Inclusive BLOG

Compass of Anxiety

Tue, 19 Jan 2010 10:05:54 +0000

Its hard to find your way around the whole area of anxiety in children, adults and yourself. So here is a useful compass to help you.

Some days the compass will spin, on others it will stay in one place and feelings and behaviour will go into extreme mode.

This compass was inspired by work with people of all ages with autism who know the world of anxiety only too well!

The increased activity area is probably the healthiest and most educational area if you have to be somewhere on the compass.

People do things for a reason, not just because they have autism, behaviour labels or whatever.

Anxiety is very often the reason for all kinds of behaviour that we can struggle with.

Colin Newton

Inclusive Solutions

Labels and Diagnoses - good or bad thing?

Tue, 12 Jan 2010 10:59:24 +0000

Labels and Diagnoses: Are they a good thing or a bad thing?

Of all the conversations we have about inclusion and young disabled people, the confusion surrounding our use of labels seems endless. Is knowing and using child’s label helpful to us or them? Or, as educators, should we avoid labels entirely leaving their use to those whose job it is to make diagnoses and predict what they think impairment will mean in the future?

How are we to talk about children and young people in a way that respects their individuality and their needs?

As ever, the answer to all these questions is: “It depends”
It depends on who is doing the asking and to what use the label is put. If we take the trouble to read what labelled young people them say about their label we will be in little doubt about what we should do. Here is Luke Jackson writing about how he first found out, at age 12, about his Asperger Syndrome.

“I first found out about Asperger Syndrome…from an article in The Guardian…The article had a checklist of certain behaviours that were considered to be traits of Asperger Syndrome. I was twelve years old when I first read this article. Mum had just plonked it in front of me as if she had done it by accident. As I read through the article my first reaction was relief. It was as if I had a weight lifted off my shoulders. I had every single ‘symptom’ on this checklist. I had finally found the reason why other people classed me as weird. It was not because I was clumsy or stupid. My heart lightened instantly and the constant nagging that had accompanied me all my life stopped immediately. I finally knew why I felt different, why I felt as if I was a freak, why I didn’t seem to fit in. Even better it was not my fault!”

Jackson, 2002

This is an insider perspective on the issue of labels. And it is telling us that young people need the information that comes with their label to help them understand their difference, know it is not of their making and, crucially, reassure them there are many others in the world like them.

So far so good. And if it was just about the power of a label to help the person with the impairment and others understand difference then there would be very little to get concerned about. If only labels were just used in this way! It is not the label that’s the problem it is how we use it. And when we use it in ways that diminish or seem to suggest that all there is to know about a child or young person is implicit in their label; this is when we get into trouble.

Consider the following account given to us by a mother as she visits possible future mainstream schools for her 4-year-old daughter with autism. The visit seems to go well for the most part, the Head seems to be listening as the mother describes her daughters personality, her likes and dislikes and some of her particular needs. The meeting comes to a close and the head teacher signs off with this attempt at reassurance:

“I’m sure we’ll be fine – We had an autistic a couple of years ago”

In that moment the mother’s mind is made up for her. There is no way now she will be considering this school for her daughter. What went so wrong here? We can assume the head teacher was trying to communicate her good intentions -

So, in the midst all this confusion, what can we do to minimise our chances of giving offense? There is one very simple answer that should serve you well in most situations: ask the person how they like to be known. And be prepared to accept their Christian name as the answer…This is always better than assuming or trying to be politically correct about what words or descriptors you think you should use. On occasions you will find your assumed political correctness is either out of date or not accepted by the group you are trying to address.

We recently did some visioning work with a group of mothers and daughters whose identity we were careful to refer to as ”travellers”. Their head-shaking and facial expressions immediately told us we were off track. When we asked them how they liked to be known as a group their answer was immediate and straightforward: gypsies or Romany gypsies. Never mind the fact that we would likely have avoided using the word gypsy at all costs, assuming it to be insulting, when a marginalised minority reclaims a word and thus affirms their identity they are saying that a word much used to insult can now no more be a cause of shame; we can only follow their lead.

‘Our professional roles will be restored to helping people to be who they want to be rather than in assessing who we think they are and getting them to accept our assessment as their reality’

Lovett, 1996

Inclusive Solutions

Engaging the hard to reach

Wed, 2 Dec 2009 14:14:06 +0000

We met Carley and Denise in Lancashire. They work in Children’s Centres but have the wisdom of life experience.

What does it take to engage with those who people say are hard to reach?

Nothing about judgement all about acceptance!

Listen to them....

Come back: Because I like myself when I am with you”

Tue, 4 Aug 2009 15:07:48 +0100

A Spanish family moved to a South American country.
One of the local women called frequently and brought gifts to the family: some handpicked berries or maybe a partridge.
The mother did not speak nor understand the local language except the greeting “Mai-mai”. The local woman did not speak Spanish. Smiling she accepted and enjoyed the tea and cake, which the mother offered.
The girls in the family admired the colourful dress of the woman and competed in trying to remember the melodic sentence, which she said each time when she left. They did remember it and years later found someone, who translated it for them:

“I will come back: Because I like myself when I am with you”

Cornelia Broesskamp - Parents for Inclusion
cbroesskamp@onetel.com

The Big Red Bus

Mon, 3 Aug 2009 15:36:44 +0100

1. WHAT IS IT – The Big Red Bus is a set of easy to use materials designed to identify a group of adults within a school who have special significance to a child in difficulty and who are willing to work together over a short period to offer some additional support to that child

2. HOW DOES IT WORK – The materials are divided into two stages . The first is an interactive assessment in which the child is asked to identify a group of adults within the school who are in some way significant to them. These are the adults who will be ‘going on the Big Red Bus’ and who will form a team on behalf of the child. The second stage involves holding a meeting with these adults which uses a needs focussed and group led framework to identify possible roles and tasks which the group members are willing to volunteer for

3. HOW IS IT DIFFERENT – The basic principle running through the materials is that it is primarily people who make the difference and not the strategy employed . To this end the Big red Bus incorporates a number of unique features including:-
• The child identifies who he or she wants to be in their ‘team’ . The process often identifies unsuspected individuals and most adults find it highly motivating to be told that they have been chosen by the child .
• The team work together to share thoughts about what the child is telling us about their needs
• The specific tasks and roles are chosen by team members and not imposed from outside.
• Each role and task is subjected to the ‘Five minute a Day’ rule

THE BIG RED BUS

INSTRUCTIONS

The ‘BIG RED BUS’ consists of a set of materials designed to help set-up a supportive team of adults around a pupil in difficulty. They are designed for use with pupils across the age range but are probably most appropriate for those in Key Stages 2 and 3
It came out of the simple realisation I came to a few years ago that whilst it is people who make the difference and not the strategy there are a range of barriers which prevent people from getting involved with others in difficulty. Also for any particular concern there is never one single answer so one is far better using people own ideas to develop a way forward.

STAGE 1 – IDENTIFYING THE TEAM

After meeting with the target child and explaining that you are wanting to try and help them to become more successful , happier at school etc the first thing to do is to ask them to list as many of the adults they can think of who they come into contact with each week at school . As they identify each individual, their names and what they do are written on blank ‘egg man’ cards e.g. ‘Mrs Andrews, Dinner Lady’ (see APPENDIX 1).
The child may wish to add some features to the card by colouring in hair etc so that the card better represents the person they are thinking of . At this stage the important thing is for them to list as many people as they can remember including people such as the caretaker , school secretary etc.
Once you have established the list you then move on and ask them to imagine that they are going to go on a special trip to a Theme Park / Fun Fair . In order to help with this the child is shown a picture of the layout of a theme park and also a large laminated Red Bus (see APPENDIX 2) with six windows and a driver’s seat. After you are confident that they have understood the idea you then ask a number of questions (see APPENDIX 3) printed on small cards.
N.B. these are just some suggestions for questions . You can use your own but they need to try and balance a range of possible scenarios

• On your journey to the park you begin to feel sick – Who would you like to sit with you?
• You have a go on the dodgems. The man says you are a brilliant driver – Who do you want to tell?
• You get so excited on the amusements that you do not notice the others going off – Who would you like to find you ?
• You have had a great day but are now tired – Who do you want to sit next to you on the way home?
• You take something from a shop without paying. You know it’s wrong – Who would you dare to tell the truth to
• You win a prize on a stall – Who would you like to share it with?
• You want to go on the row boats. You need someone to row hard with you – Who would you ask
• You go on one of the rides and then discover you have lost all of your money. You feel terrible – Who do you want to talk to

After asking each question the child is asked to choose one of the adults from their list and place their card along with the question card on one of the windows of the bus. As you go through the questions the child is allowed to either choose someone who is already on the bus or someone new from the long list. In my experience children take this task very seriously and on average they identify about 5 / 6 people. It also fascinating to note that they usually identify someone who nobody would have predicted e.g. they might choose someone who supported them in reception even though they are now in Year 6 or they might choose the school secretary who is the only one who says hello to them each morning. The important thing is that it is their choice.

N.B. If it is a primary school the pupil’s class teacher is always placed on the bus in the driver’s seat in case for whatever reason they are not chosen - they are only one whose place on the ‘trip’ is non-negotiable.
Often children will ask if they can choose people from their family but I tend to stick to those who are part of the school community

STAGE 2 – RECRUITING THE TEAM

After the child has identified who they want to be on their ‘Bus’ each person is invited to attend a meeting . It is explained to them that they do not have to attend but that the child has identified them as someone who they feel could be helpful to them. The specifics of how they were identified are also explained. It is important at this stage to be very sensitive to individual anxiety and no pressure should be put on people to attend. If they do not want to attend just say that’s fine but encourage them to continue to notice the youngster and be supportive to them in their own way.

STAGE 3 THE MEETING - IDENTIFYING ROLES

This meeting usually takes about 45 minutes although this can be extended with the permission of the group. It is led by an outside facilitator who explains that the meeting will try and identify ways in which as a group we can work together to support the child over a fixed period usually about 6 weeks . After checking if there are any questions there is then a fairly open discussion for about 10 minutes in which people are asked for any ideas, comments or observations they have about the child. The facilitator pulls this information together by introducing the idea that child is probably trying to tell us something by their behaviour and that it would be helpful to put the information in the form of a series of needs. Examples of identified needs in meetings I have held include-
• A need to be noticed
• A need to be first
• A need to be different
• A need to be better understood by other children
• A need for reassurance
• A need to feel safe
• A need to know it’s ‘not personal’
• A need to know people care about him

After a list of possible needs has been generated the group is asked to think of some possible roles which the team could play in order to try and meet these needs. At this point it is important to encourage the team to be as creative as they wish and record the actual thoughts of the group. One of my favourite roles which came up in one of the meetings was ‘escapologist’ which was in response to ‘a need to escape’ (this was a youngster who was going through a terrible time at home and just needed some periods when he could forget about all his problems).
Some of the other roles which have been proposed include:-
• An explainer
• An interpreter
• A play partner
• A rewarder
• A fan
• A touchstone
• A limit setter
• A strategist

(N.B these were all generated within the group without any prompting and were in direct response to the initial question ‘ What is the child telling us and what roles could we play to meet their needs’)

The final part of the meeting is to ask the group members to volunteer for a role. At this stage I will often make the suggestion that what we are looking for is the equivalent of ‘5 minutes a day’ This makes any commitment seem manageable and it also allows for flexibility since someone could save up the 5 minutes and offer 25 minutes a week. Either way it fits with the principle that even a small amount of additional input can make a huge difference. The 5 minutes a day idea is similar to what many charities do when they ask people to make a difference by giving the equivalent of 50p a day – very few people feel that they cannot afford that.
It is important that each individual is able to choose or not choose a role which is meaningful to them even though you might think someone is perfect for a particular role.
A good example of this was in the case of the ‘escapologist’ role . A member of staff volunteered for this and decided that she was going to undertake the role by ‘reading favourite stories with the child once a week’ This was clearly her idea and as such had all the advantages of being owned by her and therefore likely to be carried out
Once people have identified a role they are then asked to write their name, the role, and how they will undertake it on a card which is then shared. A coordinator is also identified whose job it is to monitor progress and keep people informed of any relevant information
Examples of Roles and the actions have included:

• Touchstone - Greet first thing and allow James to return at other times during the day
• Praiser – See Sarah twice weekly with work she is proud of
• Job Giver – Give David jobs at lunchtime to help diffuse situations
• Listener – Meet Andrew and listen to his views
• Interpreter – Meet Craig weekly to help him better understand the behaviours of the other children towards him

(N.B. Even if the E.P. feels that the choices of action are not the ones that they would recommend the suggestions are accepted provided they are not detrimental to the child)

The planning sheet is then completed (see APPENDIX 4 for case example)

The group then agrees to have a go at their roles and to meet weekly over a six-week period to see how things are going.

FINALLY

Whilst I have not carried out any formal evaluation of this process the informal feedback has been positive with regular reported improvements in the child’s situation within the school.
What it seems to achieve is a ‘spreading of the load’ in an acceptable way amongst a group a people who are identified as being important to the child. It also gives people permission to get involved in ways which are meaningful to them.
This approach is particularly helpful to the class teacher who often feels over-burdened by and responsible for the range and complexity of needs which a youngster displays. By knowing that other people are trying to support the child it can enable the class teacher to relax more and concentrate on some of the basics within the classroom. Also as with Circle of Friends it can have the effect of changing the predominant perceptions about the pupil and increasing the amount of good will towards them.
In my view the link between needs and roles seems to have certain ‘gut validity’ and the use of the roles as a concept allows for individual creativity in how to undertake them.
This approach is different from one in which the E.P. and other support staff provide long lists of detailed advice. Although such advice could be very appropriate it can sometimes have the opposite effect from what was intended since it can make hard pressed staff feel even more burdened and disempowered.

Question Cards

On your journey to the park you begin to feel sick

Who would you like to be with you?

You go on one of the rides and discover you have lost all of you money. You begin to cry.

Who do you want to talk to?

You have a go on the dodgems. The man say’s you are a brilliant driver.

Who would you like to tell?

When you get to the park you are worried about getting lost.

Who do you want to look after you?

You get so excited on the amusements that you do not notice the others going off.

Who would you like to find you?

You win a prize on a stall

Who would you like to give it to?

You want to go on the peddle boats. You need somebody who will peddle as hard as you.

Who would you ask?

You take something from a hop without paying. You know it’s wrong.

Who do you dare tell the truth to?

You have been very well behaved all day

Who do you want to give you a sticker?

You have a great day but now you are tired.

Who do you want to sit next to you on the way home?

Chris Johnson: Educational Psychologist: Gateshead

PIP Lancashire Volunteers in Early Years

Mon, 16 Mar 2009 15:14:15 +0000

Sherril Lovatt of the Lancashire Play Inclusion Project describes their innovative work recruiting volunteers to work in the non maintained sector of Lancashire Early Years settings.

Many challenging and disabled adults have been supported by volunteers in nursery settings also by the same team’s work.

Phone PIP on 01253 899883 or email pip.bfw@ic24.net

Buddy System with 3-4 year olds

Tue, 3 Mar 2009 16:12:48 +0000

Listen to this great Lewisham Nursery Officer, Emma working in the non maintained sector using what she has learned about peer support with 3/4year olds. Turns out that 4 year olds can do a great job and it has a positive impact on their behaviour too!!

Problems with IQ and Psychometric Assessment

Mon, 26 Jan 2009 15:20:27 +0000

When diagnosing a child’s learning difficulties the IQ test and other forms of Psychometric Assessment continue to be used across the UK and elsewhere as an indication of a child's ‘intelligence’ and continue to be a key factor in special school placement.

Colin Newton
Inclusive Educational Psychologist
Co Founder
Inclusive Solutions
December 2009

We have to provide an IQ score so that the CAHMS team can allocate their resources. They keep asking us.... (Principal Educational Psychologist - 2008- Unnamed UK Local Authority)
How sad that what follows still needs to be written in 2008! Perhaps we all need a little reminder...
The story so far...

Intelligence testing began in earnest in France, when in 1904 psychologist Alfred Binet was commissioned by the French government to find a method to differentiate between children who were ‘intellectually normal and those who were inferior’. The purpose was to put the latter into special schools where they would receive more individual attention. In this way the disruption they caused in the education of intellectually normal children could be avoided. Sound a familiar argument?
Such thinking was a natural development from Darwinism and the Eugenics movement that dates back to Sir Francis Galton in 1869 that famous scientific polymath who promoted the idea that for society to prosper the ‘weakest’ should not be allowed to have babies, as this would affect the genetic stock of future generations. He and his many followers we contemptuous of any impact education might have on raising the achievement of the ‘least able’(Thomas and Loxley, 2007).
Binet’s work led to the development of the Binet Scale, also known as the Simon-Binet Scale in recognition of Theophile Simon's assistance in its development. It constituted a revolutionary approach to the assessment of individual mental ability. However, Binet himself cautioned against misuse of the scale or misunderstanding of its implications. According to Binet, the scale was designed with a single purpose in mind; it was to serve as a guide to identify children in the schools who required special education. Its intention was not to be used as “a general device for ranking all pupils according to mental worth.” Binet also noted that “the scale, properly speaking, does not permit the measure of intelligence, because intellectual qualities are not superposable, and therefore cannot be measured as linear surfaces are measured.”
Since, according to Binet, intelligence could not be described as a single score, the use of the Intelligence Quotient (IQ) (a notion coined by Terman in America in 1916) as a definite statement of a child's intellectual capability would be a serious mistake. In addition, Binet feared that IQ measurement would be used to condemn a child to a permanent “condition” of stupidity, thereby negatively affecting his or her education and livelihood:
Some recent thinkers…[have affirmed] that an individual's intelligence is a fixed quantity, a quantity that cannot be increased. We must protest and react against this brutal pessimism; we must try to demonstrate that it is founded on nothing. (Binet)
Binet's scale had a profound impact on educational development in the UK, the United States and elsewhere. However, the American and UK educators and psychologists who championed and utilised the scale and its revisions failed to heed Binet's caveats concerning its limitations. Soon intelligence testing assumed an importance and respectability way out of proportion to its actual value.
When Cyril Burt was appointed as the first educational psychologist for London in 1913 he was much less cautious than Binet when it came to applying mental quotients. A Social Darwinist he was enthusiastic and deeply convinced of the genetic basis of intelligence. He was energetic, wrote a lot, was fond of psychometrics and was committed to the idea of inherited intelligence. All this gave great stimulus to a move towards a segregated education system based on categorisation of children.
Belief in the importance of intelligence and in the tests that purportedly measured it gave rise to a selective and segregative education system, following the high profile work of some influential educational psychologists. ... And this kind of thought is still revered especially in considering children’s failure at school. (Thomas and Loxley, 2007)
Burt’s reputation is now linked to his fraudulent invention of data about inherited intelligence based on non-existent twin studies but at the time his influence was enormous.
When medical officers were largely responsible for selecting pupils for special schools in the UK the most single important item in the selection process was the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale.
Despite such decisions being now a result of a Full Statutory Assessment in which parents wishes are significant, psychometric tools are still being used by significant numbers of educational psychologists across the UK. These tools have been revised and modernised and typically include tests such as the WISC-R and the BAS (British Ability Scales) in their updated forms but their roots and core constructs remain unaltered.
This is surprising as the shortcomings of such tools have been long known and debated among educational psychologists, in the educational establishment and beyond. Yet scores and test results are still demanded particularly around those for whom measurement is the most difficult. There is a wealth of literature that is critical of the role and negative impact of IQ testing (Leyden, 1978, Lokke et. al, 1997; Leadbetter, 2005, Farrell and Venables, 2008) and yet educational psychologists still spend the bulk of their time undertaking formal special education evaluations using psychometric assessment including IQ tests (Shapiro et al., 2004 and Farrell and Venables, 2009).
Main Problems
“For some thirty years a few clear sighted professionals have been telling us that normal, abnormal, retarded, autistic, etc., are political, social, cultural notions rather than reflections of some objective, clearly discernible reality. They have been saying that like intelligence, mental retardation is not a ‘thing’ at all.” - Anne Donnellan and Martha Leary (1994)

Test scores are appealing in the messy and complex world of children’s learning and in the demanding and oppressive world in which many educational professionals find themselves in 2000s. They offer the immediate and seductive appeal of a spuriously precise, defined result, satisfying to the assessor but telling virtually nothing useful about the child.
Why are IQ and other forms of psychometric assessment so inappropriate for understanding the learning of disabled children? Why so problematic?
Read on for the main reasons:
• Culturally Unfair. The tests, as they have been devised, constructed and used in the UK and the United States, have been primarily designed for use among white, middle-class children. The tests are both unfair and invalid when used on children from different cultural backgrounds. Researchers became aware of the problem that tests were in fact culturally derived and represented the ideas, attitudes and the linguistic concepts of the people who made them and for whom they were intended. Attempts to create tests that are culturally neutral have proved unsuccessful, and there has not been any way found to develop a test that does not penalise some cultural groups while rewarding others.
The tests have been challenged in court for being racially and culturally biased, but there have been no definitive rulings on them. In a California case, Larry P. vs. Riles (1978), the court ruled that use of the tests was discriminatory; but two years later in an Illinois case, Pase vs. Hannon, it was decided that the tests were not culturally biased and could be used to place children in special education courses.
The concern over cultural bias raised a related issue among critics: what is actually measured by the tests? The critics assert that mental abilities and potential are gauged by simply adding up correct answers. This procedure necessarily ignores how a child has arrived at the answers. Hence, the tests only measure the products of intelligence, without considering the processes by which the intelligence works. This means, the critics assert, that wrong answers would indicate a lower intelligence and a lessened potential; but research has demonstrated that the child who comes up with a wrong answer may understand as much about a problem as the one who gives the correct answer, perhaps by guessing. Furthermore, the complexity of skills and intelligence may be as great in a different cultural group, but test questions may need to be approached in another way because of differences in cultural background.
So much caution has to be present when administering and interpreting such assessment processes with different cultural groups that major validity questions are raised on every occasion. So why do it?
• Testing conditions and interpretation of test results influence the IQ measure and other psychometric outcomes.
It has been shown that the outcome of any IQ test or psychometric procedure can depend on familiarity with the test materials with the testing procedure and with the examiner.

‘No one would believe until I demonstrated it with controls that the IQ scores of pupils from an open air school could be lifted 10 points or so by thawing them out on the hot water pipes for half an hour before testing.’ (Head of Special School-quoted in Galloway and Goodwin, 1979)

Emotional tension and anxiety have also been indicated as factors affecting test scores. If being tested makes you highly anxious you will do worse and score lower.

In one US experiment asking 99 school psychologists to independently score an IQ test from identical records resulted in IQs ranging from 63 (mild learning difficulties) to 117 (gifted) for the same individual indicating the critical role of tester attitudes, qualifications, and instructions on testing.

In addition, differences in the interpretation of test scores for entire groups have been documented (Ropers and Menzel, 2007).

Taken together, these observations point out several practical shortcomings when estimating IQ. So why try?

• What is actually being measured? IQ tests are psychometric tests which only capture a few aspects of many different ‘intelligences’ or ‘systems of abilities’ omitting, for example, creative and practical intelligence social, emotional and moral intelligence, and lateral and radiant thinking. Also, wisdom is not considered. IQ tests are ‘static’ (that is, ‘What has the child learned?’) rather than ‘dynamic’ (that is, ‘What does the child achieve when given guided feedback?) Basically IQ tests do not measure intelligence but are rather tests of a child’s attainments in certain class oriented and arbitrarily selected skills.

• Misuse of IQ assessment : A central criticism of intelligence tests is that psychologists and educators use these tests to distribute the limited resources of our society. These test results are used to provide so called rewards such as special classes for gifted students, admission to college, and employment or the opposite with special education placement. Those who do not qualify for these resources based on intelligence test scores may feel angry and as if the tests are denying them opportunities for success. Many negative predispositions have been initiated, aspirations lowered and self fulfilling prophecies created.

Unfortunately, intelligence test scores have not only become associated with a person's ability to perform certain tasks, but with self-worth. At worst such assessments have been used to wrongly place pupils from ethnic minority cultures in special schools and units. As far back as 1968 this was reported in ILEA and elsewhere where pupils from an African Carribean background were particularly over represented in special education.

The PLASC and School Level Annual School Census (2002) revealed that Black Caribbean pupils were over represented in Pupil Referral Units (5.8% compared with 1.5% in mainstream schools). Of even more relevance to the misuse of psychometrics was the finding that 3.6% of Pakistani pupils were in Special Schools. Would this have anything to do with other factors such as pupils living in poverty? Or are some pupils still being assessed and doing badly on culturally biased psychometric tests?

Dyson and Gallannaugh (2008) have considered the disproportional presence of students from different social groups in the UK special needs system. They argue that disproportionality is a reality in England, as in the United States, though it cannot be understood simply in relation to racial minorities. Nor, within a non-disability-based system, does it arise principally from the misidentification of students as having impairments. Instead, they argue, it reflects broad educational and social inequalities.

• Single score too limited. Many intelligence tests produce a single intelligence score. This single score is inadequate in explaining the multidimensional aspects of human intelligences. Another problem with a single score is the fact that individuals with similar intelligence test scores can vary greatly in their expression of these talents. Two people can have identical scores on intelligence tests. Although both people have the same test score, one person may have obtained the score because of strong verbal skills while the other may have obtained the score because of strong skills in perceiving and organizing various tasks.
• Sub tests scores and reporting are still misleading. Numbers, standardised scores and percentiles all suggest a pseudo scientific reality and fixed reality that some find attractive when faced with complex decision making, while others are left confused and mystified. Whose interests are served by such scores?
• Testing only a sample of behaviours. Intelligence tests only measure a sample of behaviours or situations in which so called intelligent behavior is revealed. Most intelligence tests do not measure a person's everyday functioning, social knowledge, mechanical skills, and/or creativity. The format of intelligence tests do not capture the complexity and immediacy of real-life situations. Intelligence tests have been criticized for their limited ability to predict non-test or nonacademic intellectual abilities.
• Problems using IQ testing with disabled children and adults. Linda S. Siegel (1992), professor in the Department of Educational Psychology and Special Education at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada proposes that we abandon the IQ test in the analysis of the disabled child.
According to most definitions — although they are not conclusive — intelligence is made up of the skills of logical reasoning, problem solving, critical thinking, and adaptation. This seems reasonable, until one examines the content of IQ tests. Intelligence, as tested in all IQ tests, includes virtually no skills that can be identified in terms of such a definition of intelligence.
To support her statement, Siegel gives a detailed analysis of the subtests of the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised (WISC-R). This IQ test is composed of Verbal and Performance sections, and is often used in diagnosis of learning difficulties. In each subtest of the Verbal scale, performance is in varying degrees dependent on specific knowledge, vocabulary, expressive language and memory skills, while in the Performance scale, visual-spatial abilities, fine motor coordination, perceptual skills, and in some subtests speed, are essential for scoring.
As Siegel rightly points out, IQ tests measure, for the most part, what a person has learned, not what he or she is capable of doing in the future.
There is an additional problem in the use of IQ tests with individuals with learning impairments. According to Siegel it is a paradox that IQ scores are required of disabled people because many of these persons have difficulty in one or more of the component skills that are part of these IQ tests — memory, language, fine motor skills, and so on. The effect is that they may end up having a lower IQ score than a person who does not have such problems, even though they may both have identical reasoning and problem-solving skills. The lower IQ score, therefore, may be a result of the learning impairment, and IQ scores may underestimate the real ‘intelligence’ of the disabled individual.
• IQ vs other skills. Another assumption is that an IQ score should predict reading, If you have a low IQ score you should be a poor reader and that poor reading is an expected consequence of low IQ. However, there are many individuals who have low IQ scores and are very good readers making a nonsense of this way of thinking.
• Importance of speed and action for scoring high on tests. Most psychometric assessments are carried out against the clock/stop watch. If you are slow because of movement differences or learning style you will do worse at the assessments. If doing things is hard for you because of any kind of physical impairment or difference then you will score less well against norms created against a ‘typical ‘population.
• No such thing as fixed potential. Children and adults continue to learn throughout their lives. No-one has ever proved the existence of fixed potential, a ceiling or definitive figure that lasts a person a life time.
• Medical model dominates thinking. IQ scores and psychometric test results are clinically focused on the child or young person’s deficits especially if they have additional support needs. They provide one answer to the vexing question ‘What is wrong with you?’
I scored relatively high in an IQ test when I was a child. Since then I have done many many many very very very stupid things in my life. I still wonder what that test has to do with intelligence or understanding at all. (Alex Wien, Austria, 2009)
• Dangerous Assumption implied
Many people are under the false assumption that intelligence tests measure a person's inborn or biological intelligence that is set in stone and will never change-a fixed potential. Intelligence tests are in reality based on an individual's interaction with the environment and can never exclusively measure inborn intelligence - if such an entity even existed. Intelligence tests have been associated with categorizing and stereotyping people. Additionally, it is clear that knowledge of one's performance on an intelligence test may affect a person's aspirations and motivation to obtain goals.
Disabled people are people first. Because of the presence of an impairment, a person may act, get around, look, dance, smile, read, learn, show what she knows, or communicate differently. The key here is that this is a difference and not a deficiency. As humans, we are all alike only in that we are all different. The fact that society tends to create a hierarchy of these differences, by labeling some of them deficiencies, is a manifestation of an out-dated paradigm plagued by prejudice. This inherent prejudice against disabled people means that some differences will be defined as deficiencies and looked down upon by all of those “higher up” on the social ladder.
Anne Donnellan (1994), identified why this old paradigm is not sufficient and needs to be replaced by a more humanistic and respectful one. The key to the new paradigm is the concept of the “Least Dangerous Assumption.”
“Least dangerous assumption” states that in the absence of absolute evidence, it is essential to make the assumption that, if proven to be false, would be least dangerous to the individual. She continues by explaining that the “absence of evidence can never be absolute evidence of absence,” and as such, it is always safest and most respectful to make the “least dangerous assumption.”
Consider it this way. If I were to go fishing for a week and not catch anyfish, there would be two assumptions that could be made. First, I could say “there are no fish in the lake since I did not catch any, and I know what I am doing.” Or, second, I could say simply that “I did not catch any fish that week, and I will keep on trying.” The first assumption seems rather arrogant, while the second one is more realistic and respectful. (There is a third assumption that I could make which would be that I am not a good fisherman, but we won’t go there).The same holds true for students with disabilities. Imagine a child who does not talk with the spoken word and moves around using a wheelchair. Her teachers have worked with her for a month and have not yet seen any evidence of what she understands. In fact, they wonder if she knows or is aware of anything at all. These teachers can make one of two assumptions. They can assume that “what you see is what you get” and that this child does not know anything, that her brain is as empty as that lake. As such, they can educate her in a way that reflects those assumptions (perhaps segregated classes or regular classes with low or no expectations). Now imagine her as she graduates and uses a communication device to say, “Why did you treat me so poorly?”. I am smart and you wasted twelve years of my life!” A very dangerous assumption was made, with results that none of us would desire.
Now, consider the second assumption. These same teachers can recognise that her movement differences are differences and not deficiencies. They can assume that she knows lots and just isn’t currently able to show what she knows. Her brain is as full of knowledge and potential as that lake is of fish, but they just have not been able to reel anything in yet. As such, her schooling would reflect these high expectations and she would be considered and respected as a valued member of her school and classes. Now again, imagine her twelve years later at graduation, using her communication device to say, “Thank you from the bottom of my heart to all of my teachers who believed in me and made me feel as if I truly belonged and treated me like all of my classmates.” This is the least dangerous assumption, one that results in a young woman who can celebrate her full and fulfilling life.
But consider a third scenario as well. What if we never come up with a way for this young woman to communicate her intelligence? What if, after twelve years as a valued and respected student in all general education classes, we still do not know exactly what she has learned and knows? What harm was done? What was lost? Nothing. And that truly is the least dangerous assumption.
Understanding the concept of “least dangerous assumption” and acting on it are two different things. The idea of considering all people as capable and intelligent may not come naturally to some people due to the influence of society’s prejudices against people with disabilities. Most well intentioned adults and professionals have been taught to believe in the out-dated paradigm and, therefore, may make very dangerous assumptions about students with disabilities. Many people’s first impressions of people with disabilities are tainted by years of societal prejudice and media portrayals of what is enviable and worthwhile. While the power of these experiences is strong, we can no longer allow this to serve as a justification for the perpetuation of the prejudices against students or adults with disabilities.
The question we should all be asking ourselves is: “Do you really believe that the individual with disabilities is a valued and competent and unique person?” Think long and hard about that question. If you cannot honestly answer “yes,” then the next question is simply, “Why?” Think about your beliefs, your experiences, and the prejudice you have
been taught. Ask yourself how you can change those dangerous assumptions and mindsets. Talk with people who are friends, parents, siblings, lovers, and colleagues of people with disabilities. Listen to people who have been segregated or devalued because of the way they look or move or communicate. Learn everything you can about the many ways people communicate and get around and show us who they are and what they know. Introduce yourself to people who had labels of mental retardation while in school, who now are able to communicate their thoughts and feelings and tell us all, loud and clear, “I am intelligent!” Recognize your prejudices and work through them. It will not be as difficult as it first seems. And you will never again make assumptions about people that result in the loss of opportunity, experience, or respect.
All people are people first. Everyone belongs to this wonderful life. No one should have to conform to someone else’s standards before they are told that they are “good.” We all belong. We all have strengths and weaknesses and our own individual potential to be great people and to live the lives we want. We can all lead happy and fulfilling lives, supported by those around us to be successful adults. It is up to all of us to examine our own core beliefs and to spread the word of the least dangerous assumption. We can no longer allow the justification of a prejudice that is so dangerous. Now is definitely the time to believe that all people are valued individuals with limitless potential. Keep on fishing - the lake is overflowing!!!!
(Rossetti, Z. & Tashie, C. 2006)
So does intelligence really exist?
Probably not as any kind of single entity or potential. What else can we conclude about ‘intelligence’ from the above?
1. Intelligence can not safely be reduced to a single measure
2. Language and culture impact upon an individual's performance on any kind of psychometric test
3. Movement differences and difficulties including issues with spoken language make such testing invalid and unreliable
4. Intelligence measures are only dealing with experiences the tested person has had, they do not truly access underlying processes
5. Intelligence assessment is based on highly questionable assumptions about thought and language.
Intelligence would appear to be a fluid, context dependent variable that is not quantifiable but is a social construction. Multiple intelligences (Gardner, 1983) are perhaps one more useful way to consider thinking and problems solving processes.
Perhaps we should simply refer to specific thinking, linguistic, memory and problem solving processes without ever trying to bundle them up as one entity. We certainly should be wary of giving more value and credence to certain skills over others such as verbal over non verbal for instance.
Such a stance will call for more tentative, sophisticated ways of sketching out how someone operates in the world. Such sketching will need to be done in collaboration with those who know and love the person themselves and with their full participation. The tools used for such sketching may need to be more humble than the oppressive pseudo scientific assessment tools of the past, but in turn are likely to be more useful and respectful.
Let us live with uncertainty and accept respectfully the messiness of the unknown whilst always assuming that more is present and possible.
What should would be assessors do instead?
1. Ask those who love a person or who spend most time with them to describe their strengths, gifts and needs. This is where true wisdom about a person exists. Structured questions may help and shared reflection and theory building after collecting stories may enrich a picture and better inform decisions and strategies.
2. Beware of dangerous assumptions when assessing. Always assume competence when in doubt or when movements are difficult for a person.
3. Paint or sketch portraits in words and images of the whole person and their context. Instead of trying to be the pseudo scientific objective tester we should adopt tools more familiar to the artist creating a portrait (O’Brien 2002).
The latter investigation demands different and more nuanced tools – those that enable the search for what is healthy. Listening to children or co-constructing a narrative with them? This means reshaping the relationship between the psychologist and the learner to arrive at an end product which influences future dialogues between the young person and those closest to him or her. To deepen the conversations we might have about that young person and their inclusion/place in the world. Details are given of the particular – the complexity and detail of another’s experiences are documented in the hope that readers will see themselves in it even if it is exotic.

We only truly understand if we feel some sense of connection or identification with the person in the picture or story– stand in their shoes of the child with autism – nobody sees themselves in the generalisations of the ‘Triad’. Context is a source of understanding – not a source of data distortion. Behaviour may give us a clue – but it is the meanings people attach to the behaviours that ought really to concern us.

The standard is authenticity rather than ‘truth’ so there is never a single story – many could be told. The narrowest stories about individuals are drawn from the psychometric encounter – “Kevin has a mental age of 2 years”

LISTENING FOR A STORY vs. LISTENING TO A STORY’ (Wilson, D. 2009)

1. Make use of criterion referenced or curriculum based assessment to inform planning. How is a child progressing in relation to what they are being taught as opposed to presumed underlying intellectual processes. One of the aims of criterion referencing is to focus on individual, differentiated assessment. By moving away from norm-referencing, to a system which describes what students know, understand and can do, assessments can be used to provide feedback and to inform future teaching and learning needs.
2. Use authentic assessment processes that respect context and learning. This is a form of assessment in which students are asked to perform real-world tasks that demonstrate meaningful application of essential knowledge and skills.
"...Engaging and worthy problems or questions of importance, in which students must use knowledge to fashion performances effectively and creatively. The tasks are either replicas of or analogous to the kinds of problems faced by adult citizens and consumers or professionals in the field." (Wiggins, 2006)

1. Use the wider frame suggested by the work being done on ‘Multiple Intelligences’, and always notice and respect if not starting by noting diverse Learning Styles.
The theory of multiple intelligences was developed in 1983 by Dr. Howard Gardner, professor of education at Harvard University. It suggests that the traditional notion of intelligence, based on I.Q. testing, is far too limited. Instead, Dr. Gardner proposes eight different intelligences to account for a broader range of human potential in children and adults. These intelligences are:

Linguistic intelligence ("word smart"):

Logical-mathematical intelligence ("number/reasoning smart")

Spatial intelligence ("picture smart")

Bodily-Kinesthetic intelligence ("body smart")

Musical intelligence ("music smart")

Interpersonal intelligence ("people smart")

Intrapersonal intelligence ("self smart")

Naturalist intelligence ("nature smart")

1. Engage in participant observation which has a long and respected history in the world of anthropology. Participant observation is the involvement of the anthropologist in the activities of the people in that society, so that instead of just observing the people, the anthropologist is able to get a more hands on experience of how these people live their lives. The main advantages of participant observation are that it allows the anthropologists to obtain a deeper and more experienced insight on the activities that the individuals of a society perform and the ways in which they think and that it also allows the anthropologists to gain a good overview of how and why a society functions.
Who are the participants who will have best knowledge about a child or young person? How long will we need to be part of a young persons life to get a real handle on who they are what they bring?
1. Always respect the social model of disability! The social model of disability proposes that barriers and prejudice and exclusion by society (purposely or inadvertently) are the ultimate factors defining who is disabled and who is not in a particular society.
References

Donnellan, A. M. & Leary, M. R. (1995). Movement differences and diversity in autism/mental retardation: Appreciating and accommodating people with communication challenges. Madison, Wisconsin: DRI Press.

Gallannaugh, Frances and Dyson, Alan The Journal of Special Education, Vol. 42, No. 1, 36-46 (2008) DOI: 10.1177/0022466907313607 Disproportionality in Special Needs Education in England: University of Manchester

Gardner, Howard. Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic,1983Intelligence Quotient: Prof. Dr. Hans-Hilger Ropers/ Prof. Dr. Randolf Menzel (2007)

J Leadbetter. 2005. Activity theory as a Conceptual Framework and Analytical Tool within the Practice of Educational Psychology, Educational and Child Psychology, 22, 1, 18‐28. ISSN: 0267‐1611.PLASC and School Level Annual School Census 2002

Leyden, G. (1978) Reconstructing Educational Psychology by W E C Gillham: Croom Helm

Lokke, C., Gersch, I. M’gadzah, H. and Frederickson, N. (1997) The resurrection of psychometrics: fact or fiction? Educational Psychology in Practice, 12, 4, 222-233.IQ Test: Where Does It Come From and What Does It Measure? JAN STRYDOM, M.A., H.E.D., D.Ed. & DU PLESSIS, B.D., B.A. Hons (2000)

O’Brien, John (2002) Inclusion News. Article: ‘Great Questions and The Art of Portraiture’. This essay was part-inspired by the work of Sarah Lawrence-Lightfoot, a sociologist at the Harvard School of Education.
Rossetti, Z. & Tashie, C., (2006) The Least Dangerous Assumption, University of New Hampshire, Institute on Disability http://www.iod.unh.edu

Shapiro, ES Angello, LM, Eckert TL, School Psychology Review, 2004 - questia.com
... Has Curriculum-Based Assessment Become a Staple of School Psychology Practice? an Update and Extension of Knowledge, Use and Attitudes from 1990 to 2000. ...
Siegel, L. S., & Metsala, E., “An alternative to the food processor approach to subtypes of learning disabilities,” in N. N. Singh & I. L. Beale (eds.), Learning Disabilities: Nature, Theory, and Treatment (New York: Springler-Verlag, 1992), 45

Smith, C. R., Learning Disabilities: The Interaction of Learner, Task, and Setting (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1991), 63

Gary Thomas and Andrew Loxley Special Education and Constructing Inclusion (2007) by OPen University

Venables, K. and Farrell P. in A Psychology for inclusive education : new directions in theory and practice / edited by Peter Hick, Ruth Kershner and Peter Farrell (2009)

Alex, Wien, Austria (2009) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4183166.stm
Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2006). Examining the teaching life. Educational Leadership, 63, 26-29.

Wilson, D. 2009: FOR A STORY vs. LISTENING TO A TORY’ (Unpublished Paper)

Listening

Wed, 3 Dec 2008 12:01:38 +0000

Who needs to be listened to? Surely we ALL do?
Some parents tell us their child was welcomed to the school or setting but when it got hard the staff stopped listening. Many children and young people let us know only too clearly:
‘No one listens to me!’
The older they get the louder this message!

Even young people with no spoken words can still let us know when they do not feel listened to. Herb Lovett (1996) a psychologist from the United States was clear that we should take people seriously. Their actions and words are communications and may carry meanings that are not always obvious unless we listen very closely.

We encourage respectful listening with eyes, ears and hearts.

We have found that when working with groups of all sizes around an individual or working as a diverse group trying to achieve consensus, listening will always be key. Listening activities designed to deepen listening can help set a tone but also strengthen the connections between those present. Starting with the simplest activities of listening uninterrupted for one minute, to activities designed to encourage deeper listening skills of reflecting back, summarising and use of open-ended questions.
The purposes of empathic listening, making use of reflecting back and paraphrasing include:
1. An indication of real listening. ‘You have heard what I am saying because you have repeated it.’ Many therapists have argued that to be really listened to like this can actually bring about personal growth and change with no other intervention being present.
2. When a facilitator reflects back during person centred planning time is gained and a repeat of the contribution is made for a graphic facilitator to hear better and translate into key words or graphics.
3. Such processes help whoever is present to hear and reflect upon what has just been said.
Having reflected back we have also found it helpful to check out with the speaker, ‘have I got it right?’ - ‘Was that it?’ especially when paraphrasing a long input. If the speaker has said a lot you will inevitably need to paraphrase what you have heard. However it is essential to respectfully stay with the person’s own words and not substitute your own. By ‘psychologising’ other peoples words with your own you will only create distance and break the connection that is being made with the speaker.
Some are not comfortable with intense listening and this needs to be respected. They do not like being ‘on the spot ‘and may easily feel judged by an empathic listener.

During person centred processes, such as the MAP or PATH processes (Pearpoint, J. Forest, M. and Snow, J., 1993) it is essential to emphasise the importance of ‘respectful’ listening. Listening is also crucial for all practitioners working with children and young people of all ages especially when tackling issues involving challenging behaviour in more restorative ways.

The various processes that can be used to repair harm demand certain skills of facilitators. These include active, empathic listening, impartiality and an ability to empower others to come up with their own solutions to problems. (Tinker, R., 2005)

Great listening often delivers empathy, which in its own right can improve relationships, deepen understanding and create healthy behaviour change.

I notice that empathy is a key ingredient in any successful restorative conference. When the parties learn about the weaknesses and humanness of those who have previously been offenders, opponents or competitors, there is often a kind of catharsis. People can forgive a lot, when they understand how something came to happen. (Drewery, W., 2008)

Listening deeper, under the surface of words, is where the true meaning lies. Listening to the story, the narrative - has a power of its own.

Aboriginal Talking sticks, precious stones can be held by speakers to elevate the gravity of the speaker’s presence and clarify who actually is speaking. We like to use magic wands that light up!!

‘We all have the power to listen to voices that are seldom heard. If we choose to make the time, to learn to listen and to struggle with the pain and frustration that disempowered people feel, we will see new visions, feel new energy, and find hope in our future. There is power in the powerless. We can be catalysts, or encrusted residue. The choice is ours. (Pearpoint,J. 1993)

COlin Newton

The Sea

Fri, 21 Nov 2008 17:10:23 +0000

As a parent of three children I am struck by how the relationship feels as children grow older.

I am reminded of the sea.

Sometimes our children seem a long way out. I am watching them from afar. The sea is on the horizon.

Other times they are very close and I can watch their every move. All turbulence and waves are present.

Often we are in close physical contact. We are connected I am swimming deep in each relationship.

At times I am covered by the sea of the relationship. Overwhelmed, choking almost drowned. Then with the passage of time I breathe again and maybe they are moving away again.

Events, time and opportunities all impact upon the wonderful relationships that I am part of with my wonderful children.

I love the sea. I love my children.

Colin Newton

P.S. Louis (my 13year old son) says ‘Thats fair to say!’ when I asked if it was the same for him when he thinks about his mum and dad.

Lizzy and Puccini

Wed, 19 Nov 2008 09:52:43 +0000

We worked in the North on Monday and carried out a Circle of Adults Process around a school nurse and her worries about a young disabled woman called Lizzie.

Her impairment is cerebral palsy, she has no spoken words, is fed through a tube, can sometimes communicate yes or no with a head switch. She attends a special school. Her family are travellers. Her mum really loves her but Lizzie has been fostered many times and is about to be fostered out of the area losing contact with school staff and friends.

Her label is ‘severe learning difficulties’.

But get this....

She loves Opera...especially Puccini...

Emotionally she appears deeply depressed.

She gets really excited at seeing her mum.

I wonder just how wise this young woman really is?
How deeply intelligent?
How sensitive?
Have you ever listened to Puccini?(Listen to music above) Its very ‘high brow’- takes a lot of thought to process.
As Elliot my son said: ‘Perhaps the music speaks for her?’
How much would she benefit from facilitated communication?
What would it take for her mum to be supported so Lizzie too could join in the Traveller life style in a caravan?
Why must she be sent away again?
Why is she in a special School?

Colin Newton

Circle of Adults - Conclusion: Team 9

Mon, 15 Sep 2008 14:55:24 +0100

Circle of Adults (Newton and Wilson, 2006) is a lengthier but deeper approach to team reflection and problem solving.

Again we believe that the more complex the problem, the more diverse the team needs to be if understanding and relationships with challenging young people are to be at their best. We developed this approach in the face of intractable behaviour problems in schools, a rising tide of exclusions from schools and in the face of a disturbing, instinctive attitude that a high number of pupils ‘ just don’t belong here’. Read a detailed summary at Inclusive Solutions web site or purchase the practical handbook shown here or DVD illustrating the process at our on line store.

Building on earlier attempts to develop group and teamwork and mutual support among teachers this model evolved. Regular meetings are held between a concerned circle of adults, as diverse a group as possible. In these groups emotions are shared, personal feelings and reactions explored as well as deeper understandings of individual young people and what they bring, gained. Aspects of the system, which help and hinder are explored, and detailed problem solving is engaged in. These groups are powerful and do make a difference. We feel that the task facing teachers and other professional carers and educators of understanding and coping with emotional turmoil and hard to manage behaviour is not an easy one and processes which can offer front line staff essential support and supervision must be welcomed.

The ‘Circles of Adults’ approach addresses the need for a problem solving process that is able to take an in-depth look at meeting the emotional needs that commonly underlie challenging behaviour in schools. The approach is co-facilitated and is designed to enable the participation of teacher teams to reach a deeper understanding of a young person and to evolve a set of hypotheses and emerging strategies that better accommodate to unmet emotional and learning needs. The approach is a time consuming one and intended for use with the most challenging young people, those at high risk of being permanently excluded from the regular school system. A 90-minute session will be needed to present this approach and the format will be a live demonstration following the steps listed below.
In conclusion

A team can become much more inclusive in its operations both within and without.
Teams can commit to full the inclusion of all children and young people. Leaders can set out this as the new direction, create a sense of shared vision and work hard to take people with them both within and outside the organisation. Ultimately there will be a day-to-day management task and some shared figuring out of how every person will be included. We now know that this can be achieved.

We have explored over the series of blogs how a team can change with leadership, shared vision, community engagement and effective and diverse management. Ultimately team leaders and team members, using the wisdom and patience of Ghandi need to live the change they wish to see.

Ghandi was reversing the materialistic concept that conditions determine psychology. No, psychology could shape conditions. ‘What you think, you become’. (The life of Mahatma Gandhi, Louis Fischer, 1982)

Team Blog References

Asset Based Community Development Institute: (2005) Hidden Treasures. Community Building Workbook

De Bono, Edward. (1985) Six Thinking Hats

DFES : Head Teacher Standard 6 - Strengthening Community, Head teacher Standards. (2006)

The life of Mahatma Gandhi, Louis Fischer, 1982

Giangreco, M. (2002) Inclusion Cartoons

Newton, C. and Wilson, D., Creating Circles of Friends, Inclusive Solutions, 2005

Newton, C. and Wilson, D., Circles of Adults, Inclusive Solutions, 2006

O’Brien J. and O’Brien C. L. (2002) ‘Implementing Person centered Planning’ Inclusion Press. Toronto

Owen, Harrison: Open Space Technology: 2003

Pearpoint, J.(2002) ‘’Hints for Graphic Facilitators’’ Inclusion Press, Toronto

Pearpoint, J. Forest, M. and Snow, J.(1993) “The Inclusion Papers- Strategies to Make Inclusion Work”. Inclusion Press, Toronto.

Pearpoint, J. Forest. (1996) Solution Circles: http://www.inclusion.com/ttsolutioncircle.html

Schorr, Lisbeth – (1997) “Common Purpose – Strengthening Families and Neighbourhoods to Rebuild America”.

Wheatley, Margaret (2005) Finding our Way (BK Publishers)

Wilson, D. (2002) Teams for Inclusion: Special Children

Teams Problem Solving Together: Team 8

Wed, 21 May 2008 10:30:07 +0100

Teams problem solving together

Teams committed to effective inclusion will need to be great at joint problem solving together. They will need to be positive and solution oriented but will also need to be able to contain and process more painful and hard to resolve issues and emotions too. In some situations ‘bearing witness’, trying to restore hope, or just hanging in there through a very difficult time may be the most respectful responses to a child and family’s circumstances.

However in a myriad of other circumstances the instinct to get creative around hard to solve issues needs structured processes. One such tool is ‘Solution Circles’ which can be used for quick problem solving around stuck issues can be very powerful for all involved.

Open BOX

Solution Circles

A Creative Problem Solving Tool for getting unstuck
Designed by Jack Pearpoint and Marsha Forest (1996)

This is a short and powerful tool that takes no more than a half hour and is effective in helping a team member to get “unstuck” from a problem in life or work. ‘Solution Circles’ is a tool designed to build “community capacity” so fits well with our wheel of change. The process assumes and demonstrates that nearby people - in any community or work place have the capacity to help if asked. It requires a person to ASK - not an easy thing in our culture of the individual, privacy and ‘do it alone’. This tool puts all the values we espouse into practice and demonstrates that TOGETHER WE’RE BETTER.

Time required: No more than thirty minutes.
People per Solution circle: Best with 5-9.
Roles to be played:
〈 Problem Presenter (focus person)
〈 Process Facilitator (team manager, time keeper)
〈 Note Taker or Graphic Recorder
〈 Amazingly creative Thought Showering Team

The greater the diversity in the team the better.

Explain the steps to the teams in detail:

Step One: (6 minutes)
The problem presenter will have 6 uninterrupted minutes to outline the problem. The job of the process facilitator is to keep time and make sure no one interrupts. The recorder takes notes. Everyone else (the brainstormers) listen. If the problem presenter stops talking before the six minutes elapse, everyone else stays silent until the 6 minutes pass. This is key! The problem presenter gets 6 uninterrupted minutes.

Step two: (6 minutes)
This is a thought shower. Everyone chimes in with ideas about creative solutions to what they just heard. It is not a time to clarify the problem or to ask questions. It is not a time to give speeches, lectures or advice. The process facilitator must make sure this is truly a thought shower. Everyone gets a chance to give his or her brilliant ideas. No one must be allowed to dominate. The problem presenter listens - without interrupting. He/she must not talk or respond. We often give the person masking tape to facilitate their listening. It’s hard to just listen!

Step 3. (6 minutes)
Now the group can have a dialogue led by the problem presenter. This is time to explore and clarify the problem. Focus on the positive points only and not what can’t be done.

Step 4: (6 minutes)
The First Step. The focus person and the group decide on first steps that are doable within the next few days. A coach from the group volunteers to phone or see the person within 3 days and check if they took their first step.

Finally the group just does a round of words to describe the experience
and the recorder gives the record to the focus person. If in a large group, the
teams returns to the main group, debrief and continue. In our experiences people love this exercise and find that it generates action. It does not guarantee a solution, but it usually gets people “unstuck” and at least points to the next logical step.

Close BOX

Managing Teams: Team Hats! Team 7

Tue, 20 May 2008 10:31:39 +0100

Management

If enough quality groundwork has been done in the first three steps of the medicine wheel, then the management stage should almost be starting to shape itself. With the foundations of leadership, vision and community in place, the team is ready to be get into action and it will then grow and develop its own momentum.

So who is going to do what and when?
What does the action plan look like?
What resources will be needed?
Where will this work take place and when?
Where will this work be named in the Development or Improvement Plan?

Teams in action - Harnessing the diversity of a team

Teams need a range of gifts and strengths to be effective. They need a range of styles of thinking and acting if they are to avoid becoming stuck or ineffective when it comes to including children and young people with a wide range of difference and challenges.

In Howard Gardner’s latest book- Five Kinds of Minds(2007) we can usefully reflect on the distinctive thought styles of any group of individuals. Edward De Bono had previously provided many helpful, guiding ideas around ways of thinking with his ‘ 6 Thinking Hats’. We believe it is useful to consider how each 'Thinking Hat' reflects a different style of thinking for someone in an inclusive team or elsewhere. These are explained below:

* Red Hat:
Wearing the red hat, you look at problems using intuition, gut reaction, and emotion. You try to think how other people will react emotionally.

* White Hat:
With this thinking hat you focus on the data available. Look at the information you have, and see what you can learn from it. Look for gaps in your knowledge, and either try to fill them or take account of them. With this hat you analyse past trends, and try to extrapolate from historical data.

* Grey Hat:
Using Grey hat thinking, you look at all the negative possibilities of the decision or your team situation. You look at it cautiously and defensively. You try to see why it might not work. This hat is important because it highlights the weak points in any team plan or endeavour. It allows you to tackle weaknesses, alter them, or prepare contingency plans to counter them. Grey Hat thinking helps to make your plans 'tougher' and more resilient. It can also help you to spot fatal flaws and risks before you embark on a course of action. Grey Hat thinking can be very useful, as many successful people get so used to thinking positively that often they cannot see problems in advance. This leaves them under-prepared for difficulties.

* Yellow Hat:
The yellow hat helps you to think positively. It is the optimistic viewpoint that helps you to see all the benefits of the decision and the value in it. Yellow Hat thinking helps you to keep going when everything looks gloomy and difficult.

* Green Hat:
The Green Hat stands for creativity. This is where you can develop creative solutions to a problem. It is a freewheeling way of thinking, in which there is little criticism of ideas. A whole range of creativity tools can help you here.

* Blue Hat:
The Blue Hat stands for leadership and vision. This is the hat worn by people chairing meetings or leading in teams. The Blue hat wearer listens to the perspectives of all the other hats and looks to the future. When running into difficulties because ideas are running dry, they may direct activity into Green Hat thinking. When contingency plans are needed, they will ask for Grey Hat thinking, and so forth.

** We propose an extra hat – the Sparkly Hat:
This is the hat of values. You wear this hat to name the deep values that underpin your work in a team for inclusion. We are doing this because it is important, because, for example, ‘this child has a human right to belong!’ Human rights, equal opportunities, the end to discrimination and segregation.

By naming and reflecting upon who is wearing which hat and when, creativity and team processes can be harnessed and strengthened. Typical patterns and habits of hat wearing can be interrupted and a new hat reached for. In this way a new even more creative team emerges.

The more diverse the team the richer and more inclusive it can become. This is very evident when problem solving engages a wider group of team members than usual. We have noticed many times how the involvement of a setting’s secretary/admin person or their site manager has enhanced solutions and strategies to stuck issues.

Community Circles: Beyond Benefits-Team 6

Mon, 14 Apr 2008 16:58:46 +0100

Community Circles

In 2007 we at Inclusive Solutions began to create community gatherings in Nottinghamshire that were based on full inclusion principles. All were welcome to explore how all could get sufficient meaning, friendship and money in their lives. Based on the highly successful work of Lois Smidt and Beyond Welfare in Iowa, in the U.S. Allies and participants were gathered and wants – needs – offers were shared.

This process welcomes participants into community, assists them in identifying their strengths as well as challenges, and introduces them to the values of
relationship, reciprocity and leadership development that infuse
everything that BW does. Allies are also recruited, trained and supported for intentional
friendships with BW participants that are based on common interests.
The safety and stability, self-sufficiency, and well-being of the BW participant family remain at the center of these relationships. BW
assists families that are particularly isolated in enlisting a Circle of Support, a group of 3-4 volunteers that meets monthly to understand
and support the goals of the family. (Hidden Treasures. Community Building Workbook: Asset Based Community Development Institute: 2005)

This kind of community enlisting seems to fit well with the work of Kretzmann and McKnight (1993), Wheatley (1995) as well as that encouraged by Mike Green and others involved in what has become known as Asset Based Community Development.(REF)

It is interesting to note the linkage between the theme of community engagement in change and the ‘Head teacher Standards’ and Standard 6 - Strengthening Community in particular, which would be just as relevant to the work of managers of Early Years settings:

Schools exist in a distinctive social context, which has a direct impact on what happens inside the school. School leadership should commit to engaging with the internal and external school community to secure equity and entitlement. Head teachers should collaborate with other schools in order to share expertise and bring positive benefit to their own and other schools. They should work collaboratively at both strategic and operational levels with parents and carers and across multiple agencies for the well-being of all children. Head teachers share responsibility for leadership of the wider educational system and should be aware that school improvement and community development are interdependent.”
Head Teacher Standard 6 - Strengthening Community (2006)

So opening up participation, community engagement, focusing on capacity with maximal and inclusive involvement beyond the team members themselves are the processes crucial to building a team that shares a vision of full inclusion.

See http://www.inclusive-solutions.com/communitycircles.asp for much more...

How to bring the community with you?

Mon, 7 Apr 2008 16:08:01 +0100

Teams and Communities

People only support what they create. Life insists on its freedom to participate and can never be coerced into accepting someone else’s plans. (Whitely, 2005)

Who will you need to take with you? This is a crucial stage. Who are the key stake holders in the change towards a more inclusive team? How can you best enrol their support? What about the wider community in which your team operates?

How do we take people with us?
Wheatley(2005) argues that we should abandon mechanistic assumptions about organisational change as meaning behaves more like energy. Following this logic we do not have to achieve a critical mass, or roll out programmes across a whole setting or community. Instead we can work locally finding creative ideas that are meaningful to one area of the team or system. Energy generated here will lead to other networks taking notice.

She argues strongly for engaging participation processes when undergoing change. We should involve everybody who cares and anyone likely to be affected by changes.

We haven’t yet absorbed the simple truth that we can’t force anybody to change. We can only involve them in the change process from the beginning and see what’s possible. If change becomes meaningful to them, they will change. If we want their support, we must welcome them as co-creators. (Wheatley, 2005)

In 2006, we at Inclusive Solutions were involved in a consultation with the communities of all the emerging Children’s Centres in Oxfordshire. Oxfordshire was keen that local residents and parents’ ideas and vision for the future inform them on how their teams of the future should ‘feel’.

Many thought that the Children’s Centre should be a Focus for Community Building and Connection: This was a strongly recurring theme in all of the sessions we conducted. In some visions this was expressed as the creation of a co-operative community, a village of support where the gifts of all were recognised and used (“a place where we can learn what each has to give”). In other visions there was a wish for the aims and activities of the Centre to be owned and driven by local people. In yet others the centre was a place to gather for mutual support and friendship. The essence of the aspiration being expressed here was to take charge of the future for the community’s children.

The available literature (e.g. Kretzmann and McKnight 1993) on ‘Community Building’ strongly suggests that communities cannot be built (or rebuilt) by focusing on their needs, problems and deficiencies. Rather, community building starts with the process of locating assets, skills and capacities of residents, local associations and institutions. The vision being expressed here is radically different from the approach that begins with identifying the problems and needs within a community and it is worth rehearsing some of the drawbacks of a needs-driven approach to problem solving and community building:

〈 Viewing a community as an endless list of problems and needs leads directly to the much-criticised fragmentation of services and efforts to provide solutions and thus provokes the subsequent calls for a ‘one stop shop’ of services. It also denies the basic community wisdom (expressed throughout the visions described here) which realises problems are tightly interconnected and in fact symptomatic of the breakdown of a community’s own problem solving capacities.

〈 Targeting resources based on needs directs funding not to residents but to service providers – a consequence not always planned for or effective

〈 Making resources available on the basis of needs can have negative effects on the nature of local community leadership. If, for example, a measure of effective leadership is the ability to attract resources, then local leaders/Centre managers are in effect, being forced to devalue their families and their communities by highlighting their problems and needs and by ignoring their capacities and strengths

〈 Providing resources on the basis of needs underlines the perception that only outside experts can provide real help. And therefore the relationships that count most for local residents are no longer those inside the community, those neighbour-to-neighbour links and informal supports much mentioned in these consultations. Instead the most important relationships become those that involve the expert, the social worker, the health provider, the funder. Once again the relationships that bind communities together are weakened.

〈 At best reliance on identifying and meeting needs as the sole policy guide will only ensure a maintenance and survival strategy targeted at isolated individual clients, not a development plan that can involve the energies of an entire community.

So - if we accept that trying to address the big issues facing Children’s Centre and other teams concerned with the education, care and socialisation of children, will not be achieved by simply increasing Services – what else is needed?

One of the best-researched answer to this question that we are aware of is detailed within Lisbeth Schorr’s book – “Common Purpose – Strengthening Families and Neighbourhoods to Rebuild America”. She lists what she terms the ‘Seven Attributes of Highly Effective Programs’ as follows:

1. Successful programs are comprehensive, flexible responsive and persevering
2. Successful programs see children within the context of their families
3. Successful programs deal with families as parts of neighbourhoods and communities
4. Successful programs have a long-term, preventative orientation, a clear mission and continue to evolve over time
5. Successful programs are well managed by competent individuals with clearly identifiable skills
6. Staffs of successful programs are trained and supported to provide high-quality, responsive services
7. Successful programs operate in settings that encourage practitioners to build strong relationships based on mutual trust and respect.

Visioning: Teams for Inclusion 4

Thu, 3 Apr 2008 15:12:23 +0100

Vision

Teams Visioning

There is an old Japanese proverb, “Vision without action is a daydream. Action without vision is a nightmare.”

So what would a team truly committed to the inclusion of all children in mainstream settings actually look like? By inviting key stakeholders and frontline practitioners to be involved in collectively visioning, a shared picture will emerge - especially if the process of creating this is well facilitated.

Visioning or dreaming is about going beyond the ethos and culture that defines your school, setting or team at present.

o How would we like to see this change?
o Can we create a dream future that all can commit to?
o What value base is it rooted in?
o What blue-sky thoughts are associated with the future?

This vision or dream space is not grounded in reality but reaches for a changed world. By describing our dreams for the future of an inclusive team and its work we will set a clear direction. We may not reach this entire dream in our life times but we may well hit key staging posts along the way. We will certainly be clear where we are heading.

Care is needed in this stage of the Medicine Wheel. Facilitators and leaders need to resist the temptation to create flow diagrams or write outcomes. If you need these they can be done later when we are in the ‘Management’ phase of the wheel.

Martin Luther King reached for a dream, a dream of racial equality in the States, a dream he perhaps never thought he would see realised in his own lifetime. It was genuinely a dream and most definitely not a set of aims and objectives.

“There is no power for change greater than a community discovering what it cares about”
Margaret Wheatley – ‘Turning to One Another’ (2002)

We have discovered that giving a team the opportunity to pause and reflect on what matters most to them about the work they do is a very powerful experience. The act of listening to each other creates relationship and strengthens trust and inclusion within the team - in creating a shared vision, groups of people build a sense of commitment together.

“ I was totally blown away, when I realised how passionate people were about inclusion”………….

Teams can develop images of ‘the future we want to create together’, along with the values that will be important in getting there and the goals they want to see achieved along the way. Unfortunately, many people still think ‘vision’ is the top leader’s job. In schools, Children’s Centres and other settings, the ‘vision task’ usually falls to the manager, headteacher and/or the governors, or it comes in a glossy document from the local authority or the Government. But visions based on authority are not sustainable.
Drawing on the planning tools MAPS and PATH (Pearpoint, Forest and O’Brien 1997) and other facilitation sources we use both process and graphic facilitation to enable groups to build their picture of what they would love to see happening within their organisation /community in the future and we encourage this to be a positive naming, not just a list of the things they want to avoid.

“So nice to reflect and realise what a long way we have come”…………..”

When working with teams to create a shared vision we have found it always worth beginning the session with a range of activities and reflections designed to set the tone for the work to be done. This needs following up with a session lasting at least an hour where all present reflect on what matters most to them about their work, what they would love to see happening if there were no constraints on time, people, resources and so forth. Individuals in twos and threes can then be asked to share their thinking first with each other then with the whole group. Participants can be encouraged to use their imaginations to the fullest and to stretch their thinking as far as they can as they describe what they would love to see happening in the future - even if they have no idea of how they could get there. This part of the process is not about being realistic – it is about establishing the direction of travel.

The group will need to become more grounded as the session progresses. As people give voice to their thinking the essence of what they say can be captured on a large and colourful graphic mounted at the front of a room – similar to the image at the start of this section. The capturing is best done by someone who has learned graphic facilitation skills.

Typically facilitators can use person centred planning tools such as MAP and PATH to create vision and to do planning with any team going through a number of the following:

〈 The Story So Far – a valuable activity for new or re-organised teams where trust levels may not be high – this activity can last for up to an hour and asks team members to describe their professional journeys so far, the high and low points, the key changes. The end graphic poster typically captures the complexity of the past and the ever-changing territory the team works within. For some teams this process is key to allowing them to take the step into the future that building a shared vision requires.There can be a therapeutic value in naming the past, literally drawing a line around it and moving on.
〈 Headline Themes – a 15 – 20 minute activity which asks the group to capture the essence of their vision in 3 or 4 memorable ‘headline’ summary phrases.
〈 Naming the Nightmare – no more than 5 to 10 minutes is needed for this activity. Here we ask people to name their ‘nightmares’ - the things they would hate to see happening in their organisation or community. We don’t dwell on this nor do we encourage the same level of detailed description that we expect in the vision. However we have learned that some teams/individuals need the extra energy that is released by naming and working to avoid the nightmare.
〈 A Year from Now – a 30 – 45 minute activity which asks the team to imagine they have traveled in time and are now a year ahead from today and are looking back at what they have achieved. The rule is that the events they remember must be ‘positive and possible’ This is a more ‘playful’ activity and often releases energy and creativity in the team
〈 Naming Roadblocks and Barriers – a 45-minute activity which asks the team to name what they see as the important barriers that stand in the way of achieving their vision. We encourage the group to be as specific as they can about these roadblocks as they write them onto cards, which are then posted over the vision graphic. The team then problem solves together in twos and threes devising ways of going round, removing or reducing the roadblocks until a point is reached where most of the vision is uncovered again. This is an energising activity for teams that feel overwhelmed by the sheer number of issues confronting them
〈 Who will we need to take with us on the Journey towards the Vision – a 20 minute activity that asks the team to name key people who will need to be fully on board before work on the vision can begin in earnest. This activity begins with the people in the room who are invited to sign up to the vision there and then. It also asks the team to create a (small) list of people that the vision needs to be shared with and seek their support. With the creation of this list the team begin to chart some their first actions from the day
〈 Who are we? – Gifts, Strengths and Talents – a 30 minute activity which encourages the team to take explicit stock of their capacities and what they already have going for them as they begin working towards the vision. We do this in various ways – by asking individuals to talk about a time in their professional lives (or beyond) when they felt they were at their best, by asking the group as a whole to notice and name each others gifts and talents. This is a strong reminder for teams of the wealth of knowledge and experience that is already and always in the room
〈 Charting Specific Actions – a 30 to 40 minute activity done initially in pairs and then in groups of four. The team members are asking to start naming a sample of actions they can do in the next few days/week/month and how these actions relate to the vision. We actively coach the group to name actions that they themselves are going to do - not simply a good idea for someone else to do and which are more than just ‘good intentions’

These ideas have emerged from the work of Jack Pearpoint, Marsha Forest, John O’Brien and our own unpublished experiences of facilitating many teams across the UK. They are processes designed to promote and support the inclusion of individuals in the mainstream world and so fit very well with teams working for inclusion.

These visioning and planning processes work best with external facilitation but even without this the creation of a shared articulated vision with a plan that supports the direction of the dream will be essential for any inclusive team.

Seneca said, “Our plans miscarry if they have no aim. When a man does not know what harbor he is making for, no wind is the right wind.”

Trust - The cement that binds the solid inclusive team

Wed, 19 Mar 2008 07:39:13 +0000

The cement that holds team members together and that at best is found between leaders and their teams is trust. When present this magical gel will bring out the best in any group of people, but it is so easily lost, damaged or even completely absent.

A team may crumble and lose all strength and solidarity when there are trust issues present. In the social sciences, the subtleties of trust are a subject of ongoing research. In sociology and psychology the degree to which one party trusts another is a measure of belief in the honesty, benevolence and competence of the other party.

It is not hard to create a checklist or even a bedside book of trust by asking any group what are the qualities of the relationship that they have with someone they truly trust. Sadly some people can trust none but even they know what it is to almost trust someone. We have been asking groups about their experience of trusting relationships for the last 7 years. Here are some typical responses:

Typical qualities of Trust

Non-Judgemental
Honest
Open
Good listening
Challenging and direct
Always holding your best interests at heart
Shared disclosure

Typical Behaviour around someone not trusted

Closed body language
Not sharing anything personal
Sometimes assertive or even aggressive
Not relaxed - tense
Talking about the mistrusted person behind their back
Memos in triplicate
Gossip
Acting in an untrustworthy fashion!

When trust is lost people can act in extreme untrustworthy ways, not because there is anything wrong with them. They do not suffer from a new syndrome LOTS (Loss of Trust Syndrome!) they simply do not feel trusted.

Leaders do well to cultivate trust within teams. Trust will be needed if team members are to work hard on making inclusion a reality. Teams simply need trust to function at their best. Teams where trust is present and valued will also model the way for others. What do leaders and mangers need to do to cultivate trust? The same list as above. They need to embody and model these qualitiesand simply be:

Non-Judgemental
Honest
Open
Good listening
Challenging and direct
Always holding your best interests at heart
Shared disclosure

Is this quick overnight work? No!! Trust takes time to grow.... Nurture it.

Leadership: Teams for Inclusion 2

Tue, 5 Feb 2008 15:41:55 +0000

Leadership

There is a better way. Our team can be completely committed to full inclusion for all the children in our care. We will work to ensure their inclusion in our school or setting and in the surrounding community however different or challenging their additional needs may appear. When those same children leave us we will work to ensure their safe passage to the next mainstream setting - be it school, college or employment. If we have to accompany parents, or prepare the way to ensure the success of this inclusive transition then we will do this. We will resist the voices and pressures to move children into more segregated and special settings away from their friends and communities.

Who will we include? How about anyone who wants to attend, to participate, to be present?

All really will mean all.

There are many busy activities that any team member could engage in, but what essential or important actions will an inclusive team engage in? WE need to be clear about what a team will and will not be doing. Its too easy to just add tasks to already overburdened people. Let us be clear. The work of the Nottingham City Inclusion Facilitation team reflected in the following table illustrates what we think an inclusive team should and should not be doing:

Some things Teams for Inclusion
SHOULD be doing

• Enshrining JOINT WORKING as the team's modus operandi.
• Dedicating time to team building and recognisingthat this is a 'time hungry' but essential task
• Recognising that inclusion is about human rights, social justice and having insight into the disability equality issues that underpin the inclusion movement
• Using everyday language and making sense
• Having high expectations
• Being comfortable with saying ‘I don't know what to do in these circumstances but together we can work it out'
• Asking 'Would it be alright to do this if the child was not disabled?'
• Valuing individual team member’s strengths and gifts and supporting them to become even better at what they already do well
• Reaching out and empowering parents (particularly from socially disadvantaged groups) to become advocates for their child within the peer group and the wider community
• Continually asking 'what is inclusion?' and developing an understanding that inclusion is a process, not a fixed point to be reached
• Identifying potential leaders for inclusion within mainstream settings and investing substantially in their development
• Using 'only as special as necessary' as a key guide to the planning of support
• Recognising and developing the role of typical peers in the inclusion process, having insights into the benefits for all

What Teams for Inclusion
should NOT be doing

• Allocating patches that are the 'sole' responsibility of the individual team member. They should not be encouraging the 'myth of the expert'.
• Focusing solely on working out what is wrong with the child and identifying and meeting special needs Inventing and valuing jargon that only one person in a thousand understands
• Predicting long term limits and plateaux; inviting low aspirations from others
• Handing over responsibility to someone else
• Seeking to recreate special school systems and structures in mainstream settings - e.g. establishing 'inclusion rooms'
• Establishing hierarchies by profession and salary
• Having little or no involvement with parents of children they are supporting
• Being comfortable with and investing in the status quo.
• Not accepting that change is inevitable and resisting becoming active agents for change
• Allocating strictly equal shares of team time to each of the schools they serve
• Viewing more as better. Multiple referrals create further barriers to belonging
• Visiting schools only to see pupils on a caseload in isolation from their peers and classes

Whilst written and published 5 years ago the clear direction contained above still appears fresh and relevant to those seeking to develop interagency and multi professional teams today. Many emerging reorganised Support Services and Children’s Centres are grappling with just these challenges.

Who will be part of teams committed to inclusion?
The above gives some idea of what an inclusive team might be doing. What will such a team actually look like? We think teams who see inclusion as a central part of their work will probably not be dominated by experts but will be made up of a diverse range of practitioners with a range of skills, talents and experiences. Diversity and creativity will be their strength. A range of different thinking and learning styles will need to be present. The team will need strong leaders, influential ‘people people’, thinkers, system changers, reflectors, problem solvers, and deeply creative types! Let us not forget those who will be there because they care passionately or those who are living daily with the experience and challenges of exclusion and inclusion.

Some people will not be comfortable with working in such a team and may need support to find a different role or work elsewhere. Facilitative leadership and systems need to be in place for this to happen as respectfully, smoothly and as easily as possible. Whilst the work of the team is inclusion, not all will be suited to this work and we should not confuse ourselves into thinking we can include all workers in our team whatever their style, attitudes or beliefs. The stakes for including children and young people are too high for passengers or destructive practitioners. Our inclusive instincts will want all people to be part of the future but the leadership from this team must ensure that our support to individuals does not outweigh damage to the inclusion of children. Destructive individuals can still experience belonging in another part of the world, possibly for some away from children and families. Alternatively some individuals will need a sabbatical or a long break before they can be effective. The great Marsha Forest once said:

“I hear human service people say - I’m so tired - well leave it - get a rest. Then come back!’

There is much wisdom in her words.

Trust
The cement that holds team members together and that at best is found between leaders and their teams is trust. When present this magical gel will bring out the best in any group of people, but it is so easily lost, damaged or even completely absent. A team may crumble and lose all strength and solidarity when there are trust issues present. In the social sciences, the subtleties of trust are a subject of ongoing research. In sociology and psychology the degree to which one party trusts another is a measure of belief in the honesty, benevolence and competence of the other party. It is not hard to create a checklist or even a bedside book of trust by asking any group what are the qualities of the relationship that they have with someone they truly trust. Sadly some people can trust none but even they know what it is to almost trust someone. We have been asking groups about their experience of trusting relationships for the last 7 years. Here are some typical responses:

Typical qualities of Trust

Non-Judgemental
Honest
Open
Good listening
Challenging and direct
Always holding your best interests at heart
Shared disclosure

Typical Behaviour around someone not trusted

Closed body language
Not sharing anything personal
Sometimes assertive or even aggressive
Not relaxed
Talking about the mistrusted person behind their back
Acting in an untrustworthy fashion!

Leaders do well to cultivate trust within teams. Trust will be needed if team members are to work hard on making inclusion a reality. Teams simply need trust to function at their best. Teams where trust is present and valued will also model the way for others.

www.inclusive-solutions.com

Teams for Inclusion: 1... first of a series on Teams for Inclusion

Tue, 5 Feb 2008 15:31:09 +0000

Teams for Inclusion

Never dive alone
International Scuba Divers Law

When to consider building a team?

When in doubt build a team.

When the going gets tough and the inclusion of a child or young person is beginning to seem extremely difficult if not impossible many will conclude that the child should no longer be present. We would like to challenge this. Why do we move so quickly to assuming the child is in the wrong place? Surely the real question should not be ‘do they belong here?’ – but rather - ‘what team support is needed here for this to work?’

Or even more fundamental, ‘who needs a team around them at this time?’
Who needs the team? Who is struggling with the inclusion most?

The young person, their practitioner or teacher, their parent or even a member of the local support services?

Whatever the answer a team may need to be built, rallied or reformed. The nature of and number in that team will depend upon the nature of the situation. Diversity of membership will most surely be important to strengthen the quality of the support and of the ideas generated.
Creating effective teams for inclusion requires a courageous capacity for understanding and nurturing change both within the team and with those who the team work with.

Understanding Change – The Medicine Wheel

• 〈 The Deer looks down from the mountain and leads the herd
• 〈 The eagle soars high and sees the whole picture below and ahead
• 〈 Mice scurry around busily together building community
• 〈 Bears lumber slowly but makes things happen

Harrison Owen in his work on ‘Open Space Technology’ depicts the ancient Medicine Wheel as above (Owen, 2003). This is derived from centuries of tradition among First Nation Americans and has informed many cultures in different ways. We have found this an extremely powerful metaphor for understanding the process of team and organisational change and renewal.

The wheel of change begins in the north with a leading idea, for us – there is a better way of creating a team for inclusion. Travelling clockwise to the east we develop a shared vision of what this could look like in our setting, school or community. Then moving south we ask who needs to come with us on the journey. We wish to take as many community members along with us as we can. In an Early Years setting , this would mean enrolling the support of manager, the wider staff group, parents and ultimately children. Finally, at the west, we manage and implement the idea. We take action and turn the inclusive team into reality.

The cycle of this medicine wheel is an excellent way to view change processes for any team, organisation or community. When we contemplate change, the risk is always that we will jump prematurely from the big ideas (leadership) to practice (management) and ignore the other two important phases of creating vision and engaging the wider community.

www.inclusive-solutions.com

Support Services and Restorative Language and Practice

Wed, 14 Nov 2007 15:53:40 +0000

Peter Keane talking at an Inclusive Solutions training event about work in South Tyneside regarding the links between Restorative Interventions and Peer Mediation.He also describes some of the challenges of Peer Mediation recruitment and his journey towards no longer ‘solution giving’. Finally he reflects on the reactive nature of Support Services and what is really needed by front line teachers in classrooms.

We like it!

Relationship Manager Works Restoratively

Wed, 7 Nov 2007 14:52:32 +0000

Alison describes her restorative work on a follow up to some training on Restorative Interventions by Colin and Derek of Inclusive Solutions. We are delighted she has the senior job of Relationships manager at Sea View School in South Tyneside and this school have created a Relationships Policy. We have been promoting this as an alternative to Behaviour Policy for some years so were so please that this school had the vision to make this great appointment.

www.inclusive-solutions.com

Good Manners Towards People with Autism: Derek Wilson

Tue, 19 Jun 2007 15:24:03 +0100

1. Find out as much as you can about the particular needs and sensitivities of a person with autism before you meet them. Ask the person or the people who know them best about the kinds of arrangements that will help the person with autism feel comfortable.

2. People with autism have highly sensitive sensory systems and because of this they can easily become overstimulated/overwhelmed in many everyday environments. Many of the seemingly unusual things that people with autism might do are their way of limiting the levels of sensory stimulation they are experiencing. You should always consider what aspects of the environment (e.g. noise levels, lighting levels, odours) might be making be making a person uncomfortable and be prepared to eliminate/reduce these – even if you do not notice the sights, sounds, smells etc yourself.

3. As a rule - speak softly to people with autism. Sensitivity to the tone/volume of people’s voices is often high - particularly in new or stressful situations. Be aware that people with autism who are exposed to sudden or loud noises must protect themselves and cannot concentrate on anything else at the same time. Whenever possible prewarn people about noises that might bother them (e.g. fire alarm tests, time buzzers and bells etc) to give them a chance to prepare and protect themselves

4. Take great care about making physical contact/touching people with autism. Many people with autism have extreme sensitivity to touch – if in doubt – ask – do not assume that something like a handshake or a pat on the arm is no big deal.

5. Never expect people with autism to sit in one place for long periods of time. Movement is an essential part of staying comfortable – accept that people might want to stand during meetings and build in short breaks with the opportunity to walk around

6. Some people with autism are especially sensitive to smells of many kinds - including perfumes and other cosmetic products – limit your use of these or eliminate as far as possible until you know the person’s particular sensitivities

7. Accept that people with autism may not feel able to make eye contact with you - especially on a first meeting. No eye contact does not mean the person is not listening/or is not interested in you or what you are saying. Many people with autism say they can either look at someone or listen to them - but not both at the same time.

8. Be prepared to wait longer than you might think necessary for a person with autism to reply/respond to a question or request. Many people with autism have difficulty in making the movements (including the movements needed to speak) they want to make and need time to organise themselves.

9. Some people with autism are unable to use their voices at all – do not assume this means they do not understand what you are saying or doing – if in doubt it is always best to make the ‘least dangerous assumption’

10. Ask a person with autism if they need help before giving it.

11. Many people with autism find mealtimes/eating particularly stressful because of the many sensory issues associated with eating. Do not organise meetings/discussions over a meal

12. Allow people with autism to smell and touch things. The senses of touch and smell are often helpful in allowing them to identify people and objects when their other senses are being unreliable

13. If you change anything in an environment with which a person with autism is familiar, warn them about it in advance explaining what changes have had to be made. Order, routine and structure are very important to most people with autism – so be prepared to compromise if the change you want to make is not able to be tolerated by the person

14. Remember people (and that includes people with autism) do things for a reason. Some of the things people with autism need to do (e.g. flapping their hands, rocking, making noises) to be comfortable or reduce their levels of anxiety can be hard to understand until you know the person. Allow them to do what they need to do and accept that this may mean they need to leave the room/meeting for a time to gather themselves

15. Do not expect consistent reactions and behaviour from people with autism – like all of us, they will have good days and more difficult days in dealing with their sensory sensitivities – assume they are doing what they need to do to feel comfortable at any one time

Attachment Theory

Fri, 19 Jan 2007 10:00:11 +0000

I also think that here is the place to talk about ‘Attachment Theory’ and its relevance to this proposed paradigm shift. One obvious reason is that this body of theory sits clearly within the psychological domain and therefore has a unique sort of validity. The other reason is that it has such relevance to the topic of ‘relationships’. How could you understand ‘attachment’ other than within a relationships paradigm? However we need to be very careful not to let a medical/deficit model in by the back door! One obvious problem is that attachment theory has been the subject of to attempts to create individual pathologies/typologies – e.g. Heather Geddes’ latest book ‘Attachment in the Classroom’ spends big chunks of time categorizing young people as having ‘Avoidant Attachment’, ‘Resistant/Ambivalent Attachment’ or ‘Disorganised/Disorientated Attachment’ disorders and proceeds to outline the treatment options for each type. This is a shame because the book an otherwise excellent account of how teachers can use peer group, curriculum and their own resources to meet needs and build relationships. Attachment theory can give us clues and pointers that might help us understand how or why a child seems to relate to us in a particular way - but it can do no more than that – there is no substitute for building a relationship with the young person and coming to understand our contribution to their distress.

(This blog is an intro for a longer piece we will be writing during 2007 on behaviour/relationships and implications for how support services support teachers. All comments welcome at this early stage)

Derek Wilson
Co-Founder
Inclusive Solutions

A RELATIONSHIPS BUILDING PARADIGM

Fri, 5 Jan 2007 12:38:17 +0000

So – rather than continuing to attack the medical model approach as ineffective – let’s put our energies into developing an alternative paradigm and let it be one that recognises from the start that ‘behaviour’ is not a stand alone characteristic of a person – all behaviour occurs in a context and that context is other people and the relationships the person has or does not have with them.
Herb Lovett put it like this:
“We are all in a constant dialogue with the present and the past, with our inner selves and our outer selves, and the needs of both the individual and the group. It seems strangely limited - and limiting – to focus on only one person among many and on only one aspect of that person…”
(Learning to Listen - Paul Brookes Publishing 1996)
And if we allow the ‘relationships’ word into the behaviour arena then a new set of productive questions starts to surface:

- How can we help the young person keep/strengthen his existing relationships and make new ones? What can we do to intentionally build relationships?
- How can we help a young person make a contribution to others?
- How can we help the young person have more choices in his day? (Remembering that a ‘choice’ is only really a ‘choice’ if what you choose matters to someone else i.e. it is part of a relationship – anything short of this is phoney and young people see through it instantly)
- How will we plan to support and nurture those whose job it is to help the young person in all of the above? This is a key piece of a relationships paradigm intervention and it’s a question that barely gets a look in under the ‘what’s wrong’ paradigm. Expanding on this question leads us back to the work of Gerda Hanko and her teacher support groups, our own work on ‘Circle of Adults’ and maybe the, as yet unpublished, work by Chris Johnson and Lynn Turner and their ‘Big Red Bus” approach.

A WORD OR TWO ON ‘INTERVENTIONS’, ‘PLANS’, ‘BEHAVIOUR’ and RELATIONSHIPS

Thu, 4 Jan 2007 11:43:26 +0000

Children and young people who show difficult behaviours are usually the subject of a ‘Behaviour Support Plan’ at some point in their school careers. It is rare that they are asked if they want a Plan, let alone invited to the planning meeting. Instead the Plan is typically developed by people who are relative ‘strangers’ to the young person (the school’s EP or visiting support teacher for behaviour) – often people who have spent less than a couple of hours ‘observing’ the young person. In essence this approach to managing behaviour is driven by the following questions:

- What’s wrong with this child?
- How can we fix him?

And somewhere down the line there’s a near inevitable 3rd question that is likely to be asked:

- What do we do with him if we can’t fix him?

And we’ve all been down that road – we know where it leads….
These are all very familiar questions and, of course, stem from a medical model paradigm of what to do when things get difficult. It is easy to underestimate just how deep seated the beliefs are that underlie this paradigm. There are more labels and treatments for behaviour than ever before and this growth shows no signs of slowing in the near future – despite the fact that it is also widely believed that the effectiveness of labeling and treating behaviour is highly limited.

Derek Wilson: Co Founder Inclusive Solutions

I have a dream.....

Thu, 16 Nov 2006 16:26:36 +0000

We always love this speech as it reminds us of our dream for full inclusion of all children. Having named this dream and mentioned the speech today with the Kindred Spirits group in Walsall we were approached by John who had this story...

Anne is a year 6 looked after child who has been in foster care along with her year 7 sister for a significant time. It is hoped that she will attain national curriculum level 3 in English although she is still operating at level 2. Recently in school they have done work on “leaders”. Last week Anne pestered me to let her look on the Internet for Martin Luther King’s “I have a Dream” speech. With a bit of Google guidance from me we found both the text and an MP3 audio version which I saved onto my USB data stick. This week she asked if she could listen to it again. On playing it she adjusted the slider on Windows Media Player back and forth to find parts which she recognised and joined in, reciting sections she had learnt by hear. The part she replayed and recited several times was:
“One day right there in Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.”
Anne’s foster carers are a black couple who have a 3 year old son.

Watch the video of Martin Luther King’s amazing speech

John Taylor
Education support Team for Looked After Children.
Education Walsall
john.taylor@we.serco.com

Welcome Key in Action

Wed, 15 Nov 2006 16:33:07 +0000

Rashmi Barker is a Youth Worker in Blackburn with Darwin and she told us this great story when we met her there this week.Listen to how by building up her relationship with the headteacher of a large secondary school she was able to convince him of the need to be more welcoming with pupils.The results spoke for themselves and were soon enshrined in policy.
We can all be advocates for the ‘inclusive welcome’ whatever unchanging‘suits’ we are confronted with!

Killing Children

Wed, 8 Nov 2006 11:19:04 +0000

Royal College urging Euthanasia for very disabled children

Once again in history people are calling for killing children who are born with severe impairments. So quickly the history and struggles of disabled people and their families is forgotten. Not so long back, Nazis had the same idea. Let us remember that alongside the tough battles families face when their child is disabled and viewed by too many medics and so many others in society as of less value that they also bring gifts into the world.

What are their gifts?

These include:

Community building
Inviting love and generosity
Connecting people
Requiring problem solving from educators and carers
Slowing people up: grounding them
Teaching us about difference and acceptance of ourselves and others

Kill children who bring such gifts into the world? I don’t think so. Let us learn to value each and every one instead!

www.inclusive-solutions.com

Pass a cow

Wed, 8 Nov 2006 10:23:15 +0000

Reciprocal Relationships are important for us all whatever our difference, needs or impairments.We all need opportunities to give to pass on what has been provided to us. Just as African families can gratefully receive live cows from generous farmers in the UK and pass on the calves of those cows to other families so can a child who has been the focus of a circle of friends become a circle member for another pupil.The challenge is to ensure that all who receive get a chance to give! Its a fundamental part of being a human being.

Send a Cow is a Christian charity that enables poor farmers in Africa to become self-reliant by providing them with livestock, training and advice. We work with some of the most vulnerable groups in Africa, including children orphaned by war, families affected by AIDS, and disabled people.

Accommodations within Relationships

Mon, 10 Jul 2006 14:32:30 +0100

Anyone in a long term relationship, especially those 20 plus years kind, has learned something of accommodating to others in a relationship. However much love there is within that relationship there will be issues that it is hard to live with including these possibles:

1. snoring?
2. mood swings?
3. noises
4. habits from nail biting to scratching
5. attitudes

I could go on... Somehow though accommodations have been made, or otherwise it would have been impossible to stay with that person? We stay because it is worth it for love or friendship.

Here are some fascinating clues as to what it will take to build a more inclusive community in which we can coexist peacefully with each other. Consider what you do to accommodate significant others in your life... what do you do? What are the compromises, boundaries and coping mechanisms that are in place to keep that relationship functional?

* Polite or not so polite reminders?
* Regular Challenges?
* Adaptation?
* Ignore?
* Look away?
* Switch off or out?
* Support?
* Continue to try and shape?

Take longer in consideration of those who stay in your life through love, friendship or family ties whose behaviour is just plain difficult! How do you live with them? How do you maintain your relationship with them? Here are the clues to true inclusion!

Colin Newton

Ezine

Mon, 19 Jun 2006 09:27:05 +0100

We provide a free termly ezine to hundreds of people across the UK and the wider world who are committed to inclusion. This Ezine, a combination of magazine and email, provides national and international updates on inclusion developments and challenges. Ideas and practical support are always present in the Ezine and we lots of very positive feedback. Why not email us today and receive your own copy?

Check out back copies here!

Why group by Ability?

Wed, 24 May 2006 14:52:25 +0100

Grouping by Ability? No way does it work!

Key Research Findings

Organizing students in heterogeneous cooperative learning groups at least once a week has a significant effect on learning (Marzano, Pickering, & Pollock, 2001).

Low-ability students perform worse when grouped in homogeneous ability groups (Kulik & Kulik, 1991, 1997; Lou et al, 1996)

We hate the label 'low ability' and find it meaningless in the face of Multiple Intelligences work or when viewing pupils from a 'Gifts' perspective. Yet grouping by ability is still a dominant approach in primary and secondary education across UK.

Where is the research to support the efficacy of such activity?

'Students of low ability actually perform worse when they are placed in homogenous groups' Marzano, 2005.

This American research is supported by that carried out by NFER in 1998 concluded ' there are no significant differences between streaming, setting and mixed ability teaching on pupil achievement'. Also they conclude that: 'within homogenous groups teachers are predisposed to make negative judgments of low ability pupils which, in turn, negatively affects these pupils' self perceptions, levels of achievement and experience of schooling'. (Streaming, Setting and grouping by ability, NFER,1998

In other words pupils taught together, often in sets or withdrawal groups know why they are together and feel really bad about it.

For more information on grouping check out the American National Association of School Psychologists position on grouping by ability.

Inclusion Research

Fri, 19 May 2006 08:25:38 +0100

The research is clear to us. The human rights issue is even clearer. All children should be in mainstream schools and no more children should be placed in special schools.
Yes there will be problems to solve if this dream comes true, but there are now anyway! Lets move on. Work on figuring it out. Its time to change!
There is plenty of research if you need it.....
Check out this unequivocal quote in the TASH Journal Spring 2004 from Mary Falvey – Professor at California State University in LA:   ‘’Since (1977) hundreds of rigorous research studies have been undertaken to determine the effectiveness of integrating and including students with severe disabilities. As a result of a comprehensive review of the extant literature by myself and my colleagues, we were unable to identify even a single research article that that found that segregated service delivery models are more effective than integrated models for students with severe disabilities.”
The 2020 campaign is led by disabled people with the support of many allies of which Inclusive Solutions is one. It is a campaign to end the practice of educating children and young people with extra needs in separate, segregated schools, colleges, units or classes by the year 2020.
 Instead we want all young people to have the right to learn together in restructured mainstream provision, based on the principles of inclusion, equality and social justice.

Ten Reasons for Inclusion
Inclusive education is a human right, it’s good education and it makes good social sense
HUMAN RIGHTS  1 All children have the right to learn together. 2 Children should not be devalued or discriminated against by being excluded or sent away because of their disability or learning difficulty. 3 Disabled adults, describing themselves as special school survivors, are demanding an end to segregation. 4 There are no legitimate reasons to separate children for their education. Children belong together -- with advantages and benefits for everyone. They do not need to be protected from each other. 
GOOD EDUCATION  5 Research shows children do better, academically and socially, in inclusive settings. 6 There is no teaching or care in a segregated school which cannot take place in an ordinary school. 7 Given commitment and support, inclusive education is a more efficient use of educational resources. 
SOCIAL SENSE  8 Segregation teaches children to be fearful, ignorant and breeds prejudice. 9 All children need an education that will help them develop relationships and prepare them for life in the mainstream. 10 Only inclusion has the potential to reduce fear and to build friendship, respect and understanding. 
All these reasons are now well supported by experiential and even academic evidence. See Inclusive Solutions page on research as a start.
We know it can be hard work, but the job has to be figuring it out, not justifying whether or not to begin or to continue including someone.
We dream just as did Martin Luther King... a dream of inclusion, full inclusion, where the answer to who do we include becomes:
All means means all.
Colin Newton

Inclusive Solutions Home Page

The Inclusive Welcome

Tue, 16 May 2006 16:39:06 +0100

A Little Blog of Welcome

‘Ask us in all the world what is most important?
Tis people, tis people, tis people’
(Old Maori Proverb)
In the beginning was the welcome…
Without welcome you do not properly enter, you are not present so do not participate or perform.
Welcome is the first key to the successful inclusion of anyone
Who needs a good welcome?
Everyone who needs a relationship, needs a welcome. Particular efforts could be made when welcoming parents, carers, pupils and other family members to a situation, which is unfamiliar to them or in which, they are feeling anxious, apprehensive, aggressive or defensive. This is often the case for people invited to meet on school premises (professionals included).
Who has trouble gaining a great welcome?
Well, the UK Audit Commission asked Parent Partnership Officers around the country what families had problems gaining admission to their local schools. This is what they found.
Pupils who had been excluded, those with labels related to behaviour and anyone with autism all had problems with the welcome.
It appears that some children and their families get a much worse welcome than others.

Of course the welcome extended in a whole range of community settings will be different for some of us. Differences in sexuality, race, culture, disability, behaviour and simply physical appearance all dramatically influence how an individual is welcomed.

Symbols of Welcome
If we want to improve the inclusive quality of our welcome we do well to start with the physical symbols and environment in which the welcome takes place. Light, warmth, and soft rather than harsh furnishings all play a part. The waiting area with a settee to sit upon, flowers, and toys and books suitable for a range of differently aged children and young people.
Offers of drinks and even food are clear welcome messages of profound and often cultural importance. How do you welcome someone to your own home?
In larger groups the welcome in situations such as training events, conferences, parents evenings, and other gatherings will benefit from food, drink, sweets, music and colour as they all provide tangible symbols of welcome.
Non-Verbals of Welcome
Smiles, tone of voice, warm words, handshakes, and even hugs are a great form of welcome without words.
The physicality of the welcome depends on your relationship with the person and their cultural and personal preferences and expectations. Keep it respectful.
At other times in larger settings especially, the welcome needs more stage management and can be bigger and more dramatic. Open body position and upturned hands can accompany effusive warm welcomes. This is not a time to hold back or to only pick out certain people for a welcome.
What makes a respectful welcome?

A Sense of Safety and Belonging

Ground rules and structures will help create that essential sense of safety that is crucial to setting the right tone although sometimes even ground rules can be intrusive to this sense of safety. Self-revelations (within reason!) and openness from those welcoming a group or individual of any age can help enormously with this sense of safety and trust in the room.

Providing choices and opt out possibilities for what may be perceived as risky activities can be reassuring for the anxious.

Clarifications, and acknowledgement of real challenges can all help as can humour if used honestly and respectfully.

Lose the Magnifying Glass

In our western culture we have a strong tendency to be very self critical as well as critical of each other. In schools everyone is assessed! We magnify each other’s faults and our own. It starts with physical difference then moves quickly to how people act, behave, what they say and how they say it! We look at ourselves in the mirror, real or imagined and the critical observations begin…look at that nose, how fat are you….and so forth. Then our negative internal drivers get hold. ‘You are not good enough, clever enough, quick enough…’and the old favourite ‘One day, under my great title, my professional front, they are going to find me out…its just little old me and I don’t know much!’

We encourage people to put their magnifying glass aside and try and keep them away the length of the time we are together.

Alternatively a judge’s wig is a useful prop that when dramatically removed is a simple way of reminding each other that it will help if we are not critical of the session leaders, each other or ourselves. In such a safer climate children and adults will try out ideas, play, take risks and learning will be optimised.

Communicating without jargon

We find use of the Jargon Buster or crap detector to be invaluable in all our work. Jack Pearpoint and Marsha Forrest from Inclusion Press, Toronto taught us the power of this prop. This instrument is rattled if anyone in the room uses jargon or over complex sentences which are hard to understand. Our work has improved considerably since direct feedback and rattles have sounded in our ears! We commend it to any review meeting where parents and pupils may be present. Who should hold the buster? We think you know the answer…everyone! Or how about following the lead of the People First movement in the UK who recommend holding up a card with a question mark on it if something is not understood in a meeting.

The buster works really well in all learning situations including adult training and classrooms too! Try it out. The risks may seem high but the outcomes for greater understanding and participation are there to be won.
Rituals and Routines
For many children and young people plus adults the presence of rituals and routines can be empowering and provide a deep sense of security. This is especially important for pupils living in insecure family situations, surviving neglect, abuse or loss. It is just as important for those whose impairments lead to a greater feeling of anxiety than others.
Rituals and routines may simply relate to what happens at the start of a day, start of lessons and other key transition points. From standing behind chairs, queuing in corridors, chanted responses, to prayers. All have their value and place in ordered welcome if this is ‘what we do round here’.

Inclusion and the Welcome
If we can successfully welcome disabled, or challenging children and young people to our schools, if we can set a positive tone, we set the tone for what will follow. Communities, schools and families that truly embrace inclusion are so often the most welcoming to all who participate or visit them. Often the most welcoming settings turn out to be the most inclusive…
Box
Jonathon was joining a new secondary school. He was 13 and carries the label of autism. The welcome for him needed to be thought about very carefully. What was put in place really helped in make a great start at his new school. The elements of welcome for him included:
• Visiting the school while it was empty
• Looking at photos of key staff and pupils he would meet
• Being given a map of the school
• A meeting between his tutor group and Jonathon’s parents was facilitated in which information about Jonathon’s differences, strengths and interests was set up. The pupils were able to ask questions respectfully.
• The school has a progressive model of cooperative grouping pupils by interests and skills rather than ability wherever they can
• Being met by a small welcoming committee of other pupils who knew the school well and who became a supportive circle of friends for his first year at the school meeting weekly
• A support assistant from his previous school was there to meet him for the first 3 weeks at his new school
End Box
Improving the Welcome
There are many ways we can improve the welcome we offer:
1. Spend a day together with your team, group or family reflecting on the quality of the welcome in your setting. Who takes responsibility for welcome? Who is at the front door? What rituals and symbols are present already, which could be added?
2. Consider those who are least likely to be welcomed in your setting. What could be done to improve the welcome for them?
3. What will you do about jargon in your setting?
4. How will you ensure a sense of safety and belonging for all?
5. Turn your own welcome up by 80%, What impact does this have on your life and work?
Make it happen.

Colin Newton
Inclusive Solutions

Inclusive Solutions Home Page
Contact us if you would like more input on this

Circle of Friends

Tue, 16 May 2006 13:52:31 +0100

Circles of friends By C. Newton and D. Wilson

This blog describes the background to and the actual setting up and running of ' circles of friends' . We outline this approach to the inclusion of children with severe emotional and behavioural difficulties. We wish to:

1 To share our experiences of setting up circles of friends

2 To invite reflection and discussion around the whole area of involving pupils in the social support of vulnerable or difficult individuals

'It's no use giving up ....'

This insightful comment comes from a Year 5 pupil who has been part of a support network, a "circle of friends" for a fellow pupil in his class, Darren. Darren had shown difficult to manage and distressed behaviour throughout his school career. Over the past term a group of eight pupils from Darren's class have been brought together (with the help of their class teacher and school educational psychologist) to give time and thought to how they can be supportive towards him in the things they do and let him know that they care about who and how he is. For his part Darren has responded by doing less of the things; refusing to work, running out of school and hiding, "calling" other pupils, becoming tearful at "slight" provocations that had previously made him so challenging for pupils and staff to live with and had led to his referral to the Educational Psychology Service.

Here we describe the thinking behind this approach to meeting emotional and behavioural needs and the process by which the child's peer group can become a source of support.

The rationale behind the circle of friends approach is a simple one and, once understood, almost embarrassingly obvious. It recognises that a significant consequence for someone who shows distressed and difficult behaviour is their likely isolation from their peer group both in and out of school. Teachers will describe such pupils as" having no friends","unable to make or sustain relationships", "always fighting or arguing with other pupils". Pupils will describe them as "a nutter", "mad", "always getting done for something" - although as we shall see later when encouraged they are able to give much more balanced descriptions.

When this kind of situation is viewed systemically and with an awareness of the powerful processes of circular causation (Dowling and Osbourne 1985, Miller 1994.) it is easy to see how increasing isolation from your peer group can lead to increasing despair and bad feelings about yourself which are then reflected in your behaviour. Once you internalise the message that nobody likes you or wants to be your friend, feel that they think you are mad, feel that they will do things just to wind you up, it is easy to conclude that you have nothing to lose by giving full vent to your feelings and distress in the way you behave. And when you do, the subsequent behaviour of your classmates simply confirms your worst fears about yourself and how others see you. So is created a very vicious circle in which the effects of your behaviour have become the subsequent causes of your behaviour.

The adults around you and their interventions may accelerate this process. You may find yourself on the receiving end of a behaviour programme which is founded on ignoring difficult behaviour; in case it is reinforced by the reward of attention. (How we came to believe that there could be anything helpful or therapeutic in being ignored by others suggests a further study.) You may not have qualified for a "programme" as such but it is very likely that the message given to the rest of the class by the adults around you will be along the lines of "don't get involved","it's not your business","just ignore him". You may find yourself in Time Out or Isolation and although this may be helpful in letting you save face and in limiting your public, it is unlikely in itself to address the unmet needs that are fuelling your behaviour.

The circle of friends approach is at the opposite end of the continuum of interventions from approaches based on ignoring difficult behaviour. It is a systemic approach that recognises the power of the peer group (and thereby of pupil culture) to be a positive as well as a constraining or exacerbating influence on individual behaviour.

If we accept that peer group isolation can worsen things for an individual then it follows that efforts to increase that individual's inclusion within his peer group are likely to help that same individual. If circles can be vicious they can also be virtuous if efforts are made to set and maintain a context for this. For schools the resource implication of this approach are minimal and this is because the key resources - other pupils - are always and already there. Adult time is however needed both to mobilise the friendship circle and to facilitate its problem solving skills as it develops.

This is a relatively new approach to working with emotional and behavioural difficulties within UK schools, but has been used in parts of North America and Canada for a number of years to promote the inclusion of pupils with disabilities in mainstream schools. (Pearpoint and Forrest 1989.) Within the North American work the circle of friends approach is used as one means of normalising the life experiences of disabled pupils who are recognised as vulnerable to isolation from the ordinary pattern of extended relationships and friendships. Such isolation is seen as a risk associated with a system of segregated schooling where students' opportunities to know and be known by the wider peer group in their community are limited by their institutional and often geographical separation. This impoverishment of the breadth of relationships that people who are not disabled and segregated would take for granted remains a major and uncounted cost of any system of separate special school education (Gold 1994).

In terms of support initiatives currently in use in the UK the circle of friends approach has links with the "No Blame" approach to bullying described by Barbara Maines and George Robinson which looks to pupils themselves for their solutions to episodes of bullying. There are also links with work taking place at Acland Burghley Comprehensive School in London ( ) Here pupils in Year 8 and above have been trained in basic counselling skills to enable them to offer support to other pupils who are experiencing bullying. The circles of friends approach also sits comfortably with many of the declared aims of the typical Personal and Social Education curriculum (ref) and overlaps are described in later sections of this paper. The common ethos of these approaches lies in staff sharing responsibility for problem solving with pupils.

PROCESS

In this section we describe the process and procedures we have gone through to enable the formation of a circle of friends. We do not have evidence at this stage that would highlight what the key parts of this process are and this section should be read with this caveat in mind. What we have tried to do is emphasise what seem to us the overriding aims of this intervention- those that seem fundamental- the actual means used to achieve these aims could be varied without necessarily losing their impact.

KEY STAGES:

1) Establish the support of the school and the permission of the parents (and child*) for the approach. The commitment of the class teacher or Form Tutor has been a part of each circle we have worked with to date. This has often been no more than a willingness to "give it a try " in the initial stages, but without this we would be doubtful of the longer term prospects of the support circle becoming established.

2) Work with the whole class or tutor group to define the "problem" , evoke empathy and affirm their role in helping move things forward.

3) Share the content of the above session with the child in question.

4) Meet with the circle and child together to reiterate the above and discuss ways forward.

These meetings should then be held at regular intervals to continue and strengthen the circle , celebrate progress and problem solve as necessary.

Circles of friends in Action

The aims of the approach include the following:

1 To create a support network for the child

2 To reduce the child's challenging behaviour

3 To enable the child to deal successfully with victimisation

4 To increase the child's understanding of their own behaviour and give them more choices

5 To help the child make more friends

These aims would be communicated to anyone interested in setting up a Circle of Friends approach. They largely speak for themselves but as can be seen include very challenging aims such as helping with the making of friends. This aim has both haunted and thwarted most educationalists and psychologists over the years and yet is often at the heart of many vulnerable young person's need for healthy relationships.

Where best to start: The prerequisites for this approach

It is essential that a key member of staff understands and is committed to using the approach with the young person targeted. They will need to be able to give sufficient time to supporting the circle of friends on the weekly meetings that follow the initial meeting with the pupil's class or tutor group. They may also have to deal with issues that arise from the work for the young person, the group of pupils, for parents or even for other staff.

The child's parent or carer will need to have had the approach explained to them and given both their assent and support. New issues may emerge for them, when for instance children come knocking on the door requesting that their child comes out to play or join in an activity.

The child themselves need to have the approach properly explained to rhem in basic terms and need to accept what is about to occur. We have debated among ourselves whether the approach could continue with less than acceptance from the individual but the reader will have to make their own mind up on this one. Clearly when such an approach is described to a child emotions can range from angry resistance through ambivalence to over enthusiastic! Generally we have not found this to be an issue and we have usually entrusted this discussion to a teacher who knows the young person very well.

Setting up Circles

Initial meeting with class

Circle of friends : the small group itself

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Process for running initial Circle of Friends session

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 Introduce self

2 Agree ground rules and explain confidentiality

3 Agree aims of group eg: To help Craig make and keep friends and to help him get back on track with his behaviour

4 Invite group members to tell child why they volunteered to be in his or her group

5 Elicit and list positives and areas the child needs to work on, from the group

6 Brainstorm strategies

7 Agree which strategies can be tried and ensure commitment to these from the group. Be clear with the group about responsibilities, disclosures and boundaries. Let them know what is expected of them and the limits to this

8 Agree name for the group, avoiding child's name.

9 Describe meeting and follow up arrangements and encourage mutual support in the group.

A weekly meeting with a key member of staff , is set up with the 6/8 volunteers. The meeting is initially initiated by an outside facilitator, the educational psychologist in our work, with the teacher who is to run the group observing and helping record responses. The meeting runs for 30-40 minutes and primarily uses problem solving approaches, although also allowing space for the exploring of issues, the celebration of positives and the examination of negatives. A main purpose of the meeting is to generate tactics and supportive ideas . The facilitator meets with the whole class and with the circle by the following half term or term end to follow up progress.

The educational psychologist or teacher facilitating the group acts as chairperson containing, holding boundaries and ground rules and ensuring safe space for the exploration of feelings and ideas. The role is also to provide rich positives and praise building the esteem of the individual and the circle. The facilitator attempts to encourage mutual support, trust, honesty and openness among the group members.

First meetings of a circle of friends can be chaotic and difficult for the adult to manage constructively, sometimes angry feelings towards the focus child are expressed or discussions begun that have no obvious relevance to helping the child. The adult needs to be active at this stage in reminding the group of the ground rules, the reason why they are meeting and of the need to listen to each person's contribution. For younger children ( Year 3 and below ) it can be helpful to structure the group meeting in ways that make the listening and turntaking roles clearer e.g. by having set warm-up and closing routines, by asking for the group's comments on set questions, by allowing group members to talk only when in possession of a special object. Further ideas for strengthening the circle and facilitating its problem solving can be found in Bliss and Tetley(1993), Mosley (1991) and White (1993). These authors describe activities for use with children which promote the P.S.E. curriculum via the use of group exercises known as "circle time". Amongst the key areas of concern are: relationships with others, issues of individual identity, responses to challenging experiences - the overlap with the issues typically debated within a circle of friends is obvious.. We have found that teachers are able to use a wealth of Personal and Social Education ideas to both 'warm up' and develop group processes.

The circle quickly becomes a learning experience for all the children in the group as they talk about feelings, problem solve, listen, empathise, challenge, and work out better ideas for dealing with adults.

We have found that there is a need for clear boundaries throughout and clarity regarding how group members should be dealing with disclosures from the child they are supportingGroup processes and content can vary enormously largely being affected by the style and strengths of the facilitator and what they feel able to handle or pursue. This can range from deeply emotive material to 'straight forward' behavioural strategies.

There is an important need for maintenance, support and follow up sessions and for the outside facilitator to keep in touch, especially in a new situation.

We have been greatly impressed by the quality of the rich discussion and process that has taken place in such circles. Such discussion regularly out classed adult problem solving and mutual support. We were also struck by the power of very simple interventions from other children. For instance:

I just say forget it ... and he does

or

We just follow him out of the room and quietly ask him to come back...

Other interventions range from the rich and varied to the mundane and adult oriented. We were fascinated by interventions occurring outside the classroom :

We saw him getting angry with the dinner lady...we went and started talking to him ....told him it was not worth it....he walked away.

and even outside the school:

I leant out of the window and shouted' do you want to come swimming Craig?' He said he couldn't , but now he comes every week with us.

Preventative in class strategies were interesting:

We've invented a ' three tap code'.....if he starts talking on the carpet one of us taps the floor near him... then he shuts up.

Active interventions with the adult world revealed new insights into pupil perspectives on supply teachers, class teachers and midday supervisors, but were also excellent ways of calming difficult situations:

To an annoyed teacher, as John comes dancing and singing loudly into the room.....'He's just feeling a bit excited at the moment, Mr Newton just praised him up'...

Whilst clearly not therapy groups, some of the circles appeared to be offering therapeutic input for individual children who found themselves sharing their deepest secrets , sufferings or vulnerabilities.

Outcomes

We have at the time of writing set up circles of friends for children aged between 4 and 14, although we believe there is no age bar on the approach; cradle to grave. We have focused primarily on pupils with severe emotional and behavioural difficulties where other approaches have been tried and found to fail. We have set up circles to prevent permanent exclusions, segregation in special education or to support a return or start at school for a new pupil leaving another special or mainstream school, in short to promote inclusion. We have been involved in the setting up of about 20 such circles so far. Further afield there are now many such circles running as we have been involved in a number of local and national conferences as well in providing training to EPS services and schools to enable them to carry out this approach.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Case Study:

Christopher year 6

Negatives listed by Christopher's own class before the circle:

loses temper quickly, if you go against him he gets angry. Annoys you to get attention, can't lose in any game, swears, says bad things, if you are better than him at something he holds it against you, physically and verbally aggressive, pushes you out of the way, marches off in a huff, bullies, throws chairs etc., unstable...

Teacher's description of Christopher:

major temper tantrums, no co-operation, learning difficulties, no self esteem, we think physically and emotionally abused by dad but can't prove it

Frustrated Educational Psychologist involvement:

4 years of involvement. Lots of work with each class teacher, Tried wide variety of consultative and behavioural approaches 'in the best possible taste' Worked with parents as far as possible but faced antagonism Suggestions of abuse but nothing substantive, Aggressive response from dad. One teacher nearly had breakdown/left profession .

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4 months of circle: Circle of Help

Christopher initially agreed to the group but then changed his mind on the day of the first meeting. But when he heard the group members saying why they wanted to be in his group he 'opened like a flower'. Later he wanted a cure and was disappointed at the lack of instant results. Still later he wanted out, but changed his mind when calmer.

Outcomes reported by his class and teachers:

No tantrums at all lately No chatting out of turn Better at sports, takes the stress, not a bad loser Stopped swearing and throwing. If not happy..he tells group. New close best mate

Teacher: 'The approach has been very successful'

Group member :'Like a very good person now'

Christopher says: 'Every body feels closer'

A year later :

at secondary school Christopher was randomly selected to join 'Jane's ' circle. After a while he openly admitted:

' I used to have a circle because I used to hit and bite and I had no friends, but now I don't and I've got friends'

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OUTCOMES FOR OTHER CHILDREN

It is not only the target children that are likely to gain from being involved with a circle of friends, the process can also be a rich learning experience for all members of the circle. During the life of the group it is evident to the adults involved that the group as a whole is having an experience of problem solving which contributes to their own interpersonal skills and their understanding of the links between feelings and behaviour.

A common concern amongst teachers at the outset of this process is that it is in someway "unfair" to the other children ; that they are being used in some way and that their time is being wasted. Teachers have also voiced concerns over how they could justify the process to the parents and carers of these children. Our response has been to reframe the circles of friends approach as the Personal and Social Education curriculum in action. For us there is something ironic about a school which subscribes to the values implicit in the P.S.E. curriculum - caring for others, mutual respect, equality and fairness etc.- but when one member of the class community needs support- then questions how this can be justified. The circles of friends process enables children's personal and social development to occur within meaningful and lively situations that are already part of the life of the class.

We have not, as yet, made any systematic attempt to describe the benefits to children of being involved in this process but our initial impressions are that these involve much of what is best about open and honest human contact. Some of the key themes seem to us to be;

i) Developments in empathy.

It is noticeable and often moving to see the members of the group gain in their understanding of the focused child's point of view. This is shown in their comments during the circle meetings; "I know a bit more about how David feels because I have talked to him more" and " I feel angry when Jane gets picked on because I know it hurts her".

ii) Developments in problem solving skills.

Each week the group discusses issues and difficulties that have arisen, celebrates successes and thinks through other possible solutions and approaches to the problems that have been identified. The following extract from a Year 7 circle of friends in an inner city comprehensive details their discovery of the difference between "telling" and "asking" if you want someone to listen to your advice.

Facilitator: What are the ways we are going to try and help Jane this week?

Child in group: Tell her to be good when she does something bad.

Another child: We shouldn't tell her we should ask her.

First child: If we ask her she might not listen and swear and hit us.

Another child: We should try and advise.

Facilitator: What do you mean by advise?

Child in group: We'll ask her to be good and not tell her - she might get angry if we tell her what to do.

Jane: People make me cross when they tell me things.

Another child: If we just suggest things it will help Jane.

iii) Developments in listening skills.

Few circles that we have worked with have had ready-made skills in this area. Most have needed the support and prompting of the adult facilitator before they have been able to listen to each other's contributions and agree on ways forward.

iv) Developments in ability to identify and express feelings.

The gains that all members of the circle of friends are likely to make in this personal skill go hand in hand with the developments in listening skills noted above. By being part of a group dedicated to supporting one of its members, each individual is given the implicit message that it is safe to have needs, to find coping in some situations difficult and that when you do you can rely on others for support. This is important because it is unlikely to be the focus child alone who has feelings that are difficult to manage or behaviours that others find antagonising. For some these feelings and behaviours may have remained unexpressed. The group can provide a vicarious experience of acceptance for all its members and this may go some way towards explaining the enthusiasm and high motivation typical of successful groups- to a greater or lesser extent each member is there for themselves.

Facilitator: 'How can we help here when she loses her temper?'

Delwyn: 'Talk to her...help her calm down....be with her...comfort her'

The facilitator later shared that she felt that this was more about what Delwyn needed and wanted when he lost his temper than the focus child and yet the contribution was rich for him as well as for her.

Despite these observations the current climate in our school system maintains that there is a dichotomy between the needs of the individual and the needs of the wider community or group. It is this belief that is used to justify the exclusion of troublesome pupils throughout the system. Within the circle of friends approach this dichotomy is seen as false and it is recognised that all children have more in common than otherwise.

v) Developments in understanding the links between feelings and behaviour.

This is a difficult connection to make for adults and children alike. The circle of friends approach is rich in opportunities for children to learn that other's behaviour, and indeed their own, is a result of how they are feeling; that actions cannot always be taken at face value because sometimes the most aggressive are those that are feeling the most lonely or sad. These insights can give children a delightfully generous view of other people, even though they still want the unpleasant behaviour to stop. These extracts from discussions at various circle of friends meetings illustrate this theme.

Facilitator: How's it been going since last week?

Child in group: Yesterday Craig was very excited and a bit bad, he lost it in Maths.

Craig: It was because I was excited about the new kittens. My cat has lots of kittens and we are keeping some......

Child in group: Jane sometimes feels left out and wants attention.

Facilitator: How do you know when she's feeling like this?

Child in group: Because she goes and sits by herself and talks in

stupid voice.

vi) Increased awareness of an individual's power to change.

Outcomes for School Staff

Whilst we have not attempted any rigorous or systematic evaluation of outcomes we have encouraged teachers to keep notes of what has been happening and have collected feedback. Emerging themes have struck us at times powerfully. They include the following:

1 Teachers feel more supported by the active involvement of an outsider. The active involvement with the class, the child of concern and with the small group in a direct way that involves 'rolling up the sleeves and getting stuck in', appears supportive to the teacher. As educational psychologists this often felt highly risky, none of us had ever fronted a rogue tutor group in a comprehensive school in our entire careers!

2 The approach encourages more emphasis on positives for the teacher and pupils. Everyone soon appeared to be seeking out good news rather than negative especially the circle of friends themselves and this seemed to brighten thinking and remind teachers of the possibility of change.

3 Teachers appear to experience an increase in self esteem. staff appeared to feel good about what was happening for the individual, the group and for their teaching. As their role in running the circle is so essential they feel good in themselves when the new venture is bringing them success.

4 This approach validates earlier PSE and Pastoral work that may already be taking place in the classroom. 'We do this kind of thing all the time.....you have just brought more structure and focus...'We have been pleased to hear teachers making such strong links with other forms of personal and social development activities and they have felt good about having their own work validated from outsiders.

5 Class teachers and tutors feel an increased sense of pride in their class. This theme may sound a little old fashioned or even patriarchal but has been quite striking. The progress of a teacher's class or tutor group reflects on them as does the groups struggles, stresses and strife. Thus when the circles have worked well and individuals have really shone and impressed the teacher feels very good about this for themselves and for the group, a very positive set of emotions indeed.

6 Good spin offs in other directions. Parents have been reported to have been influenced by the increases in empathy encouraged by this work. Some parents have been actively challenged by their children when heard verbally insulting or denigrating the behaviour of a fellow pupil! General levels of empathy throughout the class group and school have been seen to increase.

7 Teachers feel reduced isolation as they now have many more Allies! Children in this work have become in effect active interventionists supporting their teacher in the challenging task of getting one of their group members back on track!

Reflections

Why does this approach appear to be so effective?

We are beginning to develop theories about this emerging from our experience of this work which require qualitative evaluation to follow up and explore further. Our emerging hypotheses at present include:

1 children gain much from the additional attention focused on them

2 children feel more accepted and liked and this affects their behaviour radically

3 other children can be much more effective interventionists than adults. Children are more likely to take notice of them and change their behaviour as a result

4 peer group pressure and encouragement to change is as powerful with individual children as it is with adult groups, perhaps more so

5 providing a framework for problem solving, support and active intervention is the ideal way of enhancing and mobilising a small community's impact on one of its individuals

6 honest and open discussion with children about an individual's pain, about isolation and lack of friends combined with the difficulties adults face in dealing with certain behaviour encourages empathy and provides a model for healthier relationships in the classroom and beyond

We have found that this work radically challenges so many of our core constructs about how we operate as professionals. We have welcomed a fresh approach to speaking openly about feelings, vulnerabilities, emotions and behaviour with children an adults. We have appreciated the inclusive drive of the work and its challenge to segregation and exclusion. We feel we are working with an approach which strengthens the individual's place in the community without the trappings of a within child model. The approach is systemic but involves the individual and their peers. We enter the messy world of human relationships but without the curse of feeling artificial or that we are engaged in social engineering. We are impacting on behaviour but are not being controlling adult behaviourists. Perhaps Circles of Friends is the antidote to so much social skills training and 'assertive discipline' style approaches to behaviour management which have left so many of us feeling cold and had so little impact on the most vulnerable individuals in our society?

The ideas implicit in the approach lend themselves to so many situations. Why should not every child in a special school have their own circle of friends in their local mainstream school? Every new entrant to a school who has had problems previously would surely benefit? What would circles of adults look like for vulnerable or challenging individuals? (See for instance Newton, 1995).

The bigger picture

This is primarily a tool to support inclusion. The approach can be used with young and old for those with the most severe disabilities as well as those with the most severe emotional and behavioural needs. It is an approach which can be used to strengthen community networks for vulnerable individuals in and beyond school settings ( see for instance the work of the Circles of Support group in Bristol). It stands at the cutting edge of optimistic, international approaches to reducing segregation and increasing inclusion.

'Its no good giving up.

Keep on inviting him swimming.

I'm inviting James to my party.

I'm inviting James to my disco later this year.

I'm inviting James trampolining.'

The Listening Group (23/3/94)

Pupils aged between 9-10 years

REFERENCES.

Asher, S. and Cole, J.(eds.) (1990) Peer Rejection in Childhood Cambridge University Press

Bliss, T. and Tetley, J. (1993) Circle Time. Lame Duck Publishing.

Dowling, E. and Osbourne, E. (eds) (1985) The Family and the School: A Joint Systems Approach to Problems with Children. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Field, T., Miller J. and Field, T. (1994) "How Well Preschool Children Know Their Friends

Early Development and Child Care Vol. 100. pp. 101-109.

Hall, C. and Delaney, J. (1992) " How a personal and social education programme can promote friendship in the infant class." Research in Education 47. pp. 29-39.

Gold, D., (1994) " We Don't Call It a "Circle": the ethos of a support group." Disability and Society 9 (4) pp. 435-452.

Mallory, B.L. and New, R.S. (1994) "Social Constructivist Theory and Principles of Inclusion: Challenges for Early Childhood Special Education" Journal of Special Education Vol. 28 no.3 pp. 322-337..

Miller, A. (1994) "Parents and difficult behaviour: always the problem or part of the solution?", in P. Gray, A, Miller and J. Noakes (eds) Challenging Behaviour in Schools London Routledge.

Mosley, J. (1991) The Circle Book Positive Press.

Newton, C. and Wilson, D.Creating Circles of Friends, 2005, Inclusive Solutions

Newton, C. (1995) 'Circles of Adults', Educational Pychology in Practice,

Pearpoint, J., Forest, M. and Snow, J., (1992) The Inclusion Papers Inclusion Press.

Perske, R., (1988) Circles of Friends Abingdon Press

White, M. (1993) " Developing Self Esteem." in Bovair, K. and McLaughlin, C. (eds) Counselling in Schools - A Reader D. Fulton Publishers

Much more information at:
www.inclusive-solutions.com