The English legal system in relation to social work practice

This is an extract from Social Work Law: Applying the Law in Practice by Michelle Evans and Denise Harvey, ISBN 978-1914171802 and published by Critical Publishing Ltd

Introduction

This chapter starts with a disclaimer, and that is: my aim is not to make you a legal professional but rather to consider the law as it relates specifically to social work practice within the wider context of the English legal system. This is something I find myself saying to students at the beginning of the semester when teaching this law module as part of the social work programme. Often students believe that taking the social work law module is like doing a law degree in 12 weeks, when in fact it is about gaining knowledge of the law and how it applies directly to the work we do as social workers. Have you ever considered how people who are not trained in law come to the knowledge of it? Well, it is simple, it is by practice and legal advice from trained family lawyers whose job it is to practice law.

Having a degree is law is not a prerequisite to becoming a social worker

The Professional Capabilities Framework (PCF 5-Knowledge) outlines clearly at prequalifying entrance point students (including ASYE) should

‘Develop and apply relevant knowledge from social work practice and research, social sciences, law, other professional and relevant fields, and from the experience of people who use services We develop our professional knowledge throughout our careers and sustain our curiosity. As a unified profession, we develop core knowledge that relates to our purpose, values, and ethics. We also develop specific knowledge needed for fields of practice and roles. Our knowledge comes from social work practice, theory, law, research, expertise by experience, and from other relevant fields and disciplines. All social workers contribute to creating as well as using professional knowledge. We understand our distinctive knowledge complements that of other disciplines to provide effective services (British Association of Social Work 2018)

What is the Law?

Let us begin by understanding what the law is. Laws are essentially a complex system of customs, traditions, regulations, and rules which state how we must behave. There are 3 main components that make laws different from simple societal rules:

• Laws are set and established and enforced by government
• Laws are compulsory
• Laws involve consequences – which are enforced through the legal system (In the UK this is usually the courts though it can also be tribunals).

The law can also be defined as a system of rules and regulations to govern society, things made by judges, means by which people can seek justice and/or reparation, rules which keep society manageable, rules which serve to oppress and or control society (Partington, 2020)

Rules on the other hand denotes something about morally accepted behaviours that help people to understand how they should behave (Partington 2020):

Law making system in England and Wales

We often hear about laws being made in the Houses of Parliament; this is the main law-making body. The link between Parliament and the Court is that any legislation passed by Parliament is then accepted by the Court and understand that this take pre-eminence over any common law. (law that is made by the Judge through cases).

Head of state

 The relationship between Parliament and the state is that most laws are exercised by the government in the name of the monarch. The Queen (Elizabeth II) is the current monarch who is the head of state. Her role primarily as the monarch is to remain legally responsible for any powers that the government exercises in law. 

Structure

The UK Parliament comprises two separate Houses: The House of Commons and the House of Lords.

The House of Commons is a representative body, the membership of which is elected, and which has legislative powers. (i.e., Laws that the Commons has the sovereignty to make. The leader of the party in power (the prime minister) chooses his cabinet which is made up of members from that political party who are also members of the House of Common (MPs).

The House of Lords is not elected and is not a representative body. Most members of the House of Lords are life peers appointed under the Life Peerages Act 1958. Such peers are appointed by the monarch on the advice of the Prime Minister, who receives advice on who to put forward from a non-political Appointments Commission (Rabb, 2021).

The Law within the English Legal system

The law is embedded within the English legal system, what constitutes the English Legal system is:

• Law making bodies e.g., parliament, judiciary, legislature
• Those that enforce the law
• Institutions, processes, and personnel that contribute to the operation and enforcement the law
• Workings of the courts and tribunals
• Legal professionals
• Police, prosecutors and jurors
• Organisations that support access to justice e.g., Citizen Advice Bureau (CAB), legal aid, law shops, advocacy projects.

Sources of Law in English Legal System

The sources of law cover the principles that include legislation, common law, statutes, Bill and delegated legislation.

Legislation

A legislation is the law created by the legislature (people elected to make law for a state) It mainly deals with the Acts of Parliament. The UK Parliament is the body that has the power to pass laws that can be applied in all four countries. The UK Parliament consists of the House of Lords and House of Common.

Common law

Common law is the one that has been derived from judicial decisions of courts and similar tribunals. The English legal system of England and Wales is a common law one.

Statutes

Statutes are formally written down law which has been executed by a legislative body other than Parliament- Parliaments pass Acts.

Bill

A Bill is a proposed Law which had been discussed and debated in Parliament. It is then approved by Parliament and goes on to receive royal assent and becomes law.

Delegated legislation

It is an Act of Parliament that may give a minister or some other party the rights to make legal provisions.

Legal Jurisdiction

Legal Jurisdiction is defined as the extent of power to make legal decisions and judgements within a defined geographical area The Courts in England and Wales have legal jurisdiction to try case in relation to offences committed in the UK. They have a single legal system known as the English Legal System, Ireland, and Scotland as well as other areas which have their own legislation and are strictly not part of the UK e.g., Isle of Man, Channel Islands (‘Crown Dependencies’). Although Wales are currently looking at having their own jurisdiction as having law making legislature, but no jurisdiction presents as incongruent for Wales. 

In England we only need to concern yourselves with English and European laws unless you go on to practice in other parts of the UK. (EU legislation currently applied until 31^{st of} December 2020) England and Wales currently have the same laws though Wales is developing its own legal system. Scotland and Ireland have completely different legal systems (Scottish Law Online, 2021).

The Courts in England and Wales

If like me, you are a visual learner, describing the structure of the English Legal system would be lost on you, Figure 1 below offers a pictorial representation of the structure of the English and its different branches.

The Courts in England play an important role in the execution of the law in relation to different parts of the law. There are different courts that deal with different matters and as outlined below those that relate specifically to social work practice have been highlighted.

Magistrates’ Courts

These courts hear all criminal cases at first instance. Less serious cases and those involving juveniles are tried in the Magistrates’ Courts, as well as some civil cases. Magistrates deal with three kinds of offence: summary (less serious cases); either-way (cases that can be heard either in a Magistrates’ Court or before a judge and a jury in the Crown Court); and indictable-only (serious cases).

The Family Court

The Family Court was established in 2014 and sits within the Magistrates Court. It has national jurisdiction and brings all levels of family judiciary to sit together in the same court.

The County Court

There are approximately 160 county courts that hear cases within their geographic catchment area. These courts deal with civil (non-criminal and non-family) cases. The County Court hears (subject to exceptions) money claims with a value up to and including £100,000 and claims for damages for personal injury with a value up to £50,000. Cases are ordinarily held where the defendant resides.

The Crown Court

The Crown Court sits in centres around England and Wales. This court deals with indictable (meaning it can be tried by jury) criminal cases that are transferred from the Magistrates’ Courts, including serious criminal cases. The Old Bailey is a type of Crown Court.

The High Court

The High Court has jurisdiction for more serious and complex civil and family cases at first instance. It contains three divisions: Queen’s Bench, Family and Chancery. The Queen’s Bench Division is the biggest of the three High Court Divisions. Included within it are a number of specialist courts: the Admiralty, Commercial, Mercantile, Technology and Construction, and Administrative Courts. The Chancery Division deals with company law, partnership claims, conveyancing, land law, probate, patent, and taxation cases. This Division has three specialist courts: the Companies Court, the Patents Court, and the Bankruptcy Court. The area that relates to social work is the Family Division, this division deals with cases that pertain to children and appeals from family proceedings, cases which have been transferred from one of the lower courts (such as County Court or Family Court)

The Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal and the High Court constitute the “senior courts” of England and Wales. The Court of Appeal is an appellate court and is divided into two divisions, Criminal and Civil. It is useful to understand this particular court as often in cases where parents appeal a decision made by the Local Authority it will be heard at this court.

The Supreme Court

The Supreme Court is the final court of appeal in the UK. It hears appeals on arguable points of law of public importance for the whole of the UK in civil cases, and for England and Wales and Northern Ireland in criminal cases. In Scotland, appeals can be made from the lower courts in criminal cases to the High Court of Justiciary. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, which comprises justices of the Supreme Court and some senior Commonwealth judges, is the final court of appeal for a number of Commonwealth countries, as well as the UK’s overseas territories, Crown dependencies and military sovereign bases (The Supreme Court Online, 2021).

Different Courts that relate to social work practice

Earlier in the chapter we identified the different courts within the English legal system. In this section we will take a closer look at the ones that most closely relate to social work practice. In children social work practice we are concerned with the functioning and use of the family court, with adults we are concerned with the court of protection, tribunals, magistrate, and crown courts (in criminal proceedings) whilst within youth justice we are concerned with magistrates’ court which becomes a youth court and the Crown Court.

Family Court

The family court deals with the following in relation to children and young people:

• Parental disputes over the upbringing of children
• Local authority intervention to protect children
• Decrees relating to divorce
• Financial support for children after divorce or relationship breakdown
• Some aspects of domestic violence
• Adoption

Court of Protection

We examine the Court of Protection in more detail in Chapter on Mental Capacity chapter. The Court of Protection deals with

Youth Court

The Youth Court is a criminal court that deals with young people who offend. A traditional magistrates Court then sits as a Youth Court. or more detail, see Chapter 5 Youth Justice.

The main criminal courts in England in Wales are:

• The Magistrates Courts
• The Youth Court – ages 10 – 17 (part of the Magistrates Court)
• The Crown Court.

All criminal offences are classified as one of the following:

• Summary only offences, which are offences that are only tried at a magistrate’s court and cannot be tried by a Jury) courts e.g., public order offences, minor criminal damage
• Either way offences, triable either  in the Magistrates court of the Crown Court e.g., theft, deception

Indictable only offence, triable only in the Crown Court and serious enough offences that warrant a trial by Jury e.g., sex offences, grievous bodily harm, murder

Types of Law that relates to social work practice

As social work is a profession that deals with people as well as the state, this will invoke a different part of the law to come into effect. Phrases like public law and private law are common occurrences in social work language.

Public Law: deals with areas in which society, the government or the state has decided to interfere in a direct manner with the behaviour of individuals, for example care proceedings where the state has set parameters in the relevant legislation (Children Act 1989) for how children should be brought up.  In extreme circumstances, the state in the form of the Local Authority will step in and take over the upbringing of children by accessing orders through the court that allows them to take on parental responsibilities. Many arguments for the interference of the state in family life surrounds the human right of that individual (Article 8 right to private and family life) and how much of a restriction or oppression the state poses if it interferes with it. The key in social work practice is about the balance of state control through the application of the law and safeguarding duties in legislation, and one’s human right to freedom and to live their life. 

Public law cases brought by local authorities or an authorised person (currently only the NSPCC) and include matters such as:

• care orders, which give parental responsibility for the child concerned to the local authority applying for the order
• supervision orders, which place the child under the supervision of their local authority
• emergency protection orders, which are used to ensure the immediate safety of a child by taking them to a place of safety, or by preventing their removal from a place of safety

Public law cases must start in the Family Proceedings Courts. They may be transferred to the County Courts if it will minimise delay or enable the case to be merged with other family proceedings, or where the matter is unusually grave, complicated, or important (Judiciary UK, 2021).

Private Law: deals with mediating behaviour of individuals between themselves, for example a dispute between customer and shop over the quality of a purchase or a dispute between parents who have decided to separate or divorce.

Private law cases are brought by private individuals, generally in connection with divorce or the parents’ separation.

Order types include:

• parental responsibility
• financial applications
• special guardianship orders, which give a special guardian legal responsibility without removing legal responsibility from the birth parents.
•  Section 8: Private law orders
• Any parent, guardian, or special guardian, stepparent with parental responsibility for the child, or person with a child arrangement order can apply for any section 8 order. There are four types of Section 8 orders available:
•  Child Arrangement order: determines who a child lives with.
•  Contact order requires the person with whom the child lives to allow the child to have contact with a named person; the order may set out the arrangements for contact. Child arrangement and contact orders can also be applied for by a person with whom the child has lived for at least three years, or any party to a marriage or civil partnership (whether or not subsisting) where the child is a child of the family.
• Prohibited steps order: these are used to prevent an action which could be exercised by someone with PR from being taken without the consent of the court, e.g., a prohibited steps order is made restraining the removal of the child from the county or from his home to prevent relocation.
•  Specific issues order: these are usually used to resolve areas of disagreement relating to the exercising of parental responsibility.

These will be covered in more depth in Chapter 3 of the book.

Importantly, and perhaps an unnecessary added complication as is with the law, is that there is always an exception to the rule, which we shall call the cross over, where the two laws meet.

Cross-Over: in the case of divorce proceedings (which is private law as it is a dispute between two individuals) if there is concern about the children’s welfare, there are powers for the Local Authority to investigate within provisions of the Children Act 1989 (public law).

The overlap: an example

Mikel is 9 and following the suicide of his father his mother became clinically depressed and unable to care for him. She developed a serious problem with cannabis. Social workers found him poorly clothed, hungry, severely neglected and living in rented accommodation with no furniture or heating. His mother had sold all of the property in the accommodation and was working as a prostitute from the address. Mikel was removed from the home under the Children Act 1989 (sec 44) by means of an Emergency Protection Order (EPO) which was applied for through the family court and placed with foster carers (the welfare of the child sec1 Children Act 1989 and the need to protect him is public law). Investigations revealed a large and supportive family in Wales and maternal grandparents who were willing to care for him. They would need to apply for a child arrangement order CAO (CAO are private law Section 8 orders under the Children Act 1989) to allow him to live with them and given them Parental Responsibility (PR). This process would be managed through the family Court.

Find out more

Equitable Education

Below is an extract from Equitable Education: What everyone working in education should know about closing the attainment gap for all pupils by Sameena Chaudry

CHAPTER 1

 INTRODUCTION

Better is possible. It does not take genius. It takes diligence, it takes moral clarity. It takes ingenuity. And above all, it takes a willingness to try.

Atul Gawande

This chapter covers:

• the reasons for writing this book and how it will support staff working in educational settings;
• the case for equity and diversity;
• a brief overview of the diversity of pupils in our classes and educational settings
• key concepts and terms that are critical to our understanding of addressing equity and diversity in our educational system;
• the pressing issues facing us at the moment which impacts particularly on equity matters in society;
• the moral and legal case for why addressing equity and diversity is essential for all staff working in educational settings;
• the format of the chapters and a brief overview of what the book covers.

This book is the culmination of my work in addressing equity and diversity issues over 35 years of working in education in a variety of extremely rewarding roles. For the past 20 years in particular, I have worked closely with hundreds of leadership teams in both primary and secondary schools in England, to successfully close the achievement and attainment gaps for a range of pupils.  We all know the transformational role that education can play, not only in the lives of individual pupils and their families but whole communities too. For many pupils it is only through education that they will have a chance of having a better life than their parents.  However, we also know that too many pupils still fall between the cracks and are denied this opportunity for lots of different reasons, some to do with the variability in the quality of education they receive in their schools and others to do with ingrained structural inequalities perpetuated by society at large. These structural inequalities can manifest themselves in different ways dependent on the characteristics of the pupils in our educational settings. 

The aim of this book is to ensure that leaders and staff in schools are better informed about the issues impacting on the achievement and attainment of different groups of pupils.  Each chapter begins by bringing together in one place all the relevant research pertaining to particular groups of pupils, highlighting the key issues pertinent to them, as well as proven best practice in addressing their achievement and attainment gaps.  Each chapter then provides an overview of current attainment outcomes for that particular group where the data is readily available and accessible. This will enable you to get an in depth understanding of the issues and reflect on your learning before moving on to supporting you in your quest to better meet the needs of these pupils.  You will be supported in this endeavour by being able to access a number of key strategies and resources that will support you to close these particular equity and diversity gaps. The strategies and resources shared in this book will, hopefully, stimulate you to seek out additional strategies and resources as part of your own continuing professional development in these areas that is tailored to the particular needs of pupils.   As we know, there are no quick fixes, so embarking on reading this book is the start of your journey in developing a greater understanding of and the requisite knowledge and skills to meet the needs of our increasingly diverse educational settings.

The case for equity and diversity

The vast majority of teachers and leaders I have worked with over the years state that one of the compelling reasons they came into teaching was because they wanted to make a difference to future generations of children and young people.  Whilst understanding that schools cannot fully compensate for the inequalities in society at large they firmly believed that a good education could provide a buffer and enable children and young people to have access to more opportunities than their parents and in doing so, follow a path which would lead them to having even better opportunities than their parents.  There was what I call ‘pragmatic optimism’ for the pupils in their charge with some exceptional teachers and leaders making sure the education they provided excelled against the odds and that postcode of their pupils and their backgrounds did not determine their future destinies.  Overall, most agreed that their ‘moral purpose’ was to ensure that a pupil’s attainment, health and wellbeing should not be determined by their parents’ income.  However, at the same time they were fully aware that our current education system ‘All too often, instead of equalising life chances… reproduces existing advantages and disadvantages’ (Dyson, Goldrick, Jones and Kerr, 2010).

In my many conversations with colleagues, they cited many reasons for wanting to make a significant difference to the young people in their charge. These centred around three key aims as defined by Blundell, Dearden and Sianesi (2001):

1. private returns which relates to personal benefits to individuals and are translated in terms of having a good income, respected occupation, and high levels of wellbeing and health;
2. social returns which relates to improvements in general health, active participation and social cohesion in society;
3. economic returns which relates to increases in employment and labour productivity.

They felt strongly that any education system and ours in particular should contribute significantly in achieving these three aims. I am sure just by the fact that you are reading this book, you too will have you’re your own personal reasons for wanting to make a significant difference to the next generation of children and young people entrusted to you, regardless of the context, demographics and backgrounds of the pupils you serve.

One of the challenges that is often posited is that you cannot have both equity and excellence, with each being somehow directly opposed to one another. However, these are not binary situations and research has shown that the best education systems on the world have both equity and excellence.  Further information on this is provided in the leadership chapter.

This takes us to diversity and again similar arguments are put forward to state that diversity and high performance are somewhat incompatible, yet this is simply not true. Yet research undertaken by McKinsey in a number of reports (2015, 2018 and 2020) shows that the business case for gender equality, diversity and inclusion is stronger than ever in terms of impacting positively on performance.  In their 2014 research they found that

…companies in the top quartile for gender diversity on their executive teams were 15 per cent more likely to experience above-average profitability than companies in the fourth quartile. In our expanded 2017 data set this number rose to 21 per cent and continued to be statistically significant. For ethnic and cultural diversity, the 2014 finding was a 35 per cent likelihood of outperformance, comparable to the 2017 finding of a 33 per cent likelihood of outperformance …’  (p 1)

Their latest research (2020) shows that ‘…not only that the business case remains robust but also that the relationship between diversity on executive teams and the likelihood of financial outperformance has strengthened over time’ (p 1). Although education has followed the lead from businesses in many ways in an attempt to improve educational provision and outcomes, they still lack the insight provided by business to look at the business case and findings of having a truly inclusive and diverse workforce, especially at leadership level.

In England, as you will see shortly in this chapter our classes have become increasingly diverse and are likely to continue to grow in diversity, yet our teaching force, especially at leadership is quite out of calibration with the changes that are taking place in our society and schools at large.  We have a situation where the Department for Education’s (2018) own research shows that leadership of the teaching profession remains stubbornly and primarily, white and male even though women make up most of the teaching workforce.  Without any coherent strategy to address these inequalities it is likely that any changes that do take place are likely to be slow and make minimal progress.

Syed (2019) in Rebel Ideas extolls the benefits of both demographic diversity (differences in race, gender, age, class, sexual orientation, religion and so on) as well as cognitive diversity (differences in thoughts, insights and perspectives), with both often overlapping with one another.  His own book proves plenty of examples of situation when diversity would have led to better decision making such as the catastrophic failings of the CIA before 9/11 to the communication breakdown on top of Mount Everest.  He also cites the McKinsey research mentioned already, as well as research undertaken by an American professor of economics who found that an increase in racial diversity of one standard deviation increased productivity by more than 25 per cent in legal, health and financial services. He states this is because such teams have a wide range of perspectives and fewer blind spots.  He goes on to explain that not only do homogeneous groups underperform, they do so in predictable ways. This is because they are surrounded by people who are similar to them and, as such, not only do they share each other’s blind spots but also reinforce them.  He calls this ‘mirroring’ whereby when surrounded by people who reflect one’s picture of reality, you reflect this picture back to them rather than bringing other perspectives to the situation.  

The diversity of pupils within our classrooms

In any classroom in England, there are pupils from a range of different backgrounds sitting in front of you waiting to be taught by you.  Typically, out of 100 pupils you are likely to see the following diversity in schools in England, which is shown in Figure 1.1.

Figure 1.1 The diversity of pupil population in schools in England out of 100 pupils.

(based on 2020 national figures provided by the DfE)

In 2020 out of 100 pupils in state schools in England …

• 32.5% were from minority ethnic backgrounds

• 19.5 % were speakers of English as an additional language

• 17.3% were eligible for free school meals 

• 12.1% were on Special Educational Needs Support

• 3.3% had an Educational Health and Care (EHC) plan

Masters to use if needed

Need to attribute the silhouettes to  https://www.freepik.com/free-vector/children-holding-hands-silhouette_837165.htm#page=1&query=silhouette%20children&position=4

Of course, these percentages will vary from school to school dependent on which school and region you teach in.  However, even if you are working in quite a monolithic context now it is highly likely that over the duration of your career as a teacher you will encounter a wide range of needs and growing diversity in your class and school.

Meeting the needs of a range of pupils and addressing the gaps in professional development of school staff in this area is the genesis of this book.  I have used my knowledge, skills and proven track record of working collaboratively with many schools to positively impact on outcomes for pupils, especially the most vulnerable, and attempted to crystalise this into the contents of this book. The intention is that you will be able to readily access the information and the support you need in one place and in doing so this  book will assist you in developing the requisite skills, knowledge and understanding to address these needs well in your classroom and school.

Current events and their relevance to this book

During the writing of this book two significant world events occurred which have a direct bearing on the contents, as well as catapulting the necessity to address matters of equity in education as a matter of urgency.  The first is Coronavirus (Covid-19), the invisible and lethal pandemic that has swept the world, affecting millions across the globe, and claiming the lives of hundreds and thousands.  Originating in Wuhan in late 2019, it has up to the time of writing (mid-August 2020) led to an estimated 20,439,814 confirmed cases and 744,385 deaths according to the World Health Organisation (WHO).  The corresponding figures for the United Kingdom were 313,798 people having tested positive in mid-August, with 46,706 declared having died from this virus. These figures are only estimates and the true extent of the impact is likely to be unknown. Furthermore, it is unclear how long the world will be held hostage to this pandemic, infecting millions more and claiming the lives of many, especially the most vulnerable.

What Covid-19 has done is exacerbate existing inequalities in the UK that have been evident for many years, particularly as a result of years of successive governments pursuing a policy of austerity. A Public Health England (2020b) report into the risk and outcomes of Covid-19 has shown that it has disproportionally impacted on particular groups as follows:

The largest disparity found was by age. Among people already diagnosed with COVID19, people who were 80 or older were seventy times more likely to die than those under 40. Risk of dying among those diagnosed with COVID-19 was also higher in males than females; higher in those living in the more deprived areas than those living in the least deprived; and higher in those in Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) groups than in White ethnic groups. These inequalities largely replicate existing inequalities in mortality rates in previous years, except for BAME groups, as mortality was previously higher in White ethnic groups. (p 4)

Public Health England has also found that Covid-19 has impacted on those working in the following occupations detrimentally:

When compared to previous years, we also found a particularly high increase in all cause deaths among those born outside the UK and Ireland; those in a range of caring occupations including social care and nursing auxiliaries and assistants; those who drive passengers in road vehicles for a living including taxi and minicab drivers and chauffeurs; those working as security guards and related occupations; and those in care homes (p 4).

In addition, a Guardian columnist and author, Frances Ryan (2020) provides shocking figures for disabled people affected by Covid-19.  Drawing on Office for National Data (ONS), she states that disabled people make up two thirds of coronavirus deaths in the UK. Indeed, estimates by the ONS show that disabled people are 11 more times likely to die due to the coronavirus. Figure 1.2 shows who is affected by Covid-19 in the UK and by how much.

Figure 1.2 Who is affected by Covid-19 in the UK the most and by how much?

Not only has Covid-19 had devastating consequences for the vulnerable in society this has also been played out in education and the awarding of A levels and GCSE examinations results in particular with the absence of pupils being able to take their examinations in the summer of 2020.  In March 2020, when the pandemic resulted in the government closing schools, a decision was made by the Secretary of State that there would be no examinations this year. We were assured that no young person would be adversely affected and that the Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation (OfQUAL) would ensure that there would be a fair procedure in place in awarding examination grades. Instead what happened was that an algorithm for awarding grades based on centre assessed grades to ensure that national results would be ‘broadly similar to previous years’ was used. This was because concerns were expressed that teacher assessed grades would not be accurate. As a result, teachers were asked to supply an estimated grade for each pupil for each subject, as well as a ranking each pupil so that they could compare this with every other pupil at the school. Critics had already warned of the fact that a high performing pupil at an underperforming school was likely to have their results downgraded as a result of the algorithm, as was a school which was rapidly improving.  However, despite earlier protestations that this would be an unfair system, a debacle ensued on results day when A level grades were announced on the 13 August 2020 which  resulted in the grades  being nearly 40 per cent being lower than teachers’ assessments in an effort to ‘maintain standards’ and contain ‘grade inflation.’ It also soon became apparent that pupils in selective private schools, who in most years perform well due to the characteristics of their pupils, resulted in the algorithm automatically putting their pupils at an advantage compared to those in state schools.  Furthermore, in a blog written by FFT Education Datalab (2020) it soon became obvious that class size had had an impact on the awarding of grades, with those in smaller class sizes being given an unfair advantage. This had resulted in private schools, who normally have smaller class sizes again gaining an unfair advantage.  Accusations of unfairness ensued, with a detrimental impact on disadvantaged young people being highlighted.  This soon led to the government backtracking and abandoning the use of the algorithm and instead deciding to use centre awarded grades in an attempt to contain the public backlash.  In order to avoid the same problem, the same decision was made in awarding the grades for GCSEs a week later. This debacle was a perfect example in how existing inequalities can so easily be perpetuated, with potential gainers and losers, dependent on the system that is used to award grades.

The second monumental world event in 2020 was the heart-breaking and shocking murder of George Floyd in May 2020.  Sadly, his last moments were graphically captured on video with the whole world to see right in front of their eyes a white police office kneeling on his neck for over eight minutes during an arrest, to the cries of ‘I can’t breathe’. The last three words he uttered are appallingly a common refrain uttered by many black people before dying in similar circumstances with little hope of justice or change taking place.  This horrendous act rightly caused tumultuous waves first in America and then across the globe.  Many other black people in America and also in the UK have suffered extreme injustices, which have led to the highest penalty of all – the loss of life.  In the UK, an investigation by the BBC (June 2010) showed that black people were more than twice as likely than their white counterparts to die in police custody. The Lammy Review, commissioned by Theresa May in 2017 as part of her work in addressing ‘burning injustices’ when she became Prime Minister highlighted the over-representation of black and minority ethnic people in the criminal justice system. Although they only represent 14 per cent of the overall adult population, they make up 25 per cent of adult prisoners and an incredulous 41 per cent of the under 18s in youth custody. Furthermore, these shocking figures came at a time when youth offending rates were falling significantly. Despite this black and minority ethnic young people continue to make up a higher share of those offending for the first time, those reoffending after a conviction and those serving a custodial sentence, highlighting disparities within the criminal justice system.

As a result of this, in the midst of the pandemic there were scenes of the toppling of statutes which symbolised race injustices going back many centuries and the ongoing legacy of race inequalities suffered by too many even today.  In the United States, in Confederate states, who are a group of southern states that had fought to keep black people as slaves in the American Civil war between 1861 and 1865, we saw Christopher Columbus statutes being torn down, with pressure on the authorities to remove monuments connected to slavery and colonialism.  In the UK, similar scenes were seen with the toppling of Edward Colston’s statute in Bristol. Furthermore, calls once were once again made for Cecil Rhodes prominent statue proudly displayed on the facade of Oriel College, Oxford University, to be removed due to its imperial and colonial legacy.

This has led to campaigners wanting the curriculum to be diversified so that young people are taught not only of slavery but given a well-rounded education as to the contributions that civilisations from across the world have made to human knowledge.  There are also demands that there should be an opportunity within the curriculum to learn about Britain’s colonial and imperial history, warts and all, rather than the sanitised version that is often promulgated. Current narratives mainly promote an understanding that colonialism was a benevolent exercise, rather than it having severe and direct consequences for many minority ethnic communities now settled and living in the UK. For many these dishonest narratives provide a disservice to all and distort facts and history, which are untenable in modern day society.

These two current world events are examples of burning injustices that impact on the vulnerable and marginalised in society. They shine a light on existing inequity and diversity issues that have been ignored and buried in society. During this time, I have been amazed at the work staff in educational settings have undertaken to support families from checking up on the welfare of pupils and extending this to their families, even to the extent of providing essential food and groceries when this was not forthcoming nationally.  Staff have been personally delivering food parcels to ensure that their most vulnerable are getting fed which is a remarkable situation to see in a country which is one of the richest in the world.  Covid-19 has just accelerated the underlying inequity gaps in our society at a time when the use of food banks has increased remarkably. Figures by the Trussel Trust, a nationwide network of food banks which provides emergency food and support for people locked in poverty, shows that in April to September in 2015 they delivered 506,369 food parcels.  In the intervening years this has grown exponentially to 1,239,399 for the same period in 2020. They state that in the UK, more than 14 million people are living in poverty, of which 4.5 million are children. Between April 2019 and March 2020, Trussel Trust food banks in their network provided a record 1.9 million food supplies to people in crisis, which was an 18 per cent increase on the previous year. Schools have provided a pivotal role in this area and have acted as an emergency service to many desperate pupils and their families.

Educational settings have also once again been reminded of the stark and appalling racial injustices that continued to be faced by black people in across the globe. Their pupils have been asking them pertinent questions about the Black Lives Matters movement #BLM and many colleagues in educational settings have felt that their curriculum is woefully lacking in better educating their pupils about such important matters if we are to achieve a more cohesive and just society in the future.  This has led to many critically looking at their curriculums and revisiting the content of what they teach. However, many feel that they need support in this area to do this well as there is a gap in their own knowledge, understanding and skills because it has not been a national priority area despite all the significant changes that have taken place in the curriculum over the past 10 years or so.

Without doubt, staff in educational settings morally want to do the right thing and be responsive to such significant and far-reaching events, which change society for ever.  They find that competing demands on their time and the challenges they themselves face make it difficult to make real positive change.  Often such important matters are seen as being on the periphery, with a push nationally by the Department for Education and Ofsted, the school inspections regulator pushing for a return to the status quo or ’normal’ as soon as possible.   It is at this point worth reminding you that staff in educational settings are bound by legal frameworks, which clearly set out their responsibilities and duties towards their pupils affected by the issues mentioned above as well as meeting the needs of pupils covered in this book. These are outlined in the following section for your information.

Legal context: educational settings and teachers’ duties [A]

Educational settings, including teachers and all staff who work in them have legal duties towards many of the pupils that we will be discussing in this book so it is worth you knowing what your statutory responsibilities are as well as the rights of your pupils when undertaking your roles.  The following are key legal requirements that you need to be up to date with to ensure you are not in breach of your legal obligations.

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) [B]

The UNCRC is an international human rights treaty that grants all children and young people (aged 17 and under) a comprehensive set of rights.  The UK signed the convention on 19 April 1990. It was ratified on 16 December 1991 and came into force on 15 January 1992.

Altogether, the Convention has 54 articles. They cover all aspects of a child’s life and set out the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights that all children everywhere are entitled to. It also explains how adults and governments must work together to make sure all children can enjoy all their rights.  It clearly stipulates that every child has rights, whatever their ethnicity, gender, religion, language, abilities or any other status.  

The following articles are particularly pertinent to the groups of pupils covered in this book.

• ‘Article 2 (non-discrimination) The Convention applies to every child without discrimination, whatever their ethnicity, sex, religion, language, abilities or any other status, whatever they think or say, whatever their family background;
• Article 13 (freedom of expression) Every child must be free to express their thoughts and opinions and to access all kinds of information, as long as it is within the law;
• Article 14 (freedom of thought, belief and religion) Every child has the right to think and believe what they choose and also to practise their religion, as long as they are not stopping other people from enjoying their rights. Governments must respect the rights and responsibilities of parents to guide their child as they grow up;
• Article 15 (freedom of association) Every child has the right to meet with other children and to join groups and organisations, as long as this does not stop other people from enjoying their rights;
• Article 28 (right to education) Every child has the right to an education. Primary education must be free and different forms of secondary education must be available to every child. Discipline in schools must respect children’s dignity and their rights. Richer countries must help poorer countries achieve this.
• Article 29 (goals of education) Education must develop every child’s personality, talents and abilities to the full. It must encourage the child’s respect for human rights, as well as respect for their parents, their own and other cultures, and the environment.
• Article 30 (children from minority or indigenous groups) Every child has the right to learn and use the language, customs and religion of their family, whether or not these are shared by the majority of the people in the country where they live.
• Article 39 (recovery from trauma and reintegration) Children who have experienced neglect, abuse, exploitation, torture or who are victims of war must receive special support to help them recover their health, dignity, self-respect and social life.’ (p 1)

The Equality Act 2010 [B]

The Equality Act 2010 came into force on 1 October 2010 and legally protects people from discrimination in the workplace and society at large.  It brought together 116 separate pieces of legislation into one Act. In the school context, the Equality Act 2010 gives protection against discrimination for pupils and staff with ‘protected characteristics’.  It replaced previous separate anti-discrimination laws pertaining to sex, race and disability and widened its scope. The nine protected characteristics it covers are as follows:

1. race;
2. religion and belief;
3. sex;
4. sexual orientation;
5. disability;
6. age;
7. gender reassignment;
8. pregnancy and maternity;
9. marriage and civil partnership.

It is worth noting that ‘age’ and ‘being married or in a civil partnership’ are NOT protected characteristics for the schools’ provisions.

The Equality Act 2020 provides protected against four kinds of behaviours.

1. Direct discrimination is defined as any instance in which a person is treated less favourably that another person because of a protected characteristic. Discrimination can be based on association, perception or because of pregnancy and maternity; 
2. Indirect discrimination is defined as any instance in which a provision, criterion or practice is neutral on the face of it but its impact does or would disadvantage those who have a protected characteristic, whether the intent was to do this or not.
3. Harassment is defined as unwanted conduct that creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for a person with a protected characteristic or has the purpose violating someone’s dignity. There are three types of harassment namely harassment related to a protected characteristic, sexual harassment or less favourable treatment of someone because they submit to or reject sexual harassment or harassment related to sex.
4. Victimisation is defined as treating someone badly because they have done a ‘protected act’ or because it is believed that a person has done or going to do a ‘protected act’.  A ‘protected act’ is:

a) making a claim or complaint of discrimination (under the Act);

b) helping someone else to make a claim by giving evidence or information;

c) making an allegation that the school or someone else has breached the Act;

d) doing anything else in connection with the Act.

Furthermore, an equality duty also known as the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) was also created under the Equality Act on 5 April 2011. The PSED duty replaced the previous race, disability and gender equality duties.

As a public organisation, including educational settings and all educators who work within them are subject to the PSED and must, in the exercise of their functions, have due regard to the following three key aims:

• eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the Equality Act 2010;
• advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not;
• foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not.

On 10 September 2011, The Equality Act 2010 (Specific Duties) Regulations 2011 came into force.  This requires public bodies, including educational settings to publish relevant, proportionate information demonstrating their compliance with the Equality Duty as well to set themselves specific, measurable equality objectives.

Safeguarding [B]

Schools and staff who work within them are subject to a number of safeguarding obligations and welfare responsibilities towards children and young people in the educational settings.  These responsibilities are clearly outlined in the Department for Education’s (DfE) statutory guidance ‘Keeping Children Safe in Education’ (2018).  This statutory guidance defines safeguarding and promoting the welfare of children and young people as:

• protecting children from maltreatment; 
• preventing impairment of children’s health or development;
• ensuring that children grow up in circumstances consistent with the provision of safe and effective care;
• taking action to enable all children to have the best outcomes.

Each school is required to have a safeguarding lead and any approaches taken should be in the best interests of the child. The guidance covers sexual violence and sexual harassment. It also includes specific guidance on ‘honour’ based violence, Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) and forced marriage.

The 2018 DfE document ‘Sexual Violence and sexual harassment between children in schools and colleges’,  outlines schools’ and colleges’ legal responsibilities and provides a whole school or college approach to safeguarding and child protection, as well how to respond to reports of sexual violence and sexual harassment.

Ofsted [B]

Ofsted’s 2019 education inspection framework makes it clear that inspectors must assess the extent to which a school complies with its legal duties under the Equality Act 2010, including the Public Sector Equality Duty. There are key areas within the inspection framework such as pupil’s personal development and provision for spiritual, moral, social and cultural development, which overlap and support educational settings fulfilment of the PSED responsibilities. 

The Teachers’ Standards

The DfE Teachers’ Standards (2013) for England define the minimum level of practice expected for all trainee teachers and teachers from the point of being awarded qualified teacher status (QTS). As such, they are used to assess all trainees working towards QTS and all those completing their statutory induction period.  They are also often used to assess the performance of teachers, especially in relation to awarding performance related pay.  All the eight standards and their sub points are relevant to ensuring the needs of all pupils are addressed to the highest standard by their teachers.  However, two specific teacher standards are very pertinent to the needs of the pupils covered in this book.  These are standards 1 and 5 in particular.

1. ‘Set high expectations which inspire, motivate and challenge pupils

• establish a safe and stimulating environment for pupils, rooted in mutual respect
• set goals that stretch and challenge pupils of all backgrounds, abilities and dispositions
• demonstrate consistently the positive attitudes, values and behaviour which are expected of pupils…’ (p 10)

                                    and

1. Adapt teaching to respond to the strengths and needs of all pupils
2. know when and how to differentiate appropriately, using approaches which enable pupils to be taught effectively
3. have a secure understanding of how a range of factors can inhibit pupils’ ability to learn, and how best to overcome these
4. demonstrate an awareness of the physical, social and intellectual development of children, and know how to adapt teaching to support pupils’ education at different stages of development 12
5. have a clear understanding of the needs of all pupils, including those with special educational needs; those of high ability; those with English as an additional language; those with disabilities; and be able to use and evaluate distinctive teaching approaches to engage and support them.’ (pp 11-12)

During my work in schools, it soon became evident that many teachers and leaders felt that they had not been adequately prepared for addressing the gaps in attainment for a wide variety of pupils.  Nor did they feel that they knew how to fully ensure that their classrooms and schools were inclusive for all pupils. Many colleagues reflected that they had not been trained well in initial teacher training to cover these two aspects of the Teachers’ Standards. Therefore, the expectation is that you will have the skills, knowledge and understanding to enable ALL pupils to get the best out of their education with you. Interestingly, meeting the needs of these groups of pupils are the very groups that newly qualified teachers often feel the least prepared to teach as Newly Qualified Teacher (NQT) surveys show year after year (2018).   Colleagues also stated that the subsequent continuing professional development they received during their careers was variable, and in many cases addressing the needs of diverse groups of pupils continued to be neglected, even though these pupils were sitting in front of them in their classrooms.  The exception to this was the recent national emphasis on addressing the needs of ‘disadvantaged’ pupils, which focused on closing the socio-economic attainment gaps. Equally, leaders felt that leadership programmes that they had undertaken did not give sufficient focus on meeting the needs of the groups of pupils in this book and often even when there was a focus on ‘closing the gap’ this was only in relation to ‘disadvantaged’ pupils because of the national profile of this group. However, they stated that the label disadvantaged did not do justice to the diverse needs of pupils within this broad category.

Find out more

Classroom Talk

The extract below is from Classroom Talk by Rupert Knight

Chapter 1

Introducing and mapping debates around classroom talk

1.1   Chapter overview

This chapter will outline:

1. what is meant by classroom talk and the scope of the book;
   1. why an evidence-informed approach is important;
   1. how you can make sense of research in this field;
   1. key debates and questions to be explored.

1.2   Introduction: what is meant by classroom talk and what is the scope of this book?

Take a walk along a school corridor, pause outside a classroom door and listen. There are voices, but whose voices? What are they saying and why? Perhaps a teacher is introducing a new concept to a class and asking questions to check understanding or provoke new thinking. Perhaps the voice heard is not the teacher’s at all, but that of a pupil answering or asking a question. Perhaps pupils are talking to one another independently of the teacher. Sometimes there is consensus, sometimes debate and disagreement. Tuning in and trying to discern the meaning and dynamics of this complex mixture of spoken language might give rise to a number of questions. A first set relates to participation and the learner’s role in this process. Are pupils passive recipients of knowledge, or active participants in the construction of understanding? The stance taken on this determines particular classroom routines and consequently patterns of spoken interaction. A second set of questions concerns the purpose and content of this interaction. To what extent is learning predetermined by the teacher, with pupils guided along a set path? To what extent, in contrast, are pupils invited to engage in open, authentic dialogue? Is talk between pupils purely social and a distraction from learning, or can peer talk be productive for learning? Finally, questions might be raised about the form of spoken language employed in all of these scenarios.

Are there modes of speech that are more cognitively or socially desirable than others and, if so, should talk be an object of learning in its own right? Some positions taken by teachers on these questions may be strongly value-related and embedded in the purposes of education more widely. From this starting point, the aim of this book is to consider the evidence around what is known – and not known – about classroom talk.

Moving beyond the mere ubiquity of talk in classrooms, it is important to question why it is particularly worthy of your attention. After all, while spoken language is the medium through which much teaching and learning takes place, its purposes and conventions are often very different from talk in everyday life. There are three broad arguments, each with its own strand of research, that have been made for a focus on classroom talk.

1. The psychological or cognitive argument: the idea that learning and development are shaped heavily – though not exclusively – by social interaction. For example, Mercer and Littleton (2007) explain that cognitive development and learning are mediated by cultural and social activities such as talk and that learning can be thought of as the joint construction of understanding through a process of dialogue;
2. The sociological argument: an interest in principles such as identity, inclusion and communicative rights, whereby authentic pupil voice and ownership of learning have a place in classrooms. For example,

Lefstein and Snell (2011) provide a critique of typical classroom discourse structures in terms of their promotion of a narrow, uncritical acceptance of knowledge and authority;

• The communicative competence argument: the idea that capability with spoken language is an essential skill for success in education and beyond. For example, Bruner (1978) notes that such competence goes beyond a grasp of syntax and semantics and depends on the

sophisticated social use of dialogue. For some, this includes valuing the richness of informal language, while for others this has been about the use of ‘correct’ standard forms.

In this book, therefore, you will be able to evaluate arguments for classroom talk not only on the basis of pedagogy and academic achievement, but also in light of cultural, social and political considerations. The case for talk is neatly previewed by Alexander’s (2012) summing up of the understanding of the role played by high-quality talk in the following:

• contributing to children’s development, thinking and learning as a form of pedagogy;
• closing equity gaps due to social disadvantage;
• enhancing employability and social and economic well-being;

• promoting democratic involvement in learning and student voice;
  • helping teachers to assess pupils’ understanding formatively. Nevertheless, such arguments are by no means universally accepted or enacted. Within the UK, for example, the effects of what Sahlberg (2016) calls

the Global Education Reform Movement have been felt. They include increased standardisation of teaching and a focus on prescribed content transmitted in a risk-averse, often teacher-led, mode. Meanwhile, the national curriculum’s (DfE, 2013) spoken language strand within the English curriculum positions talk largely as a skill to underpin reading and writing. This calls to mind Alexander’s (2014) vivid report of a government minister’s caution, during a curriculum review, about the danger of being seen to ‘encourage idle chatter in class’ (p 357). In order to explore the case for talk rigorously, therefore, a careful review of the evidence-base is required.

The scope of this book is primarily the evidence on promoting the use of high- quality talk by pupils as a means of learning. This means that some forms of classroom talk necessarily fall outside this boundary, but this is not a reflection of their importance. For example, teacher exposition through explanation and modelling is a central part of any educator’s repertoire, but will be discussed only in so far as this relates to more interactive forms of talk. Similarly, the all-important social relationships formed through informal peer talk will be considered largely for their value in promoting academic learning. In this book, then, the focus is on spoken interaction at classroom level, across age phases, as a mode of thinking and a means of jointly constructing understanding.

1.3  Why is an evidence-informed approach important?

A detailed account of current approaches to, and benefits of, the use of evidence to inform education is provided by Philpott and Poultney (2018) in this series. It is fair to say, however, that the relationship between research and teaching has sometimes been an uneasy one, with claims that there has historically been a mismatch between the knowledge required by teachers and that generated by researchers (Cain, 2015). In recent years, there has been a renewed interest in connecting teachers more directly with evidence. This arises in part from arguments for greater teacher autonomy, linked to a research-literate teaching community, active as both informed consumers and producers of evidence (BERA, 2014). This argument is strongly associated with the vision of a ‘self- improving’ school system, championed in England, for example, in government reforms (DfE, 2010). While there is much to admire in this school-led stance, it might also be seen as a product of the shift in some parts of the world towards standardisation, measurement, comparison and competition mentioned in Section 1.2.

Some have also called into question an impoverished, ‘what works’ view of what constitutes evidence and how it might be used. Biesta (2016), for example, draws attention to the emphasis on effectiveness and argues that this term has little meaning unless it is clear what an action is effective for. There are many potential value systems and purposes for education, beyond simply improving attainment, rendering a single response impossible.

Others have called into question the privileging of ‘scientific’ approaches to research, such as randomised control trials (RCTs). Attractive for their promise of an experimental, controlled trial of an intervention, potentially establishing causation, they may potentially fail to take into account context and experience. Connolly et al (2018) reflect these concerns and others in their systematic review of RCTs in education, but also conclude that this approach can make an important contribution to understanding if used appropriately.

A further issue raised with a simplistic effectiveness view is that it may encourage shortcuts and a superficial use of evidence. Meta-analyses involve an aggregation of outcomes from previous studies and the calculation of an effect size for an intervention. They provide an opportunity to compare and even rank strategies at scale (eg EEF, 2018a; Hattie, 2009) but the feasibility of meaningfully comparing disparate research studies around a broad theme and determining a single effect size have been questioned (Wrigley, 2018).

Rather than view these issues as obstacles, they might instead be seen to suggest three implications for teachers.

1. The need to take an informed and critical stance when presented with research evidence, particularly of the easily digestible, ‘what works’ variety. Research summaries and meta-analyses, for example, can be very useful tools but the story behind ranked interventions needs to be understood;
2. The importance of going beyond a view of effectiveness as improved attainment to consider the wider purposes of education. This links to the three lines of argument, with their three aims, discussed in Section 1.2;
3. The value of exploring the research around a subject in some depth and achieving a nuanced and reasonably balanced perspective on the topic. This is largely the purpose of this book and indeed this whole series.

1.4   How can you make sense of research in this field?

Navigating the research field

Substantial research interest in classroom talk dates largely from the 1970s. While there are important antecedents, such as the thinking from the 1920s and 1930s of Lev Vygotsky, even this work became widely known only after its translation into English from the 1960s onwards. The interdisciplinary nature of this research field makes it a complex one to navigate and some of the impetus has come from outside education. Early seminal studies, therefore, include those from a linguistic perspective, concerned chiefly with the structure of language use, rather than its meaning (Sinclair and Coulthard, 1975) and those using a more ethnographic approach, exploring context and relationships (Edwards and Furlong, 1978). Since the 1980s, much of the work has coalesced around two key approaches, characterised by Mercer (2010) as linguistic ethnography and sociocultural research. The linguistic ethnography tradition explores the interaction of language with social and cultural context, while sociocultural researchers focus chiefly on dialogue and collaboration as a tool for learning. From the 1980s onwards, a notable body of work has been the detailed analysis of talk conducted by sociocultural researchers in an attempt to develop analytical frameworks (eg Mercer, 1995). This has led to a degree of consensus around typical forms of naturally occurring classroom talk. Since then, another important focus has become the use of this understanding to articulate and trial more productive models of talk, sometimes in the form of teaching structured repertoires such as collaborative reasoning (eg Clark et al, 2003) and sometimes as broader approaches to pedagogy, such as dialogic teaching (eg Alexander, 2017).

The limitations of research in this field and the possible ways forward are considered more fully in Chapter 7, but it is clear that, within this diverse body of research, there exist certain patterns of emphasis. Howe and Abedin’s (2013) systematic review of research on classroom dialogue finds, for example, a field dominated by Western and particularly UK and US research, with the proportion of UK research increasing in recent years. The same review notes a curricular emphasis on Science especially, but also Mathematics and English. The evidence base is also skewed in its age focus towards primary and early secondary pupils.

In discussing the relative lack of research in secondary classrooms, Higham et al (2014) suggest various possible reasons, including the greater capacity in primary education for engaging with new pedagogies in a sustained and holistic way. Finally, Howe and Abedin (2013) note a preponderance of small-scale qualitative research – unsurprising, given the focus on close examination of dialogue. What is beginning to emerge now, however, according to Resnick and Schantz (2015) is a body of experimental studies, more rigorously testing models of classroom talk and starting to provide evidence of transfer to other contexts.

The research map which follows attempts to represent some key milestones in this research field chronologically, including some examples of important publications mentioned in this book.

   A classroom talk research map and timeline                                                     

  1960 s onward s  

Systematic research, usually quantitative and focused on categorizing observable features rather than on meaning. Often associated with teacher effectiveness.

• Flanders (1961)

* Galton et al (1980; 1999)

Researching spoken language competence (eg oracy and different ‘registers’).

• Wilkinson (1965)
• Bernstein (1971)

* Heath (1983)

• Mercer et al (2017a)

  1970 s onward s  

Linguistic research, based on analysis of transcripts to discern language structure and functions.

• Sinclair and Coulthard (1975)

* Mehan (1979)

Sociolinguistic research, based on analysis also focusing on the function and meaning of languaage.

• Barnes and Todd (1977)
• Edwards and Furlong (1978)

Social constructivist research on learning through scaffolding and contingent teaching.

• Wood et al (1976)
• Bruner (1978)

  1980 s onward s  

Ethnographic and sociocultural research with an interest in context and the development of analytic frameworks (eg exploratory talk).

• Edwards and Westgate (1994)
  • Mercer (1995)

* Wells (1999)

Researching the impact of productive models of talk (eg exploratory talk; reciprocal teaching; collaborative reasoning; accountable talk).

• Palinscar and Brown (1984)
  • Mercer (2000)
  • Clark et al (2003)
  • Michaels et al (2008)

  2000 s onward s  

Dialogic teaching research, with a focus on classroom culture and community to promote effective learning.

• Nystrand et al (2003)
  • Mortimer and Scott (2003)
  • Alexander (2017)

Experimental research designs and an interest in transfer of learning

• O’Connor et al (2015)
  • Sun et al (2015)
  • Alexander (2018)

1.5   What are the key debates and questions?

As might be expected from the preceding discussions about the nature of evidence and the diverse, multi-disciplinary perspectives informing the study of talk, this is a complex and contested field. In this section, a dialogue of contrasting views is offered as a way of introducing some of the key debates explored in the chapters that follow. On the left are justifications for classroom talk and on the right are possible counter-arguments.

Find out more

Alfie Steele, Worcestershire

A further case of intimidation, violence and eventually murder

The recently published Child Safeguarding Practice Review analysed the case of Alfie, who was murdered by his mother’s partner Dirk Howell. Howell had a history of violent and intimidating behaviour towards neighbours, family and members of the local community. Although he did have a record of threatening professionals, Howell avoided direct contact with Child protection workers in the case as he did not attend meetings including core groups, and was an “absent presence” in the family. It is significant that much of the case work was carried out online during the pandemic and lockdown. Howell’s violent and intimidating behaviour to neighbours who were frightened to report the abuse they witnessed, was not considered as a threat to Alfie’s safety.

Intimidation and violence was a major factor in this case, particularly to neighbours and members of the local community who were trying to act in a protective capacity, as well as towards professionals. However intimidation was a major risk factor which was not routinely considered and shared across agencies.

This raises the question that if the neighbours and workers are frightened and intimidated by a family member, how is it possible that a child in the family can be regarded as safe?

Child protection workers, systems and processes must be more aware of the impact of violence, and the threat violence can have on decision making, of which this latest case is yet a further tragic example. Child protection agencies should take this factor seriously, and incorporate it in the training of social workers, supervisors and conference chairs, to ensure that it is fully considered in decision making, and that practitioners are aware of the potentially tragic consequences if it is not taken into account.

Brian Atkins, February 2024

Brian is the author of Keeping Safe and Working Effectively for Social Workers and Health Professionals.

This book explores these issues in a way that is of practical assistance to workers, and helps inform the theoretical basis of the interagency processes designed to protect vulnerable children.

Buy on Amazon

Why Assess?

This is an extract from Writing Analytical Assessments in Social Work, 3rd ed by Chris Dyke.

1.1      WHO’S IT FOR?

I wrote this book for an audience of professionals writing assessments, but this isn’t how I write my assessments. Unfortunately, professional reports too often miss their mark, losing sight of their intended audience while ‘feeding a system’ – in other words, completing a task as a matter of compliance, rather than to achieve a purpose in someone’s life. These reports are about form, not substance. Your managers will read your assessments, and so will other professionals working with a service user. But the service user needs to be central – while there are times when another reader is more pressing (when you need a judge to grant an order, for example), even then the purpose of the report is to achieve a positive outcome for the service user. Some will only be able to read it when they’re much older. Some may never be able to read it – something I consider in more depth in Chapter 8 when discussing how to share your finished report. But you need to have them in mind nonetheless, not simply as the object of your report but the reader as well.

Think of your assessment on three levels.

Level One: helping a person understand themselves, and potentially create positive change in their own life (or in the lives of family members).

Level Two: helping an ‘involved professional’ (including you, and any colleagues working with the service user) help that person, whether through direct recommendations or through creating a better understanding of the person’s needs, situation and family dynamics.

Level Three: helping a ‘removed professional’ (your manager, a judge, an inspector etc) ensure that the ‘involved professionals’ are helping that person properly.

All three levels have a part to play, but we mustn’t write our reports for the third level at the expense of the first. This happens too often: Beresford (2007) found service users were disillusioned by the bureaucratic dimension of social work and resented the ‘form- filling’ approach – reminding us that ‘social work is social’, and of the importance of listening as the primary activity of assessment.

Listening goes beyond ‘sitting quietly in a living room’. It means active listening – letting the service user speak (or communicate in whatever way they find easiest), and becoming an active part of their account, reflecting their thoughts and helping them use their own perspective to improve their own self-knowledge and self-efficacy. Les Back (2007) explores this process from a sociological perspective. Challenging the common dictum that ‘everyone is the expert on their own life’, Back prefers to think of us as ‘observers in our own lives’, holding a vast store of knowledge, but not necessarily an ‘expert’: it takes reflection and a listener to understand a story, not just a storyteller. Our interviews also require more than just an ear for words: hearing gaps, hearing what someone’s not saying, and picking up what goes unspoken in a facial expression, or even (if someone’s face is covered, or paralysed by a stroke, for example) in body language alone. Where it’s practical to do so, I thoroughly recommend undertaking a visit in a pair – while one social worker conducts the interview as they normally would, the other simply observes and reflects on the interaction. When you come to share notes afterwards, you might be surprised at how much more you’ve absorbed together than as individuals.

Listening takes different forms. You’ll need to read a lot when writing an assessment, and reading is its own form of listening: there’s a difference between ‘plodding through’ reams of old documents and absorbing them with a listening mindset – looking out for themes, seeing the humanity behind the jargon, and trying to put yourself in the shoes of the people involved. Written communication still matters, and sometimes predominates, but personal communication can be far more valuable, and we can lose a lot between an idea as it is thought or spoken and written. I thoroughly recommend verbal conversations with referring agencies to avoid losing this valuable knowledge. I wouldn’t, however, go as far as Norfolk County Council (2018) who removed the written referral altogether – this step had the right objective in mind, but I would still expect any professional to be willing to put a serious concern in writing, and would be wary of any who refused. Listening also involves hearing what is not said, or what someone is unwilling to say on the record and why.

Listening is vital if you want to build an understanding of someone for an assessment, but it’s so much more than that: like many skills that are useful for analysis, active listening is what builds someone’s confidence in you as an empathic, alert practitioner who might be able and willing to help them. I won’t be so blasé as to claim that an assessment ‘writes itself’ when you really know a service user, but it helps.

Even where someone gives you a flawed or distorted account of their situation, this is still a perspective that you need to dignify, even if your role will be to challenge and con- structively shift their perspective, or to challenge an outright falsehood. Your chances of achieving meaningful change in someone’s life are better if you take on board everything

they say, and work through with them why they say it, than if you just ignore anything that seems illogical or untrue at first glance. See Chapter 6 on the challenges of confronting deliberate lies by service users or professionals.

1.2      POWER AND ETHICS IN ASSESSMENT

Writing for the service user requires:

• writing in a way they will understand and find useful. See Chapter 4 on Writing for

more details;

• recognising the inherent and potential power structures involved in assessment;

• locating yourself in the process – recognising that even if an individual is not nec- essarily the expert on their own life, they are an important authority on it, and your assessment does not constitute an objective, definitive story of ‘who they are’.

Neustadt (1960, p 33) famously distinguished executive ‘power’ and ‘authority’: the former could be laid out in statute or guidance; the latter was a subtle quality which varied person-to-person – he concluded that someone who ‘commands’ others is betraying a lack of authority, not an abundance of it.

Similarly, Jerry Tew (2006) provides a valuable model of power relationships in social work. In Tew’s model (which I thoroughly recommend reading in full) he considers two axes:

1. ‘power over’ versus ‘power together’; and
2. ‘limiting’ versus ‘productive’ relationships.

	Power over	Power together
Limiting	Oppressive	Collusive
Productive	Protective	Co-operative

This model improves upon the standard anti-oppressive models, which Tew regards as ‘zero-sum’ – in other words, an increase in power for one person means a decrease in power for someone else. The best social work practice involves co-operative power, where the social worker and service user work together to solve a problem, and all concerned are empowered.

He warns that power relationships can change over time, and one kind of relationship can

shift subtly into another, in the absence of proper reflective practice.

I have seen this in practice: when social workers adopt a ‘power over’ working style, they can act protectively when the situation requires it, but can easily slip into an oppressive mode of practice if, for example, they become exasperated with a service user and lose empathy with them. Likewise, a social worker practising ‘power together’ needs to be

vigilant that their co-operative work with a service user does not become collusive, espe- cially where the person they are working with has abused other people.

Social workers also have a role and a responsibility in the construction of a person’s identity and their relationship with society – a role that goes beyond a professional doing a job, and into the realms of sociology (or even philosophy). Every known human society has a notion of the ‘normal’ versus the ‘abnormal’, both in terms of states of mind and in terms of behaviour (Brown, 1991), and social work assessments often represent (consciously or not) the ‘policing’ of the line between the two. A social worker assesses whether the way a parent cares for a child meets a legal and societal notion of ‘good enough’ (or whether their actions amount to normal variation or the notion of ‘significant harm’), which varies over time and geography. A social worker distinguishes between an adult who can make their own decisions and one who cannot.

As Michel Foucault (1977, p 304) put it:

The judges of normality are present everywhere. We are in the society of the teacher- judge, the doctor-judge, the educator-judge, the social worker-judge; it is on them that the universal reign of the normative is based; and each individual, wherever he may find himself, subjects to it his body, his gestures, his behaviour, his aptitudes, his achievements.

The social worker’s distinction between normal and abnormal overlaps with a tacit assessment of social status and personal value. Tew (2006, p 37) found:

People may take on the attributions of inferiority imposed onto them by dominant groups, lacking sufficient support or social resources with which to contest these. They may learn to lower their aspirations in line with their position within the structuring of society.

Social workers owe it to their service users, and their profession, not to entrench and exacerbate social disadvantage in this way. Tew also found that negative definitions can feed into one another: a service user who uses their ‘most realistic strategy for having any influence’ finds themselves further stigmatised by a social worker who describes them as ‘difficult or manipulative’, or ‘non-engaging’. They are then trapped in an almost Kafka-esque situation where any attempt to challenge a negative portrayal reflects badly on them. We must be vigilant against the risk of valuing conformity, compliance and homogeneity over rights, autonomy and welfare.

This danger has recently come under scrutiny in Norway, a country known for its high quality of life, social democratic values and low inequality. However, the flip-side of such a cohesive society (relative to British or American societies, at least) might be a strong emphasis on normativity in social work – Hennum (2017, p 330) discusses how the Norwegian child protection system ‘seeks to provide children with childhoods in keeping with the Norwegian consensus on how children should be and how childhood should be lived’, while Pösö et al (2014) recognise the normativity inherent in concepts of Scandinavian child protection practice. Likewise, in the UK, social workers need to be aware that they are not performing an objective, technical task, but exercising judgement over the distinction between tolerable variation and intolerable abuse.

1.3      WHAT’S IT FOR?

In this context, and especially in an environment of increasing privatisation, austerity and decreasing tolerance for the most vulnerable people in society, social workers need to be more vigilant than ever to ensure their assessment – and their practice – remains focused on the welfare and rights of the service users involved.

Assessment can (consciously or not) promote other agendas.

1.3.1      Information-gathering as social control

Assessment, and the gathering and analysis of information more widely, has oppressive potential. The utilitarian philosopher Jeremy Bentham (1843) once envisaged a prison called a ‘Panopticon’, consisting of one giant central tower containing the observers (guards in a prison, teachers in a schoolyard, police in a market square, etc), while every inch of the yard under observation was visible to the observers. The Panopticon would not only allow guards in a prison to observe every inmate, it would create in every inmate the awareness that they might be watched, even though (in a prison of a thousand inmates and a dozen guards, for instance) they could never be under direct observation all the time. The feeling of surveillance was as powerful as the actions of the guards themselves. Foucault (1977, p 202) developed the Panopticon idea regarding wider society:

He who is subjected to a field of visibility, and who knows it, assumes responsibility for the constraints of power; he makes them play spontaneously upon himself; he inscribes in himself the power relation in which he simultaneously plays both roles; he becomes the principal of his own subjection.

In other words, social control becomes automatic. Pfaff (1996) noted the way in which the East German authorities controlled their population not primarily through force or brutality (at least not by the standards of other authoritarian regimes), but by a then- unprecedented collection of information on every citizen. In the twenty-first century, some governments on the left and right have shared the aim of ‘total information awareness’ (Cohen, 2010), usually to tackle crime and terrorism, but often seemingly to help improve provision of public services (healthcare, benefit payments, school places etc). There are practical benefits to holding information on people, especially in a safeguarding context, but also implications for civil liberties and civil rights, and for the potential abuse of power. Also, the accumulation of data can become its own aim, leading to a near-compulsive tendency for public servants to seek information on everyone they meet – again, profes- sionals can come to view people with suspicion when they are unwilling (or unable) to share information, even though those same professionals guard their information care- fully in their personal lives. Social services now hold ever-increasing information on chil- dren: Bilson and Martin (2016, p 793) found that nearly a quarter of all children born in 2009–10 had been referred to social care, and one in nine had been subject to statutory intervention – they commented that ‘this high level of involvement is only justifiable if it is demonstrably reducing harm and promoting well-being of children—an outcome which

is contested’. I have found it instructive that every senior executive or senior academic I’ve worked with has urged me never to provide my own personal information to statutory agencies (including the agencies they manage) beyond the legally required minimum.

1.3.2      Imposing a medical framework

Assessors can sometimes be unaware of the underlying assumptions in their work: in mental health, social workers again help to police a line, this time between societal constructions of what is an ‘illness’ and what is simply variation. Notable psychiatrists have challenged the objective basis of psychiatric diagnoses: the reliability of diagnosis (Rosenhan, 1973), the arbitrary tendency to medicalise behaviour (Szasz, 1974; Lane, 2008), and the presentation of subjective, fallible personal judgements as objective diag- noses (Frances, 2013). Szasz (1974, p 119) famously criticised the meaningless distinc- tion between a ‘religious experience’ and a ‘mental illness’: ‘if you talk to God, you are praying; if God talks to you, you are schizophrenic’.

The British Psychological Society (2011, p 2) is also cautious about framing certain behaviours or mental states (even those which are undoubtedly problematic) as illnesses, commenting on the latest Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) that:

The Society is concerned that clients and the general public are negatively affected by the continued and continuous medicalisation of their natural and normal responses to their experiences; responses which undoubtedly have distressing consequences which demand helping responses, but which do not reflect illnesses so much as normal individual variation.

A more sinister risk is that the language of mental illness becomes political. Szasz used the example of psychiatrists historically diagnosing women with ‘hysteria’ if they did not respect their husband’s authority over them. Pathologising a subversive or minority worldview is dangerous.

There is a distinction between not helping someone, and not framing them as ‘ill’ before helping them. Until 1987, the DSM (APA, 1987) contained homosexuality as a mental disorder. At the time of writing in autumn 2018, it still contains gender dysphoria (ie the feeling of belonging to a different gender than the gender of your birth1) despite a growing movement to challenge this (Lev, 2006). We would not balk at describing someone as gay if they are attracted to the same sex, but wouldn’t suggest that they obtain a medical diagnosis of homosexuality – to do so would suggest something inherently disordered about their sexuality. If someone’s mind works differently to our own, in many cases it makes more sense to describe them in terms of ordinary variation, rather than being disordered in relation to our ‘normalness’. If someone’s behaviour or thought process causes problems for them or other people, then it makes sense to help them, but this does not inherently mean that they are unwell or ‘abnormal’.

1.3.3      Individualising social problems

We write assessments about specific, named individuals. While good assessments involve the family and environmental context, they are nonetheless focused on the indi- vidual and household, not wider society. This makes sense when we have concerns about an individual’s behaviour or stability (although context is still important). However, focusing on (and potentially stigmatising) the individual is less justifiable where the prob- lems represent wider cultural and societal issues.

For example, I have challenged local authorities who described a family’s diet in terms of parental failings, citing the prevalence of junk food and ready meals, and the absence of fresh fruit and vegetables – I had walked around the family’s local area and found ‘food deserts’ (Wrigley, 2002) where I couldn’t find ingredients for a healthy meal within reasonable walking distance. Obviously, many similar families find ways around this, but the issue was still social as much as it was individual. Likewise, Szasz also criticised the constructed notion of obesity, not because it didn’t pose health risks, but because the medicalisation of obesity turned a social problem (food of poor nutritional value) into an individual one.

Bilson and Martin (2016) identified a tendency for social workers to ‘individualise’ social problems such as poverty, deprivation and crime. Beresford (2007) found this a key complaint of service users – being personally blamed for a problem which had its roots (and even its manifestation) in the wider community, rather than in themselves and their household.

I’ve frequently encountered practice scenarios where parents are told to work with a service (more on this in Chapter 8), otherwise social workers will deem their child to be at risk of harm – the service is then closed due to funding cuts, and social workers no longer regard the child as ‘at risk’ without the service. In other words, a professional omission represents business-as-usual; a personal omission represents child neglect. After austerity-driven cuts to housing benefit led to increases in homelessness where I worked, our managers directed us to assess families seeking assistance as they could not pay their rent – I was an agent of the state, being asked to describe in individual terms how a person came to be homeless, when the relevant variable was at the societal level.

Charlene Firmin and David Hancock (2018) have comprehensively explored the impor- tance of social work assessments that not only consider, but locate problems within, the wider environment, looking particularly at the problem of men grooming and sexu- ally abusing children (also known as ‘child sexual exploitation’ or CSE). As discussed in Chapter 4, I have been dismayed by the tendency for social workers to assess CSE in terms of the actions of the child and their parents, rather than the actions of the perpetrators.

A student recently asked me: ‘but what can we do, apart from look at the child and the family?’ Since the social worker has little remit outside of the family, this might be why so many social workers end up taking an individual, rather than social, focus. As discussed

previously with regard to ‘compliance’, social workers feel under pressure to ‘do their job’ rather than create change. My response is that there are numerous problems that pose a danger to service users – climate change; knife crime; terrorism; air pollution; widening inequality; social unrest, etc – which carry undoubted risks of harm, but are impossible for a social worker (or any individual) to solve. The answers to any of these problems are well beyond the scope of this book, or of my expertise. The point is not that a social worker can necessarily remove any risk (certainly not on their own), but that ‘writing an assessment’ and investigating members of the household is often not the solution. Social workers are not sociologists, economists or political scientists, but good social work can’t happen without some awareness of social, economic and political issues. Individual lives are often framed by changes to eligibility for benefits, immigration law, sentencing guide- lines, cuts to services and definitions of illness. Individual social workers are influenced (directly or indirectly) by a wider agenda that sometimes only becomes apparent when you ‘take a step back’ and consider the wider context.

Some issues are best understood in terms of the individuals involved. Some issues are best understood in terms of wider social issues. Some issues are more complex: one individual might be more sensitive than another to a change at a social level, due to dif- ferent personal factors which only become apparent when a higher-level change occurs (for example, a person who depended on a service more than someone else could suffer more of an impact when the service is cut; or different levels of personal resilience will affect the way two people react to sudden unemployment). In any case, it is important to recognise the different levels at which changes occur and the different dynamics under- pinning a service user’s problems.

1.3.4      Managerialism and responsibilisation

Eileen Munro (2004) draws a neat distinction between an ‘outcome’ and an ‘output’: we achieve a positive outcome when a service user experiences improvements to their qual- ity of life, stays safe or is empowered to solve a problem; while we achieve a positive output when we write a report, hold a meeting, make a referral, or otherwise carry out professional tasks in line with guidance. The latter are useful, but only as a means to an end – the outcome is the end. Even the best assessments and meetings only serve to focus people’s attention on key issues, make plans and work out how a positive outcome might come about – they are not outcomes in themselves. This is blindingly obvious, but frequently overlooked in practice. I can sympathise with the reasons for this: measuring outcomes requires detailed, expensive and nuanced research; measuring outputs can be as easy as pulling up a spreadsheet. But the purpose of your assessment is for it to be read and be useful – not for you to ‘tick a box’.

In a managerial, risk-averse culture, the tendency to focus on outputs rather than out- comes can be stifling. I frequently see professionals, with huge anxieties about a service user’s welfare or safety, attend a meeting and come out with far less anxiety, despite no change in the service user’s situation. This used to baffle me, but it represents Michael Power’s (2007) concept of ‘responsibilisation’: where our actions reduce the risk of harm

to the organisation, rather than (or as well as) reducing the risk of harm to the service user. In many cases, the two concepts overlap – a social worker who acts promptly in response to information, to do some good work which makes life safer for a vulnerable service user, has achieved both a positive outcome and (assuming they’ve done their paperwork) a positive output; just as a social worker who has done no work at all with a service user (who suffers harm) has failed to produce valuable outcomes or outputs. But this is not necessarily so. I focus in Chapter 8 on the implications for referrals to services of questionable value.

In practice, this means never losing your natural curiosity: if you’re worried by some- thing, explore it – don’t feel constrained by the terms of the initial referral or by the task you’ve been asked to do. It means identifying when the source of a problem is outside of the family and looking outside of the family for solutions. It means doing things within a timescale that matters to the service user, not within a deadline imposed by management (this may mean presenting a case to a manager or judge as to why a case should not be resolved within – for example – the 26-week deadline for care proceedings). It means professionals (not just social workers) need to stop the bad habit of confusing ‘reports written’ with ‘work done’: I’ve heard far too many experienced professionals argue that they’ve done lots of work with a service user, citing long lists of forms they’ve filled in – no doubt they worked hard on those forms, but the effort they put in doesn’t necessarily translate into the effect on a service user’s life.

This book is about writing assessments, but not because assessments are the centre of social work practice. They should be useful tools to help social work practice – while a vital skill for social workers, they are not social work practice in themselves.

1.4      CHAPTER SUMMARY

This chapter encourages social workers to take a more reflective approach to the act of assessment itself – we shouldn’t see it as a technical skill, but remember the personal, social and societal impacts our assessments have, and the power dynamics involved.

Your assessment:

• should be written for service users first, ‘involved professionals’ second, and

‘removed professionals’ third, although you should consider all three audiences;

• involves listening with a mind that is open, empathic and analytical. It should represent the conclusion of a respectful, active discussion between you and a service user, not the imposition of your narrative over theirs, nor the uncritical acceptance of their own words;

• represents an exercise in ‘co-operative power’ (Tew, 2006 – an invaluable model) which requires the exercise of ‘power together’ rather than ‘power over’, and ‘productive’ rather than ‘limiting’ working relationships;

• implicitly and explicitly places service users either side of necessary but constructed ‘lines’: the line between acceptable and unacceptable behaviour; the line between having and not having the ability to make a decision; the line between good enough and inadequate parenting. This involves personal, cultural and societal judgements, which we need to recognise;

• could become an oppressive exercise if it confuses the relevant questions of welfare, rights and capacity with more loaded questions about conformity and homogeneity;

• should be guided by the underlying agenda of social work. The International Federation of Social Workers’s global definition of social work (Hare, 2004, p 418) is a good place to start: ‘The social work profession promotes social change, problem- solving in human relationships and the empowerment and liberation of people to enhance well-being. Utilizing theories of human behaviour and social systems, social work intervenes at the points where people interact with their environments. Principles of human rights and social justice are fundamental to social work’;

• requires you to be vigilant against other, pervasive agendas: the use of ‘panoptic’ information-gathering as a means of social control; the medicalisation of difference; the individualisation of social issues; and the managerial agenda to protect the agency rather than the service user. Good practice with the service user should in any case discharge the organisation’s duties – good outcomes almost always mean good outputs, but good outputs often don’t include good outcomes.

NOTE

1 To be precise, this disorder represents the distress arising from a non-cisgender identity, not the non-cisgender identity itself, but at the time of writing a doctor’s diagnosis of gender dysphoria is still required in order for someone to legally change gender.

REFERENCES

American Psychiatric Association (APA) (1987) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual III-R. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.

Back, L (2007) The Art of Listening. Oxford: Berg.

Bentham, J (1843) The Works of Jeremy Bentham (vol 4) (Panopticon, Constitution, Colonies, Codification).

Indianapolis: Liberty.

Beresford, P (2007) The Changing Roles and Tasks of Social Work from Service Users’ Perspectives: A Literature Informed Discussion Paper. London: Shaping Our Lives.

Bilson, A and Martin, K (2016) Referrals and Child Protection in England: One in Five Children Referred to Children’s Services and One in Nineteen Investigated Before the Age of Five. British Journal of Social Work, 47(3): 793–811.

British Psychological Society (2011) Response to the Draft DSM-5. Leicester: British Psychological Society.

Brown, D E (1991) Human Universals. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Cohen, E (2010) Mass Surveillance and State Control: The Total Information Awareness Project. Berlin: Springer.

Firmin, C and Hancock, D (2018) Profiling CSE: Building a Contextual Picture of a Local Problem. In Beckett, H and Pearce, J (eds) Understanding and Responding to Child Sexual Exploitation (pp 107–20). London: Routledge.

Foucault, M (1977) Discipline and Punish, trans. Alan Sheridan. New York: Vintage.

Frances, A (2013) The New Crisis of Confidence in Psychiatric Diagnosis. Annals of Internal Medicine, 159(3): 221–2.

Hare, I (2004) Defining Social Work for the 21st Century: The International Federation of Social Workers’ Revised Definition of Social Work. International Social Work, 47(3): 407–24.

Hennum, N (2017) The Norwegian Child Protection System in Stormy Weather. Critical and Radical Social Work, 5(3): 319–34.

Lane, C (2008) Shyness: How Normal Behavior Became a Sickness. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Lev, A I (2006) Disordering Gender Identity: Gender Identity Disorder in the DSM-IV-TR. Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality, 17(3–4): 35–69.

Munro, E (2004) The Impact of Audit on Social Work Practice. British Journal of Social Work, 34(8): 1075–95.

Neustadt, R E (1960) Presidential Power. New York: New American Library.

Norfolk County Council (2018) New Service to Reduce Demand on Children’s Social Care and Keep Children Safe. [online] Available at: www.norfolk.gov.uk/news/2018/07/new-service-to-reduce-to-keep- children-safe (accessed 28 November 2018).

Pfaff, S (1996) Collective Identity and Informal Groups in Revolutionary Mobilization: East Germany in 1989. Social Forces, 75(1): 91–117.

Pösö, T, Skivenes, M and Hestbæk, A D (2014) Child Protection Systems within the Danish, Finnish and Norwegian Welfare States—Time for a Child Centric Approach? European Journal of Social Work, 17(4): 475–90.

Power, M (2007) Organized Uncertainty: Designing a World of Risk Management. Oxford University Press. Rosenhan, D L (1973) On Being Sane in Insane Places. Science, 179(4070): 250–8.

Szasz, T (1974) The Myth of Mental Illness. New York: Harper & Row.

Tew, J (2006) Understanding Power and Powerlessness: Towards a Framework for Emancipatory Practice in Social Work. Journal of Social Work, 6(1): 33–51.

Wrigley, N (2002) ‘Food Deserts’ in British Cities: Policy Context and Research Priorities. Urban Studies, 39(11): 2029–40.

This is an extract from Writing Analytical Assessments in Social Work, 3rd ed by Chris Dyke.

Click to find out more

Professional Judgement

This is an extract from the second edition of The Social Worker’s Guide to the Care Act 2014 by Pete Feldon.

Introduction

This chapter describes what the legislation has to say about the role of social workers and outlines the circumstances where professional judgements made by social workers will be relevant.

The references to relevant judgements occur in each of the sections of the care and sup- port planning pathway, and there isn’t a single list of the judgements that may need to be made. As would be expected the components of professional social work judgement are not articulated in the statutory guidance, as this is a matter for professional bodies, the regulator and employers.

This chapter outlines the judgements where social workers have a significant role. It is comprised of what is stated in the legislation about:

• social workers and the roles they could undertake;
• where judgement is applicable.

The application of these judgements is a key component of the chapters that follow.

Finally, the status of professional judgement is considered with reference to Social Work England and BASW (British Association of Social Workers).

The legislative mandate for role of social workers

The statutory guidance sets out a number of roles that social workers should undertake and others that they could undertake, but the only role where there is a clearly stated duty to employ a registered social worker is that of principal social worker (see para- graphs 1.27–1.31).

The only reference to social work in the Care Act is in section 8 (1), which states: “The following are examples of what may be provided to meet needs under sections 18 to 20… (c) counselling and other types of social work”.

The statutory guidance identifies relatively few roles that are to be undertaken exclusively by social workers. Mostly social workers are referred to alongside occupational thera- pists or included within the generic term of ‘professional’.

Social workers are referred to alongside other professionals, as follows:

• Paragraph 2.22 refers to social workers and other professionals “who are effective at preventing, reducing, or delaying needs for care and support… (including) consideration of a person’s strengths and their informal support networks as well as their needs and the risks they face”.
• Paragraph 6.7 states: “Registered social workers and occupational therapists can provide important support and may be involved in complex assessments which indicate a wide range of needs, risks and strengths that may require a coordinated response from a variety of statutory and community services. Or they may be involved at the point of first contact to advise on whether preventative services would be more appropriate at that time.”
• Paragraph 6.27 states: “Staff who are involved in this first contact must have the appropriate training and should have the benefit of access to professional

support from social workers, occupational therapists and other relevant experts as appropriate, to support the identification of any underlying conditions or to ensure that complex needs are identified early and that people are signposted appropriately.”

• Paragraph 6.84 states: “Assessments can be carried out by a range of professionals including registered social workers, occupational therapists and rehabilitation officers.”
• It is recognised in paragraph 10.33 that “one-to-one support from a paid professional, such as a social worker” is one of the choices available to a person to meet their needs.
• Where a care and/or support plan is being developed by someone other than a social worker “the local authority should ensure… that there is… access to social work advice” (paragraph 10.35).
• Paragraph 10.41 states that local authorities “should have regard to how universal services and community-based and/or unpaid support could contribute to the factors in the plan, including support that promotes mental and emotional wellbeing and builds social connections and capital”, and this “may require additional learning and development skills and competencies for social workers and care workers”.
• In agreeing the level of involvement of the individual in developing their care and/or support plan, paragraph 10.50 states: “Social workers or other relevant professionals should have a discussion with the person to get a sense of their confidence to take a lead in the process and what support they feel they need to be meaningfully involved.”

• Paragraph 13.16 states: “There should be a range of review options available, which may include… face to face reviews with a social worker or other relevant professional.”
• In relation to reviews where “a person is recorded as having a mental impairment and lacking capacity to make some decisions… making appropriate use of a social worker as the lead professional should be encouraged” (paragraph 13.17).

The only significant reference to social workers having an exclusive role is in relation to safeguarding. Paragraph 14.81 of the statutory guidance states:

• It is likely that many enquiries will require the input and supervision of a social worker, particularly the more complex situations.
• Where abuse or neglect is suspected within a family or informal relationship it is likely that a social worker will be the most appropriate lead.

Social workers are identified in this paragraph as having the skills to handle “enquiries in a sensitive and skilled way to ensure distress to the adult is minimised”.

The only other references to activities that are identified as exclusively for social work- ers are as follows:

• recovering debt incurred as a result of charges levied for the provision of care and support (see Annex D, sections 12 and 14);
• with reference to transition assessments paragraph 16.16 states: “Social workers will often be the most appropriate lead professionals for complex cases.”

The most frequent reference to social workers is where there is complexity. This can be where an individual’s needs are complex and/or their circumstances are complex.

References to judgement

There are several explicit references to judgement in the statutory guidance that are of relevance to social workers, and one in the Care Act.

In fact, the Care Act reference isn’t about a judgement that social workers make, but one that they must take into account. Section 3 (a) states: “In exercising a function under this Part in the case of an individual, a local authority must have regard to the following matters in particular—

(a)     the importance of beginning with the assumption that the individual is best- placed to judge the individual’s well-being”.

The significance of this section is explored in later chapters and there is case law to assist with its interpretation.

The references to judgement in the statutory guidance are in relation to prevention, eli- gibility determination, people who have difficulty in making decisions and responding to requests for a review.

There are no judgements specified for the core process of assessment, other than in relation to prevention. Paragraph 6.61 states: “In parallel with assessing a person’s needs, local authorities must consider the benefits of approaches which delay or prevent the development of needs in individuals”. It then adds: “Where the local authority judges that the person may benefit from such types of support, it should take steps to support the person to access those services” (paragraph 6.62).

One of the purposes of a needs assessment is to contribute to eligibility determination, and it is clear that this is a judgement in the following statement: “In all cases, the authority must inform the person of their eligibility judgement and why the local authority has reached the eligibility determination that it has” (paragraph 6.53).

There are references to people who lack capacity or have substantial difficulty in making decisions, as follows:

• “Professionals and other staff need to understand and always work in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). They should use their professional judgement and balance many competing views” (paragraph 14.56).
• “At the start of the assessment process, if it appears to the local authority that a person has care and support or support needs, and throughout any subsequent part of the process, the local authority must judge whether a person has substantial difficulty in involvement with the assessment, the care and support planning or review processes” (paragraph 7.18).

In responding to a request for a review “the local authority must consider this and judge the merits of conducting a review” (paragraph 13.23). In most circumstances a review will go ahead, but there are specified circumstances that allow for a judgement not to do so.

Professional judgements that social workers make

The statutory guidance doesn’t intend to give a comprehensive account of how social work knowledge and skills should be applied in making professional judgements about key elements of the Care Act. This is a matter for the social work profession.

What follows outlines the key decision-making areas set out in the statutory guidance where professional social work judgement is required (in the opinion of the author). Case law on professional judgement is considered in Chapter 12.

The judgements referred to in the previous section broadly identify three areas where social workers would regard their professional judgements as being crucial:

• preventing, reducing, or delaying needs for care and support;
• eligibility determination;
• substantial difficulty in involvement.

One further area where judgements have to be made is in relation to deciding on what resources the local authority will agree to allocate to meet an individual’s eligible needs.

When deciding on the personal budget to meet needs this “must be an amount which is suf- ficient to meet the needs the local authority has a duty or power to meet” (paragraph 12.25).

Each of these four areas are outlined in this section and explored in more detail through- out the book.

Preventing, reducing, or delaying needs for care and support

There are three interrelated aspects of prevention referred to in the statutory guidance where social work knowledge and skills are particularly applicable and professional judgement is required, as follows:

• strengths and capabilities;
• support from the individual’s wider network and community;
• developing social capital.

These elements of prevention are to be taken account of in the assessment stage, eligi- bility determination and in developing the care and/or support plan.

Paragraph 6.2 states an assessment can “help people to understand their strengths and capabilities, and the support available to them in the community and through other net- works and services”. This is seen as a “critical intervention in its own right” (paragraph 6.2). The purpose of assisting people to develop this understanding at the assessment stage is twofold:

• “Identify needs that could be reduced, or where escalation could be delayed, and help people improve their wellbeing by providing specific preventive services” (paragraph 6.61);
• “Consider what else other than the provision of care and support might assist the person in meeting the outcomes they want to achieve” (paragraph 6.63).

This is explored in Chapter 4.

Eligibility determination is “based on the remaining needs” (section 6.62) which have not been met through preventive interventions, so it is important that any benefits of preven- tion are realised where possible before considering whether the person has any eligible care and/or support needs (see Chapter 5).

In developing a care and/or support plan the statutory guidance states that “needs may be met through types of care and support which are available universally, including those which are not directly provided by the local authority” (paragraph 10.41). The intention is to signal the importance of what this paragraph describes as “support that promotes men- tal and emotional wellbeing and builds social connections and capital” (see Chapter 8).

Eligibility determination

Social workers play a vital role in interpreting the eligibility framework. The essential fea- tures of the framework are relatively straightforward to understand, but the circumstances of adults and carers to which it is applied are complex. The skill of the social worker lies in ensuring that the complexities of an individual’s circumstances are reflected in the application of the framework.

In making the judgement about whether an individual has eligible needs there is a consid- erable amount of detail set out in the Act, regulations and statutory guidance that social workers need to know how to interpret and apply. But when it comes to the final stage of eligibility determination, deciding on whether there is consequential significant impact on wellbeing, the statutory guidance is necessarily imprecise. This is in part because the term ‘significant’ cannot be defined in law and as paragraph 6.109 states it “must there- fore be understood to have its everyday meaning”, but it is also reasonable to assume that it was concluded that good practice can only develop over time and that any further statutory guidance would have been too constraining.

This is explored in depth in Chapter 5.

Sufficiency of the personal budget

Social workers have a key role in ensuring that the personal budget is sufficient to meet the individual’s care and support needs. But they are also expected to represent the interests of the local authority in ensuring that ways of meeting needs at no cost to the local authority are fully utilised, as well as helping people to understand that the local authority can only pay what is the ‘cost to the local authority’ to meet agreed needs.

The professional skill is in being able to achieve a balanced approach where there is tension between these requirements. Sometimes this will involve advocating for the indi- vidual where the indicative budget is not sufficient to meet their needs, but it can also mean helping individuals to understand and accept a plan that is less (both in scope and funding) than they had hoped for.

The bottom line is that the personal budget must be sufficient to meet needs. Chapter 8 sets out how various elements of the statutory guidance can be brought together and how social work professional judgement can be applied.

Substantial difficulty in involvement

Making the judgement about whether an individual has substantial difficulty in involve- ment is set out in the Care Act in section 67(4). There are situations where the difficulty is very evident, there will be many where it will not be clear whether the criteria apply, hence the need for professional judgement.

The statutory guidance gives no indication about where to draw the line in making this judgement about whether a person is experiencing substantial difficulty. It could be

argued that there are some similarities in the challenge of judging what is ‘substantial’ to that of judging what is ‘significant’ (as in ‘significant impact on wellbeing’), in that good practice can only develop over time and that any further statutory guidance would be too constraining.

The status of social work professional judgement

As a postscript to what is set out in the legislation, this section briefly outlines some references that underpin and support professional judgement.

Social Work England refers to professional judgement in the Guidance on the Professional Standards1 as follows:

“Using an evidence-informed approach to make impartial decisions is an integral part of social work practice. Social workers will listen to people, without bias or prejudice, and use evidence from assessments, alongside social work theories, models and research to apply their professional judgement.”

BASW England has produced guidance on how to apply the Code of Ethics for Social Work to Care Act decisions about resource allocation entitled An Ethical Approach to Meeting Needs in Adult Social Care2. It states that it “outlines how social workers can use the BASW Code of Ethics for Social Work to assert their professional judgement where there are concerns that financial pressures are leading to unjust decisions, and the needs of people who require care and support being unmet and under-met.”

The legal status of professional judgement is considered in Chapter 12.

Conclusion

The Care Act 2014 and the associated Regulations and the Care and Support Statutory Guidance provide a policy framework that, in the author’s opinion, is largely in accord with good social work practice.

Although this legislative framework has brought clarity to many areas of adult social care, it has also set out so as to allow for good practice to evolve. There are many areas where the framework is detailed and prescriptive, such as eligibility determination. But much of the framework is deliberately less prescriptive. Both the well-developed aspects of the system and the necessary uncertainties can benefit from elucidation to assist social workers in applying the Care Act, and this book aims to do that.

This second edition takes into account developments in case law and what is known about how the legislation has been applied. However, there has been very little research so far into how social workers apply their professional judgement. Judicial reviews and Ombudsman decisions have helped to clarify the nature of professional judgement to an extent, but there is plenty of scope for guidance on making professional judgements in adult social care to be developed. This is discussed in Part IV of the book.

Social workers play a vital role in interpreting the Act, regulations and statutory guidance for people with care and/or support needs. Much of the legislation is complex, and the circumstances of the adults and carers to whom it is being applied are also complex. The skill of the social worker lies in ensuring both that the complexities of an individual’s cir- cumstances are addressed in accordance with a local authority’s duties and powers, and making sure that the individual experiences the relevant processes as straightforwardly as possible. To achieve this social workers must rely on their professional knowledge and skills to interpret the Act, regulations and statutory guidance and use their professional judgement in making decisions where required.

References

1. www.socialworkengland.org.uk/media/3453/professional-standards-guidance.pdf
2. www.basw.co.uk/resources/ethical-approach-meeting-needs-adult-social-care-0

This is an extract from the second edition of The Social Worker’s Guide to the Care Act 2014 by Pete Feldon.

Click to find out more

Nurturing Professional Judgement

This is a review of Nurturing Professional Judgement by Benjamin Knight. Click on the title or the link below for more information.

Nurturing Professional Judgement by Ben Knight is an inspiring, thought-provoking, and useful book. It has been inspiring for me, as it has led me to explore ways of inquring into what underpins my own, and colleagues’ professional judgement.  It is thought-provoking, as it poses questions about how teachers make decisions in classrooms and how judgement can be categorised and made explicit.  It is useful, as it provides answers to the question, ‘How can we nurture professional judgement in new teachers?’

Professional judgement may not be identified as a specified focus in current teacher education policies in England, but as practitioners we know it lies at the heart of our own work.  Ben Knight categories professional judgement into two types: judgement 1, which relates to planning and thinking about what we are going to do in our teaching; and judgement 2, which involves instant decision making in a classroom context.  He explores both these forms of judgement and provides case studies and strategies for scaffolding learning about, and reflection on, teaching decisions.  Helping new teachers to take appropriate risks, to experiment, to notice decisions and their effects and to learn from these, is a difficult task.  This book shows why it is important to do this and gives us approaches to try.

Teacher educators, school-based mentors and staff in universities working with new teaching colleagues, as well as new teachers themselves, will find a wealth of knowledge and ideas in this easy to read, concise and engaging text.

Joy Jarvis (Professor of Educational Practice), University of Hertfordshire

Click to find out more

Chapter 1: Understanding the context for the Special Educational Needs and Disability Code of Practice: 0 to 25 years (2015)

This is an extract from A Critical Guide to the SEND Code of Practice 0-25 Years (2015) by Janet Goepel, Jackie Scruton and Caroline Wheatley.  

Click to find out more

---

This chapter provides:

• an understanding of the framework for the SEND CoP within the context of past legislation and guidance;
• identification of the current principles underpinning the current CoP;
• a consideration of definitions and terminology within the field of SEND;
• a discussion of medical and social models of disability.

Legislation and guidance

The 2015 SEND CoP makes reference to other relevant legislation which can be seen in the table at the beginning of this book.  It is important to note that while much of the legislation shown originates from, and is relevant to, education; this is not exclusively the case. Other legislation has particular relevance to health and social care services.

Understanding the historical context

The 1913 Mental Deficiency Act identified four categories or labels of mental deficiency:

1. idiots;
2. imbeciles;
3. feeble minded; and
4. moral imbeciles.

This terminology is rooted in medical/psychological diagnosis. The impact of such a label on the individual might have meant the difference between living at home or being placed in an institution.  This was a period where CnYP were considered to require medical intervention or support and where a deficit model was at the forefront. 

The 1944 Education Act continued to use labels to categorise CnYP. The Act introduced 11 new categories of disability, together with a new generic category ‘educationally sub normal’ of which there was a secondary ‘severely’ label.  These CnYP did not have a right to education and fell under the responsibility of the local health authority.

The Warnock Report (DES, 1978) was influential in the passing of the 1981 Educational Act.  This Report introduced the term ‘special educational needs’ and represented a shift towards a more inclusive system of education especially given that it stressed the importance of professionals working with parents as partners.  The subsequent Education Act (1981) adopted much of the philosophy of the Warnock report.  The key aspect of the Act was the introduction of a ‘Statement of SEN’, a legally binding document outlining a CYPn’s needs and the provision required to meet those needs.  A further Education Act in 1993 resulted in the introduction and implementation of the SEN Code of Practice (DfE 1994[GJ1] ).  This code has been revised, most recently in 2015 after the introduction of the Children and Families Act (2014).  Interestingly with each change of government came new legislation and a revision of the Code of Practice. 

Other milestones during the development of education for CnYP with SEN include the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) (1995), and the 2001 Special Educational Needs and Disability Act which enshrined in legislation the fundamental right for a CYPn with a Statement of SEN to be educated in a mainstream school, albeit with some caveats.  Additionally, the 2009 Lamb Report based on detailed research, underpinned the need to strengthen parental voice and confidence to help improve the quality of partnership working.

The Children and Family Act (2014) replaced the Statement of SEN with an Education, Health and Care (EHC) plan and subsequently a new Special Educational Needs and Disability Code of Practice 0 to 25 (2014) was introduced, with a further revision in 2015. This requires teachers to make high quality provision through a differentiated approach and following the four-part cycle of assess, plan, do and review.  We examine this in more detail in Part 2.

More recently the House of Commons Education Committee has published a report with a focus on how the SEN system works.  It recognised the Children and Families Act 2014 originally set out the ambition to transform SEN provision and put CnYP at the heart of that transformation.  These transformations were seen as positive; however, this report identifies that the current political environment has meant that these reforms have not been fully realised.  Factors influencing this are poor administration, a challenging funding environment and, lack of ability in local authorities (LAs) and schools in understanding and carrying out the reforms.  The report also recognised that there is a tension between CnYP’s needs, the provision available and lack of accountability.  However, it confirms what many CnYP and their parents are experiencing.  ‘This generation is being let down – the reforms have not done enough to join the dots, to bring people together and to create opportunities for all young people to thrive in adulthood’ (House of Commons 2019, p 4).

Principles underpinning the SEND CoP (2015)

The principles which underline the legislation in terms of education, health and social care are as follows:

• CnYP and their parents are involved in discussions and decisions about their support;
• CnYP and their parents are involved in planning and commissioning services;
• the needs of CnYP are identified early and early intervention is given;
• CnYP and their parents have greater choice and control;
• there is greater collaboration between education, health and social care services;
• there is high quality provision;
• a focus on inclusive practice and removing barriers to learning;
• support to make a successful transition to adulthood.

These principles are examined in more detail in Parts 2 and 3 of this book.  

Definitions and terminology

This section aims to enable you to develop a wider understanding of the complexities of terminology and definitions within SEN, as these are often different depending on which practitioner you are talking to – it is the dilemma of defining difference.

The notion of SEN has been subject over the years to a changing environment in language and categorisation.  Mittler (2000, p 9) suggests that: ‘SEN terminology has survived for so long because it is not easy to find an acceptable substitute ….it is embodied in legalisation’.

In examining the CoP, while there is a clear legal definition, the terminology could still be said to label, with words such as special educational needs or greater difficulty in learning.  Interestingly the only reference to labelling issues is seen in the 1994 CoP and not the most recent (Lehane, 2017), yet the practice of labelling children is rife within education, health and social care.

In regard to legislation for social care, a child with a disability by default is defined as a child in need (Children Act 1989).  Therefore it is important to understand that the use of a range of definitions/terminology can cause difficulty for all practitioners including parents.

However, even with different definitions we are constrained by the legal definition and these are used throughout this book, namely:

‘A child or young person has SEN if they have a learning difficulty or disability which calls for special educational provision to made for him or her.’

(SEND CoP, p 15)

and

‘a child of compulsory school age or a young person has a learning difficulty or disability if he or she:

• has a significantly greater difficulty in learning than the majority of others of the same age, or
• has a disability which prevents or hinders him or her from making use of facilities of a kind generally provided for others of the same age in mainstream schools or other post-16 institutions’.

(SEND CoP, p 16)

The definition for disability as stated by the DDA (1995, 50 1 (1)) uses language that might be better suited in a medical context.  It defines disability as: ‘A physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on a person’s ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities.’

The use of terminology within the field of SEN can be complex and confusing, as each sector has its own language. See Table 1.1 below for some examples.

Table 1.1 Some of the terminology used across sectors

SEN	Special Educational Needs	Education – schools
SEND	Special Educational Needs and Disability	Education – schools
LDD	Learning Difficulties and/or Disabilities	Post 16 – Further Education, Health and Social care contexts
AEN	Additional Educational Needs	Education – schools
ASN	Additional Support Needs	Education – schools
	Children in Need	Children Services
	Disabled Children	Children and Health Services
ALN	Additional Learning Needs	Education – schools

Scenario

You are a practitioner (from education, health or social care) who has been asked to meet the parents of a young person (YP) aged seventeen who has a diagnosis of Asperger’s.  You have been given a number of reports and letters from all the agencies involved who are working with the YP.  These include the local further education (FE) college, the social worker and the community paediatrician.  These reports use a large number of acronyms and terminology you are not familiar with and as a result you are struggling to get a clear picture of the YP. 

Critical questions

• How might you find out what the acronyms all mean?
• In your role what can you do to ensure there is consistency and continuity of terminology?
• What could you do to ensure the YP and their parents understand each organisation’s terminology, how it relates to them and what this means for the support they offer?

As already identified, different terms can be used to describe a CYPn.  Many of these stem from the framework each profession uses within that particular context. These frameworks can be influenced by different models of disability.  These are explored in the next section along with implications for practice.

Models of disability

Within the field of SEN there are a number of theoretical frameworks or models that are used.  In order to understand your role as part of a multi-agency team you need to have an understanding of these frameworks and how they might have influence on practice.

The traditional and perhaps commonly used model is known as the medical model, which focuses on a CYPn’s impairment; on what they cannot do rather than what they can do.  It can be viewed as a deficit approach.  There is a focus on ‘cure’ and ‘rehabilitation’ (Frederickson and Cline, 2015, p 11) where treatments and strategies can cure or ameliorate the disability (Hodkinson and Vickerman, 2012), using normal functioning as a bench mark.  Within the CoP phrases such as ‘majority of others of the same age’ and ‘making use of facilities of a kind generally provided for others of the same age’ (SEND CoP, 2015, p 16) are used.  Both implicitly infer difference from what is considered to be the norm. No external factors such as environment are taken into account (Frederickson and Cline, 2015; Garner, 2009).  The medical model is best summed up by listening to the voice of the disabled:

‘it has kept people focused on our difficulties and deficits so it is easy to think we are useless, burdensome and dispensable’.

 (Mason, 2008, p 33)

The social model of disability arose from the disability rights movement during the 1970s and 1980s (Oliver, 2000) and takes a more inclusive approach.  It suggests the fault lays with society, it is society that places barriers in the way and in doing so hinders and prevents participation in wider society.  It is not the CYPn’s impairment that is the barrier, rather society’s difficulty in accommodating difference (Frederickson and Cline, 2015).

Both models are not without their critics, the medical model does not consider the social characteristics of disability, while the social model may be deemed to over socialise the causes of disability (Terzi, 2005).  It should be noted that nowhere in the CoP, in any of its iterations is there an explicit mention of models of disability, yet the language seems driven by the medical model with the use of vocabulary such as ‘additional to’ (SEND CoP, 6.14) and ‘disorders’ (SEND CoP, 6.32).  While only two models are examined in this chapter, there are others such as the charity and affirmative models.  You can find out more about these through the links in the further reading section at the end of this chapter.

Critical questions

Think about your personal role in supporting CnYP with SEN and use this as the basis for reflecting on the following critical questions.

• What language do you use when you are describing a CYPn? Does it reflect one of the models of disability we have discussed?
• Does your use of language ‘label’ in either a constructive or a negative way?  How do you know?
• How does your service define SEN and disability?  Does it follow any of the models we have discussed? Is the approach used one that is enabling or disabling?
• How might you effect change in your organisation to ensure CnYP are seen as individuals and are not defined by their label?

Implications for practice

With reference to your own profession or role in supporting CnYP with SEN:

• identify which legislation is pertinent to that role;
• explain how you would ensure you comply with the legislation.

Conclusion

Having knowledge about the legal and historical background to SEN is an important part of understanding the current context for your professional practice.  Chapter 2 develops this theme and explores working together for joint outcomes.

Further reading and web-based materials

Models of Disability: the following two websites provide a clear explanation of these models.

 The affirmative model:  www.disabilityartsonline.org.uk/affirmative-model-of-disability (accessed 31 July 2019)

The charity model: www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1016/S1479-3547(01)80018-X (accessed 31 July 2019)

---

This is an extract from A Critical Guide to the SEND Code of Practice 0-25 Years (2015) by Janet Goepel, Jackie Scruton and Caroline Wheatley.  

Click to find out more

Good Autism Practice for Teachers

This is an extract from Good Autism Practice for Teachers by Karen Watson.

Communication
Autistic children have a broad range of communication abilities including, but not limited to, spoken language (Blume et al, 2021). This was historically referred to as ‘communication difficulties’ under the umbrella term ‘triad of impairment’. However, the phrase communication difficulties doesn’t fully encapsulate the range of ability and need, and the individualised nature of communication. Just because a child doesn’t speak, it doesn’t mean they have nothing to say. Some children you work with will be verbal, some will be pre-verbal, and some will use a communication aid or device. Some children may have some verbal skills but may not be able to access these when dysregulated or anxious
(Wood and Gadow, 2010). An autistic person will not always communicate in a way which is natural or standard to a neurotypical person. This is okay; different doesn’t mean worse or less. It just means that strategies need to be developed and adjusted so that communication is inclusive. These strategies will benefit everyone (Milton et al, 2017). Using a communication support strategy for a whole class, for example, could also help a child with dyslexia, a child with an executive functioning difficulty, or an autistic child.

An important thing to keep in mind is that communication is a two-way process (Frith, 1998). It is not the responsibility of one of the communicative partners to force a certain communication style and dominate the conversation. It is about meeting a child where they are, and using different strategies and responses depending on individual needs. It is important not to shoehorn autistic children into neurotypical norms, and instead reach out to them in a communication style that suits them. Ideally, utilise multiple communication strategies to help facilitate conversations and communication with others, and
between peers who have differing communication styles.

What is expressive and receptive language?
Language can be broadly categorised into two areas: expressive and receptive language
(Porter and Cafiero, 2009).

• Expressive language is how a child expresses themselves to others, while
  receptive language is how a child processes what is said to them. Broken down
  further, expressive language involves processes like choosing words, planning
  sentences, considering the impact of a communication, selecting sounds,
  articulating them, speaking fluently, using body language and non-verbal
  communication and self-monitoring.
• Receptive language involves understanding meaning and syntax, engaging auditory
  memory, listening and hearing, and interpreting non-verbal communication (Elks
  and McLachlan, 2015).
  
  When communication is examined and broken down, it becomes apparent that there are
  lots of separate processes and concepts to grasp for fluent communication to occur.
  A child may have a difficulty with one of these processes and it could throw the whole
  chain of communication off. For example, a child who struggles with non-verbal cues,
  such as body language, may become stuck at this point in the chain. This is part of both
  expressive and receptive communication, depending on whether they have difficulty with
  processing and delivering their own non-verbal cues, or interpreting them. Immediately,
  the chain of communication has links missing. If the child has missed some key information from an instruction, they will now not be able to process it fully and so cannot
  proceed to follow that instruction.
  
  Other things to consider are the processes of giving attention to whomever is speaking,
  listening and concentrating, filtering out other noise and distractions, hearing, and
  engaging both short- and long-term memory. All of that together leads to understanding.
  
  There is a lot of integration required to get to the point of understanding and responding,
  with lots of complex stimuli to be processed.
  
  Non-verbal communication
  Let’s now move on to think about non-verbal communication.
  
  A huge amount of information comes to the listener via non-verbal communication
  (Mehrabian, 1982), who uses it to support understanding. Feelings can often be interpreted
  through non-verbal communication, especially if they differ from the verbal content.
  
  Non-verbal communication can sometimes mask difficulties. A child may be highly skilled
  at interpreting standard cues, or perhaps you use the same gesture or tone and they
  have learned what it means. If you are showing predictable non-verbal cues, a child who
  struggles to interpret may simply learn what that particular cue means. This is a simple
  level of support, using predictable cues. Perhaps a consistent point to where the child
  needs to go, or a wave to support ‘good morning’. Essentially, this is the very beginning
  of signing. Signing to support meaning is a strong support strategy, which supports an
  inclusive communication environment. It is an addition to speech which can help with
  providing understanding or context.
  
  EXAMPLE
  You’ve asked a child to stand up and line up by the door. For a child who struggles to
  follow a two-step instruction, this could be tricky to complete. Perhaps they have difficulty with their short term memory: perhaps you worded the instruction in a way which was more complex than necessary, ‘Can you all stand up? Yes that’s great; tuck that chair in please; right let’s get into a lovely line by the door.’ The child is left standing behind their chair wondering what on earth to do next, while the rest of the class is lining up. Perhaps they will follow their peers and get into line, perhaps a member of support staff has noticed and gives them a quick point to the door, or perhaps they will stand by their chair and look to you for further instructions. Now, at this point, the most common response from the adult is something like: ‘Come on now, I said line up, let’s go.’ The adult assumes the child wasn’t listening, or is being defiant, when in reality it could be a simple listening or processing difficulty. If you think back to Chapter 3, sensory processing, it could even be an auditory sensitivity. Perhaps there is a distracting sound somewhere or perhaps the child wasn’t tuned into your voice when you spoke.
  
  It can sometimes take a little detective work to fully understand and support a child.
  It can sometimes be as simple as making a gesture when asking the children to sit
  down. Some people naturally use their hands and gesture when they talk; some don’t.
  Perhaps one day you have your hands full and don’t make that gesture. Two pupils
  remain standing, looking a little mystified. They are relying on gesture to support
  your speech.
  
  Autistic children in particular can find non-verbal communication a real barrier. These children may exaggerate facial expressions or maintain a very neutral expression. They may
  struggle with tone and find things like sarcasm tricky to interpret. This is not true for all autistic children; everyone is different, but it is worth being aware that differences may be present as these are some of the ways it can impact a child’s acquisition and understanding of language.
  

Click to find out more

Understanding Roles and Responsibilities in Education and Training

This extract comes from the fourth edition of our best-selling text A Complete Guide to the Level 4 Certificate in Education and Teaching by Lynn Machin, Duncan Hindmarch, Sandra Murray and Tina Richardson. 

PROFESSIONALISM: UNDERSTANDING ROLES AND
RESPONSIBILITIES IN EDUCATION AND TRAINING

What are your roles as a teacher?
As a teacher, one of your main roles is to motivate your learners to develop their ability and aspiration to learn. You may read about delivering training and facilitating learning, but in reality, you do much more than that. Your role is not just about teaching your subject or preparing learners for assessment. The focus of your role relates very much to inspiring your learners to change and develop their personal, social and professional skills to the best of their ability. In this respect, your ultimate aim is to enable your learners to understand how to take responsibility for their own development. You can do
this by planning and preparing teaching and learning activities that take account of the needs and well-being of individual learners as well as groups of learners.

Some key aspects of your role as a teacher may be:

○ developing expertise in your field by keeping up to date with the latest developments in your subject area;
○ carrying out initial and/or diagnostic assessments;
○ clear communication with your learners, other professionals and stakeholders;
○ promoting appropriate behaviour and respect for others;
○ identifying and meeting individual learners’ needs;
○ being aware of the support services available;
○ being organised;
○ being reflective, by learning from successes as well as mistakes.

What are your responsibilities as a teacher?
As a teacher, a primary responsibility is to ensure that learners are enrolled on the correct course, in terms of meeting their needs, abilities and aspirations. Further to this, you need to ensure they are on the appropriate course in terms of compliance with award and organisational requirements. You will therefore probably have responsibility for the following:

○ promoting a safe and supportive learning environment;
○ promoting inclusion, equality and diversity;
○ adhering to key legislation, regulatory requirements and codes of practice;
○ modelling professional behaviour at all times to inspire your learners;
○ taking responsibility for your own professional development;
○ working with colleagues and external stakeholders to improve the experience and achievement of your learners;
○ designing or contributing to the design of the course curriculum;
○ negotiating appropriate learning targets for the group and individuals as appropriate to their needs, aspirations and course aims;
○ planning learning activities based on the needs of your group and specific individual needs within the group;
○ designing or amending learning resources that are varied, appropriate to the award aims and challenging for your learners;
○ keeping accurate and legally compliant records to contribute to your organisation’s quality improvement strategy. This will include your group’s recruitment, retention, achievement and progression data, as well as evaluation of how performance can be improved;
○ keeping accurate records of individual learners’ progress and future needs. This is often referred to as an individual learning plan;
○ providing learners with appropriate points of referral as required.

With regard to this last point, your primary aim is to enable each learner to achieve to the best of their ability through working in a safe and supportive environment. It is therefore your responsibility to know who should be contacted if they need any additional support or specialist information, such as for finance, health, study skills or counselling issues.

What are your rights as a teacher?
Your rights as a teacher will be set out in your employment contract. Your employer will also be subject to the Equality Act 2010, meaning that you should not be subject to discrimination, harassment or victimisation. Your organisation is likely to have a recognised trade union, such as the University and College Union (UCU, 2023) or National Education Union (NEU, 2023), that provides advice and guidance on contracts and rights.

Find out more about A Complete Guide to the Level 4 Certificate in Education and Teaching by Lynn Machin, Duncan Hindmarch, Sandra Murray and Tina Richardson at our website www.criticalpublishing.com. 

Available in Paperback, EPUB, PDF, and on Kindle

ISBN : 9781915713544

4th Edition, 230 pp

Jan 2024

Buy Me

Buy Me on Amazon

---

Sign up for news and special offers