3.1 Therapeutic intervention for extended school non-attenders
The majority of the research in the area of intervening in ESNA has been confined to clinical studies (e.g. Egger, Costello & Angold, 2003; Carless, Melvin, Tongue & Newman, 2015; Heyne, King, & Tonge, 2004). Therapeutic interventions have focussed on the most effective treatment to minimise the internalising disorders of depression and anxiety amongst extended school non-attenders. Most research has focussed on the effect of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) (Baker and Bishop, 2015) There is an urgency when implementing effective strategies for school refusers, since the more school a child misses the less likely he or she is to be able to reintegrate and the more impact it is likely to have on his or her attainment, social and emotional wellbeing (DfE, 2011a). However, children are more likely to be referred for clinical services once the behaviours associated with non-attendance have become established (DfE, 2011a). There is dispute between researchers as to how effective CBT is in ameliorating the factors that might be maintaining school non-attendance (Kearney, 2008). The evidence so far suggests that purely focussing on implementing CBT to reduce anxiety and/or depression in school refusers it does not automatically lead to a resolution in non-attendance (Kearney, 2008).
It is argued that adapting school environments to meet the needs of children with ESNA is suited to the role of the educational psychologist (Carroll, 2015). One approach to EP practice is consultation, this approach involves working together with the adults who know the child best. In consultation meetings, EPs facilitate the discussion with all key adults to explore the issues around the target child and search for solutions to support their education and well-being. In consultation, the EP takes the role as a facilitator, rather than the expert. EPs view the key adults as the experts in the child and that everyone involved has unique contribution to make (Wagner, 2008)
3.2 School-Based Intervention for Extended School Non-Attenders
Stroobant and Jones (2006) argue that, “school refusal behaviour is not fixed but is multi-dimensional, and changes over time in response to internal and external variables such as maturity, school pressures and adult and peer behaviour” (p. 211). This explains why identification, assessment and intervention can be such complex processes. King and Bernstein (2001) recommended that the assessment process should involve an in-depth understanding of the factors leading to the extended non-attendance
19 behaviour being maintained. It is suggested that this is best achieved by triangulating important information from the child, parents and school staff.
Baker and Bishop (2015) highlighted that due to the impact that not attending school has on a child, many studies have advocated that school attendance should be resumed earlier rather than later. This is because of the opportunities that school provides, including the development and mastery of adaptive problem-solving skills necessary in adulthood to effectively communicate with others. Statistics from the DfE (2011a) suggest that the more school missed, the less likely children are to obtain GCSEs. Increased rates of bullying, in the form of social isolation, was also found to be higher in persistent non-attenders. It is possible that this is because the children are not in school to form supportive relationships. Another explanation could be that there becomes a difficulty in maintaining relationships when off school for a prolonged period of time.
Due to the lack of consensus across LAs regarding how to best meet the needs of children with ESNA, Baker and Bishop (2015) suggested a need for a systematic review of evidence surrounding current intervention practice and more detailed analysis of individual occurrences to build up a picture of practice-based evidence.
3.3 Out of school provision for extended school non-attenders
In addition to phasing the return to school and reducing pupils’ timetables, extended school non- attenders are also educated in out-of-school provision or alternative provision. Alternative provision (AP) is defined as an organisation where pupils engage in timetabled, educational activities away from school and school staff (The Office for Standards in Education, Ofsted, 2011). The AP offered by local authorities (LA) in response to ESNA varies from county to county (Archer et al., 2003). Archer et al. (2003) found that most of the LAs involved in their audit offered a home tuition service, however, these LAs did not state the number of hours of support available. Three quarters of the LAs offered alternative curricular provision for these pupils and over half offered provision at a pupil referral unit (PRU). Some LAs referred to other specific provision, for example, hospital schools, and some noted that the individual schools were expected to provide appropriate support, for example, through learning support units (LSUs) or inclusion units. In Gregory and Purcell’s (2014) study two children were receiving input from the Home Tuition Service and three children were home educated. Local authorities must comply with regulations that a child, who is educated outside a mainstream school, should receive teaching each week equivalent to a full school week. Ofsted inspect and regulate services that care for and educate children and young people. A review by Ofsted (2004) reported that there was a problem with the amount of time to find appropriate out of school provision for young people. It was taking some LAs up to seventy-five days to find alternative provision. In a
20 review of APs, Taylor (2012b) described that the quality of support offered by APs was too variable. A key factor stated as important when organising provision was to ensure communication is frequent between school in which the child with ESNA is registered and the AP to ensure the needs of the child are met (Taylor, 2012b).
An AP audit (DfE, 2011a) reported that there were 14,050 pupils in PRUs and 23,020 in other AP settings on full or part-time placements. The Alternative Provision Directory (DfE, 2017) has
information on 493 organisations providing alternative education. Out of these organisations 57 claim to cater specifically for children with ESNA. The organisations included in the directory only include those that have been registered and it is expected that thousands more are unregistered (DfE, 2017). The data and research outlined above suggests that there are a range of strategies used by schools with the aim of supporting children with ESNA. However, the way in which these strategies are
implemented varies in quality across schools and it is suggested that children are being sent to alternative provisions because it is not known what else to try. If a social model of ESNA is to be realised, the researcher believes that more research should be done to explore how systems around the child could be changed. The research above suggests that the focus of intervention has been on changing the relationship between children with ESNA and school, i.e. a change in the microsystem. However, it is believed that both a change in the relationship between parents and their children and in the relationship between parents and school staff (mesosystem) could also help resolve ESNA.