1

HOME-SCHOOL AGREEMENTS: A TRUE PARTNERSHIP?

Suzanne Hood and Janet Ouston

The Research and Information on State Education Trust (RISE)

Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Conference, Cardiff University, September 7-10 2000

Abstract

All schools in England and Wales have been required to have a signed home-school agreement in place since September 1999.This recent government initiative has proved particularly contentious, and the greatest diversity of opinion has almost undoubtedly been between schools themselves. This paper describes and discusses the findings of a recent national research study which sought to evaluate the responses of teachers, governors, students and parents to the home-school agreement initiative; and the progress of schools with its implementation. The study findings lend little support to the governments view that home-school agreements will provide a framework for improved partnership between parents and schools. However, the paper concludes by setting out a number of suggestions for good practice in the development and implementation of agreements.

Introduction

Though agreements between schools and parents have been used in schools for many years, the School Standards and Framework Act (1998) requires all schools in England and Wales to have introduced a signed home-school agreement from September 1999.

Home-school agreements are defined by the Act as statements specifying:

  • the school's aims and values;
  • the school's responsibilities;
  • the parental responsibilities; and
  • the school's expectation of its pupils (Section 98, Subsection 2).

The Act further specifies that these agreements are to be drawn up in consultation with parents, and that parents of pupils of compulsory school age should be invited to sign the agreement as soon after September 1999 as 'is reasonably practicable'. Pupils may also be invited to sign where governing bodies consider that they have sufficient understanding to do so (section 98, subsection 5).

Guidance issued by the DfEE (1998) and by the Welsh Office (1999) sets out the rationale for home-school agreements as follows:

‘Parents are a child's first and enduring teachers. They play a crucial role in helping their children learn. Children achieve more when schools and parents work together. Parents can help more effectively if they know what the school is trying to achieve and how they can help. Home-school agreements will provide a framework for the development of such partnership’ (1998 para 4: 3;1999 para 5: 4).

Whilst a considerable consensus has developed over recent decades, that children benefit when school and home work closely together, the question of exactly how such relations are to be achieved is far more controversial; and the view - expressed by the government that signed home-school agreements might promote improved parent-school partnership has proved particularly contentious - and a source of considerable debate amongst and between politicians, educationalists, professional associations and parents organisations.

This paper reports on the main findings from a national research study which sought to evaluate the responses of key participants to the home-school agreement initiative; and the progress of schools with its implementation. The study ‘Home-School Agreements: a True Partnership?’ was funded by the Nuffield Foundation and carried out by the Research and Information on State Education Trust (RISE) between December 1998 and March 2000, thus spanning the months immediately before and after home-school agreements became a statutory requirement.

The research aimed to elicit the views of teaching staff, governors, parents and importantly also of pupils themselves. With a few notable exceptions (eg Chapman 1996) children as actors are remarkable for their absence in the literature on home-school relations (see Edwards & David 1997 for discussion). Moreover, children’s views on home-school relations are rarely sought. Home-school agreements are of interest here because the initiative designates a role to children as contributors to a parent, pupil, school partnership. Indeed the DfEE Guidance refers to a ‘triangle’ between the three parties (1998, para 16: 6). However, the extent to which children are constructed in the initiative as active participants with rights (as opposed to passive signatories to their responsibilities) is questionable.

The paper begins with a brief history of the development of home-school agreements and a summary review of key issues from the relevant literature (see Hood 1999; Ouston & Hood 2000 for a more extensive review) This background material is followed by an outline of the research programme The main findings from the study are then presented and discussed.(full findings are in Ouston & Hood 2000) Finally, the paper concludes with a list of suggested guidelines for good practice in the development and implementation of home-school agreements.

Home-school agreements: history and literature review

Home-school or pupil ‘contracts’ of varying kinds have been used in schools in this country since at least the mid-1980s and schools have made extensive use of agreements which are individually negotiated between pupils, school staff and (sometimes) parents and targeted at specific behaviours with a system of rewards and sanctions. However, the idea that parents might be invited to sign a document confirming that they have obligations relating to schooling was first introduced by Macbeth who suggested that a ‘signed understanding’ could be the basis of ‘heightening awareness among all parents and of applying moral pressure on defaulting parents’ (1989: 24). In 1989 the Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce (RSA), supported by the National Association of Head Teachers (NAHT), set up a 2-year development programme. ‘the home-school contract of partnership’, followed in 1993-95 with another project ‘Parents in a Learning Society’. Both projects drew on good practice from schools that used contracts/agreements as part of wider approach to the development of home-school work and partnerships.

Supporters of home-school contracts/agreements, including the NAHT, have noted their value in clarifying for parents the aims and ethos of schools, the expectations of parents and pupils and the responsibilities of schools. Opposers have noted variously that agreements ignore the power differentials between school and parents, that they are mistakenly predicated on the idea that parents form a homogeneous group (so neglecting the role of class, education and gender as significant factors in parental involvement in education) (see Vincent (1996); and that they add to the administrative burden of schools to little useful effect. Whilst supporters have commonly argued that home-school agreements should be developed within a broader framework of home-school policies, opposers have tended to rest their case on the value of home-school policies as a more worthwhile alternative to home-school agreements.

Debates about the merits of agreements have centred, also, on the key issue of enforceability. The previous Conservative administration linked agreements - then termed contracts - with school admissions policies by allowing admissions authorities to offer a place subject to 'the agreement of parents or pupils to specific understandings' (Education Act, 1997, Section 13, Schedule 3). However, the present Labour government repealed these provisions and the Guidance states that parental failure to sign should not be used as in decisions about admissions (DfEE 1998, para 40:13; Welsh Office, 1999 para 36: 10) and that failure to sign or comply should not be taken into consideration in decisions about exclusions (1998 para 36: 12; 1999 para 31: 9).

Although these measures have been largely welcomed by those who view the use of sanctions as punitive and as potentially counter-productive, others - particularly in schools and education authorities - have questioned both the point and the effectiveness of 'toothless' agreements. And, significantly, the thorny question of enforceability has continued to dog the initiative until the present day. That these debates continue reflects some of the very real and practical concerns of schools regarding what measures - if any - can be taken if signatories fail to comply. However, the literature also suggests that some more fundamental tensions may be embodied in the whole idea of home-school agreements (eg see Bastiani 1996; Blair & Waddington 1997), even where sanctions have been removed; and where the name has been changed from contract to agreement.

In summary these are that:

  • the notion of a signed agreement implies a morally binding relationship - and this kind of relationship sits uncomfortably with the concept of partnership - which is central to home-school agreements; and
  • there are tensions in a policy measure which aims to apply both to all parents and to target those who are perceived as unco-operative, unsupportive or in some way problematic.

These tensions can themselves be understood as a reflection of the different, and often conflicting 'models' of parents role in schooling and education which have informed education policy over recent decades: more recent models of parent as ‘consumer’ and as ‘partner’ and more long-standing models of parents as ‘supporters’ and as ‘problems’.

Significantly, the home-school agreement initiative reflects an emphasis on parents as consumers and partners - but it is also implicitly influenced by a more long-standing models of parent as supporters and as problems (see also Hood 1999).

The research programme

Our research study had two specific aims, to

  • investigate the extent to which home-school agreements were perceived to improve partnerships between parents and schools; and to
  • contribute to the development of good practice

And there were two main stages to the research:

  • a postal questionnaire survey for headteachers in a randomly selected sample of 4000 schools across England and Wales (May-June 1999); and
  • interviews in four co-educational London schools with headteachers and a sample of teachers, governors, parents and students from Years, 6, 7 and 10 (November 1999-February 2000).

The study also included analyses of :

  • 133 responses to the DfEE’s consultation on home-school agreements, and
  • 90 home-school agreements from the questionnaire schools.

The analysis of responses to the consultation is not reported here The analysis of home-school agreements was used (along with the questionnaire and case study responses) in the development of the good practice guidelines (see below) (Full reports of both analyses can be found in Ouston & Hood 2000).

The postal survey

The questionnaire

The questionnaire included a mix of open and pre-coded questions which were designed to elicit data concerning: schools progress on implementing a home-school agreements and their attitude towards the initiative.

Responses received

There were 1385 responses from the total of 4000 questionnaires distributed. This represents a 35% response rate which is about what might reasonably be expected from a postal survey. The responses were broadly representative of school sector (primary 77%, secondary 17%, special 6%). However, it is important to note that they were not necessarily representative of the experience and attitudes of schools The majority of questionnaires were completed by headteachers (84%). More rarely they were completed by the deputy head (10%) or by ‘another’ (6%).

Progress with implementation of home-school agreements

Schools varied considerably in terms of the progress that they had made with home-school agreements. Thus, 12% of schools reported that they had a home-school agreement in place before 1999 and 18% had introduced an agreement during 1999. 66% schools were currently working on their agreements and 4 % had not done any work on an agreement as yet. Secondary schools were more likely than both primary or special schools to have had a home-school agreement in place before 1999.

The consultation process

Almost all of the schools which were working on or had introduced their agreement during 1999 reported having consulted parents (96%); Almost all had consulted governors (97%) and teachers (96%), and many had consulted other school staff (65%). However, a significant proportion (33%); of these schools had not consulted all parents individually as the Guidance requires (DfEE1998, Welsh Office 1999, para 11, p.5); and less than half had consulted with students (40%). Schools which had an agreement before 1999 were less likely to have consulted parents individually or to have consulted with other stakeholders.

Signing of home-school agreements

The proportion of parents who had signed agreements was higher in schools which had had an agreement before 1999, reflecting in part a previous practice of ‘requiring’ parents to sign as part of the admissions process. Amongst schools which had introduced an agreement during 1999 just under half (43%) reported high rates of parental signing (more than 75%). However, over a quarter (26%) reported very low rates (0-25%).

Those schools which were currently introducing home-school agreements were more likely to invite students to sign than those which had agreements before 1999. In 83% of secondary schools all students were asked to sign. Students were also asked to sign in 41% of primary schools and 32% of special schools. Children in reception and / or Key Stage 1 classes in primaries were not usually invited to sign.

Overall 76% of schools reported that a member of school staff would also sign the agreement.

Views on the value of home-school agreements

Respondents were asked to report their views on the advantages and disadvantages of home-school agreements. 11% reported that there were no advantages at all to home-school agreements and 14% that there were no disadvantages.

There were no significant differences in attitude towards home-school agreements between primary, secondary and special schools. However, schools which had already introduced a home-school agreement were more likely to be enthusiastic about agreements These schools were also more likely to have given the initiative a higher priority and to have also had a home-school policy in place.

The most frequently cited advantages of home-school agreements were that they:

  • clarified the roles, responsibilities and expectations of all parties
  • enhanced partnership, communication and involvement with parents.
  • made the school's value and vision clear
  • put pressure on parents

The most frequently cited disadvantages of home-school agreements were that they:

  • are not enforceable and there is no compulsion to sign
  • will not be signed by those parents whom schools would like to sign
  • add to the burden of schools administrative work and may be costly to implement
  • won’t be effective - just a ‘piece of paper.’

The case studies

The four schools

The four case study schools were selected from all the schools in the Greater London area that had returned a questionnaire (N=126). The schools included two (a primary and a secondary) where the headteacher had shown a broadly positive questionnaire response to home-school agreements; and two (a primary and a secondary) where the response was broadly negative. These schools were neither at the extremes of advantage or disadvantage - within the London context - and all had a broad ethnic and cultural mix The two secondary schools were already using an agreement (though one of these was revising it in line with the DfEE Guidance), and the two primaries were developing new agreements.

Data collection

A similar semi-structured interview schedule was designed for teachers, governors, students and parents to elicit their experiences and views regarding home-school agreements and their implementation.

Individual tape-recorded interviews were carried out with a total of 16 teaching staff, and 14 governors, and 15 small group discussions were held with 62 students (from Years 6,7 and 10 - so aged respectively between 10-11; 11-12 and 14-15). In addition tape-recorded telephone interviews were carried out with 25 parents. The majority of these were with mothers, not fathers (20 mothers and 5 fathers) - a disparity which is commonly reflected in studies of parent-school relations and which is directly linked to the institutionalisation of women’s role as carers in public care organisations (see Steedman 1988 & Maclachlan 1996).

The responses of teachers and governors

The general pattern of responses from teaching staff and governors, revealed clear distinctions, as might have been expected, between the responses of those in positive and negative schools. Belonging to a 'negative' or 'positive' school was a more significant factor in teachers' (and to a lesser extent governors') response to home-school agreements than was school sector (eg being in a primary or secondary school). However, teaching staff (and governors) did link perceived advantages and disadvantages of agreements to sector issues.

Teachers and governors in 'positive' case study schools emphasised that agreements:

  • can 'encompass' established school ethos and behaviour policies;
  • can provide a useful summary of expectations to be introduced at the beginning of the child's school career;
  • can provide a useful reference point, reminder or lever to be referenced throughout the child’s school career;
  • can be 'tailored' to the needs and circumstances of the individual school;
  • but are meaningless without the framework of established ethos, practices and policies of the school.

Teachers and governors in 'negative' case study schools emphasised that agreements:

  • will fail to reach those parents who are unsupportive of the school;
  • are unnecessary where home-school relations are already good;
  • are unnecessary as they duplicate existing school material (eg the school prospectus);
  • are of little value without sanctions attached;
  • introduce an unwanted formality to home-school relations (particularly in primaries);
  • are problematic to implement as it is difficult to ensure that all parents and students sign, understand and 'own' agreements (particularly in secondaries).

The responses of students

Age was a more significant factor in students responses to home-school agreements than either belonging to a positive or a negative school or gender. Year 10 students were, on balance, considerably more negative than those from year 6 and 7.However, students from negative schools were marginally more likely to stress the disadvantages of home-school agreements than those from positive schools.