Our Domestic Violence Awareness Raising Programme: Evaluations

What we have here is combined evaluation of the above, taking the results from the Customer's Evaluation and a slightly different approach, where participants are asked to write a couple of lines on a post card, detailing what the event meant to them: Thanks to Matt for your help in getting all of this together!

A West Midlands University February 2011: Human Resource Officers – Violence against Women by Men They Know – Domestic Violence and associated factors.

We were asked to run a development session regarding the implications of domestic violence and how it affects people in the workplace. It was an important session because statistics suggest that at least one in four people suffer domestic abuse at some point in their lives – which, for the participants, means that it is statistically probable that victims of domestic violence include people they know, and people they work with. The greater majority of the participants of the event wished to obtain a greater understanding of the issues that relate to domestic violence, not least of which the signs of what to look out for from somebody who may be suffering from it. From this; they would like to be able to listen to and offer guidance and advice to the relevant people. This in turn would help them in their job role as Human Resource Officers, though it was suggested by one participant that disclosures are not common.

Most of the participants agree that almost all of the objectives – both the objectives of the event and their personal learning objectives – had been achieved, one of which commented that the course “has covered all of the areas of domestic violence.” The constructive criticism that we received suggested that there wasn’t enough time to cover every aspect of such a large topic, particularly where it relates to recognising the signals that would point to signs of abuse. It was also specifically suggested that it would be useful to spend some time discussing how, as Human Resource Officers, domestic violence issues should be discussed when a member of staff discloses them. This comment will be taken into account when planning future presentations on this domestic violence; however it is recognised that it relates to the work objectives of this particular group.

We also use evaluations to monitor the quality of the materials used for the event. In this situation, there were some comments made about the case examples that we used, but the statistics that highlight the number of cases and the extent of the problem were seen as the more significant factor in increasing and improving the understanding of domestic violence amongst the participants. We received many comments describing the events and statistics as “eye opening,” expressing their surprise of how common and widespread the situation is. They also recognised the quality of John Dooner as the facilitator for this event, who was described as “Informative, tactful, sensitive to DV issues and [the] group,” and generated an active interest amongst the participants to this difficult topic.

We have some interesting and fair responses from the human resource officers. We have improved the understanding of issues of domestic violence with the people in the organisation who are in a position to act should it arise in the course of their duty. While we had very little control over the time constraints of the event, we ultimately feel that the content was arranged and delivered in the best interests of the people involved, and we hope to see the results of the impact we have made on their perceptions and conduct in issues of domestic violence.

"ONE LINE RESPONSES"

• Having access to the information delivered in this programme can only make me more supportive and effective in my role.
• A thought provoking session for all HR professionals (anon)
• An eye opener for those who think life is perfect
• I think that this course is definitely an eye opener as to what is going on in the real world. I found this course very helpful and informative.
• Very useful and informative
• Very informative, was surprised at the numbers involved.
• Eye opening
• A very eye-opening session! I didn’t realise how common this topic was until I saw the statistics.
• Course provided an excellent overview of the subject and increased awareness of the feelings of the target and why they may behave in certain ways.
• The course increased my understanding of the prevalence and “symptoms” of domestic violence, and how it can impact on ‘target.’
• The percentage of women affected by domestic violence is a real eye-opener. It makes you realise that a large percentage of the workforce are affected. This training helps to give you a greater understanding of how you could support staff who are seeking help from someone.
• It was an eye opener to find out how many women are abused/part of domestic violence and the behaviours of the perpetrators.
• Very thought-provoking and challenging stuff, but a very valuable course.
• A good comprehensive overview into the key issues of this thought-provoking area.
• Very difficult topic – sadly more prevalent than you would anticipate. Thank you.

December Newsletter 2010

THIS ACADEMIC YEAR

We have continued to deliver direct support to Children and Young People who are experiencing challenges that impact on their behaviour, attendance and performance we have worked alongside Leadership Teams, Mentors, Attendance Specialists and Data Managers

A NEW DEVELOPMENT TO MEET OUR PARTNERS' NEEDS

We now have access to a highly experienced and qualified Children's Support Worker/Children's Bereavement Counsellor who brings an extensive background of first-hand experience in supporting Children and Young People traumatic and challenging periods in their lives including:

• Bereavement
• Loss through separation/divorce
• Working with terminally ill Children & Young People

It is intended that our new Associate Consultant will be available to work in existing partner schools and to extend our work to others from January 2010-more information will be available early in the new term.

We anticipate that the major benefit to Children, Young People and their Families will be option to access a skilled professional in partnership with their school.

For schools, colleges, academies and training organisations we feel confident that access to this development will enable them to enhance their existing support to young people in distressing circumstances.

Motivating Trainees.

The following write-up of our work was received after a Workforce Development Programme with Trinity Training, Wolverhampton. Excellent communications with Trinity Training resulted in our delivering an event that matched trainee and instructor needs.

http://www.trinity-training.com/


“We approached Coady Consultants in May 2010 seeking assistance in the development of an improvement plan relating to behaviour and classroom management.  Since that  time, John Dooner has worked with us, providing advice and resources to enable the views of all parties – staff and learners – to be obtained and analysed, and delivering staff training relating to the concerns that had come to light. We have been very impressed by John’s willingness to adapt his materials to suit our particular needs- he seemed to have an instinctive understanding of our requirements - , his attention to detail and his enthusiasm.  The staff training day resulted in an on-going action plan and we may well seek John’s assistance with the implementation of this in the future.”

Janette Clough
Staff Development Manager

SAFEGUARDING CHILDREN YOUNG PEOPLE AND VULNERABLE ADULTS

A West Midlands University:

December 2010: Safeguarding Children and Vulnerable Adults

As part of our on-going working relationship with a local university, we have worked with H.R professionals to develop Safeguarding Policies.  Faculties and activity area have each nominated a Designated Representatives as a “first point of contact” for their particular area. Comments received from participants are heartening; most of who were looking to improve their understanding of Safeguarding issues, particularly with regard to policy and procedures.

Most felt that the objective of the event had “achieved stated aims,” the event being informative with “effective contextualisation and group discussion.” We have taken on board the small number of constructive comments

Participants felt that the course did much to improve their understanding of Safeguarding issues. They all responded positively, including one individual who was heavily involved in the drafting of the University’s current policy.

For many, the course reinforced knowledge that they already had, while at the same time increasing their confidence in dealing with such matters. One person who is relatively new to teaching commented that they found the event “Enjoyable, informative, thought provoking – left me reflecting on my practice.” Most of the participants agreed that attendance on the course would help them to achieve their work objectives. One of the participants who deals with these issues on a regular basis commented that while our course doesn’t answer all of the questions, it was “very useful indeed.”

All of the participants gave positive feedback regarding the delivery of the event, describing the tutor John Dooner as “knowledgeable, engaging [and] interesting,” with a “very friendly but clear delivery.” We have a significant pride in delivery quality of our presentations, and we were pleased to see that this occasion was no exception.

All in all we were very encouraged by the responses from the university. We have improved the understanding of these very serious issues with a substantial number of people who will now feed this information back to their relevant departments. We found such criticism as there was to be fair and constructive, and we’re looking forward to implementing the development points that they implicitly provide for us.

Keep Calm & Carry On

T

This was a smashing little book was Christmas present from my daughter: one of those spontaneous ones (the book, not Beth) that often has a relevance beyond the original intention.

There was something of a slip in the original typing of the Title: I wrote "Keep Clam and Carry On" and whereas I have no problem with marine and freshwater bi-valves, they weren't supposed to feature here...however. "Keeping Clam" = "Keep Quiet" so maybe there's something worth thinking about here, namely the choices available to us when we can opt to speak or be quiet.

How many times do we pass on unsubstantiated gossip, partial truths, delicate pieces of information that benefit no-one and can result in great harm. When this happens, our poorly judged comment or intentional hurt has a inbuilt potential to come back and hurt us or to reduce our trustworthiness in the eyes of others.

Fairness for Your Future? Don't Aim Higher: Get Real & Limit Your Ambitions

Aim Higher is an organisation that promotes access to Higher Education amongst non traditional groups. You know the ones I mean; bright young people who may have a series of factors that mean that they are less, rather than more likely to go to University. Aim Higher provides structured mentoring in their schools, access to a vast range of University experiences in years 10,11 and the sixth form and engagement with professionals who have "been there and done it." In any sane world it would be seen as a rock-solid investment in our collective futures. The government is withdrawing its funding-a paltry £78 Million.

True to form the coalition states that Universities will need to demonstrate that they are engaging with students from non-traditional backgrounds: if this is the case, the need to get their collective fingers out-Aim Higher Funding finishes in July.

It has been my privilege to work within Aim Higher's network in the West Midlands-working our way though a collective approach to Safeguarding Young People on Residential Summer Schools. There were 14 or so Universities involved meaning that learners from Coventry could go on a programme in Worcester, young people from Birmingham could experience programmes in Warwick and so on, all delivered by highly qualified University Lecturers and supported by well-trained and organised Aim Higher workers.This year, on one programme alone, somewhere in the region of 1200 young people benefited from the experience in the West Midlands and engagement in schools continues to be a major factor in motivating young people who-I restate-may come from disadvantaged backgrounds where expectations of progression into Higher Education are low.

There's an almost casual shrug to the assertion that Universities will, post Aim-Higher-need to show that they are engaging with non-traditional, disadvantaged groups. Unless there is some sharp thinking as to how they might work together to keep the collective knowledge, connections and excellent practice that exists within Aim Higher I can foresee expertise, creativity and money being wasted in the name of the pinch-faced dogma that masquerades as policy.
To conclude-the Coalitions's Spin Doctors seemed to have insisted that the words "Fair" and "Fairness" be dropped into conversations whenever possible. I'd be fascinated to hear how we match the concept of "fair" with the decimation of an organisation designed to deliver fairness to our future.

Worrying Signs and Concerning Noises

Worrying Signs and Concerning Noises

I was surprised to read the linked article-seven out of ten teachers want to quit their jobs because of badly behaved pupils http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/seven-out-of-10-teachers-want-to-quit-survey-shows-2096257.html and every bit as concerning for me is the implicit assertion that some sort of deregulation will help. Deregulate what exactly?
Statute tells us that we may use “reasonable force”, what seems to be absent from the debate is reference to criminal (case) law that gives the profession some working definition related to what “reasonable” might look like. The teaching profession, as things stand, is right to err on the side of caution-headline cases often resulting in the end of a teaching career. There’s a wider agenda running here and it’s to do with the coalition’s assertion that there is something fundamentally wrong with our state system that can be improved by throwing further confusion at an already demoralised profession-the Charter School.“ Here’s something from Michael Gove:
“He has insisted - along with other Democrat reformers like Arne Duncan, Joel Klein and Michelle Rhee – that there be more great Charter schools – the equivalent of our Academies– to drive up attainment, especially among the poorest. In New York, Charter schools – like the inspirational Knowledge is Power Programme schools - have dramatically narrowed the vast performance gap between black and white children and 91% of those benefitting are on free or reduced price meals.
With a relentless focus on traditional subjects, a culture of no excuses, tough discipline, personalised pastoral care and enthusiastic staff who work free from Government bureaucracy to help every child succeed, these schools are amazing engines of social mobility that are now sending children from ghetto areas to elite universities.” http://www.michaelgove.com/content/national_college_annual_conference
Michael Gove’s commitment to the potential of Charter Schools may well have been increased by his support of and work with Frances Lawrence, widow of the London Head Teacher, Philip Lawrence-murdered in a gang-related incident outside of his school and I personally applaud the support he has given to a process that has rewarded good citizenship and supported legislation to ban knives.
How do we as communities address the problems that exist on our streets and in our houses and family lives that contribute to the uncertainties that contribute to 70% of surveyed teachers and, at their most extreme, are in part responsible for the murder of a good man, inspirational leader and gifted headteacher?
Margaret Thatcher’s assertion that “There is no such thing as society” was part of statement that suggested that there are “individual men and women and there are families” and that the use of the term “society” had become a byword with which to explain a dependency culture: it was the government’s job to sort out problems. The same government that did almost nothing other than at its best preside over and at its worse seek to influence the factors that led to the collapse of the heavy industries that were part of the foundations that underpinned society.


So now, “society” is failing to get a fair deal from schools that are bound by bureaucracy-this from the party of government whose reforms of the late eighties and early nineties saw a disproportionate increase in form filling in the name of accountability that has seldom been replicated and the part answer if to consider a system-Charter Schools-that is succeeds in a different culture where the gap between rich and poor experienced would be unacceptable in every aspect to British Society.
In a letter to the New York Times, J.D. Merriman, Chief Executive of the Charter School Center (sic) refers to the stringent reviews of groups who wish to start Charter Schools, that they (the schools) should be held in account for achieving the outcomes promised and that this has to be underpinned (Charter Schools or otherwise) by one of New York’s great assets, a well motivated and cohort of Principles and Teachers who place achievement at the top of their agenda.
So, how does this square with the current position: where will the well motivated cohort of leaders and teachers emerge, to whom will they be accountable, how will achievement be recognised and how will high standards of behaviour be maintained?
Almost twenty years ago I accepted the Headship of a Pupil Referral Unit in Birmingham: our population was made up of three categories. Fixed Term Excluded, Permanently Excluded and Indefinitely Excluded. Indefinite Exclusions made up the larger proportion of the Centre’s population and existed largely “off the radar” of their Mainstream school-gone quietly, no fuss and the money remained with the schools.
Schools had two routes open to them. Exclude or Statement of Special Education Needs-in 1997-1998 around 12,300 (.16 of the total school population) Children and Young People were excluded from school, by 2008-2009 there had been a massive adjustment to 6550 (.09 of the total school population). During the same period, the number of Statemented Children in mainstream schools has risen.
In the late nineties and early part of this decade I headed up Behaviour Support services in two West Midlands Authorities and part of the job was to provide access to support personnel who could work within schools, with learners, their parent and teachers and, at the same time, make it more challenging for schools to exclude. This against the background noise of increased accountability and bureaucracy and increased pressure on the centralised capacity to offer the provision needed to make a major impact, the prevailing mantra to schools on a national scale seeming to be “You must cope”.
Money taken from the Centre made its way into schools budgets: it is my belief that the competing demands of providing support and discipline and of being simultaneously pro-active and reactive has significantly diluted the impact of work schools can offer to learners who challenge, fractured families who are unable to assist us and the increased realisation that there are hard, hard times to come.
The “improvement” (reduction) in permanently excluded pupils hides in my view, a substantial contributory factor to teacher stress and demoralisation and here it is. The behaviour that once resulted in exclusion has not significantly changed. It is contained differently. Increased budgetary pressure on other front line services has reduced the capacity to respond as well as we might-the pressure on Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service, Social Care and other Local Authority Support Services has increased the tensions and frustrations that surround challenging children in difficult circumstances.
The answer is not to further dismantle the capacity to deliver cohesive and coordinated responses. Neither is to be found in suggesting to interest groups that all that is needed is to set up a Charter School and within “One Leap Jack Was Free” of the constraints of State provision all will be well-this does a disservice to all concerned.
Making it “easier” for teachers to use physical intervention places us all in a difficult place-what is reasonable? When is it unreasonable? Who should be trained? And at the very time we seem to be the potential architects of a concerning tension that will encompass Safeguarding issues, I note the resignation of Jim Gamble from CEOP following the Home Secretary’s decision to incorporate it into the National Crime Agency.
The Vetting & Barring Scheme and I.S.A may well be regarded as too bureaucratic to survive in their current format at a time when careful thought should be given to who we recruit and how, should we go along the route of Charter Schools.
There’s unlikely to be a simple answer-experienced professionals require affirmation of their status, let them contribute to the debate on behavioural standards, levels and types of intervention needed and the capacity building required to increase job satisfaction and reduce the impacts created by children and young people whose challenging behaviour make their continued presence in Mainstream Education a problematic blight on outcomes, achievement and happiness for the wider school community.

Bear Trap Avoidance # 1 "Can I Just Have A Minute?"

My recent work with Middle Managers has been hugely enjoyable. Challenging, practical and pragmatic they hold high aspirations for themselves, their teams and the organisation, with a firm grip on the difficult times and challenges we all face (a substantial proportion of my work is delivered in the public sector.
One of the more common areas of discussion is centred around how to deal with challenging individuals who might be on their way to becoming Toxic Employees. Another concerns the words and phrases we can use to maintain dialogue at difficult times and how to signal “No” in a manner that is acceptable to those concerned.
Here are some of the common themes I’ve worked around over the recent past-some of what follows is tongue in cheek enough, underpinned by some serious messages.
There are some avoidable Bear Traps and the first one I’d like to raise is the balance between an “open door” policy and having your day systematically hi-jacked so that your activities become compressed into a claustrophobically small space. Open door policies are great and I think they send out clear messages of accessibility, inclusivity, respect, worth and value. I’m of the view though that they are at their most productive when everyone understands that access should no be abused-an open door is not an invitation to hi-jack precious time with trivia.
“Can I just have a couple of minutes of your time?” How often is that seemingly innocent question a coded way of asking “Any objections of I just screw up the next 45 minutes of your working day and put you off your concentration for the following hour, make you late for an appointment and miss returning a phone call?” However, because we’re generally decent people, we sometimes have a tendency to freely give our time away, giving the intruder a method of obtaining what they want; namely a legitimate reason for being away from where they need to be and doing what they should have been doing. Ironically, the desire of the “open door manager” to be accessible in order to raise performance actually complies with the undesirable intentions of others to develop a deceptively subtle work-avoidance strategy that costs them nothing.
So, at the time the question is asked, maybe an enquiry along the lines of “Is it really just a couple of minutes or do we need to book a slot” would increase our control. “I’ve got to be at X by Y, so I can give you 5 minutes” should mean just that. The temptation often exists to give of yourself without considering the messages transmitted. “I was talking to John about this and he agrees,” might not be what John was saying at all-he may well have been delivering a series of “I’m listening” messages that have been interpreted-perhaps opportunistically-as tacit approval with unwanted consequences.
Oh by the way, look out for the power of words like "just"-they're another Bear Trap for later!

So: This Is What We're Heading Towards!

There have been some interesting developments this weeks with the Secretary of State for Education, Michael Gove delivering a monumentally flawed overview of the new Academies Programme by first stating that some were safe, only to say in a later release that there had been a clerical error and some that thought they were safe weren’t. Anyway, he’s said sorry so that must be alright must it not? The corrected statement contained clerical errors too, a good/bad week for clerical errors depending on how you look at things.
A recent Times Education Supplement article pointed out that many academies were pushing up their pass rates by entering lower ability learners into non-academic subjects were passes are easier to achieve. Really? I’m shaken to the core of my being.
Research tells us that schools with a number of residual problems in lower attainment, poor facilities and low expectations have opted for academy status and I can see why. Apart from enabling a greater sense of self determination, it enables them to draw a line under the past and start again with some new and invigorating approaches to teaching and learning. Part of this approach includes curriculum developments that reach out to engage young people who might otherwise effectively “switch off” from their education and fuel a downwards spiral of poor engagement in employment, education and training.
Too many years ago now, I used to moderate courses developed and marketed by both City & Guilds and B.Tec. They were an honest attempt to change the direction of young people who were vulnerable to voting with their feet and simply not attending or creating “hot spots” in the school timetable. Overall, the level of engagement was better than might have been expected had we stayed within the more traditional curriculum.
So, academy leadership teams realise that they are about transformation and that one of the transformative strategies will be to increase the options available to the “new disaffected” (these are, I suspect, very much similar to the old ones), who are at risk of becoming NEET (Not in Education, Employment or Training) and will need a different skill set to remain engaged in the education/training process. Information tells us that at risk learners are likely to reside in poorer areas with higher risk and vulnerability factors and yes, poorer schools in terms of fabric, catchment and results at out-turn, higher exclusion and absent rates with greater teacher turn over. The Academies Programme was, at least in part, I feel at genuine and honest attempt to reverse the trend.
The newly elected coalition had a golden opportunity to state that whatever else needed to be cut and trimmed (slashed and burned?), education would remain its highest priority and would be resourced accordingly. It’s a depressing start: let’s begin to water down the strength of the Vetting and Barring Scheme (big government = very bad) and at the same time suggest to parents and other “interested groups” that they might wish to open schools in closed down shops. Then let’s move quickly and give the National Curriculum’s QCDA the coup de grace and do away with BECTA. Gove has gone on record as saying that academies should have greater freedom re qualifications (26/5/10) and then tells a substantial number of them “No, you only thought you were going to be one, now your not: clerical error-happens all the time.”
So, where are we? Sandwell, worst hit by clerical errors is one of the poorer areas in the UK and its needs unsurprisingly speak with a powerful voice about what should be in place to enable people to live better lives. Education standards need to rise: their Academies programme has been decimated and a further 90+ redundancies have been issued at Sandwell College, an innovative and eclectic organisation that meets the needs of a diverse community. Today’s news tells us the government is considering re-allocating the funding in Primary Care Trusts to GP’s. What I see here as a return to provision at the Parish Pump.
Those with money can and will buy their way out of the mess by moving to areas where there are “better” schools or, it would seem, opening one of their own. Much as the public perception of “The Successful Fee Paying School” might be about standards, it’s often a more complex social reasoning that persuades some parents to say, “I want my child to mix with people other than those who attend school x” and as long as we continue to leave school x to its own devices, it is unlikely that there will be a significant change.
One stop health shops, the bringing together of community health, access to services have their impacts most keenly felt in areas of high need and it’s a long hard slog to turn around some of the crushing social factors that have militated against progress and development: mark my words, it’s Housing next.
Some flagship decisions mooted this week will have long-lasting consequences. It’s a great life; just don’t have the wrong post-code, go to the wrong school, be unemployed, sick, old or poor.
Well done everyone: a promising start!