Home >> Publications >> Annual and Special Reports >> School Admission and Exclusion Appeal Panels >> Part 4: Training

Part 4: Training

Overview

Extracts from our visit reports:

" Training has largely consisted of sitting in a couple of times before acting as a panel member. The combined training of the three members could best be summed up as minimal."

" They were all very enthusiastic about the training which they received. Whenever there was any change in the regulations, for example, they were invited to attend a half-day session, which included briefing from the Legal Adviser. There was no separate training for Chairmen."

" None of them, including the Chairman, had had any training of any kind. The clerk said that the LEA was in the process of recruiting additional panel members and if sufficient numbers were forthcoming, training would be considered."

" Both the Chairman and the members said that they had been trained using the new training material which they thought was excellent. The training was delivered by the people from ISCG Information for School and College Governors."

" Neither of the wing members have had any training specifically for this role and the clerk was unsure how she could organise some for them. It became clear what a problem an untrained wing member can be. One of them insisted on getting his point or question in, no matter what stage of the procedure the case had reached."

4.1 It is our long-standing view that training for all tribunal Chairs and members is an absolute prerequisite before any person sits to hear an appeal. Tribunals are judicial bodies and proper training is essential to enable them to carry out their functions effectively. Ideally, every tribunal system should have a robust and comprehensive training policy in place, both knowledge and skills based, which includes a clear commitment to the provision of induction training for new members, regular refresher training for existing members and specific training for Chairs. This applies equally to school admission and exclusion appeal panels.

4.2 Our recently published Standards Framework sets out our specific requirements in respect of training, including:

induction training before tribunal members begin sitting;
regular refresher training for all members;
lead members to be trained in chairing skills;
regular provision of guidance to members on matters of law and practice;
training for all members in diversity and equal treatment issues.

4.3 We have on many occasions in the past urged the Department for Education and Skills to ensure that better arrangements are put in place for training panel members of both admission and exclusion appeal panels. We would have liked, ideally, to see a specific statutory requirement in the 1998 Act for local education authorities to provide the necessary resources for training admission and exclusion appeal panels. However, the Department did not accept this suggestion.

4.4 In respect of training for panel members, the revised Code of Practice on School Admission Appeals states "The Secretary of State considers that it is very important for appeal panel members and chairpersons to receive training, both before being appointed to a panel and afterwards, to continue to update their skills and knowledge during membership." The Code also includes the message that it would not be appropriate for untrained members to sit on a panel. We will monitor what impact this has in our future visits to hearings. Similarly, the revised guidance for exclusion appeal panels simply states "LEAs should ensure that all panel members and clerks receive suitable training and that the chair is trained in the specific chairing skills the panel requires".

Developments in Training

4.5 In September 2000, the Department issued new training material for members of admission appeal panels. This material was developed by ISCG Information for School and College Governors. When we were consulted on the draft of the training material we said we were pleased that this work was finally being taken forward by the Department. We also considered that the material was of a high standard and urged that it be promulgated widely to all LEAs and admission authorities. We attended some of the early training sessions involving the use of the new material. These sessions were well received by the trainees, with the one proviso that some of the more experienced panel members found parts of the training material quite basic. Feedback from trainees suggested that future training sessions needed to be better tailored to the suit the specific needs of the audience.

4.6 In September 2001, the Department issued separate training material for members of exclusion appeal panels. This material had been adapted from the admissions training pack, and was again developed by ISCG. We were pleased at this further development, and were impressed by the high quality of the material. We urged again that the material should be promulgated widely to all LEAs.

4.7 Since then we have asked the Department for feedback on the take-up of the new training materials, because evidence from our visits suggests that some panels and their clerks are still unaware of the existence of this material. Indeed, during one of our most recent visits a very experienced and enthusiastic clerk from a large LEA, who had herself been very proactive in providing training for her panel members, had neither heard of nor seen any of the new training material issued by the Department. This suggests that the material may not be reaching its intended target audience.

4.8 The Sheffield Hallam study found a high level of satisfaction with the quality of training from those panel members whose views were canvassed. However, the study also found that more and differentiated training for Chairs and presenting officers was needed. The particular sample of members canvassed, in general, appeared to have a greater level of awareness of the new training material than we have found at our visits.

4.9 In a meeting with representatives from ISCG, we learned that they have run a number of training sessions, funded by the Department, although largely covering admissions. They estimated that their training sessions have targeted around 30% of all LEAs across England and Wales, the feedback from which has been overwhelmingly positive. The position in respect of training for exclusion panels is not so encouraging, since it would appear that LEAs have to a large extent been left to arrange their own training sessions using the new material.

The current position on the provision of training

4.10 It is clear from our most recent visits that the new training material has had a positive impact on the effectiveness of admission and exclusion appeal panels, in those LEAs and admission authorities where it has been taken up. However, evidence from our visits shows that the overall position in respect of the provision of training to panel members remains patchy, with pockets of good practice in some LEAs and admission authorities, but very little improvement in others. Whilst the Department has made efforts to promulgate the new training material widely, there is evidence that this has been to little practical effect in some LEAs and admission authorities. It remains the position that the limited training offered to many panel members still amounts to no more than arranging for members to observe one or two hearings before they are asked to sit on an appeal panel. This is entirely unsatisfactory. We have noted the new references to training in the respective guidance to admission and exclusion panels, which are an improvement but do not go as far as we would wish. In our view, it should be mandatory for all new panel members to receive full induction training before being allowed to hear appeals.

Extract from our visit reports:

" The aim of the seminar, which appears to take place annually, is to bring together new and existing panel members to share experiences and discuss matters of interest. We both felt distinctly uncomfortable about the underlying messages in two of the presentations, and felt sure that, despite a robust defence of their role, some panel members might well think they were being got at. We both agreed that the sort of propaganda being propounded was wholly inappropriate in a training event of this kind."

4.11 We have attended training seminars run by some LEAs for new and long serving panel members, and have been impressed by the commitment of the clerks who make the effort to run such events on an annual basis. However, we have experience of unsuitable content at seminars, including material from a senior LEA official whose address to panel members comprised a critique of the impact on schools of admission panels' decisions. We also observed a local headteacher give a presentation with the same underlying message, that panels did not fully appreciate the results of their decisions. In our view, such presentations, which attempt to influence panel members not to allow appeals, are entirely inappropriate for training seminars of this kind.

Training for panel Chairs

Extracts from our visit reports:

" Training is provided for new members and is now compulsory. It is given by a trainer who is experienced and all three agreed that the quality was good. No specific training is given for chairs."

" The members are part of a busy team who are given one day's induction and an annual training day. This is probably sufficient for admission appeals, but the chairman had evidently been given no special training in chairmanship and, although he was evidently willing and keen, he was not always in control."

4.12 Whilst the new training material gives helpful guidance on matters such as the respective roles of panel Chairs and members, in our view, the technical nature of this material does not fully address the more practical training needs in respect of the skills required by panel Chairs. The Department had previously indicated that it was in contact with the Tribunals Committee of the Judicial Studies Board, which provides advice and support on training to tribunals, with a view to setting up "Training the Trainer" courses in LEAs. We are not aware that any LEA or admission authority currently offers any form of training in chairing skills to panel Chairs. This is a matter which we would urge the Department to remedy at the earliest opportunity.

4.13 In making arrangements for training for panel Chairs, we would urge the Department to have regard to the JSB's "Competence Framework for Chairmen and Members of Tribunals", which has recently been published. The framework comprises six "headline" competences, the latter three of which are of particular importance in the "management" skills required by panel Chairs. The headline competences are:

law and procedure
equal treatment
communication
conduct of hearings
evidence
decision making

Resources for training

4.14 We consider that the general lack of provision for training for panel members stems from the failure of LEAs and admission authorities to provide adequate resources for training, for which there is no specific requirement in the 1998 Act. It is apparent that, in those LEAs where we have noted good practice in the provision of training, this has usually been due to the positive influence exerted by the clerk to the panel. Some of the clerks to whom we have spoken have admitted that they have faced an uphill struggle to obtain funding for training, which often has to be diverted from other budgets. This is a particular problem for foundation and voluntary-aided schools which are their own admission authorities.

4.15 We recognise the competing demands on education budgets, and that ultimately the main priority must be the provision of education. Nevertheless, LEAs and admission authorities have a statutory duty to operate these appeal panels, and it is in the best interests of children, their parents and schools that they should be run efficiently and effectively. Providing an adequate level of training for panel members is essential in order to achieve this. We consider that efforts should be made to identify the level of resources required for training panel members and to earmark the necessary resources from the relevant budgets.

4.16 Echoing the theme developed in chapter 2 about a regionally based appeals service and the sharing of best practice among LEAs, we recommend that the training function should also be organised on a regional basis, harnessing the existing good practice that already exists in some LEAs. This would:

enable levels of experience in training provision to be built up quickly in areas where it is most needed;
avoid unnecessary duplication of effort between LEAs; and
enable training costs to be shared among LEAs and admission authorities.

Voluntary and Foundation-Aided Schools

4.17 We have particular concerns about the training provided for admission appeal panel members serving foundation and voluntary-aided schools, particularly where these admission authorities run their own appeal panels rather than asking the LEA to do this for them. These authorities have the poorest record overall in terms of the training they provide to their members. There appear to be two main reasons for this. The individuals responsible for organising the panels can often be quite isolated from access to advice and information, with the result that they may not be aware either of what training is available and/or how to access it. The problem of finding the necessary resources for training is even more acute, since it will often be thought to be too resource-intensive to organise training for one or two panel members.

4.18 We take the view that this problem could be overcome if, as recommended at paragraph 2.50, responsibility for running the admission appeal panels for all foundation and voluntary-aided schools, including the responsibility for training, were to be transferred to LEAs. This arrangement appears to work well for those admission authorities on whose behalf the LEAs already organise and manage their appeal panels.

contents | next >

^ top