3.1 Developing overall policy at authority level
All education authorities were providing some active leadership, support and advice to schools as part of their responses to the BB-BL report, but the quality and nature of their responses varied considerably. Only around half the authorities had given a clear lead in establishing an integrated framework that helped schools develop linked policies on care and welfare, behaviour and social inclusion. Other authorities had provided little support for schools to develop and implement their own policies. In a few of the authorities which had developed effective policy frameworks, there was still a need for practical guidance on implementation.
Most authorities had given a good lead in developing arrangements for cooperation at a strategic level between education and other partners including community services, social work and health, as part of their response to the BB-BL recommendations. Overall there was more evidence of joint working at strategic level, including the voluntary sector. In some cases this had been achieved in the context of mergers between education and social work departments. In addition, joint working had also been based on the development of Integrated Community Schools (ICS) initiatives into a more strategic approach to integrating children's services by community planning partners. The lead given for a multi-disciplinary approach to promoting positive behaviour had prepared the ground for more effective deployment of partner agencies to meet the needs of schools and individual pupils.
|
One education authority had given an effective lead through providing a wide range of policies which took very good account of 'Better Behaviour - Better Learning'. The education and social work departments had been combined to provide joint leadership and integrated services for children and young people. Successful interagency working provided an effective multi-disciplinary approach. The authority had given priority to developing strategic arrangements for staged intervention and the resources for supporting them. A number of subgroups were developing a coherent approach to supporting pupils with social, emotional and behavioural difficulties (SEBD) across the stages. |
All authorities had provided some leadership to schools to help them establish appropriate guidelines on exclusion and almost all had procedures for monitoring exclusions and attendance. In many cases, however, these procedures had yet to be fully and rigorously implemented.
3.2 Developing specific approaches across the authority
Almost all authorities had given a good lead in encouraging schools to develop a range of approaches to promoting positive behaviour (PPB) and to include these in development plans. Almost all, for example, encouraged their schools to establish dress codes and to form pupil councils.
Only about half of the authorities had established coherent links between policies on behaviour management, promoting positive behaviour and effective learning and teaching. Where this was done, authorities emphasised the need for classroom management approaches in which teachers adapted teaching and learning to meeting a variety of individual needs, and in which they used information and communication technology (ICT) to motivate pupils.
|
One education authority had developed an effective policy to support pupils with social, emotional and behavioural difficulties (SEBD). Clear links were made between learning and teaching and behaviour management through the development of a 'Discipline for Learning' initiative. Policy focused on initiatives to encourage better behaviour including buddying/mentoring, and pupil councils. Very effective structures were in place at authority level to plan, monitor and review positive behaviour management strategies. |
Most authorities had developed strategies for increasing the range of out-of-school activities available to pupils in order to promote social inclusion and engage vulnerable pupils more effectively in their education. These included breakfast and after-school clubs, and activities provided by sports coordinators, and community education and youth workers.
Only about half of the authorities had given a good lead in developing the use of curriculum flexibility to motivate and include disaffected young people and raise their attainment. Some of these pupils were offered an alternative curriculum which included contributions from further and higher education colleges. Many other authorities had encouraged schools, especially secondary schools, to develop their own approaches to providing curriculum flexibility which led to educational gain for pupils. Overall, authorities required to give schools a stronger lead in exploiting the potential of curricular flexibility in meeting pupils' needs. As part of this process, however, they also need to ensure that any new approaches developed by schools are well designed and consulted upon, offer real educational benefits for pupils, and are effectively monitored and evaluated.
A substantial minority of education authorities had established or were developing systems to promote early intervention for pre-school and primary children and their families. These systems focused on supporting pupils with the most challenging social, emotional and behavioural difficulties. Almost all other authorities had clear plans to develop these arrangements. Current approaches to supporting children and their families included the development of early learning teams, children and family centres and the delivery of parenting skills programmes. There was also individual counselling provided for parents of children who had behavioural difficulties both at school and at home.
Home-link workers played a key role, for example in supporting and counselling parents and their children and in providing anger-management training for pupils. Many primary schools had developed good arrangements to intervene early to support children with behavioural difficulties.
| One education authority had strongly supported schools in their reviews of policy and procedures relating to BB-BL. A strong thrust towards inclusion was evident with the emphasis on strategies to keep pupils in mainstream education. The authority had developed a 'Nurture Group' approach to early intervention for pupils with behavioural difficulties. This initiative provided an enhanced personal and social development curriculum for these pupils and made adjustments to address their individual needs. It was designed to make and sustain close links with parents of children at the early stages of primary school. Initial evaluations of this initiative were very positive from headteachers, teachers and parents. |
Almost all authorities had provided good leadership in introducing or extending a framework of staged assessment and intervention to support teachers in addressing behavioural problems. These frameworks were designed to establish the most appropriate strategies for dealing with a range of behaviours, and were often related to learning strategies.
|
One education authority had developed very effective staged intervention where external agencies worked closely with headteachers. Good levels of consultation and support from the education authority were key factors for success. |
Whilst some frameworks for staged assessment and intervention had been in place for some time, BB-BL had led several authorities to focus on developing more effective approaches at the earliest stages of intervention. The Framework for Intervention (FFI) approach, in particular, had been used effectively to ensure that low-level disruptive behaviour was addressed positively at an early stage and prevented from escalating. A nominated teacher, trained as the behaviour coordinator (BCo) in each school, supported class teachers in developing their own solutions to behaviour problems. One authority had piloted the FFI system in two secondary schools and five primary schools. The approach was subsequently extended to all of the authority's primary schools which developed a wide range of strategies to support pupils with behavioural difficulties. Currently, some 23 authorities were participating in the national pilot and all reported favourably on its effectiveness. Almost all planned to extend the pilot to other schools as part of their strategy within a wider staged intervention system.
The strong focus on identifying problems early, and providing effective support to help teachers resolve them successfully within the mainstream classroom, was a very positive aspect of the FFI approach.
Some authorities were also considering developing other approaches to respond to incidences of bullying and indiscipline. These included restorative approaches, which have been adopted in the youth justice setting to resolve conflicts and find solutions. In the school setting, they involve helping pupils to understand their behaviour without condoning or tolerating unacceptable behaviour. With national support, three local authorities in Scotland are piloting restorative practices in their primary and secondary schools. These pilots will also be subject to independent evaluation.
At higher stages of assessment and intervention, where more intensive support for pupils at risk of exclusion was necessary, several agencies were involved through School Liaison Groups (SLGs) or Joint Assessment Teams (JATs). JATs which typically included social workers, health professionals and educational psychologists as well as school staff, were often linked to effective implementation of the ICS approach. This, in turn, was often enhanced by developments supported through the Better Neighbourhood Services Fund. All authorities had a key multi-agency operational group to deal with referrals of pupils who required intensive support. These groups had a key 'gatekeeper' role in deciding on alternative provision either within the authority or through an external residential placement. Almost all secondary schools and an increasing number of primary schools provided staged intervention. Several authorities needed to provide more support for staged intervention in their schools.
3.3 Quality assurance
Over the period of this study, authorities were focused more on developing and implementing their approaches to implementing the BB-BL joint action plan, than on evaluating their procedures. However, some had established elements of good practice in monitoring schools' approaches to behaviour management. These included monitoring the appropriateness of referrals to the authority, the number and nature of referrals to the Children's Reporter, the outcomes of HMIE reports on individual establishments and trends in attendance and exclusion figures. In addition some authorities monitored their implementation of the action plan through the use of outside consultants, seconded senior staff visits to schools, questionnaires to schools, and 'Best Value' reviews of behaviour support services.
Almost all authorities which had set up a strategy group to provide leadership in implementing the BB-BL action plan used this group to some extent in monitoring, reviewing and planning next steps for action. Those which had established a multi-agency strategy group were best placed to take forward and monitor developments. Several authorities had yet to set up a group to monitor progress. Where no such group was in place, procedures for quality assurance were less clear and there was more likely to be inconsistent practice across schools.
|
An effective Discipline Task Group (DTG) set up by one authority included a wide range of professionals. The action plan formulated by the group made clear links between learning and teaching and the promotion of positive behaviour. The plan was also closely linked to developing integrated services within the ICS initiative. A DTG coordinator had been appointed and a number of primary and secondary teachers were seconded to disseminate good practice and organise training for staff. |
Almost all authorities included strategies to implement the BB-BL action plan within their annual service plan or improvement plan. In some authorities, recommendations also appeared in Children's Services Plans, to ensure joint working among partner agencies. Only a few authorities had placed a strong requirement on headteachers to address the recommendations of the BB-BL action plan in their school development plans. In cases where this had occurred, the authorities concerned had indicated appropriately that implementation of the report should be closely linked to improving attainment and achievement.
|
One authority, in close cooperation with partner services, had developed a strategy for behaviour and discipline as one strand of a wider review of support for learning. This was also linked with a broader multi-agency review of support for young people. The authority had set behaviour improvement targets in the service plan and expected schools to include them in their school development plans. |
3.4 Staff development
Most authorities had provided some appropriate staff development for teachers in promoting positive behaviour, including courses on behaviour management for probationer teachers.
|
One primary school used a range of ways to promote positive behaviour management. This included strong teamwork among the senior management team to coordinate a wide range of support, including highly-appreciated support for parents. There was a high level of interest among staff for training in positive behaviour management and a number had undertaken very effective staff development. |
Staff development in some authorities did not focus sufficiently on links between effective learning and teaching and behaviour management. The most successful approaches made links with different styles of learning, effective classroom management and the uses of ICT as a motivator for learning. Most authorities had worked with local colleges to provide auxiliaries with training in aspects of additional support needs and promoting positive behaviour.
| One authority had provided a good range of development and training opportunities focused on positive behaviour management in schools. Courses on 'critical skills' provided staff with positive strategies for dealing with challenging behaviour. Other courses promoted the 'inclusive classroom', and the connections between effective learning and teaching and managing challenging behaviour. |
Some very good staff development programmes for headteachers and senior managers had been established in almost all authorities. However, in more than half of secondary schools and a substantial minority of primary schools, the skills learned from these programmes were not always used well to promote positive behaviour. In these cases, authorities and headteachers needed to make more effective use of professional review and staff development to identify and meet the needs of senior managers.
In order to draw on proven skills in leadership to promote best practice, SEED had recently introduced master classes for headteachers and senior managers on promoting positive behaviour. SEED had also recently set up an advisory group to ensure the ongoing delivery of continuing professional development by authorities and schools in Scotland. It was too early to see the impact of these initiatives.
Some training using multi-agency teams was provided in authorities. In most cases this involved child protection training and training provided jointly by education and social work for staff dealing with looked-after children. In some authorities, training was provided by health and social work staff. A few authorities were beginning to extend the range of inter-agency training, often in association with the development of integrated community schools.
|
In one authority, the education department and social work services
teams worked well together to ensure a joint approach to staff development. |