Equity within education

This is the third report on the state of equity in the English education system from the Centre for Equity in Education based at The University of Manchester. It argues that efforts to create a more equitable education system are now at a strategic crossroad – trapped between a target-driven ‘effectiveness and improvement’model of service reform, and efforts to develop localised and coordinated responses to inequity.

Key findings:
- The report argues that if equity is to be enhanced, the space must be created for policies to be joined up locally and oriented to meeting community needs.
- Despite repeated policy interventions, the most disadvantaged children and young people continue to be at greatest risk of impoverished educational experiences, low achievements and limited life chances.
- Policy has focused on ‘improving’ schools and other education settings and making them more ‘effective’, yet the source of inequities lies largely beyond the school, in social disadvantage. Efforts at educational improvement have to be linked into a coherent strategy to address wider social and economic issues.
- There is currently more potential than ever before to achieve greater equity within the English education system. In particular, we find that multiple co-ordinating mechanisms exist in the form of Local Strategic Partnerships, neighbourhood management initiatives, integrated children’s service networks, extended services clusters and the like. In practice, however, these deliver little by way of co-ordinated strategies that might address educational inequity.
- Often, these co-ordinating mechanisms have little effective involvement from schools and wider community stakeholders. Even where they do, their ability to generate strategy is hamstrung by the perverse consequences of the government’s target-setting regime. Participants are accountable for separate sets of targets, and have to achieve these within short timescales.
- Despite this, there are examples of more genuine collaboration. These are characterised by a contextual analysis leading to a local strategy. Participants probe beneath the surface of headline performance indicators to understand how local dynamics shape particular outcomes.
- If these approaches are to flourish, action is needed at three levels:
• Head teachers and other education leaders need to:
− be proactive in joining and forming partnerships with other key actors in the areas they serve
− work with their partners to understand ‘how things work round here’ and to formulate a long-term area strategy to tackle inequities
− harmonise work within their schools and settings with this wider strategy.
• Local authorities and other local leaders need to:
− promote the development of partnerships at area level
− offer support to partnerships for contextual analysis and strategy formulation
− develop their own contextual analyses and strategies as a framework within which area partnerships can operate
− bring a democratic voice to bear on the work of area partnerships.
• Central government needs to:
− continue to create spaces in which local partnerships can flourish
− encourage these partnerships to undertake contextual analyses and formulate long-term strategies
− counter the perverse consequences of the target-setting regime by locating accountability at the level of the partnership, entering into dialogue about local goals, and extending the timescale over which achievements are measured and the range of evidence this involves
− develop its own contextual analyses and strategies as a framework within which local authorities and area partnerships can operate.

Home-school partnerships

This report by the New Zealand Ministry of Education describes the findings of a research project designed to improve understanding of the key elements of successful home–school partnerships and how they operate in some different school settings. The project includes a review of evidence and an empirical research component.

Key points:
- The research literature is unequivocal in showing that parental involvement makes a significant difference to educational achievement. Given this, it is not surprising that during the last decade there has been a high level of interest in interventions aimed at involving parents (especially “hard to reach” parents) more fully in the education of their children, as a means to raising educational achievement of children who are currently not performing to expectations in the education system.
- The research literature does suggest that successful home–school partnerships display many of the following features:
- Relationships in successful home–school partnerships are collaborative and mutually respectful.
- Successful partnerships are multi-dimensional, and responsive to community needs.
- Successful home–school partnerships are planned for; embedded within whole school development plans; well resourced and regularly reviewed.
- Successful partnerships are goal oriented and focused on learning.
- Effective parental engagement happens largely at home.
- There is timely two-way communication between school and parents in successful partnerships.
- Building successful home–school partnerships takes time and commitment. In nearly all the case study schools, teachers, parents, and sometimes children, thought the principal was a key player in the establishment of successful partnerships. Teachers’ attitudes also seem to be critical to the success of home–school partnerships.
- Context affects the nature of partnerships and the way they develop. Home–school partnerships are perceived to be easier to establish in small schools, and in closely knit communities, and more difficult with secondary age students.
- The case studies show that technologies such as mobile phones, the internet and DVDs are being used creatively to strengthen links between school and home. Several case study schools are also exploring ways of modifying current school practices such as parent–teacher interviews and homework as ways of facilitating genuine two-way communication between school and home.
- One interesting finding was how little we really know about the effectiveness of home–school partnerships as strategies for reducing disparity and/or developing successful 21st century learners. The report concludes by raising some questions that we think are important to consider. Specifically it suggests that there is a need to find out more about exactly what sort of home–school partnerships are beneficial, how they are beneficial, and to whom.

Customer Perception of DCSF, young people's view

This survey by the BMG, for the DCSF, follows a similar survey directed towards parents. It asks young people (10-19) for their views, as aligned to the DCSF Departmental Strategic Objectives.


Key points:
- Young people report that their parents are generally involved in their school or college life (82% disagreed that their parents prefer not to get involved), they feel supported by their parents in their work (95%) and they generally always tell their parents how they are getting on in their education (85%). The majority of young people also reported that their parents usually know what kind of homework they have (as 72% disagreed that their parents do not know what kind of work they have).
- In general, car usage amongst this group is the exception rather than the norm, as two in five (41%) young people report that they never travel to school, college, university or work by car, and a further one in four do so rarely (26% travel by car less often than not). The remaining one in three (32%) travel by car every day or more often than not.
- All young people were asked whether they have someone they could talk to about things that matter to them if they were feeling worried or angry. The majority of young people feel they definitely have someone they could speak to in such a scenario (71%), while a further one in four (23%) feel they probably have someone they could speak to. A minority of 6% feel they do not have someone to talk to, or are unsure of whether they do.
- Overall, young people feel that there is not very much of a problem of bullying in their school or college, as reported by over eight in ten (84%). This comprises one in four (24%) who feel that bullying is not a problem at all, while six in ten (60%) feel it is not very much of a problem.



- Around nine in ten young people feel safe during the day in the given situations. Over nine in ten feel it is safe in school or college, 93% feel it is safe in the local community, and just fewer feel safe on public transport during the day (91%) or travelling to and from school or college (91%).

- Amongst all young people primary schools are rated positively (good or very good) by the highest overall proportion (97% rate them as good), followed by universities (96%) and 6th form colleges or Further Education colleges for those aged 16-19 (94%). Secondary schools are also rated positively by the majority (88%). However universities are rated as very good by the highest proportion (39%), followed by sixth form colleges and further education colleges for 16-19 year olds (37%) and then secondary schools (27%), with primary schools rated as very good by one in five young people (20%).

- Young people were asked how they would describe pupil behaviour at their school or college. Half feel that pupil behaviour is generally good (51%), while just over one in three (37%) feels it is acceptable, and one in eight feels it is poor (12%).

Family Intervention Projects Evaluation

This evaluation by the DCSF and the Department for Communities and Local Government examines the national network of Family Intervention Projects (FIPs) which were set up as part of the Respect Action Plan, launched in January 2006. These projects aimed to reduce anti-social behaviour (ASB) perpetrated by the most anti-social and challenging families, prevent cycles of homelessness due to ASB and achieve the five Every Child Matters outcomes for children and young people. FIPs use an ‘assertive’ and ‘persistent’ style of working to challenge and support families to address the root causes of their ASB.

Key findings:
- 53 FIPs were set up during 2006 and 2007. Of these 34 were effectively set up from scratch and the remaining 19 projects existed prior to 2006 and were not making fundamental changes when they became a FIP. Typically FIPs were working with families in their own homes for between six to 12 months. Most projects were either being run by a team within the Local Authority (LA) or a voluntary sector provider.
- 885 families were referred to a FIP between February and October 2007, of these 78% met the referral criteria and agreed to work with a FIP. FIPs appeared to be working with their intended beneficiaries as families had high levels of ASB and criminal activities and were homeless or at risk of becoming homeless because of their ASB. These families were also well known in the area for causing ASB.
- The early outcomes reported by FIP staff for 90 families who completed the FIP intervention displayed considerable improvements in all key areas of the FIPs’ work. ASB and criminal activities had declined considerably at the point families exited from a FIP, as had the risk of families engaging in ASB. The risk of families being evicted had also considerably reduced. The outcomes for children and young people were also reported to have improved.
- Eight features of the FIP model appeared to be critical to its success: recruitment and retention of high quality staff, small caseloads, having a dedicated key worker who manages a family and works intensively with them, a whole-family approach, staying involved with a family for as long as necessary, scope to use resources creatively, using sanctions with support, and effective multi-agency relationships.

Parenting Early Intervention Pathfinder Evalaution

This report builds on earlier papers by the DCSF and presents the evidence of the evaluation of the Parenting Early Intervention Pathfinder (PEIP). The PEIP was a DCSF funded programme over the period September 2006 – March 2008 at a cost of £7.6 million in DCSF grant payments to LAs. PEIP funded 18 local authorities (LAs) to implement one of three selected parenting programmes with parents of children aged 8 – 13 years: Incredible Years, Triple P and Strengthening Families, Strengthening Communities, selected as having a sound evidence base for their effectiveness. The main aim of the study was to explore the roll out of these three programmes on a large scale across a substantial number of LAs: to examine parent and child outcomes, cost-effectiveness and the processes that optimise (or impair) the delivery of parenting programmes.

Key findings:
- The Parenting Early Intervention Pathfinder has been successful in rolling out three evidence-based parenting programmes across 18 LAs with high levels of positive gains for parents and their children.
- The PEIP increased the pool of trained facilitators: approximately 1100 additional trained staff.
- PEIP provided parenting training for 3575 parents on 425 courses of which 338 courses finished by the end of the PEIP and 87 were continuing.
- Parental course completion rate was good and similar across programmes: 73% of parents overall.
- The training was very successful as measured by improvements in the parents’ mental well-being, their parenting skills, their sense of being a parent, and also in the behaviour of the child about whom they were concerned.
- The three programmes produced comparable outcomes on all measures of improvement.
- Cost effectiveness varied greatly between LAs using the same programme indicating the importance of local policy and organisational factors.
- Cost effectiveness also varied between the three programmes: the average cost per parent completing was £2955, with Incredible Years courses being the most costly.

Support needs of children and young people who move due to domestic violence

This is the summary report of findings from research funded by the Scottish Executive and commissioned by Women’s Aid. The research explores the views, experiences and support needs of children and young people who have to move home as a result of domestic abuse.

Key findings:
- Information from prior studies suggests that children experiencing domestic abuse are likely to know about it and be affected by it; have sophisticated understandings and information about it; and to have mixed views about refuge life. Earlier studies also suggest that given the complexities of their lives, it can be difficult for organisations to find effective ways to support them.
- Moving school or returning to school following having to move house because of domestic abuse was a major source of anxiety; this seemed to be focused on anxieties about implications for relationships with friends and friendships.
- One theme emerging strongly from the interviews was the value young people placed on having someone they could completely trust to talk to about their experiences. However, finding someone appropriate to fulfil this role could be difficult.
- Support agencies should prioritise helping them maintain old friendships and networks; helping them build new ones where this is not possible.
- Recognition should be given to the value young people in this situation place on being able to talk about their experiences to someone they completely trust who will keep their information private; recognise how difficult it is for them to find support at this time from friends and relatives.
- Schools should acknowledge the difficulties young people have when return in to or moving school in this situation; appreciate this is a very difficult transition; make planned and appropriate provision.
- Schools should take seriously the concerns and anxieties young people have about peer relationships when returning to school or moving school in this situation; find ways to acknowledge this; make planned and appropriate provision.