Executive Summary

This report presents findings and recommendations from a survey of School Planning Council (SPC) members in BC on how well SPCs are functioning in their legislated role after the transition year of 2002/2003 and one full year of operation.

The survey was conducted mainly online in May and June 2004. As there is no central registry of SPC members, school district superintendents were approached and asked to support the research by authorizing distribution of the survey invitations through school principals to SPC members.

Forty-one (41) of BC's 60 school districts agreed to participate in the survey, representing 54% of public schools in the seven school regions of BC. A total of 4,525 invitations to participate were sent to SPC members. An additional 65 usernames and passwords for the online survey were released to requesting individuals, for a total eligible sample of 4,590. The survey yielded 1,118 responses for an overall response rate of 24% with a margin of error of plus or minus 2.5%. Analysis showed that respondents were representative of SPC members across the province.

The survey questions covered governance, school plans, organizational structure, decision-making, training, resources and support, and successes and challenges. Most questions used a five-point rating scale. In addition, there was opportunity for respondents' comments.

The data revealed that, at the conclusion of 2004, 74% of respondents were satisfied with the operation of their SPC. A greater majority (83%) felt their SPC was acting according to its mandate. Almost all respondents (95%) reported that the priorities of their school were reflected in the school plan. The goals identified in school plans were SMART - specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and timely (92% to 98%). Respondents indicated most SPCs developed plans to monitor (86%) and report on the progress of (81%) the school plan.

Principals chaired a large majority (79%) of SPCs. Many methods were used to select the SPC chair, including election, board policy, self-selection, and others. Two-thirds of respondents (67%) indicated their SPC attempted to open up its process to the school community by inviting nonvoting participants to SPC meetings. Some (39%) said their SPC networked with other SPCs in the district, and made meeting agendas (46%) and minutes (53%) available to the public. Just less than a majority of respondents (46%) felt their SPC could benefit from further members.

Most respondents (86%) reported that their SPC made decisions by consensus. Considerably fewer (47%) reported using the majority vote method. Eighty-seven percent (87%) said their SPC consulted with their parent advisory council during preparation of the school plan, despite the requirement of the School Act that all do so. Almost all (97%) said their SPC sought advice from school staff, and some (42%) from provincial organizations.

Training workshops were available in the 2003/2004 school year in most districts (81%), but just over half of respondents (55%) took advantage of them. Those who did reported that the workshops were successful in explaining the purpose of SPCs (97%), and informing members about school planning (92%) and their position on the SPC (79%). Respondents gave a variety of suggestions for training. Data gathering and analysis, and the SPC mandate, roles, and process were priorities.

By and large, respondents reported that SPCs were given sufficient information to accomplish their goals (79%). Over half (59%) were satisfied with the resources available. Nevertheless, respondents agreed that SPCs could benefit from more support in the form of templates and handbooks (62%), communication (65%), and information gathering (68%). Respondents made many suggestions for support in these areas.

The data showed that relationship-building in the development of school plans is going well in the province. Respondents showed a high level of satisfaction in three key relationships: among SPC members (90%); between the SPC and the PAC (87%); and between the SPC and school staff (84%). Fewer (63%) were satisfied with the relationship between the SPC and the school board. Open-ended comments from respondents, however, suggested some dissatisfaction with all of these relationships, especially between the SPC and school board which appeared in some cases to be strained or non-existent.

Results were mixed on the all-important question of whether SPCs were beginning to have an impact on student achievement. Just over half of respondents (54%) agreed this was the case. Fewer thought the SPC was beginning to have an impact on the allocation of resources (43%) and the allocation of staff (23%).

Notable successes of SPCs were improved communication, dialogue, and collaboration among stakeholders. Respondents also cited creating a common vision, identifying goals, focusing the school's attention on a plan, and greater parent involvement.

A considerable challenge facing SPCs was finding and keeping parent membership. Data gathering and interpretation were also problems, as was the question on the mind of many SPC members, Can we really make a difference? Many felt their role was unclear.

The researchers concluded that, given that School Planning Councils have operated in BC for only one full year, they are functioning well and are striving, with the knowledge and resources available, to fulfill their mandate to prepare a school plan for improving student achievement in the school.

Recommendations

Based on the findings, the following recommendations were offered to improve the capacity of School Planning Councils in BC to fulfill their mandate:

1. Develop a more comprehensive explanation of the purpose and role of School Planning Councils and their value in children's education. Basic questions to be answered are:
- Can the School Planning Council really make a difference to student achievement in the school?
- Do our decisions matter to the school board?

2. Develop a method of communication for SPC members to learn from and dialogue with other SPCs. This could take the form of meetings and conferences and a website.

3. Develop guidelines for SPC operation to encourage and make it possible for a broader pool of parents to be available to participate in SPCs.

4. Develop guidelines on the kinds of data of value to SPCs. The use of redundant, excessive, or extraneous data should be discouraged.

5. Develop templates and tools for data gathering to assist SPCs in collecting useful data.

6. Continue training SPC members, with emphasis on
- SPC mandate, roles, and process - data collection and analysis.

7. Provide adequate resources for developing and implementing school plans.

8. Examine ways to encourage full participation of teachers in the work of SPCs.

9. Explore ways to improve the relationship between SPCs and their school board.

Published October 2004, ISBN 0-9734046-6-3

♦ Order ♦