Transcript Ballymun Whitehall Area Partnership Family Involvement in

Ballymun Whitehall Area Partnership
Family Involvement in Education in Ballymun,
Research Study – November 30th 2009
Dr. Paul Downes
Director, Educational Disadvantage Centre
Senior Lecturer in Education (Psychology)
St. Patrick’s College, Drumcondra,
[email protected]
FAMILY INVOLVMENT IN EDUCATION
IN BALLYMUN
(Ballymun Whitehall Area Partnership 2009)
Based on a survey of 40 mothers, 6 fathers and one female guardian
Questionnaires were completed for 16 children in preschool, 16 in primary school and 15 in
secondary school
The children of the parents interviewed attended 8 different preschools, 10 different primary
schools and 10 different secondary schools, as follows:
Preschools: Tír na nÓg; Ballymun East; Little Rascals; Aladdin’s Cave; Sr. Majella’s; Little
MooMoo’s and two named childminders;
Primary Schools: Holy Spirit Boys; Holy Spirit Girls; St. Joseph’s Junior School; St. Joseph’s
Senior School; Virgin Mary Boys; Virgin Mary Girls; Our Lady of Victories Girls; Hold Child
Boys; Scoil an tSeachtar Laoch; North Dublin National School Project.
Secondary Schools: Trinity Comprehensive; St. Mary’s Glasnevin; Plunket College; Beneavin
College; St. Aidan’s CBS; Scoil Chaitríona; Mercy College Beaumont; Margaret Aylward
Community College; Dominican College; Central Remedial Clinic
Voice of parents – parent centered – aspect of
international right to health, including mental health
(Downes 2007)
The UN Special Rapporteur is explicit on this point of access and participation of
ethnic minority, disadvantaged and local groups as key issues regarding fulfillment
of indicators of the right to health under the ICESCR:
6. It must be accessible to all, not just the wealthy, but also those living in poverty;
not just majority ethnic groups, but minorities and indigenous peoples, too; not
just those living in urban areas, but also remote villagers; not just men, but also
women. The health system has to be accessible to all disadvantaged individuals
and communities.
7. Further, it must be responsive to both national and local priorities’. ‘Properly
trained community health workers…know their communities’ health
priorities…Inclusive, informed and active community participation is a vital
element of the right to health’.
Early School Leaving is a Mental Health
Issue !
*Kaplan et al’s (1994) North American study of 4,141 young people
tested in 7th grade and once again as young adults which found a
significant damaging effect of dropping out of high school on mental
health functioning as measured by a 10-item self-derogation scale, a 9item anxiety scale, a 6-item depression scale and a 6-item scale
designed to measure coping.
*This effect was also evident when controls were applied for
psychological mental health as measured at 7th grade. The significant
damaging effect of dropping out of school was also evident even when
controls were applied for gender, father’s occupational status, and
ethnicity
Slide 2.1: Level of contact by
survey respondents with
different people in their
social network (number of
parents)
Total Applicable
Responses
Of Which …
Most Days
At least once
a week
About once a
month
Less often
than
this
Never
Your Mother
35
30
3
1
0
1
Your Father
32
23
4
2
0
3
Other Grandmother (not your
mother)
40
7
11
4
6
12
Grandfather (not your father)
25
1
5
3
7
9
Partner
38
37
1
0
0
0
Child's Parent/Other Parent
31
17
2
1
4
7
Your Sister(s)
40
29
5
4
2
0
Your Brother(s)
41
13
12
9
6
1
Child's Brother(s) or Sister(s)
35
30
2
2
1
0
Work Colleagues
20
15
3
2
0
0
Neighbours
46
29
13
0
1
3
Friends
47
30
10
2
3
2
Social Worker
16
0
0
2
1
13
HSCL Coordinator
23
1
3
2
3
14
GP
45
0
2
7
33
3
Child’s Teacher
31
12
2
7
10
0
School Principal
31
6
4
5
13
3
Preschool Staff
15
15
0
0
0
0
Preschool Leader
15
11
2
1
1
0
Paid Childminder
2
1
1
0
0
0
Other
17
4
4
6
2
1
Building on strengths
Broad based emotional communication
skills across the community and family
systems can impact across a much wider
network
Downes, Maunsell and Ivers (2006): Pupils
responses indicating high rate of confiding
in family
Table 2.7: Levels of Emotional Support Received by Survey Respondents from Different
People in relation to Raising of Child
Total
Applicable
Responses
Of Which …
A Large
Amount
Quite a
Bit
A
Certain
Amount
Not
much
Never
Your Mother
35
22
6
5
1
1
Your Father
31
12
4
6
3
6
Other Grandmother
(not your mother)
39
3
3
3
5
25
Grandfather (not
your father)
25
1
0
2
1
21
Partner
38
33
3
1
0
1
Child's Parent/Other
Parent
31
16
0
2
2
11
Your Sister(s)
40
14
10
6
4
6
Your Brother(s)
42
4
3
6
11
18
Cont.,
Child's Brother(s) or
Sister(s)
32
Work Colleagues
2
5
1
6
18
20
1
2
3
3
11
Neighbours
46
0
2
10
3
31
Friends
47
4
10
15
7
11
Social Worker
16
1
0
1
0
14
HSCL Coordinator
23
0
1
2
0
20
GP
45
2
2
3
4
34
Child’s Teacher
31
1
1
1
5
23
School Principal
31
0
0
3
4
24
Preschool Staff
15
0
0
1
4
10
Preschool Leader
15
0
0
1
4
10
Paid Childminder
2
0
2
0
0
0
Other
17
3
2
2
0
10
Table 3.1: How Parents Feel when Visiting Child’s
School/Preschool/Childminder
No. of
Responses
Extre
mely
Welco
me
Some
what
Welco
me
Somew Unwelc
hat
ome
Unwelc
ome
Presc
hool
16
14
(88%)
1
(6%)
0
(0%)
1
(6%)
Prima
ry
16
12
(75%)
4
(25%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
Secon
dary
15
7
(47%)
2
(13%)
6
(40%)
0
(0%)
Total
for all
Respo
ndent
s
47
33
(70%)
7
(15%)
6
(13%)
1
(2%)
10 Secondary schools
School Matters (2006) P 69 “The Task
Force sees the school as the centre,
nested in its unique ethos and culture… A
school is imbued with its own unique
ethos and culture”.
Statutory Committee on Educational
Disadvantage (2005): Make the school a
focal point of community education
QDOSS (Downes 2006): Arts, Sports and
Parental Involvement in Out of School
Services
Teacher conflict resolution skills,
understanding of local culture
%
Figure 3.10: Proportion of Parents ‘Happy and Satisfied’ or ‘Somewhat
Happy but Could be Improved’ on Verbal Communication with School/
Preschool/Childminder
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Preschool
Happy and Satisfied
Primary
Secondary
Somewhat happy but could be improved
Figure 3.10 shows that 88% of preschool parents were ‘happy and satisfied’
with their level of verbal interaction, with another 7% ‘somewhat happy’,
suggesting high levels of satisfaction in this regard. For primary level parents,
the equivalent figures are 69% and 31%, again suggesting a good level of
satisfaction. However, at second level, reflecting answers to previous questions,
the equivalent figures are 27% and 33%, with the data showing 27% ‘somewhat
unhappy’ and 13% ‘unhappy/dissatisfied’.
The responses to the question: ‘Are you treated
fairly by teachers in school ? Why/Why not ?’
were as follows:
PRIMARY: 6th Class
YES. DON’T KNOW/NO ANSWER.
170
3
NO. YESBUT.
36
21
NO.
YES BUT.
SECONDARY: 1st Year
YES.
90
DON’T KNOW/NO ANSWER.
10
41
Downes, Maunsell and Ivers (2006) Blanchardstown
21
-
-
Approximately 74% of pupils at primary level (6th class) state that
they are treated fairly by teachers in school
Approximately 55% of students at secondary level (first year) state
that they are treated fairly by teachers in school
Approximately 15% of pupils at primary level (6th class) state that
they are not treated fairly by teachers in school
Approximately 25% of students at secondary level (first year) state
that they are not treated fairly by teachers in school
It is worth noting that these differences between 6th class primary
and 1st year secondary are statistically significant i.e., there is a
statistically significant increase in perception of being treated unfairly
by teachers in secondary school compared to primary school.
Table 3.7: Overall Level of Happiness of Parents with Support Received in
relation to Child’s Education
No. of
Respon
ses
Happy
and
Satisfied
Somewh
at Happy
but
Could be
Improve
d
Somewh
at
Unhappy
Unhappy
/
Dissatisfi
ed
Preschool
16
11
(69%)
4
(25%)
1
(6%)
0
(0%)
Primary
16
12
(75%)
3
(19%)
1
(6%)
0
(0%)
Secondary
15
5
(33%)
7
(47%)
0
(0%)
3
(20%)
Total for all
Respondents
47
28
(60%)
14
(30%)
2
(4%)
3
(6%)
Developing school climate at post-primary level
No sunlight ! Not money !………..
NDP ………………………………..
Transition – not merely a problem
of the individual
H.Dip……………………………….
Table 2.8: Extent to Which ‘A Large Amount’ of
Emotional Support in relation to raising their child is
received by Parents from Different People
People from whom at least
75% of parents receive
‘a large amount’ of
emotional support
People from 50-75% of
parents receive a large
amount of emotional
support
Partner (70%)
People from whom 25-50%
of parents receive a
large amount of
emotional support
Respondent’s mother (47%), Child’s other parent
(34%), Respondent’s sister(s) (30%),
Respondent’s father (26%)
People with whom under
25% of parents receive
a large amount of
emotional support
Brother(s) (9%), Friends (9%), Other grandmother
(6%), Child’s brothers or sisters (4%), Work
colleagues (2%), Social worker (2%), Child’s
teacher (2%), Other grandfather (2%), GP
(0%), HSCL Coordinator (0%), Preschool staff
(0%), Preschool leader (0%), Paid childminder
(0%), Neighbours (0%), Child’s school principal
(0%)
•Illustrates the outreach gap in family therapeutic services
Need for multidisciplinary community based psychology teams for
outreach and emotional support for families and children – prevention
and early intervention multidisciplinary teams (see Familiscope,
Ballyfermot www.familiscope.ie)
•This sample can be presumed to be easier to reach than others who
did not participate
•Where is the professional support for those experiencing trauma
(bereavement, suicide, bullying, substance misuse etc) depression and
life stressors (divorce etc) ??
Stokes (2009) survey of reported difficulties of Youthreach
participants:
37% Dysfunctional family background
22% Need for sustained psychological support
20% Substance misuse problems
23% Literacy and numeracy problems
13% Specific learning needs
School Matters (2006) P 35 “Many of the behaviours ‘acted out’ in the
classroom are linked to events happening outside of the school itself,
including family relationships, alcohol and drug use or mental health
issues”.
This report (2009) concludes:
* “The relatively low number of parents receiving supports from
local community organisations may suggest scope for increased
awareness of available supports”.
* “Particular supports may be needed to support parents who
themselves have low levels of education or who are not in paid
employment”.
* “There is no system for early (i.e. the first five years)
identification of families at risk of educational or social isolation;
however, there are structures through which preventative and
support programmes could be mediated (assuming additional
resources were made available), the community-based public
health service being a case in point.”
Table 3.5: Level of Happiness of Parents with ParentTeacher/Parent-Childminder Meetings
No. of
Respons
es
Happy and
Satisfied
Somewhat
Happy
but Could be
Improved
Somewhat
Unhappy
Unhappy/
Dissatisfied
Preschool
9
9
(100%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
0
(0%)
Primary
16
14
(88%)
1
(6%)
1
(6%)
0
(0%)
Secondary
15
5
(33%)
7
(47%)
2
(13%)
1
(7%)
Total for all
Respondents
40
28
(70%)
8
(20%)
3
(8%)
1
(3%)
Note: Seven parents of preschool children did not answer this question as they indicated that the question was
not applicable to them, presumably because there were no parent-teacher meetings organised in their
child’s preschool
However, there were also some less positive experiences and comments, which
included the following:
“The meetings need to be better organised” (Primary school parent)
“They are not very private. Conversations can be overheard” (Secondary school
parent)
“Parent-teacher meetings are too negative; they do not support or encourage my son.
I felt intimidated as though I were the child” (Secondary school parent)
“In the hall, parents have to queue. I could be hours waiting to see one of my
children’s teachers” (Secondary school parent)
“Meetings are not frequent enough and could be more constructive” (Secondary
school parent)
“I didn’t have a wholly positive experience at meetings. Some teachers weren’t
accessible. The school took my name and number but the teachers never called me. I
queued a few times and then the line was closed and left without seeing the teacher”.
(Secondary school parent)
“No privacy as everyone is in a small hall. This is a problem if your child has
difficulties as everyone else can hear. Some teachers didn’t really know my daughter
– it was a ‘tick box’ exercise. As a middle of the road student she goes unnoticed
unlike an A student or a troublesome student’ (Secondary school parent)
“I was unhappy with what I felt was a teacher’s rude comment about my daughter”
(Secondary school parent)
Table 4.1: Attendance by Parents at School
Activities and Events (No. of Parents)
No. where
Activity
Happen
s
Parent
Always
Attend
s
Parent
Sometimes
Attend
Parent
Doesn’
t
Attend
Parent Not
Invited
School plays/ musicals/concerts
34
24
1
2
6
Sports days or events
44
14
2
1
27
Open days
32
22
7
1
2
Fundraising activities
36
8
7
4
16
School trips
42
6
2
5
29
Suggestions to Encourage Engagement
To end the survey, parents were asked if there was anything they would like to see to
facilitate improved engagement with their child’s education. A number of comments
were made, as listed in Box 4.1:
Box 4.1: Comments on Improvements Parents would like for Family
Involvement
“Early intervention team should have a local presence – at the moment, their courses
are in town” (Preschool parent)
“Parents’ Association volunteer parents group. A ‘Mammy in the Room’” (Preschool
parent)
“Coffee mornings to meet other parents so we could hear more about what is going
on” (Preschool parent)
“Schedule so you know what is happening and can follow progress” (Preschool
parent)
“Have more community members on the board. Ask parents to be involved on a
voluntary basis” (Preschool parent)
“Tell us what is on so we can get involved” (Preschool parent)
Family Involvement in Education in Ballymun (2009):
“There are particular issues in relation to parental
involvement in the education of second-level students
with parents finding this more challenging”.
Nonthreatening to overcome fear – fear of failure, also
fear of success (Ivers 2008)
Policy Recommendations
Teacher Professional Development at Post Primary– Conflict
Resolution Skills, Engagement with Parents and Promotion of
local heritage/culture
Post primary school strategies for feedback from parents on
parent-teacher meetings so that they are more client friendly
Community based outreach and therapeutic teams
Opportunities for parental participation in afterschool
services through local School Completion Programmes
Accredited community leadership training courses
A forum for extended dialogue between post primary schools
in Ballymun/Whitehall area and parents on the basis of this
study
Future Research to engage hardest to reach parents, including
intergenerational drug use, where parents are also involved in
generating the key questions
References
Downes, P (2006) QDOSS (Quality Development of Out of School Services): Agenda for
Development
Downes, P., Maunsell, C & Ivers, J. (2006) A Holistic Approach to Early School Leaving
and School Retention in Blanchardstown. Blanchardstown Area Partnership.
Downes, P. (2007) Intravenous Drug Use and HIV in Estonia: Socio-Economic
Indicators Regarding the Right to Health for Its Russian-Speaking Population,
Liverpool Law Review, Special Issue on Historical and Contemporary Legal. Issues
on HIV/AIDS, Vol.2. pp. 271-317
Educational Disadvantage Committee (2005). Moving beyond educational
disadvantage 2002-2005. DES
Ivers, J (2008) ‘Fear of Success among North Inner City Youth’. Unpublished thesis.
Educational Disadvantage Centre, St. Patrick’s College, Drumcondra
Kaplan, D.D., Damphousse, J.R. & Kaplan, H.B. (1994). Mental health implications of
not graduating from high school. Journal of Experimental Education, 62, 105-123
Phillips, S., and Eustace, A. (2008) Findings from study on family involvement in
education. PLANET/Pobal
Stokes, D. (2009). One system, two modes: The role of the Youthreach programme in
Irish education. Presentation given in Dublin City University, January 2009
The Report of the Task Force on Student Behaviour in Second Level Schools (2006)
School Matters