Giving Meaning to “Meaningful Enough”: Why Trevino Requires New Counsel on Appeal

Generally, defendants cannot raise new claims in a writ of habeas corpus unless they can accomplish the difficult task of showing that they could not have raised the claims earlier. In 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court laid out an equitable exception that allows defendants to claim—for the first time in a writ of habeas corpus—that they had an ineffective trial attorney if their failure to make a timely claim was due to a second ineffective attorney or no attorney whatsoever. The exception, however, only applied to defendants in states that required ineffective assistance claims to be brought in collateral proceedings, as opposed to allowing the claims on direct appeal. However, a year later, when faced with inequity in Texas, the Court broadened the exception, applying it to any state that does not provide a defendant with a meaningful opportunity to initially raise that claim, regardless of the forum they chose. In doing so, the Court neglected to explain how “a meaningful opportunity” should be measured. This Note seeks to provide that explanation, arguing that it must depend on whether a defendant is provided with a new, unconflicted attorney on appeal. If the same attorney represents a defendant at trial and on appeal, a defendant cannot meaningfully challenge his lawyer’s performance at trial. If a defendant does not receive new counsel on appeal, habeas courts should consider claims of ineffective assistance regardless of the procedural history of the case

Maximising Board governance effectiveness in small and medium-sized Australian independent schools

My experience of working with boards of independent schools has led me to conclude that boards often struggle to know how they might make their governance more effective. Very little has been written and few empirical studies have investigated governance of independent school boards in Australia, despite the considerable responsibility and power entrusted to them. This study asks how well such boards are governing and what they could do to engender fully effective governance. Currently, there are no standards or instruments for assessing the effectiveness of board governance. This study identified seven governance effectiveness factors (GEFs) from the literature on governance in schools and other non-profit organisations. These factors were used as assessment instruments in seven case studies of school boards in small to medium-sized independent schools. The research was predominantly qualitative and involved four research methods: a survey, semi-structured interviews, a review of board documents and observation of board meetings. The data were explored by assessing the GEFs within each case and across cases. The findings showed that five boards demonstrated poor governance effectiveness, one was very poor and only one was effective. Three unexpected themes emerged from the data, showing how boards can move towards governance by delegating operational management of the school to the principal. These involve boards understanding, first, the nature of governance and developing the intention to govern effectively, second, when and how to make the difficult transition from operational management to governance, and third, how to adapt their approach to governance as they gain experience with it. A model of this transition process and a framework to guide managers and researchers through key decisions were developed. These fill a critical gap in the literature on board management in independent school governance

Where has the Strategic Thinking Gone in the Non-profit Board Room? A Study of Board Member Perception and Reality

As a practitioner working closely with independent school boards the researcher observed that many boards of small to medium sized independent schools were operationally focussed to the detriment of strategic thinking. Much of the literature on board governance effectiveness stresses the importance of strategic thinking, yet some empirical studies suggest not all non-profit boards are strong in this area. Research however is limited, especially in the independent school sector. This paper therefore presents an empirical study of the extent of strategic thinking in seven independent school boards. The study reveals an alarming picture as to the extent their strategic thinking. This paper begins by initially setting the scene, highlighting the importance of strategic thinking in the relevant literature before presenting the study and its findings. The reality revealed in these case studies serves as a wake-up call to all non-profit boards. Unless a non-profit board thinks strategically, it will never maximise its governance effectiveness

Australia in the 1970\u27s : A Fertile Context for Educational Experimentation and Innovation

The 1970s have provided a social, political and economic climate which has been conducive, in many ways, to educational reform. Social and technological changes have helped to foster attitudes which are tolerant of and sometimes encouraging towards progressive ideas and experimentation in education. Public interest in and concern, accentuated by the mass media, for what schooling is or is not doing had been reflected in political policies and government initiatives. There have been signs of a greater desire by parents, and to some extent students, to participate in policy-making in schools. In general, teachers have also shown in the 1970s a greater readiness than in earlier decades to innovate and to experiment with new teaching/learning approaches