The NSW Minister for Education Adrian Piccoli recently announced a number of major changes to the NSW school regulator, the NSW Board of Studies (BOSTES). The NSW Government has accepted the recommendations of the March 2016 independent review of BOSTES, chaired by Emeritus Professor Bill Louden AM (the Review).

This is the first article in a four part series on the role of the regulator in assessing school compliance. In this series, Craig D’cruz, National Education Consultant at CompliSpace, explores the role of State and Territory education authorities in determining how schools meet their accreditation or registration requirements and the scope of the authorities' powers. In Part Two of this series, Craig will be asking the question; 'What are the Regulators really looking for when undertaking a registration review of a school?'

The Review's findings

According to the conclusions of the Review, four core themes have emerged that the Panel considered should guide the next phase of reform for the BOSTES:

• shifting the regulatory focus to one that is outcomes and risk based;

• directing effort to areas that will have the greatest impact on student outcomes;

• improving strategy and agility; and

• ensuring clearer accountability and decision making.

Mr Piccoli has stated that “The BOSTES plays an important role in education in NSW and these reforms will give it increased authority to support quality teaching in every classroom across every school and every sector,”.  “These changes will ensure teachers are better supported, cut red tape for schools and give students faster access to innovative, contemporary syllabuses.”

New name, new structure, new powers

From 2017, the BOSTES will be known as the NSW Education Standards Authority (Authority). According to the Minister’s media release, the BOSTES President Tom Alegounarias said the Authority will be strategically focused to better support quality teaching and learning.  “I welcome the review and these changes. The Authority will strengthen and build on the foundation of trust and respect that BOSTES has established,”. In theSydney Morning Herald, Mr Alegounarias also noted that "the Authority's efforts would be focused on schools where there was a high risk of problems, whilst devolving some of the administrative burden of compliance to principals."

The Authority will:

• be led by a streamlined Board of up to 14 educational leaders (down from 23 members);
• introduce random, risk-based school inspections and thematic reviews;
• identify schools needing support to meet regulatory requirements; and
• ensure teachers have more curriculum flexibility to engage students with deeper learning, using regularly updated syllabuses, particularly in technology-rich subjects like IT.

In addition, the Herald reported that the Authority will also have enhanced powers to lift school compliance and teacher quality with the ultimate aim of improving student results. It was reported that the changes have been welcomed by the Association of Independent Schools NSW and the Catholic Education Commission of NSW, as well as the NSW Business Chamber.

The new authority will “have the power to close non-compliant schools and conduct random unannounced inspections in Catholic, private and public schools”.  Non-government schools will also be subject to an increased number of random and risk-based audits, and the ‘authority will also have the power to formally warn and ultimately deregister any school not meeting regulatory requirements.’ This power is similar to those found in other States and Territories.

However, Mr Picoli was also quoted as saying, "It's not punitive, it's not about closing schools down, it's about finding where there might be weaknesses and helping schools address those weaknesses in their systems." "The board ought to make schools nervous around school registration requirements, and it ought to make teachers nervous around teaching standards".

Indicators of governance failures will be acted upon

The Herald also reported that certain indicators of poor governance practices would attract the Authority's attention and generate risk audits and school inspections.  Such indicators could include issues such as a rapid turnover of school boards or senior staff, concerns about finances, very poor academic results or a rush of parent complaints. All of which would, in all probability, also trigger similar responses in regulatory bodies in other States and Territories.

These changes bring the BOSTES into a similar position of authority as many other regulators in other States and Territories.  However, increasing powers of regulatory authorities are not new for schools. Non-government schools across Australia, have been increasingly aware of government scrutiny of their finances (as most are in receipt of Federal and State funding), their charitable status (as per the requirements of theAustralian Charities and Not-For Profit Commission) their educational offerings (as per State and the Federal Australian Curriculum and Assessment Authority requirements) and their requirements for governance (as per the Australian Securities and Investment Commission and State/Territory Acts).

According to The Educator, Bill Louden, was critical of the BOSTES for “needlessly duplicating” national reforms in regulation and curriculum areas, saying the board's regulatory processes are “currently administratively burdensome for schools, teachers, employers and indeed for BOSTES itself”.

What should schools consider? 

So what actions should NSW non-government schools take in light of these changes?  Legislative reform will be required for any of the 13 Recommendations of the Review to take effect. According to Mr Piccoli's media release, such reform will commence in the spring sitting of NSW Parliament.

Media reports have identified potential key changes:

• firstly, as per the article in the Herald, ‘Independent schools will be subject to an increased number of random and risk-based audits’ ; and
• attributed to Tom Alegounarias ‘the authority's efforts would be focused on schools where there was a high risk of problems, whilst devolving some of the administrative burden of compliance to principals’.

In the first instance, we would argue that if such changes are implemented, NSW non-government schools will need to look closely at their Enterprise Risk Management Strategies and the manner in which they mitigate their risks. Principals will need to ensure that the identified risks, from board level to environmental level are identified, monitored and that they have clear policies and strategies in place to ensure that the risks are managed (or mitigated) at an acceptable level of compliance under this new regime.

In the next article, Craig will be asking the question; 'What are the Regulators really looking for when undertaking a registration review of a school?'