ANÁLISIS DE DATOS

In the course of her interview, System Leader Judy observed that the framework of legal information provided to government school principals was “Fairly relentless . . . and fairly comprehensive, so that we make sure they’re really well-equipped to take on the role”. That characterisation seems not to have been over-stated. Judy went on to explain:

They have a fairly extensive induction process where we go through all the main

documents that are remotely associated with legal or risk management issues or related to the Education Act. . . . The second thing is continual awareness-raising, so that we bring to the attention of our principals at Forums, plus through weekly memos, we’ll feature various legal documents, just to refresh their memories . . . Checklists that principals can go through to make sure that they’re compliant with standards . . . Professional learning around critical incidents . . . By most of their phones we will have the list with all the

Departmental Level

Supervisory Management

Level

School Level

• Legal section

• Risk management, IR, HR professional conduct • System leaders

• Principal network leaders • Colleague principals • Legal Handbook • Policies

phone numbers and processes they need to follow. (Personal communication, June 24, 2014)

From the specialised education law perspective, Legal Officer Elliott noted, “We send a message out through the Early Years of School newsletter, from DepSec Early Years. And if we want to get a message to schools about things that might have happened or be changing, that’s how we do it.” (Personal communication, June 24, 2014)

Departmental policies, guidelines and procedures (2012i) provide specific information to government school principals concerning the DoE’s position regarding legal issues and the actions required to achieve a particular result. While not all such documents relate to legal matters, many do so (see Appendix T1). The role of written departmental policies was described by System Leader Jersey:

In recent years the Department has been really strategic about getting policies up. So there’s a policy on everything: a policy on policies. . . . It’s very clear around whether they are policies or guidelines or whether they’re requirements. That’s on a portal on the Department’s website; it’s updated regularly. When it’s updated people are advised of that update . . . so that leaders in a school are aware that there’s something there, if they need to know about it. (Personal communication, August 20, 2015)

In addition to legal policies, guidelines and procedures, the DoE provides its principals with legal guidance through a Legal Issues Handbook (Department of Education (Tasmania), 2014c), prepared by the Legal Services unit. The role of the Handbook was outlined by Legal Officer Elliott:

We have a Legal Issues Handbook that’s online. . . . Whenever we have something coming up we think, “Right, let’s embed that in here” or whatever. It’s about getting the message out. We tweak the Handbook or a policy to say, “OK everybody, do this.” (Personal communication, June 24, 2014)

The formal sources of legal information do not, however, present a complete picture. A critical element of principals’ legal decision support lies in their informal interactions with fellow school leaders. Referring to her own experience, Principal Network Leader Harper reported:

There are multiple principals around, there are people that you can ring and ask . . . . You want to be a little bit independent yourself, so you ring a colleague just to check with them. I’ve certainly been in that situation. If I thought that I knew the answer and I wasn’t

really worried about it, but I just wanted to check with someone. I think that’s a process that principals often use. . . . We’d use colleagues. (Personal communication, June 24, 2014)

Supervisory management level.

The Tasmanian DoE provides educational services across the State through two distinct

organisational groups (Department of Education (Tasmania), 2015a) — Departmental Services, and Early Years and Schools (EYS). Within EYS, the supervision and management of

government schools is the responsibility of Learning Services South and North, each led by a General Manager, with one or more Assistant General Managers. Principal Network Leaders are experienced former school principals who provide support to school leadership, “Principal Network Leaders provide at the shoulder support to principals to lead and manage school

improvement and accountability and provide positive learning environments for all” (Department of Education (Tasmania), 2013-14, p. 8).

Several participants commented on the role of Learning Services managers, as well as Principal Network Leaders, in providing advice to school principals on legal issues. Principal Jordan noted that he would contact Learning Services staff to seek initial advice on a problem:

We work in an accountability framework, we seek advice when we’re not sure; that’s what I do, I certainly don’t act without, when I’m unsure about something I seek advice . . . . There is a very strong support within our Learning Services areas; I think a principal who’s unsure would contact them, and then they would say “Well, you need to contact Legal” or they would contact Legal for them through HR or through the General Manager. (Personal communication, August 28, 2015)

Similarly, Principal Perry suggested, “A situation will crop up here, and I’ll think ‘I haven’t had a situation like this happen before’. I’ll email either to Learning Services, where we have a support manager who’s quite skilled or I’ll go straight to Legal.” (Personal communication, September 22, 2015)

Departmental level.

The Department Services group of the DoE provides a range of specific information assistance to government school principals (Department of Education (Tasmania), 2015a) on issues that may have legal implications, concerning: information technology, human resources, injury

That support is in addition to the legal interpretations and guidance provided by the Legal Services unit. The operation and functions of the Legal Services unit were outlined by Legal Officer Elliott (Personal communication, June 18, 2014):

We give information to schools about legal issues; we interpret court orders; a whole bunch of things. We also provide support for Learning Services [for legal training]. . . . Requests for legal advice go through Legal Services, and then we will facilitate the access. And then we will interpret that back to the school so they understand what it means . . . No there isn’t [any cost to schools for legal support]. We’re employed public servants; we’re just here to support schools. . . . A lot of the message is simply that we’re here. Email us if you have a problem. (Personal communication, June 24, 2014)

The interview data revealed two important themes concerning the interaction between school principals and the DoE Legal Services unit. The first involved the circumstances in which principals might request support from Legal Services. In Principal Network Leader Frances’ view, “Probably you should seek advice when something out-of-the-ordinary happens” (Personal communication, June 24, 2014), while Principal Jordan suggested she would seek expert legal advice in situations of doubt, “I always take advice from our Legal Department if I’m not sure about something. . . . So anything where we’re unsure . . . we usually contact out Legal

Department to get advice.” (Personal communication, August 25, 2015) The data further suggested that government school principals seek assistance from their departmental legal

advisers when a decision or other action has the potential to become a high stakes issue, because: it falls outside standardised policy parameters, or it involves external parties. Principal Perry observed:

If there’s anything that I’m a bit concerned about, particularly Court Orders, Restraining Orders, attendance procedures, lawyers ringing or sending letters and wanting to come on-site to interview or give subpoenas, I always just send a quick note down to our Legal team as part of an email. (Personal communication, September 22, 2015)

The second theme concerned principals’ assessment of the standard of support provided to them by Legal Services staff. To categorise that assessment as ‘satisfactory’ does not do justice to the plaudits heaped on Legal Services by principals and administrators. For example, Principal Logan commented:

It’s a huge safety net, and I’m happy with that. . . . It’s certainly one of the aspects that they, as a system, I believe we actually do well. . . . I think it’s an area where principals, from my experience, are well supported. (Personal communication, September 10, 2015) When the interview data from government sector participants were interrogated more closely to establish the bases on which the principals’ trust was founded, it became apparent that some participants closely identified the performance of the Legal Services unit with the work of a particular legal adviser, and did not distinguish between the lawyer and the advice. For

example, Principal Network Leader Deb (Personal communication, August 24, 2015) spoke positively about the accessibility of legal advice for government school principals, whilst System Leader Jersey and Principal Logan (Personal communications, August 20 and September 10, 2015) praised the availability and accessibility of the legal adviser. The responses regarding the timeliness of advice were clearer; for example, Principal Jordan, Principal Network Leader Frances, and System Leader Judy (Personal communications, August 28, 2015; June 24, 2014; and August 20, 2015) reported positively about the quick response they received from Legal Services on urgent enquiries. Several participants mentioned their trust in Legal Services, which was explicitly applied to both the legal adviser and the legal advice. For example, Principal Logan commented, “There’s certainly a lot of trust in the people who have that role, trust in their advice. I’ve never found any advice to be lacking” (Personal communication, September 10, 2015).

Notwithstanding the positive views expressed by participants, it was important that “outlier data” (Clark, 1989, p. 31) should also be acknowledged and considered, to promote the validity and reliability of qualitative results (Merriam, 2009; Roller & Lavrakas, 2015). To do so, data from three different sources were addressed: a Coroner’s report of findings into the death of a Tasmanian school student in 2009 (Levi, R. (2012) TASCD 92); an interview conducted with an administrator from a Tasmanian educational professional association (Personal communication, December 8, 2015); and a media report of the Tasmanian Legislative Council Budget Estimates Hearing (Bird, 2015).

The Coroner’s Report into the 2009 drowning death of a Tasmanian public high school student (Levi, R. (2012) TASCD 92) determined that the school principal did not have a full understanding of the Outdoor Education Guidelines, particularly the requirements for excursions involving inherent risk activities, and that he was only one of many government school leaders

with this deficit (para. 76). Further, the Coroner was satisfied that “The department failed to ensure that the principal and staff . . . fully understood the Guidelines” (paras. 74–75). It is acknowledged that the Coroner’s views were based on arrangements some five or more years ago and the data collected for this study suggested that those criticisms had been acted on. The Guidelines were reviewed and were replaced by the Procedures for Planning Off-campus

Activities (2014d),and training for principals in risk management was increased (Gallasch, 2012). As noted by System Leader Judy, “In the last couple of years we’ve really upped the ante on the Guidelines available; we’ve updated things like the Outdoor Education guidelines.” (Personal communication, June 23, 2014)

Secondly, Administrator Whitney argued that Tasmanian Government system educators were beginning to feel isolated from the DoE as a consequence of budgetary constraints:

People feel unsupported. . . . Right now, for example, the central bureaucracy of the Department of Education has been pared back and pared back in eight successive

Budgets, so there’s really nothing left to cut. . . . Without a high-functioning bureaucracy our schools won’t function well; they’ll go on, but things will erode, break down. The levels of support will decline. (Personal communication, December 8, 2015)

While Administrator Whitney outlined the possibility of government principals being left “hanging out to dry” (Personal communication, December 8, 2015), some six months earlier an unnamed government school principal’s letter was read out during the Tasmanian Legislative Council’s Budget Estimates (Bird, 2015). In that letter the correspondent asserted that it could take days to get legal advice, “When I had a crisis and needed quick advice I rang four senior people and couldn’t get anyone” (Bird, 2015, p. 7). Attempts to contact the correspondent for an interview were unsuccessful.

Summary —– Research Question 1.3 Sources of legal information.

A summary of qualitative findings regarding sources of legal information for government school principals is at Figure 53.

Catholic school system.

Interviews with participants working within the Catholic school system in Tasmania presented a picture regarding principals’ sources of legal information which was similar to that for

government school leaders, as illustrated in Figure 54.

Figure 54. The levels of legal support available to Catholic school principals.