Identifying Young People ‘At Risk’

Deb Hull

Workshop

• Research project

• Current models

• 2006 trial

• Evaluation

• Processes to support a ‘whole school’ model for MIPs

Research

‘At Risk’ of what?• Not completing school?• Becoming totally disengaged from education,

training and work?• Youth offending?• Harm?

Does everyone in your school agree on the ‘what’?

School-based indicators/behaviours

• Truancy

• Behavioural issues

• Low literacy level

• Low numeracy level

• Significant change in demeanour, behaviour or performance

• Attitude to schooling

• Does not value school completion

• Articulated intention of early school leaving

• Negative peer influence

• Aggression/violence

Community and family risk factors

• Poverty

• Low income household

• Parental unemployment

• Australian-born parents, English-speaking background

• Aboriginal or Islander

• Refugee

• Fragmented/reconstituted family structures

• Separation from family

• Low parental education attainment

• Poor family management practices

• Poor parent-child relationships• Abuse• High crime neighbourhood• Incarcerated parent• Frequent change of

location/school• High number of people in

neighbourhood with vocational qualifications

Personal Risk Factors

• Poor health

• Low birth weight

• Ill health or disability

• Disruptive behaviours

• Passivity

• Low self esteem

• Low motivation

• Self-harming

• High level of aggression/violence

• Pregnancy/motherhood

• Offending• Substance misuse• Association with anti-social

peers/adults• Sex work• Social isolation• Male• Non-metropolitan• Working more than 5 hours of

paid employment per week, especially for males

• Primary carer for parent or guardian with illness or mental illness

School-based risk factors

• Unsupportive school culture

• Repressive discipline

• Large class sizes

• Unstimulating content

• Competitive exam-dominated assessment

• Negative student-teacher relationships

• Negative peer relationships in school community

• Absence of school counsellors• Lack of student participation in

decision-making• Poor school/home

relationships• Poor teaching quality• Lack of clear relationships

with the wider community leading to an absence of support and referrals

Pitfalls of identifying young people as ‘at risk’

• Encourages focus on young person rather than school improvement

• Pigeon-holing does not allow for resilience

• No process to declare ‘no longer at risk’, no fresh start

Model 1: common practice

Some combination of:

• Referral from teachers• Referrals from parents• Self referrals from students• Review of literacy and numeracy levels• Review of school reports and assessment

outcomes• Review of attendance patterns

Model 2: student survey

• Detailed questions designed to elicit extent to which student has experienced or exhibited risk factors

• All students complete

• Analysis and reporting

Model 3: school checklist

• Checklist/spreadsheet of risk factors

• Completed by teachers

• Access to complete and accurate information?

Model 4: staff-student connection

• School structure at centre• Each student has one staff member who is

responsible for their welfare, and for communication and maintaining positive relationship

• Staff member may ‘follow’ the student through successive years at school

• Staff member is first point of ‘at risk’ referral by teachers, parents, student

• School processes support action by these staff members

Model 5: data review

• Developed by Doug Smith – Brimbank-Melton LLEN

• Draw down data from CASES• Identify list of ‘at risk’ young people• Teacher review of list, add and remove

names

2006 Trial of Model 5

• 5 schools in Brimbank-Melton area in 2005

• Up to 50 interested schools from Western Metropolitan Region and Grampians Region in 2006

Data review model

• See handout• Includes capacity to map programs and

services• Includes capacity to monitor student progress• Includes capacity to monitor effectiveness of

programs and services

Evaluation

• How do you know if the system your school is using to identify ‘at risk’ young people is working?

• How can you improve if you don’t know?

Process

• What are the processes (not the programs or services) that need to be in place to support whole-school approaches to retention/engagement?