Values and Beliefs Held About Parenting and Education by School Staff and Parents of Pupils with Special Educational Needs in the Context of Home- School Collaboration

Effective collaboration between school staff and parents of children identified as having special educational needs is considered to be an essential component of the child’s successful education. Differences in beliefs and perspectives adopted by the school staff and parents play an important role in the process of collaboration. However, little is known about the precise relationship between the beliefs and the process of collaboration. The purpose of this study was to explore the values and beliefs held by the school staff and parents in the areas of parenting and education. The study also explored the link between these beliefs and the process of collaboration within four parent-teacher dyads from mainstream primary schools. Focus groups and semi-structured interviews based on repertory grid technique were used. The findings highlighted an overall similarity in the participants’ views on collaboration and in their important beliefs about parenting and education. At the same time, differences in perspectives adopted by parents and teachers were also identified. The author discusses how these differences in perspectives are manifested in the process of collaboration from the point of Cultural Capital Theory. The factors such as power differentials, trust between parents and teachers, and limited resources and constraints of educational system are highlighted. Implication for practice for teachers and educational psychologists are discussed.

Self-Harm in Secondary Schools: What are the Perceptions and Experiences of Staff ?

The purpose of this study is to explore the perceptions and experiences of secondary school staff with regard to adolescent self-harm. The research was conducted in a Local Authority where there were particular concerns about rising numbers of young people presenting with self-harm. While the majority of young people who self-harm are supported in the community and never access clinical services, surprisingly little research has considered the role of schools and their staff. The research that has been done suggests that school staff can feel underqualified and overwhelmed in their attempts to support young people who self-harm. Further, there is a growing evidence base that when young people experience negative attitudes towards self-harm it is distressing and reduces the chance of them seeking further help. To address this, qualitative exploratory research was conducted with thirteen members of staff working in secondary schools. Since the research was concerned not just with experiences, but also with perceptions of adolescent self-harm, the participants were from two groups: those with direct experience of supporting young people who have self-harmed and those without any direct experience. Data collection involved individual semi-structured interviews which were analysed using thematic analysis. The research indicated that secondary school staff are keen to help and understand young people who self-harm, but that they do not always feel skilled or confident enough to do so, often feeling that some kind of specialist is required and/or fearing that they might make a situation worse. Findings highlighted the emotional impact of this work and illustrated the importance of supporting staff, who expressed a desire for further training and other forms of professional support such as supervision.

Supervision For School Staff: What is Valuable about Solution Circles?

Group supervision is used for support, education and/or monitoring. Despite the potential value of these elements for school staff, it is rarely practised. This mixed methods research, from a critical realist perspective, explored the use of Solution Circles to structure staff supervision groups in three schools. Five circles were run in each school, involving thirty-one participants, eighteen of whom contributed data. Thirteen staff trained as facilitators. The self-efficacy, resilience and anxiety levels of the staff taking part were not found to be significantly different as a result of the intervention. However, a small effect size was noted for self-efficacy, perhaps worthy of further investigation in the context of the small sample size. Thematic analysis of participant feedback (gathered during the last circle, which ran as a Focus Group) indicated the following mechanisms as affecting the value of Solution Circles for staff supervision groups: the structure of the sessions; aspects linked to the groups meeting a ‘need to talk’; elements which helped participants to ‘feel like a team’; and, school context factors. Semi-structured interview data from six facilitators indicated that the structure of the circles, individual characteristics of facilitators, the provision of support for facilitators, and elements of the wider school context, were all mechanisms which affected the facilitation of the programme. Further research might implement elements of these mechanisms and measure their impact.