present structure with the reserved right to make some minor alterations to ensure flexibility."

"70”, “The School Board felt strongly that the current system was flexible enough with parents already deciding locally what suited their school best."

"71”, “"

"72”, “"

"73”, “"

"74”, “No too many types of arrangements would be difficult to monitor effectively.  People feel more comfortable with a structure since they know what they are taking on is developing a constitution etc."

"75”, “No we do not believe that the forum would be more flexible - we believe less parents would be involved. The PTA and Board memberships are already decided locally"

"76”, “Nice idea in theory - but on past history of our School Board won't work.  Still needs formality of School Board"

"77”, “No"

"78”, “No - the present Act could be amended to allow things to be more inclusive"

"79”, “No but locally, parents in individual schools should be asked if (a) they want more flexible parent forums instead of School Boards, or (b) to keep the School Board but allow for more flexibility in structure and to relax the membership restrictions and the process of membership"

"80”, “No. Whilst accepting that School Boards were set up by a Tory Government with self-governing schools in mind, I see no reason why the current situation cannot be fine tuned to meet the (apparent) difficulties caused by the election process etc.  School Boards are all inclusive"

"81”, “I believe that there has to be some level of formality to encourage Board members in the understanding of the responsibilities of their post."

"82”, “The existing School Board provision should be retained with some scope for increased flexibility to enable schools to best involve their parent body in ways which benefit the school and its pupils"

"83”, “"

"84”, “No current system should be retained and amended as necessary"

"85”, “No - the current system seems to work well - each representation on the School Board (parents, staff, ht, councillors and co-opted members) know their roles and responsibilities. There is no evidence that suggests where there are School Boards they are not working well.  The challenge is for the Executive/LA to work together in those areas where there are no School Boards to promote the benefits and encourage parental involvement.  School Boards are but one means of parental involvement in schools.  It is formalised, but there are others such as PTAs that are not.  If it isn't broke don't fix it."

"86”, “Yes but need core group to keep it going and needs to be flexible.  Need some kind of continuity and to find out what's important to parents"

"87”, “"

"88”, “No - because present proposal (as presented to us) would not work as it present no continuity and no adequate framework for development.  Should the proposal be radically amended to provide continuity and a robust framework then a more flexible system would be supported."

"89”, “"

"90”, “"

"91”, “No"

"92”, “We, as a school board, representing the views of parents whose children attend (our) school, are unanimously rejecting the new proposal, and are against abolishment of the Scottish School Board 1988 Act."

"93”, “No, structure is more suitable with clear guidelines incorporating some flexibility."

"94”, “No"

"95”, “No :- if a formal arrangement isn't in place nothing would happen."

"96”, “"

"97”, “Not if the current powers / balances / checks are removed.  Does not address lack of parental involvement."

"98”, “It depends on how flexible."

"99”, “No"

"100”, “Best practice structures should be in place and monitored."

"101”, “Yes"

"102”, “No - This school board is very efficient and effective and involves 40% of parents."

"103”, “No.  By and large parents are not keen to participate in such consultation processes to my mind the school board system works.  Any attempt to tailor the system to the school will in my opinion be inconclusive."

"104”, “No.  School board has been a successful system with regulated statutory business & role of 'critical friend' of school.  Instead of embarking on an expensive programme of change, current system could be made more flexible."

"105”, “No."

"106”, “No"

"107”, “No, I think the school board system operates effectively."

"108”, “No"

"109”, “No"

"110”, “No, adjustments can be made to existing legislation as there would be no continuity of representation."

"111”, “Our school works well with a school board although some adjustments could be made.  However if you've decided to go with this new system, guidelines must be given but schools must be given flexibility to suit their own area."

"112”, “"

"113”, “No"

"114”, “Yes"

"115”, “No, coming from a school whose school board has worked successfully for many years and given the usual lack of interest by many parents."

"116”, “Yes, to a degree, but if the arrangements work as they are, leave them."

"117”, “No.  More flexibility can be achieved without replacement."

"118”, “No"

"119”, “This could be discussed."

"120”, “No"

"121”, “There are limitations in the scope of the school board arrangement but this is not resolved by adopting a new system of parental forum."

"122”, “No - as the ""School Board""  only needs to be ""tweaked"" and remain as a legal body by an Act of Parliament."

"123”, “No, still a need for a basic structure in order to maintain a constructive committee."

"124”, “No"

"125”, “No"

"126”, “No - on the grounds that while you may consider wide parent involvement desirable it does not happen and what would happen is that some would rise for specific events then fade.  The lack of continuity that a formal school board offers allows the majority of parents a feeling of participation."

"127”, “Do not agree.  We feel there would be less interest from parents."

"128”, “The current system of school boards has proved very effective.  At (our)Primary School we see no need for change."

"129”, “No not really.  We feel that some schools find it hard to get any parental involvement and would not be properly represented by a forum with say one parent member.
School and parents would be best served by a formalised school board that could canvas local opinion."

"130”, “No - if change is seen to be required a simple amendment of the current School Board legislation could clearly achieve the underlying aims of the proposed legislation."

"131”, “In our school the Board format works well, we think.  Possibly in small schools (e.g. 20 pupils) many need a more flexible approach or all parents will be involved.  In larger schools we think representation by election is suitable."

"132”, “Blank"

"133”, “Establish school boards - suits the needs of there schools, so the way that suits each school are different."

"134”, “To a certain extent but formality of agendas, minutes, etc should continue."

"135”, “No, but the present School Board system should be modified - including the election process."

"136”, “Blank"

"137”, “I believe school boards should be modernised but still retain guidelines which would be standard across country but with a degree of flexibility within each school."

"138”, “Yes"

"139”, “No"

"140”, “No"

"141”, “No"

"142”, “No"

"143”, “No"

"144”, “No - quite happy with school board as at present."

"145”, “"

"146”, “"

"147”, “More flexible, but still structured and controlled with the school board structure still in place."

"148”, “Yes with an appropriate framework."

"149”, “Yes - flexible in a framework"

"150”, “No"

"151”, “We feel the system should stay the same with some small changes / improvements."

"152”, “No !"

"153”, “Yes"

"154”, “I disagree"

"155”, “Blank"

"156”, “Yes, needs to be replaced by a more flexible system, but all needs to have high level of commitment from parents."

"157”, “No"

"158”, “No"

"159”, “"

"160”, “No.  Current system works well and should remain unchanged."

"161”, “No"

"162”, “Current system OK in the main; no change."

"163”, “No.  School Boards should be modified by abolishing elections."

"164”, “I hadn't been aware that the government had any intention of replacing School
Boards, and I believe, that School Boards weren't given this impression either.  School Boards were of the belief that the government intended to amend the School Board system to make it  more flexible.  The parent forum, as described, sound too flexible and fluid to be of constructive use.  There has been no explanation of what tangible results we could expect from such forums or why they would be better - this is unsatisfactory."

"165”, “Not willing to answer 'loaded' questions about something unnecessary."

"166”, “"

"167”, “We would like to see improvements to existing legislation for School Boards.  More flexibility should be applied with regards to the election process (it needs to be less formal) and changes to the limit on the numbers of members a Board can have.  These changes need to  be made within the boundaries of current legislation.  The proposed forums are lacking in guidelines and structure."

"168”, “Whatever system is in place it requires the structure to be established by the local authority.  A combination of structure and formality allows the group to function in the wider community, avoids divisions between schools and promotes networking."

"169”, “A more flexible system will only work if parents want to be involved.  Danger of apathy. Risk of cliques.  Risk of people with individual issues or agendas."

"170”, “Education is a formal institution and the parent representation should be similar"

"171”, “No"

"172”, “No"

"173”, “No the present format could be refined to incorporate individual school requirements."

"174”, “Trying to be all things to all men can result in a forum with limited powers and ability to formulate policy.  Existing Boards working well - no need to 'throw out baby with bath water'"

"175”, “No - parent forums would not have the same standing and would have no legislation behind them.  It could also end up with several cliques of parents not willing to let others in and a self written constitution would be a downgrade from proper legislation."

"176”, “Perhaps renaming 'School Boards' might help.  The name is off-putting to some who may be interested, but would a 'forum' produce a better result?"

"177”, “No - no need for change."

"178”, “Yes so long as the status quo of PTAs (out with the statutory structures) and School Boards can be kept if this is locally desired.  There is no mention of staff involvement."

"179”, “No - School Boards should not be replaced."

"180”, “No the existing School Board structure should be adjusted increasing flexibility to allow more parents to be involved if they wish to.  In addition School Boards already operate in many different ways which suggest there is already a certain amount of flexibility."

"181”, “No - our Board feels there is no need for change."

"182”, “Ideally School Boards should be a little more flexible but parental forums as suggested would definitely require some basic structure to be workable."

"183”, “No - not as such.  We appreciate that School Boards can be seen as intimidating, formal and not fully representative but feel this could be improved by more minor changes to the  School Board Act, better promotion and increased support form the Authority.  We feel that with the proposed flexible system of a parent forum, groups could easily lose their focus and purpose. It would be difficult to support such a mix of structures - benefit of SSBA and SPTC would be lost."

"184”, “A definite no"

"185”, “"

"186”, “Yes - as long as parents can include what they want in the constitution and there are no restrictions"

"187”, “No"

"188”, “No need.  School Boards are as flexible as they need to be, without being disorganised.  May lose stability if become too flexible."

"189”, “No. Evidence in the bill to suggest this, it shows only one parent required on the forum."

"190”, “No. Too much opportunity for organised groups with own interests and agendas to misrepresent the school."

"191”, “"

"192”, “No - School Board system works quite well at present - some minor adjustments could be made to improve system without repealing the Act."

"193”, “We are happy to have a more parent-friendly forum, incorporating both Board and PTA but we want to retain existing powers, structure, etc.  We think it's good.  We want simpler elections and parent Board members from each class."

"194”, “No we do not agree with replacing the School Board but we are happy to improve the School Board by building on the School Boards' strengths and improve on their weaknesses."

"195”, “Not necessarily as we feel our current School Board system already works well."

"196”, “A more flexible system within School Boards - perhaps a parental questionnaire before election of parent rep."

"197”, “No"

"198”, “No - the current system is workable."

"199”, “The current system works well but it might be beneficial to alter parts of the present system to make it work more efficiently rather that introduce a completely new forum.  There could be some flexibility to suit local needs."

"200”, “No - too vague. Who has the final say if parents locally disagree with which way their parent forum should develop?  Who adjudicates?"

"201”, “No we do not believe that forums would be more flexible - we believe less parents would be involved.  The PTA and Board memberships are already decided locally!"

"202”, “Yes, but any obligations should not be lost.  Teaching staff must have right to attend."

"203”, “There should be more flexibility for parents.  This could be built into School Boards and not replace them entirely.  Build on what is currently in place."

"204”, “No"

"205”, “No"

"206”, “No"

"207”, “No"

"208”, “No.  School Board works well.
Majority of parents don't like the legislation, but are happy with what the people on it do."

"209”, “I think the current school board system seems to work well and to change it might not necessarily be advantageous"

"210”, “No - The school board system has a much wider representation - school, parent, community & in case of Catholic School - Church.  The parent forum reduces this representation to one body."

"211”, “Yes but must have some sort of structure - complete freedom would not work."

"212”, “No"

"213”, “No.  School Boards already have the provision for adequate and appropriate parental involvement.
Any amendments deemed necessary as a result of the consultation process could be made within the existing Act."

"214”, “No"

"215”, “Disagree, school board to remain as is."

"216”, “No"

"217”, “There should be no need to replace School Boards."

"218”, “School Boards are adequate at the present time."

"219”, “We are very happy with the system that is in place at present and see no reason to change it."

"220”, “No"

"221”, “There is room for reform but not necessarily replacement."

"222”, “No"

"223”, “No.  We believe the existing arrangements which provide for school boards to deal with the formal governance of the school and for PTAs to deal with less formal aspects work well and are sufficiently flexible to achieve meaningful and properly regulated parental involvement in the school."

"224”, “"

"225”, “No"

"226”, “No"

"227”, “No we do not.  We believe that the existing Act should be ""tweaked""."

"228”, “No"

"229”, “No"

"230”, “Blank"

"231”, “No"

"232”, “"

"233”, “No - the constitution of school boards, as laid down at present, gives parents a majority of the seats on school boards."

"234”, “The present structure suits our particular circumstances very well.  Our school board is very effective and school and school board work closely together.  We realise, however, that this structure may not suit all schools.  However, we would most likely choose to retain the existing structure.  * see below"

"235”, “No"

"236”, “No; current system works; draft is very vague and no real structure.  The draft document does not incorporate the main duty of the school board - representing the PUPILS education / welfare."

"237”, “"

"238”, “The present School Boards has worked very well in my school and has been a true partnership.  A more flexible system could prove less effective."

"239”, “No.  Not decided locally by parents.  There must be a framework / guidelines set out by the Scottish Executive.  I am happy with ""forum"" !"

"240”, “No.  Should alter the less flexible more formal parts of School Board legislation. Do not see how it is possible to get consensus of all parents and have constantly changing forum.  Common phrase heard: 'Don't fix what is not broken'."

"241”, “No.  Our school board works effectively as it is."

"242”, “No.  Criteria or similarity across the board as different systems would undermine all the work that has already been done.  Council could / should create a 'model' constitution."

"243”, “Qs 4/5 Flexible system proposed too loose - could be one parent.  Difficult to achieve anything !
Present structure and numbers at present suitable for (our SB).
Enough flexibility in present system to suit school needs.
Could cause political issues if no formal structure."

"244”, “No"

"245”, “Try improved by reform not replaced.  Don't lose the strength to combat the weaknesses.  Modify, improve and make the ""election"" system less prohibitive for parents.  A ""woolly"" free for all forum does NOT seem a credible alternative."

"246”, “"

"247”, “"

"248”, “Yes we agree that the more flexible system could be a positive step to encourage more parental involvement.  However we are concerned at the possible loss of influence of individual School Boards and PTAs and we feel that this influence should be allowed to continue."

"249”, “No I firmly believe the existing system has a professionalism which wouldn't be reproduced by a 'forum'"

"250”, “No - current one should be modernised instead."

"251”, “No but if they are to be replaced then many schools in rural areas cannot find enough parents to function and a one teacher school does not have a teacher member.  However this should be contained within the local committee plan.  We would prefer a flexible system of parent forum to suit the local community and school but no forum should not be open."

"252”, “"

"253”, “"

"254”, “Must be a recognised structure where parents can have access areas to school life"

"255”, “No as it will allow too much variation within the authority.  We believe this will result in ineffective 'talking shops' being created with no real influence over important school matters - e.g. the parental role in the appointment of the Head Teacher will be diminished to that of a spectator.  With no pre-defined formal structure the forum concept is doomed to failure."

"256”, “No - present system is democratic and works well."

"257”, “No - more flexibility is needed.  We believe we should build on the current School Board model instead of reducing it to a rubber stamp."

"258”, “Flexibility may bring inequality - we advocate equal power to all Boards otherwise some will be fighting their own corner to the detriment of everything else."

"259”, “Agree one body may be better but should take best of both existing groups (School Boards and PTA) and should be accountable to parents/local authority/community"

"260”, “No it was felt that improvements could be made through the existing framework of School Boards.  The part that needs modernising is the selection procedure so that it is a system that encourages more people to put themselves forward."

"261”, “A more flexible structure for the School Boards, rather than replacing them with forums."

"262”, “Yes want to encourage more parents to come"

"263”, “Open to changes to improve on current arrangement.  Good existing relationship with Board/PTA/parents/staff.  Statutory position of Board strong"

"264”, “Tweak the Board slightly but no system will realistically increase involvement whatever it is called."

"265”, “Retain School Board functions as part of a flexible system."

"266”, “No but - more flexible parent forums should be an addition to School Boards, keep the School Board but allow for more flexibility in structure, relax the membership restrictions and the process of membership"

"267”, “"

"268”, “"

"269”, “No - needs to be the same for every school"

"270”, “No"

"271”, “No"

"272”, “No - we consider that a change would weaken the overall power that the School Board has to resolve issues."

"273”, “No - far too woolly."

"274”, “No - too fluffy - a School Board has specific set-out duties/responsibilities which are understood.  WHICH PARENTS DECIDE?!!"

"275”, “No we believe that such flexibility would lead to the collapse of what is currently a regular and useful communication between the School and our parent body."

"276”, “No"

"277”, “No - this would be less focussed and less organised.  How would you get agreement from a couple of parents!  There has to be parental representation but  this should be made up by an elected group of parents.  Not, it is a way for the local authority to cut costs by making it informal.. Needs to have structure, rules, accountability to be seen to be effective.   Formal Boards give parents much more clout with the authority - a mandate by being elected by other parents.  If informal then only in those schools where parents are willing to take part will there by any representation.  Some schools will not have any parents who will want to be involved, if it is informal."

"278”, “No - In (our Region) there is 100% uptake of School Boards.  The proposed bill will not significantly improve the parental involvement in the schools.  Indeed, without a suitable framework and a lack of statutory powers it would  become a monster that nobody would want to become involved in, or those with a personal agenda.  It would appear that the School Board system has become too successful for some political aspirants and the proposed legislation seeks to reduce and de-power that system."

"279”, “No this would potentially allow forums to be set up with a personal agenda or axe to grind and may not benefit the school or parents.  Also different Boards within an authority may have different constitutions etc.  This will eventually create additional strain on the authority in terms of support."

"280”, “"

"281”, “"

"282”, “No"

"283”, “We support the evidence that children do better when parents are actively involved in supporting and helping their child's learning.  However, the School Board and PTA of (Our) Primary are opposed to the Draft Bill as written for the following reasons:
- No clear link between abolition of school boards and increased parental involvement has been demonstrated.
- The draft bill does not identify the nomination / selection process for Parent Forums, therefore democracy and legitimacy of forum members representing the views of the parents cannot be assured.
- The draft bill allows for multiple forums to exist and a forum may consist of only one parent.  This could lead to pressure groups with single item agendas existing and undermining the primary role of the school, the education of our children.
It is our view that the existing School Boards (Scotland) Act 1988 can and should be amended to encourage greater parental involvement.  However, the changes being proposed do not deliver on this primary objective and indeed could lead to reduced parental involvement."

"284”, “Responses majority (4) stated NO with comment: keep school boards and encourage a parent forum if decided locally by parents - could this mean a conflict of interest, would everyone agree ?  Concerns that may loose structure, remove stability and continuity, school boards meet criteria already.  Minority (1) stated YES with comment definitely be replaced by a more flexible system, parents are put off by formal rigidity and by bureaucracy of Board.  Not sure if it should be decided locally by parents unless there are national guidelines."

"285”, “"

"286”, “NB It is the view of (our) school board that these questions are too prescriptive in nature and do not give an opportunity to address some fundamental matters raised by the proposed new bill as drafted.  Please see our response in the additional comments box."

"287”, “No.  The current system gives School Boards clout as a legal body - the LEA listen, things happen, it works."

"288”, “No"

"289”, “"

"290”, “"

"291”, “We, as a school board, representing the views of parents whose children attend (our)Primary School, are unanimously rejecting the new proposal, and are against abolishment of the Scottish School Board 1988 Act."

"292”, “"

"293”, “"

"294”, “No, we believe the current system is working. In our opinion, it is not guaranteed that opting for a 'more flexible  system' will bring more parents into participation.  The School Board will have been replaced with an inferior system instead of being improved.  We should not ' throw out the baby with the bath water'."

"295”, “No!!! To replace the School Boards with a parental forum is a detrimental step that is replacing order and control (base on existing School Board Act) with potential chaos. I believe that the new proposed legislation allows each parent forum to decide what constitution they would wish to operate under. Therefore, the education authority could be faced with parental forums very different in nature and free to pursue whatever they consider appropriate - which may be counter-productive to the school."

"296”, “"

"297”, “No.  The format of the new forum is open to abuse and influence by any individual."

"298”, “"

"299”, “"

"300”, “"

"301”, “"

"302”, “"

"303”, “"

"304”, “School Boards and the associated legislation should not be changed in preference for Parental Forums. The current forums, School Boards and PTAs, have recognised constitutional duties and responsibilities which provide focus for parents, school and education authorities' representations. In addition, the current arrangements facilitate communication between the relevant groups.

"

"305”, “"

"306”, “No.  We are clear in our commitment to the present structure with the reserved right to make some minor alterations to ensure flexibility.
"

"307”, “"

"308”, “"

"309”, “"

"310”, “No. The formality of School Boards and the fact that school has to be answerable to them gives them more influence than an ad hoc group would have.  More flexibility could be introduced to the existing structure.  Allowing them to run even if they don't have their quota might be a good idea for smaller schools.  Allowing for the formation of short-lived and specialist groups under the wing of a Board could also broaden parental involvement."

"311”, “We do not agree with this.
Effective School Boards have evolved beyond the legislation over the years. Rather than starting from scratch, it would be more effective to modify the existing legislation to reflect existing practices.
Parental involvement can not be equated to parental representation. In the existing setup, parents are elected to represent parents while the new format would encourage parents to represent their own children. This may lead to a forum losing direction.
If parents are to decide the format of the forum, this could lose the effective working relationship between parents, staff, the community, local Councillor and the Church where a school is linked to a Church.
"

"312”, “"

"313”, “"

"314”, “No - but with varied remit"

"315”, “It was felt that School Boards should not be replaced.  While it sounds reasonable in theory apathy among parents is likely to mean low attendance."

"316”, “No we do not consider School Board should be replaced but rather their strengths built upon known weaknesses addressed e.g. the election process, Board membership numbers and composition.  We are concerned that the 'flexible' nature of the proposed parent forum could result in extreme variations across the local authority area which could then lead to inconsistencies between schools."

"317”, “We do not agree that School Boards should be replaced, just perhaps improved.  The strengths of Boards should be built upon but weaknesses, e.g. election process, should be eradicated.  Decisions made by parents in a way which suits them will result in every school being potentially different.  This could prove to be dangerous and basically unworkable."

"318”, “No not sure if parent forum will have same clout."

"319”, “Yes"

"320”, “No we believe tweaking the system we have now would be far more beneficial than starting from scratch with no consistency between schools or regions."

"321”, “Improvements could be made to existing system, but existing framework should be kept."

"322”, “No - School Boards are working well  - why change them."

"323”, “No - give existing Boards support to help include more parents."

"324”, “No - we are content with the concept and operational structure of a School Board."

"325”, “I would like to see some more flexibility introduced however I do believe that there should be a certain nationally recognised structure and format so that we can be sure we are all working towards the same goals."

"326”, “While supporting increased flexibility we feel that without an imposed structure flexibility will result in a hotch potch system which will probably be successful only in schools with highly motivated Boards, and quite unstructured in apathetic Boards."

"327”, “Decidedly not.  There is no evidence to indicate this is either requested or necessary.  Instead a more positive promotion of parents' rights and responsibilities (and pleasures and rewards) through School Boards should be of immediate concern."

"328”, “Yes"

"329”, “No - the basis of structure of regulations of School Board does not need to be replaced.  Tweak only the existing procedure."

"330”, “No"

"331”, “There already is an option for a school to have either a PTA or a School Board.  This should stay as it is and in some cases the Board and the PTA could work closely together even without merging."

"332”, “This is a meaningless question.  No replacement system is proposed to compare with the Current Board system.  Any system should be responsive to local circumstances but this should be within a prescribed framework.  To leave it completely open ended will simply cause confusion for parents and chaos for local authorities.  There may well be a case for bringing together the functions of the Boards and PTAs.  The extra duties of fund raising etc could be accomplished through sub-committees."

"333”, “Could start with a national standard framework to become more flexible in 2 to 3 years time when parent forums have developed."

"334”, “Not necessarily - it could be very difficult to determine or decide what format to take as parents differ widely in outlook and objectives.  It could be constantly changing and not achieve anything at all."

"335”, “No - the School Board is more than adequate for this school."

"336”, “No - standards would vary.  Differences would develop, creating more differences and problems between schools particularly when children (families) move to different areas.  In many areas, School Boards would cease to function."

"337”, “No"

"338”, “Current system ok in the main - no change"

"339”, “School Boards should be restructured and modernised.  Perhaps doing away with the formal election process and moving towards an AGM type of election."

"340”, “We do not agree that the current system of parental representation - i.e. School Boards should be replaced.
At a meeting held at (our) High School on 16th May 2005, including members of the School Board, School Association and staff of the school (a total of some 16 individuals) it was unanimously agreed to respond only to Question 4 of the “Involving Parents” Consultation, and to respond to this question as follows:

Rather than abolishing School Boards, we believe the existing legislation should be amended and updated, including providing for greater flexibility (e.g. to allow 6 or 8 parent members rather than the current limit of 4 in a school of our size), and giving Education Authorities greater responsibility for promoting parental involvement (e.g. by disseminating ideas to help ensure School Boards are as effective and representative as possible).

We wish to retain the existing rights and powers of the School Board, particularly in their relationship with Education Authorities.  Under current legislation, School Boards have considerable clout and this can be used very effectively, to the benefit of the school.
 
We also wish to retain the stated functions (possibly with some updating) of School Boards relating to “the administration and managnities for parents to make a real contribution to the school.

We wish to retain the right/duty of the Head Teacher to attend School Board meetings since we believe this is the best way of ensuring dialogue and the appropriate focus for meetings.  We also wish to retain the right of Councillors to attend School Board meetings.

We wish to retain the right to full parental involvement in the appointment of senior staff, while accepting that the appointments process itself may require modernisation.

We do not consider the level of flexibility proposed for Parent Forums would necessarily result in either greater parental involvement or better representation.  In rural areas, it would appear that the clearly defined structure of current School Boards helps to ensure their continued existence.  In the absence of sufficient parents with the necessary time, energy and commitment, too much flexibility could result in parental involvement levels falling.  The proposed flexibility would also allow Parent Forums to be (or become) both unrepresentative and unaccountable.

We see no evidence that the proposed legislation would increase parents involvement in their children’s learning.  The research indicates that it is parental values, educational aspirations, and direct involvement (providing intellectual stimulation, parent-child discussion, ensuring homework is completed, etc, etc) which affects levels of attainment and achievement.  The draft Bill does nothing to promote this type of involvement.

We support the attempt to achieve stronger, more inclusive and effective parental involvement in education, and to enhance communication and partnership between schools and parents.  Once the decision is made to retain School Boards we would be happy to take part in consultation on how to improve their effectiveness."

"341”, “No we believe the current system is working.  In our opinion, it is not guaranteed that opting for a  'more flexible system' will bring more parents into participation.  The School Board will have been replaced with an inferior system instead of being improved.  We should not 'throw out the baby with the bathwater'"

"342”, “In my capacity as Chairperson of the Board,  I plan to write to all parents in the school regarding the proposed changes -  I envisage a fairly low response rate. If a person has a wide-ranging interest in Education they will seek to represent themselves in whatever capacity.  From a schools perspective, would they want the fund raising and policy making mixed? (as suggested in the consultation ""in effect the existing PTA/FODS 'committee' could become the new parent forum"")"

"343”, “No. School Boards should not be replaced by another body. School Boards should remain as an integral part of the various forms of parental involvement in schools. Catholic schools have a Board member nominated by their Church. This reflects the Church's right to be represented.  Retain the present system. ""Tweak"" - don't abolish."

"344”, “No, we see the merit of parental 'Involvement'.  Representation' involves a small minority - involvement involves us all. Parents are involved throughout everything."

"345”, “NO - we do not support the repeal of the School Boards (Scotland) Act 1988.  While there is certainly a wide variation in parent participation at Schools across Scotland - and indeed in the effectiveness of School Boards - we do not support the issue of disbanding this form of representation.  Our school has a very effective School Board with a highly active and collaborative partnership between Head Teacher and teaching staff, parents and local education authority.  Many (possibly the majority) of School Boards are working - why not review enhancing and improving this tried and tested system rather than casting it aside in favour of a new unproven approach that could well achieve much less than the current system?  School boards are very effective in the UK private school sector, as well as other countries such as the United States."

"346”, “The majority expressed the view that the improvements planned by the introduction of parent forums could be included and incorporated within the existing School Boards system whilst retaining the well established, existing framework.
There was concern expressed with regard to the loss of legal basis and framework of the existing constitution.

"

"347”, “No. We believe that there is scope to modernise School Boards in a way that would add more flexibility but outright abolition would prove counter productive as would the loss of the current legal framework."

"348”, “The following reasons:
Boards currently operate in just under 80% of Scottish schools; whilst it should be 100% we don't believe it's necessary to abolish the current system in order to accommodate a very small minority of schools.  See comments below about improvements that could be made to current system to facilitate establishment of Boards/encourage parental involvement/improve existing Boards.  As far as we can see the new parent forums will have no formal legislative powers in connection with school management.  Whilst the current powers are limited, they do however provide the Board with a certain status & standing and a body to be listened to. It provides the opportunity to partner the school/Head Teacher & we are very concerned that the Bill does not address the practical ways in which the parents will take an active part in the good management of the school.  Whilst the proposals say that parents/forums can make ""representations"" to the school/Authority, without specific powers to hang this on, it's likely to be no more than a token gesture and a source of frustration to parents.
It's not clear in the draft Bill what happens if parents cannot agree on what sort of representation suits them best. We would be concerned about the establishment of ""splinter"" groups with very specific agendas and who would not be bothered to deal with the more mundane, day-to-day business currently covered by the Boards.
The absence of Regulations as to how the parent forums would operate e.g. published minutes etc. could mean a poorer service to all parents.
We believe it is misleading to say that School Boards can be retained under the new legislation.
"

"349”, “Given the diverse needs of individual parents, the concept of flexibility is very welcome. The current School Board system is based largely on 'one size fits all'- something that has been abandoned in most other areas of education. However, it would be important to ensure that the strengths of the current system are not lost, particularly the principle that all sectors of the community are represented.  Parent forums may provide an opportunity for strengthening parent representation in schools because they allow an independent voice for parents to emerge. However, they will need to ensure that they are effective, representative, transparent and in-touch with other parents to ensure that they are seen to be legitimate as a voice for parents. Clear guidance nationally on how parents forums would be constituted may help to ensure that they develop rather than erode the parents' voice in education policy.  The option of keeping the PTA as a separate body should remain.  Many parents who contribute to the work of the PTA have little interest in becoming involved in the matters proposed for the Parent Forum.  We do not anticipate that this proposed legislation will lead to an immediate surge in parental involvement and interest in schools. "

"350”, “Absolutely not.  The retention of School Boards is not the key issue under consideration.  The key question to be answered is whether the proposals to establish Parental Forums is likely to improve parental involvement in their child's school and increase their engagement in the wider community agenda.
The Scottish Executive has presented no concrete and consistent evidence to justify their favoured approach. To support Parental Forums, at the expense of School Boards, would be based on little more than an act of faith that the Scottish Executive has a clear insight into views of the majority of parents. We would argue that it would be a very risky strategy for the Scottish Parliament to support the draft Bill as written.
The George Street Research does not provide a compelling case for Parental Forums, whilst the Banks Report argued that School Boards play an important role, but are in need of modernisation.
In 2002, at the time the Banks Report was published the then Depute Education Minister Nicol Stephen MSP said ""School boards can do a great deal to help by acting as one line of communication between schools and all parents. .... Strong school boards will bring many other benefits too. For example, they can greatly improve community involvement in schools and can play a supportive role in the context of more devolved school management"".
What evidence has arisen in the last three years to suggest that Nicol Stephen was so wrong in his assessment of the value of School Boards?
Banks in his report highlighted that School Boards have a role to play in the reform and improvement of Scottish schools and that ways of sharing good practice should be identified.  He noted a number of weaknesses with the existing school Board legislation and called for a number of changes to make School Boards more effective.  Amongst these were increased parental involvement and simpler election processes.
The Scottish Executive's desire to move away from a 'one size fits all' approach can be achieved by amending the existing School Board legislation, which will build on existing best practice, whilst at the same time allowing schools to adopt strategies more applicable to local circumstances.  For example in some communities it may be considered appropriate to look at a cluster School Board covering a number of schools.  The amended legislation must account for
 such flexibility.  We value the role that teachers and co-opted members play in the on-going work of the School Board and it is essential that their formal involvement is retained in any future legislative changes.  Retaining School Boards within a more flexible, but nationally consistent, framework crucially allows for parents to retain a national voice - through the Scottish School Board Association (SSBA).
"

"351”, “"

"352”, “"

"353”, “"

"354”, “Definitely not.  The school board is a very successful and positive forum in our school and works well complementing the running of the PTA.  These are two very different forums - fulfilling different roles and parents are already able to decide where their skills are best placed."

"355”, “Yes we agree, as filling the places of both a board and PTA is difficult for a small school with few parents to draw from and as there is much overlap in the roles of both bodies, a parent forum as a substitute could be advantageous for schools like ours.  We believe the new body should, broadly, have the same rights, resources and responsibilities as currently legislated for the school board in the 1988 act. See also our answer to Q1 and Q2."

"356”, “"

"357”, “No, we think the current system works - separateness of School Board and PTA is a positive thing as they have very different roles to play in our school."

"358”, “No, while it is definitely appropriate for there to be more flexibility, there does not seem any good reason why the existing School Board legislation should be repealed, the existing powers of School Boards removed, etc. Rather the School Board legislation could be amended.

The aim is stated to be to encourage more parents to be involved, and for the system of representation to work better for more parents. It is not clear how the proposed legislation will achieve this, nor is the purpose of this representation made clear, nor what the involvement is intended to achieve.

In at least some schools the issue of Elections rarely, if ever arises, since there is relative lack of interest in being on the School Board. 1 am unclear that there is any evidence that it is the issue of Elections which deters people from becoming involved. 1 suspect it is primarily the time commitment required, etc.

In view of this, it is unclear that asking parents to decide what approach to the Parent Forum they prefer will be effective. If parents do not have the time or inclination to take part in an existing structure, they may well have no more inclination to be involved in setting up a new structure.

For a truly representative Parent Forum to be set up successfully will require considerable input of time and effort, and preferably proactive and ongoing Community Development work. It is unlikely that individual parents (e.g. the current members of the School Board), would be in a position to do this. This suggests that the existence and success of Parent Forums it will be very dependent on significant input by Education Authorities.

The clearly defined format of the current School Boards helps to ensure their existence. Without this, it is more likely that either a Parent Forum will never be formed, or that in the absence of interested parents (with the time, energy and commitment to put in a lot of work) that it will falter or cease to exist.
"

"359”, “"

"360”, “Less formality - more flexibility - clear guidelines - proper checks and balances."

"361”, “See introductory paragraphs which cover this but additionally:

- No.
- Danger here is that PTAs as such, could be eroded and they suddenly become one thing and functions are totally different.
- If a lot of formal business to be attended to would delay a lot of decision making about nitty-gritty stuff - a Bill will not affect PTA directly, which could still exist, which could mean two competing bodies.
- Two functions are totally separate.
- What is ""flexible"" and anyway School Boards already have flexibility.
- This Board considers itself to be a good role model.
- Cross reference to HMIE Report about parental involvement.
"

"362”, “We like the existing system of the School Board and the Parent Teacher Association which well suits our School and its community.  The School Board election procedures could be reviewed to make the process more (..parent accessible/user friendly""."

"363”, “"

"364”, “"

"365”, “"

"366”, “No"

"367”, “"

"368”, “"

"369”, “No"

"370”, “No compulsion to replace Boards should take place.  If a School and parents wish a different way of communication it should be allowed but not at the expense of the Board system."

"371”, “No - a core number of parents who commit to serve on a School Board for a set number of years provide a valuable resource.  (Our) Council train these parents and they sere on Attendance Councils where they meet with pupils whose attendance gives cause for concern and their parents.  In many cases the parent is reassured seeing other parents trying to help.  Council members need to be experienced and are seen to be approachable.  It takes time and resources to train parent Board members.  Expertise is built up over time.  Parent forums would not afford this level of commitment."

"372”, “No"

"373”, “N/A"

"374”, “Yes - 5 groups - basic guidelines required, would have to have powers at least equal to existing, as long as appropriate school staff and third parties attend, as long as local democracy maintained, not an imposed structure
No - 1 group - would a parent forum group together to lead in ""wrong"" direction"

"375”, “Definitely not.  The current system may require small adjustments but does not need to be removed."

"376”, “No - I think it works well at the moment."

"377”, “No - we do not want to encourage individuals to small groups of parents to set up their own parent forums all with individual agendas and with their own constitutions.  This can only lead to conflicts of interest.  As we are a small school and have an open door policy both with the Board and Teachers a parent can at any time raise an issue with either group and their points will be listened to and acted on accordingly.  Therefore we would have no requirement for parent forums as you suggest."

"378”, “No - inconsistency will lead to uncertainty."

"379”, “No - School Boards should not be replaced by another body.  School Boards should remain as an integral part of the various forms of parental involvement in schools.  Catholic schools have a Board member nominated by their church.  This reflects the Church's right to be represented.  Retain the present system - tweak - don't abolish."

"380”, “Not necessarily, many School Boards work effectively.  This system may remove the right for the Church to be represented in a Catholic School and therefore would weaken the statutory rights of the Church."

"381”, “No - there should be greater flexibility to respond to local issues but the School Board system has served parents and schools well for many years and adaptation to its present format would be much more effective than abolishing Boards in favour of forums.  If parents wanted to get involved more they have done so by now!
"

"382”, “No I think the structure of the School Board is important to keep."

"383”, “Yes - School Boards should be replaced by a flexible system of parent forums allowing schools to build on and improve their system at present.  Our School Board at present does encourage parental involvement and this should be kept and improved."

"384”, “I think the idea of flexibility is a good one, but it also needs to be pointed out that in schools where the current arrangement works well they might well be better off leaving things as they are - if it works, don't fix it."

"385”, “As long as all parents are (and feel) represented through a PTA with minuted reference on the Board this would be fine."

"386”, “This would all depend on the size of school and the potential number of parents that would be involved.  There is not a lot wrong with the elected School Board system the way it is."

"387”, “Whatever system involves more parents should be used in individual schools.  But there should be a 'fall back' forum type which will exist if none other is developed."

"388”, “Should have ability to co-opt more parent members."

"389”, “Do agree that where School Boards are in place and work adequately for individual schools, they should continue, but do consider parent forums to offer platform for parental representation.  These however should be well managed (chaired) and be consistent in respect of representation, i.e. Head Teacher/Staff attendance and also in parental attendance."

"390”, “No - not entirely - in absence of formality there is a risk of lack of commitment/interest etc."

"391”, “No - the parent representation should be within a defined framework that has consistency throughout Scotland.  A system  that is driven by subjective requirements such as 'decided locally' 'best suits them and their school best' can lead to fragmentation and a breakdown of consistency both locally , regionally and nationally."

"392”, “I can see merit in this approach as I think the current system is too formal and is teetering towards extinction.  I don't think School Boards carry any weight to any great effect but they could be tweaked to make them more accessible."

"393”, “No - School Boards are different and can be flexible i.e. tweaking - election process, size, name."

"394”, “There needs to be a degree of structure and the involvement of community members.  Who decides what is best for a school?  What if there is dissent?  Proposed system is open to abuse."

"395”, “No present system gives formality and control of how School Boards are formed.  The electoral system could be made slightly more flexible in that the schools themselves should be able to call and run the elections."

"396”, “School Boards are flexible enough and make sure there is accountability and structure.  Perhaps elections could be made easier but Boards need a framework to ensure the appointment is taken seriously."

"397”, “No - parents are represented on School Board at present.  Parents not on Board can attend a meeting or ask for item to be put on agenda.  School Board meetings may need o be advertised a bit more."

"398”, “Still need to have strategies and rigour otherwise people will do whatever they like!"

"399”, “No"

"400”, “Absolutely Not"

"401”, “No"

"402”, “No - this appears to be unhelpfully vague and unlikely to promote effective and accountable involvement."

"403”, “"

"404”, “This is the crux of the proposals in the draft Bill.  Although the views of individual Board members on it varies, the Board as a whole is not convinced that a system of parental forums as proposed would produce significant improvement in parental representation.  We are sceptical of the claim (p6) that ""many (parents) see the (current) formal structures to be intimidating, closed and not necessarily there to seek or represent their views"".  Boards have the advantage that, unlike the greater claimed flexibility of the proposed parent forums, the way in which they work is prescribed nationally and in law.  Each parent has the right to take part in the Board by seeking election to it or attending Board meetings.  Such clear and universal rights would be diluted and in some cases potentially lost under the proposals in the draft Bill.  We also find it patronising to parents that it is assumed they find a simple system of regulation of Boards ""intimidating"".  Three Board members attended the consultation on the proposals organised (here) on behalf of the Executive by the Scottish Civic Forum.  In the course of that event an Executive civil servant stated that 88% of schools in Scotland have a School Board.  With the disadvantage and challenges of the current system that we accept exist, we think such a high proportion a considerable achievement, especially since many of the schools without Boards are likely to be small primaries in rural areas or schools in deprived areas.  It might be more effective to concentrate on improving the existing system to increase the proportion of schools with an effective Board rather than introducing a new system with many challenges.

Our response to many of the following questions, for example 5,6,9,14,20 and 21 further exemplify in detail why we hold this view.

An additional danger of parent forums is that their potential informality and less clear statutory purpose leads to competition or overlap with PTAs with which most Boards have good relationships as they have different functions."

"405”, “No. (Our) Primary School Board considers that the current system is inclusive and provided there are minor adjustments to the current system then it should continue.
"

"406”, “No, we feel that we already are able to decide locally how we organise parental representation nothing in the current legislation that stops us from doing that.
"

"407”, “No, we would prefer to see the current system of School Boards reformed and updated to meet current requirements.  The School Board system is not perfect, but it is a recognised structure, which works well provided it has the support of the Head Teacher and the LEA. We understand that 90% of Scottish Schools have a Board and we think it would be a major mistake to sweep this system away in favour of an undefined system, which would lead to uncertainty and loss of confidence.  We do not think that this approach will meet the objective to involve more parents or different types of parents.  In our view the proposed parent forums would lead to less parental representation as parents would be turned off by the amount of work involved in agreeing a forum structure.  Networking between groups, as happens now with School Boards, would also be more difficult. We feel the ramifications of this proposed bill have not been thought through.
"

"408”, “"

"409”, “No.  School Boards have made a huge contribution since their inception and have evolved over time adapting to changing circumstances to ensure their role is effective.  Whilst I accept the legislation is not perfect (what is) it could be 'tweaked' as was originally indicated by the Executive to make it better.  This will be best achieved by amending the 1988 Act which has not had any major changes to it since its inception and is therefore suitable for amendment contrary to what the Executive state the draughtsmen say.  To allow individual bodies the freedom to determine their own structure will lead to chaos and a complete lack of consistency and direction."

"410”, “"

"411”, “"

"412”, “No, we do not agree with this proposal. rather it would be better to retain the existing legislation, but to make the School Boards more flexible.  The proposals in the draft Bill would not encourage more parents to become involved, they would not be attractive to most parents, and they open the possibility of a Parent Forum being dominated by a single parent with strongly held views.
"

"413”, “"

"414”, “No"

"415”, “"

"416”, “"

"417”, “"

"418”, “"

"419”, “No.  We are of the view that the vast majority of Scottish parents probably have little appreciation of what a School Board is and does and unless there are particular issues affecting the school have little interest in the work of the Board.  This may be due in part to a lack of interest, a view that ""someone else gets involved with that"" or perhaps parents in general are relatively content with the workings of their schools.

We feel that any new efforts to involve a wider cross section of parents will no doubt be met with the same apathy.  However, rather than throw out School Boards and adopt another means of securing parental involvement, we consider it would be preferable to build on the existing framework as School Boards are largely effective and understood within the community.  We believe is it would be better to work harder to demystify the work of School Boards and attract a wider cross section of parents and also establish/support Boards in those schools which do not currently have effective structures."

"420”, “"

"421”, “"

"422”, “"

"423”, “ No. The main driver behind the draft bill is to enable parents to access more information and be actively involved in the education of their children. The role and responsibility of the School Board quite rightly does not address the specific needs of individual children but enable parents to assist in the continued quality and standard of education and management of schools. The School Board is also responsible for encouraging parental involvement in PTAS. The draft bill does not address the management responsibilities, powers and duties of School Boards as set out in the 1988 Act. The Act places a duty on the School Board to raise the standard of education in schools or address specific actions which will ensure that more parents become more involved in the education of their children.

There are some aspects of the School Board Act which should be review and updated such as more flexibility for additional parent membership on Board, election process etc. However, there is not a need to completely replace the 1988 School Board Act.
"

"424”, “We are strongly opposed to the replacement of School Boards as stated in the School Board Scotland Act.  We are not opposed to flexibility however we feel that where School Boards are functioning successfully (89%) of schools there is no need to have differing systems. In schools where there is no school board having complete flexibility (putting more autonomy on the parents) is unlikely to motivate parental involvement."

"425”, “"

"426”, “School Boards should be improved not replaced by a more flexible system. Build on the strengths of Boards but improve or eradicate our weaknesses viz., the election process. However, if the election process
is re-organised we do wonder how it will affect our powers and responsibilities?
If decisions were left to the parents - these forums would be different in every school, leading to a very dangerous position with unworkable groups being formed."

"427”, “Yes, provided this is done within a predetermined framework
"

"428”, “Absolutely not.  The retention of School Boards is not the key issue under consideration.  The key question to be answered is whether the proposals to establish Parental Forums is likely to improve parental involvement in their child's school and increase their engagement in the wider community agenda.

The Scottish Executive has presented no concrete and consistent evidence to justify their favoured approach.  To support Parental Forums, at the expense of School Boards, would be based on little more than an act of faith that the Scottish Executive has a clear insight into views of the majority of parents.  We would argue that it would be a very risky strategy for the Scottish Parliament to support the draft Bill as written.

The George Street Research does not provide a compelling case for Parental Forums, whilst the Banks Report argued that School Boards play an important role, but are in need of modernization.

In 2002, at the time the Banks Report was published the then Depute Education Minister Nicol Stephen MSP said ""School boards can do a great deal to help by acting as one line of communication between schools and all parents. .... Strong school boards will bring many other benefits too.  For example, they can greatly improve community involvement in schools and can play a supportive role in the context of more devolved school management"".  What evidence has arisen in the last three years to suggest that Nicol Stephen was so wrong in his assessment of the value of School Boards?

Banks in his report highlighted that School Boards have a role to play in the reform and improvement of Scottish schools and that ways of sharing good practice should be identified.  He noted a number of weaknesses with the existing school Board legislation and called for a number of changes to make School Boards more effective.  Amongst these were increased parental involvement and simpler election processes.

The Scottish Executive's desire to move away from a 'one size fits all' approach can be achieved by amending the existing School Board legislation, which will build on existing best practice, whilst at the same time allowing schools to adopt strategies more applicable to local circumstances. For example in some communities it may be considered appropriate to look at a cluster School Board covering a number of schools. The amended legislation must account for such flexibility.

We value the role that teachers and co-opted members play in the on-going work of the School Board and it is essential that their formal involvement is retained in any future legislative changes. Retaining School Boards within a more flexible, but nationally consistent, framework crucially allows for parents to retain a national voice - through the Scottish School Board Association (SSBA).
"

"429”, “No. The Board believes that the existing system works well, subject to minor modifications - see the Board's accompanying Statement."

"430”, “Broadly speaking any system, which encourages better parental involvement, is welcome. However the suggestions put forward for setting up Parent Forums appears to be too loose.  How could such a flexible system be easily managed, or indeed set up, locally without reasonably strict guidance. It is yet to be proved that School Boards are inflexible."

"431”, “Definitely not!  Whilst the (George Street) research recommends ""deformalising and broadening membership"" of School Boards - and that the Scottish Executive widely advertises and promotes such changes - it does not recommend abolition.  It seems to see its own-style parent forums as complimentary to improved School Boards. We regard this approach as sensible. The research identifies significant weaknesses of existing School Boards, with which many of their members will agree - being frustrated by aspects of existing legislation.  However, School Boards do have value as a focus for, mandatory consultation of parents by officials, for their involvement and support of their schools, and have even been commended for this in HMIe reports.  To abolish this resource, rather than utilise it for improvement, seems irresponsible. This is a major example of the need to think ""and"", rather than ""either / or""!"

"432”, “We agree that individual schools should be able to put in place a system of parental representation that suits their needs, but we consider that this should still be within a legislative framework that requires a constitution, agenda & minutes, with defined (perhaps by school and parents) rights and responsibilities."

"433”, “School Boards should be restructured and modernised.  Perhaps doing away with the formal election process and moving towards an AGM type of election."

"434”, “As indicated above, the Board does not support the abolition of the current system. The Board believes that the present arrangements for parental representation are working well and subject to the minor amendments proposed, could be modified to operate even more effectively.

This section of the consultation paper suggests that the new system would allow parents to decide on arrangements which suit them best.  There is a danger, however, that flexibility is confused with vagueness.  By failing to prescribe a framework within which these bodies would operate, the legislation may inhibit parents from coming forward.  If there is no constitution and the forum has to negotiate its terms of business with the education authority before progress can be made, busy parents may decide not to participate.

The Board is also concerned that as currently drafted, there is only a discretionary duty on the education authority to prepare a scheme for the establishment of a parent forum, unless a quarter of the parents demand otherwise. In practical terms, how will such parents be aware of their rights unless they have an intimate knowledge of this legislation or they are advised of their rights in plain English by the education authority? Will therefore the new system be as accessible and flexible as is proposed?
"

"435”, “No.  We find the School Board (Scotland) Act 1988 already in place to be well established and effective in carrying out all those functions defined by it.  All that is needed are adjustments so as to incorporate suggested improvements that would enhance parental involvement, not detract from it by abolishing the involvement of key parental community members who; through their membership to School Boards and PTAS; have already shown their dedication and commitment to partnership with schools.
> Chair noted that while the nature of School Board elections allowed parents the freedom to elect Board members deemed by them as being those best placed to serve school communities periodically, proposed parent forums over-flexibility could result in the opening up of a window to conflict amongst parent forums in disagreement with one another and whose membership on such forums could remain for unspecified amounts of time. This could in fact alienate parents further owing to no required regulations of conduct during meetings.
> The Scottish Executive's proposals to abolish School Boards and to redefine PTAs as they currently exist are in fact taking away power from the only organized and dedicated parents currently willing to take the time to get involved!
> Who is going to give forums structure?  There are no agendas, no minutes, no Chair and therefore no form of organisation.  How then could parental involvement be enhanced by such proposals?
> School Boards are seen by parents to deal largely with the formal side of things. Parents not interested in this can join the PTA. Both have different functions however work together to attain overall goals - albeit in different ways - namely raising the standard of education in schools and for the benefit of school communities. One group cannot do both.
> In effect, while new forums roles could be seen to be incorporated under the umbrella of currently existing PTAS, the formal role dealt with by School Boards could not. Dealing with correspondence such as that currently received from the Education Service often requires formal responses carried out by School Boards. The flexibility of forums would cause loss of structure and formality, resulting in the loss of power and avenue of formal response.
> In the event of eliminating teacher representation, this could lead to the danger of individuals holding grudges against the school/and or school staff members as a result of matters pertaining to differences of opinion for various reasons getting together in small groups and carrying out personal vendettas, therefore losing track of what is important - focusing on what is best for the school and the students.
"

"436”, “No. (Although the existing School Board system could be made more flexible)."

"437”, “Agreed, with provisions.
- We are open to changes that improve on the current arrangements.
- Both the School Board and Parent Staff Association have developed a good working relationship with the Management Team and Staff.  We are nervous that interfering with the dynamics threatens this relationship.
- The statutory position of the Board is clear and unambiguous, and has worked well at our school.
- We would welcome flexibility and the removal of unnecessary constraints, but think it should be achieved within a statutory framework.
"

"438”, “No.  The current system has flexibility and structure.  The proposed arrangements lack structure, order & accountability and could result in such a variety of arrangements that the education authorities would find interfacing with them to be unmanageable.
The current system is also democratic and accountable
There are no guarantees that the proposed forums would either.
"

"439”, “No.  While we think the current School Board format is somewhat restrictive we believe that the Parent forum goes too far the other way and is somewhat vague.  Who would decide locally one parent, ten parents?  What evidence is there that the current school board format is not working."

"440”, “No.  There is already great flexibility in the School Boards system but if Parent Forums come in there should be statutory minimum standards to which all schools must adhere to give consistency across the country.  (Our) High School already has flexible parental involvement through the School Board and the School Association."

"441”, “No"

"442”, “Not necessarily.  The school board works well for us and really would not change for the better in terms of representation if abolished. "

"443”, “"

"444”, “"

"445”, “"

"446”, “Yes"

"447”, “Yes. it is hard for people to put themselves up for election."

"448”, “"

"449”, “No !!!"

"450”, “No"

"451”, “No - strongly object"

"452”, “"

"453”, “No"

"454”, “No.  I consider that school boards have achieved much by way of parental involvement already.  I believe that parental involvement could be improved by adapting the present system instead of abandoning it.  For example making school board meetings available and open to all parents with elected board members running the meeting."

"455”, “"

"456”, “"

"457”, “Yes"

"458”, “Not sure.  How would you recruit parents ?  Difficult at present to interest parents, do you think there are parents out there waiting to be asked?  Most parents are only interested in their own children and what they are doing."

"459”, “Yes, but requirement for 'model' constitution and definite guidelines."

"460”, “No.  We do not agree that school boards should be replaced by a parent forum.  A parent forum would have no responsibility or accountability."

"461”, “No.  Would be replacing a defined, understood and effective system with an unknown."

"462”, “If schools all do different things then you loose coherence and it becomes more difficult to ensure the quality and effectiveness of these forums."

"463”, “No"

"464”, “No.  What we have at the moment is fine and works well, so why change it ?"

"465”, “A more flexible system will only work if parents want to be involved.  Danger of apathy.  Risk of cliques.  Risk of people with individual issues or agendas."

"466”, “There should be a representative from the Church in Roman Catholic schools"

"467”, “No"

"468”, “No, as no formal structure means nothing to motivate or guide thousands of ............ quangos."

"469”, “We like the school board current system and would like further detail of new proposals which would take over."

"470”, “Existing school board system is fine, but might be made a little more flexible with membership / numbers / quorum / election procedure a formal structure is required in order to interact formally with local authorities and other organisations."

"471”, “Removal of current structure will de-stabilise the whole system.  This more flexible system could diminish the parent involvement."

"472”, “No, our school board works ."

"473”, “No"

"474”, “No.  The current system has enough flexibility and all parents can be represented at school board meetings should they desire."

"475”, “No, we do not agree.  Our school board and PTA work successfully in partnership.  If a more flexible system was decided locally there are dangers of it being open to abuse.  Special Interest groups could easily dominate a parent forum."

"476”, “No.  This sounds a very vague concept which would struggle to work in practice.  Who is on the parental forum, what is their remit or who decides what their remit is; it is a struggle to get parents to volunteer for things anyway."

"477”, “No.  We prefer the more formal legislation which is clear about what is required from a school board."

"478”, “No, in this instance we believe ""tweaking"" of existing Act would best suit parents needs for involvement of their children's education."

"479”, “No, because all parents have the right to nominate and elect parent members to serve on the school board, it is vital to have staff members, co-opted members from the community and representatives from the education department, on school boards so that the school authority and community parents all work together to try to provide the best education for young people."

"480”, “Parental representation needs structure.  The current system allows for school staff and reps from the community to be members, which is better than not having such representation."

"481”, “No, each school has a different system then forums,..... could not exist  and so the power of parents will be diluted."

"482”, “Structure, rules and regulations are a necessary part of civilized society."

"483”, “No - generally felt that there is a huge potential to divert focus away from the real issue of improving and maintaining delivery of education.  Parents are transitory and what suits a particular group at a particular time m