Purpose of This Handbook
This handbook outlines the principles, criteria, and decision making framework that must be followed by all Heads of Strategy and Agenda when selecting which student suggestions are taken forward each week. Its purpose is to ensure that decisions are consistent, fair, structured, and aligned with the goals of Student Axis.
The organisation relies on credibility and trust. Without a clear system, decisions can become random, biased, or ineffective. This handbook exists to prevent that and to ensure that all selections contribute meaningfully to improving student life.
Core Principle
Not all popular ideas are good ideas, and not all good ideas are popular. The responsibility of the Head of Agenda is to balance student interest with quality, feasibility, and impact. Decisions must always prioritise meaningful outcomes over surface level popularity.
Role of the Head of Agenda
The Head of Agenda is responsible for reviewing, filtering, and selecting student suggestions in a way that reflects the best interests of the wider student body. This role requires objectivity, critical thinking, and consistency. The responsibility is not to select what is most visible or most requested, but to identify what is most valuable, realistic, and impactful.
Basic Eligibility Criteria
Before any suggestion is considered, it must meet a set of minimum standards. The suggestion must be relevant to student life within the school and clearly stated in a way that can be understood without confusion. It must not promote harm, disrespect, or misconduct, and it must not target any individual or group negatively. Additionally, the suggestion must be realistic within the context of a school environment.
If a suggestion fails to meet any of these conditions, it must be rejected immediately, regardless of how many votes or likes it has received.
Evaluation Criteria
Once a suggestion passes the basic eligibility criteria, it must be evaluated more deeply using these factors:
1. Relevance - The suggestion should affect a meaningful portion of the student body or address a genuine area of student life.
2. Impact - Consider whether the suggestion, if implemented, would create a noticeable improvement or provide clear value.
3. Feasibility - The suggestion must be realistically achievable within the limitations of the school's environment, authority, and available resources.
4. Clarity - The idea should be expressed in a way that allows it to be understood and developed further without confusion.
5. Sustainability - Preference should be given to ideas that create lasting improvement rather than temporary or one time fixes.
6. Constructiveness - The suggestion should move beyond complaint and contribute toward a solution or meaningful improvement.
Popularity Consideration
Votes and engagement levels are important indicators but must not be treated as the sole deciding factor. A suggestion with high engagement may be prioritised, but it does not automatically qualify for selection. Similarly, a suggestion with lower engagement may still be selected if it demonstrates strong value based on the evaluation criteria.
A highly liked suggestion can and should be rejected if it is unrealistic, inappropriate, unserious, or lacking meaningful value.
Disqualification Conditions
A suggestion must not be selected under any circumstances if it is clearly a joke or not intended seriously. It must also be rejected if it is logistically impossible, violates school rules or values, or is based on misinformation. Suggestions that are repetitive without adding any new perspective or that are too vague to be developed further must also be excluded.
Weekly Selection Guidelines
Each week, all submitted suggestions should be reviewed. Ineligible suggestions must first be filtered out based on the basic criteria. The remaining suggestions should then be evaluated using the defined factors. From this, a shortlist should be created, balancing high impact ideas, realistic proposals, and student interest. A manageable number of suggestions should be selected each week to ensure focus and quality of execution.
Decision Integrity Rules
All decisions must be made without personal bias, favouritism, or external influence. Personal relationships, popularity of individuals, or pressure from others must not affect the outcome. Decisions must always reflect the interests of the wider student body rather than any specific group or individual.
Documentation and Transparency
For every selected suggestion, the reasoning behind the decision should be recorded. This includes noting which evaluation criteria were met and why the suggestion was prioritised. This process ensures accountability, consistency, and transparency within the organisation.
Continuous Improvement
Heads of Agenda must regularly reflect on their decisions and the outcomes that follow. They should consider whether the selected suggestions are meaningful, whether fairness is being maintained, and whether the organisation is contributing to real improvements in student life. Adjustments should be made where necessary to improve the system over time.
Final Principle
The role of the Head of Agenda is not to choose what is loudest, but to choose what is most meaningful, valuable, and impactful.
