iv Programme Theory 4 Table 5.8 Programme Theory

Context Mechanism Outcome

The involvement of parents and carers is believed to be important in

supporting students with SEBD.

Teaching staff liaise with parents. Information about student progress is shared with parents, any difficulties are shared at an early stage and positive problem solving to support students takes place.

Parents report liaison with school is good and they are aware of the strategies teaching staff are employing to support their child. Parents are aware of what they can do to support their child at school.

Teachers report time is available to liaise with parents and that this is of benefit to students with SEBD.

The analysis of interviewee responses for Programme Theory 4 is presented in Appendix XXI.

All of the interviewees agreed with the theory that home background (C) can have a significant effect on students in school, that parental support is important for students to be successful and a range of mechanisms suggested that Willow Park was

177

improving its work with parents with improved outcomes for students. For instance, one parent commented:

“I think [working with parents] must be high on their list because with [PLA] and now this Inclusion Manager, you know it‟s not something I ever heard about when I was at school. They seem to be on the ball about that..The Head teacher has written to me and said „We will do all we can to support [student]. I‟ve been over there and met the Head mistress and thanked her for what she‟s done.”

Another parent reported that, although working closely with parents seemed to be a high priority for the school (C), if parents do not support the school this affects a child‟s progress (O).

A member of the SLT reported that his role was to monitor the log of reported incidences and if a student had more than 5 incidents in a four week period it was expected the student‟s Tutor contact parents (M). This system was reported to have

reduced the overall incidents of poor behaviour over the six months it had been in operation and to have provided useful information about a student‟s progress to feedback to their parents (O).

Teachers noted that, through the revised behaviour policy, they were increasingly being encouraged to work more closely with parents but that it could be difficult to find the time to do this (C) and they sometimes asked the PLA to liaise for them (M). The PLA noted that some parents may find it difficult to approach teaching staff, for instance if their own experience of school had been poor (C), and that some parents wanted someone else to solve any difficulties they were experiencing with their child rather than taking responsibility themselves. These contextual factors made it more difficult for students to be successful in school, but the PLA, a teacher and a parent reported that the PLA role of supporting parents to liaise with teachers (M) was a successful strategy in increasing parents‟ confidence (O). The PLA commented:

178

“One parent I work with has become more confident and has built up a good relationship with her child‟s Head of Year and rings him frequently, when she‟s not happy”.

Liaison with parents, the student‟s Tutor and TA (M) was reported to increase school staff understanding of the child‟s traveller culture and parents understanding of

school expectations, as well as parents ability to support their child, for instance through asking the child about their school work. (O). This was more successful when liaison was arranged regularly (M). A TA commented:

“I speak to [child‟s parent] regularly, maybe two or three times a week. Usually she rings because she is worried about how it‟s going or wants to tell me something that has happened at home. We have a good working relationship, I think she trusts me”

The PLA reported some teaching staff believed home and school should be kept separate, a context which worked against effective home-school liaison:

“Some people in school believe that things to do with home are outside of the school are beyond the remit of the school. I hope that I‟ve taught some of them that those issues impact massively on that young person”.

A student reported being present at meetings concerning them with their parents and teacher (M) made them feel part of the decision making process and they were more likely to sign up to any decisions made as a result (O). Students also noted that their parents noticing how they are at home, teaching specific skills that are useful in school (such as looking at a teacher when they are taking in order to demonstrate attention) were also helpful mechanisms. Students were positive (O) about „good

179

news‟ post cards being sent to their parents by school teachers (M), and noted

detentions were less effective (O) if their parents were not informed about them (M).

In terms of gaining a variety of views about liaison with parents, it is important to note all the parents interviewed in this study reported contact with school to be at least good enough. This may have been an artefact of the selection procedure, in that parents less engaged with the school may have been less engaged with me as a researcher. As noted in Section 4.4.i, I was unable to arrange an interview with one parent. It is likely that the collection of views of parents less engaged with and by the school, would have provided useful information in considering the validity of this programme theory. Revisions to Programme Theory 4 are presented in Table 5.

Table 5.9 Revised Programme Theory 4

Context Mechanism Outcome

The involvement of parents and carers is believed to be important in

supporting students with SEBD. Parents are supportive of the

school.

Teaching staff liaise with parents. Information about student progress is

monitored regularly and shared with

parents, any difficulties are shared at an early stage and positive problem solving to support students takes place which

involves the students in the process.

Parents report liaison with school is good and they are aware of the strategies teaching staff are employing to support their child. Parents are aware of what they can do to support their child at school.

Teachers report time is available to liaise with parents and that this is of benefit to students with SEBD.

Parental understanding of school and teachers‟ understanding of student home background is increased.

180 5.4.v Programme Theory 5

Table 5.10 Programme Theory 5

Context Mechanism Outcome

A school that believes good relationships between teaching staff and students is important in promoting good behaviour.

Teachers develop good relationships with students. When difficulties arise they have time to listen, discuss and problem solve with students. Students‟ views on

supporting students with SEBD are taken into account.

Teachers develop a deeper understanding of the needs of students. Students feel teachers listen to, understand and respond to their needs. Parents feel teachers understand and respond to the needs of their children.

The analysis of the interviewee responses for Programme Theory 5 is presented in Appendix XXII.

A noted in Section 3.4.iii, the importance of positive student-staff relationships in supporting SEBD are frequently reported in the literature (for example Wise and Upton, 1998; and Pomeroy, 1999). The semi-structured interview responses indicate a majority of interviewees agreed with this theory and that overall student-staff relationships at Willow Park were very good. Teaching staff made time available to students (M). OFSTED had also reported that student-staff relationships were good.

The SLT reported the behaviour policy is implemented more rigidly in Years 7, 8 and 9. Teachers tended to discuss and negotiate their responses to poor behaviour more as students move into Year 10 and beyond. A student in Year 11 reported this helped develop more positive relationships with teachers „on a level‟, and encouraged the

development of personal responsibility for behaviour (O):

“Having a close relationship with [teachers] helps, you can talk to them. It‟s important throughout school. It‟s easier as you get older because you‟re more mature.”

181

Interviewee responses indicate contexts reported to hinder the development of good relationships include students who are less able or willing to seek and accept help from teachers and larger class sizes where teachers reported it more difficult to notice a student struggling.

Mechanisms reported to support the development of good student-staff relationships included teachers talking to students in a non-confrontational way, developing a personalised curriculum for a student as the teacher would have to carefully consider a student‟s strengths and weaknesses, and teaching staff making time to talk to a

student after an incident. A member of the SLT noted teaching staff may need training regarding talking and listening to students effectively.

Interview responses from a teacher, a student and a parent noted that listening to student views (M) was underutilised at Willow Park, and student views were not fully taken into account:

“The student voice is under used when considering poor behaviour. Maybe behaviour could be put as a regular item on the School Council? The views of 6th Formers are underused. They have „been there‟ and are here by choice.”

“The School Council is not proportional [does not represent students experiencing SEBD]

“Involving students in decision making in school – so that they take ownership and hopefully respect changes to policy.”

In considering the mechanism of fully utilising students‟ views to increase the effectiveness of the implementation of the behaviour policy, it was raised within the 3+ Behaviour Group that, although the group represented a range of school staff, no students, whether experiencing SEBD or not, were included within this group. The 3+ Behaviour Group planned to remedy this.

182

Programme Theory 5 was revised as presented in Table 5.

Table 5.11 Revised Programme Theory 5

Context Mechanism Outcome

A school that believes good relationships between teaching staff and students is important in promoting good behaviour across all Year

groupsand where students

want to develop good relationships.

Teachers develop good relationships with students. When difficulties arise they have time to listen, discuss and problem solve with students. Students‟ views on supporting students with SEBD are taken into account and are gained at the school level.

Teachers develop a deeper understanding of the needs of students. Students feel teachers listen to, understand and respond to their needs. Parents feel teachers understand and respond to the needs of their children.