Posted in Governance

Above: Sheree Limbrek - CEO of CPSL - meets with the CaSPA Board on August 23.

Catholic Professional Standards Limited has been established in recent times, to set up processes that will ensure the Catholic Church learns the hard lessons from the Royal Commission into Sexual Abuse are followed up with better systems and procedures.

This body was set up as an entity and is co-owned by the Australian Catholic Bishops and the Religious Congregations of Australia.

The key focus up to this point is to set up Standards that will govern practices and behaviours in all aspects of the Catholic Church. 

Where there is a suggestion the standards are not being followed, there will be a follow up audit to ascertain what has occured. All members of the Church will be subject to these audits including Bishops, Priests, Schools and other ministries.

When the CaSPA Board met with the CPSL CEO, Sheree Limbrek it was heartening to hear of the scope of this organisation. It also signalled that when the Governance of Catholic Education is brought up for review, there can be a similar far reaching reform that will take place.

CaSPA Principals are encouraged to read more about CPSL on their Web Page: https://www.cpsltd.org.au

 

Former prime minister Julia Gillard makes no apology for establishing the controversial My School website as education minister, despite concerns it has become a rating tool and led to a multimillion-dollar coaching industry.

She said she was also pleased to see politicians "falling over themselves" to align themselves with her policy of needs-based funding.

Ms Gillard said fears about the negative effects of the My School website had not eventuated, but did not address recent criticism of the comparison system made by many, including NSW Education Minister Rob Stokes.

"I fought for the radical transparency provided by the My School website, believing that the more good-quality information that we deliver in the public realm, the more that is out there, the better education policy debate is going to be," she said at the EduTECH conference in Sydney yesterday. "I still believe that. The nightmare scenario painted at the time I delivered that reform, of league tables and name and shame, has simply not come true, and I was very confident it would never come true."

Ms Gillard also said her needs-based school funding reform was "bitterly opposed every step of the way" by those who wanted to get political advantage from siding with certain school sectors.

"Now I am delighted to see people from all sides of politics falling over themselves to grab the mantle of being the truest believer in needs-based funding," she said. "This is a change in Australian politics of which I am very proud."

NSW Teachers Federation President Maurie Mulheron said the only reason My School didn't lead to league tables was industrial action by teachers. "It's really galling to hear her say that," he said. "[My School] has turned what was meant to be low-stakes into a highstakes test. It has caused immeasurable damage to the teaching of curriculum across the country. It has led to the blossoming of a coaching industry.

"The creation of My School was a singularly retrograde policy initiative, which very few people in the profession would defend."

 

From; Sydney Morning Herald, Sydney  by Jordan Baker
09 Jun 2018

The following article appeared in today's copy of The Age. If it was an isolated incident, one would see it as very unfortunate for a highly committed and capable school leader, but unfortunately it would seem that it is anything but unique.  As noted elsewhere, some of our CaSPA principals are being subjected to similar attacks in Sydney while the CaSPA Conference planned for Cairns in July continues to be the target for ultra conservatives who question whether our schools belong to the Church and adhere to the "authority of the Bishops". A short visit to the website of one of these groups - ChurchMilitant - at least gives one comfort that we do not subscribe to the sad and belittling "teachings" of the church they claim allegiance to....

It can't be easy running a school these days. Parents invest so much hope and expectation in their children's education, and some invest a lot of money, too.
At the same time we seem to lack faith in the education system we feel that things aren't quite right, and that they certainly aren't what they once were. Many don't like the way schools have changed.

And while in the past the school gate may have been the main forum for parents to air their unhappiness, these days even slight grumbles can be quickly amplified by social and other media.
Dr Michael Davies [pictured above] knows the difficulty better than most. On Tuesday morning Dr Davies announced that he would step down as headmaster of Trinity Grammar School in Kew at the end of the current term.
His resignation follows months of disquiet and unrest in the school community.
In March, Trinity's deputy headmaster, Rohan Brown, was sacked by the school council for cutting a boy's hair before a school photo session.

To an outside observer, the sacking didn't look unreasonable: you'd think the days of a teacher taking to a student's below-the-collar hair with a pair of scissors were long gone, and in sacking Rohan Brown, the school council was making exactly that point.
But after protests by students - who wore casual clothes instead of their uniforms - and a campaign by some parents and old boys, Dr Davies announced an independent review of Mr Brown's sacking.
The review found that although Mr Brown had contravened the school's disciplinary procedures, he should be reinstated. (The review also recommended that if Mr Brown returned to the school, the headmaster should advise him that "he should never in any circumstances cut a student's hair".)
The scandal at the private school in Kew shows no sign of slowing down with many students wearing brown armbands to honour a sacked staff member.

Dr Davies was criticised by some in the school community (including vocal old boys) for changing Trinity's culture. David Baumgartner, president of the Old Trinity Grammarians' Association, attacked what he said was Dr Davies' increased focus on academic results at the expense of producing well-rounded young men.

Some parents disagreed, one telling the ABC, "For the four years that Michael Davies has been there we've seen the school just go from strength to strength."
At a community meeting in March, more than 1500 parents, students and former students called for Dr Davies and the school council to resign. A separate vote found that just 26 per cent of staff at the school supported the headmaster.
Yet in reluctantly accepting his resignation this week, the current school council chairman, Robert Utter, said: "Over the past four and a half years, Dr Davies has been instrumental in the school's continuing evolution as a leading private educational institution. Michael, with support from a team of highly-regarded teachers and educational leaders, has implemented an impressive list of academic, outreach and co-curricular initiatives at Trinity."
It seems that Dr Davies was trying to bring the 115-year-old Anglican grammar school into the 21st century, and not everybody was happy about it.
Whether his resignation will be a good thing for the school or a bad thing will be debated for some time to come. But the circumstances in which Dr Davies came to his decision amid the clamour of an angry mob should fill us all with disquiet.

From: The Age 16 May 2018 11:20am

by Matt Holden, an Age columnist.

The Catholic Church is so big and complex. That is one of its defining characteristics yet the media and society at large, much less the Catholic community itself, often fail to grasp its consequences.

We live in an era of big institutions, such as big government, big business, big unions and other large organisations, including big churches. Business uses its size and complexity to reduce its tax burden and government has the power to crush dissent and diffuse calls for accountability. But the Catholic Church is particularly complex with its dioceses, agencies, orders, congregations, lay movements and international Canon Law.

The size and organisational complexity of the church has bedevilled the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. Survivors of child sexual abuse have often been fobbed off when making claims against the church by the so-called Ellis defence which has used the law to pretend that no church entity can legitimately be sued in a particular case. Such a defence has rightly been condemned as legal trickery.

Now church reformers are facing the same dilemma, although in a different fashion. The problem lies with the many layers of authority and geographical organisation. This makes the church big and slippery. Getting a grip on it is much like mud-wrestling with an elephant. Its size and shape mean that there are numerous opportunities to engage with it but also equally numerous veto points and dead-ends when it comes to getting action.

Would-be reformers, like the groups which met last Friday in Canberra as the Australian Catholic Coalition for Church Reform (ACCCR), are faced with the dilemma of just where to begin. Should they start from the top down, concentrating their efforts on the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference and the Vatican? That strategy involves dealing with the President and the Permanent Committee through either their local bishop or the ACBC Secretariat with an eye on the May and November meetings of the whole conference.

Or should they begin from the bottom up, concentrating their efforts on their local parish or diocese? That strategy has the advantage of greater accessibility but the limitation that parish and diocese must work within the larger framework of church rules. There is also enormous variability between parishes and dioceses. Some reformers will find themselves welcomed by a progressive bishop or priest, but others will be stymied by apathy and conservatism.

The local level also includes schools and agencies, like Catholic Care, as well as hospitals and aged care institutions. All provide avenues for staff and clients to engage with the larger institution.

"We are taking on trust the claims by church leaders that everything is on the table and it will not be business as usual. But we are worried that those assurances will not come to pass."

This complexity is also a mixed blessing in approaching participation in the processes of the 2020 Plenary Council, which many reformers are planning to do though with a mixture of trust and scepticism. We are taking on trust the claims by church leaders that everything is on the table and it will not be business as usual.

But we are worried that those assurances will not come to pass, either because real reform is out of the hands of the Australian church or because there is no firm intention of constructing a broad agenda which includes structural and cultural issues such as the absence of women from decision-making and the barriers to lay leadership.

For that reason it is essential that the bishops engage with the ACCCR communique and release the response of their Truth, Justice and Healing Council to the royal commission to the Catholic community when they receive it in late April. Furthermore, a lay woman co-chair should be appointed to the Plenary Council leadership without further ado to provide the necessary gender and lay/clerical balance.

In general both church reformers and church officials should be much clearer and in the case of church leaders much more transparent about levels of responsibility within the church. That would make it plainer what precisely can be achieved within the Australian church within parishes and dioceses and collectively nation-wide. That in turn would make it more obvious what each level can reasonably be expected to do when it comes to institutional reform. A great deal of inertia and buck-passing, and ultimately dashed expectations, will be avoided if that is the case.

Reprinted from Eureka Street 31 March 2018 by John Warhurst

John Warhurst is an Emeritus Professor of Political Science at the Australian National University and chairs Concerned Catholics Canberra-Goulburn.

Above: An animated meeting of parents and the school community at Trinity Grammar in Melbourne

While Catholic Schools work to new understandings of Governance post the Royal Commission into Sexual Abuse, recent unrest at a Melbourne Independent school illustrates the importance of developing sound Governance practices and principles.

Private schools around Australia will be watching, with interest even alarm   the extraordinary turmoil impacting Melbourne's Trinity Grammar, sparked by the sacking of much loved and long-standing teacher and deputy head Rohan Brown.

Other schools will be watching developments in the saga for three key reasons: the speed with which events have unfolded; the massive reputational impact the issue has had on Trinity; and the damage done to key relationships important to the future of the school.

In what can only be described as a 'shambles of governance' at the school over more than 10 days, we see reflected, at the very least, a total failure of those in a position of leadership at Trinity to listen, take soundings and to weigh the likely consequences of their actions.

As student and wider school community antipathy became louder and louder, the relatively new chair of the school's council, Roderick Lyle, resigned along with two of his other directors.

It seems probable that more directors will depart in the coming days and weeks. Students current and former are also up in arms over what they perceive as appalling and unjust decision-making at the senior levels of the school.

How can this shambles be explained? It has a lot to do with a failure to listen and a failure to consult.

Schools are notoriously poor at consulting their own stakeholders while, at the same time, being notoriously good at extracting money from parents and past students to pay for future plans and projects.

The fact that this appears to be among the issues impacting Trinity does not mean that Trinity is the only school which does not understand its own community.

Many schools simply don't bother asking their own communities what their views are, what they want, or whether the timing is right for this or that.

The implication being: 'We are not much interested in your views.'

Schools public and private frequently misread or don't bother 'reading' their own communities.

Listening and consulting require hard work. Time and resources are a pre-requisite to do both well. Any teaching institution which fails to listen and consult in the 21st century deserves the adverse stakeholder reaction which will most certainly come their way.

Schools would do well to remember that parents and students are by another name customers. Like customers everywhere, they have choices. Choices with both their decisions and their wallets.

For these institutions, reputation is everything. People enjoy associating with institutions held in high regard. Conversely, they will turn their backs on institutions that appear incapable of managing their reputations.

Just as young people everywhere are becoming less interested in 'membership-based' organisations, so too are they less inclined to stay loyal to a school merely because their mother or father went there.

Schools, unlike virtually any other organisation, have in their immediate orbit, the very people who understand connectivity, communication and consultation better than any age group before them.

Why the principals and boards of schools, are apparently so reluctant to engage, understand and learn from their own students (and parents and former students) is one of the mysteries of the 21st century.

Those schools that don't lift their game, and learn to listen, may well find the option to do so is removed from them.

They probably won't exist.

By:John Simpson is a former member of council at Scotch College and a member of council at Monash University.

Published: https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/state/vic/2018/03/17/trinity-grammar-controversy-private-schools/