A report in to current and future practice of Alternative Educational Provision.
This report was compiled by:
Dr Rachel HarrisonThe University of Winchester
Dr Craig JohnstonThe University of the West of England
Thisdocumentreportsthefindingsandsuggestionsmade byresearchersatTheUniversityofWinchesterandthe UniversityoftheWestofEnglandregardingcurrentand futurepracticeatYouthOptions.Theresearchexplored ‘whatworks’increatingalegacy,encouragingbehavioural change,andincreasingeducationalengagementofchildren andyoungpeople.
Wereviewedacademicandpracticeliterature.Wethen interviewedLookedAfterchildrenandyoungpeople, otherchildrenandyoungpeoplewithSpecialEducational NeedsorEducation,HealthandCarePlans,arangeof YouthOptionsstaffandtwoheadteachers.
Areasofsignificantstrengthwerefoundintheapproach takenbyYouthoptionsstafftowardsthechildrenand youngpeoplewhomtheysupport.Suggestionsaremade forfuturepractice;aGoodPracticeGuideisprovidedasis afullreviewofcurrentacademicandpracticeliteratureof alternativeeducationprovisioninEnglandin2023.
WefoundthattheYouthOptionProjectsdeliveredvibrant, attractiveexperiencestoadiverserangeofdisadvantaged youngpeople.Theprojectsdevelopedtheireducational legaciesusingmethodologieswhichensuredthatarangeof activitieswereofferedwhichwereaccessibleand affordable.Wefoundactivitieswereorganisedand deliveredinacaringwayusingasupportiverelational style.ThesecharacteristicshelpedtoensurethatallYouth Optionssitesmetandexceededtheirparticipationgoals.
EachoftheYouthoptionssitesidentifieddifferenttarget groupswithinasmallpopulationofdisadvantaged childrenandyoungpeopleandcreatedinformal educationalprogrammesthatseemedattractivetothem. ThesitesusedbyYouthOptionsdeliveredarangeof educationalandsocialactivities;however,theyeachalso hadindividualisedandinnovativestoriesregardingtheir workwithparticulargroupsandindividuals.
This report was funded by the Clinical Research Network in order to provide Youth Options with information regarding their provision. The Clinical Research Network funding was focused on meeting the needs of under-served communities.
Thisresearchandfinalreportwouldnothavebeenpossiblewithout thewillingnessofthosewhowentoutoftheirwaytoorganiseand takepartininterviewsandthosewhosharedtheirthoughtsand experiencessofullyandfrankly.Weofferthankstothefollowing groupsofpeople:
MadeleineDurie,CEOofYouthOptions
ThestaffatYouthOptions Head Teachers
Parentsandguardianswhogavepermissionfortheirchildrentotake part.
Wewouldliketoofferparticularthankstothemany childrenandyoungpeoplewhoagreedtotakepartfor theircontributionstotheresearchandtothisreport.
WearealsogratefultotheClinicalResearchNetworkfor theirfundingofthisprojectandourrespectiveUniversities.
Theresearchprojectfocusedonprovidingpossibleoptionsforfuturedirectionsfor thecharityYouthOptionsbyinterviewingarangeofstakeholdersincludingLooked Afterchildrenandyoungpeople.TheresearchandthissubsequentReportandGood PracticeGuidecreatedidentifiedfourkeyareasforconsideration:
(1)thepurposeandvalueoftheAlternativeEducationProvisiondeliveredbyYouth Options,
(2)thechallengesofdeliveringAlternativeEducationProvision,
(3)whatcouldhelpindeliveringAlternativeEducationProvisionand
(4)possible futuredirections.
Weprovidepracticalsuggestionsforplanning,marketingandrecruitment,location, activitytype,staffandleadership,retentionofchildrenandyoungpeopleandof staff,progressionofchildrenandyoungpeopleandstaff,andthedevelopmentof volunteeringopportunities.
YouthOptionsintendtousethisreporttocreatetheirownevaluativetooltobetter understand their current and future service delivery.Youth Options also intendsto usethisreporttoenablethemtoapplyforlonger-termfundingthantheycan currently access, therefore extending the scope and reach of their offer.
Youth Options is a children and young people’s charity based in Hampshire that provides opportunities to children and youngpeopletoachieveabetterfuture. In2022YouthOptions engagedover3500childrenandyoungpeopleacrossarangeof servicesandactivities.
Theworkfocusesonthreekeyareas:
• Prevention
• Targeted Action
• Progression Opportunities
Prevention work:
isprimarilycommunityworkincludingopenaccesscentrebasedearlyyears,afterschool,holidayandyouthclubsand street-basedyouthwork,primarilyinareasofneed.
Targeted Action:
arebespokeactivities,oftengrantfundedorcommissioned, targetedatchildrenandyoungpeopleaimedatreducingthe impactofnegativelifeexperiences.
Progression:
opportunitiesfocusesonprovidingapositivewayforwardfor childrenandyoungpeoplefacingthegreatestadversity. Deliveryofallofthisworkisthroughtrainedearlyyears practitionersandyouthsupportworkers,supportedinsome areasbyvolunteersworkingalongsidetrainedstaff. Theywork withthechildrenthroughapathwayofengagement, developingandempoweringchildrenandyoungpeoplewith theskillsandknowledgetogivethemtheopportunitiestotake personalresponsibilityfortheirfuture.
“It’s really important that this research is happening. Charities do not usually have the money to do this kind of research, but it is important for charities to be able to plan for the future. I’m pleased to be involved”.
YouthOptions StaffMember.
AlternativeEducationProvisionisarrangedbyLocalAuthoritiesforchildrenandyoung peopleofcompulsoryschoolagewho,duetoschoolexclusion,shortorlong-termillness or behaviour issues would not otherwise receive suitable education in mainstream schools (DfE, 2013). Broadly speaking, Alternative Education Provision may include informal settings such as outdoor provisions or formal settings such as Pupil Referral Units,alternativeprovisionacademies,freeschools,andhospitalschools.
According to the Department for Education report in January 2022, the number of pupils attending Alternative Education Provision (including Local Authority alternative provision, independent schools and other providers that are not able to register as a school)hasincreasedbyover3,100(10%),to35,600since2020/21(DfE,2022).
A House of Commons briefing paper in 2018 reported increasing numbers of children and young people with mental health needs in alternative provision, with one in two pupils having social, emotional, and mental health conditions as their primary category of Special Educational Need. There is also a growing recognition that pupils’ mental health and wellbeing influence their educational attainment. Most alternative educational providers therefore aim to facilitate re-engagement with learning, as well as promoting social and emotional development, with the ultimate outcome of pupils reintegratingintomainstreameducation.
Research Objectives:
This research sought to explore the role and value of alternative education provision deliveredbyYouthOptionsthroughconsiderationofthefollowingobjectives:
(1)the purpose and value of Alternative Education Provision delivered by Youth Options
(2)thechallengesofdeliveringAlternativeEducationProvision
(3)whatcouldhelpindeliveringAlternativeEducationProvision
(4)possible futuredirections.
Consent for this project was received through The University of Winchester Ethics Committee on 13.12.2022 (application RKEEC221001_Harrison) and The University of the West of England (application RKEEC221001)
TheresearchprojectinvolvedevaluationoftheprovisiondeliveredbyYouthOptions,an alternative education provider in South-West England, and those involved with or participating in this initiative. The research incorporated a sample of participants (childrenandyoungpeople,managers,practitionersandheadteachers)whichprovided anopportunitytogaininsightintotheprojectasawholeandtogainasenseoftheethos behindtherangeofactivitiesthatwereoffered.Interviewsandinformalobservationsof activitiesoccurredwithineachYouthOptionssite.
The focus of the data collection was on gaining an understanding of how to create a sustainable‘whatworks’provisionfordisadvantagedchildrenandyoungpeople.Youth Optionswantedtogaininsightintogoodpracticeandpossibleoptionsforthefuture.The researchprojectwasdesignedtoinformpracticeandcontributetothesuccessofYouth Options. Data was thus collected throughout the duration of a school term (January –May 2023). In addition, we adopted a participatory ethos in our approach to data collection by encouraging project staff and participants to help us to understand what issueswereimportanttothem.
Weengaged two sites thatweremostrepresentativeof Youth Options and werereflective of the background and characteristics of the participants. We attended several of these sessionsineacharea.
The research project was coproduced with Youth Options. Meetings were held with key staff to determine the most effective methods to be used to achieve the research aims. Methodsagreedwereinterviewsandobservations.
Formal and informal interviews were therefore held with participants which included children and young people, managers, practitioners, headteachers and the CEO of Youth Options. These took place in person wherever possible. When this was not possible, online interviews were held. Interviews with adults were audio-recorded (whether online or in-person). Many of the children and young people we met did not read or write. Children and young people were given the option to be audio-recorded or to have their words written down verbatim. All chose to have their words written down by researchersandsomeaskedforthesetobereadbacktothematthetimeoftheinterview. We were careful to interview participants involved in different activities across each of the Youth Option sites and ensured that we included individuals who represented the demographic composition of the projects. Interviews with selected children and young people occurred throughout sessions in order gain a sense of what was important to them, their initial aspirations and the changes that they may experience through the course of their sessions. Where appropriate, children and young people were visited more than once, in order to build trust and create a relaxed atmosphere. Some children and young people were happy to talk throughout their session, others did not want to miss activities or stay too long after their session was over. Subsequently, in addition to their usual outdoor settings, interviews were also held in various settings (including meeting rooms, hallways, the dining areasofYouth Optionscentres, inoffices, caféareas as well as outside in parks and playgrounds).
Interviews with adult participants explored issues such as barriers, challenges, attractors, participation levels, changes in attitudes, skills and knowledge as well as addressing their perceptions of Youth Options itself. The opportunity to conduct formal interviews with adult participants was impacted by the location of the activities which meant that there were not always ‘ideal’ spaces in which to conduct interviews. All those interviewed howeverwentoutoftheirwaytomakethemselvesavailableeitherinpersonorviaonline interviews.
Thereweresomelimitations to theresearch thatmayhaveimpacted thefindings:
• Althougheveryeffortwas madeto interviewyoungpeoplefromdifferentsocialand culturalbackgrounds and levels of dis/abilitythis was not always possible. Therefore, theviewsofchildrenandyoungpeoplewhoweremostaccessiblearemorerepresented
•Thequalitativedataisprimarilybasedupontheinputprovidedbychildrenandyoung peoplewhowereeagertoparticipateintheresearchorwhohadacloseconnectionwith astaffmember.Thiscouldmeanthattheviewsofyoungpeoplewhowerelessengaged intheprogrammesareunder-represented
• Every effort was also made to give young people enough time to complete the interviews. However, procedural bias may have occurred. Some of the children and youngpeopleaskedtobeinterviewedattheendofasessionand,thus,mayhavebeen morelikelytoanswerquestionswithoutfullyconsideringtheirresponses.However,we have no reason to believe that the young people were not attempting to answer the questionstruthfully
• Every effort was made to contact and interview as many Youth Options staff as possible. Not all staff responded, and many did not work specifically with the target group of Looked After children and young people which this research project was funded toresearch,soitispossiblethatthistooinfluencedtheresponseswegained.
Thetablebelowmapsthedifferentphasesofthestudy,thekeystakeholdergroupswe engagedwith,whichobjectivesthatspecificphasesoughttoaddressandthe methodologicalapproachthatwasemployed.
LeadPractitioners
ChildrenandYoung People
To foreground the voice ofmanagerstogain insightsaboutthenature, purpose,andvalueof alternativeeducation;
To identifybarriersand facilitatorstoengagement withandinalternative education;
To examinehowwell alternativeeducationis resourcedandwhat trainingisprovidedfor thosewho‘teach’oneach site.
To foreground the voice of children/youngpeopleto gain insightsaboutthenature, purposeandvalueof education
To identifybarriersand facilitatorstoengagement withYouthOptions education
Interviewsand observations
Thirteenadultparticipantswereinterviewed,andelevenchildrenandyoungpeople wereinterviewedandobserved.Sixteensitevisitsandelevenonlineinterviewstook place.
Allparticipantsactivelychosetotakepartandreportedtheirexperiencesofbeing interviewedaspositive.
Supporting Statements:
Madeleine Durie, CEO of Youth Options stated, “Youth Options was delighted to be able to participate inthe research project. Asa charity, it isvery challenging to find resourcestolookattheimpactofourworkbeyondourowninternalassessmentsand feedback. Tohaveauniversity-ledresearchprojectcarryingoutthatresearchhasbeen invaluable and will not only help our own improvements but also help other organisations working with Looked After Children to consider how they deliver their services. Dr Craig Johnston and Rachel Harrison worked with me and the delivery teamtoensurethattheresearchapproachwasappropriateforthechildrenandyoung people who were involved. Their research and professional experience of the needs and challenges of these young people was essential to making this project successful. The collaborationbetweenourcharityandtheUniversity,thankstothis funding, will extend beyond this particular research project and help usto continue to improve our impact and ultimately better outcomes for children and young people”.
Regarding the work Youth Options has done with her pupils a Headteacher stated that Youth Options, “is lifechanging” for young people involved. The Headteacher wanted to be interviewed so she could share her view that Youth Options should have funding to provide opportunities for far more children and young people.
Childrenandyoungpeoplefedbackthattheyenjoyedbeinginvolvedinaresearch project.Theyindicatedthattheyvaluedbeinglistenedtoandhavingtheirwords writtendownandreadbacktothem.
Findings from Interviews and Observations. Qualitative findings – The transcripts from all individual interviews and observations were analysed using deductive thematic analysis techniques. As a result, several themes weredevelopedthatrelateto:
(1) ThevalueofYouthOptions
(2) TerminologyaroundYouthOptions’OutdoorLearningProvision
(3) LearningatYouthOptions
(4) YouthOptionsandSchools
(5) ThechallengesofdeliveringalternativeeducationatYouthOptionsand
(6) Suggestions for future directions
Allwordsandphrasespresentedinquotationmarks“” aredirectquotesfromresearch participants.
A key strength of Youth Options which was consistently presented was the value of simplybeingoutdoorsinnature.Thiswasextremelyimportantintermsofchildrenand youngpeopleunderstandingthemselvestobevaluedhumanbeings.Participantsinthis study typically identified mental health, general well-being, improved confidence, and social skills as key outcomes from attendance at Youth Options. There was a strong emphasisonusingarelationship-basedpedagogywhichincludedfocusedplayand/or learning opportunities as a vehicle to improve these aspects of the lives and development of children and young people. The specific opportunities this relationship-based approach took differed across settings and with different children and young people, accordingtotheirindividualneeds.
What came across very strongly and consistently in interviews therefore was the concept of sessions being “child and young person-led”. Children and young people were clearly placed at the centre of the work which staff undertook. A staff member gave a typical example regarding one child who “hadn't attended school for months, attended with us, and she wanted to build a den in the woods…So [we’ve] given that young person what sheneeds.Sheneededtoplay”.
Role-modelling appropriate behaviour, particularly in terms of relationships with oneself and others, was a clear focus. One staff member related being told by one child, “‘I just feellikeI'm agood boywhen Icomehere’. So you givehim theopportunityto bepositive and [for children to] have self-worth about themselves”. Every child and young person was described by one staff member as getting “the same level of investment in care and development” irrespective of their background or educational ability.
Activelylisteningtochildrenandyoungpeople,actingontheirideasandrespectingtheir choiceswereidentifiedascoreactions withinthischild-centred approach.Thesewere strong themes for staff“theycometo us allclosed off and curled in on themselves,it’s ourjobtoopenthemup,youknow?Empowermentthat’swhat wedo”.Staffdescribed havingarangeofactivitiesavailableforchildrenandyoungpeopletochoosefromand explainedtheimportanceofbeingflexibletomeetindividualneeds.
Alternatively,childrenandyoungpeoplecouldchoosetheirownactivitiesnotsuggested by staff. When this happened, staff viewed this as positive. Onechild for example was observed refusing all activities offered by one staff member but instead decided he wanted to build a large nesting area for a bird he had just seen. This was actively encouraged by the staff member, who supported the child to consider appropriate nesting materials and praised his ideas as innovative. This approach was typical in observationsmadebyresearchers.Anotherchildofferedhisownratingssystemforhis experiences:“Ilikeschool5outof10.Ilikecookinghere11outof10.IlikeYouthOptions 1000outof10”.
There was also an important emphasis on children and young people being supported to feel comfortable and safe. One staff member explained, “You know sometimes this is the only two hours every week that they are actually safe. A place of safety once a week where they know they are safe, for some kids that’s what we are”. Several adult participants were clear that this was particularly important for some children and young peoplesuch as thoseknown to professionalservices, who werevulnerableto exploitation or who were Looked After. The relationship-based approach Youth options took was thereforeconsideredtobehighlyrelevant.
“Ilikeschool5out of10.Ilike cookinghere11 outof10.Ilike
Despite the overwhelming value to all aspects of mental and physical health and wellbeing which Youth Options was considered to provide, there was a lack of clarity expressedbymanyparticipantsregardingwhatitwasthatYouthOptionsdidinrelation toitsOutdoorLearning Provision.Descriptions typicallyproducedthestatement“Like aForestSchoolbutnotaForestSchool”forexample. Whenquestionedaboutmeanings of phrases commonly used by participants to describe Youth Options, particularly ‘Outdoor Learning’ and ‘Forest School’, some described Outdoor Learning as less structuredthanForestSchool,othersdescribeditasmorestructuredthanForestSchool.
There was also a general lack of clarity about what these two terms meant. ‘Outdoor Education’ was also often used but not always clearly defined. In addition, some participants had a clear understanding of the education system in the U.K., others did not.Allparticipants who expressed an opinion about theeducation system in England feltitmettheneedsofaselectfewpupilsbutwasnotfitforpurposeforallpupils.Itwas feltthatYouthOptionswasessentialinpartbecausetheexistingeducationsystemwas failingchildrenandyoungpeople.
Childrenandyoungpeoplespecifically,asistypicalmorewidelyof childrenandyoung peopleinalternativeeducationsettings,usuallystatedthattheydidnotknowwhythey wereatYouthOptionsexceptthattheywere“notallowedtogotoschool”.Mostchildren and young people interviewed stated they thought Youth Options was “good”, one described it as “a solid set-up”, for example. Children and young people consistently expressed satisfaction with the Youth Options staff with whom they worked and very muchvaluedone-to-oneworkingorbeinginsmallgroups“soIknowhowtodothings”. Staffwereroutinelydescribedas“nice”.
Children and young people who attended a range of alternative education settings saw Youth Options as part of their alternative education routine. Most children and young people could list a range of practical skills they had learned at Youth Options, such as fire-building, cooking, using a hammock and creating wooden objects. Children and young people typically stated they did not have their own short- or long-term goals beyond wanting to go back to school full-time. However, two young people stated they were keen to attend college, whilst another who did have long-term goals stated his aim whilst at Youth Options was to learn “anything that makes me feel smarter”.
Outcomes for attendance at Youth Options were usually set by schools or external agencies. Thesewereoften nebulous andnotrelated to outdoorskills. Rather theyrelated toimproved attendanceat school,or improved behaviour atschool.Onestaffmember explained outcomes are often, “massively varied…[it] could be they need to develop communication, or itcould bethattheyarestruggling to build confidenceand self-esteem andsobeingabletodothesethingswhicharen'tacademic.Theydon'thaveanacademic focusandnothavingtositdown and bequiet andread and writeand dootherthings. Thatcouldbearealstruggle.Buttheyarestillabletosucceedinotherwaysandshowing themthatthere'smorethanonewaytosucceedandthattheyaregoodatthingsIthink isreally,reallyhelpfulforthem”.
YouthOptionsstaffconsistentlyfocusedonchildrenandyoungpeopleasholisticbeings whoneededanddeservedadultapprovalandpraise.Staffregularlydescribedchildren andyoungpeopleas“bright”and“eagertolearn”.
Staffmemberswereclearthatchildrenandyoungpeoplewere“learningskillsbutthey don’t realise they are learning”. The “soft” skills being learned which were most often described included listening, following instructions, learning to undertake tasks in a stepby-step way, dealing with failure to undertake a task successfully at the first attempt, makingfriendsandtakingturns.
Staff,however,didnotseethemselves as‘teachers’andoftendescribed theways inwhich they actively worked to show children and young people that staff were different from their (school)teachers. ‘Learning’ was described in passive ways, children and young people learned skills whilst at Youth Options but were typically not described as being taught those skills. One staff member summarised this approach “I’m not a teacher, I’m here to give you the opportunity”. Staff members gave numerous examples of the ways in which they had autonomy in what happened in their sessions which they very much valued “the way we deliver is up to us”. The “Youth Options Way” of working, however, always included talking through (rather than teaching) safety rules before any activity wasundertaken.
Children and young people were encouraged to take risks as appropriate to them as individuals and continually supported to consider the consequences of their actions. It was important to staff that they supported children and young people to understand actions and consequences in a non-judgmental way.
Inaddition,itwasoftennotedbyparticipantsthatthesessionswerevaluedbecausethey could contribute to the development of social skills among young people. This was deemedespeciallyimportantbecauseparticipantsstatedthatmostyoungpeopleunder their charge lacked those important skills. There was emphasis placed on the importance of developing social skills to be successful at school, to ease the transition back to mainstreamschool,and forlifeingeneral,bothcurrentlyand onceyoungpeoplehave leftschool.Oneadultparticipantexplained“Ithinkinalotofcircumstancesit'saneed justforachancetodeveloppositiverelationships...safeadultsparticularly,I'mthinking ofouryoungpeople,whicharelivingincare,lookedafterchildren,alotofthem[are]in needofasafe,trustingrelationship”.
Children and young people learning from one another and teaching one another was highlightedasanotherkeystrengthoftheYouthOptionsapproachtolearning.Thiswas particularly evident in group sessions where new children and young people joined existing groups and were taught practical skills by existing attendees. A staff member stated“whenayoungpersonsuccessfullyusesatoolorbuildsafireandisabletodothat inasafeandsensibleway...Ithinkthatreallygoesquitealongwayinhelpingthembuild confidence and self-esteem, especially when they can come back and potentially then somebodyelsejoinsasession.Theywereabletoshowthemhowtodoit. That'sreally beneficial,realisingthattheycanbuildrelationships”.Childrenandyoungpeoplewere supported to learn how to make friends whilst at Youth Options. One staff member relatedthatachildhadrealisedthevalueoffriendshipandhadusedthisnewskillwhen returning to school. The child had explained, “I’ve realised school’s a lot easier when you’vegotfriends”.
“Ithinkinalotof circumstances,it'sa needjustforachance todeveloppositive relationships...”
Adultparticipants,childrenandyoungpeopledescribeddifferencesbetweentheways inwhichschoolstaffcouldviewchildrenandyoungpeople,andthewaysinwhichthese samechildrenandyoungpeoplewereviewedatYouthOptions.AllYouthOptionsstaff werekeentostresstheirunderstandingandrespectformanyschoolstaff.Theyfeltthat schoolstaffwereoften working with largenumbers of children and young people and often may feel they have no option but to focus only on those children who were successful (behaving in socially normative ways, achieving good grades, with regular attendance).
Some school staff, however, were felt to have negative assumptions and low expectations of children and young people using Youth Options. One staff member explained “Social Workers are saying to us, ‘please don't view this young person negatively because the school always views them negatively. And I promise you they're not. They're great, you'll see’. And they have been great. They just aren't great in a school environment”. One young person felt there should be “less criminalisation of young people at school. For example,ifayoungpersonwearsatracksuittheyarethoughtofasabadpersonatschool. I was blamed and seen as a troublemaker and chucked out of school. To be fair, I built that reputation. I was quite naughty and rude in school. I was not as nice to classmates as I could have been, I was young, about 12, and immature.” He felt school could be improved by the employment of “better teachers that want more from you”.
YouthOptionswasfelttoofferanon-judgmentalspaceforchildrenandyoungpeopleto learnasopposedtoschool,“inschoolwhenyou'retoldtodosomething,itfeelspointless. You know, if you're doing schoolwork, what's actually the point of doing that? Schoolwork? It's boring and…not getting anything out of it”. Despite this, all children andyoungpeoplewhoexpressedanopinion statedtheywantedtobeatschool.There was a strong sense that skills learned at Youth Options were transferable to school settings. One staff member explained “Building self-esteem and building confidence is definitelysomethingthattheycancarrythroughintoschool,intosituationswherethey previously didn't feel confident. That might have shown itself in disengaging with the class or some kind of other behaviour which was viewed negatively [in school]”. One adult participant described the ways in which school pupils using Youth Options had growninconfidence,whichhadledtothemgainingimprovedskillsinsubjectssuchas MathsandEnglish.Thisalsoincludedchildrenandyoungpeoplewhoweresignificantly marginalised and under-represented, including those who had Special Educational Needs, those with Education, Health and Care Plans, and/or those who were refugees fromarangeofcountries.
Anadultparticipantreportedthisdifferenceinschoolattainmentwasevidenttoparents also,whowerekeentofindwaystopayfortheirchildrentoattendYouthOptionsmore regularly, despite those parents being disadvantaged and often living in poverty. One adult participant described the work which Youth Options staff undertook as “lifechanging”forallwhoattended.
Practitioners and managers identified somebarriers thatimpacted on theoveralldelivery of the sessions. These included knowledge and skills, appropriate facilities, transport and communicationdifficultieswithschoolsandexternalindividuals.
Staffreportedfeeling a levelofconfidencein knowing whychildren and youngpeople mayact in ways which can challengeothers.Theyalso expressed satisfaction with the levelsofsupportandoffersoftrainingwhichweremadebyseniorstaff.
Several practitioners and managers did though query the appropriateness of their own (and others’) knowledge and skills. Practitioners and managers explained that it was difficult to recruit staffwith the expertise needed to work with disadvantaged children and young people. Accordingly, there were many instances when non-specialist staff were working with children and young people. Often, this was a person who had an interest in and participated in outdoor activities outside of work.
In addition to the range of training opportunities available as part of Youth Options’ formal training programme, staff felt formal qualifications were needed and their suggestions for future training were broad ranging. They included training on how to dealwithchildrenwhentheyareinextremedistress,mentalhealthtraining,trainingon arangeofSpecialEducationalNeeds,trainingonhowtosupportchildrenaftertheyhave experienced a safeguarding event, training in the psychology of children and young people, training on how to deal effectively with children who do not respond to consequences approaches, de-escalation training, counselling training, and training in humandevelopmentandbehaviourincludingbrainbiologyandbehavioraltriggers.
Participants also mentioned the importance of having appropriate facilities and equipment. While some were content with the space and facilities, they had available, most said that the types of activities that they could offer were restricted by the lack of space and facilities available. Some practitioners had resorted to trying to use classrooms to deliver sessions, but these spaces were deemed inappropriate for Outdoor Learning activities.
“Schoolsaren'talwaysthebestat communicating”.
Paperworkfromschoolslistinggoals forchildrenoryoungpeopletoachieve wasoftentaken“withapinchofsalt”.
Staff acknowledged that engaging young people in the outdoors and particularly in woodland areas with ponds and streams has an inherent higher risk than delivering within a constrained site but that this brings opportunities to engage positively with nature. Working in spaces where children and young people could physically leave if theywanted to was considered to beasafetyissuebysomestaffwhodealtregularlywith particular children or young people who had a history of running away from spaces or situations. However, staff explained that both sites have fenced off areas for delivery and, at Bishopstoke Road, a high gate and fence to stop access onto the road. Staff also explained thereareriskassessmentsputinplacefor each child dependingontheir need.
There were also issues which affected the amount of time children and young people had at Youth Options. Transport was reported by adults, children and young people to be a key barrier to participation in Youth Options. Transportused was often taxis, which were reported to beunreliable, with sometimes unhelpfulor aggressivedrivers A staff member explained “The kids hate taxis mainly…taxis are useless. Don't drop them off in the right place and don't turn up on time...You can see their frustrations with them”.
Somepractitioners wereabletouselocalcommunityfacilitiesforeducation,but again there were concerns about education time-loss, as well as cost, travel and transition concerns. One adult participant relied on borrowing a minibus from a nearby private school and a Youth Options staff member travelling back and forth to drive it. Lack of reliable,effective,affordabletransport wasconsideredtobeaside-effectofineffective funding, which may fund a place at Youth Options, but did not fund the much-needed transportcoststogetachildoryoungpersonthereandback.
DespitesignificanteffortsbyYouthoptionsstaff,difficultiesinbuildingandmaintaining good communication links with schools was also identified as an issue which could negativelyimpactYouthOptionsasanorganisation,itsstaffandthechildrenandyoung peopleit supports.When communication worked well it relied on relationships which staff had spent significant time and effort to build and maintain with interested and engaged adults whosupported childrenoryoungpeople. Whenthoseadultsmoved to different jobs or did not engage with Youth Options staff for other reasons, fragile networks were often broken, and new networks took significant time and effort to be established.
Theissueofidentifyingakeypersonwithinaschoolandthengettingcontactwiththat personwasconsideredtobedifficultandtookconsiderabletime.Whencommunication didnotworkwell,staffreportedthishinderedtheirabilitytogaininsightsintotheneeds of children and young people while they were attending Youth Options. They also reportedalackofinformationregardingfollow-upandprogressofchildrenandyoung peopletheyhadsupported:“They'rejustkindofgoneandthenthat'sit”.Thisincluded not having accessible school staff, social workers, or foster carers to contact, and difficultieswhenchangestothesepeopleweremade.
Therewasa“runningthemethatschoolsaren'talwaysthebestatcommunicating,and againwewillunderstandwhy.Becausetheyareincrediblybusywithlotsofthingsthat they're trying to juggle”. Paperwork from schools listing goals for children or young people to achieve was often taken “with a pinch of salt” because it was so inaccurate. Information about triggers for children and young people was identified by staff as essential but often missing from paperwork they received. Accurate and clear informationwasdesiredbutconsideredtobeunlikelywithout“amagicwand”.
AdultparticipantshadsomesuggestionsforfuturedirectionsforYouthOptions.Some stafffeltthat an environmentalfocuswouldbehelpful.This wasusefulintermsofthe sustainability of the sites and of the planet. Clarity about Youth Options’ mission and aimswassuggestedbyparticipants.AlladultparticipantswantedYouthOptionstooffer morespacesandsessionstomorechildrenandyoungpeopleiffundingwasavailableto enable this. This funding could be used primarily to enable the expansion of the staff team.
Having an effective, reliable and child-friendly transport system to enable the safe and efficient movement of children and young people to and from Youth options was also considered tobean essentialwayto enablethosewith chaoticlives to gain regular access tothestabilityYouthoptionsoffers.
Induction days for pupils, visiting and working in schools and better communication with schools, parents, carers and Social Workers were listed as ways in which Youth Optionscouldeasetransitionsforchildrenandyoungpeopleduetostartattendingat YouthOptions.Itwasfeltthatthiswouldalsoimproveitscurrentservice,increasetheir customer-baseandbuildonitssuccessfulrelationshipswithchildrenandyoungpeople. A significant advertising campaign so that Youth Options was widely known and recognisedwasalsohighlighted.Someparticipantsexplainedtheyhadheardabout YouthOptionsonlyinadvertentlybywordofmouth,onegainedfundingtosendpupils to Youth Options through their own professional networks (rather than any official channels).Theshort-termnatureoffundingwasalsothoughttobedetrimentaltothe futurehiringofhigh-calibre,experiencedandqualifiedstaff.Itwasfeltthatitwasonly fundingthatwasholdingbackthesignificantexpansionofYouthOptions.
The Youth Options projects often delivered fun, rewarding and active educational experiences to disadvantaged young people. This good practice guide reflects the learningfromtheprojectthatcanbeusedtoinformotherprojectsandcancontributeto ‘whatworks’andthegrowthoftheprovision.
Youth Options sessions were designed to engage children and young people in safe spaces and thereforecost,safetyand conveniencewereimportantin allcases.Inaddition, thetrusting,friendlyrelationshipsbetweenthestaffandthechildrenandyoungpeople werecrucialtothesuccessofeachoftheinterventions.Similarly,theinformaldelivery style which emphasized fun personal and individualized interactions appealed to childrenandyoungpeople.Finally,theimportanceofgoodreferralsinthedevelopment aims of children and young people and the sustainability of programmes emerged in mostcases.
This Good Practice Guide covers the following topics: Planning and initiating a new session;Marketingandrecruitingchildrenandyoungpeople;Location;Typeofactivity; Staffandleadership;RetentionandProgression
Planning and initiating a new session.
Fromtheresearchweundertookweidentifiedseveralgoodpracticestepsthathelpwith initialplanning:
• Sessions can be promoted via appropriate lesson planning and through appropriate work with schools to ensure that the children and young people are directly engaged by individuals and organisations they trust
• Successfulsessions arethosewhereorganisershavetaken timeto getto knowand understandwhatyoungpeopleareinterested in,what enthusesthem,andwhat theyfindchallengingordifficult.Itisimportanttoconsidertheneedsofchildren and young people within thecontext of schooland thelocalcommunity(school lessonsandsportsactivitiesforexample)
• Partnershipswithlocalorganizationscanhelpinitiatinginitialengagementofthe childrenandyoungpeople
• Youth Options could work much more closely with Schools, Youth Services, Police,YouthOffendingTeamsandHealthprofessionals.Thesepartnerscanhelp deliverorpromotesessions,providejointfunding,orfurtherreferchildren and youngpeople
• Partnerships may be used to develop long-term networks for education pathways andprogressionroutes
• The informal style was effective; however, some partners may be more used to more formal approaches. For example, some teachers may be uncomfortable with theinformalapproachofstaff
• Children and young people could be even more involved in designing and organisingsessions.
Marketing and Recruiting Children and Young People.
A wide range of methods need to be used to attract children and young people beyond referrals.Thesemayinclude:
• Wordofmouth
• Attendingmeetingsinschoolsandthroughcommunitygroupsandclubs
• Introducing taster sessions
• Usingsocialmedia/online(e.g.Instagrampages,Twitter)topubliciseactivities
• Asking staff to publicise the sessions in schoolsand other organisations
• There are a significant number of success stories. Success stories can help to highlight the achievements of programmes and sessions and more especially the achievementsof the children and young people
• Young people identified having fun with staff whom they trust as key to their sessions.Advertisingthatreflectstheseelements,therefore,maybeeffective.
Travellingtosessionscanbeabarrierformanydisadvantagedyoungpeopleintermsof cost,nothavingsomeonetotakethem,territorialconcerns,andsafety.Formostchildren andyoungpeople,holdingsessionsinlocalandaccessiblevenueswascrucial.Keyissues relatingtolocationinclude:
• Accessibleandconvenient-deliveredinaccessiblevenues,atappropriatetimesin theschoolday
• Safe and secure: it is important that young people feel that they are secure in the venue
• Comfortable:locationinwhichyoungpeoplefeelphysicallyandemotionallysafe andatease
• Neutral:notlinkedtooridentifiedwithaspecificgroup
• For manyschoolscostisakeyfactor intheirdecisionsaboutparticipation
• Most sessions were provided free to users. This facilitated continued attendance and accessibility for many children and young people at the sessions
• Charging a fee for additional services may help with sustainability of programmes.
There was no one activity that metthe needs of all young people, however:
• Offering individual outdoor activities was the best way to engage children and youngpeople,includingsomewhomayhavebeennegativeaboutsuchactivities. Theseactivitieswerealsousedsuccessfullytobringtogetherchildrenandyoung peoplefromdifferentandsimilarbackgroundsandneighbourhoods
• Variationsofactivitieswaswelcomedandshouldbecontinued
• Children and young people stated that they like to try new activities. Some participants preferred outdoor activities which were non-traditional or more technicallychallengingsuchasboxing
• ‘Trendy’, culturally relevant activities can also be appealing, and children and youngpeopleexpressedadesiretotryactivitiesthattheyhadseenontelevision–thismayrequireadditionalequipment.
Staff and leadership.
The skill and expertise of those delivering the sessions are crucially important to the success of the session. The staffs’ informal style and approach (which is built on a range of personal rather than professional qualities and characteristics) enable them to effectively interact with (and potentially influence) children and young people. We found thatthefollowingareimportant:
• Arelaxedapproachtodelivery
• Appropriatequalifications,trainingandexperienceforbothstaffandleaders
• A passionate commitment to improving the lives of young people through a relationship-basedapproachtolearning
• Agoodunderstandingoflocalfacilitiesandpeopleaswellasmoreformalskills ensuresthatsessionsarefunandchallenging
• Flexibilityinapproachandsensitivitytotheneedsofchildrenandyoungpeople
• Younger participants valued knowing that there was a responsible person supportingsessions. Retention.
Staff used different strategies to engage and retain children and young people. They ensured that the sessions were fun, interesting and inclusive of individuals and their needs:
• Fun means a range of different things to different people. On the whole, fun is aboutbeinginvolved,‘fitting-in’,beingactive,gainingasenseofachievementand spendingtimewithpeopletheylike.Childrenandyoungpeopleshouldcontinue tobeaskedaboutwhattheythinkfunisforthem
• Clear communication between staff and children and young people is essential; childrenandyoungpeopleneedtoknowwhatgoingonsothattheycanplantheir owninvolvementandattendance
• Fostering open dialogue and opportunities for feedback during the sessions to reviewprogressandresolve any problemswhenthey arise
• Where appropriate, mechanisms for keeping in touch with children and young peoplecouldbeintroduced
• Successful sessions may be linked to other future activities such as residential experiences,clubsorlocalevents.Thisallowsabroadeningofchildrenandyoung people’sexperiences,thepotentialtoincreasesocialnetworksandthepossibility ofopeningupnewpathways
• Successful staff may act as catalysts to identify, train, and be supportive to volunteerswhothemselvesmaydeveloptheknowledgeandskillstobeinvolved inoutdoorlearning
• Include young people in the organisation and running of sessions including the developmentofrulesandritualsingames
• It could be possible to further embed children and young people involvement in a session by assigning responsible roles, such as team captains, leaders or peer mentors.
Themostsuccessfulsessionsthatwevisited encouragedchildrenandyoungpeopleto progressanddeveloptheircapacity(eitherintermsofactivityskillsorsocialcompetence, for example). Successful sessions place a value on pathway progression. Volunteering and peer mentoring may lead to experiences and training thathelp young peopledevelop personalandsocialskills,andknowledge.Volunteeringorpeermentoringmayprovide anopportunitytorealizeandbuildthepotentialofyoungpeopleaswellashelpingwith thesustainabilityofprogrammes.VolunteersmaybenefitYouthOptionsbyhelpingwith sessions,providingsupporttoyoungpeople,servingaspeerrolemodelsand mentors. Volunteering may help young people to acquire the knowledge and skills to plan and deliver activities as well as developing arange of professional,technical, and personal skills.Volunteeringmayalsofacilitateentryintothelabourmarket:
• Youth Options could recruit their own under-sixteen-year-old participants who demonstratepotentialandareeagertobecomefuturevolunteers
• Thesevolunteers andpeer mentorscouldprovideinformalencouragement and individualsupport
• Volunteers and peer mentors could provide formal skill and knowledge development
• Volunteers and peer mentors could provide opportunities to directly assist staff onprojectstoincreasetheircomfortinleadershiproles
• Volunteers and peer mentors could provide opportunities to broaden the horizons andcareeraspirationsofchildrenandyoungpeopleusingYouthOptions
• There may be benefits to providing funding, such as gym passes or free training (or other tokens) to volunteers and peer mentors to encourage progression or continuedinvolvement
• Many staff assisted participants in getting help to address a range of personal and life issues, e.g. bullying, mental health and welfare advice. This requires that staff have knowledge and training to identify these needs and make appropriate referrals.
Introduction
This section of the report identifies some of the existing evidence that could help to informhowYouthOptionsmightfocustheirsupportforinterventionswithchildrenand youngpeople.
Overview: Children (and/or young people) and alternative educational provisions.
The review of literature aboutalternative educational provisions (AEP)suggests the need to create sustainable opportunities for children and young people (CYP), particularly those from socially and economically disadvantaged backgrounds. For example, having careexperienceis akeyfactorreported ashaving asignificantimpactonchildren’saccess to education, the shaping of their experiences of education and is identified in literature alongside other forms of disadvantage (Department for Education (DfE), 2018a; 2018b). CYP with care experience are overrepresented both in AEP and in school exclusions statistics (DfE, 2022;2023). Although we do notlook at theevidenceof AEP in relation to a specific group, it is important to acknowledge that children who access AEP settings are not a homogenous group. Social difference such as race, gender, place and disability, for example shape CYPs views of education, their experiences, and their level of participation in educational activities (DfE, 2019). It is well known from research that outcomes for pupils who experience AEP or exclusion tend to be poor at the end of their compulsory schooling (HM Government, 2022). This should not always be seen as an issue with the quality of some AEP providers. The outcomes each CYP achieves in the sector can representsignificant achievements given the factors that led to them accessing AEP. But relative to the general population, the outcomes for this group of CYP are poor and persist into early adulthood. Improving their post-16 (and beyond) employment and educationprospectsoughttobeapolicygoal(seeBeynon,2021).
The DfE’s 2023 measure of the relative propensity of different groups in the population accessing AEP demonstrates very clearly that there are differences within the population of the CYP accessing such provision. However, the index does not go on to identify the reasons for the variations. A review of existing evidence about CYP likely to enrol in or bereferredtoAEPsuggeststhatingeneral:
1.66%ofpupilsinAEPwereaged14-15(comparedto13%inthestateschoolsector),
2.80%hadspecial educationalneeds(comparedto15%of allschool agepupils),
3.40%wereeligibleforFreeSchoolMeals(comparedto14%inthestatesector).
In summary, those attending AEPs are on average 14 to 16, have SEND and are from ‘poor’backgrounds.
FormostoftheCYPincludedintheresearchundertakenbyMalcolm(2021)theideathat alternative forms of education could be understood as fun and enjoyable was more importantthansomeoftheotherbenefitsofferedbyadiverseandgrowingrangeofAEP providers.Inessence,relationshipsmatter.Malcolmgoesgoontoconcludethatthereis a lack of good quality and long-term research that evaluates the effectiveness of interventions, especially in England. This is not to say that interventions are not effective, rather thattheevidenceis notavailable, as rigorousevaluationsareoften notundertaken. AsMalcolmfurtherpointsout,althoughCYPhaveclearviewsonbarriersandsupports toparticipation,researchsofarhasfailedtotakeproperaccountofthese,particularlyin relationtotheviewsofchildrenincare.Theoverallmessagehereisthatit iscrucialto understandtheviewsofdifferentgroupsofchildren inrelationtoparticipation inAEP andtotaketheseasastartingpointindevelopingbothpolicyandpractice.
AlthoughAEPisneglectedinpolicyterms,researchthatdoesexisthighlightssomekey issuesand concerns.To begin with,thereistheproblemofdefining thesectorandthe theoryunderpinningtheseprogrammes,describedbyPage(2023)as‘wide-rangingand disparate’. Page discusses the diversity of forms of AEP: Local Authority/Council run, privately owned, linked to outdoor education and work-based learning settings and special schools. As such, Taylor defines AEP as ‘where pupils engage in timetabled, educationalactivities awayfromschoolsites’(Taylor2012,p.4).Thisdefinitionissuitably all-encompassing:schoolsorprogrammesthataresetupbyLocalAuthorities,schools, communityandvoluntaryorganizations,orotherentitiestoserveCYPwhoseneedsare not being met and who, for a variety of reasons, are ‘failing’ in a traditional learning environment.ForPennacchia,and Thomson(2016a)thedefiningfactorofAEPistheir emphasisoninnovationinpedagogy,caringrelationships,andarestrictedcurriculum–adefinitionallensthatfocusesonCYPratherthantheorganizationaltype.Thisfocuson thechildisacommonthemeacrosstheliterature:JalaliandMorgan(2018)highlightthe senseofbelongingandconnectednessnotexperiencedinmainstreamschools;Malcolm (2018a)discusses theemphasisonrelationshipsbetween staff andchildren,theflexibility ofstructureandcurriculum;tailoredtotheinterestsandgoalsofstudents;O’Gormanet
al (2016) emphasize the prioritization of care that creates the setting as a ‘safe space’. A definition that focuses on child-centeredness and flexible pedagogy stretches the boundaries to include a variety of outdoor settings such which may be actively chosen by Local Authorities – in this case, Youth Options.
From our observations and site visits, it is similarly hard to define Youth Optionsalthoughtheprioritizationofcare,child-centerednessandsafespaceslinktotheideas above but also closely align with the role of outdoor education and Forest Schools. OutdoorEducationsettingsandForestSchoolsadvocateCYPsindependence,learningis encouragedtobeconstructedbytheCYPthemselvesratherthan sittinginaclassroom and being told how learning works. O’Brien et al (2007) support the fact that ‘Forest Schools’andoutdooreducationbothalignwithconstructivistlearningtheoryduetothe key skills and styles of learning that is used in the schools. They state, Forest School allows for constructivist learning to take place in which the “children construct understandingandmeaningthroughtheactivitiestheyundertakeontheirownandwith others”(Ibid,p252).Inthesecases,CYPinoutdoorlearningspacesproducetheirown meanings and understandings of different aspects of the outside environment. They have thefreedomtoexploretheskillstheyarebeinginfluencedtolearnaswellasexploringa ‘real’ setting rather than an artificial setting: the classroom. The obvious difference betweenYouthOptionsandemergingideasofAlternativeProvisionsinmoretraditional learningenvironments(i.e.astructuredclassroom)isthesettings.AtYouthOptionsCYP are predominately exploring and learning in woodland areas rather than indoors at a deskandtableinaroom.TherearesignificantotherdifferencesbetweenYouthOptions andatraditionalclassroomsuchastheroleofthe‘teacher’,thelearningmotivation,the collaborationandtheresponsibilityofthelearner.
Bruner (1995) coined the concept of ‘scaffolding’ to represent what the relationships between a teacher and a learner look like in outdoor learning settings. Scaffolding in Youth Options is a shared understanding of space between the ‘teacher’ or educator and CYP. This can lead to a mutual interpretation of what is being learned. At Youth Options the responsibility is on the learner to actively guide their own learning. In a school classroom, students tend to be more passive as responsibility for learning resides with a teacher.
AEP and CYP from disadvantaged backgrounds.
Theliteratureindicatesthatsomenegativeattitudes,perceptionsandpreferencesthat children from disadvantaged areas have toward education and those associated with educationareshapedbythedifferentspaces,placesandresourcesthattheyhave
available to participate and engage in education (Pennacchia and Thomson, 2016). This is often significant in relation to the nature of the education provided, to individual participation and to important life outcomes such as CYPs lifestyles and their social and cognitive development (Pennacchia et al, 2016). The 2022 Children’s Commissioner Report indicates the extent of differences between attendance and positive outcomes in England. It shows the growing divide between the richest and poorest families in the U.K. with large concentrations of poverty in the Southwest of England. Dean’s (2018) research also shows that that poverty has continued to affect the attendance and participationofCYPandthatthegapsbetweenthesemeasuresfortherichestandpoorest familieshavewidenedoverthelasttenyears.
A survey of school attendance also found a bias towards the more advantaged classes in society, noting that poverty affects CYPs progress and achievement through education more than any other individual factor (Dorling, 2014). This is important because sociability and participation partially define social inclusion and ‘normality’ and because poverty is a significant riskfactor in becoming excluded, with all the implications this has for identity, health and well‐being. CYP in care are frequently seen as the most at risk with society, yet their capacity to participate in differing forms of education is invariably shaped by social inequality and exclusion. In practice this means 1.8 million pupils persistently absent. Ministers have expressed fears about persistent absence, which has been exacerbated by the Covid pandemic. Based on data from around half of Councils in England,areportfromestimatedthatalmost1.8millionpupils(22percent)missedmore than 10 per cent of sessions in the autumn term last year, while 124,000 (1.5 per cent) missed overhalf.Thesefindings mirror thosepublished byBeynon (2021),whichshowed that over 20 per cent of primary pupils and over 30 per cent of secondary pupils were persistentabsentees.
Inlinewiththeseconcerns,theliteraturesuggeststhatdisengagementfromeducationis increasing. Indeed, someresearchers suggestthatthereisamoralpanicsurroundingnonattendanceamongCYP(Parsons,2005),especiallyaroundthosewhogrowupinpoorer communities. Consecutive Governments (and more recently the Children’s Commissioner) have identified CYP living in poorer communities as a target for alternativeinterventionsasoutcomesforthisgrouprelatetoarangeofwiderinequality issues in England. While all segments of the English school population are affected by disengagement,oneofthecommon mythsthatexistsintheBritishpressisthatCYPin care at most at risk (Jones, 2013). In this generalization, two facts commonly are overlooked: a) the relation between dis/engagement can vary by gender, ethnicity, disabilityorageand b)whiledisparitiesin attendanceareclosing,thosewithalackof AEPintheirareaarebecomingmoredisengaged.
AEPindisadvantaged,or‘poor’communities,havealsobeenidentifiedasimportant in keepingyoungpeopleawayfromcrimeandincreasingcommunitycohesion(Timpson, 2019).Timpson’sreviewofAEPalsohighlightedacommonperceptionthatexistsinthe AEP literature: that any educational activities in poor communities will have an identifiableinfluenceoreffectonthelivesofCYPwholivethere.However,Timpsonalso identifies a lack of evidence relating to the impact of these projects (especially large developmentinitiatives)inpoorcommunities.Timpson’sreviewindicatesforexample, thatAEPmayprovideacontext whichdevelopsstrongbondsthroughsharedsymbols and identity as well as common purposes, all of which are conditions for promoting a senseofbelonging,trust,andto“combattheperniciouseffectsofapathyandcessation ofmotivation”.TheTimpsonreviewalsoidentifiedevidencethatthosewhoparticipated inAEweremoresatisfiedwithlife,moretrusting,moresociableandhealthierwhilstin these provisions than they were whilst atschool. Extending this analysis, Malcolm (2021) suggests that AEP increases subjective well-being generally. Indeed, it is ubiquitously maintained that participation in AEP has a positive effect on improved educational results,socialnetworks,social cohesion,as well as increasing confidenceand senseof self-worthandreducingoffendingbehaviour.
Theevidencetosupporttheseviews,particularlystudiesthatincludetheviewsofCYP wholiveinpoorcommunitiesishowever,limited.ThislackofresearchledJohnstonand Bradford(2022;2023)tosuggestsocialcohesionandsocialliteracymaynotbedueto failingsinAEP.Repeatedstudiesshownoevidenceofachangeinthesocialpatterning orotheridentifiablenormativeoutcomesofthoseaccessingAEP.Ratherthisisreversed: only one percent of those accessing AEP obtain 5 GCSEs and 14-to 16-year-old young people are also less likely to participate in paid work once leaving AEP than CYP accessing regular education. This evidence would seem to provide a rationale for buildingacoherentpolicyorrationaleforthoseaccessingAEP.However,manyauthors claim it is a fallacy to think that it is possible to change the aspirations, attitudes, preferences,and perceptionsofyoungpeoplethroughtheirinvolvement in AEPalone. JohnstonandBradfordcontinuetoargueforexample,thatthelivesofyoungpeoplefrom disadvantagedbackgroundsaredeterminedlargelybywhathappensoutsideofAEP.
These authors’ concerns relate to the outcomes of AEP and the need for other enabling factors to be in place: changes in the physical environment, changes in social infrastructure and facilities and parity in resources. These enabling factors are related to concerns about the importance of AEP transformative potential, particularly in relation to providing CYP with the cultural capacity (or social capital) to renegotiate school and employment. Other authors are also sceptical of the role AEP on its own can play in transforming young people’s lives. A wide-ranging review of recent academic journal
articles, (Johnston et al, forthcoming) that examines the role of AEP draws similar conclusions.ThisreviewnotesthatitwasnotAEPbutaspectsofthewiderexternalsociocultural and economic environment which most affected CYP. Thus, stakeholders in AEP should be aware of the limitations of any attempt to use AEP to deliver changes in the attitudes, aspirations, preferences, and perceptions of CYP in the absence of parallel initiatives in larger social, cultural, and economic environments and without closer partnership working with schools and stakeholders (Pennacchia and Thomson, 2016b).
The point is not to debunk the positive influence of AEP, but to suggest that the circumstancesofsomeCYParecomplexandsolutionsnotascompleteassomeauthors suggest (Solomon & Thomas,2013). Gathering evidencefromCYP is thereforecrucial. This has the potential to challenge the naïve assumption that offering short-term provisions and increased opportunities for alternative educational activities will routinely achieve specific and/or long-term outcomes. It is also accepted practice to involve CYP in the developing, designing and delivering of provision, whilst aiming to increase effectiveness and accountability. However, there are few examples in the literatureofhowthismightbeachieved inpractice. Themessagesfrom literaturearethat itis importanttogainandunderstandtheviewsofdifferentgroupsofyoungpeoplein relationtodevelopingAEPandtousetheseasastartingpointindevelopingpolicyand practice.
AEP: Developing the skills of provision leaders.
The claim that AEP is a panacea for CYP in poor communities and the associated assumption that leadership is a key component in successful programmes has certain weaknesseswhenlookingtofurtherthedevelopmentofAEPstaffandleaders.Thereis acontinuedfailuretosystematicallymonitorandevaluatetheunderpinningfactorsthat may lead to establishing and maintaining positive relationships and to connect these with outcomesinCYP’slives,suchaswhetherasenseofbelongingcanaffectattitudechange. Indeed,thereislittleinsightintowhattheserelationshipslooklike,whatformtheytake andwhatsocialprocessesunderpinthem(JohnstonandBradford,2023).
The limited evidence in this literature endorses the potential of positive social relationships between leaders andparticipants (Archer etal,2010).Someauthorssuggest that if programme leaders and staff are to make a positive impact on the lives of CYP, thereisaneedtoofferthemprofessionaldevelopmentonpracticesthataremostlikely to lead to establishing and maintaining positiverelationships. IntegratED (2022)and Tate andGreatbatch(2017)promotethreefactors:
•EffectivematchingofCYP’sneedswiththespecificprojectobjectives
•GivingCYPtheopportunitytoworkwithothersand,moreimportantly,workforthe benefitofothers
•Establishing positive relationships between leaders and CYP
AlthoughitmaybedifficulttodemonstratethatsocialrelationshipsforgedthroughAEP will, on their own, make a generalisable contribution to the solution of various social problems,JohnstonandBradford(2023)andJames(2005)doargue theneedtoilluminate whattypesoflearningor'socialisation'furnishwhichoutcomes(positiveandnegative) for which CYP and under what conditions. In other words, to maximise the impact of AEP it is importantthat we understand the‘socialconnections’madebetween leaders and CYP in AEP, what the intended and unintended effects and consequences of these relationshipsmightbeandhowCYP’slivesaredifferentiallyaffectedbysocialnetworks based on trust and respect. Thesefindings mayprovide insights into the lives of older CYP, such as their ability to produce and utilise these bonds and connections to build newrelationships,toresistnegativesocialnetworksandtobuildresourcestodevelop positivelife-pathways(Whiteetal,2012;LevinsonandThompson,2016).
Despitethelimitedamountofevidenceavailabletosupporttheviewthatleadersand AEPstaffhaveapositiveeffectuponthelivesofyoungpeopleindisadvantaged communities,severalissueshavebecomeapparentfromtheliteraturereview:
•TheseadultsareclosesttoCYPasparticipants(bothproximallyandemotionally)and aregenerallyperceivedas‘rolemodels’whocanexertapositiveinfluencewithCYP
•Role models are not always positive. They can promote negative social images, beliefs, and behaviours. This can apply equally to staff (particularly leaders) and parentsasitcantocelebritiesandteachers
•Ingeneral,themosteffectiverolemodelsarethosewhofocusondevelopingalong term,mentoringrelationshipparticularlyforindividualsfromsociallydisadvantaged groupsand‘atrisk’groups
•Role-modelling as a concept is under-theorised in the literature
•ThecapacityofAEPtoevaluatetheirleaders’skilldevelopmentappearslimited.
Organisations (such as Youth Options) may need support and guidance to be able to undertakemeaningfulevaluationsoftherolethatleadersplayinCYP’slives.
Developing sustainable AEPs.
For many, not least the current Government, the apparent poor behaviour and poor engagement of some children and the development of AEP holds potential for educating a challenging part of the school population. However, there is much debate in the literature over how and whether this can be achieved. The evidence gathered so far that AEP increase participation and provide a viable long-term legacy, or positive political ‘trickle-down effect’ is complex. Historically, AEP has a weak profile both in political discourse and as an element in welfare state provision (Timpson, 2019). AEP are characteristically understood as a counterbalance to ‘formal’ education. An emphasis on the importance of AEP situates these provisions as apparently leading to more involved, responsible, and integrated young people. Political support for AEP may also be tied to its imputed capacityto reducethe‘burden’ on regular schools who arefailing to meetthe needs of CYP with additional needs in regular provision. Thus, questions persist around whether the AEP is concerned with citizenship, efficiency or ‘deficit reduction’.
One of the key messages from the DfE 2023 SEND Review policy document is that many of the positive benefits of AEP. Key benefits listed are; the development of relationships that may assist in nurturing transferable skills and community coherence. However, the Centre for Social Justice (2022) suggested that the scale of the challenge that AEP providers set themselves appeared too high for the relatively small amounts of funding that have beenallocated inexisting budgets. Certainly, several AEP’s have made claims and predictions that their provisions will increase participation in formal education, particularly for CYP in some of their poorest communities. What is also evident however is that past governments have tended to avoid clarifying whether they expect participation in AEPto be long-lasting or short-term (in order to fixCYP)and then return them to school. The literature suggests that increases in short-term participation in mainstream school because of AEP are by no means guaranteed.
Forexample,Uncertaintyoverhowthe2023policydocumentwilldevelopeducational activity, mentalhealth and well-being legacies through AEPacross England and Wales isre-emphasized byJohnstonetal(forthcoming)intheirsystematic and wide-ranging literaturereviewof theevidencefor increased valuesurrounding AEP. Other research availableon AEPsuggests that anygains made maynot besustained,and that the low numbersofAEPandthedearthoffundingmakeitdifficulttomonitortheimpactofAEP on long term participation in formal education (Dodman 2016; Done, Knowler and Armstrong,2021;EllisandWolfe,2019).
Bearing this in mind, a central pillar of Youth Options’ strategy for securing their sustainableprovisioncouldbetoincreasethequantityandqualityofstaffbytargeting andthendevelopingstaffmembers(andpossiblyvolunteers).Theideathatvolunteers orgraduatescanberecruitedfromareasinwhichtheyliveisnotnew(Thomson,2014). Indeed,provisionsatthelocallevelareoftendependentonvolunteers.Volunteeringhas beenacentralfeatureofseveraleducationalinitiatives,bothwithintheUKandUS,and research has highlighted the profound influence of local youth volunteers who have supportedAEprogrammesfor‘at-risk’CYP.Suchanapproachtorecruitmentisfavoured not only because such recruits are often regarded as having more 'street credibility' (Nicholson and Hoye, 2008) than traditional coaches and other professionals, but the development of volunteering may also offer training, work-related skills and employmentopportunitiesforthoseoutsidethelabourmarket.
TheliteraturealsoillustratesaviewofAEPasbeingembeddedinintrinsicself-interest, which relates primarily to personal development, with young people engaging in volunteeringasaformofexchangeoratransaction:volunteersoffertheirtimeinreturn for personal gain of different kinds. Most of the literature adopts a definition that encompassesonlyformaltypesofvolunteering.Volunteeringinthesetermstakespart inanorganisedformandincludesyoungpeoplewhoarefindingitdifficulttoaccessthe labour market or young people seeking other benefits. In addition to motivations, ongoing research with young volunteers shows that several practical and context-specific factors facilitate volunteering. Time and proximity seem to be important factors in supporting volunteering (Bradford et al, 2016). For example, the potential young volunteer,evenifalreadymotivatedtovolunteer,requiresthetimetoparticipateandan opportunitytodosomustbelocatedclosetohome.
Similarly,akeyfacilitatorforvolunteersisthattheycanmeetinasettingthatisofinterest tothemorisinacontextthattheyarefamiliarwith.Thisincludesyoungpeoplewhoare not motivated by self-interest but instead by a desire to help others. Voluntary engagement in sport, for example, tends to be regarded more negatively by CYP than voluntaryactivityin otherfields (Bradfordet al.,2016).Yet,youth-based programmes remain apopular field of engagement for volunteers of allages,particularlyfor young volunteers.Theimpactofyoungpeoplefrompoorcommunities(especiallythosefrom BAMEcommunitiesanddisabledgroups)onotheryoungpeopleandtheircommunities is mostly absent. Consequently, there is only a limited body of evidence available that indicateswhatyoungpeoplegraduatingfromAEPindisadvantagedcommunitiesmight gainfromandcontributetovolunteering. Thissuggeststhatvolunteeringis important in:
• Providingchoiceandvarietyintermsofareasofpossibleinterest
• Providingenjoymentandanexpressionofsharedenthusiasm
• Developingmutualunderstandingandbreakingdownsocialbarriers
• Developingskillsandconfidence.
Bearingthisinmind,thereisarealneedtoinvolvestakeholders,includingyoungpeople inthedesignanddeliveryofAEPdevelopment.Thisinvolvement maychallengemyths about young people and validate the impact they have in their communities. There is littleevidenceintheliteraturethatillustratesformsofvoluntaryengagementinAEPand howtheseengagementsandvoluntaryrolesmayormaynotfacilitatethedevelopment of personal and social skills, develop self-confidence, self-efficacy and self-control in young people’s individual and collective social lives. The scarcity of research on these engagementsisperhapsareflectionofthelackofvaluegiventotheroleofyoungpeople as volunteers graduating from AEP. Understanding the levels of involvement will validate young people’s experiences and draw attention to the value of social relationships, social networks, and generalised trust in shaping effective service provision for CYP in their own communities. Our review of the literature suggests several factors that impact theprovisions for CYP, and which willhave implications for Youth Options.First,itisimportanttoacknowledgethelimitationsoftheresearchevidencefor many of the claimed impacts and social benefits of AEP on CYP, especially those from disadvantagedcommunities(McShane,2020).Theselimitationsarisefromthreebroad factors:
•ThelackofrobustresearchintothebenefitsofAEPforCYPfromdisadvantaged communitiesandhouseholds–especiallyforthosewhohavecarerelatedexperiences
• ThedifficultiesinmeasuringanddefiningmanyoftheapparentbenefitsofAEP participation,suchassocialcohesion,andseparatingthosebenefitsfromotherpositive andnegativeinfluencesandanyaccesstosocialcapitalthatmayexistwithinCYP’s lives
• Measuring the cause and effect of AEP (in this case between Youth Options’ interventions and actual change) in CYP’s lives presents some difficulties (i.e. what is causeandwhatiseffect).
Nevertheless,YouthOptionsencompassesaspectrumofactivitiesandsettingsandlocal facilitiesthatareandcanbeadaptedtomeettheneedsofCYPwithdifferingeducational levels. Furthermore, expanding the ‘social side’, often a key part of Youth Options’ activities, may also serve to support CYP’s continued involvement and enjoyment of educationalbasedactivitieswhichinturn,mightalsohelpensuresomeoftheapparent healthandsocialbenefitsofparticipationandsustainableprovisions.
The literature review also identifies some key groups for AEP interventions:
I. CYPfromdisadvantagedbackgrounds(especiallythosewithcareexperience)
II. CYP with disabilities
III. Girlsandyoung women
IV. CYP from BME backgrounds
Although thereis aconsistentidentification ofthesegroups in theliterature, itshould not be assumed that other disadvantaged groups do not exist simplybecausethey arenot referredto.Forexample,migrant,asylum-seekerandrefugeechildrenmayhaveneeds although thereis littleliteratureon these. Minorityethnicgroups, disabled CYPand those onlowincomesalsofacebarrierstoparticipation in regular education.For example,a decline in participation levels amongst disadvantaged CYP may be due to a range of similar but welldocumented barriers including health difficulties, lack of information, money, time, confidence, and the appropriate support to access educational activities (Childrencommissioner,2022).
RegardingknowledgeaccumulationsurroundingAEP,Johnstonetal(2023)concluded thatthequalityofexistingtheoreticalevidenceunderpinningAEPisoftenpoor,which might hamper general understanding of AEP and the measurement of identifiable outcomes.Onarelated note, manyoftheexistingstudiesin thefieldtendtobeconcerned with what activities young people do, instead of investigating why CYP chose to participate in a particular activity. Attributing any key changes in CYPs participation, aspirationsorbehaviourstoAEP(orAEPactivities)mustbeaccomplished byfocusing onanyimpactmadefromtheperspectiveofCYPthemselves.Thatis,fromthebottomup (from where CYP are- currently), rather than relying upon external top-down indictors. By including the former approach, the impact of AE programmes can be assessed through close consideration of what would have happened to CYP in the absenceofAEP.
•The literature suggests that where interventionsare successful, stafftake full account ofCYP’svoicesandinvolvetheminplanning,organisation,andevaluation
•Whereprojectsaresuccessful,theyareflexibleandtakeaccountofyoungpeople’s circumstances and backgrounds (See O Brien, 2007)
•Itisimportanttoidentifythemotivationforparticipation. ManyCYPvaluefunand arelesscompelledbypossibleformaloreducationalbenefits.ThepointisthatCYP attachdifferentmeaningstodifferenttypesofeducationalparticipationandproviders shouldunderstandthese
•Forsomeyoungpeople,goodrolemodelsandperhaps(peer)volunteersare importantsourcesofencouragementtoparticipate
•Adults are important for CYP. Indeed, the role of relationships is crucial to increase participation in formal education and in breaking down social barriers more widely, andthisimpliesthatprojectsshouldconsider staffandvolunteerissuesincluding recruitment andcontinuousprofessionaldevelopment (See Malcolm, 2021)
•Muchoftheliteratureimpliesthatsuccessfulprojectsarewellconnectedinthesense thattheyinvolvetherightpartnersandstakeholders.Thismeansthattheycandrawon goodlocalknowledgetobestdevelopthework.CYP,theirpeerandfriendshipgroups andfamiliesarestakeholders.
Key Texts:
O’Brien, L. and Murray, R. ‘Forest School and its impacts on young children: Case studies in Britain, Urban Forestry & Urban Greening’, Volume 6, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 249-265.
Malcolm,A.(2021)'RelationshipsinAlternativeProvision:Areviewoftheliterature', RelationshipsFoundation.Availableonline:https://www.integrated.org.uk/wpcontent/uploads/2021/05/210512-Relationships-in-AP-literature-reviewcompressed.pdf
Tate,S.andGreatbatch,D.(2017)‘AlternativeProvision:EffectivePracticeandPost16 Transition’January, SueTateConsultingLtd;DfE;London.
References:
Archer,L.,Hollingworth,S,andH.Mendick.2012.‘UrbanYouthandSchooling:The ExperiencesandIdentitiesofEducationallyand‘atRisk’YoungPeople’.Berkshireand NewYork:OpenUniversity
Harrison.R.andJohnston,C.YouthOptionsFinalReport(2023)
Beynon,K.(2021)‘LongtermoutcomesofPupilswhoexperienceAlternativeProvision’ Accessedonline13/05/2023
https://ffteducationdatalab.org.uk/2022/07/long-termoutcomes-of-pupils-who-experience-alternative-provision/
Bradford,S.,Hills,L.andJohnston,C.(2016)‘Unintendedvolunteers:thevolunteering pathwaysofworking-classyoungpeopleincommunitysport’,InternationalJournalof SportPolicyandPolitics,8:2,231-244,
Bruder,C.andSpensley,J.(2015)‘DevelopingpsychologicalservicesataPupilReferral Unit’.PsychologyofEducationReview39pp.71-75.
Children’sCommissioner(2022)‘WhereareEngland’sChildren’.Accessedonline, 13/05/2023
https://www.childrenscommissioner.gov.uk/resource/where-areenglands-children-interim-findings-from-the-childrens-commissioners-attendanceaudit/
CommissiononYoungLives.(2022).‘AllTogetherNowInclusionnotexclusion: supportingallyoungpeopletosucceedinschool’[onlinereport].
https://thecommissiononyounglives.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/COYLEducation-report-FINAL-APR-29-2022.pdf[Accessedon26.10.22]
Centre for Social Justice (2020) Annual Report
https://www.centreforsocialjustice.org.uk/newsroom/integrated-annual-report-2020
Dean, C. (2018) ‘Freedom and reinvention: the experience of disengagement from educationforyoungpeopleandtheireducators’.UniversityofHull.
DepartmentforEducation(2018a)‘Creatingopportunityforall:Ourvisionfor alternativeprovision’.March.London:DepartmentforEducation.
DepartmentforEducation(2018b)‘ForgottenChildren:alternativeprovisionandthe scandal of ever- increasing exclusions’. London: Department for Education
DepartmentforEducation.(2019).‘ElectiveHomeEducation:CallforEvidence,2018’.
GovernmentconsultationresponseApril2019.DepartmentforEducation.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attac hment_data/file/791552/EHECfEResponseDocumentv9.4.pdf[Accessedonline 15.07.22]
DepartmentforEducation.(2022).‘SuspensionandPermanentExclusionfrom maintainedschools,academiesandpupilreferralunitsinEngland,includingpupil movementGuidanceformaintainedschools,academies,andpupilreferralunitsin England’.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attac hment_data/file/1101498/Suspension_and_Permanent_Exclusion_from_maintained_sc hools academies_and_pupil_referral_units_in_England including_pupil_movement. pdfAccessedonline[26.10.22]
Dodman,H.F.(2016)‘CanPRUswork?:asearchforananswerfromwithinalived experience’. Brunel University.
Done,E.J;Knowler,HandArmstrong,D.(2021).‘‘Grey’exclusionsmatter:mapping illegalexclusionarypracticesandtheimplicationsforchildrenwithdisabilitiesin EnglandandAustralia’,JournalofResearchinSpecialEducationalNeeds,21(1),36–44.
Dorling,D.(2014)‘Inequalityandthe1%’,London,Verso.
Ellis,G.andWolfe,V.(2019)‘FacilitatingWorkDiscussionGroupswithStaffin ComplexEducationalProvisions’.Availableonline:
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/0f09/824ec0a13c980a8242b61d566f55668621b7.pdf
HMGovernment.(2022).‘SENDReview:Rightsupport,rightplace,righttime’ GovernmentconsultationontheSENDandalternativeprovisionsysteminEngland. Accessedonline[12.09.22]:
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attac hment_data/file/1063620/SEND_review_right_support_right_place_right_time_access ible.pdf
IntegratED.(2022).‘AlternativeProvisionQualityToolkit’.Availableonlineat:
https://www.integrated.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/AP-Quality-Toolkit2022-compressed.pdf[Accessedonline15.02.23].
Jalali,R.andMorgan,G.(2018)‘‘Theywon’tletmeback.’Comparingstudent perceptionsacrossprimaryandsecondaryPupilReferralUnits(PRUs)’.Emotionaland BehaviouralDifficulties(23)55-68.
James,G.D.(2005)‘Findingapedagogy’.UniversityofEastAnglia.
Johnston,C.(2020)‘Dis/locatingImaginedFutures:Thedisabledhabitusandyoung disabledpeopleinalternativeprovision’People,PlaceandPolicy:(14/2)173-186.
Johnston,C.andBradford,S.(2022). ‘Masculinity,disability,socialclass,and alternativeprovision’.MenandtheirWelfareSeries.London:TaylorandFrancis.
Johnston,C;andBradford,S.(2023).‘OtherLives:YoungDisabledMenonthemargins ofAlternativeProvision’.DisabilityandSociety.
Jones,E.J.(2013)‘Rebelwithoutavoice:developingstudentvoiceinapupilreferral unit’.UniversityCollegeLondon(UniversityofLondon).
Levinson, M. P. and Thompson, M. (2016) ‘‘I don't need pink hair here’: Should we be seekingtoreintegrateyoungsterswithoutchallengingschoolcultures?’.The InternationalJournalonSchoolDisaffection12(1)23–43.
McShane,J.(2020).‘Weknowoff-rollinghappens.Whyarewestilldoingnothing?’ SupportforLearning,35:3,259-275.
Nicholson,M.andHoye,R.(2008)(eds)‘SportandSocialCapital’.Butterworth.
O’Brien,L.andMurray,R.‘Forestschoolanditsimpactsonyoungchildren:case studiesinBritain’.UrbanForestry&UrbanGreening6(2007):249-265.
O’Gorman,E.,N.Salmon,andC.A.Murphy.2016.‘SchoolsasSanctuaries:A SystematicReviewofContextualFactorsWhichContributetoStudentRetentionin AlternativeEducation’.InternationalJournalofInclusiveEducation20(5):536–551. doi:10.1080/13603116.2015.1095251.
Page,D.(2023).‘Atmospheres,SpacesandJobCrafting:HomeVisitsinAlternative Provision’.ResearchPapersinEducation38(1):102–120.
Parsons,C.(2005)‘SchoolExclusion:TheWilltoPunish’.BritishJournalofEducational Studies,(53),2,187-211
Pennacchia,J;Thomson,P;Mills,M.andMcGregor,G.(2016).‘Introductiontothis specialissue:Alternativeprogrammes,schoolsandsocialjustice’,CriticalStudiesin Education,57:1,1-5.
Harrison.R.andJohnston,C.YouthOptionsFinalReport(2023)
Pennacchia,J.andThomson,P.(2016). ‘Complementingthemainstream:an explorationofpartnershipworkbetweencomplementaryalternativeprovisionsand mainstreamschools’,PastoralCareinEducation,34(2),67-78.
Pennacchia,J&Thomson,P.(2018).‘AlternativeProvisionPolicyinEngland’inMills, MandMcCluskey,Ged.Internationalperspectivesonalternativeeducation:Policyand practice,London:InstituteforEducationpress.
SchoolCensus(2023)SchoolExclusionshttps://explore-educationstatistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/permanent-and-fixed-period-exclusions-inengland[Accessedonline13/05/2023]
Solomon,M.andThomas,G.(2013)‘Supportingbehavioursupport:developinga modelforleadingandmanagingaunitforteenagersexcludedfrommainstream school’.EmotionalandBehaviouralDifficulties(18)44-59.
Taylor,C.(2012).‘ImprovingAlternativeProvision’.https://fi les.schudio.com/oswaldtwistleschool/files/files/Taylor_Report_on_AP.pdfAccessed online13/05/2023
Tate,S.andGreatbatch,D.(2017)‘AlternativeProvision:EffectivePracticeandPost16 Transition’January, SueTateConsultingLtd;DfE;London
Thomson,P.(2014).Literaturereview:‘What’sthealternative?Effectivesupportfor youngpeopledisengagingfromthemainstream’.ThePrince’sTrust. https://alternativeducationresearch.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/literature-reviewfinal-15-10-14.pdf[Accessedonline14.09.22]
Timpson,E.(2019)‘Timpsonreviewofschoolexclusion’.London:DfE.
White,R.;Martin,K.andJeffes,J.(2012).‘Thebackontrackalternativeprovisionpilots: finalreport’.NationalFoundationforEducationalResearch. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=sso&db=edsbas&A N=edsbas.25DD6443&authtype=sso&custid=s5099118&site=eds-live&scope=site Accessedonline[02.11.22]: