160 likes | 411 Views
Workshop. Research projectCurrent models2006 trialEvaluationProcesses to support a
E N D
1. Identifying Young People At Risk
Deb Hull
2. Workshop Research project
Current models
2006 trial
Evaluation
Processes to support a whole school model for MIPs
3. Research At Risk of what?
Not completing school?
Becoming totally disengaged from education, training and work?
Youth offending?
Harm?
Does everyone in your school agree on the what?
4. School-based indicators/behaviours Truancy
Behavioural issues
Low literacy level
Low numeracy level
Significant change in demeanour, behaviour or performance
Attitude to schooling
Does not value school completion
Articulated intention of early school leaving
Negative peer influence
Aggression/violence
5. Community and family risk factors Poverty
Low income household
Parental unemployment
Australian-born parents, English-speaking background
Aboriginal or Islander
Refugee
Fragmented/reconstituted family structures
Separation from family
6. Personal Risk Factors Poor health
Low birth weight
Ill health or disability
Disruptive behaviours
Passivity
Low self esteem
Low motivation
Self-harming
High level of aggression/violence
Pregnancy/motherhood
7. School-based risk factors
Unsupportive school culture
Repressive discipline
Large class sizes
Unstimulating content
Competitive exam-dominated assessment
Negative student-teacher relationships
Negative peer relationships in school community
8. Pitfalls of identifying young people as at risk Encourages focus on young person rather than school improvement
Pigeon-holing does not allow for resilience
No process to declare no longer at risk, no fresh start
9. Model 1: common practice Some combination of:
Referral from teachers
Referrals from parents
Self referrals from students
Review of literacy and numeracy levels
Review of school reports and assessment outcomes
Review of attendance patterns
10. Model 2: student survey Detailed questions designed to elicit extent to which student has experienced or exhibited risk factors
All students complete
Analysis and reporting
11. Model 3: school checklist Checklist/spreadsheet of risk factors
Completed by teachers
Access to complete and accurate information?
12. Model 4: staff-student connection School structure at centre
Each student has one staff member who is responsible for their welfare, and for communication and maintaining positive relationship
Staff member may follow the student through successive years at school
Staff member is first point of at risk referral by teachers, parents, student
School processes support action by these staff members
13. Model 5: data review Developed by Doug Smith Brimbank-Melton LLEN
Draw down data from CASES
Identify list of at risk young people
Teacher review of list, add and remove names
14. 2006 Trial of Model 5 5 schools in Brimbank-Melton area in 2005
Up to 50 interested schools from Western Metropolitan Region and Grampians Region in 2006
15. Data review model See handout
Includes capacity to map programs and services
Includes capacity to monitor student progress
Includes capacity to monitor effectiveness of programs and services
16. Evaluation How do you know if the system your school is using to identify at risk young people is working?
How can you improve if you dont know?
17. Process What are the processes (not the programs or services) that need to be in place to support whole-school approaches to retention/engagement?