Making the difference – involving parents better in schools

Additional Comments

"1”, “"

"2”, “"

"3”, “"

"4”, “"

"5”, “"

"6”, “"

"7”, “"

"8”, “"

"9”, “"

"10”, “"

"11”, “(Our)School Board do not see anything in the new proposals that will encourage those parents who have so far been unwilling to be involved in their child's education to come forward and be involved now.  By having no specific areas of interest these parent forums are in great danger of becoming self-perpetuating groups of disaffected parents, creating their own constitutions and agenda, and creating a gap of trust between them and the teaching professionals.  School Boards have now been in existence for 16 years.  They have become established and known in the Schools.  It would be far better to build on their success than to abolish and start all over again.  The money that would be saved from not creating the whole apparatus of Parent forums could then be more usefully put towards financing more teachers in the classrooms or towards funding the McCrone Report."

"12”, “"

"13”, “"

"14”, “"

"15”, “"

"16”, “"

"17”, “"

"18”, “"

"19”, “"

"20”, “"

"21”, “"

"22”, “"

"23”, “"

"24”, “Far too lengthy a questionnaire for the Board members to discuss. Wish it could have been shorter and more simplified.  Sorry!"

"25”, “"

"26”, “"

"27”, “"

"28”, “"

"29”, “"

"30”, “"

"31”, “On first glance of the Executive's consultation document I am afraid that I am already of the view to agree with some of the comments raised by the SSBA.  I assumed that the Scottish Executive must have made their proposals based on earlier research therefore rather than re-inventing the wheel I did some homework and discovered that in July 2002 an independent report ""Support for School Boards"" prepared by Philip Banks.  The report would appear to be the seed from which the current consultation on the draft bill came from.  The report makes good reading on parental involvement in schools and there is a comprehensive list of those consulted in Appendix B.  I have also provided some bullet points below from the report which I believe could be included as issues in the response to the consultation which any future Bill must address.
It is recognised that school boards have difficulty in attracting membership particularly from areas of social disadvantage and ethnic minorities.  HTs as professional advisers to SBs are key agents for their success.  There is a need for a national restatement of the aims and objectives which effective SBs could pursue would be helpful to in achieving more generally a higher level of activity.
Way forward - retains SBs and improve format, restating the role of SBs in the context of the improvement agenda, finding ways to disseminate good practice, improving communications between SBs and the wider parent body, establishing more consistent levels for teachers and parents, easing access for SBs to essential information, using ICT more effectively, raising general expectations of the contribution to be made by SBs, setting the funding of SBs on proper basis, ensuring a better fit between national and local training, both for induction and on-the-job training, broadening the appeal of SBs to include a wider range of backgrounds, clarifying the relationship between SBs and PTAs and the national bodies that support them, encouraging a more consistent level of support from education authorities, the present structure of SBs and the process of establishing them with a view to improving outreach into the parent community.  I believe that while more parents should be involved in their children's school, scrapping Boards will not be the answer and nothing I have read persuades me otherwise.  If anything the lack of thought of how the Scottish Executive's proposals will be implemented in schools is worrying.  There is nothing in the Executive's document which states how many more parents will become involved in their child's school.  I believe that any response to the consultation must argue that the statutory powers that School Boards have must be protected and enhanced.  Concerns that the membership of SBs could do with a wider spectrum of parents is an issue which must be addressed preferably by school.  In conclusion, I have read the Scottish Executive's consultation document and I have to agree with the SSBA's views that the 1988 Act legislates for parental participation and gives Boards a partnership in the good management of schools and that the Bill does not address this at all and that the Bill is only concerned with the setting up of Forums, and really divorces parents from taking an active part in the good management of their children's school."

"32”, “I am very relieved that you are taking this matter up on our behalf."

"33”, “"

"34”, “"

"35”, “"

"36”, “"

"37”, “"

"38”, “Every family is represented on the School Board - we only have 4 families with children on the island"

"39”, “"

"40”, “"

"41”, “"

"42”, “didn't receive response to remainder of questions after 12"

"43”, “"

"44”, “"

"45”, “Board feels that partnership between the parents and Head Teacher and staff is the crucial feature.    A merging of the present School Boards and Parent Teacher Associations into one body, with flexibility to undertake varying roles within the resultant parent forum would be a good idea.  A minimum standard structure is necessary"

"46”, “"

"47”, “"

"48”, “"

"49”, “"

"50”, “"

"51”, “"

"52”, “We have drafted this view after a full consultation exercise with all parents.  Many however felt so confused by the document and the questionnaire they felt unable to comment and those who did have commented on how challenging some of the multiple questions are with their double negatives and difficult wording.  Couldn't think of a better way to put people off! "

"53”, “We found ourselves in disbelief at the new proposals set out for 'Parental Involvement'.  School Boards have been running efficiently and effectively for a number of years and we would wish this to continue.  Parents need guidance and structure which the school provides through School Boards.  How can you have forums with no structured.  It would appear that this new Draft Scottish Schools Bill has not been thought through.  Who chairs the meetings? Who decides who comes?  Who decides when, where etc?
As a School Board representing some 300+ parents it is our view that School Boards should remain and continue.  In all, no major changes are required and School Boards should be 'status quo'.
After question 12 the remainder of the questionnaire is not filled in because the Board and the PTA did not want to discuss 'Forums' at all.  School Boards exist and work – (we) do not want any changes."

"54”, “"

"55”, “"

"56”, “responding as Councillor"

"57”, “"

"58”, “"

"59”, “Only answered up to question 4 - rest irrelevant"

"60”, “"

"61”, “"

"62”, “"

"63”, “"

"64”, “"

"65”, “"

"66”, “We completed and returned the consultation questionnaire by email after going through the questions at our last School Board meeting.  We did emphasise that the School Board format works well for us and that we would like to see the school forum make up very similar or identical.  Ours is a small 44 pupil primary school and we have given up attempting to have a PTA.  There are no shortage of parent volunteers generally when required.  We considered that the local education authority is in the best position (after local consultation) to decide the make up of the school forums and how they should operate.  We were unanimous in saying that joint forums between schools would not be desirable and representing the interests of more than one school might cause conflict."

"67”, “"

"68”, “"

"69”, “"

"70”, “No comments have been received from parents, all of whom have received the summary leaflet."

"71”, “Individual response - member of PA"

"72”, “"

"73”, “Response from parents of 5 children who will go through the school (PTA)"

"74”, “"

"75”, “"

"76”, “"

"77”, “"

"78”, “"

"79”, “"

"80”, “"

"81”, “"

"82”, “"

"83”, “We disagree with the proposals contained within the Scottish Executive's draft bill on parental Involvement and we feel the present structure of School Boards within (our) Council provides a model which works well.  We are against the Scottish Executive proposals for the following reasons:
Not convinced that changes would promote greater parental involvement
No clerk, no minutes or agenda - could result in confusion.  Present system regulates conduct at meetings.
Would reduce the effectiveness of what has proved to be successful
No election system - self-selecting system not healthy
Two thirds of Scottish Schools already have School Boards - do not understand the need for change
(Our Region's) School Board forum working very well  - a model that other authorities could adopt
Make communications less clear - e.g. who does the authority communicate with - one person or 20 people?
No clear guidance or parameters - a group(s) of parents could lobby others or attempt to drive an agenda.  Sub groups or cliques could emerge, allowing promotion of self interest - safeguards in present system
No involvement of School Boards in senior appointments
Proposals confuse parental representation and parental involvement. Parents in many schools very much involved in the life of the school
A change to the new system could mean a total of one person involved with no staff representation or community members
No requirement for Head Teacher’s attendance at meetings
No regulated period of time for membership"

"84”, “"

"85”, “"

"86”, “"

"87”, “On behalf of (our) Primary School Board I wish to register the opinion of our School Board to the current proposals of the Scottish Executive to reform parental involvement in Scottish schools and the repeal of the School Board Act of 1988.   We do not believe there is any need for this repeal and in our experience the School Board as it stands, is working very well indeed.  We currently have three parent members, a teacher and two local clergy on our Board and we feel our school benefits greatly from the member involvement.  This of course would be out of the question in the new proposals. (Our) Primary School is central to the life of this village and having those, other than parents on the Board is vital and provides a perfect balance that would be greatly missed at a parent only forum.  Our School Board is functioning very well and we wish to retain it.  The feedback we have had from parents also supports the status quo.  I would encourage the Executive to scrap these plans and to focus their attention on the original goal of improving the current system and making adjustments where required.  I am glad we are having the opportunity to voice these concerns.

"88”, “"

"89”, “The members of (our) Primary School Board have individually studied the proposals and these were discussed at length during our most recent meeting.  While our individual reasons were varied, the collective and unanimous opinion of the School Board was that on balance we would prefer to retain the existing legislation.  We are therefore not in favour of implementation of the proposed new legislation."

"90”, “Parent response"

"91”, “"

"92”, “It is our view that the existing legislation, the School Board (Scotland) Act of 1988, is one of the mediums we can best use to involve parents in school activity.  Others include our current Parent Staff Association and our Parents Group meetings.
The framework is already there to allow parents the opportunity to get involved in the school.  Perhaps what we could be better at, as existing stakeholders, is promoting awareness, more proactively, of the ways parents can get involved.
In summary we are unanimously rejecting the new proposal, and are against abolishment of the School Board (Scotland) Act 1988."

"93”, “"

"94”, “"

"95”, “"

"96”, “"

"97”, “Parental interest in board / forum system is low."

"98”, “"

"99”, “"

"100”, “"

"101”, “Have sent consultation to Scottish Executive."

"102”, “"

"103”, “We understand that (our Council) are collating responses for onward transmission to (SSBA)."

"104”, “"

"105”, “"

"106”, “"

"107”, “"

"108”, “"

"109”, “"

"110”, “"

"111”, “"

"112”, “"

"113”, “"

"114”, “"

"115”, “"

"116”, “I do not see that any pupil or school will benefit from the proposed changes.
Parents always have and always will be able to get involved with their child’s education, if they so wish."

"117”, “Note that questions 5 to 9 are based on the premise that school boards will indeed be replaced by parent forums !"

"118”, “Co-opted member of this school board."

"119”, “"

"120”, “"

"121”, “"

"122”, “"

"123”, “"

"124”, “"

"125”, “"

"126”, “"

"127”, “"

"128”, “This is a very biased questionnaire !"

"129”, “"

"130”, “"

"131”, “"

"132”, “Following a consultation with our School Board and having considered the questions stated, we believe that the current and existing legislation is adequate.
No matter how procedures are set, if parents wish to get involved, they do not need new legislation to do so.
Parents should be involved with their child's education unconditionally.
The matter that concerns us is Disclosure Checks and we are of the opinion that if the authorities covered the expenses parents would be more willing to become involved.  The current measures are very restrictive (who pays? re-imbursement etc)."

"133”, “"

"134”, “"

"135”, “All these questions have been biased towards a Parent Forum rather than maintaining the School Board system with modernisation."

"136”, “"

"137”, “"

"138”, “I am the Teacher rep on Board"

"139”, “"

"140”, “"

"141”, “"

"142”, “"

"143”, “"

"144”, “"

"145”, “"

"146”, “"

"147”, “"

"148”, “"

"149”, “"

"150”, “"

"151”, “"

"152”, “"

"153”, “Consultation with parents - ""We are parents."""

"154”, “"

"155”, “"

"156”, “"

"157”, “"

"158”, “"

"159”, “Consultation of PTA is with other members of the committee."

"160”, “"

"161”, “"

"162”, “Consultation was with parent members of board."

"163”, “"

"164”, “I note that the research commissioned by the Executive consulted a wide range of parents, particularly, a 'silent majority'.  I don't understand who these parents are and would have liked a more scientific explanation of these parents.  As I don't know of anyone who was consulted and I must know at least some of the 'silent majority' my children attend 3 different educational establishments, I would have to ask if the consultation was really wide ranging enough. I don’t think that this consultation has been advertised widely enough either.  The whole section on page 6 regarding research was vague and didn't seem to consider any other issues than parent's views."

"165”, “"

"166”, “Following consultation (our) Primary School Board have concluded that the current School Board system works well to serve the needs of the school and community.  We have an excellent working relationship with the school and head master.  Our parents are kept well informed and are welcome to attend any of our meetings.  The proposed legislation is weak and does not inspire confidence.  Rather than involving parents it seeks to reduce their representation.  We feel that rather than spending money altering the current system it would be much more appropriate to direct this money towards school improvements."

"167”, “"

"168”, “"

"169”, “"

"170”, “"

"171”, “"

"172”, “"

"173”, “"

"174”, “"

"175”, “no longer got a PTA"

"176”, “"

"177”, “The questions in general are badly worded or incomprehensible.  This sort of document is unlikely to encourage more parents to become involved."

"178”, “"

"179”, “"

"180”, “We chose not to answer all questions in the draft document but rather picked those which seemed most relevant."

"181”, “"

"182”, “"

"183”, “"

"184”, “Little response was received from parents."

"185”, “"

"186”, “"

"187”, “"

"188”, “"

"189”, “"

"190”, “"

"191”, “"

"192”, “"

"193”, “The Head Teacher should be the first port of call for any queries/complaints.
Advice and reporting to parents is good but certain aspects could be clearer.  For example all parents know that their children work through levels A - E in primary schools but few parents know what this entails, what timescale is involved for each level, what educational standards pertain to each level etc.   Yes, parents should get advice and information and there should be a duty on authorities but we would also like to see a duty on parents to turn up for appointments with the Head Teacher or class teacher when made.  Communication between the school and parents needs to be full, clear and in plain English.  Parents' understanding of how the school works and how children are taught is often poor and this should be taken into account when discussing any issues with them.  At every step of the way, parents should be encouraged to understand how the system works and how they can better help their child to succeed in school.  Verbal communication to parents by the Head Teacher at every opportunity (i.e. Church services and any other events where parents are invited to attend) should be encouraged (this is very good in our school).  Parents get the opportunity to attend parents evening and discuss report cards - some do not bother to attend, usually those whose children most need it - could parents be obliged to attend?  Could parents be obliged to attend on Parent Forum meeting a year?"

"194”, “"

"195”, “"

"196”, “"

"197”, “"

"198”, “"

"199”, “"

"200”, “"

"201”, “"

"202”, “"

"203”, “"

"204”, “We believe that the abolition of the School Board as we know it will be a retrograde step.  We feel that our School Board represents a cross section of society.  The school is very much a focus of village life.  Our School Board is made up of a local Councillor, minister, parent, staff and other members of the community who play an active role on the School Board.  We are not in favour of a change to a parental forum.  We strongly agree with the SSBA and its reservations regarding the abolition of the School Board.  We wish you success and look forward to hearing from you about any progress made."

"205”, “"

"206”, “"

"207”, “"

"208”, “"

"209”, “"

"210”, “"

"211”, “We attempted consultation, but got little feedback (all invited to meeting)."

"212”, “"

"213”, “Consulted with the PTA"

"214”, “Not formally discussed with parents, but discussed at Board meeting."

"215”, “"

"216”, “The PTA - not interested."

"217”, “Consulted with parents on school board"

"218”, “"

"219”, “"

"220”, “"

"221”, “We do feel there is a definite need to have more Parental Involvement in schools, but we also feel that the proposals in the Draft Bill will not achieve this.  For example, the draft sets out the functions of a parent forum, but these functions are already being done better with more authority by the existing school boards.  There is a consensus among our members that the new Bill lacks structure and does not detail any remit for a proposed parent forum.
One suggestion we would put forth for ""tweaking"" the 1988 Act, would be to extend the parent member ratio, to include one parent from each school year group, therefore creating a better continuity throughout the school board."

"222”, “"

"223”, “WE BELIEVE THIS BILL TO BE UNNECESSARY AND A DIMINUTION OF PARENT'S AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS' STATUTORY RIGHTS TO BE INVOLVED IN THE GOVERNANCE OF THEIR SCHOOLS.
We believe this bill reduces the currently prescribed obligations of the local education authority to empower, delegate to, support and work with the school's governing body.  The new proposal may, on the face of it improve accessibility of parents but the authorities are under no obligation to address any issues raised.
At the moment the Rector makes a report to the School Board and issues raised can be addressed in a formal professional manner.  In our experience this has allowed probing into a matters in a  way that has benefited the parent and pupils.  The Parent  forum proposed would be basically an open house, which would lead more to a confrontational approach and would destroy not build relationships.
Currently the teaching staff is represented on the School Board which provides a valuable forum for both parents and teaching staff to communicate on policy issues and school specific issues.  The Parent Forum does not include for this.
We believe the so called flexibility within the bill will lead to ""lower common denominator"" solutions imposed by local education authorities who will inevitably develop a ""one size fits all"" approach for the schools within their area.  Parents and other stakeholders will have few statutory rights other than the right to be heard and ignored.  The argument in the bill is that the Parent Forum can be set up as a School Board but there is no legislation to empower this.
WE BELIEVE THAT THE EXISTING LEGISLATION WORKS WELL FOR ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS IN (OUR SCHOOL) AND IS SUFFICIENTLY FLEXIBLE TO ACCOMMODATE IMPROVEMENT WHERE APPROPRIATE."

"224”, “If any changes are to be implemented the legislation should be strengthened and retained in such a way that it will attract more parental involvement, which is the ultimate aim of the proposals.  We have discussed this and can suggest the following changes:
- Increase the flexibility of the school board such that between 4 and 10 parent members can sit on the school board.  This would address the real concern re standing for election.
- Provide centralized support for the School Board in the form of provision of a Clerk to handle the administrative aspects of the School Board.
- Widen the scope that can be discussed by the school Board, to include staffing, curriculum and budgets.
As you can gather we have had much debate on the subject and have strong concerns in the proposed legislation.  As such we would urge you to press for reconsideration of the introduction of the bill as proposed and introduce a new bill which will build upon the existing arrangements with the above changes."

"225”, “"

"226”, “"

"227”, “"

"228”, “"

"229”, “"

"230”, “"

"231”, “We are very happy with the way we operate at the moment - either a school board or PTAs."

"232”, “The following points were agreed upon during our discussion.
1. It was agreed that the procedures for joining a school board were far too cumbersome as they stood and put many parents off joining.  The need to write a personal statement and much of the form filling could be easily streamlined.
2. The Board felt that it was important that the present powers they had, would be retained in any future structure.
3. As a Board we felt that parents whose children had left the school should automatically leave the Board at the same time."

"233”, “Both our board members and those parents who responded to our consultation exercise clearly are of the opinion that the present boards should remain and so should the 1988 Act.  The general feeling is that parents' rights should be maintained and strengthened, not diluted as is felt to be likely under the new bill.
Furthermore parents already form a majority among board members, which could easily be increased, if necessary, without new legislation and allow school boards to continue in their present form, under the protection of the School Boards (Scotland) Act 1988.
Finally I would like to draw your attention to our reply to question 13 - does it not seem absurd that in a draft bill entitled ...""Parental Involvement"", that parents have no right to attend parent forums, when at present parents can freely attend school board meetings ?  Is this proposed reduction in parents' rights intended ?"

"234”, “"

"235”, “We are totally against the introduction of Parent Forums replacing School Boards.We feel that the position of the School Board is an important and structured committee of people committed to looking after parents' interests in the running of their school. The school board competently deals with all aspects of school life and encourages parents at all times to become involved. Parents are kept up to date on a regular basis and are invited to submit ideas, comments, complaints, etc which are always dealt with promptly by the School Board. The benefit of having a structured and organised set of rules enables the board to deal with situations fairly without prejudice. Parent involvement is a very important part of school life and is always encouraged, but if parent forums become the replacement for School Boards the lack of an organised group of people could quickly become a free for all Strong individuals would quickly take over, concerned only with their own situations instead of dealing with the facts from an unbiased point of view. People need organisation to get anything done and the introduction of Parent Forums would take this away."

"236”, “We have sent the PTA the consultation document of the Bill.  We sourced this document ourselves (Making the difference - improving parents involvement in schools).  These documents were NEVER sent to our local school.  If this type of consultation is representative of how the new Act will continue it is likely that parents will have even less say and that these decisions will be taken centrally in Edinburgh. It came in too late for consultation."

"237”, “"

"238”, “"

"239”, “"

"240”, “Summary: We feel any School Board / Parent Forum must have a formal structure, with minutes and have school representation, especially Head Teacher and preferably community involvement to provide balance."

"241”, “"

"242”, “"

"243”, “"

"244”, “"

"245”, “"

"246”, “At our School Board meeting on Wed 25 May members agreed that they are opposed to the above Bill.  We discussed at length the Consultation Questionnaire but for most of the questions we reached the same answer and therefore concluded that we would take (the Minister's) advice in his letter of 14 April 2005 ""if you want to maintain your current School Board arrangements, you will of course be free to do so"".
Our Board felt that individual schools making their own rules could only be a retrograde step and if the School Board system is to be replaced, it must be by a better one than the proposed Parent Forum.  School Board rely on diversity of knowledge and experience of members to be used to advantage and the proposed Parent Forums would lack structure which is important when you are acting on behalf of your school.
I must apologise for the delay in replying and hope that our views on the proposed Bill will be acknowledged. "

"247”, “(Our) School Board unanimously feel that the proposals in the draft bill document  ""making the difference improving parents involvement in schools"" are vague, misleading and do not answer fundamental points.  In short, a wholly unsatisfactory document detrimental to the future of our education system in Scotland.
School Boards are currently involved in the management of schools.  The new proposals refer to 'parental involvement'.  It is felt that these proposals will lead to a deterioration between parents and school.
Since 1988 School Boards have been a great success.  This should be built on, not dismantled by inadequate and ill thought out proposals. The Minister has ..... championed School Boards in the past.
In conclusion this proposed draft bill is a wholly unsatisfactory document, and we as a School Board representing the parents and pupils have no confidence in your proposals.

"248”, “"

"249”, “"

"250”, “"

"251”, “"

"252”, “"

"253”, “We have discussed the questions that you sent us .  We find it very difficult to fill out.  We have concerns about the prescriptive role of local authority in establishing a framework for local implementation.  We would like to retain the positive leadership of School Boards and keep PTA as separate organisation.  Many thanks."

"254”, “"

"255”, “"

"256”, “Apologies that this is late - we have however tried to respond honestly and fully!"

"257”, “"

"258”, “"

"259”, “"

"260”, “"

"261”, “"

"262”, “"

"263”, “"

"264”, “"

"265”, “"

"266”, “"

"267”, “"

"268”, “"

"269”, “"

"270”, “"

"271”, “"

"272”, “"

"273”, “"

"274”, “"

"275”, “"

"276”, “"

"277”, “"

"278”, “"

"279”, “"

"280”, “The Board felt that the concerns raised by the SSBA on the extent and nature of the proposed changes adequately reflected their views.  We are therefore writing in support of the submission made by the SSBA.  In particular, it was felt that making Boards more 'informal' could have a negative effect.  At the moment, Board members take their role seriously and feel they have a mandate from the parent body to raise relevant issues.  Any dilution of that mandate would be seen as reducing the importance of Board members.  We recognise that there are a number of areas where School Boards do not function properly.  However, we feel that the proposals set out in the consultation paper may actually damage existing arrangements.  It was also felt that the role of the Head Teacher in attending and contributing to Board meetings was critical.  Any reduction in the role of the Head in Boards would weaken the functioning of School Boards.  Overall we were concerned that the current proposals focus on areas where there are failings in the current system without adequately learning from incidences where School Boards are operating effectively.  We do welcome the current focus on how Boards operate and would be keen to see further proposals from the Scottish Executive."

"281”, “"

"282”, “Completing this did not give me a sense that we have grasped the nettle.  The education system in this country has been given, and to a large extent accepted, not only the task of educating our children but of fixing all their ill's.
We are promoting a culture of rights without responsibility by failing to back teacher's disciplinary decisions at the coal face when the going gets tough.  Parents know that they can level any number of extreme accusations without ever having to justify their claims.  They seem to be able to simply contact the Education Authority and 'Parent Power' conquers all.
The SSBA needs to make some clear statements on what it requires otherwise it will lose the hard won influences that it has."

"283”, “"

"284”, “"

"285”, “"

"286”, “As a School Board, we firstly state that we are wholeheartedly in favour of promoting greater, effective parental involvement and representation in all schools, and also in the whole process of education.
However, we do have grave concerns that the bill as drafted for consultation will not achieve this end.  We would make the following specific points:
- there will be a significant loss of the statutory rights which the parent body currently holds (through the School Board);
- there will be significant reduction in the EFFECTIVE involvement of parents in the education process as a whole - while there may be a large number of parents involved as members of the proposed Parent Forums, the reduced statutory powers of these Forums may mean that their views have little or no impact in the educational process;
- the extremely vague guidelines for the establishment of parents' forums and their associated constitutions is likely to lead to great variation and inconsistency between the forums of different schools.  This can only, in turn, lead to chaotic, inconsistent and potentially ineffective representation;
- moreover, there is also a very real risk of the formation of minority 'single-interest' groups which could both cause division within the parent body, the school community and the wider community and dominate the business of the Forum to the exclusion of others, important, matters;
- as a result of the lack of required representation from staff and community, there is a real danger of isolation of the parent body from the school and wider community.  This may well lead to a significant deterioration in relationships between parents and schools, with obvious serious adverse consequences;
- consultation with the entire parent body of (our) school shows more than 91% support for maintaining the current system.
The information before us does not suggest that there has been a significant and wholly representative demand to repeal the School Boards (Scotland) Act 1988 nor does it suggest that the proposals within the draft bill will be any more effective in promoting parental involvement than the existing system - quite the opposite, in fact.
Overall and in conclusion, we feel that the new system of Parent Forums as proposed is likely to lead to a reduction in the effective involvement of parents in the education of their children and we are thus opposed to it.
We would much prefer to see the appropriate updating of the School Board (Scotland) Act 1988 and further efforts to develop and encourage the current roles undertaken by School Boards and Parent Teacher Associations."

"287”, “"

"288”, “As a school board we are keen to implement anything which we feel is in the school's best interests.  However, on reading the various pieces of information we have received pertaining to the creation of the parents forums we are against this Bill.  We feel that the School Boards (Scotland) Act 1988 could do with a few  amendments and certain changes would not go amiss but we do not want to see the end of our school board.  The way we have read this is that the current school board & PTA would’ve dissolved and in its place would be a single organisation with many powers but no authority.  At present members are elected to a school board and are afforded a budget to pay a clerk and to oversee various matters within the school.  The PTA is a voluntary organisation operating with the sole purpose of fundraising for the school and dealing with parents worries regarding school procedure.  The new forum would have no teacher participation and would involve parents far too much in the running of the school. which is a recipe for disaster if ever there was one.  There would be no minutes or agendas and everything instead of being official and structured would be very laid back. Certain aspects of the new bill are attractive, for example, the repealing of the need to be elected would be more convenient proving that there are strict guidelines pertaining to duties and length of term served.  However changing the current legislation to allow the original act to be updated but not repealed could do this.  We are still in our first term as members of our school board and PTA but so far we cannot see the advantages that the introduction of a parent forum would make but only severe disadvantages.
We have filled in this questionnaire to the best of our abilities given that many of the questions were couched in somewhat difficult fashion.  Hopefully we have managed to convey in an acceptable manner the fact that we are satisfied with our current parent-run organisations within our school and hope to maintain said organisations for a very long time."

"289”, “After consultation with the school's Parent Support Group and the parents we unanimously reject the new Bill."

"290”, “Having studied the draft proposals, attended meetings held by the Scottish Civic Forum and Education Services, (a) Council as well as holding discussion at a full Board meeting of (our) School Board, we reject the majority of the proposals in the draft bill on the grounds that, in practice, they would constitute a weakening of parents' current rights and would undermine the partnership with the school the Board has worked hard to establish.

We question the basic premise that, currently, there is a lack of opportunity for parental involvement.  At present, involvement takes many forms and parents can opt to take an active role by participating in Boards, PTAs or PAs, or become involved in activities organised by the school itself e.g. workshops, parents information evenings or simply pick up the telephone and discuss an issue with key personnel in the school.  It is the experience of our Board, and several of our parents are themselves involved in education, that 'involvement' is a two-way process and parents cannot be compelled to participate.  Therefore, we refute the suggestion that a  gone size fits all' system exists at present. We believe that existing good practice in many schools means varied and flexible opportunities for parents to participate and this combined with the option of joining a Board/PTA constitutes a wide array of opportunities.  Consequently, without more detailed information regarding the proposed 'new duty on education authorities to promote parental involvement', we reserve judgement.

Repealing the School Board (Scotland) Act (1988) and presenting parents with the option of becoming involved in a 'forum' with, initially at least, no structure, no requirement to form a structure, potentially no representatives from the school to listen to parents needs and concerns and ultimately no real say in any aspect of the management of the school, will do nothing to create 'more and better' parental involvement.  Indeed these proposals in the draft bill, should it proceed to the next stage, may have the opposite effect of de-motivating and discouraging committed parents who are currently involved and know that their efforts can and do make a difference for all the children in attendance at their schools. Parents will quickly perceive that forums will be little more than 'talking shops', given the vague and insipid language contained in the new draft bill, and implementation will have the effect of disempowering.

We believe the draft bill to be deeply flawed. We accept that there is a need for the removal of the unnecessarily bureaucratic procedure in the 1988 Act, for example, in the election process. However, to encourage meaningful partnership, we would like to see consolidation and expansion of the existing elements of the Act that allow parents a say in the effective management of schools and for this to be expressed in unambiguous terms to prevent individuals from imposing subjective interpretations (a potential danger created by the language of the new draft bill) and thereby permitting parents the length and breadth of Scotland an entitlement to equal participation in partnerships with our schools."

"291”, “We have taken on board the views of various organisations including, The Scottish Catholic Education Service, The Scottish School Boards Association, and meetings with our own School board Chairs facilitated by (our) Council Education Services.

It is our view that the existing legislation, the School Board (Scotland) Act of 1988, is one of the mediums we can best use to involve parents in school activity. Others include our current Parent Staff Association and our Parents Group meetings.

The framework is already there to allow parents the opportunity to get involved in the school. Perhaps what we could be better at, as existing stakeholders, is promoting awareness, more proactively, of the ways parents can get involved.

In summary, 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 School Board (Scotland) Act 1988.
"

"292”, “We attach a copy of a Survey carried out of our Parents. We have considered the implications of the Bill and, taking into account the views of the Parents, we offer our views for consideration in addition to the Scottish Executive Response Form attached.

We believe the School Boards in (our Region) have worked well, and congratulate, (our Region) Council Education & Leisure Services in making this possible. We are always ready to embrace progress and improvement and would have liked to have seen some ""tweaking"" of the existing legislation. We urge caution in revolutionising the status quo.

Irrespective of how well intentioned Guidelines and Councils may be in setting up the Parent Forums, without legislation to compel funding and co-operation with the Forum, there will be a fear that the PF priority will fall well down the list in the face of so many other important issues and political agendas. Our parents are more optimistic but we suspect that is because of the good relationship which has existed with (our Region) Council.

We and our Parents overwhelmingly advocate for a continuance of the formal structure - routine meetings, Agenda, Minutes, and attendance by the Head Teacher.
We had anticipated the Election Process to be a stumbling block for Parental Involvement, but this received a big vote of confidence in the Survey. Parents obviously appreciated the accountability provided by elections.

A shorter term of office would be favoured. 4 years is onerous and unnecessary as re-election after 2 years can achieve the same result without the commitment.

Single parent Forums would not be representative and are to be avoided. Six or more should be encouraged with a possible link to the size of the school. Parent representatives for each of the school years might also be desirable but may be difficult to achieve.

The remit of the Parent Forum should include the appointment of Senior Teaching Posts, School Policy, Health & Safety, Additional Support Needs etc. and should encompass School Board / PTA functions.


Parental opinion was sought by means of a survey. Parents were challenged by Teaching Staff as they gathered in the playground to collect their children, at a Book Fair and over two evenings of Parents' Nights.

School records show there to be 202 ""eldest child"" attending and accordingly we can conclude there to be 202 families with children attending (our) Primary. We obtained 86 responses to our survey - a respectable 43%.

The questions and responses were as detailed:-

Has the current arrangement of School Boards worked well, establishing a working partnership between Parents and the Education Authority ?   Yes 91% No 7%

Would you be confident a Parent Forum would be effective, without legislation to compel the Education Authority to fund and co-operate with the Forum ?   Yes 42% No 52%

Is the current formal structure of routine meetings, with Agenda and Minutes, and attendance by the Head Teacher appropriate. ?   Yes 86% No 8%

Would you have confidence in an informal Forum ?   Yes 50% No 42%

Would greater Parental Involvement be achieved by
(a) removal of the election process ?   Yes 43% No 40%
(b) a minimum / maximum term of office on the Forum ?   2yrs 45%, 3yrs 9%, 4yrs 6%, Other 3%

How many parents should be required to form a Forum ?   <5 5%, 6 - 9 29%, 10+ 26%

Should they be elected ?   Yes 76% No 16%

Should a Parent Forum discuss appointment of Senior Teaching Posts, School Policy, Health & Safety, Additional Support Needs ?   Yes 74% No 19%

Should a Forum include School Board and PTA functions ?   Yes 84% No 12%

What change in the present system would get you more involved ?
1.    Parents help in classroom
2.    Day / night / weekend /during school hours, meetings
3.    More notice of meetings
4.    Parents voices being heard in the set up & systems of the school
5.    Involving Parents on what activities go on at school
6.    Education should be left to the Professionals
7.    I believe the present system works well
Make it less formal, get the kids to get the Parents involved.
"

"293”, “After consulting with parents and the Head Teacher, (our) School Board considers that there is no need to repeal the School Board (Scotland) Act 1988.

Over the last 12 years, the School Board has worked well and been effective in exchanging information and working for the benefit of the parents, the school and the wider community.

Representatives of staff, parents and 6th year pupils have been involved, giving a broad perspective to discussions at their meetings. These discussions have been open, and led to finite results.  The Head Teacher has stated the benefit of having this formal forum to discuss issues with those representatives.

In addition, the Head Teacher appreciates that the School Board can communicate directly with, and in fact lobby, the elected Members of The Council on issues which the Head Teacher and staff cannot do.

The School Board considers that the roles and functions of the School Board should be retained and that there is a place for a national voice through The Scottish School Board Association.

The Board recognises that some amendments could be made to the existing Act, giving more flexibility to the Boards. For example, instead of requiring a particular number of parent representatives, a band of numbers may be more appropriate, thus avoiding an election when there is perhaps one more nominee than required. Why turn away one volunteer? The election process is daunting enough for parents.

However, the Board also considers that deregulation, as proposed, would lead to an undemocratic and unaccountable gathering of parents and therefore a dilution of standards.
At the present time, there is a duty on the Boards to raise standards of education in their school but that does not appear to be the case under the proposals.  The Board also has a structure and has organised business meetings in an open manner, which is openly accountable to parents and staff in the school.

The Board is rather sceptical of the proposals, given that the information passed to them does not Show hard evidence that parents actually want change or that School Boards do not represent them.

This School Board has consulted with the parents of our pupils, and members have also attended consultative meetings and Area Forums. As a result, there has been no indication that there is a feeling that School Boards don't work effectively at present, far less that the proposals could help with our children's learning.

We further consider that the proposed changes will not encourage or improve parental involvement.  Under the present arrangements, parents and staff have to seek re-election after a certain time period.  However, under the proposals for a parent forum, there may be a risk of being more exclusive if parents do not leave after a certain term.

At present at Board meetings, there is an open discussion with the Head Teacher, and parents' views are duly listened to, considered, and taken on board if they are appropriate. We feel that a parent forum, without input from the Head Teacher does not work towards a combined benefit to parents, pupils and school.

Regarding the interviewing of senior appointments, our Head Teacher has advised that he is very happy with the present arrangement and feels that School Board parent members can add valuable viewpoints to the selection process.

We feel therefore that this response reflects our very strong views and would also add that the questions suggested in The Scottish Executive document ' Making the difference - improving parents' involvement in schools' weighs very heavily towards an assumption that the School Board (Scotland) Act 1988 will in fact, be repealed.
"

"294”, “"

"295”, “"

"296”, “(Our) School Board invited all parents, via a school newsletter, to an evening meeting in the village hall to discuss proposals regarding the draft Parental Involvement Bill.  Seven people attended: four were school board members, four were PTA members and one was an interested parent.

It was agreed at the meeting that there was no need for a repeal of the School Boards (Scotland) Act 1988 and that parental representation could be modernised by 'tweaking' the Act.

It was agreed that the Draft Bill is unlikely to achieve the aim of involving more parents in their children’s learning at our school, but that there were actions we could take now to make our School Board more inclusive.  For example, the main topic for discussion at forthcoming School Board meetings will be included in the schools weekly or fortnightly newsletter, with a reminder that meetings are open to all.

It was also agreed that the role of the School Board and PTA's at our school were entirely different and the two bodies could not be merged successfully.
"

"297”, “"

"298”, “Points raised

1. Style of questions was misleading, making assumptions of where the boards are going.  Don't think kept promise of 2004.

2. We thought that the Head Teacher and Councillors should be kept on School Boards in every sense.

3. Seems to be a very expensive exercise and we are concerned of the financial implications of starting afresh - wasting tax payers money!

4. Parent Forum should be consistent across Scotland with some form of National guidance.

5. Change doesn't necessarily improve parent involvement, if parents want to be involved they will regardless of what it is called or what it does.

6. Feel this change will confuse parents even more. School Board and PTA should be kept separate although continued communication between both is imperative.

7. We should make people aware of what School Board's are about instead of changing it again. There should be a clear, concise explanation of what Boards should be doing for all parents, however not in the format of a huge booklet as this wouldn't be read, but instead in a leaflet to all parents explaining what the Board is and what it can / cannot do and what it sets out to achieve.

8. Retaining input from co-opted members is important to a Board. The balance between parents and teachers should stay similar to present as this seems to work well.

9. The election process should be simplified as per point on draft response.

10. We don't want a new School Board model we simply want to improve our existing model.
"

"299”, “I feel it is important to highlight the good things that have been done for the school where I am Chair to the Board.

Well before I joined the Board, the school has been in desperate need of new windows and given that the Head Teacher, being an employee of the council, cannot put pressure on them, the School Board with support of the parents was able to use their power, in a respective and assertive way and get new windows just recently.

A major issue for us was that our dining room used to be in the playground, and a few years ago was moved. When the Parents Association wrote to the council to ask if we could use part of the ground for a garden for the school, they were told that the ground was up for sale, and had been for a few years - the school was never advised of this.

Unfortunately the Parents Association were rebuffed at every attempt to stop this and turned to the Board for assistance.  We corresponded with parents, did a lot of paper work, talked to people in power, and were successful in stopping the sale of the ground - this clearly shows that without the 'power' of the Board you do not get anywhere.

The Head Teacher of the school is distraught to think that she may well lose her Board and realises that the PA can really do nothing for her where she cannot become involved because of her position.  The PA are great, they do good things, but they are not interested in the legislative side of education and even hated having to form a constitution - this was of course needed, but it is very much not unique to my school.  As an aside, paying annual insurance to the SPTC does not buy support when there are issues, but being a member of the SSBA does!  I am sick and tired of hearing (.....) bump her gums; she is not even head of the SPTC!

For the Scottish Executive to say this is not political is in my mind, a downright lie.  School Boards started in Conservative times and it is not liked one little bit - but the Executive should realise that other political parties feel the Boards do a great job - and for me, well the Councillor on my Board is Labour and he is very supportive.
"

"300”, “The Board members are very concerned that the new Draft Bill will abolish School Boards as they stand at present and create informal Parent Forums which will almost certainly result in a loss of parental representation and partnership with the school.

(Our) School Board enjoys a strong relationship with the school's management and teaching staff and encourages active involvement from the Church and local community members.  We feel that this is a particular strength of the present School Board format and would not wish to see it changed.

While members do appreciate that some formalities, e.g. the formal election process, may be 'off-putting' for some parents, we feel that the new Draft Bill is too radical and that some element of formality must remain to ensure that the Board has a strong partnership in the good management of the school.

(Our) School Board does not agree with the proposed legislation and would wish its concerns to be recorded and acted upon."

"301”, “(Our) School Board met last week and we discussed the Scottish Executive's proposals to reform parental involvement in schools.  Time did not permit the Board to consider all the questions that you posed in the questionnaire that accompanied your correspondence, so I am responding by letter.

(We are) very fortunate in that the Education Department has been very supportive of School Boards for many years.  Members of the senior management of the Department are ""attached"" to each school Board and they regularly attend meetings.

The Board has read the Scottish Executive's leaflet B37729 2/05 and consider the proposals as detailed therein fundamentally flawed.  Whilst the stated aim of involving more parents is admirable, we can see nothing in the proposals that suggests that they will have this effect. There is a total lack of detail as to what parent forums will actually do.  Without any formal constitution we cannot see where any benefit will accrue. We consider that there appears a real danger that they will become talking shops that will achieve very little.

The present system is by no means perfect but it appears vastly better than what is proposed by the Scottish Executive.

(Our) Board agrees that what is proposed represents a real danger of losing representation and the partnership that has been build up over the last 16 years.  We support you fully in your opposition to these proposals.
"

"302”, “(Our) School Board considered the consultation on the Parental Involvement Bill (and) it was resolved to respond in general terms due to the complexity of the issues raised.  The consultation questionnaire seems not to address fundamental issues but concentrates on the role of the education authority; whereas those questions that consider more detailed aspects could equally be relevant to a review of school boards as originally envisaged.

The Board is very concerned at the proposal to repeal the 1988 Act and abolish School Boards.
It is not clear how the proposed legislation will enable or motivate proper parental involvement in the management of the school.
It is felt that this will, contrary to the stated aims, lead to a lesser role for parents and hence separation from more formal involvement in school issues.
There appears to be no means of representation and partnership with schools as presently enabled through the Boards.
It is our belief that as a result many schools will be left without any parental representation.

The proposed parental forums appear to be too open in their structure and remit. Presently many PTAs, much less regulated that school boards, still find securing active parental involvement a difficulty.

The School Board does not accept the suggestion that the present arrangement is 'not flexible' or is 'not inclusive' nor that that the new bodies would overcome these alleged shortcomings. We do accept that a review of the present functions and working arrangements for Schools Boards would be appropriate to encourage wider involvement.

For the above reasons the Board requests that the Minister for Education and Young People reconsiders this proposal and does not proceed with the repeal of the 1988 Act.
"

"303”, “I have responded to the Scottish Executive on behalf of our school and board.  We put out a quick questionnaire to all the parents at our school.  That's just under 500 children, and approximately 250 sets of parents.

We gave the parents 2 options to vote on

1. I don't support the Scottish Executive proposal to dissolve school boards.
2. I support the Scottish Executive proposal to dissolve school boards.

So far, we haven't received one vote for the 2nd option.
We circulated the page of comparisons of existing and proposed legislation along with the voting tear off slip.

Unfortunately I posted off my reply to the Scottish Executive without photocopying it, but you can rest assured that whilst we thought some parts of the bill are positive - who could criticise more parental involvement ? - the abolition of school boards would be a retrograde step.

We feel that a lot of what the executive is trying to achieve, could be handled under the existing structure, and at (our school) we are already expanding parental involvement by setting up parent forums.  This is with the guidance (and experience) of the board and appointed staff at the school.  We feel that this probably would not have happened if the board had not suggested it."

"304”, “We have completed the questionnaire on-line but attach this response since there was no acknowledgement/confirmation that the electronic version had been received.  We also wish to share our views with our MSP and the Scottish School Board Association.

Overview Comment
The consultation document on the draft bill is disappointing since it does not build upon the existing relationships which schools, parents and the wider community have developed through existing legislation associated with School Boards and PTAs.  Consultations and discussions to date have focused on enhancing current relationships without the requirement for a complete redrafting of the existing legislation.  It is therefore surprising that the Scottish Executive proposals for parent forums are significantly different from earlier consultations with the proposed approach adding no additional value or opportunities.  It is inconceivable in the 'current school environment that generating new legislation will stimulate greater active parental involvement. It is generally recognised that current arrangements work well although some aspects such as the School Board appointments system require to be modified to generate greater parental involvement.  The consultation attempts to generate the perception of a highly flexible, modern and devolved approach to parental involvement.  However, the absence of a constitution, structure, duties and responsibilities of parent forums has the potential for a degenerative impact on the school community.  The Scottish Executive is urged to reconsider their approach and attempt to build on existing relationships which have developed through existing School Boards and PTAs."

"305”, “As a School Board we feel we cannot give a fully comprehensive reply to the draft bill by using the consultation questionnaire with which we were supplied. This would appear to be very leading and we found ourselves while agreeing with much of it in principal, we do not agree with the end result.  We, therefore, have decided that the best way to make our views known is to reply by letter.

The present set up of separate School Board and P.T.A. works well in our school. It allows those in membership to be involved in the school in the way in which they feel most comfortable and most needed according to the skills they feel they have.  The amalgamation of these, along with the de-formalisation of meetings, could lead to chaos.  With no agenda to follow there is scope to lose sight of the matter in hand and therefore lead to members going off on their own tangent, giving more weight and time to less important matters and not enough to others which may require more discussion.  With no minutes of meetings how can views, discussions and decisions of the proposed forums be taken into consideration by the school, let alone carry any weight or influence to affect what is in going on in the School.

We agree that some tweaking of the School Boards (Scotland) Act 1988 would seem to be all that is required.  Below you will find a short list with explanations of the conclusions that we came to regarding changes to the 1988 Act.

Relaxation of the Election Process - Make individual schools responsible for the election of board members.  This would allow for a broader representation of parents from the whole school rather than only one age group of pupils being represented as can happen at the moment.  This may also remove some of the intimidation felt by many, which discourages them from standing for election to the Board.  Retiring members should automatically be put forward for re-election unless they have otherwise stated.

More Parent Members - Four parent members cannot fully represent the needs and views of the whole school.  An increase in the number of parent members would allow for representation from each level of the school.

More Community Members - Two community are not enough to represent the views of the community and give the benefit of their experience in business and management.

Being Seen to be Friendly - Make the School Boards appear more friendly by indicating to non members that they are welcome any to Board meeting unless otherwise stated. Have meet the Board evenings and display a poster of who's who on the Board. This way Board Members are more recognisable and parents may feel more at liberty to approach them with their views.

We therefore, as already stated, cannot support the Scottish Schools (Parental Involvement) Bill, but would support, as suggested by the SSBA, a tweaking of the School Boards (Scotland) Act 1988.
"

"306”, “- We welcome moves to encourage more parental involvement
- We believe this bill to be unnecessary and fear that it may lead to an erosion of the rights of parents and other stakeholders to real involvement in education issues and local schools at the heart of our communities.
- There is insufficient need to revise the whole system for the sake of a small minority of schools whose parental body feel alienated from school and the formality of a school board
- Many schools are happy to continue to function using the less formal process of the PTA. Why not continue with this?
- The Board strongly feels that team work and good communication are the bedrock of parental involvement in education. Without the Head and staff members to advise the Board, it risks being an empty talking shop with no credibility.
- All bodies should be answerable to the people they represent.
- It is dangerous not to have elections and lays the school and parent forum open to the possibility that it will come under the influence of a single interest group/ clique. Terms of office should also be finite.
- The electoral system puts people off being involved. This could be modified to make the system less formal & intimidating.
- It is appropriate that we require representative bodies to communicate with the people they represent, so minutes, agenda etc must be made kept & made available.
- Attendance of non-members should not be decided upon by the forum. All meetings should be open unless there is an overriding need for confidentiality.
- The proposals are not specific enough. They do not give a clear idea of the rights and responsibilities of the proposed parent representative body or the degree to which its work will be supported by the education authority.
- The existing legislation works well & provides a good framework for parental involvement in schools. It is imperative that statutory rights are maintained.

We would therefore suggest that existing legislation should simply be amended and strengthened. We would also suggest the consideration of the following:-
- Increased flexibility re the number of parent board members required would ensure fewer difficulties at election times
- A less rigid and formal election system to encourage greater parental involvement
- A requirement on authorities to provide greater support to School Boards for setting up, better communication with parents, maintenance, and administrative support.

Whilst we welcome the debate on how to increase parental involvement in schools, we have grave reservations about the proposed legislation. We urge you to reconsider and take the best of what we already have, tried, tested and trusted by the majority of the parent population and simply make it better.
"

"307”, “We would like to see the 1988 Act being kept and improved upon.  We are fortunate (here that) all our schools have Boards, with the present system working well.  Our main changes would be the election process and allow for more parents to serve on Boards.  Our Education Authority has built up a good working relationship with the Boards, frequently holding meetings of School Board Chairs.

If 1988 Act is repealed the following should be considered:

The Draft bill at present lacks any structure, the new act should have a model framework decided at National level with such Groups as SSBA, School Board Officers Network etc being consulted on what this framework should include.
It was suggested the Forum could have a two tier type system, where a Committee type setup for Parents interested being involved at this level to creating Sub Groups [which could include all parents or some where appropriate e.g. Discussions on topical items, School Closures etc. Our Experience is that most Parents will only get involved if it directly involves their child, typical examples are Parent nights, and again School Closures.  New Forum to hold an Annual or Bi-annual General Meeting inviting all Parents, the election process could be part of this meeting.

Lots of concern that without structure,' new setup'[Parent Forum] could turn into nothing but talking shops, also nothing to stop more than one group being active in a particular school. Parents could lose the little power they had under the new act.  Alienate Local Authorities especially to those who already have a good working relationship with their present Boards.

Ways/incentives to attract Parents to serve on 'new setup', feel it will be the same 'old soldiers' that will volunteer their services.
Parent Forums, and School Boards could be off putting as a title of the new setup. Some suggestions were School Focus Group, Parent Focus Group, School Advisory Forum or Group. It was also suggested the name should also be decided nationally as this would cause less confusion particularly for Local Authorities who will have responsibility.

Keep the right for Headteachers to continue as Advisors, and Staff Members to be part of the 'new Setup', this will maintain that all important link between Education Authority and Parents.

Parents continue to be involved in Head and Deputy Head appointments, however more training required and more funds to implement this.

Clerk to the Board - this office should also be kept and obviously be changed where required to suit the new setup.

More funding available from the Scottish Executive for 'new setup' could include funds to have a crèche facility, one way of maybe attracting more parents.  More funding would also encourage better communication at all levels i.e. Scottish Executive - Local Authority - Parent Forum - Parent.  Email address for new Forum, could encourage parents to become involved or have their voices hear in an indirect way.

Include Pre 5 Establishments in the new Set up, after all these children and their parents are part of the ""big picture"".

PTA'S remain a separate setup, however the new Forum should continue to encourage and support PTA'S.

Our Board concerned Scottish Executive spending all this money in trying to change something that is working perfectly well, when all that is needed is some parts of the act to be modified."

"308”, “We fully support:
greater parental involvement and representation not just in schools, but in the whole of the education process
making it more straightforward for parents to express their views and to receive adequate responses
education authorities being required to support greater parental involvement and representation in the whole of the education process
education authorities being required to provide financial support or support in kind to enable greater parental involvement and representation.

We do have grave concerns about implementation of the proposals contained within the bill:
there will be a significant loss of the statutory rights which the parent body currently holds
we fear there will be a significant reduction in the involvement of parents in the education process as a whole as there is no requirement on education authorities to canvass the view of parents on wider education issues - e.g. implementation procedures for the Additional Support for Learning Act
we feel that the broad guidelines for the establishment of parents' forums and their associated constitutions is likely to lead to confusion, chaos and disillusionment.  If parents are not motivated to become involved where there is an existing structure in place, we feel they are unlikely to be motivated to involvement where they have to start from scratch and actually agree on the form and structure from the beginning
there is very real potential for ineffectiveness due to lack of regulation for conduct, agenda and minutes for parent forum meetings - valuable training for school board members is currently available; it will be virtually impossible to provide training and advice for parent forum members given the diversity of groups which are likely to exist
there is a very real risk of the formation of very vocal, minority 'single- interest' groups which could not only cause division within the parent body, the school community and the wider community, but lead to the 'silencing' of the majority
we believe that there is a very real risk of 'short termism characterising the new parent forums, both in terms of issues considered and in the very format of individual forums. There appears to be no safeguards to ensure that forums consider a range of concerns or that the constitution, once established, cannot be re-written at a whim
we believe that there could be a significant loss of the strategic overview of the education process as a whole which parents can currently have through the function of school boards
we fear the isolation of the parent body from the school and wider community due to the lack of required representation from staff and community
we believe that the very valuable partnership which exists through current arrangements which entitle council officers and elected representatives to attend and address Board meetings and pupil representatives to become co-opted Board members could be lost under the new proposals
there are likely to be significant difficulties for Head teachers and education authorities as they deal with the plethora of issues which are addressed to them without substantially increased resources.

Considering the proposals as stated in the draft bill, we see little that could not simply be achieved by updating the School Boards (Scotland) Act 1988 and by seeking to develop and encourage the current roles undertaken by School Boards and Parent Associations. Undoubtedly for this to work effectively in each education authority area would require commitment, time and resourcing. Would it be cynical to suggest that this may be why this is not an attractive option?

We have seen no substantive evidence to suggest that there has been a significant and representative call to repeal the School Boards (Scotland) Act 1988 nor have we seen evidence to suggest that the proposals within the draft bill will be any more effective in promoting parental involvement than the existing system. We would suggest that the proposed system of parent forums be piloted in areas of low parental involvement so that real evidence on the effectiveness, or otherwise, of the system in increasing parental involvement and representation can be gathered.

In canvassing our own parent body in its entirety, we have received unanimous support for maintaining the current system."

"309”, “(Our) Primary School has an attaching nursery and in total 600 children attend either the primary or the nursery school.

In formulating this response the School Board has taken a number of steps to find out the views of parents about the proposals. These include:
asking parents to complete a questionnaire at a recent parent's evening
holding a meeting with parents, to which all parents were invited
polling parents about their views on key parts of the proposals
other informal discussion with parents
past experience of what parents have asked the Board to become involved in.

This paper therefore attempts to reflect the general views of the parents of children at the school.

Key views of parents:
1 .The objectives set out by (the Minister) in the foreword to the consultation will not be achieved by the proposals.

2. The proposals do nothing to generate interest from parents who currently show little or no interest in supporting their children's education through Boards, PTAs and other similar organisations.

3. The proposals are too vague and confer no legal rights on parents. This means local authorities and schools that wish to discourage parental involvement will find it easy to thwart attempts of parent forums to bring about change.

Each of these points will now be expanded upon.

1. The objectives set out by (the Minister) in the foreword to the consultation will not be achieved by the proposals.

Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the foreword to the consultation set out advantages of parent's being involved in their children's education and the objective of having more inclusive and effective parental involvement. Parent's who are involved in groups such as School Board and PTA all felt that membership of such groups tended to be/ from the same group of people and, it was almost impossible to expand that group except from parents of pupils entering primary 1. People simply do not have the time, inclination or desire to become more involved.

It is felt unanimously by parents that the proposals will fail to achieve the stated objective and desired outcome.

2. The proposals do nothing to generate interest from parents who currently show little or no interest in supporting their children's education through Boards, PTAs and other similar organisations.

Currently parents who have an interest in being involved in groups such as a School Board or PTA actively seek to be involved in at least one of these groups. The number of members of each School Board is limited by legislation and those who are not involved in one, but wish to be, tend to seek other ways to be involved such as the PTA.

It was felt that the proposals for parent forums do nothing to encourage any more parents to be involved in these groups. It was felt to be important that this point be included if the stated objectives are to be achieved. Additionally, it was felt by some that the changes might in fact discourage some people who are already involved from continuing their involvement, and cause them to withdraw from the already small pool of interested parents. This is clearly contrary to the objectives.

3. The proposals are felt to be too vague and confer no legal rights on parents. This means local authorities and schools that wish to discourage parental involvement will find it easy to thwart attempts of parent forums to bring about change.

The proposed complaints process will do nothing to address underlying desires to exclude parents.

Parents felt that the existing statutory rights that they could take advantage of via school boards were being taken away from them. The new proposals use vague terms such as 'seek to'. Parents 'seeking to' can be easily blocked by education authorities and schools who wish to discourage them, and a complaints process run by education authorities does nothing to address this, or inspire confidence that parent's views will be properly considered.


It is felt that only changes to the existing legislation needed are in relation to becoming a Board member. Instead of a fixed number of members for a School Board set a range in which the number of members has to fall. In all cases the majority of the membership would still be parents. This approach would allow the Board to function subject only to a minimum number, and still allow for more to be involved. Only in rare circumstances where particularly large numbers of parents wish to be involved would there be a need for a limit on membership.

Boards could set their own criteria for someone becoming a member when there are fewer than the maximum allowed, or to determine who shall form the Board when there are more people wishing to be involved than vacancies. This would avoid the legal requirement for elections and for candidates to write about themselves.

If amending the existing legislation to achieve the above is unacceptable to the Scottish Executive then the suggested alternative is as set out below.

Minimum legal rights for parents to be enshrined in the Act. A Parent Forum could exercise these rights if they wish, but need not. The critical point here being the right to exercise these powers would be with the parent forum. The school or education authority would have no power to veto them. These rights would need to include:
the right to require a Headteacher to attend meetings and provide answers and information to the forum
the right of members of the forum, in conjunction with the Local Authority Education Department, to select the candidates for the short leet for all Headteacher and depute Headteacher positions
the right of members of the forum to form at least half of the membership of interview panels for all Headteacher and deputy Headteacher positions
the right to devise and ask their own questions of the candidates at interview
each person on the interview panel to have an equal vote when choosing the successful candidate
the right to approve the school budget spend.

Additional comments.

The consultation states that the proposals were informed by discussion with various groups including school board chairs. 1 attended a meeting with SEED in March 2004 to comment on proposals then being considered. SEED are now giving the impression that the proposals now being consulted on have been discussed with school board chairs, and the clear implication is that the chairs support the proposals.

I do not feel that the proposals reflect the views presented at the meeting I was at.  I have also spoken with others School Board chairs who were at the same meeting and who share this view.  It is concerning that the impression being given by SEED is that the proposals have backing of School Board chairs when the chairs themselves do not recognise the proposals as those they were consulted upon. The impression being given by SEED is clearly misleading.

Normally when proposals are published the evidence to support the changes is also published.  It is notable that the evidence in support of these proposals is not.

It is understood that the research on parent's views was based on responses of 200 parents chosen specially, and not as a cross section of parents.  If that is the case their views cannot be and must not be, considered representative of parents of around 1 million children!  If this research were published it would be easier to see the extent to which this research was valid and could be relied upon.

We believe all evidence supporting the proposed changes should have been published so as the basis for the proposals can be seen and understood when responding to the consultation.

In fact we wonder how many School Board meetings (the Minister) has attended?

Members of (our) Board have expressed concern about the presentation of the proposals.  The presentation of them suggests that many of the measures proposed do not exist and that the Bill, if enacted, would implement them.  The consultation also suggests that School Boards, as currently exist, are ineffective because of these deficiencies.  In fact many of the measures proposed already exist, and are not in fact new.  Improvements to the way in which School Boards operate are welcome but they should be properly debated.  Also, the way the questions in the consultation are phrased tends to be of a closed nature so discouraging proper comment.

This is another example of the misleading way the proposals are presented."

"310”, “"

"311”, “I attach the response which our School Board intends to submit to the Executive on the consultation.

We have also emailed the Scottish Executive complaining about the way the consultation has been carried out.

Hopefully our voices will be heard, but it's looking unlikely!
We also intend to write to all (our) MSP'S.
Good luck on your campaigning!"

"312”, “These are the results from the questionnaire that our School Board put out to parents at our school.
We put together our own questions as we felt  that parents wouldn't answer the Scottish Executive questions.

We put out 199 questionnaires and got 24 responses.

1. How well do you feel the Board currently works?
A majority of parents who responded felt that it works well.

2. In the recent leaflet sent out to all parents one of the options is that the PTA and School Board are amalgamated. What do you think of this option?
Opinion was divided.

3. ""School Boards would be replaced by new bodies which would be shaped and appointed by the parents' body in each school to represent parents' views"". In the draft bill these are called ""Parent Forums"". What are your views on this?
Diverse views were expressed. More than half thought that the change would improve parental involvement.

4. What issues do you think the new Parents' Forum should have the right to consider? Other than the present remit?
A wide range of additional issues was suggested, mostly pupil-centred, but no one issue had widespread support.

5. What changes in the School Board would be required to encourage you to become involved in it?
Opinions varied, lack of time being often given as a reason for not being involved.   Some parents felt that the Board was not open enough, others that the term of office was too long.

6. It is usually a ""staggered"" four year term - how long do you think a member should serve on the new Parents' Forum?
Opinions varied but a majority preferred a term shorter than 4 years

7. Do you think the Forum should have a formal committee? E.g. chairperson to chair the meetings, clerk to take minutes.
Nearly all parents agreed

8. The leaflet states ""Each school is unique. We believe that the parents in each school should decide on the format they want for the Parent Forums"". Should Parents' Forums have some uniformity within a council area or do your think it reasonable that every school has its own?
Opinion was divided but more than half favoured some uniformity.

9. Who do you think should have membership of the Forum? Should it be confined to parents or should it also include members of staff members co-opted from the community?
Almost none felt that it should be confined to parents.  Many preferred the inclusion of community members as well as staff

10 Any other comments/suggestions?
Not many parents responded but some pointed out that the new body would need to work hard at openness and at communicating with parents in general Various ways to achieve that were suggested.



Q1   24 responses
Good  16   67%
Bad 
Don't know  8   33%


Q2   24 responses
Good idea  13   54%
Bad idea  9   38%
Don't know  2   8%



Q3   24 responses
Good for more parental involvement  14   58%
Won't change anything  2   8%
No view  5   21%
Should have educational involvement  2   8%
Would be less formal  1   4%


Q4   11 responses
Don't know or no view    11   46%


Q5   8 responses
No view   5   21%
None   3   13%


Q6   22 responses
4 years   5    21%
2 years   10   42%
1 year   5   21%
Don't know    1    4%
No tenure   1    4%


Q7    24 responses
Yes   23   96%
No   0
No view   1   4%


Q8    24 responses
Uniformity   15   63%
Own format   9   38%


Q9   24 responses
Just parents   1   4%
Parents + staff   8   33%
Parents + staff + community members   15   63%


Q10   11 responses
Stick to current format
No comment   11   46%"

"313”, “I am responding to your request of April 6th as a parent who has six years experience as a member of the School Board of a small, primary school - one that is split into English and Gaelic mediums. 1 have been its chairman for the past three years.

I regard (the Minister's) proposals as disastrous and agree with all your criticisms of them. I would like to emphasise however, that they are a recipe for anarchy or domination by cliques and/or loud mouths.

School Boards must continue but I would like to see modifications and extensions to the existing legislation which accommodate the very real differences between small rural schools and larger urban ones.

In communities where informed, experienced parents are not in short supply, elections to School Boards should ensure that only those who realise the consequent responsibilities arising from election, come forward. Elections also encourage such communities to seek out such parents and ask them to stand. Unfortunately, in the small rural context, this situation is not easy to achieve
 nor is it easy to co-opt such people.  With English/Gaelic divisions the situation is made even more difficult.

If we could ensure that all School Boards would mostly be made up of informed people committed to improving educational standards and the well being of children, 1 would advocate strengthening their powers. This to allow parents more control over the education of our children and to balance, or if necessary counteract, the influence of councillors, councils, government and, unfortunately in some cases, teachers.

Having spent many years teaching at under- & postgraduate levels in several Universities and therefore having witnessed the devastation of our educational system caused by the interference of several governments, I suggest (the Minister) and his colleagues focus on the real causes of the present crisis in social perceptions and interactions.  As one example, why, given the huge influence of television on children and adults, is the 'dumbing down' principle rife within the public service media?  On the very rare occasions when they appear, why are science, engineering and technology treated with such disdain.  In short why are populism and the principle of making money no matter what the consequences, paramount."

"314”, “"

"315”, “"

"316”, “"

"317”, “"

"318”, “"

"319”, “"

"320”, “"

"321”, “"

"322”, “Impossible to consult with parents because of the timescale which included the Easter holidays."

"323”, “"

"324”, “"

"325”, “"

"326”, “"

"327”, “"

"328”, “"

"329”, “"

"330”, “These questions would answered more fully at the ""Making the Difference"" seminar on proposals held on 14 May at (our) school.  I hope the information and answers given that day have been noted."

"331”, “Other points that we find of great significance:

1.  A regulated period of time which members serve before required to stand down and seek re-election should be kept.  The re-election should be staggered to retain the build up of knowledge from the Board members that stay.

2.  There should be a legal obligation for Board members to declare conflict of interest.

3.  It is essential for the good running of the School Board meetings to have an agenda set and publication of meetings.

4.  A paid or unpaid Clerk is essential for the good running of the School Board.

5.  The duty of the Boards is to raise the standard of education in the school.

6. The current Act legislates for parental participation and provides the Board a partnership in good management of the school.  It is essential that the management of the school should be checked from a parental or community perspective.

We hope that the answered questions and comments will help the Scottish government to decide to keep the current Act and only make very small changes where needed.  There is no need for a radical change in the set up of the relationship between parents and teachers."

"332”, “"

"333”, “Views of School Board on the document -
The current system of parental representation, School Boards, should be replaced by a more flexible system of parent forums but with reservations.  The proposals in this consultation of the draft bill, give the impression that the new parent body will have less formal power than at present.  The new parent forums may have a more flexible framework in which to operate but that very flexibility may in the early days lead to a loss of the authority and good relationships that some school boards had built up over the years.  This may take some time to rebuild, which may set back the promotion of parental involvement in schools.

Views on Parent Forums (sections 4-8)
The flexible framework proposed in the draft bill raises these concerns:

The loss of ability for parents to call for a parents meeting to question the parent forum unless it is included in the forum's constitution may lead to a loss of the forum's accountability to the whole parent body.

Views on scheme for establishment of a parent forum (section 5)

The duty of the education authority to assist in the setting up of parent forums and to prepare schemes for example and guidance is too vague in the initial change over from School Boards to parent forums

An education wide or national scheme could be adopted for a specific time span, maybe 2 or 3 years, to give the forums a chance to become established and functional.  Then permit a broader and more flexible interpretation of the forum, as highlighted in the draft consultation document.

Some educa