D e v e l o p m e n t
a n d
R e v i e w
2013 – 2017
S c h o o l
I m p r o v e m e n t
/
S c h o o l
School Review and Development
(SRD) Guidelines
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)
Contents
Section 1: The School Review and Development (SRD) Program (principles and purpose) ...................................... 1
1.1.
The Purpose of School Review and Development ................................................................................ 1
1.2.
Principles Underpinning the Program ................................................................................................... 1
1.3.
Scope of Accountabilities ...................................................................................................................... 1
1.3.1.
NSW Government Accountabilities ....................................................................................................... 1
1.3.2.
Australian Government Accountabilities .............................................................................................. 2
1.3.3.
Catholic Schools Office Accountabilities ............................................................................................... 2
1.3.4.
Annual School Report............................................................................................................................ 2
1.4.
Board of Studies and Diocesan Focus Areas ......................................................................................... 3
1.5.
Compliance Certification ....................................................................................................................... 3
Section 2: The Structure of the School Review and Development Program ............................................................. 4
2.1
Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 4
2.1.1
Regulatory Requirements (Tier 1) ......................................................................................................... 5
2.1.2
Quality Assurance (Tier 2) ..................................................................................................................... 6
2.2
Review Reports ..................................................................................................................................... 6
2.2.1
Self-Evaluation Report .......................................................................................................................... 6
2.2.2
School Review and Development Report .............................................................................................. 7
2.3
Post review – Strategic Planning ........................................................................................................... 7
Section 3: Monitoring non-curriculum requirements................................................................................................ 8
3.1
Staff ....................................................................................................................................................... 8
3.2
Premises, Buildings, Facilities ................................................................................................................ 8
3.3
Work Health and Safety ........................................................................................................................ 8
3.4
Child Protection – Legislative Requirements ........................................................................................ 8
3.5
Management and Operation of the School .......................................................................................... 9
3.6
Managing Risk ..................................................................................................................................... 10
3.7
Handling Complaints ........................................................................................................................... 10
Section 4: Returns to the NSW Board of Studies ..................................................................................................... 11
Section 5: Provisional and Initial registration/accreditation ................................................................................... 12
5.1
Process for Placing a School on Provisional Registration/Accreditation ............................................. 12
5.2
Process for New Schools ..................................................................................................................... 12
Section 6: Roles and Responsibilities ...................................................................................................................... 13
6.1
Roles in the Process of School Review and Development .................................................................. 13
6.2
Role of the School Principal ................................................................................................................ 13
6.3
CSO Roles in School Review and Development ................................................................................... 13
6.4
Role of the Assistant Director School Improvement ........................................................................... 13
6.5
Role of the Schools Consultant ........................................................................................................... 14
6.6
Role of the Leader, School Review and Development ........................................................................ 14
6.7
Role of the External Validation Chair .................................................................................................. 14
6.8
Role and selection of the School Review Panel .................................................................................. 14
6.9
Role of the NSW Board of Studies, Teaching & Educational Standards (BOSTES) .............................. 15
6.10
Role of the Board of Studies Inspectors .............................................................................................. 15
Section 7: Ethical Framework ................................................................................................................................. 16
Section 8: Appendices ............................................................................................................................................. 17
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
Tier 1 Review Day – Overview ............................................................................................................. 17
Tier 2 Review Days – Overview ........................................................................................................... 18
Relevant Documents ........................................................................................................................... 19
Focus Areas ......................................................................................................................................... 20
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)
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
Mission
is the
philosophical core
of each of the
three domains of
the program.
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:











1.3.
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.
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 nongovernment 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





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 are supported in the preparation of their report with the following documents:



Broken Bay Annual School Report template
Content Guide: Annual Reports – primary schools
Content Guide: Annual Reports – secondary schools
School Review and Development Guidelines
Page 2
Reports are due to the CSO by the end of Term 1 of the subsequent reporting year. Principals are asked to email
their completed report to the Professional Assistant to the Head of Educational Services. A comprehensive
review 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.
Schools are required to populate their report with the data and to provide comment where necessary. 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.
Board of Studies 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 Online Audit Tool (OAT), or the Compliance Certificate. The
Compliance Certificate replaces completion of the OAT and is being phased-in with review schools. The
completion of this certificate is 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.
School Review and Development Guidelines
Page 3
Section 2: The Structure of the School Review and Development
Program
2.1
Introduction
The SRD program can be described as one in which schools either engage in an external review which is
overseen by an external review panel, or self-review which is overseen by the school principal. All schools are
scheduled for external review once in a 5 year period, with approximately nine (9) schools selected for inclusion
in the external review program annually. Self-review schools engage in processes aligned to external review and
are supported by the Schools Consultant and key CSO personnel in the achievements of their strategic and
annual priorities. The external review program of schools extends to three days and is comprised of one Tier 1
day and two Tier 2 days.
The Broken Bay SRD program is constructed on a two-tiered model. The following diagram describes the
structure of the model.
Tier 1
Compliance
with
regulatory
requirements
Pre-review: Self-evaluation
According to an agreed schedule of School Review and
Development, schools develop a manageable plan to
undertake a thorough self-evaluation of regulatory
requirements, strengths and areas for development.
Schools document their findings using the compliance
checklist and the Self-Evaluation Report.
During review: External validation
Review panels validate the school’s evidence of
compliance and their documented reflections of their
learning journey.
Tier 2
School selfevaluation
and reflection
on their
learning
journey
Post review: Strategic plans
Recommendations and findings from the review inform
the School Strategic Plan (SSP) and the School
Improvement Plan (SIP).
Tasks associated with review include the completion of documentation by schools, panel members and CSO
personnel. Schools complete the compliance checklist (Tier 1) and the Self-Evaluation Report (Tier 2). Both
documents are made available to respective panel members. (These documents are available on the SRD
website, http://srd.dbbcso.org; password = srd; school review tiers tab).
The school Principal in consultation with the Schools Consultant and the Leader, School Review and
Development manage the stages of the program. The specific tasks within each stage are executed through a
collaborative planning approach, however, particular stages can be predominately labelled as CSO tasks and
school tasks. The following graphic describes the key stages of the program from planning to validation to future
planning. Differentiation of key tasks is shown using blue (CSO tasks) and red (school tasks) coloured shapes in
the graphic below.
Organising the
review
CSO task
Preparation of
documentation
School task
Identification of
strengths and
areas for
development
School task
School Review and Development Guidelines
Review of school
by external panel
CSO task
Preparation of
Review Reports
CSO task
Development of
school plans
based on the
outcome of
review
School task
Page 4
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 curriculum documentation in primary schools, with four Key Learning Areas
(KLAs) reviewed. In secondary schools, all KLAs are reviewed. All schools maintain/complete a compliance
checklist.
The information provided in the following table describes the current monitoring practice with external and selfreview schools.
External review schools (approximately 9 schools per year)
Self-review schools
Preparation for External Review
Self-review schools complete a
compliance checklist (to be
published on the DSS O drive) or the
web-based Online Audit Tool (the
‘Tool’)
(http://education.cnsdata.com.au/)
annually.
 The selection of schools takes place and the review panel is
determined (CSO task).
 Dates for review are scheduled and the communication of these
dates is provided to schools at least 6 months prior to review (CSO
task).
 External review 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,
School Review and Development.
Review day
 On the scheduled review day, the review panel makes a
determination of the school’s status of compliance based on the
documentation provided by the school. Panel members document
their findings by completing relevant checklists.
Post review
 A report on the panel’s findings is provided to the school on the
analysis of the checklists.
In the case where the external review panel raises concerns about the
school’s status of 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.
The audit of some non-curriculum requirements for schools may be
conducted at a time conducive to the respective auditor rather than the
scheduled review date. This may involve areas related to:





Attendance
Work Health & Safety
Premises, Buildings, Facilities
Child Protection (Legislative requirements)
Institute of Teachers requirements
Schools completing the Tool:
These schools answer a series of
questions based on the registration
and accreditation requirements for
non-government schools by
selecting from ‘yes’ or ‘no’ options.
The Tool also allows schools to
include a description of their
documentation and processes used
as evidence of compliance in free
text fields. A report on the status of
the school’s compliance based on
the information provided by the
school is generated by the Tool. The
report is assessed by the Leader,
School Review and Development,
after which time feedback is
provided to the school. (Note: The
Tool is currently being phased out in
preference to the compliance
checklist).
Schools completing the O drive
checklist:
These schools are monitored by the
Schools Consultant and any followup related to the execution of the
requirements is managed by the
Consultant.
The results of these audits, along with the results of the audits conducted
on the scheduled Tier 1 day for these review schools are summarised in
the complete Tier 1 review report.
School Review and Development Guidelines
Page 5
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 9 schools per year)
Self-review schools
Preparation for School Review
Self-review schools are encouraged
to engage in an annual selfevaluation of achievements and
areas for development since their
last 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. The Tier 2 review date is scheduled approximately two (2)
weeks after Tier 1 (CSO task).
 Review schools complete the Self-Evaluation Report hyperlinking
evidence to school documentation (school task).
 The Self-Evaluation Report and the most recent Annual School
Report are provided to the Tier 2 panel members in preparation
for review days (CSO task).
They are also encouraged to use the
existing review school
documentation for their selfevaluation.
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 and dialogue.
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 strategic plan.
2.2
Review Reports
The school’s Self-Evaluation Report completed in preparation for external review, and the CSO’s School Review
and Development Report completed on the outcome of the external review, 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
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
School Review and Development Guidelines
Page 6
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:



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?
Future Directions:


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. 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.
School Review and Development Guidelines
Page 7
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 NSW Institute of
Teachers (IoT) requirements. With respect to the latter, support is provided to schools by the HR Education
Officer NSW IoT to ensure the completion of particular documentation. This documentation tracks information
about NSW IoT requirements as it relates to full time, part-time and casual teaching staff. This includes:





staff working towards accreditation at the level of Proficient/Professional Competence
staff maintaining accreditation at the level of Proficient/Professional Competence
the provision of supervisor/mentor support
financial currency with the NSW IoT
accurate details on IoT accounts.
The CSO Broken Bay Induction Planner 3rd edition 2013 (CuriaNet  Catholic Schools Office  Human Resources
Services  Professional Learning) provides schools with information relating to NSW IoT 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 5-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.
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 Professional Learning (CP PL) on an
ongoing basis linked to the School Review and Development program.
Schools scheduled for review in any given year are targeted for CP PL in the year prior to their review.
Staff complete two CP PL sessions at their school delivered 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 Commission for Children and Young People Act 1998. 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 Commission for Children and Young People Act.
School Review and Development Guidelines
Page 8
 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.
All staff sign an attendance sheet verifying their attendance at the CP PL sessions. This information is maintained
centrally and may also be maintained by schools. The formal CSO CP PL sessions do not prevent schools from
conducting any school based CP PL. A number of resources are available for schools on CuriaNet (CSO intranet)
to provide refresher sessions for their 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
The CSO Child Protection Officer attends each school prior to Tier 1 for the purpose of reviewing school based
policies and practice. Typically the CSO Child Protection Officer will:
 check that the school’s Staff Handbook contains sections outlining:
o procedures for handling allegations against staff of inappropriate behaviour towards children
o procedures for mandatory reporting students at risk of significant harm
o employment screening / Working With Children Check 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 also defines a ‘responsible person’ as the
Principal of a 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.
School Review and Development Guidelines
Page 9
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  Catholic Schools Office  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.
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. Information relating to the procedures for raising a
formal complaint can be located on the CSO public website
(http://www.cso.brokenbay.catholic.edu.au/resources/polproc.html).
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 Diocesan Schools Board Complaints Handling Policy and Procedures for Diocesan Systemic Schools available
from CuriaNet (CSO intranet) details the framework established for the handling of complaints that relate to the
operation of diocesan systemic schools (CuriaNet  Catholic Schools Office  DSS Resources)
School Review and Development Guidelines
Page 10
Section 4: Returns to the NSW Board of Studies
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)
Within 14 days of the
breach
Written notification
As soon as practicable
after the breach occurs.
Written notification
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
Notification through
RANGS
A school ceases to operate
Within one (1) month of
the change
Notification through
RANGS
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
Notification through
RANGS
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
Notification through
RANGS
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









Ombudsman Act 1974
Commission for Children and Young People Act 1998
Institute of Teachers 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.
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).
Appointment of a new principal
Where there is an appointment of a new principal (or equivalent) the Board of Studies 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 the Board of Studies within one
(1) month of such change occurring
School Review and Development Guidelines
Page 11
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.
School Review and Development Guidelines
Page 12
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:






6.2
School Principal
Teachers
Parents
Students
Schools Consultant
Parish Priest.
Role of the School Principal
The school Principal:










6.3
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.
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:






6.4
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).
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.
School Review and Development Guidelines
Page 13
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:










6.7
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.
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:




6.8
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.
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.
School Review and Development Guidelines
Page 14
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:



6.9
the requirements of the task
the likely availability of desired panel members within the timeframe of the program
overall resource demands of the process.
Role of the NSW Board of Studies, Teaching & Educational Standards (BOSTES)
The NSW BOSTES:




6.10
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.
Role of the Board of Studies 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.
School Review and Development Guidelines
Page 15
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.
School Review and Development Guidelines
Page 16
Section 8: Appendices
8.1
Tier 1 Review Day – Overview
The following table describes the actions by panel members on review day; the Tier 2 days are described on the
following pages.
Tier 1: Outline of a typical day
When
What
Who
9am
Briefing with Principal
Principal, Chair, Schools Consultant, Leader SRD meet to discuss any
particular issues which the Principal may wish to raise.
9.30 am
 Panel arrives
 Panel briefing
begins
Chair and Leader SRD lead panel briefing to unpack the purpose of
the day & to review key documents to be completed.
10am
Audit begins
Panel members review school information and complete related
checklists.
2.30pm
Panel de-briefing
session
 Panel members summarise findings with group by highlighting
strengths and/or any concerns.
 Session led by Chair and Leader SRD.
3pm
Panel may leave at this time
3pm
De-briefing with
Principal
3.30pm
End of day
School Review and Development Guidelines
 Chair engages in discussion with the Principal to provide an
overview of the panel’s findings.
 Consultant & Leader SRD are also present for this discussion.
 Discussion includes next steps:
 Report written by Leader SRD from the panel’s findings.
 Report provided to the Principal at the conclusion of the Tier
2 review.
Page 17
8.2
Tier 2 Review Days – Overview
Tier 2 Day 1 review schedule
When
What
Detail
8.15 am
School welcome
Panel and school members gather for welcome and prayer (school to organise
prayer).
8.45 am
Panel briefing
Chair and Leader SRD lead panel briefing to unpack the purpose of the review
days and to review key documents to be completed.
9:45 am
Principal’s presentation
Contextual information using relevant data is presented to the panel. This
session provides the opportunity to highlight key strengths and challenges
documented in the Self-Evaluation Report (the key document that will be used
by the panel); the mode of delivery of this session is determined by the school.
10:30 am
Morning Tea with staff; Panel introduction
10:50 am
Evidence gathering by
panel



Panel members begin to gather evidence through the analysis of
documentation and dialogue with key staff.
Key staff present to selected panel members in each of the domains
(Mission, Learning and Teaching, Pastoral Care) – as determined by the
Principal.
School to organise rooming and IT required for these sessions.
12.30 pm
Closed panel meeting &
working lunch


Chair leads discussion of findings by panel members.
This session allows panel members to consolidate, seek clarity and request
further information (if required).
1:30 pm
Focus groups

During this time, the panel meets with key interest groups:
1. Teachers through classroom visits
2. Parents
3. Student leaders
4. Parish Priest (or similar as determined by the school’s context)
The school determines the scheduling of these activities. Key questions are
asked of each group by panel members.
Not all panel members will be involved in each forum.


2.30 pm
Closed panel meeting
Panel members share thoughts/findings with group by highlighting strengths
and/or any concerns/clarifications required.
3.00 pm
Preliminary feedback to
Principal

3.30 pm
End of day 1
Chair engages in discussion with the Principal to provide an overview of
the panel’s findings.
Tier 2 Day 2 review schedule
When
What
8.30 am
Panel arrival; Panel begins the process of writing their report from the evidence provided/collected
10:30 am
Closed panel morning tea (school provided); Panel continues report writing
12.30 pm
Closed panel lunch (school provided); Panel continues report writing
1.30 pm
Panel concludes report writing and collation of domain reports
2.15 pm
Closed panel meeting



3.00pm
Detailed feedback to
leadership team
Meeting between school leaders and panel to discuss summary findings
3.30 pm
Summary feedback to
staff
Panel and staff gather for feedback session led by Chair and Principal
3.45 pm
End of day 2 and end of review
School Review and Development Guidelines
Detail
Panel convenes to discuss completed report.
Report is checked for consistency of information.
Panel asked to highlight a maximum of 3 areas to feedback to staff.
Page 18
8.3
Relevant Documents
All documentation related to School Review and Development is available on the SRD website at
http://srd.dbbcso.org; password = srd
Compliance checklist (http://srd.dbbcso.org/schoolreview-tiers.html)
Compliance Checklist
(for completion by
schools)
Self-Evaluation Report (http://srd.dbbcso.org/schoolreview-tiers.html)
Support document for regulatory requirements
(http://srd.dbbcso.org/policies.html)
Document
Management Guide for
Schools
Self Evalution Report – Domain Reports
(http://srd.dbbcso.org/school-review-tiers.html)
School Review
Tier Two
Quality Assurance
School Strategic Plan (3-year) and annual Improvement Plan (SIP) templates and support documents
(http://srd.dbbcso.org/strategic--annual-plans.html)
School Review and Development Guidelines
Page 19
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)

Extension of and evaluation
of Tier 1 pilot

Development of KLA
checklists for school selfevaluation

Management of the
opening of St Brigid’s Lake
Munmorah for Year 7

Trial and evaluation of
Curriculum Focus Day

Management of the
opening of St Brigid’s Lake
Munmorah to Year 8
2013
2014
Safe and Supportive
environment (S5.6.1)
Curriculum (S5.3 & S7)
Educational and Financial
reporting (S5.10)
Staff (S5.2)
2015
Safe and Supportive
environment (S5.6.2)
Management and operation of
the school (S5.9)
2016
Curriculum (S5.3)
Premises/Buildings (S5.4) &
Facilities (S5.5)
2017
To be determined
2018
To be determined
2019
To be determined
2020
To be determined
School Review and Development Guidelines
Page 20
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)
ii)
the authority has a school improvement framework in accordance with the regulations and
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-assessment
b) 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; and
b) 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.
School Review and Development Guidelines
Page 21