Use of remote technology in school admission and exclusion appeal hearings: Consultation Analysis

4. Comments on Key Themes

In this section we set out the key themes that were identified in consultees’ responses to the consultation. As noted above we do not quantify the number of responses that referred to a particular theme.

4.1 Greater flexibility

Many responses noted the advantages of video conferencing acknowledging the increased flexibility it brings to both the participants and local authorities/appeal committee.

One individual respondent commented:

“It provides additional flexibility for working parents and also for those volunteers who assist local authorities in discharging their duties by participating as education appeal committee members.”

An organisation representing local authorities responded that remote appeals hearings are easier to access for parents and removes the need for travel time/expenses, which is a particular issue for those living in remote and rural areas.

The local authority response noted that it:

“Provides parents with increased flexibility in terms of their 'attendance', particularly given that many have other children that they need to provide childcare for and many of whom have working commitments.”.

Local authority responses highlighted the importance of increased participation in appeal hearings, attributing it to the decreased burden on parents for arranging childcare, minimising travel time to a venue, and reducing the need to take time off work.

“The use of remote means for appeal hearings allows parent/carers to take part in a hearing without taking time off work, arranging childcare or travelling to a public building which may be some distance away and can avoid or reduce the costs incurred by these matters. We are of the view that the use of remote means should certainly remain as an option as it benefits parents/carers and authorities.”

However, this view was challenged in a response which noted that although generally feedback had been positive for remote appeal hearings, panel members have reported that in-person hearings are better able to provide support for families. This could be because they facilitate clearer communication, allow for personal interaction, and offer a more supportive environment for presenting and understanding individual cases.

4.2 Reduced financial burden

Several respondents to the consultation highlighted that the adoption of video conferencing for appeal hearings has provided cost savings for parents and carers and the local authorities. Many respondents representing local authorities reported that it minimised the financial strain associated with traditional, in-person attendance, including expenses such as transportation and the need for arranging childcare services. Many respondents acknowledged the ability to participate remotely also diminishes the necessity for taking unpaid time off work, ensuring that individuals can maintain their income while engaging in process. This insight underscores the considerable benefits of remote hearings, aligning with our commitment to enhancing accessibility and efficiency within our procedures.

A local authority response noted:

“Attending in person may be a barrier to some parents/carers. The use of remote means for appeal hearings allows parent/carers to take part in a hearing without taking time off work, arranging childcare or travelling to a public building which may be some distance away and can avoid or reduce the associated costs.”

The response from SOLAR Education Lawyer's Group noted:

“The use of remote means for appeal hearings allows parent/carers to take part in a hearing without taking time off work, arranging childcare or travelling to a public building which may be some distance away and can avoid or reduce the costs incurred by these matters.”

4.3 Accessing appeal hearings

Several people expressed the convenience of participating from one's home environment explaining that it eliminates barriers that may arise from travelling to a physical venue, which can be especially challenging for those with mobility issues or disabilities. They further noted that the familiarity and comfort of one's surroundings can significantly reduce anxiety levels and enhance communication for individuals with additional support needs, as it ensures an accommodating setting for their participation.

An individual noted:

“As an autistic woman going through the process of a hearing for my disabled child, the access to remote hearings is vital. Expecting disabled people to physically attend an unfamiliar environment with the challenges that causes would be detrimental. It’s important that people are enabled to attend remotely to ensure their individual needs are met.

Additionally, hearings generally involve people with children who are not in school and who are at home. Frequently they have few or no options of satisfactory childcare and would struggle to find someone to look after their child to physically attend. For example, my child has ASD, ADHD, FASD and is care experienced. They cannot and will not be left with anyone other than their parents. To request people to attend in person adds yet another challenge to an already hugely challenging process.”

4.4 Time commitment

Some respondents highlighted the significant reduction in time commitment associated with remote appeal hearings conducted via video conferencing.

One respondent noted:

" combined appeal hearings meant that parents/carers were not having to sit in a Council building for hours waiting on their allocated individual hearing as they had allocated time slots to rejoin virtually for their individual hearing."

4.5 Environment

Some respondents noted that participating in appeal hearings from the home environment offers a less formal and intimidating experience. Being in familiar surroundings helps alleviate some of the anxiety and stress that may arise in traditional in person hearings. It was also noted that children and young people can find remote hearings less intimidating and better able to participate in the discussion meaning participation has increased for children and young people following the introduction

A local authority response explained that:

“Most Appellants have access and are positive around experience of remote hearings. Remote hearings are also efficient, practical and reduce the possibility of appellants feeling that it is an intimidating experience.”

A further local authority response noted that:

“It has on some occasions also enabled a child to attend with a parent from the comfort and familiar setting of their own home proving to be a very supportive option for some families.”

An individual challenged this noting that:

“This is too serious. People need to be able to communicate in, and respect, situations of this level of importance. They will feel so much better for doing this in person.”

These responses highlight the need for choice from the appellant to ensure they can participate in a way that suits their needs.

4.6 Increased participation

Some respondents reported that there had been increased participation in appeal hearings for parents and carers and children and young people. The main reasons noted were due to the convenience and accessibility of remote video conferencing. Additionally, the informal and less intimidating nature of remote hearings encourages active engagement from participants.

A local authority response explained that:

“The experience of the Council is that the introduction of remote hearings has allowed hearings to be conducted in a more efficient way (for parents/carers and/or representatives and the Council) and has led to increased participation by parents/carers. Requiring personal attendance (or representation) is considered to be a barrier to some parents/carers participating in appeals for a number of reasons, including the requirement to travel, employment commitments or other caring responsibilities.”

Conversely a local authority response noted that face to face interactions can improve participation and that virtual can reduce the effectiveness of communication:

“While the bulk of hearings could have been settled on the information set out in the papers, there are always some cases where face to face interaction results in new information or interpretations (affecting both officials and panel) which might not be as accessible in remote hearings, particularly as communication has to be slower and more structured so may have less tacit information.”

4.7 Digital Exclusion

Concerns were raised around digital exclusion noting that not everyone has access to the necessary technology or internet connectivity required to participate effectively in virtual hearings. This disparity in access could potentially marginalise certain groups, such as those from low-income backgrounds or rural areas with limited infrastructure. Additionally, points were raised about the digital literacy levels of certain demographics, which may hinder their ability to navigate online platforms or engage in virtual proceedings confidently.

A local authority response noted that:

“The option to hold the appeal through video conferencing strengthens the access to justice for parents, carers and young people, but only as an option, not as the default format. Making it default would negatively impact upon access to justice for parents, carers and young people who do not have the technology or internet connection that is required for full participation in the appeal process.”

A local authority response noted that the ability to attend in person significantly mitigates the risk of digital exclusion recognising the importance of choice in mitigating the risk of digital exclusion.

Question 2: Do you agree that video conferencing should be the default option and telephone conferencing, or wholly written means be used only where it is not possible to use video-conferencing?

4.8 Providing choice to appellant

The gathered feedback reveals a range of viewpoints on the preferred default mode for appeal hearings. While some respondents advocated for video conferencing to be the default option, citing its convenience and efficiency, many others argued in favour of in-person hearings as the default, emphasising the importance of face-to-face interactions and the intrinsic value of physical presence in appeal hearings.

An individual response noted:

“It’s free, easy to access, efficient and reduces the already stressful nature of the process. It is accessible for everyone regardless of disability. Just because things were done differently before Covid doesn’t mean they should go back that way. Nothing can be done better in-person than it can online. In current times when money is tight, remote should be default to save everyone’s time and money.”

A local authority response noted:

“I don't think we should be using video conferencing and definitely not telephone or written. This would be very difficult for parents/carers to make their point as we often find that they submit little prior to the hearing and rely on speaking to their case on the day.”

There was widespread support for granting appellants the choice to decide the format that best suits their needs, highlighting the significance of individual autonomy and flexibility in the appeals process.

A local authority response noted:

We believe that the appellant should be given the choice at the outset as to whether they would prefer an in person or online hearing We would expect all parties to be in agreement with the choice before proceeding. Hybrid options can be catered for given the technology is now available to do this.

Concerns were raised regarding the adequacy of telephone and written formats, with some participants expressing reservations about their suitability for effectively facilitating hearings. While a minority advocated for telephone hearings as the default, acknowledging its suitability for certain cases, others cautioned against relying solely on written formats, deeming them inadequate for ensuring comprehensive participation and understanding.

An individual response noted:

“I am happy within limits that video conferencing offers a substitute for face-to-face meeting but consider telephone conferencing and wholly written as not being adequate for appeals.”

Another individual response noted:

“If business can be conducted via telephone, then why would a school hearing require video attendance? Adding video also creates more opportunities for technical issues.”

These varied perspectives underscore the complexity of determining the most suitable default mode for appeal hearings and highlight the importance of considering factors such as accessibility, efficacy, and individual preferences in shaping future guidelines.

Question 3: Do you agree that remote means should only be used where all parties agree?

Several people agreed that remote means should only be used where all parties agree. Some agreed, although expressed that there should be flexibility for councils to stipulate in certain circumstances. Concerns were raised by some that if the appellant is given the choice this could have unintended consequences for combined hearings as different appellants will require different approaches.

A local authority response noted:

“The decision to use a remote hearing should not be enforced on someone. It is important that all parties are in agreement to ensure we are meeting with the public sector equality duty.”

An individual noted that the decision on how an appeal hearing should be conducted should have a valid reason for their choice rather than this being down to personal preferences:

“If there is a request that remote should be used then the disagreeing parties must have a valid reason why they cannot attend remotely. It should not be refused due to another person’s personal preference. Remote enables individuals to attend who may not be able to physically and is an equitable solution.”

A further local authority response explained the unintended consequences for having it if all parties agree in the context of combined appeal hearings:

“The ability to hear appeals by remote means can also be of benefit where there are a considerable number of appeals to be heard in relation to the same school on the same day/s and hearings are combined. Combined hearings have the advantage of streamlining the process and significantly reducing the officer time and committee time involved which in turn reduces the time taken to hear appeals and provides more certainty for parents/carers. If hearings were only allowed to be conducted by remote means where all parties agree, this would significantly impact the ability of authorities to hold combined hearings. It would also have an adverse impact on parents/carers who are then forced to attend in person as a result of another parent/carer’s preference.”

Question 4: Are there any other improvements that should be made to how remote means is used in appeal hearings for example to mitigate the risk of digital exclusion?

Some respondents highlighted the importance of early check-ins to ensure parents and carers have the necessary access to technology. Others noted that it is important to provide ensure access to devices can be made available through a local library or council building.

A local authority response stated:

“Providing an appropriate area in a council building, not necessarily principal offices, for families who may not have devices to access a device for the hearing.”

A few respondents highlighted the benefits of hosting hybrid meetings. Explaining that each appellant can choose how they wish to take part.

An individual noted:

“Many local authorities now offer hybrid meetings; where attendees can choose to be present in person or online. This type of hearing option should be encouraged.”

A few respondents noted a local authority’s obligations and ensuring practice is in line with Equality Act 2010.

A local authority response stated:

“We are aware of the duties upon us in terms of the Equality Act 2010 and are used to making reasonable adjustments where required. We are also alert to the possibility of digital exclusion and poverty and have implemented the Scottish Government Connecting Scotland initiative. Our remote hearings allow for the parent/carer to participate by videocall or by telephone using either a mobile or landline. Adjustments would also be made in individual circumstances.”

The issue of digital confidence and literacy was also emphasised, noting that it should not be assumed that appellants possess the necessary skills or confidence to participate effectively in remote hearings. This underscores the importance of providing support and guidance to ensure everyone can engage fully.