Memorandum submitted by Research in Practice
1. This submission is from research in practice,
a registered charity, established in 1996—and a department
within the Social Justice programme of the Dartington Hall Trust
in collaboration with the University of Sheffield and the Association
of Directors of Children's Services. Our Partner network is a
central feature of our organisation and currently consists of
114 agencies in England and Wales, including local authorities
and children's organisations.
2. Our core work is to build the capacity
for evidence-informed practice across children's services, in
order to support sound decision-making at all levels. This involves
bringing together practitioner expertise with formal research
evidence—creating new knowledge and new skills to improve
life chances for children, young people and their families. Our
Partners are central to our services. We work as the "team
around the agency", bringing a range of experts and resources
to each Partner, working with staff at all levels on each Partners'
individual priorities. A further aim is to connect our Partners
with national policy and research agendas through key strategic
collaborations.
3. In order to meet these objectives we
provide a wide range of accessible publications and products,
a distinctive learning programme, regional tailored support for
Partner agencies and a website. One of our most distinctive offers
is our unique Change Project programme, an innovative knowledge
exchange model of working where we recruit representatives from
Partner agencies to share existing knowledge, practice, research
and resources on a key topic which is then shared within the larger
network in the form of a Handbook. This Handbook is the outcome
of an extensive piloting process and includes theory, practice
examples, tools and short films. It is also informed by a commissioned
research review.
4. This most recent Handbook is called On
the Path to Success: Promoting engagement in learning at Key Stage
3 (Cooke E and Barnes T, 2010). We also commissioned a research
review from the National Foundation for Educational Research Disengagement
and Re-engagement of Young People in Learning at Key Stage 3 (Morris
M and Pullen C, 2007).
5. The Handbook is designed for managers,
teachers and practitioners working with young people at risk of
disengagement from learning at Key Stage 3. It aims to demonstrate
how the use of research, in a range of different ways, can strengthen
practice in this challenging area. Although it does not specifically
address behaviour it does consider in some detail the underlying
structural issues that need to be addressed in order to promote
engagement in learning and thus prevent disaffection and disruptive
behaviour. Engagement with and enthusiasm for learning is an absolute
prerequisite for a successful educational experience at school
and measures taken to promote interest and motivation at this
stage are critical in averting later difficulties.
6. Our explorations with those working at
a local level clearly demonstrate that access to good quality
data is essential in order to have significant insights into attendance,
attainment and exclusion. Data collation, and intelligent use
of data is therefore an important tool for educators planning
to intervene early to prevent disengagement later.
7. We would like to contribute to the Committee
by citing some of the key findings of the review and the Handbook
that have relevance to the areas on which you are seeking submissions.
DISENGAGEMENT FROM
LEARNING
8. Frequently disengagement from learning
is a prelude to challenging and disruptive behaviour that can
lead to exclusion. A particular problem is the term "disengagement"
itself. Its widespread use might seem to imply a consensus about
what constitutes a "normal" pattern of engagement with
learning for this age range. However, the different ways in which
engagement can be measured (behavioural, emotional or cognitive)
led Fredriks and colleagues to conclude, in their research review
that engagement is a "multidimensional phenomenon for which
there is currently no clear definition or conceptualization"
(2004).
9. The implications of these findings is
that a wide understanding of what disengagement involves needs
to be employed in order that preventative measures are put into
place before disengagement becomes disaffection and disruption.
In terms of high quality teaching practice, this involves paying
attention to the child who is inattentive and unengaged as much
as to the child who presents more demanding behaviour. In addition,
disengagement from school should not necessarily be understood
as a lack of interest in learning and may indicate some underlying
family or peer difficulty. Addressing what engages individual
young people is central to maintaining motivation and an interest
in learning; it follows then that teaching staff that understand
this and have the freedom to tailor their approach depending on
the child's needs are therefore better placed to mitigate disengagement
from learning.
THE SIGNIFICANCE
OF KEY
STAGE 3 (AGES
11 TO 14)
10. Although there is a large body of evidence
relating to the scale and impact of engagement at Key Stages 4
and 5, far less research focuses specifically on engagement and
disengagement at this crucial stage. Yet these are vitally important
years for laying the foundations for lifelong learning, influencing
the important decisions pupils make at age 14 and engaging young
people in the learning process. They also cover young people's
transition from primary to secondary school—a critical period
in terms of educational attainment and involvement, when school
may start to seem more system-driven and less personal. The research
on this topic has focused on the impact of the social aspects
of transition, the perceived and actual challenges of the curriculum
beyond Years six and seven and the structural aspects of transfer.
Good communication between phases and addressing continuity in
curriculum and pedagogy are approaches that have been devised
to tackle this problem (Morris and Pullen, 2007). Opportunities
to share skills and knowledge between the respective staff teams
across Key Stage 3—for example, shared training for Year
six and Year seven staff within a locality—are a useful
means of supporting more successful transition (Sharp C, 2010).
11. Although many young people progress
through Key Stage 3 without difficulty, a significant minority
find this stage in their educational journey problematic. Potential
triggers for disengagement can include transition from primary
school (as above), teaching and assessment approaches, curriculum
issues, the onset of adolescence and a decline in protective family
factors. Certain groups are more likely to lose interest in learning
than others. Strategies to engage young people have had varying
success—the most successful have been those that do not
simply seek to address the "symptoms" of disengagement
but positively work to forge participation and engagement in learning.
Work of this nature is critical at Key Stage 3 because of the
importance of maintaining a positive and involved engagement with
school activities before disengagement takes hold.
12. A particularly vulnerable group is "looked
after" children. There are numerous indicators of how poorly
children in care do educationally in comparison with the overall
population. In 2008-2009 children in care were five times more
likely to be permanently excluded than their peers. Lack of stability
can have a critical effect on educational engagement for this
group. Exclusion from school—and permanent exclusion in
particular—can place great strain on care placements and
lead to disruption and even more instability. Good interprofessional
communication between front-line staff from social care and education
at an early stage is critical. There is good evidence that the
role of the Virtual School Head has successfully raised the priority
of education for looked after children with their responsibilities
as "champions" for this group, tracking and monitoring
their progress and ensuring that all looked after children have
an effective personal education plan (PEP) in place (Berridge
et al, 2009).
Joe, a young person being looked after by foster
carers, began to become disengaged from education at his secondary
school in Year nine—he stopped completing homework, failed
to attend any revision classes as the curriculum approached Key
Stage 3 SATs, and began to truant. Minor but challenging behaviour
in class became increasingly frequent. The most successful subject
Joe took part in was PE—particularly rugby, for which he
was thought to have a special talent. Joe was encouraged to take
part in a trial for a local under-18 Rugby League team. He was
awarded a place, which allowed him to train with the team three
nights a week. Both Joe's foster carers and his school worked
hard together to encourage and support this interest, but made
it clear that this opportunity had to go hand in hand with Joe
completing his work requirements at school (he was now in Year
ten). Joe's behaviour and attendance improved and his friendship
groups broadened. Now back on track, Joe has just completed his
GCSEs and is expected to fulfill his targets.
INVOLVING PARENTS
AND CARERS
13. It is also important to recognise that
learning can take place in non-formal settings, for example within
families and peer groups, as well as in organised out-of-school
settings. Working with parents, carers and family members as partners
in their children's learning is also crucial in engaging young
people. Parents need to be engaged in actively supporting their
children's learning and development and a range of professionals
need to work together in an integrated way to promote good educational
outcomes for children and young people. The role of the Common
Assessment Framework, where schools have been fully engaged, has
been shown to engage parents and help develop trusting and positive
relationships and developed a professional awareness of families'
needs (Easton et al, 2010)
A Family and Student Services Centre in a local
authority provides a service that meets a variety of needs—learning,
health and family needs—which aren't usually found within
regular LSU provision. Based within a secondary school, the Centre
has a part-time social worker attached to its service and also
provides drop-in clinics with local health staff. Work also takes
place with families and is not solely focused on learning and
behaviour problems. Unusually, students can self-refer. Because
the unit is used by a variety of students with a range of needs,
it is not perceived with the same degree of stigma within the
school as conventional units can be.
14. In a study published by the Joseph Rowntree
Foundation on out-of-school activities it is noted that "a
key feature of successful projects working with excluded children
was to build close relationships not just with the young people
but with their families, addressing the family circumstances as
well as the child's learning needs and making education a shared
enterprise between family, educator and child" (JRF,
2007). This tells us something about the skills required in those
working with this group of young people.
15. In addition well planned, multi-agency
interventions need to be implemented by agencies working with
the small minority that have become totally disengaged to secure
their return to learning, often outside the mainstream school
setting.
THE EFFICACY
OF ALTERNATIVE
PROVISION FOR
PUPILS EXCLUDED
FROM SCHOOL
BECAUSE OF
THEIR BEHAVIOUR
16. Learning that takes place outside school
is often seen as auxiliary, but it can be crucial. Although "alternative"
provision has been shown to have some success, longer term however
the impact is less clear (Kendall et al, 2007). In one
of eight studies Frankham and colleagues note that a characteristic
of successful projects however was the ability to build close
relationships with the young person, that is, the ability to forge
a co-operative relationship, paying attention to the importance
of the past experiences of young people that may have been characterized
by a distrust of people in authority. What is known to work includes
small classes, negotiated activities, flexible approaches, extended
care and meeting the whole range of young people's needs and aspirations.
The organisations involved in the study by Frankham showed tenacity
in chasing up young people and refusing to give up on them (Frankham,
2007). Other initiatives have tried other approaches. Positive
Futures, a sports based initiative, funded by the Home Officer
and run by Crime Concern used sport and physical activity as a
way of engaging disadvantaged and the most socially excluded young
people with some success (Crabbe, 2007).
We hope that this submission has conveyed to
the Committee the significance of maintaining interest, motivation
and enthusiasm for learning and the importance of early intervention
to avert disengagement and later difficulties that often transform
into difficult and disruptive behavior. We would also emphasise
the crucial importance of intervention at Key Stage 3. We trust
that this submission will support the Committee's work on this
important topic. If you would like to discuss any of the issues
raised or need further details or clarification, or if we can
contribute further to the Committee in any way, please do not
hesitate to get in touch.
Elizabeth Cooke
Knowledge Manager
September 2010
REFERENCESBerridge
D, Henry L Jackson S and Turney D (2009) Looked after and Learning:
Evaluation of the Virtual School Head Pilot London: DCSF
Cooke E and Barnes T (2010) On the Path to Success:
Promoting engagement in learning at Key Stage 3 Dartington:
research in practice
Crabbe T (2007) Positive Futures: Putting the pieces
together? Positive Futures monitoring and evaluation report: Manchester
Frankham J, Edwards Kerr D, Humphrey N and Roberts
L (2007) School Exclusions: Learning partnerships outside mainstream
education. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation
Fredricks JA, Blumenfeld PC and Paris AH (2004) "School
Engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence"
Review of Educational Research, 74 (1)
Joseph Rowntree Foundation (2007) Experiences
of Poverty and Educational Disadvantage. York: Joseph Rowntree
Foundation. Online version available.
Kendall S, Wilkin A, Kinder K, Gulliver C, Harland
J, Martin K and White R (2007) Effective Alternative Provision.
(DCSF research report RW002). London: DCSF
Morris M and Pullen C (2007) Disengagement and
Re-engagement of Young People in Learning at Key Stage 3 Dartington:
NFER/research in practice
Sharp C et al (2010) Ensuring that all
children and young people make sustained progress and remain fully
engaged through all transitions between key stages C4EO/NFER
Thomson P and Russell L (2007) Mapping the Alternatives
to Permanent Exclusion. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation
Wikeley F, Bullock K, Muschamp Y and Ridge T (2007)
Educational Relationships outside School: Why access is important.
York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation
| 
