Funding Opportunities - 21 Nov 2017

Nov 22 2017
1.     Local Sport Defibril...

Victorian CaSPA Principals recognised for their service

Nov 21 2017
At the recent meeting of AGM of the PAVCSS on N...

South Australia Farewells some of its long serving Principals

Nov 20 2017
At the recent meeting of APCSS in Adelaide, ...

CaSPA Submission to Gonski 2.0 Panel on Educating for Excellence

Nov 19 2017

CCI Supports Principal Health and Well Being

Nov 18 2017
Above: Hugh Easton form CCI discuss well bei...

Daniel Delmage wins 2017 CaSPA Equity Scholarship

Nov 17 2017
At the recent CaSPA Board meeting, the Director...

Phil Lewis farewelled as President of CaSPA

Nov 16 2017
Phil Lewis finished his term on the Board of...

Francis Sullivan meets with CaSPA Board

Nov 15 2017
Francis Sullivan CEO of the Truth, Justice a...

Government Policy leads to School Fee Increases

Nov 14 2017
Catholic schools along the nation's east...

Gonski 2.0 gives 'dumbed down' curriculums a D-minus

Nov 13 2017
Australian students have suffered as a result o...

Pure discrimination from SA government on school funding

Nov 12 2017
Bishop of Port Pirie and NCEC Commissioner, Gre...

Catholic Sector anticipates better outcomes from Review of SES

Nov 11 2017
The Catholic sector hopes the National School R...

Profiles: Sr Marg Ghosn [NSW]; Sue Lennox [NSW]: Matt Byrne [Vic]

Nov 10 2017
We thank the following colleagues for sharing t...

Funding Opportunities - 9 Nov 2017

Nov 09 2017
1.     Student Mentoring Pr...

Self Awareness - The key to success in the classroom AND as a school leader

Nov 08 2017
Those who have worked in the field of Profes...

CaSPA News


NCEC Key Stakeholder Meeting looks at important current issues

Posted on 2 November 2017
NCEC Key Stakeholder Meeting looks at important current issues

The NCEC Key stakeholder meeting includes executive members of the National Catholic Education Commission [NCEC], Catholic School Parents Australia [CSPA], Australian Catholic Primary Principals [ACPPA] and CaSPA.  This group meets four times a year and looks at current issues that involve the Catholic Education sector.

Some of the key items considered at the Nov 2nd meeting in Sydney included:

Funding update 

  • Overview of Gonski 2.0 policy and funding developments
  • $1.1 billion transition issue and advocacy
  • Gonski consultations and submission
  • National School Resourcing BoardSES methodology review

Disability funding and reform

  • General overview
  • Nationally Consistent Collection of Data for Students with Disability
  • Data which indicates significant losses to the Catholic sector with the proposed changes to funding students with disability

2020 NCEC Conference, Plenary Council and other conferences

  • Timing of the conference and complementary alignment of dates
  • Roles of Principals and Parents in the conference.
  • Ideally all groups will look to have a combined National Catholic Education Conference to complement the running of the Plenary Council

Principal representation on the NCEC Commission

  • This matter will continue to be raised with both national and state Catholic Education Authorities
Posted in: NCEC Funding   0 Comments

Meetings with NSW Principal Groups

Posted on 1 November 2017
Meetings with NSW Principal Groups

Above top: Principals from the Parramatta Diocese

Above bottom: Principals from the Broken Bay Diocese

It has been a busy week catching up with Catholic Secondary Principals in a number of NSW centres.  Unlike most other jurisdictions, the Catholic Secondary Principals do not meet on a state wide basis.  Rather most of their gatherings are around their Diocesan centres:

  • Armidale
  • Broken Bay
  • Bathurst
  • Lismore
  • Maitland/Newcastle
  • Parramatta
  • Sydney
  • Wagga
  • Wilcannia Forbes
  • Wollongong

Further to this, there seems to be very limited opportunities for "Religious Institute" school Principals to meet with their Diocesan school colleagues.

At CaSPA we see great advantage in all Catholic Secondary Principals in a State or Territory being able to meet and support their colleagues. As a first step to promoting this option for our NSW principals, we have been meeting groups in their separate diocesan groups to let them know of the work of CaSPA. In time we hope there will be opportunities to share beyond these groups and across all Catholic schools regardless of their governance arrangements.

We also note common issues confronting Catholic Secondary Principals when we conduct these meetings.  Among these issues are:

  • Interest in promoting Principal Health and Well Being
  • The opportunity for Secondary Catholic Principals to have an effective voice in their Awards and Conditions
  • Concern with the future of funding arrangements
  • The challenge of leading large Catholic Colleges while maintaining fidelity with a contemporary Catholic Identity
  • Having an effective voice in the shaping of new governance structures for Catholic Education
Posted in: Catholic Secondary Principals Australia   0 Comments

Catholic Schools to close as a result of Gonski 2.0

Posted on 31 October 2017

Above: Holy Eucharist Primary principal Terry Gardiner. Photo: Luis Enrique Ascui

Victoria's Catholic education body is warning of school closures under the Turnbull government's Gonski 2.0 funding model, with two Melbourne schools to shut this year.

Holy Eucharist Primary School in Malvern East and Mother of God Primary School in Ivanhoe East have told parents that they will be closing and amalgamating with neighbouring schools.

Catholic Education Melbourne executive director Stephen Elder said the closures were a ''warning of things to come'' under the government's funding changes. ''As matters stand there is a very real threat of future closures and the dislocation that will bring,'' he said.

Mr Elder said the two small schools had received financial support from the broader Catholic school system but this would be difficult to maintain under Gonski 2.0. Enrolments have slumped at both schools 106 students attended the Mother of God School in 2016. Just 25 students attend the Holy Eucharist Primary School.

Federal Education Minister Simon Birmingham hit back, saying the Catholic sector could still determine how it distributed funding.

He said funding for the Catholic Education Commission of Victoria would increase by $86.6 million next year and $1.1 billion over the next decade.

''It is unfortunate if some want to play politics with school closures despite increasing levels of funding,'' Mr Birmingham said.

''Given CEVC funding is projected to increase by $86.6 million next year the question many will ask in response to stories like this is 'where is the money going'?'' Terry Gardiner became the principal of Holy Eucharist earlier this year and had hoped to reverse its dwindling enrolments. He said parents were incredibly upset about the school's closure.

''It's an amazing community,'' he said. ''Small schools can offer great opportunities ... students get close attention and parents love that everyone knows each other.''

The billboard outside the Malvern East school now reads: ''Holy Eucharist Primary School 1930 2017. Thanks for the memories.''

On the other side of town, Father Bill Edebohls from Ivanhoe Parish believes that federal funding changes and sluggish enrolment growth led to the closure of the Mother of God School.

''As a smaller school, Mother of God has required significant financial subsidy from the wider Catholic Education system and under the recent changes to school funding enacted by the Turnbull government, it will be extremely difficult to maintain the levels of assistance Mother of God needs,'' Father Edebohls said in a statement posted on the Parish's website.

''Instead, the burden would have been passed on to parents in the form of significantly higher fees together with a debt burden that would be unsustainable.''

Staff will lose their jobs at both schools, and most students will move to neighbouring Catholic schools in the parishes.

Catholic Education Melbourne says that it faces ''unprecedented measures'' that will dictate how much money its schools receive.

These measures includes the removal of the ''system-weighted average'', which bases funding for systemic schools on the average socio-economic status of all schools in the system.

''[Mr Birmingham] has replaced it with a focus on individual schools that will make it harder to keep small schools or others with special demands viable while holding down fees,'' Mr Elder said.

The Catholic sector is hoping a review of the socio-economic status model will fix some of these issues. The system-weighted average will remain in place for 2018 while the review takes place.

A spokesman for the Andrews government said the funding changes were bad for schools across all sectors.

''Make no mistake, this is a drastic cut to what schools both government and non-government should be receiving.''

From: the Age, 30 Oct, 2017

by Henrietta Cook

Posted in: Government Funding   0 Comments

Bringing about change in your school - the 4 Building Blocks you will require

Posted on 30 October 2017
Bringing about change in your school - the 4 Building Blocks you will require
Four key actions influence employee mind-sets and behavior. Here's why they matter.

Large-scale organizational change has always been difficult, and there's no shortage of research showing that a majority of transformations continue to fail. Today's dynamic environment adds an extra level of urgency and complexity. Companies must increasingly react to sudden shifts in the marketplace, to other external shocks, and to the imperatives of new business models. The stakes are higher than ever.

So what's to be done? In both research and practice, we find that transformations stand the best chance of success when they focus on four key actions to change mind-sets and behavior: fostering understanding and conviction, reinforcing changes through formal mechanisms, developing talent and skills, and role modeling. Collectively labeled the "influence model," these ideas were introduced more than a dozen years ago in a McKinsey Quarterly article, "The psychology of change management." They were based on academic research and practical experiencewhat we saw worked and what didn't.

Digital technologies and the changing nature of the workforce have created new opportunities and challenges for the influence model (for more on the relationship between those trends and the model, see this article's companion, "Winning hearts and minds in the 21st century"). But it still works overall, a decade and a half later (see diagram above). In a recent McKinsey Global Survey, we examined successful transformations and found that they were nearly eight times more likely to use all four actions as opposed to just one.1 Building both on classic and new academic research, the present article supplies a primer on the model and its four building blocks: what they are, how they work, and why they matter.

Fostering understanding and conviction

We know from research that human beings strive for congruence between their beliefs and their actions and experience dissonance when these are misaligned. Believing in the "why" behind a change can therefore inspire people to change their behavior. In practice, however, we find that many transformation leaders falsely assume that the "why" is clear to the broader organization and consequently fail to spend enough time communicating the rationale behind change efforts.

This common pitfall is predictable. Research shows that people frequently overestimate the extent to which others share their own attitudes, beliefs, and opinionsa tendency known as the false-consensus effect. Studies also highlight another contributing phenomenon, the "curse of knowledge": people find it difficult to imagine that others don't know something that they themselves do know. To illustrate this tendency, a Stanford study asked participants to tap out the rhythms of well-known songs and predict the likelihood that others would guess what they were. The tappers predicted that the listeners would identify half of the songs correctly; in reality, they did so less than 5 percent of the time.2

Therefore, in times of transformation, we recommend that leaders develop a change story that helps all stakeholders understand where the company is headed, why it is changing, and why this change is important. Building in a feedback loop to sense how the story is being received is also useful. These change stories not only help get out the message but also, recent research finds, serve as an effective influencing tool. Stories are particularly effective in selling brands.3

Even 15 years ago, at the time of the original article, digital advances were starting to make employees feel involved in transformations, allowing them to participate in shaping the direction of their companies. In 2006, for example, IBM used its intranet to conduct two 72-hour "jam sessions" to engage employees, clients, and other stakeholders in an online debate about business opportunities. No fewer than 150,000 visitors attended from 104 countries and 67 different companies, and there were 46,000 posts.4 As we explain in "Winning hearts and minds in the 21st century," social and mobile technologies have since created a wide range of new opportunities to build the commitment of employees to change.

Reinforcing with formal mechanisms

Psychologists have long known that behavior often stems from direct association and reinforcement. Back in the 1920s, Ivan Pavlov's classical conditioning research showed how the repeated association between two stimulithe sound of a bell and the delivery of foodeventually led dogs to salivate upon hearing the bell alone. Researchers later extended this work on conditioning to humans, demonstrating how children could learn to fear a rat when it was associated with a loud noise.5 Of course, this conditioning isn't limited to negative associations or to animals. The perfume industry recognizes how the mere scent of someone you love can induce feelings of love and longing.

Reinforcement can also be conscious, shaped by the expected rewards and punishments associated with specific forms of behavior. B. F. Skinner's work on operant conditioning showed how pairing positive reinforcements such as food with desired behavior could be used, for example, to teach pigeons to play Ping-Pong. This concept, which isn't hard to grasp, is deeply embedded in organizations. Many people who have had commissions-based sales jobs will understand the pointbeing paid more for working harder can sometimes be a strong incentive.

Despite the importance of reinforcement, organizations often fail to use it correctly. In a seminal paper "On the folly of rewarding A, while hoping for B," management scholar Steven Kerr described numerous examples of organizational-reward systems that are misaligned with the desired behavior, which is therefore neglected.6 Some of the paper's examplessuch as the way university professors are rewarded for their research publications, while society expects them to be good teachersare still relevant today. We ourselves have witnessed this phenomenon in a global refining organization facing market pressure. By squeezing maintenance expenditures and rewarding employees who cut them, the company in effect treated that part of the budget as a "super KPI." Yet at the same time, its stated objective was reliable maintenance.

Even when organizations use money as a reinforcement correctly, they often delude themselves into thinking that it alone will suffice. Research examining the relationship between money and experienced happinessmoods and general well-beingsuggests a law of diminishing returns. The relationship may disappear altogether after around $75,000, a much lower ceiling than most executives assume.

Money isn't the only motivator, of course. Victor Vroom's classic research on expectancy theory explained how the tendency to behave in certain ways depends on the expectation that the effort will result in the desired kind of performance, that this performance will be rewarded, and that the reward will be desirable.8 When a Middle Eastern telecommunications company recently examined performance drivers, it found that collaboration and purpose were more important than compensation (see "Ahead of the curve: The future of performance management," forthcoming on The company therefore moved from awarding minor individual bonuses for performance to celebrating how specific teams made a real difference in the lives of their customers. This move increased motivation while also saving the organization millions.

How these reinforcements are delivered also matters. It has long been clear that predictability makes them less effective; intermittent reinforcement provides a more powerful hook, as slot-machine operators have learned to their advantage. Further, people react negatively if they feel that reinforcements aren't distributed fairly. Research on equity theory describes how employees compare their job inputs and outcomes with reference-comparison targets, such as coworkers who have been promoted ahead of them or their own experiences at past jobs.9 We therefore recommend that organizations neutralize compensation as a source of anxiety and instead focus on what really drives performancesuch as collaboration and purpose, in the case of the Middle Eastern telecom company previously mentioned.

Developing talent and skills

Thankfully, you can teach an old dog new tricks. Human brains are not fixed; neuroscience research shows that they remain plastic well into adulthood. Illustrating this concept, scientific investigation has found that the brains of London taxi drivers, who spend years memorizing thousands of streets and local attractions, showed unique gray-matter volume differences in the hippocampus compared with the brains of other people. Research linked these differences to the taxi drivers' extraordinary special knowledge.10

Despite an amazing ability to learn new things, human beings all too often lack insight into what they need to know but don't. Biases, for example, can lead people to overlook their limitations and be overconfident of their abilities. Highlighting this point, studies have found that over 90 percent of US drivers rate themselves above average, nearly 70 percent of professors consider themselves in the top 25 percent for teaching ability, and 84 percent of Frenchmen believe they are above-average lovers.11 This self-serving bias can lead to blind spots, making people too confident about some of their abilities and unaware of what they need to learn. In the workplace, the "mum effect"a proclivity to keep quiet about unpleasant, unfavorable messagesoften compounds these self-serving tendencies.12

Even when people overcome such biases and actually want to improve, they can handicap themselves by doubting their ability to change. Classic psychological research by Martin Seligman and his colleagues explained how animals and people can fall into a state of learned helplessnesspassive acceptance and resignation that develops as a result of repeated exposure to negative events perceived as unavoidable. The researchers found that dogs exposed to unavoidable shocks gave up trying to escape and, when later given an opportunity to do so, stayed put and accepted the shocks as inevitable.13 Like animals, people who believe that developing new skills won't change a situation are more likely to be passive. You see this all around the economyfrom employees who stop offering new ideas after earlier ones have been challenged to unemployed job seekers who give up looking for work after multiple rejections.

Instilling a sense of control and competence can promote an active effort to improve. As expectancy theory holds, people are more motivated to achieve their goals when they believe that greater individual effort will increase performance.14 Fortunately, new technologies now give organizations more creative opportunities than ever to showcase examples of how that can actually happen.

Role modeling

Research tells us that role modeling occurs both unconsciously and consciously. Unconsciously, people often find themselves mimicking the emotions, behavior, speech patterns, expressions, and moods of others without even realizing that they are doing so. They also consciously align their own thinking and behavior with those of other peopleto learn, to determine what's right, and sometimes just to fit in.

While role modeling is commonly associated with high-power leaders such as Abraham Lincoln and Bill Gates, it isn't limited to people in formal positions of authority. Smart organizations seeking to win their employees' support for major transformation efforts recognize that key opinion leaders may exert more influence than CEOs. Nor is role modeling limited to individuals. Everyone has the power to model roles, and groups of people may exert the most powerful influence of all. Robert Cialdini, a well-respected professor of psychology and marketing, examined the power of "social proof"a mental shortcut people use to judge what is correct by determining what others think is correct. No wonder TV shows have been using canned laughter for decades; believing that other people find a show funny makes us more likely to find it funny too.

Today's increasingly connected digital world provides more opportunities than ever to share information about how others think and behave. Ever found yourself swayed by the number of positive reviews on Yelp? Or perceiving a Twitter user with a million followers as more reputable than one with only a dozen? You're not imagining this. Users can now "buy followers" to help those users or their brands seem popular or even start trending.

The endurance of the influence model shouldn't be surprising: powerful forces of human nature underlie it. More surprising, perhaps, is how often leaders still embark on large-scale change efforts without seriously focusing on building conviction or reinforcing it through formal mechanisms, the development of skills, and role modeling. While these priorities sound like common sense, it's easy to miss one or more of them amid the maelstrom of activity that often accompanies significant changes in organizational direction. Leaders should address these building blocks systematically because, as research and experience demonstrate, all four together make a bigger impact.

From:, April 2016

About the author(s)

Tessa Basford is a consultant in McKinsey's Washington, DC, office; Bill Schaninger is a director in the Philadelphia office.

Posted in: Leadership   0 Comments

Pressure on Churches to join abuse compensation scheme

Posted on 29 October 2017
Pressure on Churches to join abuse compensation scheme
The states and churches were under intense moral and political pressure last night to opt in to the Turnbull government's $4 billion child-sex abuse redress framework to enable 59,000 victims to receive compensation.

Social Services Minister Christian Porter yesterday called for nationwide pressure on the states and responsible organisations to opt in to the federal scheme amid concerns some would baulk at the cost.

Victoria yesterday offered inprinciple agreement, while NSW promised to continue negotiating with Canberra in a bid to provide a meaningful payment system.

As foreshadowed in The Australian, Mr Porter yesterday introduced a bill to federal parliament to enable the setting up of the commonwealth's redress system amid expectations Victoria, NSW, the Northern Territory and the ACT would opt in.

Commonwealth entities were the responsible agencies in the cases of an estimated 1000 victims of abuse; the remainder are covered by the states and the relevant institution.

There will be intense negotiations with governments and institutions after Mr Porter backed a scheme in which the test will be a "reasonable likelihood" that abuse occurred. "We are trying to create a low-hurdle, simple, clear, easyto-navigate process for the survivors of the abuse," Mr Porter told the ABC. "What we're very much hoping and encouraging is that the Catholic Church, the Anglican Church, Victoria, NSW, opt in the not too distant future to also allow survivors whose suffering occurred in those jurisdictions and in those institutions to make their applications inside this scheme.

"The reason that we've crafted the scheme in a consultative way is we want to make sure that its fundamental terms and conditions and processes are acceptable to all of the states and territories." The Catholic Church's Truth Justice and Healing Council chief executive Francis Sullivan said it was crucial that the states legislated to enable a truly national redress system. He said failure to secure a uniform response would leave victims at risk of not receiving compensation. Warning the states must opt in, he said of Mr Porter's legislation: "It's only a commonwealth scheme."

Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews said he was "very keen" to get the state into a national scheme. "But it's got to be a proper national scheme, there's got to be involvement from the non-government sector, that's probably the biggest outstanding issue - to what extent are the churches and others signed up to this," he said.

NSW Attorney-General Mark Speakman said he would engage with other jurisdictions "with a view to quickly developing a meaningful and practical national scheme for redress".


From: The Australian,  by John Ferguson

27 Oct 2017
Posted in: wellbeing   0 Comments
Tell a FriendPrint This PageBookmark SitePrincipals LoginEnquiry