Section 1: The School Review and Development (SRD) Program ...srd.dbbcso.org/uploads/1/3/0/4/13041637/srd... · Web viewSection 1: The School Review and Development (SRD) Program

School Review and Development (SRD) Guidelines

2013 – 2017

All documentation related to School Review and Development is available on the SRD website at http://srd.dbbcso.org; password = srd

School Review and Development SRD Guidelines (revisions 1/7/2013; 14/11/2013; 13/1/2014; 16/4/14; 5/02/2015)

Sc

ho

ol

I

mp

ro

ve

me

nt

/

S

ch

oo

l

Re

vi

ew

a

nd

D

ev

el

op

me

nt

http://srd.dbbcso.org/

Contents

Section 1: The School Review and Development (SRD) Program (principles and purpose)......................................1

1.1. The Purpose of School Review and Development................................................................................11.2. Principles Underpinning the Program..................................................................................................11.3. Scope of Accountabilities.....................................................................................................................11.3.1. NSW Government Accountabilities......................................................................................................11.3.2. Australian Government Accountabilities.............................................................................................21.3.3. Catholic Schools Office Accountabilities...............................................................................................21.3.4. Annual School Report..........................................................................................................................21.4. BOSTES and Diocesan Focus Areas.......................................................................................................31.5. Compliance Certification......................................................................................................................3

Section 2: The Structure of the School Review and Development Program.............................................................4

2.1 Introduction.........................................................................................................................................42.1.1 Regulatory Requirements (Tier 1)........................................................................................................42.1.2 Quality Assurance (Tier 2)....................................................................................................................52.2 Review Reports (Externally validated schools).....................................................................................52.2.1 School Self-Evaluation Report..............................................................................................................52.2.2 School Review and Development Report.............................................................................................62.3 Post review – Strategic Planning..........................................................................................................6

Section 3: Monitoring non-curriculum requirements...............................................................................................7

3.1 Staff......................................................................................................................................................73.2 Premises, Buildings, Facilities...............................................................................................................73.3 Work Health and Safety.......................................................................................................................73.4 Child Protection – Legislative Requirements........................................................................................73.5 Management and Operation of the School..........................................................................................93.6 Managing Risk....................................................................................................................................103.7 Handling Complaints..........................................................................................................................103.8 Financial Accountability.....................................................................................................................10

Section 4: Returns to BOSTES.................................................................................................................................11

Section 5: Provisional and Initial registration/accreditation...................................................................................12

5.1 Process for Placing a School on Provisional Registration/Accreditation.............................................125.2 Process for New Schools....................................................................................................................12

Section 6: Roles and Responsibilities.....................................................................................................................13

6.1 Roles in the Process of School Review and Development..................................................................136.2 Role of the School Principal...............................................................................................................136.3 CSO Roles in School Review and Development..................................................................................136.4 Role of the Assistant Director School Improvement..........................................................................136.5 Role of the Schools Consultant..........................................................................................................146.6 Role of the Leader, School Review and Development........................................................................146.7 Role of the External Validation Chair.................................................................................................146.8 Role and selection of the School Review Panel..................................................................................146.9 Role of the NSW Board of Studies, Teaching & Educational Standards (BOSTES)..............................156.10 Role of the BOSTES Inspectors...........................................................................................................15

Section 7: Ethical Framework................................................................................................................................16

Section 8: Appendices...........................................................................................................................................17

8.1 SRD component map.........................................................................................................................188.2 SRD component overview..................................................................................................................198.3 SRD key documents...........................................................................................................................198.4 Focus Areas........................................................................................................................................208.5 School Improvement Plans: Statutory requirements.........................................................................21

School Review and Development SRD Guidelines (revisions 1/7/2013; 14/11/2013; 13/1/2014; 16/4/14; 5/02/2015)

Section 1: The School Review and Development (SRD) Program (principles and purpose)

1.1. The Purpose of School Review and Development

The fundamental purpose of the School Review and Development program is to provide support to diocesan systemic schools to ensure compliance with regulatory requirements and to provide the framework for self-evaluation and school development. Processes within the program include external validation and critique of the school’s improvement journey. The framework for the program is articulated into three (3) domains:

Mission Learning and Teaching Pastoral Care

The program is informed by the diocesan Leading Learning (https://leadinglearning.dbb.org.au) initiative which aligns leadership and professional learning with school development.

1.2. Principles Underpinning the Program

The School Review and Development program will:

provide opportunities for schools to clarify their core Mission, Vision and Catholic Worldview ensure alignment with the school improvement priority of the diocese, Leading Learning strive for excellence in learning and teaching foster a climate of school self-evaluation contribute to continuous school improvement identify strengths and areas for improvement which inform short and long-term goals enable a process for review that is developed collaboratively with teachers and Principals facilitate effective personal and whole school reflection provide opportunities for schools and their communities to celebrate their achievements support and enhance the effectiveness of leaders in schools fulfil accountability requirements to regulatory bodies and stakeholders.

1.3. Scope of Accountabilities

The scope of the accountabilities encompasses the NSW Board of Studies Teaching and Educational Standards (the ‘BOSTES’) regulatory requirements under the NSW Education Act 1990 (the ‘Act’), Commonwealth government funding requirements and additional diocesan requirements. The following section details the requirements of each of these sectors.

1.3.1. NSW Government Accountabilities

The Act provides for the registration and accreditation of individual non-government schools within a system of non-government schools formed under the Act such as the Broken Bay Diocesan Schools System (DSS). The BOSTES, as the regulatory body, needs to ensure that a non-government school meets the requirements of the Act and is responsible for making recommendations to the Minister concerning the registration or decisions concerning the accreditation of non-government schools. Therefore, the BOSTES is involved in setting both the regulatory and accountability requirements of the Act for non-government schools and for systems of non-government schools, and the oversight of compliance with these requirements. These requirements are outlined in the BOSTES Registration Systems and Member Non-government Schools (NSW) Manual (the ‘Manual’) and relate to:

The Proprietor and Principal of the School (Section 5.1 Manual) Staff (Section 5.2 Manual) Curriculum (Section 5.3 Manual) Premises and Buildings (Section 5.4 Manual) Facilities (Section 5.5 Manual)

School Review and Development Guidelines Page 1

Mission is the

philosophical core of each of the

three domains of the program.

http://www.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/manuals/#regaccredsystemsmanuals

https://leadinglearning.dbb.org.au/

Safe and Supportive Environment (Section 5.6 Manual) Discipline (Section 5.7 Manual) Attendance (Section 5.8 Manual) Management and Operation of the School (Section 5.9 Manual) Educational and Financial Reporting (Section 5.10 Manual)

The maximum period for registration/accreditation is generally five years. Areas of compliance are continually reviewed at the system level in response to new BOSTES requirements and other legislative requirements. The current BOSTES registration/accreditation cycle is 2013-2017.

1.3.2. Australian Government Accountabilities

For the current funding cycle schools must comply with the following requirements annually:

National student assessments Participation in national reports on the outcomes of schools Publication of information by schools (Annual School Reports) Provision of student reports to parents Provision of individual school information to ACARA Financial viability From 2014:

o Implementation of the Australian Curriculum (from 2014) [The Australian Education Act 2013 (part 6 division 2, paragraph 77 (2) (b); The Australian Education Regulation 2013 (part 5, division 3, section 42)]

o Implementation of a framework for School improvement planning (from 2014) [The Australian Education Act 2013 (part 6 division 2, paragraph 77 (2) (d) parts (i) and (ii); The Australian Education Regulation 2013 (part 5, division 3, subdivision D, section 44)] [see Appendix for details]

In addition to the specific commitments listed above, schools also need to meet their reporting requirements regarding the collection of information requested by DEEWR (for example, school census information) as well as information being collected by ACARA for the annual National Report on Schooling.

DSS processes will provide the means for monitoring a school’s compliance with the educational accountability requirements listed above.

1.3.3. Catholic Schools Office Accountabilities

The Catholic Schools Office (CSO) requires schools to have effective processes in place to meet system accountabilities. Each school is required to have a strategic school improvement planning process in place that engages it in an ongoing cycle of evaluation, goal-setting, implementation, monitoring and adjustment.

These accountabilities include the 3-year School Improvement Plan (SIP) and the implementation of systemic policies and procedures. In addition to this a range of DSS guidelines and other documentation have been developed for schools to assist the implementation of these accountabilities and to embed the elements of these requirements into their practice.

1.3.4. Annual School Report

An Annual School Report (ASR) is required from each school. The report provides general information pertaining to the school’s educational performance over the reporting year, summary financial information and an overview of key school policies. The completed report is published on the school’s website and made available in at least one other form by 30 June of the subsequent reporting year. Additionally, the report’s availability must be advertised publicly, for example, via the school hoarding, community notice board, school website.

Schools use a web-based program to write their ASR by logging onto https://asr.dbb.org.au (password=password).

Reports are due to the CSO by the end of Term 1 of the subsequent reporting year. Principals are asked to submit their completed report using the submit feature on the web-based form. A comprehensive review


https://asr.dbb.org.au/

process is undertaken before the reports are given to the Schools Consultant for final sign-off, who liaises with the school principal if further editing is required.

CSO Financial Services and CSO Educational Services manage and provide the respective data for the report. This data is automatically populated into the report for schools. This data includes relevant demographic, attendance and assessment data. The CSO publishes the reports to the BOSTES website (RANGS) and to the CSO public website.

1.4. BOSTES and Diocesan Focus Areas

Whilst schools are required to be compliant across all areas all of the time, the BOSTES sets particular areas for further focus within the 5-year registration and accreditation cycle. These focus areas are determined in negotiation with the DSS and can be influenced by state, federal and diocesan priorities. The full scope of focus areas for the current registration cycle is provided in the appendix (section 7.5).

1.5. Compliance Certification

Certification by schools of NSW state regulatory requirements and commonwealth government funding requirements is achieved by completion of the Compliance Certificate. The completion of this certificate may be accompanied by a school visit with the School’s Consultant and the Leader (SRD), usually during term 4 of any academic year. Discussion relating to the evidence of compliance listed on the school’s Compliance Checklist (a word document filed on the school’s O-drive), as well as implications for schools if new requirements or revisions to existing requirements eventuate, is fundamental to these meetings.

Certification of Australian Government funding requirements is managed by the NSW Catholic Education Commission (CEC). Each year the CSO certifies to the CEC that schools within the diocese have met their accountabilities for the specific Australian Government funding requirements.


Section 2: The Structure of the School Review and Development Program

2.1 Introduction

The Broken Bay SRD program is constructed on a two-tiered model. Tier 1 describes the processes involved with regulatory requirements. Tier 2 describes the processes involved with quality assurance.

Tasks associated with the components of review include the completion of documentation by schools, panel members and CSO personnel. Schools complete the Compliance Checklist (Tier 1) and the School Self-Evaluation Report (Tier 2). Both documents are made available to respective reviewers and/or panel members at the time of school review (see SRD website, http://srd.dbbcso.org; password = srd; school review tiers tab).

The school principal in consultation with the school’s consultant and the Leader, School Review and Development manage the components of the program. The specific tasks within each component are executed through a collaborative planning approach; however, particular tasks within components can be predominately labelled as CSO tasks and school tasks. Table 1 (appendix) describes the key components of the program.

2.1.1 Regulatory Requirements (Tier 1)

The Tier 1 process is used to determine the status of the school’s compliance with regulatory requirements across all mandated curriculum and non-curriculum requirements. Due to the scope of the requirements a sampling approach is taken with documentation.

All schools maintain/complete a compliance checklist to record and track of local and contextual evidence. All schools attend a School Review Curriculum Focus Day annually to review curriculum requirements in

specific KLAs. Selected schools (approximated 15 per year) are reviewed by personnel with subject matter expertise

every 3 years in non-curriculum areas.

The information provided in the following table describes the monitoring practice with schools.

All schools: Curriculum review Selected schools: Non-curriculum review (approximately 15 per year)

Preparation for a curriculum focus day (CFD) All schools are reviewed in 2 or 3 KLAs annually Dates for the CFDs are scheduled and the communication of these

dates is provided to schools at least 6 months prior (CSO task). Schools complete a compliance checklist to record their evidence of

compliance, hyperlinking evidence to school documentation (school task).

The checklist and related documentation is located on the DSS O-drive – a dedicated drive which can be accessed by the Leader SRD.

Attendance at the CFD On the scheduled CFD, peer review of curriculum documentation

takes place; discussion results in the determination of the school’s status of compliance based on the documentation provided by participating schools. Table facilitators document their findings by completing relevant checklists.

Post CFD A report on the panel’s findings is provided to the school on the

analysis of the checklists.

The review of non-curriculum requirements for schools may be conducted at a time conducive to the respective reviewer and no less than within two weeks of a scheduled quality assurance panel review or school self-review (Tier 2) .This involves areas related to: Student attendance Work Health & Safety Premises, Buildings, Facilities Safe and Supportive Environment Risk Management Staffing and BOSTES teacher

accreditationThe results of these reviews are summarised in the complete review report.

In the case where concerns are raised about the school’s compliance, the school is asked to develop an action plan to address these concerns. A follow-up visit to the school is organised to assess the school’s progress on its plans and a further report is prepared for the Director of Schools (see further detail section 5.1). The review panel includes key DSS personnel who are responsible for specialised areas related to the requirements. Panel members complete relevant checklists related to curriculum and non-curriculum requirements.



2.1.2 Quality Assurance (Tier 2)

The second tier of the SRD program has a strong focus on quality assurance and improvement and is a key component of the strategic planning process.

It provides a formal opportunity for the school to evaluate its effectiveness at a particular point in the planning cycle both in terms of its own goals and within the broader framework of system and government expectations.

By identifying the school’s strengths and areas for development the review findings inform the annual and longer term planning processes, through the SIP and SSP, respectively, and help validate planning priorities.

External review schools (approximately 7 to 8 schools per year) Self-review schools (approximately 7 to 8 schools per year)

Preparation for School Review

The selection of schools takes place and the review panel is determined (CSO task).

Dates for school review are scheduled and the communication of these dates is provided to schools at least six (6) months prior to review. (CSO task).

Review schools complete the School Self-Evaluation Report (SSER) hyperlinking evidence to school documentation (school task).

The SSER and the most recent Annual School Report are provided to Tier 2 panel members in preparation for review days (CSO task).

Review day

On the scheduled external review days, the external review panel provides critical comment on the school’s learning journey based on the evidence provided through documentation, dialogue and classroom visits.

Post review

A report on the panel’s findings is provided to the school on the analysis of the evidence.

The school then engages in further discussion with key diocesan staff to develop the school’s next 3-year SIP.

All schools are encouraged to engage in school self-review on an ongoing basis. They are also encouraged to use the existing review school documentation for their self-evaluation.

A smaller group of schools, approximately 7 to 8 schools each year engage in structured opportunities for school self-review. These schools:

use the National School Improvement Tool (NSIT) in selected domains to evaluate their learning journey for the current SIP.

participate in a professional learning and sharing day Celebration of Learning during Term 4 to:Þ invite other self-review schools to

comment and provide feedback relating to their shared experiences along their learning journey

Þ develop their next 3-year SIP

2.2 Review Reports (Externally validated schools)

Note: This section applies to schools that are reviewed by an external validation panel:

The school’s Self-Evaluation Report completed in preparation for external review by the school, and the CSO’s School Review and Development Report completed on the outcome of the external review by the review panel, are important documents which provide a complete picture of the school’s journey and the evaluation of that journey. The purpose and content of these reports is described in the following section.

2.2.1 School Self-Evaluation Report

The school’s Self-Evaluation Report is prepared by external review schools in collaboration with key diocesan officers and is structured according to the three domains Mission, Learning and Teaching and Pastoral Care. Each domain is framed by a guiding principle and a set of indicators that underpin the principle.

The activities associated with the preparation of this report enable the school to reflect on the effectiveness of initiatives and developments along their journey in each domain. The audience for the Self-Evaluation Report is the school community, staff, school board (where applicable) and the school review panel. The panel refers to the school’s Self-Evaluation Report to further their understandings about the school’s learning journey and to pose questions related to that journey and future directions.


The school’s Self-Evaluation Report consists of two sections, the Principal’s Report and the Domain Reports. The Principal’s Report is a key section of the school’s Self-Evaluation Report and sets the scene for the Domain Reports which form the remainder of the complete document. The Domain Reports articulate school strengths, challenges and future directions. The school considers the following questions in the respective domain for both current achievements and future directions:

Current Achievements: Future Directions:

What has the school achieved since the last school review that has led to furthering school improvement?

What is the evidence for these achievements? What opportunities and challenges does this

present for the school?

What does the school wish to sustain/transform?

What are the school’s 3-year goals from this reflection?

Further information about the structure of the Self-Evaluation Report can be accessed from the School Review and Development website at http://srd.dbbcso.org; password = srd).

2.2.2 School Review and Development Report

The review report is prepared by the Leader, School Review and Development based on the outcome of the review. The review report describes the findings of the panel based on the evidence provided. The review report includes commendations and recommendations for the school’s consideration.

This report is comprised of separate Tier 1 and Tier 2 reports. The Tier 1 report provides information to schools on the status of compliance with regulatory and diocesan requirements. The Tier 1 report is provided to Tier 2 panel members on the day of review. The Tier 2 report articulates the panel’s validation of the school’s learning journey since their last review and provides recommendations for future planning.

The final report is presented to the school and a copy is kept in CSO files. The report consists of the following sections:

the Chair’s overview and overarching recommendations detailed overview of the school’s status of compliance strengths validated by the panel for each domain strategic directions validated by the panel for each domain other considerations that the panel recommends for each domain.

Signatories to the report include the Chair and the Assistant Director, School Improvement.

2.3 Post review – Strategic Planning

Following the external validation on the Tier 2 days, the school leadership team meets with key CSO personnel, to refine the school’s validated future directions into a small number of high priority 3-year strategic goals. A similar process is followed with self-review schools but takes place during Term 4 at the professional learning and sharing day Celebration of Learning. This process leads the school to develop a new 3-year SSP. The strategic goals are then further refined into annual school improvement goals, which are documented in the annual SIP. The processes associated with review provide opportunities to affirm the school’s strengths and successes and to identify areas for future development. These processes enable the school community to engage constructively in school life and to contribute collaboratively in the future development of the school.



Section 3: Monitoring non-curriculum requirements

3.1 Staff

The CSO Human Resource (HR) team manages the requirements relating to staff employed in diocesan systemic schools which include Child Protection screening for all staff (see section 3.5 below) and the BOSTES teacher accreditation requirements. With respect to the latter, support is provided to schools by the respective HR Education Officer to ensure the completion of particular documentation. This documentation tracks information about the BOSTES requirements as it relates to full time, part-time and casual teaching staff. This includes:

staff working towards accreditation at the level of Proficient staff maintaining accreditation at the level of Proficient the provision of supervisor/mentor support financial currency with the BOSTES accurate details on BOSTES accounts.

The CSO Broken Bay Induction Planner 3rd edition 2013 (CuriaNet Þ Catholic Schools Office Þ Human Resources Services Þ Professional Learning ) provides schools with information relating to BOSTES accreditation requirements and support provided by CSO.

3.2 Premises, Buildings, Facilities

The CSO Facilities team regularly monitors the repair and maintenance of schools within the system. The team supports schools in the design and construction phases of school building projects and by responding to emerging issues. The written evidence includes the school's occupation certificate, which is held by the CSO. All schools are visited over a 3-year cycle by CSO facilities staff to ensure schools meet their obligations with this requirement. The CSO Senior Facilities Officer completes the Facilities Checklist for those schools scheduled for a Tier 1 review. The CSO Procurement Officer ensures that schools have an up-to-date fire safety statement and that this information is communicated to the relevant authorities. The school facilities unit also prepares individual maintenance plans for schools, provides asbestos management plans and maintains data concerning the available facilities for each school.

3.3 Work Health and Safety

A Safety Management System compliant with A/NZ Standard 4801 (the ‘Standard’) has been adapted and implemented across schools to support compliance with the relevant legislation, WHS Codes of Practice, Standards and Guides, and to provide safe and supportive school environments.

Systematic implementation of the Safety Management System by schools is conducted according to an Annual WHS plan, which is completed by all schools.

A web-based electronic tool monitors each school's implementation of the Safety Management System. Schools are externally audited for compliance with the Standard on a cyclical basis – approximately every 5 years. Identified issues of non-compliance are routinely addressed and monitored.

The CSO Broken Bay WHS website provides schools with up-to-date information relating to current issues and concerns.

3.4 Child Protection – Legislative Requirements

The CSO Child Protection team provides school based Child Protection (CP) Professional Learning (PL) on an ongoing basis as well as conducting site checks linked to the School Review and Development (SRD) program.

Three approaches to CP PL are currently in place, on a pilot basis in 2015, representing a change from previous years’ PL approaches.

i) Child Protection Professional Learning 1 (applies to schools on Tier 2 external panel review; approx., 7 to 8 schools annually)

Traditionally schools scheduled for external review are targeted for CP PL in the year prior to their review. This arrangement will remain the same and staff will complete two CP PL sessions at their school delivered


https://whsonline.dbb.org.au/bb/Pages/home.aspx

https://curianet.dbb.org.au/Catholicschoolsoffice/HR/Professional%20Learning/Pages/ProfessionalLearning.aspx

https://curianet.dbb.org.au/Catholicschoolsoffice/HR/Professional%20Learning/Pages/ProfessionalLearning.aspx

by the CSO Child Protection Officer to ensure that they are informed of their child protection responsibilities under the Ombudsman Act 1974, Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 and the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012.

These sessions are:

Session 1: Promoting Child Safety – Addressing Complaints Against Staff : this relates to professional conduct of staff and how to identify and respond to ‘reportable conduct’ allegations against staff under the Ombudsman Act and the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012.

Session 2: Promoting Child Safety – Managing Risk of Harm Concerns: this relates to identifying when a child or young person may be at risk from abuse and neglect and how staff and schools manage mandatory reporting responsibilities and wellbeing concerns under the Children and Young Person Care and Protection Act.

ii) Child Protection Professional Learning 2 (applies to schools scheduled for Tier 2 self-review; approx., 7 to 8 schools annually):

Schools scheduled for self-review will be offered a 45 minute Upskilling Session at their school, delivered by the CSO Child Protection Officer who will present scenarios intended to revive and build on previous learning in relation to promoting child safety.

All staff present at the CP PL sessions mentioned above (i) and (ii), will sign an attendance sheet verifying their presence at the CP PL and Upskilling Sessions. This information is maintained centrally and may also be maintained by schools.

iii) Child Protection Professional Learning 3 (applies to schools not scheduled for a Tier 2 review; 30 schools annually):

Schools not participating in a Tier 2 review will be offered CP PL via interactive eLearning modules. Staff will be allocated two (out of a possible five) CP PL online tutorials. The objective of these tutorials is to ensure that staff are provided current information with regard to their obligations according to the Ombudsman Act 1974, Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998 and the Child Protection (Working with Children) Act 2012. Staff are required to pass a simple quiz at the end of each module which includes the capacity for the CSO to verify staff that have completed the tutorial and therefore concluded their obligations regarding eLearning for this year.

The five online learning modules are as follows:

Session 1: Introduction To Child Protection Session 2:Understanding Mandatory Reporting - Risk Of Significant Harm Session 3:Working With Children Check – The Check Session 4:Complaints Involving Employees And The NSW Ombudsman Act Session 5:Other Important Child Protection Issues

The CSO CP PL does not prevent schools from conducting any school based CP PL. A number of resources are available for schools on CuriaNet (CSO intranet) to facilitate further sessions for staff. Any staff member unable to attend a CP in-service at their school is listed on the attendance sheet for follow up sessions with the school Principal or to attend an in-service at another school.

Site checks

In addition to the CP PL provided, schools involved in either a Tier 2 self-review or an external panel review are reviewed by the CSO Child Protection Officer in a formal way. The CSO Child Protection Officer will:

check that the school’s Staff Handbook contains sections outlining procedures for: o handling allegations against staff of inappropriate behaviour towards childreno mandatory reporting students at risk of significant harmo employment screening requirements for paid staff, external service providers and volunteers

check that the Child Protection Resource Manual (including the Professional Guidelines for School Staff in their Relationships with Students) is accessible in hard copy to all staff

check that the Parent Handbook contains a section informing parents of the school’s child protection


responsibilities ensure that all schools have available, in their reception areas, a pamphlet for parents explaining to the

community what the school does in terms of meeting legal child protection responsibilities ensure that staff induction manuals/packages outline child protection procedures and refer to key

documents such the Child Protection Resource Manual and the Professional Guidelines for School Staff in their Relationships with Students.

sight any school based CP PL records check that the school principal maintains confidential student records involving risk of significant harm or

wellbeing concerns in a lockable, restricted access filing cabinet check that appropriate Working With Children Check documents are collected at the school for all external

service providers and volunteers and that their details are recorded in a database check samples of teacher personnel files for evidence of Working With Children Check clearance and

referee checking.

Annual Child Protection Compliance Reports

The CSO Child Protection Officer prepares annual compliance reports for the CSO Director’s Group providing statistics and analysis relating to allegations against employees, reports relating to risk of significant harm and wellbeing concerns and professional learning. These reports help to identify anomalies in expected reporting from schools, potential gaps in knowledge and understanding of child protection requirements, as well as other emerging trends/issues which may need to be addressed.

3.5 Management and Operation of the School

The Act requires that a system of non-government schools nominate a ‘responsible person’, defined as a person within the DSS who can direct the principal in relation to aspects of governance and management of the school upon which the Minister’s approval of the system is based (section 4.6 BOSTES Manual). In Broken Bay, the Diocesan Director of Schools exercises this responsibility.

The Act defines a ‘responsible person’ as

a) the proprietor of the school and, if the proprietor is a corporation, each director or person concerned in the management of the school, or

b) a member of the governing body of the school, or c) the principal of the school.

On an on-going, daily basis, the Assistant Directors, Schools Consultants, Heads of Finance and Human Resource Services, and the Leader, School Review and Development, significantly support the Director of Schools in the exercise of this role and have procedures in place to support school Principals in the exercise of their role. Further, with regard to particular initiatives, the educational and other professional staff members of the CSO assist Principals, as part of their ministry of leadership and service.

Performance appraisal and contract renewal of school Principals

The Performance Appraisal for Leaders (PAL) process comprises an annual cycle that includes a series of interviews with the Schools Consultant to identify priorities and goals, develop and monitor action plans and evaluate achievements. It is directly linked to achieving improved educational outcomes for students. The data used in PAL informs the process of contract renewal. Contract renewal for Principals occurs at the end of a contract period (initially three and then every four years) and provides an opportunity for Principals to reflect on their leadership over the contract period. A panel is appointed consisting of the Head of Human Resource Services (chair), the Schools Consultant and a peer Principal from within or outside the diocese. The Principal completes a detailed self-reflection and, using a 360⁰ process, data is gathered from stakeholders in the community. The purpose of contract renewal is for Principals to reflect on their leadership; gather critical feedback on their performance; be affirmed for their strengths; provide an action plan for future development; and to ensure a robust process of accountability for their leadership of the school.

The document Policy for Addressing Performance of Principals and Disciplinary Matters sets out important information in response to situations of unsatisfactory performance and in alleged cases of serious misconduct by a Principal. The document can be located at (CuriaNet Þ Catholic Schools Office Þ DSS Resources ). This policy may be implemented under the direction of the Head of Human Resource Services or the Director of Schools in response to these situations.


https://curianet.dbb.org.au/Catholicschoolsoffice/dssresources/Pages/default.aspx

3.6 Managing Risk

The Diocesan Schools System has implemented a Risk Management Framework and Policy consistent with the ISO 31,000 Standard for Risk Management. Principals should ensure that all Risk Management practices within the school are aligned with the Framework and Policy and that risk management principles as outlined in the Framework are embedded within school activities where appropriate. The Principal oversees risk management and determines whether or not the level of risk posed by an activity is acceptable.

This will involve ensuring that a comprehensive and documented risk assessment is undertaken before major school events (on and off site) and projects are commenced and that all day to day operational activities are underpinned by systematic and ongoing risk management. Where responsibility for activities such as outdoor education has been outsourced, it is the responsibility of the Principal to ensure that these agencies have undertaken the necessary steps towards risk management.

The role of the DSS Risk Manager is to ensure that schools adhere to the Risk Management Framework and Policy and to support Principals and staff in the development of appropriate risk management tools and related resources.

3.7 Handling Complaints

Diocesan systemic schools are committed to providing a happy, safe environment for all staff and students. There are occasions however, when a member of staff, a student, a parent or a member of the wider community

can be concerned about something that is happening at a school that appears to be unsatisfactory or unreasonable.

The CSO advises that the resolution of complaints and grievances should be handled in the first instance by schools. In circumstances where this cannot take place, matters will be referred to the Schools Consultant via the CSO. If there are concerns about the complaints process, the outcome of a complaint, or that concerns have not been addressed by the Schools Consultant, the complainant may ask the Director of Schools to review the matter.

Records of complaints, interviews and other documentation handled by schools are kept in a separate restricted access complaints file. Similarly, records of complaints handled by the CSO are maintained in a separate comprehensive database. This database is managed by the CSO Manager Executive Support who also provides an annual report to the CSO Director’s Group. This report summarises the number and type of complaints and the resolution of such complaints.

The Complaints Handling Policy and Procedures for Diocesan Systemic Schools is available from CuriaNet (CSO intranet; CuriaNet Þ Catholic Schools Office Þ DSS Resources ) and the public website Community of Catholic Schools. The policy details the framework established for the handling of complaints that relate to the operation of diocesan systemic schools.

3.8 Financial Accountability

Diocesan schools are audit financially by an external auditor. All secondary schools and approximately 50% of the number of primary schools are externally audited by Moore Stephens annually.

The diocesan Head of Internal Audit supplements the work of the external auditor on a cyclical basis. The internal audit function is an independent and objective activity that provides assurance to the Bishop and Diocesan Finance Committee that the whole Diocese including the CSO and schools operate transparently, comply with policies and procedures and are accountable for their use of resources. Internal Audit supplements the work of the external auditor and other assurance providers through reviewing the operational, financial and administrative aspects of schools on a cyclical basis, which largely follows the SRD process. It does this through conducting field audits at schools and providing recommendations arising from the audit in the form of a report back to the Principal, Director CSO, Schools Consultant and SRD Leader. Matters for action are monitored and reported upon until finalised by Internal Audit through quarterly reporting to the Diocesan Audit & Risk Committee and the Director, CSO.


http://www.csodbb.catholic.edu.au/about/dsp-collection.cfm?loadref=125

http://www.csodbb.catholic.edu.au/about/dsp-collection.cfm?loadref=125

https://curianet.dbb.org.au/Catholicschoolsoffice/dssresources/Pages/default.aspx

http://www.cso.brokenbay.catholic.edu.au/resources/polproc.html

Section 4: Returns to BOSTES

Sections 4.6 and 5.9.3 and of the BOSTES Manual state that the approved authority for a registration system must provide, and document its process for providing, a return to the BOSTES in the particular circumstances. The Leader, SRD takes responsibility for these returns. The mechanism for and timeframe for these returns is detailed in the following table.

Return Time frame Mechanism for notification to BOSTES

Breach of any of the legislation (section 4.6 BOSTES Manual)

Ombudsman Act 1974 Child Protection (Working with Children Act) 2012 NSE Teacher Accreditation Act 2004 Disability Discrimination Act 1992 Work Health and Safety Act 2011 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Food Act 2003 Explosives Act 2003 Building Code of Australia.

Within 14 days of the breach

Written notification

Notification in relation to a ‘responsible person’ (section 4.6 (1), (2) of the BOSTES Manual)

(1) The Act requires that the BOSTES be notified if a person defined as a ‘responsible person’ under the Act:

is convicted of an offence that is punishable by imprisonment for twelve (12) months or more, or

becomes bankrupt, applies to take the benefit of any law for the relief of bankrupt or insolvency debtors, compounds with his or her creditors or makes an assignment of his or her remuneration for their benefit, or

if the person is a corporation – is the subject of a winding up order or has had a controller or administrator appointed

(2) The Act also requires the BOSTES be notified if the ‘responsible person’ becomes a mentally incapacitated person and becomes a

patient at an institution because of that capacity or a protected person under the NSW Trustee and Guardian Act 2009

(There is no notification requirement for the above if the person concerned ceases to be a ‘responsible person’ (1) or takes leave from the position or ceases to hold the position (2).

As soon as practicable after the breach occurs.

Written notification

Appointment of a new principal

Where there is an appointment of a new principal (or equivalent) BOSTES must be notified within one (1) month of such change(s) occurring. Where the approved authority has management responsibilities for member schools, notification could be made by the approved authority in an annual return to the Board at the beginning of each school year. Where, due to unforeseen circumstances, throughout a year a variation occurs to the information contained in an annual return from a registration system, for example a new principal is appointed, the approved authority must notify BOSTES within one (1) month of such change occurring

Within one (1) month of the change occurring

Notification through RANGS

Sale of a school Within seven (7) days of completion of the sale

Written notice by the purchaser

The school’s proprietor changes for any reason Within seven (7) days of the change

Written notice by the new proprietor

Change of name of a school Within one (1) month prior to the change taking effect


A school ceases to operate Within one (1) month of the change


Staffing of a member school: Where there is a turnover of half or more of the teaching staff during any twelve (12) month period.

Commencement of the next new term


Curriculum: Where a member school intends to deliver all or a significant part of students’ courses of study by means of distance education. This excludes situations where a member school that does not normally deliver courses by means of distance education provides units of work/activities for a student who has been granted leave by the principal

At least nine (9) months prior to the implementation of such a change


Premises and buildings: Where a member schools intends to add another campus Within three (3) months prior to the change

Written notice

Premises and buildings: Where a member schools intends to close or cease operating a campus

Within one (1) month of the change

Written notice


Section 5: Provisional and Initial registration/accreditation

5.1 Process for Placing a School on Provisional Registration/Accreditation

Member schools are monitored for compliance through the external validation component of the SRD program. External validation is conducted by the SRD panel who consider documentation provided by the school during the Tier 1 school visit. If, in considering the evidence, the SRD panel forms an opinion that there are concerns that the school may not comply with some of the requirements for registration and/or accreditation, the following steps will be taken:1. The panel Chair and the Schools Consultant discuss the concerns with the Principal and provide an

opportunity for the member school to provide further evidence of compliance. Following the meeting the Principal will be informed in writing of the matters of concern discussed and the agreed action to be taken in relation to each matter and the time frame for completion.

2. A meeting of the SRD panel may be convened by the panel Chair to consider the further evidence of compliance provided by the school. This evidence will be provided through additional documentation forwarded to the office and/or a further visit to the school.

3. If, following consideration of this additional evidence, the panel forms the opinion that there are matters of concern that are still not adequately addressed, the panel prepares a report that includes the recommendation that the school be placed on conditional registration and/or accreditation.

4. The report from the panel is forwarded to the Principal for comment and then provided to the Director of Schools for consideration.

5. If, following consideration of the SRD panel report, the Director of Schools is satisfied that there are matters of concern regarding the school’s compliance with requirements for registration and/or accreditation, the Director will notify the Principal of the intention to recommend to the NSW BOSTES that the school be placed on provisional registration and/or accreditation. In this notification the Principal will be informed of the reasons for the proposed recommendation and of the school’s right to appeal the decision.

6. If the school wishes to lodge an appeal against the proposed recommendation, the Director of Schools will convene an appeal committee comprising CSO Schools Consultants and education experts not involved in making the original recommendation. If appropriate, the Director of Schools may ask for a BOSTES Inspector to join the appeal committee.

7. The appeal committee will consider all evidence provided during the original validation process and any further evidence the school may provide.

8. Following consideration of the appeal committee’s report the Director will either confirm the decision to recommend provisional registration/accreditation or will make a recommendation that the school is now fully compliant and should receive full registration and/or accreditation. The Director’s decision is final and the school has no further right of appeal.

9. If the Director of Schools confirms the decision to recommend provisional registration/accreditation the Director will inform the NSW BOSTES within 14 days of the recommendation, the process used to arrive at the recommendation and the reasons for making the recommendation.

5.2 Process for New Schools

Occasionally, new systemic schools are established within the diocese. When a new systemic school is established within the diocese, the following processes are actioned:1. An application is made to the BOSTES for initial registration/accreditation of the new member school by 31

March in the year before the year the CSO intends to commence operating the school.2. The new member school will be supported each year of the registration period in their documentation and

processes relevant to the new school’s context. These processes reflect the requirements for initial registration/accreditation as detailed in Section 6 of the Registration Systems and Member Non-government Schools NSW Manual.

3. The Leader, School Review and Development and the Schools Consultant will lead the processes pertaining to the school’s status of compliance with regulatory requirements each year until the school reaches its full cohort, for example, if the school is a Year 7-10 school only, assistance and interventions will take place every year for four (4) years. After that time, the school will join the regular SRD cycle along with all schools within the diocese.

4. A log of the support provided will be maintained for diocesan records each year of the school’s development cycle.


Section 6: Roles and Responsibilities

6.1 Roles in the Process of School Review and Development

All members of the school community are invited to contribute their views throughout the School Review and Development program: This includes:

School Principal Teachers Parents Students Schools Consultant Parish Priest.

6.2 Role of the School Principal

The school Principal:

gives visible and active leadership in the School Review and Development Process ensures ongoing communication with the Assistant Director, School Improvement, Schools Consultant

and Leader, School Review and Development with regard to school review negotiates calendar dates for all school review activities with CSO personnel works effectively with the Schools Consultant in planning and leading school review ensures that the school review process and the final report are comprehensive and address key aspects

in context of both Tier 1 and Tier 2 communicates the processes and outcomes of school review to the school community actively involves the school community in the school self-evaluation process selects and develops appropriate review processes and instruments with the support and direction of

the Schools Consultant manages the progress of review according to the agreed timeline for both the annual Tier 1 compliance

audit and the school review external validation process promotes the findings of the review and ensure that the future school improvement plans and strategic

plan reflects these findings.

6.3 CSO Roles in School Review and Development

The CSO works collaboratively with the school leadership teams in planning and supporting the review and to discern the appropriate level of support required to assist the school in its preparation for review. The CSO:

establishes a framework that defines clear standards, criteria and processes for school review conducts school reviews in a professional and collaborative manner provides timely and appropriate feedback to schools against the stated standards reports annually to the BOSTES, the DSS Director’s Group and the Director of Schools on the compliance

status of the DSS schools, and makes recommendations for the registration and accreditation of schools as appropriate

involves, where appropriate, the expertise of Schools Consultants, Education Officers and other professional staff from within the CSO, Principals and school leaders, students and community members, and those with expertise from outside the local system

maintains a system of policies and procedures relevant to the BOSTES registration and accreditation requirements via the SRD website (http://srd.dbbcso.org; password = srd).

6.4 Role of the Assistant Director School Improvement

The Assistant Director, School Improvement:

has oversight of the complete SRD program approves the final composition of the review chairs and panel members is the final signatory to the review report.



6.5 Role of the Schools Consultant

The role of the Schools Consultant in the SRD Program is to assist the Principal and the school community in its preparation for review, including the development of the Self-Evaluation Report, and in the ongoing monitoring and evaluation of the school’s SSP and SIP. The Schools Consultant supports and guides the Principal to ensure that the review process is authentic and developmental. Furthermore, they assist the Principal in engaging in appropriate review processes and self-evaluation instruments. The Schools Consultant works with both the school and with personnel from the CSO to monitor the implementation of the SRD program. They have an ongoing role in ensuring that the school continues to meet regulatory requirements and that the school has in place and implements the required policies and procedures.

6.6 Role of the Leader, School Review and Development

The Leader, School Review and Development:

leads and implements the SRD program prepares school panels for review conducts the Tier 1 and Tier 2 school review visits leads, develops and facilitates professional learning sessions related to the program facilitates staff meetings, with Schools Consultants, to assist schools in their preparation of review

documentation prepares the final review reports in close liaison with the Schools Consultants and the Chair liaises with the BOSTES and Assistant Director, School Improvement on processes associated with the

program facilitates the development of the school’s next School Improvement Plan (SIP) based on the outcome

of the findings of the review panel provides on-going assistance and feedback to schools, with Schools Consultants, in the development of

their (SIP) provides annual reports to the DSS Director’s Group on the outcome of annual school reviews.

6.7 Role of the External Validation Chair

The school review panel is chaired by a senior DSS leader. The primary role of the Chair, appointed by the Assistant Director, School Improvement, is to lead the validation of the review by providing authenticity to the processes undertaken by the Principal and the school and to confirm the findings and recommendations arising from the review.

The Chair leads the validation panel in ensuring that the school has engaged in an authentic consultation and discernment process during the self-evaluation phase. The Chair also ensures that determinations made by the external review panel on the outcome of review are an accurate reflection of the data gathered as evidenced through dialogue with key school and community personnel and through documentation provided by the school.

The Chair oversees both the Tier 1 and Tier 2 review and ensures that:

recommendations arrived at by individual panel members are faithful to the discussions held in the course of the process

recommendations are couched in language that is professionally and culturally sensitive to the local situation

recommendations are substantive and appropriate in assisting the school formulate a strategic plan the panel exercises corporate responsibility for its work assisting the school.

6.8 Role and selection of the School Review Panel

The ideal panel member is a person who brings expertise and objectivity, is a good listener and has good communication skills. In addition he/she has a demonstrated the capacity to think critically and analytically and to function within a whole-school perspective.

The role of the Tier 1 panel members is to make a determination on the school’s status of compliance based on the documentation provided at review. Panel members are drawn from classroom practitioners and complete KLA checklists to determine the status of curriculum compliance at the particular review school. Non-curriculum requirements are managed and assessed by CSO personnel with relevant expertise, who also form the panel. Reports relating to this area, for example, Child Protection, Work Health and Safety, are forwarded to the Leader, School Review and Development prior to the scheduled Tier 1 review date.


The role of the Tier 2 panel is to provide critical comment on the school’s learning journey since their last review and to provide recommendations for strategic planning. This is achieved through an investigation of documentation provided, through dialogue with school personnel, students and other stakeholders (parents, parish priest) and through educational walks and talks. Panel members are drawn from Principals of diocesan systemic schools and can also include one member who is external to the diocese and in a senior education role in their particular context.

In general, panel members are selected according to:

the requirements of the task the likely availability of desired panel members within the timeframe of the program overall resource demands of the process.

6.9 Role of the NSW Board of Studies, Teaching & Educational Standards (BOSTES)

The NSW BOSTES:

provides detailed specifications to the DSS about the requirements for registration and accreditation of schools under the terms of the Act

approves the DSS process for ensuring each school’s compliance with the requirements for registration and accreditation

following advice from the DSS, recommends to the Minister for Education that a school be registered for a specified period and for specified Years of schooling

following advice from the system, accredits schools for the Record of School Achievement and/or Higher School Certificate.

6.10 Role of the BOSTES Inspectors

The NSW BOSTES Inspectors:

annually monitor the DSS process for ensuring that its schools are complying with the requirements for registration and accreditation (this usually involves two Inspectors observing a review team in action in one or more of the DSS schools)

reports to the BOSTES Registration Committee on the findings from the annual monitoring provides regular updates on BOSTES policies and procedures for DSS representatives.


Section 7: Ethical Framework

Any review process has the potential to heighten anxieties and bring into higher relief matters of fairness. The issue of confidentiality is also vital. It is therefore important, if a review process is to be regarded as fair, that all participants feel that the process is safe for them. One way to achieve this objective is to clearly state an ethical framework for the process.

The key values and ethical requirements of review processes are:

1. The process be seen as one of confidentiality and trust and be safe for all participants.

2. The evaluation is carried out with thoroughness and in a timely manner with wide participation by staff and the school community. Documentation for the school review and development process and the selection of domains needs to be owned by the Principal and staff.

3. Discussions between the Principal, Schools Consultant and the Leader, School Review and Development relating to the documentation provided and the processes for engagement with review is done in a timely and transparent manner.

4. The choice of panel members is negotiated between the Assistant Director, School Improvement, Principal, Schools Consultant and Leader, School Review and Development.

5. Support documentation and training for the School Review and Development Program will be available so that all participants can be effectively inducted into the process and the tasks they will be asked to carry out are clearly stated.

6. Discussions within the panel in the course of the school review are confidential to the panel.

7. The Chair is the formal liaison person between the panel, the school, Assistant Director, School Improvement, the Schools Consultant and the Leader, School Review and Development. If panel members have concerns regarding matters relating to the operation of the review they liaise with the Chair who will seek to have them resolved.

8. The panel is empowered to make recommendations in its own right with reference to the material and issues put before it.

9. If in the course of the school review the Principal believes that an aspect of the process is not in accordance with the process as set out in the formal documentation, or if someone is behaving outside the ethical framework outlined above, then he/she will discuss these concerns privately with the Chair and seek resolution of any issues that have arisen. If a resolution is not possible the matter will be referred to the Assistant Director, School Improvement.

10. Final responsibility for completing the draft Review Report on behalf of the panel rests with the Leader, School Review and Development and is validated by the Chair.

11. Signatories to the final report are the Assistant Director, School Improvement and the Chair; the final report is returned to the school within one month after the review.

12. The final report is presented to the Director of Schools.

Confidentiality agreements are signed by panel members of review schools to action this ethical framework.


Section 8: Appendices

Documents contained in this section:

8.1 SRD component map

8.2 SRD component overview

8.3 SRD key documents

8.4 SRD focus areas

8.5 School Improvement Plans: Statutory requirements


8.1 SRD component map

ComponentActivity in external

review year

Activity in self-review

year

Activity in non-review

yearDetail

Main document

Component 1aCurriculum

review (Tier 1)

(conducted annually)



Involves Attendance at a Curriculum Focus

Day (CFD) for specific KLAs (dates, venues & KLAs to be determined).

KLA coordinator (or KLA ‘expert’) from each school engaging in a peer review of KLA documentation.

Documentation required relates to: Timetables Scopes and sequences List of resources/equipment by KLA used to deliver the curriculum Assessment plans/policies outlining how student progress is assessed, monitored, recorded and reported Teaching programs Student work samples (includes assessments)

Tracking document:

Compliance Checklist

Component 1bNon-curriculum review (Tier 1)

(conducted

every 3 years)

(conducted

every 3 years)

Involves CSO officer reviews school non-

curriculum documentation. Determination of review date by

school and reviewer; date to be organised at least 2 weeks before the Quality Assurance (Tier 2) external panel review.

Documentation required relates to:

Staff (teacher qualifications, documented plan for relief staff, outside tutors/external providers, teacher accreditation)

Premises, Buildings, Facilities, WHS (property maintenance and compliance with relevant legislation) Risk Management Child Protection (mandatory reporting, screening, reportable conduct) Student Welfare (security, supervision, codes of conduct, complaints/grievances, pastoral care,

communication, discipline) Student enrolment and attendance

Tracking document:Compliance Checklist

Component 2aSchool self-

review (Tier 2)

(conducted

once in 6 years)

Involves Participation in a professional

learning and sharing Celebration of Learning day, held for all self-review schools

School Leadership Teams invited

Documentation required relates to: School SIP Evaluation of one SIP domain against the National School Improvement Tool (NSIT) performance levels

School Improvement Plan (SIP)

Component 2bExternal

validation (Tier 2)

(conducted

once in 6 years)

Involves Visit to school for 2 days by an

external validation panel for each diocesan domain (Mission, Pastoral Care (PC), Learning & Teaching (L&T))

Documentation required: Self-evaluation report (comprised of Principal’s report and Domain reports) Principal’s report (about 4-6 pages) provides contextual information about the school, reports on

initiatives, past successes, future plans (this may also include information about the achievement of any numerical targets set) and trends in assessment data.

Domain report provides information about the school’s strengths, evidence of these strengths, and future plans (articulated as a 3-year goal). The report compiled with all staff in the 3 diocesan domains (Mission; PC; L&T). The equivalent of 1 SDD is to be set aside to develop the domain reports with staff; CSO staff to lead session.

School Self-Evaluation Report

Component 3SIP facilitation

(conducted

every 3 years)

(conducted

every 3 years)

Involves visit to the school for 3 hours approx., one month after review to develop the school’s next 3-year SIP.

The school’s consultant, Leader SRD and a representative from CSO Mission, PC and L&T work with the school’s leadership team to develop the SIP overview. The overview documents goals, targets, key improvement strategies, baseline data.

School Improvement Plan (SIP)


1. CFD 2. Non-curriculum

review3. School self-review

2020

1. CFD2. Non-curriculum

review3. External panel review

2017

CFD

2019

CFD

20182016

CFDCFD

2015Sample timeline of

school involvement over 6 years

8.2 SRD component overview

SRD component overviews

Information about each component of the SRD program is detailed in the component overviews. Information includes the purpose of the particular component and summary procedures for each component

8.3 SRD key documents

Compliance checklist and support document (Component 1) School Self-Evaluation Report (for externally validated schools) (Component 2)

School Improvement Plan (SIP) templates and support documents (Component 3)

All documentation related to School Review and Development is available on the SRD website at http://srd.dbbcso.org; password = srd



8.4 Focus Areas

A report on the outcome of the monitoring activities related to these focus areas is provided to the Assistant Director, School Improvement annually.

Year Focus Area 1 (BOS) Focus Area 2 (BOS) Focus Area 3 (System)

2012 Curriculum (S5.3) Discipline (S5.7) & Attendance (S5.8)

New Attendance Policy and procedures and use of new attendance codes.

Development of support materials and SRD website (http://srd.dbbcso.org; password = srd)

2013 Safe and Supportive environment (S5.6.1)

Educational and Financial reporting (S5.10)

Extension of and evaluation of Tier 1 pilot

Development of KLA checklists for school self-evaluation

Management of the opening of St Brigid’s Lake Munmorah for Year 7

2014 Curriculum (S5.3 & S7) Staff (S5.2) Trial and evaluation of Curriculum Focus Day

Management of the opening of St Brigid’s Lake Munmorah to Year 8

2015 Safe and Supportive environment (S5.6.2)

Management and operation of the school (S5.9)

focus on implementation of the new School Review and Development (SRD) Cycle

support schools with the revised attendance register codes for implementation beginning 2015

continue to oversee the registration and accreditation requirements for St Brigid’s Lake Munmorah (first operating year, 2014).

work with the BOSTES to determine new regulations for Governance (S5.9 BOSTES Manual) as they apply to registration systems

2016 Curriculum (S5.3) Premises/Buildings (S5.4) & Facilities (S5.5)

2017 To be determined






8.5 School Improvement Plans: Statutory requirements

The Australian Education Act 2013 [part 6 division 2, section 77 (2) (d) parts (i) and (ii)] specifies that the approved authority (that is, the CSO), ensures that

i) the authority has a school improvement framework in accordance with the regulations andii) each school develops, implements, publishes and reviews a school improvement plan in accordance

with the regulations.

*****************

The Australian Education Regulation 2013 [part 5, division 3, subdivision D, section 44] states that a school improvement plan

(1) (a) must include the following

i) contextual information about the school;ii) a description of the process for conducting a self-assessment of the school;iii) information about the school’s performance based on the school’s self-assessment, having regard to

the National School Improvement Tool or any equivalent document (whether or not prepared by the Ministerial Council);

iv) a description of the process for reviewing the school improvement plan and

(1) (b) focus on strategic planning, including on areas of the school that may be improved.

(2) In developing the school improvement plan, the approved authority for the school must ensure the school has regard to the following:

a) the results of the school’s self-assessmentb) how the 5 national reform directions apply to the school (that is, quality teaching, quality learning,

empowered school leadership, meeting student need, and transparency and accountability)c) the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan 2010-2014;d) the National Safe Schools Framework or any equivalent document (whether or not prepared by the

Ministerial Council).

(3) The approved authority must ensure that the school improvement plan is developed in consultation with persons responsible for students at the school and others in the school community.

(4) The approved authority must ensure that:

a) the school’s progress against the plan is reviewed each year and, if necessary, the plan is updated; andb) a report is prepared describing the school’s achievements in relation to, and progress against, the plan

in the previous year.

(5) The approved authority must ensure that the school improvement plan, and the report mentioned in paragraph (4) (b), are published:

a) promptly after the plan has been developed or updated, or the report has been prepared, (as the case requires); and

b) in a form that is readily accessible to the public.
