Social pedagogy trials fail to make an impact

The trials, in which 30 children’s homes employed European practitioners trained in social pedagogy, was undertaken and funded by the government from 2009 to 2011.

Researchers from Bristol and York universities found that the method, which aims to focus on the child’s development by drawing on a number of disciplines, such as psychology, philosophy and sociology, had failed to make a positive impact on outcomes.

Overall, during the follow-up period, the evaluation found there had been little change in general behaviour problems, aggression and violence, risk behaviours (including going missing and substance misuse) and self-harm. Patterns of school attendance and exclusion also showed little signs of change although most of those attending school were reported to be making progress.

The only significant change in outcomes that was noted was the rate of placement disruption, which decreased significantly from the rate during the six months before the social pedagogues joined the homes to the rate one year after the first pedagogue was employed.

The report states: "Even within the constraints of this exercise, it is disappointing that homes – with or without social pedagogues – were not making marked progress with groups of residents but we should not rush to judgment.

"We have seen that homes accommodate very problematic youngsters, mainly for planned, brief periods. It would seem difficult for individual (or even groups of two or three) social pedagogues to bring about significant shifts in the practice of a workforce that has limited or no background either in social pedagogy or, in most cases, in the academic disciplines which underpin it.

"These difficulties were inevitably reinforced by the wider professional context in which residential staff operate, which is characterised by bureaucracy, regulation and risk aversion. It is perhaps unsurprising, therefore, that in the absence of wider changes in the homes and in the context in which these operated, we did not detect differences in measureable outcomes for the young people."

For the pilots four homes were chosen where social pedagogues had been working prior to the trial; eight homes recruited social pedagogues from overseas; and six homes employed social pedagogues to work part-time in a home and to take on a consultancy role within the area to increase awareness of social pedagogy. Additionally, 12 homes were chosen as comparison homes to be tracked alongside.

The evaluation examined 114 children, of whom 66 were still at the homes when the follow-up survey was conducted seven months later.

The researchers found that heads of children’s homes are keen to see a social pedagogy approach adopted across England, but believe systematic change is needed across the residential care sector for this to be successful.

As part of the pilots, social pedagogues were recruited from countries including Denmark, Germany, Flanders and Belgium. The evaluation revealed that many were unaccustomed to elements of residential practice in England, including the large number of staff in homes; the low professional status of residential work; and preoccupations with bureaucracy and risk aversion. More than a third of the 30 pedagogues that were recruited from overseas by eight homes left prematurely.

Young people expressed mixed responses to social pedagogy, with some saying they felt well cared-for by staff, but others speaking of boredom, a lack of attention and some appeared to be quite estranged from staff in the homes.

The report concluded: "Social pedagogy is taken for granted in much of Europe but the development of a distinctive English variety would need to take account of the historical context, societal norms and current role of residential care in England. We hope that this report has indicated the potential impact of social pedagogy in residential homes and that it informs future developments in children’s services."