post- adoption support for children and young people in
TRANSCRIPT
1
Post- Adoption Support for Children and
Young People in Educational Settings
Andrea J Stother
2019
A thesis submitted to The University of Manchester for the degree
of Doctor of Educational and Child Psychology in the Faculty of
Humanities, and the School of Environment, Education and
Development.
2
Contents Page Contents page 2
List of tables 4
List of abbreviations 4
Abstract 5
Declaration 6
Funding body 6
Copyright statement 7
Acknowledgements 8
The author 8
Overall introduction to the thesis - Aims of the research and preliminary research - Overall strategy - The researcher’s professional background and experience - Philosophical orientation: ontology and epistemology - References
9-15 9 10 12 13 15
Paper One: Evidence-Based Practice in relation to Post-Adoption Support in Educational Settings Abstract 17
Introduction - The needs of adopted children: social, emotional and
mental health - The needs of adopted children: educational attainment - Post-adoption support - The current picture
17-22 18
19 20 21
Method 23
Findings Overview of the findings
- Methodological quality - Methodological appropriateness
Themes - Strategies for support - Shared understanding - Communication - Monitoring
29-38
29 30
31 35 36 38
Discussion - Understanding the voice of the child across interacting
systems - Implications for practice - Limitations of the present review - Implications for future research
38-43 39
41 42 43
References 44
Paper Two: Continuing in Post-16 Education: The View of Adopted Young People. Abstract 50
Introduction - Participation in education - Post-adoption support - The role of schools
50-56 53 55 56
Method - Design
56-60 56
3
- Participants - Data collection - Data analysis - Ethical considerations
57 58 59 60
Findings Themes- research question one
- A positive self-identity - Supportive people - Supportive approaches - Supportive systems
Themes- research question two - Increasing awareness of adopted children’s needs - Features of adoption friendly settings - Methods to get the message across
60-70
61 62 64 64
68 69 70
Discussion - Implications for understanding - Implications for practice - Limitations - Implications for research
71-76 72 74 74 75
References 77
Paper Three: The Dissemination of Evidence to Professional Practice. Introduction 81
Section one: Overview of evidence- based practice and practice-based evidence
81
Section two: A review of current literature in relation to effective dissemination of research and notions of research impact
85
Section three: A summary of policy, practice and research development: Implications from the research
- Personal - Organisational - Professional
89-92
89 90 92
Section four: A strategy for promoting and evaluating the dissemination and impact of the research
- Awareness - Understanding - Action
93-100
93 94 97
References 101
List of Appendices
105-130
Appendix 1: Journal submission guidelines 105
Appendix 2: Review framework for qualitative evaluation/ investigation research
111
Appendix 3: Review framework for quantitative evaluation research
113
Appendix 4: Ethical approval 115
Appendix 5: Consent form 117
Appendix 6: Participant information sheet 118
Appendix 7: Distress policy 121
Appendix 8: Interview schedule 123
Appendix 9: Braun and Clarke’s six stages of thematic analysis 124
Appendix 10: Example of a coded transcript 126
Appendix 11: Thematic Analysis: Photographic Evidence 127
4
Appendix 12: References for appendices 130
List of tables
Table 1: Study characteristics (Paper 1) 27
Table 2: Participant characteristics (Paper 2) 57
Table 3: Key impact indicators and success criteria (Paper 3) 98
List of abbreviations
APA American Psychological Association
LA Local Authority
ASA Adoption Support Agency LAC Looked After Children
BPS British Psychological Society NEET Not in Education Employment or Training
CAMHS Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service
NICE National Institute for Health Care and Excellence
C&YP Children and Young People OFSTED Office for Standards in Education
PBE Practice Based Evidence
DfE Department for Education PEP Personal Education Plan
EBP Evidence Based Practice PPP Pupil Premium Plus
EEF Education Endowment Foundation
RAA Regional Adoption Authority
EHCP Education Health and Care Plan RCT Randomised Controlled Trial
EP Educational Psychologist SEN Special Educational Needs
EPAC Education Plan for Adopted Children
SENCo Special Educational Needs Coordinator
GCSE General Certificate of Secondary Education
SLR Systematic Literature Review
TA Teaching Assistant
HCPC Health Care Professions Council
UK United Kingdom
IPA Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis
USA United States of America
IEP Individual Education Plan VAA Voluntary Adoption Authority
Total word count: 24 249
(excluding, acknowledgements, declaration, copyright statement and appendices)
5
Abstract
Background:
Effective post-adoption support services can enhance adopted children’s
experiences and achievement at school. Adoption services are undergoing
significant changes, led by the introduction and embedding of Regional Adoption
Authorities (RAAs); Local Authorities have an enhanced statutory duty to support
adopted children in school, through the Children and Social Work Act (2017).
Young people should participate in planning and evaluating services that are for
them, however, research which considers the views of adopted children and
young people is limited.
Methods/ participants:
The first paper describes a systematic literature review (SLR) to evaluate
research regarding post adoption support in educational settings. Eleven studies,
published between 1997 and 2017, were identified and evaluated for
methodological quality and relevance of focus. The second paper reports a
thematic analysis of an exploratory in-depth survey. Semi-structured interviews
were used to gain the views of five adopted students, aged 16-19, about the
support that they received in school. The third paper provides an account of the
dissemination of the research to professional practice.
Analysis/ findings:
The SLR found relevant studies to be limited in number and methodological
quality. Aspects of effective support identified across the studies were classified
under four themes: Strategies for support: Shared understanding; Communication
and Monitoring.
The empirical investigation identified adopted young people’s views on how
school experience can be enhanced by supportive approaches, supportive
systems, supportive people and a positive self-identity. Adopted students’ ideas
about what school staff should know about adopted children and how the
information should be delivered, are explored.
Conclusion/ implications:
High-quality co-ordinated research, involving adopted young people, is needed to
inform planning of post-adoption support within educational settings and make
use of funding at an organisational, school and individual level. In order to
increase the impact of this research, the findings will be disseminated using
strategies relevant to Virtual School (VS) staff and others who may have a role in
putting the findings into practice.
6
Declaration
No portion of the work referred to in the thesis has been submitted in support of an
application for another degree or qualification of this or any other university or other
institute of learning.
Funding Body
This project was funded through England’s Department for Education (DfE) ITEP
award 2016- 2017.
7
Copyright statement
i. The author of this thesis (including any appendices and/or schedules to this
thesis) owns certain copyright or related rights in it (the “Copyright”) and s/he
has given The University of Manchester certain rights to use such Copyright,
including for administrative purposes.
ii. Copies of this thesis, either in full or in extracts and whether in hard or
electronic copy, may be made only in accordance with the Copyright, Designs
and Patents Act 1988 (as amended) and regulations issued under it or, where
appropriate, in accordance with licensing agreements which the University has
from time to time. This page must form part of any such copies made.
iii. The ownership of certain Copyright, patents, designs, trademarks and other
intellectual property (the “Intellectual Property”) and any reproductions of
copyright works in the thesis, for example graphs and tables (“Reproductions”),
which may be described in this thesis, may not be owned by the author and may
be owned by third parties. Such Intellectual Property and Reproductions cannot
and must not be made available for use without the prior written permission of
the owner(s) of the relevant Intellectual Property and/or Reproductions.
iv. Further information on the conditions under which disclosure, publication and
commercialisation of this thesis, the Copyright and any Intellectual Property
and/or Reproductions described in it may take place is available in the University
IP Policy (see
http://documents.manchester.ac.uk/DocuInfo.aspx?DocID=24420), in any
relevant Thesis restriction declarations deposited in the University Library, The
University Library’s regulations (see
http://www.library.manchester.ac.uk/about/regulations/) and in The University’s
policy on Presentation of Theses.
8
Acknowledgements
Thank you to my supervisor, Professor Kevin Woods, for keeping me on track with
this thesis and all the other requirements of the Doctorate course. I have greatly
appreciated your guidance, expertise and humour over the last three years. Thanks
to Dr Sarah McIntosh for coming up with the initial idea for this research and your
continued enthusiasm, support and ideas. I am also very grateful to the participants
of my research for their time and ideas, without which this study would not have
been possible.
Thanks to the University of Manchester Trainee Educational Psychologist cohort of
2016- 2019. It has been great to get to know you all and share the ups and downs
of this course together! Special thanks to Sarwat for the lifts over the Pennines
which always provide an entertaining end to a day at university and to Adi for
always being miles ahead of me and helping me to catch up.
Thanks to my friends in Harrogate, particularly to the members of the ‘Book Club’
who have provided me with prosecco, gin and cheese whilst hearing about this
thesis; special thanks to those of you who have offered to read it!
I am eternally grateful to my mum and dad for their continued patience and support
which has helped me to believe that I can achieve what I want to in life. Thanks to
my ‘in-laws’ for providing childcare that has allowed me to study. I am also grateful
to the Manchester posse of the Stother family, particularly Pam and Amber, who
have been there for me from my interview day to provide me with food, drink, a bed
and emotional support.
A big shout out goes to my sons, Kai and Lewis who have risen to the challenge of
getting to and from school on the days when I am not around and endured three
years of psychological testing whilst I have practised the tools of the trade! You
continue to make me laugh, show that you love me and provide endless (usually
welcome) distractions from my studies- I am so proud of you.
Finally, all the love and gratitude in the world goes to my partner Rob, who I could
not have done this without. Thanks for your reassurance, support and
encouragement, not just over the last three years but during the 20 in which we
have been together.
My wonderful family and friends, I hope to spend more time with you now that this
thesis is finally finished!
The Author
The author holds a BSc in Psychology from The University of Birmingham and a
PGCE in Primary Education from The University of Leicester.
9
Overall Introduction to the Thesis
Aims of the Research and Preliminary Research
The research topic originated from the practitioner educational psychology research
commissioning process at The University of Manchester. As a first-year trainee
educational psychologist, the author chose from several research proposals
presented by practitioner educational psychologists (EPs), on topics identified as
under researched and in need of further investigation. In the case of the research
reported here, the research commissioner, an EP working within an Adoption
Psychology Service, proposed further research to enhance knowledge about
effective support for adopted children in schools. Children who leave care into
adoption are often considered by schools and local authorities to have found their
‘happy ending’ (Gore Langton, 2017), however, rates of social, emotional and
mental health difficulties remain high among adopted children and recent evidence
suggests that their school experiences and attainment can be compromised (White,
2018).
Preliminary research completed in 2017 explored the contribution of EPs to
adoption support and involved interviewing the research commissioner and the
manager of the Adoption Psychology Service. Qualitative interview data was
analysed; findings identified a gap in knowledge and provision concerning post-
adoption support for adolescents. From this preliminary study, and in collaboration
with the research commissioner, the aims of the current research were established
as identifying effective post-adoption support in educational settings and exploring
adopted young people’s perspectives of the experiences that can support adopted
students to participate in post 16 education. It was hoped that an understanding of
the evidence base and young people’s views would support staff within Regional
Adoption Authorities and Virtual Schools to plan and advise others on effective
10
intervention and support for adopted children and young people within schools,
colleges, universities and alternative educational provision.
Paper One of this thesis aims to answer the research question; ‘What is the
international evidence for effective post-adoption support and interventions within
educational settings?’ This is achieved through a systematic literature review,
evaluation and analysis of the existing empirical research on support for adopted
children within education. The empirical research in Paper Two aims to answer the
research questions; ‘What helps adopted young people to remain in education?’ and
‘What should school staff be told about what helps and how should they be told?’
via an exploratory in-depth survey design using a semi-structured interview method.
Overall Strategy
The thesis is presented in three parts: Paper 1, a systematic literature review (SLR);
Paper 2, a report of an empirical study; and Paper 3, an account of the
dissemination of the research to professional practice. Papers 1 and 2 have been
prepared in accordance with the submission guidelines for the journal ‘Adoption and
Fostering’ (Appendix 1). Paper 1, the comprehensive SLR explored the existing
empirical research regarding effective post-adoption support in educational settings.
Relevant studies were found to be limited in number and methodological quality and
young people’s voices were virtually absent from the literature. Therefore, the
rationale for Paper 2, to conduct an exploratory piece of empirical research to
extend the current literature
was established.
For Paper 2, an exploratory in-depth survey design using a semi-structured
interview method was chosen to explore the research questions (Jansen, 2010).
This qualitative methodology was selected to capture and authentically reflect
11
adopted adolescents’ perspectives and experiences and allow the researcher to ask
follow-up questions which varied dependent on participant responses. The
researcher was positioned within a local authority (LA) to collect data during the
three-year doctoral initial professional training as a practitioner educational
psychologist. Five young people (aged 16-19) were recruited using a sequential
approach to purposive sampling, through contacts in the researcher’s workplace
local authority and the adoption team in a neighbouring authority. To enhance
generalisability of the findings the participants varied in gender, age, family
construction, type of educational placement and the level at which they were
studying. Interviews were recorded and professionally transcribed; a thematic
analysis of their responses identified that ‘a positive self-identity’, ‘supportive
people’, ‘supportive approaches’ and ‘supportive systems’ help adopted young
people to continue in post-16 education. Participants identified benefits of school
staff’s increased awareness of adopted children’s needs and knowledge of the
features of ‘adoption-friendly’ settings.
The use of Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) to analyse the data was
considered and rejected for this study for four main reasons. Firstly, this research
has a focus on education and the researcher considered that analysis through IPA
would broaden the study to include the lived experience within an adoptive young
person’s home placement, which is outside the focus of this study. In addition, the
heterogeneity of the participants is one of the key features of this research; it would
have been difficult to attain this with the smaller number of participants which would
be required due to the time-consuming nature of IPA. Furthermore, IPA can require
sophisticated communication and the researcher did not want to rule our
participants with language needs. Finally, the second research question asks
adopted young people for their ideas; thematic analysis and the associated data
12
collection processes provide a more appropriate means to elicit information which is
not solely concerned with previous experiences.
Papers 1 and 2, consider the research findings in the context of recent
developments in the field of Adoption, including the role of the Virtual School as
defined in The Children and Social Work Act, 2017 and the redesign of adoption
services within the UK, led by the vision of embedding Regional Adoption
Authorities, as outlined in ‘Adoption: A Vision for Change’ (DfE, 2016). Paper 3
begins with an overview of the concepts of evidence-based practice and practice-
based evidence; followed by an evaluation of the evidence on effective
dissemination of research about adoption, including recognition of the multi-
professional audience. An explanation of the strategy for disseminating the findings
of Papers 1 and 2 at the research site, and at the broader organisational and
professional levels, together with a strategy for evaluating the dissemination and
impact of the research, highlight the importance of a co-ordinated, cumulative and
progressive programme of further research which is steered and co-produced by
adopted students.
The Researcher’s Professional Background and Relevant Experience
Prior to starting on the Doctorate in Educational and Child Psychology at The
University of Manchester, the author worked as a Children’s Centre Services Leader
and Early Intervention Manager within a multi-agency team in a local authority.
These roles involved supporting vulnerable children and young people and their
families, including adopted children and adoptive parents. Through co-ordinating
multi-agency support, advising schools and working closely with managers and staff
from Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services and Children’s Social Care; the
author has developed an appreciation of the benefits of intervening proactively and
13
experienced the challenges and benefits of embedding new approaches in
response to changes to legislation and organisational structures.
Axiology concerns the role of researcher’s own values on all stages of the research
process (Li, 2016); recognition that data is a product of the interaction between the
participant and the researcher is of importance. As Darlaston-Jones (2007) explains
‘we bring to our research our world views complete with bias and prejudice – ‘it is
not possible to separate the me from the research’ (p. 25). As a mother, the author
has some understanding of the universal support provided for families and the
needs of children at various stages of development. Previous experience of the
difficulties that adoptive families can face and experience of the professional
misunderstandings about the needs of contemporary adopted children and, has
developed her interest in this area of work. Her experience, values and beliefs that
adopted children and young people are disempowered and their needs often
ignored, and that service users should actively participate in the planning and
evaluation of provision for them, has influenced the choice of research methods.
Philosophical Orientation: Ontology and Epistemology.
Ontology can be defined as the ‘study of being’ or what constitutes reality (Crotty,
1998, p. 10) whereas epistemology and epistemological assumptions are concerned
with ‘how knowledge can be created, acquired and communicated’ (Cohen, Manion
& Morrison, p. 7). It is important for researchers to consider and take a position
regarding their perceptions of how things are, as different paradigms take
differing assumptions of reality and knowledge which is reflected in choice of
methodology (Scotland, 2012).
The researcher took the stance of critical realism, which underpinned the research
and is evident in the research methods selected. Critical realism questions the
14
‘polarized debate between positivism and constructivism’ and provides a third way
which is useful in social research. A critical realist approach does not assume that
the data constitute a direct reflection of what’s happening in the world (Willig, 2007);
instead presupposing that the data need to be interpreted to fully understand the
structures which generate knowledge in this area. A critical realist stance resulted
in attempts to understand the meaning that participants attributed to the subject,
whilst recognising that reality is not necessarily accessible.
In line with this epistemological position the author adopted a qualitative
methodology to elicit participant views and to co-construct findings through
questioning, exploring, probing and summarising information in the absence of an
absolute ‘truth’. The semi-structured interview schedule (see Appendix 8) consisted
of open-ended questions which were piloted and revised following feedback from
adopted young people. During analysis a process for inter-rater validation of coding
was used to minimise potential bias.
15
References
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2002). Research methods in education.
Routledge.
Darlaston-Jones, D. (2007). Making connections: The relationship between
epistemology and research methods. The Australian Community
Psychologist, 19(1), 19-27. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Dawn_Darlaston-
Jones/publication/284970190_Making_connections_The_relationshi
p_between_epistemology_and_research_methods/links/56a02de708
ae4af52546f7e5/Making-connections-The-relationship-betweenepistemology-
and-research-methods.pdf. Accessed on 6th May 2019.
Department for Education (DfE) (2016). Adoption: A vision for change. London: DfE
Publications.
Gore Langton, E. (2017). Adopted and permanently placed children in education:
from rainbows to reality. Educational Psychology in Practice, 33(1), 16-30.
Jansen, H. (2010). The logic of qualitative survey research and its position in the
field of social research methods. In Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum:
Qualitative Social Research (Vol. 11, No. 2).
Li, Y. (2016). Expatriate Adjustment and Expatriate Learning. In Expatriate
Manager’s Adaption and Knowledge Acquisition(pp. 7-72). Springer, Singapore.
Roots, E. (2007). Making connections: The relationship between epistemology and
research methods. Australian Community Psychologist, 19(1).
Scotland, J. (2012). Exploring the Philosophical Underpinnings of Research:
Relating Ontology and Epistemology to the Methodology and Methods of the
Scientific, Interpretive, and Critical Research Paradigms. English language
teaching, 5(9), 9-16.
White, R. (2018). Bridging the gap: Giving adopted children and equal chance in
school. Banbury: Adoption UK.
Willig, C. (2007). Reflections on the use of a phenomenological method. Qualitative
research in psychology, 4(3), 209-225.
16
Paper One:
Evidence-Based Practice in relation to Post-Adoption
Support in
Educational Settings.
Prepared in accordance with the author guidelines for the Journal Adoption and Fostering (see Appendix 1)
Word count: 8661(including tables and references)
17
Evidence-Based Practice in relation to Post-Adoption Support in
Educational Settings.
Abstract
Effective support services at every stage of a child’s educational journey can be
transformative to adopted children’s experiences and achievement at school. A
rigorous systematic review methodology was used to evaluate research regarding
post adoption support in educational settings. Relevant studies were found to be
limited in number and methodological quality. Aspects of effective support identified
across eleven studies were classified under four themes: Strategies for support:
Shared understanding; Communication and Monitoring. These themes can inform
collaborative planning to meet adoptive children’s needs and could be introduced to
school staff and adoptive parents through joint training. We propose that co-
ordinated interdisciplinary research which focuses on the views of children and
young people is required to meet the requirements of the Children and Social Work
Act (2017) and make effective use of funding provided at an organisational and
school level.
KEY WORDS: - adopted children; post-adoption support; school; education;
intervention
Introduction
Adopted children are one of the most vulnerable groups in society (Langton & Boy,
2017). Children who have been placed for adoption in the UK within the last 30
years, are likely to have experienced abuse, neglect or trauma (NICE, 2015). They
have an increased risk of additional or special educational needs and compromised
educational, social, emotional and health outcomes (DfE, 2016b). In the USA, 54%
of adopted children, compared to 23% of non-adopted peers, are diagnosed with a
psychological or medical condition that affects their ability to learn, get on with
18
others, or take part in physical activities (Zill & Bradford Wilcox 2018). In the UK,
nearly half of adopted children have a recognised special educational need or
disability (White, 2017), compared to 14.6% of all pupils (DfE, 2018).
The needs of adopted children: social, emotional and mental health.
The results of a 2018 survey for Adoption UK, with almost 2000 adopted children,
show that 73% of adopted children agree with the statement ‘other children seem to
enjoy school more than me; 79% of adopted children feel routinely ‘confused and
worried at school’; 75% of adopted children at secondary school do not feel their
teachers understand how to support them. Almost 70% of adoptive parents feel their
child’s progress in learning is affected by problems with their emotional wellbeing in
school (White, 2018).
Until recently, research, legislation and service provision has identified the needs
and difficulties of looked-after, rather than adopted, children (Langton & Boy, 2017).
Whilst there are assumed to be some similarities in these two groups, due to the
effects of disrupted early care, an assumed equivalence of needs between the two
groups could be misleading. Recent legislation, including the Children and Social
Work Act, 2017, focuses on adopted children as a distinct group; local authorities
and educational settings now have a statutory duty to specifically meet the needs of
children adopted from care.
Analysis of data from a longitudinal study of young people in England found that
teenage adopted young people report that they experience the highest rates of
bullying; 75% of adopted children compared to 53% of Looked After Children (LAC)
and 40% of the general population (Wijedasa & Selwyn, 2011). Attention should be
drawn to the self-report nature of this study; the possibility that adopted children feel
freer to report bullying and the positive correlation between bullying awareness and
reported incidences of bullying (Smith & Watson, 2004). Missing school can
19
expose young people to risks, at 13- 14 years, a third of adopted children reported
they had missed at least one lesson in the preceding year, this is significantly higher
than that reported by LAC or the general population (Wijedasa & Selwyn, 2011).
This finding aligns with the fact that one third of adoptive parents have experienced
their child’s refusal to go to school, running away from school, or truanting (White,
2018).
Adopted children in kindergarten and first grade display above average levels of
problem behaviour and exhibit below- average levels of positive learning attitudes
(Zill, 2015). Later in school they are more than four times as likely to have repeated
a grade or had their parents contacted for behavioural problems (Zill & Bradford
Wilcox, 2018).
In the UK adopted children are 20 times more likely than their peers to be
permanently excluded from school (White, 2017). In the USA, adopted children are
three times more likely than their non-adopted peers to have been suspended or
excluded from school (Zill & Bradford Wilcox, 2018). Exclusions have an adverse
impact on the educational attainment of adopted children and ultimately their life
chances (White 2018).
The needs of adopted children: educational attainment.
Educational attainment can be viewed as a powerful predictor of later life
experiences (Wijedasa & Selwyn, 2011). The attainment of adopted children in
England is significantly lower than that of their peers and the gap widens as they get
older (DfE 2016a). Adopted children appear to be doing better educationally than
LAC, analysis of data from a longitudinal study in England suggests that adopted
children and the general population are more likely to achieve 5 A* to C grades at
GCSE than LAC (Wijedasa & Selwyn, 2011). These data accord with that recently
20
collated by the Department for Education (DfE) which found that in 2016 30% of
previously looked after (including adopted) children achieved the expected standard
at the end of primary school, compared to 25% of LAC and 54% of the general
population; 26% of previously looked after (including adopted) children, 14% of
LAC, and 53% of all children achieved 5 good GCSE grades including English and
Maths. This DfE data is limited to children whose families have declared their
adoptive status to their school; the general population is likely to include some
pupils who are not experiencing problems at school and have not revealed their
adoptive status.
Although a higher percentage of adopted children than LAC achieved 5 good
GSCEs, the DfE data suggest that when adopted children are compared with all
children, they are approximately half as likely to obtain good grades.
At 18-19 years 14% of adopted children are reported to be enrolled in a programme
of university study, compared to 33% of the general population and 16% of LAC
(Wijedasa & Selwyn, 2011). The prevalence of adopted children at university is
slightly lower than that of LAC, despite better grades, suggesting that more support
may be required to encourage adopted children to continue participating in
education. Young peoples’ and their families’ choice must also be considered;
university tuition fees are expensive, and it is possible that some adopted children
are pro-actively choosing alternative routes to successful careers.
Post-adoption support.
Post-adoption support can mean different things to different children and families
and varies dependent upon an adopted child’s age and developmental stage
(Pennington, 2012). It can include services to enable groups of adopted children
and adoptive parents to come together; provide therapeutic support, counselling,
information and advice; enable mediation e.g. between an adoptive child and
21
adoptive parents when a placement is at risk of disruption; provide financial and
practical support e.g. respite care; support families on working in partnership with
schools and other agencies; train professionals and parents. Without appropriate,
timely and effective support, adoptive families are put under increased strain which
can have long-term impacts including health and educational problems, and
adoption breakdown (Selwyn, Wijedesa & Meakings, 2014).
The current picture.
A child’s journey in education in the UK, typically involves several educational
settings, starting at nursery or pre-school, then primary and after that, secondary
school, followed by one or more post-sixteen options, including college, supported
apprenticeships and university. Children in the UK are adopted at an average age
of three years and five months (DfE, 2016b) and support has traditionally been
prioritised for three years after the adoption order (Stother, 2017). Post-adoption
support is more prevalent when children are attending early years or primary
educational settings, whilst it is recognised there is a peak of difficulty for adoptive
children in the teenage years and at times of transition (Selwyn, Wijedesa &
Meakings, 2011).
In 2016, the UK government set the aspiration that by 2020 ‘Every adoptive family
has access to an on-going package of appropriate support with a right to a high
quality, specialist assessment of need. This support is delivered from day one and
continues throughout childhood, whenever it is required. Adoptive families have a
supportive relationship with their local agency and know they can turn to them for
additional support at any time, without judgment’ (DfE, 2016a, p.7).
Effective post-adoption support across educational settings at all stages of a child’s
educational journey can contribute towards this aim. Local Authority (LA) Adoption
Social Work Teams, Adoption Support Agencies (ASA) and Child and Adolescent
22
Mental Health Services (CAMHS) are amongst the professional groups currently
providing post- adoption support to children, families and professionals (DfE,
2016a). Support services are delivered in community and therapeutic settings and
family homes; services can also be accessed over the telephone, using social
media or the internet (Duquette et al., 2012). The systems for educational and
therapeutic support vary across authorities and can be difficult to access and
understand (Gore-Langton, 2016); many adopted children have complex and over-
lapping needs that do not easily fit the tight criteria demanded by agencies.
Adoption services are undergoing significant changes, led by the introduction and
embedding of RAAs which promise an improved method of designing and delivering
support services to meet local need (DfE, 2016b). The role of teachers and schools
in helping adopted children emotionally, socially and educationally, is supported
through funding streams such as the Pupil Premium Plus (PPP) for adopted children
(DfE, 2014) and Pupil Deprivation Grant (Welsh Government, 2015). The National
Institute for Health Care and Excellence (NICE) suggests that LA VSs and school
designated teachers should work together to provide timely, responsive and
effective post-adoption support informed by evidence-based practice (NICE, 2015).
Changes in legislation, the restructure of services and new models of delivery
provide an opportunity to rethink provision and improve outcomes for adopted
children (DfE, 2016b). Educational settings are under external scrutiny and pressure
through bodies, such as Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED), which
regulate school effectiveness and track pupil’s learning progress. The lack of
statutory frameworks for adopted children means that schools have been missing
clear guidance on how to systematically identify, monitor and meet the needs of
adopted children. Adopted children, as service users should participate in the
planning of post-adoption services (Adoption: A Vision for Change, 2016; NICE
Guidelines, 2015); it is mandated through children’s rights legislation, and important
23
practically, that their views are sought and listened to. Decisions on provision,
staffing and budgeting must be informed by the best available research so that
children, young people and families receive the maximum benefit.
Against this background, this Systematic Literature Review (SLR) seeks to answer
the following research question:
What is the international evidence for effective post-adoption support and
interventions within educational settings?
Method
A systematic search of the literature was conducted following the PRISMA process
(Moher et al 2009), using the following databases: - Applied Social Sciences Index
and Abstracts (ASSIA), Education Resources Information Centre (ERIC), Psych Info
and Google Scholar. Literature searches were completed between August 2017
and December 2017 using the following search terms: - ‘adopted children’, ‘adoptive
children’, ‘child adopted’, ‘adopted child’, ‘education’, ‘school’, ‘post-adoption
support’, ‘support’, ‘intervention’ and ‘programme’. Searches were conducted using
single and combined terms. Hand searches of Adoption and Fostering and
reference harvesting from relevant articles were also carried out.
Due to a lack of relevant peer reviewed studies which focused on evidence for
effective post-adoption support and interventions for adopted children within
educational settings the systematic search was broadened to include Electronic
Theses Online Service (EThOS) and experts in the field were consulted to identify
relevant unpublished/ grey research. It was recognised that these sources were
likely to have lower levels of peer review than those obtained through the academic
journal publication process; however, as rigorous screening for methodological
quality was applied to all selected papers this was considered acceptable.
24
Using this combination of search strategies, 650 papers were originally sourced;
569 papers were excluded, after removing duplicates and screening titles. 81
records were screened, by reading the abstracts, against the following inclusion
criteria: published in English; published between 1997 and 2017 (since following
preliminary scoping a 20 year search period was deemed to be efficiently inclusive,
as most relevant research is published after 2010); includes adopted children and
focuses on education/ schools.
At this point 46 papers were excluded, and 35 full text articles were read and
assessed for eligibility using the above inclusion criteria and an additional criterion,
includes primary research data. At this stage, 23 papers were excluded, and 11
papers included in the final synthesis.
Data classification.
The 11 papers were read in full and examined and reviewed using research report
quality criteria. Each paper was read at least twice, and four papers, an approximate
33% sample, were read and independently coded by the researcher and research
supervisor, prior to a calibration meeting which focused on non-agreed checklist
criteria. At this meeting moderation discussions took place for each jointly read paper,
to reach a consensus view on the quality of the paper and to ensure consistent
interpretation and application of the quality criteria. This process showed a high level
of post-discussion agreement, (average inter-coder agreement of 97%).
The qualitative studies were assessed using the Review Framework for Qualitative
Evaluation/ Investigation Research (Appendix 2), which was adapted from a
systematic review of the effectiveness of Solution Focussed Brief Therapy (SFBT)
by Bond, Woods, Humphrey, Symes and Green (2013) and has been extensively
used in subsequent Systematic Literature Reviews (e.g. Ezzamel & Bond, 2016;
Law & Woods, 2018; Snape & Atkinson, 2016; Tyrell & Woods, 2018). This
25
framework identified 12 criteria (appropriateness of research design; clear sampling
rationale; well executed data collection; analysis close to the data; evidence of
explicit reflexivity; comprehensiveness of documentation; negative case analysis;
clarity and comprehensiveness of reporting; evidence of researcher-participant
negotiation of meanings; emergent theory related to the problem; transferable
conclusions and evidence of attention to ethical issues), each paper received a
score between 0 and 14 (some criteria carrying two points). Scores were converted
into percentages to allow comparison.
Two mixed method studies were assessed using the Review Framework for
Qualitative Evaluation/ Investigation Research and a Review Framework for
Quantative Evaluation Research (Appendix 3) adapted from Bond et al.’s (2013)
review. The Quantative Evaluation framework identified 7 criteria, (use of a
randomised group design; focus on a specific, well-defined disorder or problem;
comparison; use of manuals/ protocol/ training; fidelity checking/ supervision;
sample large enough to detect effect; use of outcome measure(s) that have
demonstrated good reliability and validity). Each paper achieved a score between 0
and 8. Scores were converted to percentages and these studies were credited the
score from the framework on which the highest score was achieved (referred to as
Weight of Evidence A in Table 1).
Three studies scored 25% or less and were deemed to be low quality, three studies
scored 26-65% and were defined as being medium quality, whilst five studies
scored 66% or over and received a high-quality judgement.
Studies were also systematically scored using key criteria which assess the
methodological appropriateness of the study to the research question
Therefore, in respect of methodological appropriateness each study was given a
score of 1 or 2 for four key criteria:- Data respondent (Child or Young Person 2,
26
Parent or Professional 1); Sample size (N>30 2, N<30 1); Analysis of data
(appropriately powered statistical analysis 2, descriptive analysis 1); Mode of support
(specific intervention 2, approach 1). Scores are referred to as ‘Weight of Evidence
B’ in Table 1 (see Gough, 2007). A score of 4 was achieved by 3 papers and deemed
to be ‘Low’; 5 papers had a score of 5 which was classified as ‘Medium’ and the
remaining 3 studies which received a score of 6 or 7 which was identified as ‘High’.
Judgements on methodological quality were combined with those on methodological
appropriateness to produce a ‘Total Weight of Evidence’ for each paper, which then
provided the basis for a broadly configurative synthesis (Gough, Thomas & Oliver,
2012).
27
Table 1: Study Characteristics
*AC Adopted Children **FASD Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder ***EP Educational Psychology ****NS Not specified
*****W of E Weight of Evidence
Author/ Year
Country Population Age range
of children
Sample Design Data Analysis
Summary and Findings W of E *****
A
W of E B
Total W of E
Barratt 2012
UK AC * NS ****
1 multi-agency team of
professio-nals
Account Methodology (professional experience)
Account Methodology (professional experience)
Description of difficulties for AC in the education system. Methods of involving CAMHS practitioners in multi-agency support positively evaluated.
Low 8%
Low 4
Low
Duquette et al. 2011
Canada AC Adoles-cents and
young adults
36 adoptive
parents of young
people with FASD**
Survey by question-
naire
Thematic Analysis
Examination of educational advocacy experiences of adoptive parents and young adults. Internet recognised as an essential tool to seek advice and support.
High 73%
Medium 5
Medium High
Gilling 2014
UK AC Aged 12
1 adopted child
Account Methodology
(parent perspective)
Account Methodology
(parent perspective)
Description of ignored needs and misunderstandings in a boy’s educational journey. Suggestions for improved educational practices.
Medium 28%
Medium 5
Medium
Lyons 2016
UK AC NS 10 adoptive parents
Action Research
Thematic Analysis
Participatory action research facilitates knowledge development of adoptive parents’ perceptions of the enabling factors and barriers in communicating with school staff. Generation of a resource, which focuses on practical structures and emotional support.
High 75%
Medium 5
Medium High
Nowak- Fabrykowski 2015
USA Fostered and AC
Aged 5-8
22 teachers
Survey by question-
naire
Content Analysis
Exploration of early childhood teacher’s perceptions of teaching AC. Teachers give advice on dispositions and academic strategies that promote nurturing development.
Medium 28%
Low 4
Low Medium
28
Nowak- Fabrykowski et al. 2009
USA Fostered and AC
NS 23 foster carers
Survey by question-
naire
Thematic Analysis
Foster parents give advice on the adoption of foster children. 65% of foster parents reported school was helpful.
Low 23%
Low 4
Low
Rose et al. 2016
UK Children with unmet attachment needs who
have experienced
trauma/ neglect
NS 75 members of school staff and 95 sets of pupil data
Survey Content Analysis
Impact evaluation of the ‘Attachment Aware Schools’ project. Findings include a significant improvement in academic attainment, a significant decrease in exclusions and sanctions and a reduction in the symptoms of hyperactivity.
Low 20%
High 7
Medium
Soharabi- Shiraz 2014
UK AC NS 6 parents 8 members of adoption
support group
including school staff
Mixed Methods
Thematic Analysis
Creation of a training programme to be delivered to school staff and adoptive parents was successful in addressing the needs of participants and raising awareness of attachment issues. Unique contribution of the EP identified.
High 66%
Medium 5
Medium High
Stewart 2017
UK AC NS 84 teachers
11 adoptive parents
Semi- structured Interviews
Thematic Analysis
Examines the views of professionals towards adoptive families, pre and post training intervention. Findings support the effectiveness of a brief, standardised intervention.
High 76%
High 6
High
Syne 2012
UK AC Aged 4-11
1 EP team Survey by question-
naire
Basic Quantita-
tive Analysis
Description of the role of EPs in supporting transitions for AC and their families. Findings demonstrate that multi-agency, solution focused collaborations have a positive impact on stability.
Medium 32%
Medium 5
Medium
Taymans et al. 2008
USA AC NS 146
professionals (trainee teachers/
counsellors)
Quasi- experimental survey design
ANCOVA and
Thematic Analysis
Views of professionals towards adoptive families pre and post educational intervention support the effectiveness of a brief standardised intervention.
High 86%
High 7
High
29
Findings
Overview of findings.
Methodological quality.
The methodological quality of the studies included in the analysis varied; three
studies received a rating of ‘low’ quality (Barratt, 2012; Nowak- Fabrykowski,
Helinski & Buchstein, 2009, Rose et al., 2016) three a ‘medium’ quality rating
(Gilling, 2014, Nowak- Fabrykowski, 2015 and Syne, Green & Dyer, 2012,) and five
a ‘high’ quality rating (Duquette et al., 2012, Lyons, 2016; Taymans et al., 2008;
Sohrabi-Shiraz, 2014; Stewart, 2017 ).
Of the eleven studies included in this analysis, seven were conducted in the United
Kingdom (UK), three in the United Stated of America (USA) (Nowak- Fabrykowski,
2015; Nowak- Fabrykowski, Helinski & Buchstein, 2009; Taymans et al., 2008) and
one in Canada (Duquette et al., 2012). Seven studies were published in peer-
reviewed journals between 2008 and 2015. One study was identified through
consultation with adoption experts/ published on research websites (Rose et al.,
2016) and three are, as yet, unpublished doctoral theses (Sohrabi-Shiraz, 2014;
Lyons, 2016; Stewart, 2017).
Limiting the inclusion criteria to studies which focus on adopted children discounted
many which focused on LAC. In line with most governments’ legislation, research
for LAC is more prolific than that for children who have been adopted. Of the 11
studies in the review, eight focused solely on adopted children; two considered
fostered and adoptive children (Nowak- Fabrykowski, 2015; Nowak- Fabrykowski,
Helinski & Buchstein, 2009) and one identified adopted children in a larger group of
children with unmet attachment needs who have experienced trauma or neglect
(Rose et al., 2016). Seven of the studies do not specify the age of the adopted
children, of those that do, three focused on pupils of primary school age (Gilling,
30
2014; Nowak- Fabrykowski, 2015; Syne, Green & Dyer, 2012) and one on
adolescents/ young adults (Duquette et al., 2012).
Methodological appropriateness.
Professionals are the sole or joint data respondent in the majority of the studies. Five
studies (Barrat, 2011; Nowak-Fabrykowski, 2015; Rose et al. 2016; Syne, Green &
Dyer, 2012 and Taymans et al., 2008) focus entirely on the views of professionals,
whilst two consider both professional and parental views (Sohrabi-Shiraz, 2014;
Stewart, 2017). Parents/ carers are the data respondent in three studies (Duquette et
al., 2012; Lyons, 2016 and Nowak-Fabrykowski, Helinski & Buchstein, 2009).
Adopted children’s voices are strikingly absent from the findings of the studies in this
review; only one study focuses on the view of an adopted child (Gilling, 2014).
The studies varied in sample size, ranging from account methodologies of one child
(Gilling 2014), which may limit generalisability of findings, through medium sized
studies, including an evaluation of the experiences of 36 adoptive parents (Duquette
et al., 2012) to larger scale data gathering including an intervention involving 146
professionals (Taymans et al., 2008). Even the larger studies, have a relatively
small number of respondents which can, in no way capture the range of
experiences and outcomes for the thousands of adoptive families in the UK.
Eight of the studies were qualitative evaluations and three were mixed methods
investigations (Taymans et al., 2008; Rose et al. ,2016; Sohrabi-Shiraz, 2014).
Study designs were varied and included six surveys (Duquette et al., 2012; Nowak-
Fabrykowski, 2015; Nowak-Fabrykowski, Helinski & Buchstein, 2009; Syne, Green
& Dyer, 2012; Rose et al., 2016; Taymans et al., 2008), two account methodologies
(Barrat, 2011; Gilling, 2014); semi-structured interviews (Stewart, 2017) and action
research (Lyons, 2016).
31
Illustrating the limited evidence base, only three out of eleven of the studies focused
upon reviewing an existing resource or support package for post-adoption support
(Rose et al., 2016, Stewart, 2017 and Taymans et al., 2008). Lyons (2016) and
Sohrabi-Shiraz’s (2014) research involved the development and positive evaluation
of a new resource. Three of the studies provided retrospective descriptions of
experiences (Gilling 2014; Nowak-Fabrykowski, 2015; Nowak-Fabrykowski, Helinski
& Buchstein, 2009) alongside recommendations for future provision.
Barratt (2012) and Syne, Green & Dyer (2012) examined the experiences of a multi-
agency team; Duquette et al. (2012) considered adoptive parents advocating for
their adopted children, all three studies highlighted important elements of support.
The evidence for effective support or interventions for adopted children in school
can be categorised under four themes: Strategies for Support; Shared
Understanding; Communication and Monitoring.
Themes.
Strategies for support.
The studies in this review identified two main strategies for supporting adopted
children in education, ‘Training’ (Rose et al., 2016; Sohrabi-Shiraz, 2014; Stewart,
2017; Syne Green & Dyer, 2012; Taymans et al. 2008) and ‘Support Groups’
(Duquette et al., 2012; Lyons, 2016; Syne, Green & Dyer, 2012).
Teachers view Training about supporting adopted children in education as limited
(Stewart, 2017). Rose et al. (2016) evaluated the impact of the Attachment Aware
Schools action research project which involved class-room and on-line training
commissioned to improve outcomes for ‘Children with unmet attachment needs who
have experienced trauma or neglect’. It offers practical, effective tools and
techniques, including insights into attachment theory and the impact of trauma to
the developing brain and subsequent behaviour; links are made to implications for
32
school learning and opportunities to develop Nurture Groups and Theraplay through
action research. 97% of school staff felt the project impacted positively on their
professional practice. 92% of school staff reported an increase in their confidence to
use Emotion Coaching strategies; this is in-line with the finding that many adopted
children received support in school with an emphasis on emotional literacy (Stewart,
2017).
Taymans et al. (2008) explored 146 pre-service teachers’ and counsellors’
perceptions of the needs of adoptive children in school, before and after a 75-
minute educational intervention. The intervention consisted of a reading assignment
based on ‘SAFE at School’ (Schoettle, 2003) and an interactive presentation given
by the executive director of the Centre for Adoption Support and Education (CASE).
A prevalence of social, emotional and behavioural needs was reported amongst the
adopted children within the studies in this review. Taymans et al.’s, (2008)
evaluation suggests that general training about ‘Diversity’ or ‘Attachment’ is unlikely
to provide teachers with the awareness that they require about adopted children.
Findings from this study provide positive support for the effectiveness of a brief,
standardized intervention during initial training to increase education professionals’
awareness of particular challenges adopted that children and their families may face
in school settings. Arguably, the self-report nature of the questionnaire, the open-
ended nature of the questions after the intervention and the fact that it was required
to be completed outside of regular class time may have skewed the results.
Through an investigation of primary teachers’ perceptions about adopted children in
education, Stewart (2017) explored existing support systems. This investigation
included an analysis of data from interviews with 15 parents and nine teachers and
84 questionnaires completed by primary school teachers. 61% of the questionnaire
33
respondents had received training on Adverse Childhood Experiences and 100%
felt this training would be useful for other teachers. Through the interviews, a lack of
teacher training and over-dependence upon parents as information providers was
identified. 61% of questionnaire respondents reported that they were aware of
resources, interventions or support that they could access in school e.g. in class
support; therapeutic support. Few teachers accessed professional support for
adopted children, as suggested by Barratt (2012); in some cases, this was due to no
perceived need for support rather than barriers to accessing support.
Sohrabi-Shiraz’s (2014) study was the only one within the present review which
developed and evaluated collaborative training with adoptive parents, school staff
and professionals. Themes, highlighted by a steering group, were addressed
through a bespoke training programme; pre and post measure analysis showed that
participants’ understanding of the needs of adopted children was higher post
training. The data suggests that the role of the EP was central to the delivery of the
programme and the continued work of support system development. As this
training was bespoke, additional steps would need to be taken to make the package
generalisable. Arguably, part of the success of this intervention comes from the fact
that it is a bespoke package, focusing on the participants’ knowledge, skills and
experience; to repeat this would be time consuming and may not be a priority for,
already stretched, resources.
Lyons (2016) used collaborative action research to develop a resource to support
adoptive parents in their communication with schools. The resource included
information for parents to complete on topics such as, ‘Aspects of the Curriculum
that adopted children may find difficult’ and ‘Trust and Control’. There are also
pages where families could fill in individual details e.g. ‘Important people in my life’;
‘How I communicate my needs’ and details of useful websites and books, which can
34
be shared with school staff. Additional training for school staff about the impact of
early developmental trauma and the needs of adoptive children was a key
recommendation of Lyon’s (2016) study.
Where these studies specify the age range of the adopted children (of the parents
or supported by the professional), all are of pre-school or primary (elementary)
school age. Yet primary and secondary (high) schools differ greatly with regard to
systems of pastoral care for children and young people, and parental relationships
with education staff change as students get older. Some research findings for
primary aged pupils are unlikely to be relevant for older adopted children.
Post-Adoption Parental Support Groups were viewed by adoptive parents and
professionals as an essential source of support. The professionals, involved in
Syne, Green & Dyer’s (2012) study concluded that parents need opportunities, after
adoption to discuss and reflect upon the issues raised by the transition.
Professionals can have a role through attending groups e.g. to enhance
understanding about school application processes, or setting up groups e.g. for
parents of adopted children within a certain school or geographical area, however,
this relies upon capacity and resources. When feeling discouraged many parents
turn to support groups: one parent stated ‘by talking to other parents it would give
me the steam to go out and advocate again’ (Duquette et al., 2012, p 1214).
Parents identified the Internet as an important source of practical and emotional
support; it allowed them to find information and provided a method to connect with
other adoptive parents and help each other to solve problems whilst on-line
(Duquette et al., 2012).
There was no research which evaluated Post-Adoption Support Groups for
children and young people. Yet in the researchers’ professional experience,
35
adopted young people can benefit from actual and virtual support groups of their
own. The increase in the use of smart phones and social media, means that support
for young people and parents can be more easily accessible and immediate. This
brings its own challenges with parents, children and young people needing to
assimilate these messages as part of a bigger package of support.
Shared understanding.
Adopted families, like all families, are as different as they are similar (Taymans et
al., 2008). When school staff are aware that adopted children are on their roll, it is
important that key members of staff take the time to develop a shared
understanding for each adoptive family (Lyons, 2016). Local authorities and/ or
individual schools may not be aware of the adopted children as parents are
sometimes reluctant to reveal their child’s adoptive status. Barratt (2012) gives an
example of how a father who was adopted himself felt his son would be ‘more
vulnerable to criticism and racism’ if staff and other children knew he was adopted.
There is no detail given about the ethos of the school and whether staff were open
and honest about the benefits of sharing this information; adoptive parents may
need more encouragement and support than other parents to see the value of
developing this shared understanding. Syne, Green and Dyer (2012) stress the
importance of working proactively rather than reacting when a crisis occurs. This
creates a potential dilemma for schools about whether to ask for information about
children’s adoptive status or wait for parents to reveal it.
As with all home-school partnerships, adoptive parents, adopted children and
school staff need to work in a partnership which is based upon trust, respect and
mutual collaboration (Duquette et al., 2012). Additional considerations for adoptive
families include:- parental perceptions that school staff are the ‘gate-keepers’ to
resources (Gilling, 2014) and school staff perceptions that adopted children are less
36
vulnerable than LAC, those who are meeting educational milestones do not need
support and that ‘highlighting differences could have a negative effect’ (Stewart,
2017). In the researchers’ professional experience, these beliefs can be unhelpful
and lead to misperceptions or mistrust. School staff that involve parents in decisions
about how to spend the PPP for Adopted Children (Gore- Langton, 2016) and
encourage open and honest conversations are likely to have more effective
collaborations.
The parents involved in Duquette et al.’s (2012) research believe that the
educational experiences of adopted children are directly linked to the advocacy
efforts of their parents. It is important that everyone involved understands the
others’ perspectives (Barratt, 2012) and that the development of a shared
understanding of the needs of individuals is co-constructed between staff, parents
and children through communication and systems that are empowering for parents
(Lyons, 2016), children and young people.
Communication.
Advice from teachers to teachers is that, it is important to ‘keep channels of
communication open’ (Nowak- Fabrykowski, 2015). Some families report that they
do not know how to start communication, or what to say related to their adopted
child’s journey (Cooper & Johnson, 2007) and want support. A framework can aid
communication for school staff and parents. Syne, Green & Dyer (2012) evaluated
the use of an Education Plan for Adopted Children (EPAC) and concluded that this
process and framework can reduce school staff’s anxieties about approaching
adoptive parents and allow parents to identify their children as being adopted
without feeling they will be negatively labelled. Arguably, any ‘system’ like this can
be viewed as unfair from a parent’s point of view due to the perception that those
who are able to make sense of it have greater and quicker access to support
(Duquette et al., 2012).
37
Lyons (2016) used collaborative action research to develop a resource to support
communication between parents and schools. The focus group involved in Lyon’s
research positively evaluated the use of guided role play scripts for parents to
scaffold and support participants to practise their skills in communicating with school
staff. Arguably, parents who had volunteered for a focus group may be considered
less reluctant to use role play as a technique. In the researchers’ professional
experience some parents would find this a nerve-racking experience and may prefer
talking things through with someone that they trust or being accompanied for the
discussion. An interesting finding within this research is the development of an
understanding about how parents perceive their position in the ‘communication
arena’; the fact that they feel that professionals ‘own’ the communication space and
that previous experiences of disempowerment influence communication with school
staff. A limitation of this study is that it is an action research project, which is
situation specific and did not aim to create universal knowledge. However, parent’s
struggles to enter a collaborative, non- threatening dialogue may be universal.
Lyons concluded that knowledge of enabling processes and conditions can lead to
improved well-being and empowerment in the parent community.
The voice of adopted children is conspicuously absent from the studies considered
in this review. It is recognised that children will also need on-going support with their
communication with adults and peers. An identified role of parents and
professionals was to help adopted children to tell their story (Barratt, 2012) in the
way they want to, at the time they want to and to support them after they have done
so; research which explores this with adopted children and young people is needed
to advise adults how to support this communication effectively.
Communication on a wider scale is important to support adopted children. A
conclusion of Taymans et al.’s (2008) evaluation of a training resource, was that
38
staff want more information on multi-agency sources of support and that adoptive
families benefit from staff who can sensitively refer them on. Adopted children and
adoptive parents should participate in local service planning (NICE, 2015) and
mechanisms which facilitate this involvement e.g. parent consultation groups (Syne
Green & Dyer, 2012) have been positively evaluated.
Monitoring.
Once strategies and systems have been set up to support the needs of adopted
children and their families, it is important that they are regularly and collaboratively
monitored and reviewed (Duquette et al., 2012; Syne, Green & Dyer, 2012).
Statutory processes such as Individual Education Planning (IEPs) and Education
Health and Care Plan (EHCP)s can be used to do this if pupils have been identified
as having Special Educational Needs (SEN Code of Practice, 2014), however,
these processes typically miss some adopted children. Syne Green and Dyer
(2012) evaluated the use of a specific Education Plan for Adopted Children (EPAC)
as a method of planning and monitoring support for all adopted children on a short-
and medium-term basis and found that parents considered it to be highly beneficial
in supporting transitions such as starting a new school or a new class.
Discussion
Through systematically reviewing and synthesising relevant existing literature this
study aimed to establish up to date, international evidence for effective post-
adoption support and interventions for adopted children, within educational settings.
There is very little published research in this area and none which presents the
perspectives of adopted children themselves. A search for papers about strategies
and interventions specifically for adopted children, in an educational setting yielded,
very few results; studies were included which focused on adopted children within a
larger sample. There was a disappointing lack of studies with high methodological
39
quality or appropriateness within peer- reviewed journals; addition searches were
conducted which led to the inclusion of an unpublished paper from a research
website and three unpublished doctoral theses. In total,11 studies were identified,
due to the low numbers none were excluded on the grounds of low methodological
quality or appropriateness. Of the five high quality papers (Duquette et al., 2012,
Lyons, 2016; Taymans et al, 2008; Sohrabi-Shiraz, 2014; Stewart, 2017), three are
as yet, unpublished doctoral theses (Lyons, 2016; Sohrabi-Shiraz, 2014; Stewart,
2017); it is recognised that theses have a larger word count within which to
demonstrate high methodological quality. The three papers with high
methodological appropriateness were a peer reviewed journal article (Taymans et
al., 2008), a paper sourced through a research website (Rose et al., 2016) and a
thesis (Stewart, 2017). One study had one adopted young person as a data
respondent; the vast majority of conclusions are based upon data from small and
selective groups of professionals and adoptive parents.
Understanding adoption support: the voice of the child across
interacting systems.
Adopted children and young people are likely to have opinions about how to best
support them, but their views were non-existent within this review. Those providing
post-adoption support need to ensure that adopted children, not just adoptive
parents, know about and have access to support services (Selwyn, Wijedasa &
Meakings, 2014). Educational staff and other professionals, using educational
establishments as a setting for interventions, have an instrumental role in ensuring
that adopted children get the appropriate, timely and effective support
recommended in recent legislation (DfE, 2016a). Adopted young people should
participate in planning services and support through schools and LA VSs and school
designated teachers should work together to provide timely, responsive and
effective post-adoption support informed by evidence-based practice (NICE
40
Guidelines on Attachment, 2015). Currently, evidence-based practice is minimal and
creation of knowledge about effective intervention and support relies too heavily on
the voices of adults, which further limits the comprehensiveness and inclusivity of
the available evidence.
Planning effective post-adoption support within educational settings requires
interdisciplinary learning and cross-disciplinary support. Research about adopted
children in education is of interest to many professional groups; but appears to be
led by none. The journals in which relevant studies were located varied in their
target audience, including: - teachers and headteachers, clinical and educational
psychologists, CAMHS practitioners, social workers and psychiatrists. The research
foci of the studies were disparate; ranging from retrospective accounts about
service inadequacy (Gilling, 2014) to participatory action research resulting in the
production of a resource (Lyons, 2016). The research appears to be dictated by
context (Gilling, 2014; Barratt, 2012) and utility considerations (Rose et al., 2016)
rather than wider and longer term aims to improve understanding of the area. A co-
ordinated approach to research and the dissemination of knowledge in this field is
required to avoid inadequate and inconsistent service planning and delivery.
The perception of teachers and other school staff, of their role in supporting adopted
children, varied throughout the studies. Indeed, some teachers felt that, not all
adopted children would need support and that ‘highlighting differences could have a
negative effect’ (Stewart, 2017). Increasing demands on schools to meet targets
relating to academic attainment may lead others to argue that teachers ‘are not
social workers’, and that their role is specifically to support adopted children’s
educational attainment rather than providing holistic support. Confusion about the
role of schools may contribute to some parents being unwilling to reveal their child’s
adoptive status. Even the most willing school staff are confused; they face the
41
dilemma between proactively seeking information about pupils’ care experiences to
plan and intervene before problems occur and waiting for pupils and parents to offer
information before co-constructing plans.
Many adopted children have unstable early experiences; stability at home and
school is important, especially as children reach adolescence. Research around
post-adoption support to prevent adoption breakdown e.g. Selwyn, Wijedasa &
Meakings (2014), is more prolific than post-adoption support to prevent school
exclusion and non-engagement. The former focuses upon the family as a system,
whilst in the latter, the family are included within a larger system alongside
educational establishments and wider community services; the interactions between
each element within the system need careful consideration.
Implications for practice.
It should be noted that practice implications are limited due to the limited number of
papers included with high methodological quality and appropriateness. In the
researchers’ professional experience, school staff are often unsure about where to
access support for adopted children in school. Due to new legislation schools have
a statutory duty to identify a named member of staff for adopted children (HM
Government, 2017); this means that services can be pro-active in offering strategies
for support to a named contact. The use of a framework, such as Syne Green and
Dyer (2012)’s EPAC to facilitate communication and monitoring, is supported
through indicative positive evaluation. Arguably, school staff, who are inundated
with requests to develop plans for every area of their work, may need convincing of
the value of one that is non-statutory. A further amendment to statutory procedures
would increase the likelihood of effective monitoring of plans to support the needs of
adopted children.
Five of the studies concluded that training for school staff working with adopted
children was an effective strategy (Lyons, 2016; Rose et al., 2016; Sohrabi-Shiraz,
42
2014; Stewart, 2017; Taymans et al., 2008). Training packages varied in their
content, with some following a manualised approach and others developed to focus
upon the participant’s needs; prompting consideration of a trade-off between needs
and efficiency. Increased manualisation reduces the requirement for highly
specialist delivery and follow up support, therefore reducing cost and potentially
increasing breadth of access. A combination of training within initial teacher training
programmes and continued professional development is likely to provide the largest
increase in the awareness of professionals and impact upon the educational needs
of adopted children.
Adoptive parents are also unsure about accessing support. In the researchers’
professional experience, parents adopting older children, may have experienced a
disjointed development of the parental role. They have often not experienced
communication with school staff during the Foundation Stage, when staff are often
more visible, and communication is encouraged. They are faced with navigating
systems of school communication at a time when they are negotiating the multitude
of challenges associated with parenting and with adopting a child and, without
explicit encouragement, may not initiate or maintain communication during these
difficult times.
Limitations of the present review.
Post-adoption support in schools is an understudied area; there appears to be an
absence of evidence for effective intervention which reaches beyond small scale,
local work conducted by interested practitioners. This review included unpublished
papers and those identified through consultation with experts in the field; it is
possible that other literature sources exist which were inaccessible by the search
strategies employed (e.g. book chapters, professional practice accounts). The 11
43
studies originated from three countries which limits comprehensiveness of an
international review. Studies originally conducted in other languages are more likely
to be translated for English publication when they have positive or statistically
significant findings (Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, 2008), therefore
language bias was also a limitation.
As the author is a novice researcher, the use of an SLR framework was invaluable
to develop understanding and criticality of the breadth of elements of the research
process. The focus on a specific research question required by a systematic
approach (Petticrew & Roberts, 2009) provided insights about methodological
quality and data respondents which could potentially influence future policy, practice
and research. The lack of published research which focuses, specifically on support
for adopted children in an educational setting meant that very few studies were
included in the review and the lack of breadth in the studies could be considered a
limitation. An alternative method of literature review e.g. narrative or prose based
(Petticrew & Roberts, 2009) has the potential to include more studies and could, for
example, include perspectives of LAC and post-adoption services which offer
support to the wider family.
Implications for future research.
Recent government legislation has identified ‘adopted children’ as a distinct priority
group, in need of support in education. Despite this recent shift in interest, there is a
limited number of studies on adopted children, which means it is unlikely that the UK
government will achieve their 2020 aim that ‘Every adoptive family has access to an
on-going package of appropriate support’ (DfE 2016a, p.7), in any more than a
tokenistic sense. To provide on-going support, interventions and strategies are
required at every stage of a child’s journey through education; good quality primary
44
research which identifies and evaluates effective intervention with older adopted
children and young people is virtually absent from the existing research.
Current research focuses upon gaining the views of professionals and parents; the
voice of adopted children and young people is distant and muted. A co-ordinated,
cumulative and progressive programme of future research, which includes the view
and participation of adopted students, has the potential to inform strategy decisions,
organisational change and improve outcomes for adopted children and young
people throughout their lives.
45
References
Barratt, S. (2012). Adopted children and education: The experiences of a specialist
CAMHS team. Clinical child psychology and psychiatry, 17(1), 141-150.
Biehal, N., Ellison S., & Baker, C. (2010). Belonging and permanence; outcomes in
long-term foster care and adoption. London: BAAF.
Bomber, L. (2007). Inside I’m hurting: practical strategies for supporting children
with attachment difficulties in schools. Worth Publishing.
Bond, C., Woods, K., Humphrey, N., Symes, W., & Green, L. (2013). Practitioner
review: The effectiveness of solution focused brief therapy with children and
families: A systematic and critical evaluation of the literature from 1990–
2010. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 54(7), 707-723.
Brown, A., Waters, C. S., & Shelton, K. H. (2017). A systematic review of the school
performance and behavioural and emotional adjustments of children adopted from
care. Adoption & Fostering, 41(4), 346-368.
Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (2008) Systematic Reviews: CRD’s guidance
for undertaking reviews in health care. York: University of York .
Cooper, P., & Johnson, S. (2007). Education: The views of adoptive
parents. Adoption & fostering, 31(1), 21-27. Department for Education (DfE).
(2014a). Key Stage 2 attainment for children recorded as adopted from care.
London: DfE Publications.
Department for Education (DfE). (2014). Response to main queries on adopted
children and pupil premium. Retrieved from http://www.casa-uk.org/department-for-
education-response-to-mainqueries-on-adopted-children-and-pupil-premium/.
Accessed on 23rd February 2019.
Department for Education. (DfE). (2015). Special educational needs and disability
code of practice: 0 to 25 years. London: DfE Publications.
Department for Education (DfE) (2016a). Adoption: A vision for change. London:
DfEPublications.
46
Department for Education. (DfE). (2016b). Outcomes for children looked after by
local authorities in England, 31 March 2016: additional tables. London: DfE
Publications.
Department for Education. (DfE). (2018) Promoting the education of looked-after
children and previously looked-after children. London: DfE Publications.
Department for Education (DfE) (2016a). Adoption: A vision for change. London:
DfE Publications.
Duquette, C. A., Stodel, E. J., Fullarton, S., & Hagglund, K. (2012). Educational
advocacy among adoptive parents of adolescents with fetal alcohol spectrum
disorder. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 16(11), 1203-1221.
Ezzamel, N. & Bond, C. (2016). How have target pupil, peer and school level
outcomes related to peer-mediated interventions for pupils with ASD been
evaluated? European Journal of Special Needs Education (online)
doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2016.1194568. Accessed on 23rd February 2019.
Gilling, A. (2014). Jasper’s story:‘Letting me down and picking me up’–one boy’s
story of despair and hope at primary schools in England. Adoption &
Fostering, 38(1), 60-72.
Gore Langton, E. (2017). Adopted and permanently placed children in education:
from rainbows to reality. Educational Psychology in Practice, 33(1), 16-30.
Gough, D. (2007). Weight of evidence: a framework for the appraisal of the quality
and relevance of evidence. Research papers in education, 22(2), 213-228.
Gough, D., Thomas, J., & Oliver, S. (2012). Clarifying differences between review
designs and methods. Systematic reviews, 1(1), 28.
Harris-Waller, J., Granger, C., & Hussain, M. (2018). Psychological interventions for
adoptive parents: a systematic review. Adoption & Fostering, 42(1), 6-21.
HM Government UK (2017). Children & Social Work Act 2017. London: HM
Government.
47
Langton, E. G., & Boy, K. (2017). Becoming an Adoption-Friendly School: A Whole-
School Resource for Supporting Children Who Have Experienced Trauma Or Loss-
With Complementary Downloadable Material. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Law, E. & Woods, K. (2018). Representation of the management of
behavioural difficulties within educational psychologists’ practice. Educational
Psychology in Practice, 34(4), 352-369. Online first at
https://doi.org/10.1080/02667363.2018.1466269. Accessed on 23rd February
2019.
Lyons, J.P. (2016) Using collaborative action research to support adoptive parents
in their communications with school staff (unpublished DEdPsychol thesis).
Manchester: The University of Manchester.
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & Prisma Group. (2010).
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA
statement.
Nowak-Fabrykowski, K. T. (2015). Nurturing development of foster and adopted
children. Early Child Development and Care, 185(3), 486-495.Gough, D. A., Oliver,
S., & Thomas, J. (2013). Learning from research: Systematic reviews for informing
policy decisions: A quick guide. London: Nesta.
Nowak‐Fabrykowski, K., Helinski, M., & Buchstein, F. (2009). Reflection of foster
parents on caring for foster and adopted children and their suggestions to
teachers. Early Child Development and Care, 179(7), 879-887.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) (2015). Children’s
attachment: Attachment in children and young people who are adopted from care, in
care or at risk of going into care. London: NICE.
Pennington, E. (2012). It takes a village to raise a child. Adoption UK. Retrieved
from
http://www.adoptionuk.org/sites/default/files/documents/Ittakesavillagetoraiseachild-
Report-June12.pdf. Accessed on 19th September 2018.
Rose, J., Gilbert, L., & McGuire-Snieckus, R. (2015). Emotion Coaching-a strategy
for promoting behavioural self-regulation in children/young people in schools: A pilot
study. The European Journal of Social & Behavioural Sciences, 13, 1766-1790.
48
Rose, J., McGuire-Sniekus, R.,Wood, F. &. Vatminides, O. (2016) Impact evaluation
of Attachment Aware Schools Project for B&NES VS: Phase 1 Pilot Study-
Combined Summary Report. Bath: Institute for Education, Bath Spa University.
Schoettle, M. (2003). SAFE (support for adoptive families by educators) at school.
Silver Spring, MD: The Center for Adoption Support and Education.
Selwyn, J., Wijedasa, D., & Meakings, S. (2014). Beyond the adoption order:
Challenges, interventions and adoption disruption. London: DfE Publications.
Smith, P. K., & Watson, D. (2004). An evaluation of the ChildLine in Partnership with
Schools (CHIPS) Programme. Department for Education and Skills.
Snape, L. & Atkinson, C. (2016) The evidence for student-focused motivational
interviewing in educational settings: a review of the literature. Advances in School
Mental Health Promotion, 9(2), 119-139. doi: 10.1080/1754730X.2016.1157027.
Sohrabi-Shiraz, J. (2014). Creating an attachment theory and adoption
psychology based training programme for parents and school staff (unpublished
DEdPsychol thesis). Manchester: The University of Manchester.
Stewart, R. (2017). Children Adopted from Care: Teacher Constructions of Need
and Support (unpublished DEdPsychol thesis) Cardiff: Cardiff University.
Stother, A. (2017). The role of Educational Psychologists’ in post-adoption support
(unpublished DEdPsychol research paper). Manchester: The University of
Manchester.
Syne, J., Green, R., & Dyer, J. (2012). Adoption: The lucky ones or the Cinderellas
of children in care?. Educational and Child Psychology, 29(3), 93.
Taymans∗, J. M., Marotta∗, S. A., Lynch∗, S. J., Riley, D. B., Oritz, D. M., LaFauci
Schutt, J. M., ... & Embich, J. L. (2008). Adoption as a diversity issue in professional
preparation: Perceptions of preservice education professionals. Adoption
Quarterly, 11(1), 24-44.
Tyrell, B., & Woods, K. (2018). Methods used to elicit the views of children and
young people with autism: A systematic review of the evidence. British Journal
of Special Education, 45(3), 302-328. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-
8578.12235 . Accessed on 23rd February 2019.
49
Welsh Government. (2012). Tackling the impact of poverty on educational
attainment. Cardiff: Llywodraeth Cymru.
Wijedasa, D., & Selwyn, J. (2011). Transition to adulthood for young people in
adoptive care: secondary analyses of data from longitudinal study of young people
in England (LSYPE). Bristol: Hadley Centre for Adoption and Foster Care Studies.
White, R. (2017). Adoption UK’s Schools & Exclusions Report. Banbury: Adoption
UK.
White, R. (2018). Bridging the gap: Giving adopted children and equal chance in
school. Banbury: Adoption UK.
Zill, N. (2015). Why adopted children still struggle over time. Retrieved from
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/12/adoption-happily-ever-after-
myth/418230/ . Accessed on 23rd February 2019
Zill, N. & Bradford Wilcox, W. (2018). The Adoptive Difference: New Evidence on
how adopted children perform in school. Retrieved from
https://ifstudies.org/blog/responding-to-questions-about-the-adoptive-difference- .
Accessed on 23rd February 2019.
50
Paper Two:
Continuing in Post-16 Education:
The View of Adopted Young People.
Prepared in accordance with the author guidelines for the Journal Adoption and Fostering (see Appendix 1)
Word count: 7497(including tables and references)
51
Continuing in Post-16 Education: The View of Adopted Young People
Abstract
Adopted children face challenges at school which adversely affect their experience
and attainment. Without effective post-adoption support in educational settings they
are at an increased risk of being excluded from, or opting out of, education. Semi-
structured interviews were conducted with five adopted young people aged between
16 and 19. A thematic analysis of their responses identified that ‘a positive self-
identity’, ‘supportive people’, ‘supportive approaches’ and ‘supportive systems’ help
adopted young people to continue in post-16 education. Participants identified
benefits of school staff’s increased awareness of adopted children’s needs and
knowledge of the features of ‘adoption-friendly’ settings such as, supporting children
to share their adoption story and knowledge and use of specialist external agencies.
Within the context of current UK legislation and resource constraints, implications of
the findings for understanding the educational needs of adopted young people, for
the development of future practice, and for the contribution of future research, are
discussed. Attention is drawn to the importance of multi-agency working and the
role of adopted young people in steering and co-producing effective post-adoption
support in educational settings.
Introduction
Adopted children are one of the most vulnerable groups in society (Langton & Boy,
2017). Children who have been placed for adoption, in the UK within the last 30
years, are likely to have experienced abuse, neglect or trauma (NICE, 2015). Every
child’s adoption journey is different; the impact of their adverse childhood
experiences apparent in a variety of ways influenced by risk and protective factors.
As a group, adopted children have an increased risk of social, emotional and mental
52
health difficulties compared to the general population they are more likely to
experience school exclusion or leave education without qualifications (DfE, 2016b),
impacting adversely on their life chances (White, 2018).
In England alone, schools are educating more than 42,500 children known to have
left care as a result of an Adoption Order, a Special Guardianship Order or a Child
Arrangements Order (DfE, 2016b), and there are thousands more in Scotland,
Northern Ireland and Wales. It is likely this figure is an underestimation since
schools are not always aware of their pupils’ adoptive status and, until recently,
there were no systematic local or national methods for obtaining data on adopted
status of students.
A recent survey, of nearly 2000 adopted children and over 2000 adoptive parents,
found that a significant majority of adopted children are struggling at school (White,
2018). 81% of adopted secondary school children agreed with the statement ‘other
children seem to enjoy school more than me’; two thirds report being teased or
bullied because they are adopted and 75% of adopted children do not feel their
teachers understand how to support them. Almost 70% of adoptive parents feel their
child’s progress in learning is affected by problems with their emotional wellbeing;
nearly half of adoptive parents of secondary school pupils have kept their child off
school because of concerns about their mental health or wellbeing and one third
have experienced their child refusing to go to school, running away or truanting
(White, 2018).
Although it is recognised by many parents and teachers that education
encompasses much more than the grades that children receive at the end of the
year (Langton & Boy, 2017), it is important to note that the attainment of adopted
children in England is significantly lower than that of their peers and that the gap
53
widens as they get older (DfE, 2016b). 30% of adopted children achieved the
expected standard at the end of primary school, compared to 54% of the general
population; 26% of adopted children achieved 5 good GCSE grades including
English and Maths, compared to 53% of the general population (DfE, 2016b). In the
UK, nearly half of adopted children have a recognised special educational need or
disability compared to 14.6% of all pupils (DfE, 2018). This figure should be treated
with some caution; it is possible that adoptive parents are more inclined to
proactively pursue an EHCP, due to increased perception, awareness or
knowledge, that recognition of a SEN can provide support which may mitigate
against their child’s difficulties associated with early trauma. Adopted children are
20 times more likely than their peers to be permanently excluded at some point in
their school career (White, 2017). In the current educational climate of financial cuts
there is a feeling that school staff prioritise exam results at the expense of well-
being (Cowburn & Blow, 2017). Children who require additional staff time and
attention and are unlikely to attain the expected standard are a source of concern
for teachers, pastoral staff and senior leadership teams. In 2013 the PPP was
introduced in England for children who have left care into adoption; this is an
acknowledgement that trauma and loss in early life are likely to have a pervasive
impact throughout children’s school careers (Langton & Boy, 2017). It enables
schools to address children’s wider needs and is not specifically focused on
attainment (DfE, 2014). To make good use of this resource, staff need to develop
support from a reliable evidence base.
Participation in education.
A child’s journey in education in the UK, typically involves several educational
settings, starting at nursery or pre-school, then primary and after that, secondary
school, followed by one or more post-sixteen and post-eighteen options, including
54
further and higher education. In 2013 the UK government passed legislation to raise
the compulsory participation age from 16 to 18; informed by research showing that
young people who ‘participate in post-16 education or training’ are more likely to be
in employment at a later date (Spielhofer, 2007). Young people have a choice about
how they continue in education or training post-16: full-time study through a school,
college or training provider, work or volunteering combined with part-time education
or training; an apprenticeship or traineeship. Evidence suggests it is necessary to
offer a range of suitable post-16 pathways, to ensure the availability of high-quality
guidance and support, and to offer good alternative pre-16 provision which will
engage young people and encourage them to want to continue learning post-16
(Thompson, 2011). Without effective post-adoption support in educational settings,
there is an increased risk of adopted young people being excluded from, or opting out
of, education. Young people who are ‘Not in Education Employment or Training’
(NEET) miss education and training which gives them the opportunity to develop skills
and qualifications that will open doors to future employment, help them make the most
of their potential, and earn more over their lifetime (DfE, 2018).
Although completed before the change in participation age, an analysis of data from
the longitudinal study of young people in England (LSYPE) found that at 13-14 years,
a bigger proportion of adopted young people, than young people in the general
population or LAC anticipated that they would be in education after the age of 18
(Wijedasa & Selwyn, 2011). At 18-19 years 14% of adopted children are reported to
be enrolled in a programme of university study, compared to 33% of the general
population and 16% of LAC (Wijedasa & Selwyn, 2011). The prevalence of adopted
children at university is low, despite their higher aspirations, suggesting that more
effective support is required during school and further education to encourage
adopted children to access higher education.
55
Post-adoption support.
Children in the UK are adopted at an average age of three years and five months
(DfE, 2016) and support has traditionally been prioritised for three years after the
adoption order (Stother, 2017). Post-adoption support is currently more prevalent
when children are attending early years or primary educational settings, whilst it is
recognised there is a peak of difficulty for adoptive children in the teenage years
and at times of transition (Selwyn, Wijedesa & Meakings, 2014; Stother 2017). A
combination of physiological changes and a desire to establish an individual identity,
makes adolescence a challenging time for many young people (Perry 2015).
Parents of adopted teenagers report an increase in aggression, child to parent
violence, home placement breakdown, exclusion from school and challenging family
relationships (Pennington, 2012; Selwyn, Wijedasa, & Meakings, 2014).
Adoption Services within the UK, are currently under-going a re-design, led by the
vision of embedding RAAs by 2020, as outlined in ‘Adoption: A Vision for Change’
(DfE, 2016a). Recent Legislation recognises the needs of adopted children in
educational settings and extends the role of Local Authority VSs to support their
needs (HM Government, 2017).
‘Adoption: A Vision for Change’ (DfE, 2016a) emphasises that the views of adopted
children should be demonstrably used in the shaping and co-production of local
services and help to inform national policy developments. The NICE Guidelines on
Attachment (NICE, 2015) also advocate the participation of young people in
planning services and make recommendations about the support that should be
offered in adolescence, through schools, to children adopted from care; it is
mandated through children’s rights legislation, and important practically, that
adopted young peoples’ views are sought and listened to (Hall, 2017).
56
The role of schools.
Schools can effectively support children who have experienced loss and trauma
(White 2018); when school staff have good knowledge, skills and understanding of
adoption, the effect on adopted children’s education and outcomes is considered
transformative (Langton & Boy, 2017). A recent systematic literature review
(Stother, Woods & McIntosh, submitted) considered the evidence for effective post-
adoption support in educational settings; relevant studies were found to be limited in
number methodological quality and appropriateness. Good quality primary research
which identifies and evaluates effective intervention with older adopted children and
young people was virtually absent from the research. There has been limited
scrutiny of the views of adoptive parents and professionals and no published
research examining the views of adopted children about the support that they have
received in education.
Against this background, this research focuses on working with adopted young
people to identify and share the positive experiences that have supported them to
participate in post 16 education and seeks to answer the following research
questions:
• What helps adopted young people to remain in education?
• What should school staff be told about what helps and how should they be
told?
Method
Design.
An exploratory in-depth survey design using a semi-structured interview method
was chosen to explore the research questions (Jansen, 2010). This qualitative
methodology was selected to capture and authentically reflect adopted adolescents’
perspectives and experiences about remaining in education.
57
Participants.
Five young people were recruited using purposive sampling through contacts in the
researcher’s workplace local authority and the adoption team in a neighbouring
authority. The participation eligibility criteria required that the young people were:
aged 16 to 25; participating in education; living with their adoptive parents (fulltime
or during holidays) and that they had been adopted for more than three years.
To enhance the potential generalisability of the findings, a sequential approach to
recruitment was chosen to ensure that the participants varied in gender, age, family
construction, type of educational placement and the level at which they were
studying.
Table 2: Participant Characteristics
Young
Person
Gender Age Placement Level of
Qualification*
Ruby Female 16 Independent School 2
Seb Male 18 Supported Internship 2
Leo Male 18 College 2
Ellie Female 18 College 3
Joe Male 19 College 4
* Level 2 qualification is equivalent to GCSE grade 4-9. Level 3 qualification is equivalent to A-Level.
Level 4 qualification is equivalent to BTEC Professional Diploma level. Level 5 qualification is
equivalent to HND or foundation degree level.
Recruitment through support services was an effective method to identify young
people aged 16 to 19, however it was ineffective to identify young people aged 19 to
25. This may be due to cut-off ages for children’s services or young people
choosing not to self-identify as adopted and/or in need of support. Following
consultation with young people, posting on social media was considered as an
58
additional recruitment strategy. This was rejected due to difficulties with
independently validating the young people’s identification and the lack of opportunity
to check whether participating in the research would be in the young person’s best
interest. This resulted in five young people participating in the study; it was the
researcher’s intention to have a participant group of eight.
Data collection.
Semi-structured interviews were deemed to be an appropriate data gathering
method as they allow individuals to talk about their lives in an open-ended and
extensive way (Roulston, 2010) and for the researcher to ask follow-up questions
which vary dependent on participant responses.
To ensure relevance and authenticity the interview questions were trialled and
adapted with a group of 14 adopted young people and three workers from a post-
adoption support group for teenagers. The initial interview schedule included the
phrases ‘if you think back’ and ‘imagine’ as openings to questions. The adopted
young people suggested that they have the potential to be upsetting. In the final
interview schedule, these terms were removed, and the following phrase was added
to the introduction ‘If there is anything that I ask, that you do not want to talk about;
don’t worry, just tell me and we will move on’. The participants in the pilot study also
suggested that the participants should be provided with the questions in advance to
reduce anxiety; this suggestion was actioned.
Informed consent to share data gathered in this research study was gained from
the participants (Appendix 5) and a Participant Information Sheet (Appendix 6), the
Interview Schedule (Appendix 8) and an informal discussion were provided a week
in advance of the interview, as suggested by the adopted young people.
Single interviews, lasting between 24 and 52 minutes (average time 36 minutes)
were conducted between March and September 2018. Participants were offered a
59
face-to face interview in their educational establishment or an alternative venue
(children’s centre, library) and where geographical or time constraints applied, the
option of a telephone or video interview. Two interviews took place in quiet, private
rooms within educational establishments, one in a children’s centre, one over the
telephone (due to practical difficulties in securing a room in an out of authority
setting), and one via WhatsApp video (due to geographical constraints and the
participant having Autistic Spectrum Condition and expressing a preference for this
medium). Participants were given the option of having a family member or
professional accompany them for the interview; four interviews took place with only
the young person and the researcher, Joe, chose to have his mother accompany
him for his WhatsApp video interview.
Data analysis.
The interviews were audio-recorded and professionally transcribed. Data was
analysed to identify patterns, similarities and differences between the participants’
responses and the perceived impact that the experiences they report has had on
the maintenance and success of their educational placements. An example of a
coded transcript can be seen in Appendix 10. The researcher and researcher’s
supervisor independently coded a sample of transcript to check inter-rater reliability,
confirming a 90% intercoder agreement which was considered acceptable for the
purpose of the study.
The analysis was structured using Braun & Clarke’s (2006) six stages of thematic
analysis which is a structured qualitative research method for identifying, analysing
and reporting themes in data and is outlined in Appendix 9. Photographic evidence
showing the thematic analysis process can be seen in Appendix 11. Alternative
methods of analyses were considered and rejected as the aim of this research was
to extract meaning at a semantic, rather than latent level and it did not involve
generating new theory in a previously untheorized area.
60
Ethical considerations.
This research was guided by The Health and Care Professions Council Guidance
on Conduct, Performance and Ethics (HCPC, 2016) and The British Psychological
Society Code of Human Research Ethics (BPS, 2014) and received university
ethical approval (Appendix 4). Throughout this research the dignity, rights, safety
and well-being of participants was considered, respected and safeguarded.
Attention was paid to the fact that issues discussed within the interviews may not
have been shared within the family group; this was addressed by ensuring the
research was sensitively written up using pseudonyms so that individuals could not
be identified. It was recognised that issues raised in the interview may have led
participants onto discussing current support needs; in addition a Distress Policy was
written to outline the steps the researcher would take to support participants who
were upset (Appendix 7). As participants were identified through organisations to
which they were already known, it was felt that these organisations could provide an
easily accessible source of support which was referred to during the course of some
interviews. The researcher was mindful that it is important to be very clear about the
beginnings and endings of relationships, due to the attachment needs of some
adopted children. In this regard, clarity about the parameters of the research was
ensured during conversations and written communication.
Findings
Thematic analysis of interview data generated four inter-related main themes
concerning young peoples’ views on factors that have helped them to remain in
education: ‘A Positive Self-identity’; ‘Supportive People’; ‘Supportive Approaches’
and ‘Supportive Systems’. Two main themes were generated in relation to the
messages that school staff should receive and one main theme which focused upon
how to get the messages across. The interviewees felt school staff should have
61
‘Increased awareness of adopted children’s needs’ and ’Knowledge of the features
of adoption-friendly settings’ and suggested some ‘Methods’ to achieve these. The
following sections discuss the main themes in detail.
Themes.
Positive self-identity.
All the young people acknowledged that they have a key role in determining their
own continued participation in education. The effective support that they have
received has helped them to accept themselves as adopted young people and
believe in themselves as successful students.
Ellie, for instance, credits her increased confidence to support that has included
‘making me feel alright about myself, like it’s OK to be adopted and just to accept
myself for who I am.’ As Leo is settled at college, he feels able to speak up about
his needs as an adopted young person; ‘Yeah, I was actually on about being angry
with somebody. I said, ‘I struggle because I’m adopted’. And then she was like…’oh,
I didn’t know’? So then it kind of created a conversation (with the member of staff).’
Perseverance, a personal sense of responsibility and a positive outlook about the
future have helped the young people to get where they are today. Seb explained,
that his family have encouraged him to persevere and emphasised ‘I try really hard
because it’s not going to take long to get what I want, unless I don’t work, but I try to
do my best’. Leo’s experience is that his positive outlook can surprise people; ‘A lot
of people have said ‘how can you stay positive about life even though you’ve been
through what you’ve been through?’ And I said, ‘just because I’ve been through it
and that was the past and now it’s (time) to focus on the future.’’
Empowering young people to help themselves is important. Whilst reflecting on the
support he has at college, Leo explained, ‘I think I still need a bit of support…but…I
think I’m kind of learning myself how to do it now’.
62
Supportive people.
Identities of supportive people.
Family members were identified as supportive by all the young people, four
identified good support from school or college staff and three referred to adoption
support agency staff. Support from other young people, whether other adopted
children or non-adopted peers was high-lighted by all.
Ruby describes the support that peers can offer; ‘I had someone in the year
above…. They decided to help me, and a couple still do and come and say, ‘How
are you?’ and stuff and that’s good……. And I don’t know why they did it, but it
made things better’. Ellie recognises that having an adequate peer support network
can make the difference between coping and not coping at school; ‘I wouldn’t have
called them friends. I had, like acquaintances, that I was civil with so that I could
actually survive at school and like not be isolated.’
In addition to non-adopted peers, other adopted young people provide an important
and enduring source of support. Ellie explained she attends an ASA group for
teenagers; ‘I’ve got really close friendships through that group. We’ll stay in touch’.
Leo high-lighted that there are likely to be adopted young people at his college,
whose identity he is not aware of, and that he could help them or benefit from their
support.
Leo: …So I know about 3 of us that are adopted, but there’s still…college is
massive, it could be…
Interviewer: There could be more couldn’t there?
Leo: Yeah, so we don’t really speak to each other because…there’s not a thing that
goes up ‘you’re adopted!’ and…
63
Qualities of supportive people.
Participants referred to people who, had time, showed interest, were prepared to
listen and were persistent about advocating for their needs, as being supportive.
Ruby felt the most supportive member of school staff demonstrated an
understanding that others did not, potentially identifying a need for wider staff
professional development; ‘Some teachers would talk but not understand….
whereas she would be like speaking my way…she had had some training to do with
emotions and stuff’. Ellie agreed that feeling understood is important:
Ellie: Hmm, so I felt like X [leader of agency working with adopted teens] could
really understand me…because she kind of knew where I was coming from.
Interviewer: Yeah and in school has anybody come close to that?
Ellie: No.
Interviewer: Or at college?
Ellie: No.
Joe could identify numerous members of school and college staff who were
supportive; Ruby, Leo and Seb high-lighted one or two, in contrast Ellie could not;
she explained that the approach of professionals from the ASA provided her with
the support she needed.
Ellie: They are so non-judgemental…they support you no matter what and they’ve
always got like a caring heart and…they’ll always listen to you and give you their
honest opinion…they won’t just tiptoe around something.
Reflecting upon the qualities of the teaching assistants (TAs) who have provided
them with individual support, Seb, Leo and Joe identified a friendly approach and
Seb and Leo high-lighted a sense of humour. Seb felt the TAs who supported him
64
well were good role models, shared his interests and got the right balance between
support and developing independence.
Supportive approaches.
Participants identified some general Supportive Approaches within an educational
setting: being pro-active, pupil-centred, responsive and flexible; respecting
confidentiality and providing space and time.
Settings need to be pro-active in identifying their adopted students, including those
who are showing no outward signs of needing support, and promoting the support
that they can offer. Ellie explained that she has achieved her expected grades and
not got into trouble; her school and college have done nothing to acknowledge her
identity as an adopted young person. Ruby feels the support that she received was
reactive and too late; ‘it only really got sorted, like the bullying…once I’d had my lip
stitched…it took 2 assaults to get actually sorted.’
It is important that settings are responsive and flexible with their education offer,
behaviour policy and support offer. Leo prefers the work days to the study days of
his supported internship and his provider has balanced his offer to play to his
strengths. Joe’s school offered flexibility in allowing him to miss lessons, that may
cause distress and miss days from school when he was particularly struggling.
Recognition of his individual needs meant that Leo benefitted from adaptions, did
not always have to experience isolation and received individual adult support to help
him to ‘chill out’. A recognition that adopted young people may need increased
support ‘after an incident’ requires flexibility from, often stretched, support services.
Supportive systems.
When children leave care into adoption the statutory Personal Education Plans
(PEPs) which support LAC are no longer required. Syne, Green & Dyer (2012)
positively evaluated the use of an EPAC however, the use of these (or similar)
65
systems is not widespread and was not referred to by participants in this study.
Participants did identify some other supportive systems, which are broadly
summarised as statutory and funding systems, communication systems and
transition systems.
Statutory and funding systems.
EHCPs provide a statutory framework to support adopted children with identified
Special Educational Needs (SEN). An EHCP was a requirement to access Seb’s
supported internship and the EHCP funding allowed Joe to attend an independent
special school which met his needs. Joe’s experience is that the framework and
funding attached to an EHCP supported him in secondary and further education but
stopped when he transferred to higher education. Joe’s family found the change in
system difficult to navigate and felt that the EHCP provided flexibility which the new
system did not offer.
Joe’s mum: (Disabled Student’s Allowance) It’s more like one size fits all, you get a
computer and software but not an attachment figure!
Systems to facilitate communication.
Communication within educational establishments can be supported by good
pastoral systems; there was a recognition that the large size of secondary schools
and post 16 settings requires a more creative communication system than within
primary schools. In contrast to accessing a one-to-one teaching assistant in school,
Joe’s college provide varied options for him to communicate with staff ‘…so…I go
in one day a week to have mentoring sessions… study skill sessions…and also at
lunchtimes…they’ve got a room where I can go to…if I want a quiet lunch and
chat…’.
66
A system of communication, between settings and with families can contribute
towards supporting continued participation in education, as illustrated by this
exchange with Leo:
Interviewer: And who persuaded you that it’s a good idea to…take up this
opportunity? Because if you were just at home playing on your Xbox, not speaking
to all the people who were ringing. How did it happen?
Leo: It was when I was at college… and they went… ‘got a meeting for you.’ Then
this lady (from the hospital) came and talked to me about it (the supported
internship). So…I talked to the lady…and I went, ‘yeah, I want to do it.’
Interviewer: So, she gave you a different option?
Respondent: Yeah and then my dad went, ‘take it.’ And I said, ‘I will.’
A group for young people, through a local ASA, was identified by Ellie, Seb and Leo
as a supportive system to facilitate communication between adopted young people:
Ellie: Well, not only do we just…not only do we come together to work like once
every 2 months, there’s also activity days, so we can all bond with each other and
have like a fun time. But also, at the same time it’s not just for the X [agency
working with adopted teens] group, it’s branched out to other adopted teenagers, so
we can meet anyone who’s adopted and just form bonds with them and just talk to
them and try and help if we can.
Ellie had previously attended a similar group run by her social worker; none of the
participants referred to communication systems for adopted young people facilitated
by educational settings, which could be easier for young people to access
independently. Although, the value of face-to-face meetings to develop relationships
cannot be underestimated, electronic systems, such as websites and social media
67
groups provide a readily accessible alternative and a preferred method of
communication for some young people.
Ellie: Yeah and if they (adopted young people)’re struggling then they can always be
told about the X (agency working with adopted teens) website…… which they can go
on and…rant to people if they need to.
Interviewer: And do you think that those young people say at your college, who are
adopted, but don’t know about those websites?
Ellie: Yeah…I’d say…we have tried to promote it
It could be argued that it is not the role of educational professionals to set up these
systems. However, whilst respecting confidentiality, they could feasibly put adopted
young people within their establishment in touch with each other. Staff have an
important role in signposting young people and need knowledge of local post-
adoption support groups.
Systems to facilitate transition.
Many adopted young people have experienced sudden and unexpected transitions
in their home lives; in contrast, the transitions to post 16 and post 18 education are
expected and can be planned for in advance. A planned transition system, which
recognises the potential difficult nature of transitions and manages expectations,
can provide extra support at a key time of need to adopted children and their
families.
Ruby experienced a difficult transition from primary to secondary school; ‘I had the
worse start I think to a secondary school…. within the first few days I was an outcast
already...it wasn’t great’. Hopefully, the potential move from school to college will be
more positive, as she explains; ‘I started going to therapy and she’s really helping
me with the transition between going from secondary school to college’. She
68
recognises that future transitions are likely to be challenging; ‘If you go to university
and have to leave home and stuff. I think it’s going to be a very emotional roller
coaster……I think parents need support as well because sometimes they are more
protective as they didn’t get to do it (protect you) when you were younger’. If
schools, colleges and universities offer systems to support transitions it is likely that
more adopted children will continue to participate in education.
Increasing awareness of adopted children’s needs.
There is no ‘one package fits all’; adopted young people felt it is important for school
staff to recognise the individuality of their adoption journeys and needs. The
participants unanimously expressed the benefits of a whole-school approach, with
all staff having an awareness of the common needs experienced by adopted
children and the difficulties these can cause in school. Needs can be summarised
as those related to attachment, belonging, early developmental trauma, learning
and communication. These can lead to difficulties with; emotional regulation,
relationships, changes/ transitions and conforming to school behavioural
expectations and feelings, of blame, isolation and anger.
Staff need an awareness of the link between unmet needs and an escalation in
challenging and risky behaviours, as Leo describes; ‘And I just kept getting angry
and running around school like a headless chicken…. I kept walking off site and I
made the teachers run after me.’
When their needs are met young people feel safe, secure and motivated to attend
and achieve. Staff might be surprised about what meets young people’s needs, as
illustrated through this quote from Seb:
Seb: Yeah, I kind of get excited about college, so…unlike high school, I wasn’t
excited. I didn’t want to go in…. most of the time I would say I’m unwell.
69
Interviewer: So, you’ve got good things here that make up for the kind of…the worry
about coming?
Seb: Yeah, I think it’s also cause the security here, so if anything did go wrong, the
security that will always…help.
Interviewer: Oh, you mean the security guys on the door?
Respondent: Yeah, I know all the security people, so I can talk to them if I see
something…. a lot of arguing and a lot of fights.
Features of adoption friendly settings.
In accordance with Langton & Boy (2017), the young people recognised that every
type of setting should strive be adoption-friendly. Joe explained that, in contrast to
the small school he attended until he was 16, ‘my college is massive, but the
department is small’ and his mum added; ‘So it was very easy wasn’t it, to kind of
just re-create those sorts of (relationships)…it’s about relationships isn’t it?’. Sharing
the ways in which adopted students have been successfully supported in further
and higher education can help other educational establishments to become
adoption-friendly.
The young people highlighted the following steps necessary to ensure continued
support for adopted students: identifying the adopted students; providing support for
them to share their adoption story in their own way; providing a supportive and
creative ethos and identifying and accessing local external sources of support (for
young people and professionals). Competing priorities for staff time and resources
were perceived as barriers to providing a supportive and creative ethos and
developing as an autism-friendly setting.
70
Ruby: ‘It’s almost those kids that like…have dyslexia or autism…seem to get
support, but …. I feel like some areas of kids who’ve got trauma and stuff should get
that as well’
Ellie: To be honest because…teachers are so bogged down and grades and
everything and jumping through…I feel like they’re jumping through hoops….
Interviewer: And not concentrating on the individual young people?
Ellie: No.
Methods to get the message across.
The young people had numerous ideas about how school staff should receive
information about supporting adopted children, which fall under three themes;
awareness raising in society; initial input for staff and on-going staff support. Ruby
explained ‘I think there is a stigma about adoption’ and Leo suggested ‘a TV advert’
as a method that could help to dispel myths. As Ellie explained, ASAs have a role in
challenging stereotypes and disseminating the views of young people:
‘We’ve created a film about adopted teenagers, I think it’s a podcast. We went into
the city and asked random strangers what their opinions were about adoption’
‘X (leader of the support group for adopted teenagers) asked me to talk to the
board, at some awards and at a conference’.
The film includes adopted teenagers commenting upon the views expressed by the
general public. Leo is involved in the group that made the film and suggested ‘send
it to all the schools and colleges…. all the teachers and staff should watch it’. The
use of a school training day for a whole-school staff input about adoption and
attachment was advocated by all the young people. The video and books about
adoption and adopted children’s’ needs were identified as useful training resources.
71
After their initial input staff should be encouraged to continue to discuss and revisit
issues about adoption. Communication with experts was identified as a continued
support method; adoptive parents can provide expert input about their children, and
professionals, including social workers and therapists can extend staff learning, as
illustrated by Joe’s comment on his attachment therapist speaking to school staff:
‘Well, we have like sessions with her…so…we’ve known her for ages now, so we
know her very well and she makes us very comfortable so yeah, she knows a lot
about her subject, but she also knows me very well.’
It is important that staff keep up to date about how to access additional support and
advice for themselves as professionals and for adopted children and young people
and their families.
Discussion
This research focused on asking adopted young people to identify and share the
positive experiences that have supported them to participate in post 16 education.
The researcher sought to increase understanding about what helps adopted young
people to remain in education and gain young people’s views about what school
staff should be told about what helps and how the messages could be delivered.
It can be considered that, whilst working within a ‘supportive system’ it is easier to
adopt a ‘supportive approach’ and be a ‘supportive person’. Schools or colleges
which may have differently aligned priorities arguably have potential to constrain the
impact of, the most interested and well-intentioned individual staff within schools.
The young people in this study identify that adopted children experience specific
social, emotional and learning needs, in line with the findings of White (2018); the
broad nature of these needs has been recognised in legislation through the remit of
PPP funding. This research emphasises that school staff need to have ‘increased
awareness of adopted children’s needs’ and associated difficulties in education.
72
Through focusing on the ‘features of adoption friendly settings’ and developing
‘supportive systems’ to facilitate communication and transition, a range of staff can
provide a personalised response to support adopted children throughout their
educational career. Adopted children have a role to play in increasing awareness of
adoption; they should be encouraged to share their thoughts and be listened to,
which can be facilitated through use of video resources. Staff can help by
supporting each adopted child to share their own individual journey in a way that
suits them and by developing and monitoring plans that focus on individual needs.
Expert input into staff training days, and the use of external post-adoption support
services, can support schools to use systems, develop approaches and nurture
understanding relationships to support each adopted child’s own belief in
themselves. A ‘positive self-identity’ as an adopted young person and successful
student can have a helpful impact on family and peer relationships, encourage
continued participation in education and ultimately support young people in the
workplace and society.
Implications for understanding post-adoption support in education.
Effective support for adopted children in education necessitates effective
interdisciplinary working practices (Stother, Woods & McIntosh, submitted). Staff
within the sectors of education, psychology, social care and voluntary agencies
need to recognise the expertise and contributions of other professionals, whose
remit they may not fully understand. The UK government has set an aspiration that
‘Every adoptive family has access to an on-going package of appropriate support
with a right to a high quality, specialist assessment of need. This support is
delivered from day one and continues throughout childhood, whenever it is
required’. (DfE, 2016a, p.7). To increase the numbers of adopted children
continuing to participate in education, thereby improving their life chances, it is
important to ensure that this support package spans multiple agencies and
73
encompasses needs and difficulties within educational settings, as well as those
experienced in a home environment.
In setting up RAAs, the UK government intends that improved outcomes for adopted
children will be facilitated through new ways of working with them, their families and
the professionals who support both (DfE, 2016a). Explicit consideration of adopted
children as part of a system encourages reflection upon the elements of the system
and the interactions between them, including the well identified dilemma of
balancing the needs of individuals and minority groups with that of larger groups,
within a classroom or school system (Farrell et al., 2006). An activity theory
perspective (Leadbetter et al., 2007; Greenhouse 2013), is useful for developing the
necessary understanding of the complexity involved in achieving the outcome of
adopted children being supported, where they would wish, to continue in post-16
and post-18 education. Through viewing the VS as the ‘subject’, the relevant
‘community’ consists of adopted students, adoptive parents, school staff, LA staff
and those employed within the voluntary sector, working within ‘rules’ dictated by
their setting and government legislation; the ‘division of labour’ is likely to be
different for each case in context. Research, such as that reported here, can itself
be considered a ‘mediating artefact’ through which positive change towards
realisation of the outcome can be supported.
Educational professionals who are strongly vocationally motivated to meet the
needs of adopted children will be aided through using the ‘supportive approaches’ of
being pro-active, pupil-centred, responsive and flexible; respecting confidentiality
and providing space and time. Special schools often provide more scope for
supportive approaches; however, most adopted children are educated in
mainstream schools. An overarching system which allows mainstream schools to
develop a specialism/ enhanced provision in supporting the needs of adopted
children in education could facilitate staff expertise about existing supportive
74
systems (EHCPs, PPP) the development of new ones (e.g. to encourage
communication between adopted children) and provide an ethos in which
‘supportive approaches’ for adopted children are less likely to clash with other
priorities.
Implications for practice.
Pro-actively planning for educational transitions is in line with previous evidence
which highlights the necessity to offer a range of suitable post-16 pathways, high-
quality guidance and support and flexible pre-16 provision which will engage young
people and encourage them to want to continue learning post-16 (Thompson,
2011). Traditionally, post-adoption support is more evident when children are
attending early years or primary educational settings, whilst it is recognised there is
a peak of difficulty for adoptive children in the teenage years and at times of
transition (Selwyn, Wijedesa & Meakings, 2014). In line with the principles of early
intervention (Allen, 2011), a universal education support package for adopted
children in the UK could be offered through LA VSs during Year 11, for post-16
transfer, and year 13 for post 18 transfer. The cost of such a support package is
likely to be offset through a reduction in the numbers of adopted children who
present as NEET.
Limitations.
The small sample size of this study, which was restricted by the time available to the
researcher and challenges with participant recruitment, is a limitation. Although it is
possible that a larger sample size may have identified similar themes, the intended
participant group of eight young people, and/or larger scale research may have
been more comprehensive with findings considered more generalisable and
appropriate to influence policy and practice. In addition, the diversity of the sample
is limited; participants were recruited through support services known to the
75
researcher and were current recipients of support. This study does not capture the
viewpoints of young people who had received support through different services or
were no longer receiving support. There are also likely to be adopted young people
who have been successful in education and have never accessed support services.
Another limitation is the age range of the participants; the chosen recruitment
strategy was not effective in identifying young people aged 19-25. This meant that
the perspectives brought about by increased maturity were missed in the current
study.
On reflection, provision of the interview schedule in advance may have prompted
discussions with parents/ professionals which could be considered by some to
compromise the integrity of, and limit, the ‘young people’s views’. Three out of five
of the young people shared that they had read and thought about the questions but
not discussed them with anyone. One young person was accompanied by his
mother and another shared that he had talked about the questions with his dad and
that ‘he didn’t have good ideas, I have much better ideas.’ The intention of the pilot
study was to improve the study design; the inclusion of the suggestions was
critically assessed to ensure that the focus remained on sharing the voice of the
young people and this could have been reiterated through the written participant
information and preliminary discussions.
Implications for research.
This research provides some evidence of the importance of consideration of
adopted children’s educational experiences for mainstream, special and VS staff
and outlines some features and benefits of effective support. Research can be
considered as a mediating artefact in activity theory (Leadbetter et al., 2007;
Greenhouse, 2013) as it can provide an impetus for change. To the researcher’s
knowledge, this is the first study which has focused on the views of young people in
identifying post-adoption support within educational settings. A co-ordinated,
76
cumulative and progressive programme of research which is steered and co-
produced by adopted students is necessary to ‘turn up the volume’ of the voice of
adopted young people whilst broadcasting messages about what helps them to
continue in education.
77
References
Bomber, L. (2007). Inside I’m hurting: practical strategies for supporting children
with attachment difficulties in schools. Worth Publishing.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative
Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101.
Brown, A., Waters, C. S., & Shelton, K. H. (2017). A systematic review of the school
performance and behavioural and emotional adjustments of children adopted from
care. Adoption & Fostering, 41(4), 346-368.
Cowburn, A. and Blow, M. (2017). Wise Up – Prioritising wellbeing in schools.
Young Minds.
Cooper, P., & Johnson, S. (2007). Education: The views of adoptive
parents. Adoption & fostering, 31(1), 21-27. Department for Education (DfE).
(2014a). Key Stage 2 attainment for children recorded as adopted from care.
London: DfE Publications.
Department for Education (DfE). (2014). Response to main queries on adopted
children and pupil premium. Retrieved from http://www.casa-uk.org/department-for-
education-response-to-mainqueries-on-adopted-children-and-pupil-premium/
Department for Education. (DfE). (2015). Special educational needs and disability
code of practice: 0 to 25 years. London: DfE Publications.
Department for Education (DfE) (2016a). Adoption: A vision for change. London:
DfEPublications.
Department for Education. (DfE). (2016b). Outcomes for children looked after by
local authorities in England, 31 March 2016: additional tables. London: DfE
Publications.
Department for Education. (DfE). (2018) Promoting the education of looked-after
children and previously looked-after children. London: DfE Publications.
78
Farrell, P., Woods, K., Lewis, S., Rooney, S., Squires, G., & O’Connor, M. (2006). A
review of the functions and contribution of educational psychologists in England and
Wales in light of “Every Child Matters: Change for Children”. Nottingham: DfES
Publications.
Greenhouse, P. M. (2013). Activity theory: a framework for understanding multi-
agency working and engaging service users in change. Educational Psychology in
Practice, 29(4), 404-415.
Gore Langton, E. (2017). Adopted and permanently placed children in education:
from rainbows to reality. Educational Psychology in Practice, 33(1), 16-30.
Health and Care Professions Council. (2012). Standards of Conduct, Performance
and Ethics. London: Heath and Care Professions Council.
HM Government UK (2017). Children & Social Work Act 2017. London: HM
Government.
Langton, E. G., & Boy, K. (2017). Becoming an Adoption-Friendly School: A Whole-
School Resource for Supporting Children Who Have Experienced Trauma Or Loss-
With Complementary Downloadable Material. City: Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
Leadbetter, J., Daniels, H., Edwards, A., Martin, D., Middleton, D., Popova, A., ... &
Brown, S. (2007). Professional learning within multi-agency children's services:
researching into practice. Educational Research, 49(1), 83-98.
Lyons, J.P. (2016) Using collaborative action research to support adoptive parents
in their communications with school staff (unpublished DEdPsy thesis). Manchester:
The University of Manchester.
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) (2015). Children’s
attachment: Attachment in children and young people who are adopted from care, in
care or at risk of going into care. London: NICE.
Pennington, E. (2012). It takes a village to raise a child. Adoption UK. Retrieved
from
http://www.adoptionuk.org/sites/default/files/documents/Ittakesavillagetoraiseachild-
Report-June12.pdf.
79
Selwyn, J., Wijedasa, D., & Meakings, S. (2014). Beyond the adoption order:
Challenges, interventions and adoption disruption. London: DfE Publications.
Spielhofer, T. (2007). Raising the participation age in education and training to 18:
review of existing evidence of the benefits and challenges. London: DfE
Publications.
Stother, A. (2017). The role of Educational Psychologists’ in post-adoption support
(unpublished DEdPsychol research paper). Manchester: The University of
Manchester.
Stother, A., Woods, K. & MacIntosh, S. (2019). Evidence-based practice in relation
to post-adoption support in educational settings. (Submitted). Adoption and
Fostering.
Syne, J., Green, R., & Dyer, J. (2012). Adoption: The lucky ones or the Cinderellas
of children in care?. Educational and Child Psychology, 29(3), 93.
Thompson, R. (2011). Individualisation and social exclusion: the case of young
people not in education, employment or training. Oxford Review of Education, 37(6),
785-802.
Wijedasa, D., & Selwyn, J. (2011). Transition to adulthood for young people in
adoptive care: secondary analyses of data from longitudinal study of young people
in England (LSYPE). Bristol: Hadley Centre for Adoption and Foster Care Studies.
White, R. (2017). Adoption UK’s Schools & Exclusions Report. Banbury: Adoption
UK.
White, R. (2018). Bridging the gap: Giving adopted children and equal chance in
school. Banbury: Adoption UK.
80
Paper Three:
The Dissemination of Evidence to
Professional Practice.
Word count: 6293 (including tables and references)
81
The Dissemination of Evidence to Professional Practice
Introduction
This paper begins with an overview of the concepts of evidence-based practice and
practice-based evidence; followed by an evaluation of the evidence on effective
dissemination and notions of research impact. Next, is an explanation of the
strategy for disseminating the findings of papers 1 and 2 at the research site,
organisational level and professional level. The paper concludes with an outline of
the strategy for evaluating the dissemination and impact of the research.
Section 1: Overview of Evidence- Based Practice (EBP) and Practice-Based
Evidence (PBE)
Evidence-based practice (EBP) in psychology can be defined as the conscious,
explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions (Sackett,
Rosenberg, Grey, Haynes & Richardson, 1996), it involves ‘the integration of the
best available research with clinical expertise, in the context of patient
characteristics, culture and preferences’ (American Psychological Association
(APA), 2006, p273). Within the context of EBP, evidence is conceptualised as
knowledge which is acquired through empirical research (Biesta, 2010).
EBP has been advocated as best practice in the fields of health and education
(Hargreaves, 1996; Sackett el al., 1996), through the promotion of effective
psychological practice and the application of empirically supported principles to
improve public health (APA, 2006). The aim of EBP is to maximise positive
outcomes for services users (Dunsmuir & Kratochwill, 2013)) through overcoming
the limitations of decision-making solely based upon practitioner intuition and/or
anecdotal reports (Sackett et al., 1996).
82
EBP allows for research to be drawn from different methodologies and evidence to
originate from a variety of sources. Traditionally, there is generally agreed to be a
hierarchy, in which evidence acquired through randomised controlled trials (RCTs),
systematic literature reviews (SLRs) and meta-analyses is considered more
rigorous and robust than evidence acquired from case studies and personal
experiences (Kennedy & Monsen, 2016).
Some practitioners have been reluctant to fully embrace concepts of EBP (Fox,
2011; Burnham, 2013). Critics refer to four main reasons: a ‘skills gap’ with
practitioners having difficulty accessing and interpreting the evidence
(Ramchandani, Joughlin & Zwi, 2001); contradictory or insufficient evidence (Fox,
2011); a perception that RCTs destroy a key aspect of the effectiveness of
psychological interventions, i.e. the relationship of the psychologist to the client
(Walker & Sofaer, 2003); and a feeling that the results of RCTs do not usually reflect
real life situations in education where variables are not always easily controlled
(Fredrickson, 2002). Indeed, reservations have been expressed about the concept
of the evidence hierarchy alongside a recognition that the research approach of
choice will depend upon the question that is being asked and that it is the best
available evidence of the most appropriate type that is needed (Frederickson,
2002).
Evidence-based practice within educational psychology.
The HCPC’s (2015) standards of proficiency for practitioner psychologists highlight
the importance of EPs being able to ‘use professional and research skills in work
with service users based on a scientist-practitioner and reflective practitioner model
that incorporates a cycle of assessment, formulation, intervention and evaluation’
(p.22). For EPs aspiring to be scientist practitioners there is an imperative to link
83
interventions, at individual, group and organisational levels with evidence-based
understanding and practice (Miller & Fredrickson, 2006), through demonstrating the
scientist-practitioner principles, to: think effectively; weave gathered data into
formulations; act effectively, and critique work systematically (Lane & Corrie, 2007).
Therefore, if EBP is perceived as, the use in applied practice of the best research
evidence almost to the exclusion of practitioner expertise and client preferences,
this presents difficulties in the application of EBP to educational psychology
(Kennedy & Monsen, 2016). In 2002, Frederickson drew attention to the fact that in
health care settings, EBP was seen by some as ‘a dangerous innovation designed
to cut costs and limit clinical freedom’ (p.92 Frederickson, 2002); in 2019, a narrow
definition of evidence-based practice could lead to similar conclusions within EP and
adoption services, individual educational settings and academy chains. The role of
effective applied psychologists is to integrate knowledge from research with their
expertise and client preferences, through employing a range of complex cognitive
and affective strategies (Wren, 2015); this requires recognition of practice-based
and case-based evidence to complement and add to that gained through academic
research.
Dutton’s (1995) three stage model can be used to develop understanding of the
transformation of experience to professional practice for applied psychologists.
Firstly, ‘pattern recognition’ allows analysis of a situation to recognise familiar
patterns and compare them with previous situations. Next, ‘knowing in action’ when
conventional routes, such as assessment and consultation are used to resolve
difficulties identified by pattern recognition. Finally, ‘naming and framing’ when
psychological theories and frameworks are used to clarify problems in ways that
indicate solutions. The theoretical frame that the psychologist gives to the problem
then becomes the rationale for intervention. However, a potential difficulty arises if
84
an EP always interprets and responds to problems in a similar way due to
attachment to particular theories; their practice can suffer due to primacy effects and
confirmation bias (Fox, 2011). In addition, EP input can be hindered if the EP does
not come to a shared understanding with interested parties about the basis of the
intervention; exploring the evidence base with teachers, social workers, parents and
young people can increase understanding and facilitate interventions (Fox, 2011).
Practice-based evidence.
Practice-based knowledge is defined as ‘knowledge that comes from professional
practice and experience, opinion and belief’ (adapted from Fox 2011). PBE is an
important element of EBP, which allows for the safe trialling of original and
innovative techniques to build an inclusive research evidence base (Barkham,
Hardy & Mellor-Clark, 2010). To develop as an EP, practitioners will experience
unique situations and reflect on experiences to inform future practice (Fox 2011);
they will integrate PBE with academic research and individual setting and client
characteristics to guide decisions about what to do and how to effect improvements
in the future (Wren, 2015).
It is important to raise the profile of EPs doing research as well as using research
(Frederickson, 2002); EPs can strengthen their own evidence bases using PBE by
turning their own experiences into professional expertise (Fox, 2011). Until 2005,
EPs had to train as teachers before entering educational psychology training; Miller
& Fredrickson (2006) suggest that, until recently, little value was placed upon a
scientific approach within teaching. The change from a one-year master’s degree to
a three-year doctorate for the initial training of EPs, combined with the introduction
of continued professional development doctorates for qualified EPs (Frederickson,
85
2002) shows a shift in the educational psychology profession regarding the
importance of research and EBP. Trainee EPs have an extra two years of study to
reflect on research and practice and there is a requirement to complete an original
piece of doctoral research before working as a qualified EP. Current research
knowledge and skills and links with academic institutions are brought into EP
services through newly qualified EPs; in addition Assistant EPs, who are keen to
develop skills relevant to doctoral study bring additional capacity (Monsen, Brown,
Akthar & Khan, 2009) to some EP services to develop PBE relevant to their current
practice and priorities.
In conclusion, it is important for EPs to embrace evidence- based practice and avoid
becoming too attached to particular theories, frameworks, and perspectives, within
the course of their practice (Fox, 2011). Recognising the place of practice- based
and case- based evidence and its integration with evidence gained through
academic research will allow EP services and individual practitioners to embrace
EBP and see the importance of developing their own professional expertise, using
scientist-practitioner principles to guide their reflections and evaluations.
Section 2: A Review of Current Literature in Relation to Effective
Dissemination of Research and Notions of Research Impact
Effective dissemination is about maximising the benefit of research by getting the
research findings to the people who can make use of them; research impact is
described as the effect that research has beyond academia. Bristow, Carter &
Martin (2015) suggest activities designed to ensure that evidence can be translated
into action are key to knowledge generation; reflecting a growing recognition that
evidence does not naturally flow into policy and practice. Research needs to be
generated and disseminated in accessible and useful ways to benefit policymakers
86
(Wilson, Petticrew, Calnan & Nazareth, 2010), practitioners (Thyer, 2001) and
service users, such as parents and children. Harrison & McNeece (2001) highlight
that findings need to be shared in a timely manner, otherwise they run the risk of
becoming out of date and not benefitting their target audiences.
As recognition of the need to improve dissemination and research impact has
grown, so has the amount of research into dissemination practices. SLRs which
focus on the effectiveness of dissemination in children’s services highlight a wide
variety of dissemination practices (Wilson el al., 2010) and a number of influences
on research impact, including: the dissemination experience of researcher; use of
clear and simple language; relevance and applicability of findings to specific
educational contexts and practitioners’ motivation and competency (Becheikh, Ziam,
Idrissi, Castonguay & Landry, 2010).
Dissemination can be considered as a three-level process: awareness,
understanding, and action (Harmsworth & Turpin, 2000). ‘Awareness’ involves
creating a general knowledge of the activities and outcomes of the research and
supporting the building of an identity and profile within the researcher’s target
community. Next, ‘Understanding’, involves communication between the researcher
and target audiences (other researchers, practitioners, policy makers and
consumers of services) which allows them to develop a further understanding of the
research methods, findings and implications. Finally, ‘Action’, relies upon successful
engagement of target audiences at the preceding two levels, and involves a process
of change in policy or practice informed by the research.
The way that research knowledge informs policy is not simple; Bristow, Carter &
Martin (2015) outline ‘three generations’ of thinking about this interaction: linear
87
models, relationship models, and systems models. Firstly, linear models view
policymaking as a one-way process involving a transfer of knowledge from
researchers to policymakers. Relationship models build on this thinking,
emphasising the importance of interactions among people producing and using
evidence. Systems models incorporate the principles of linear and relationship
models, and in addition account for the constantly changing cultural and institutional
context in which the interactions happen.
Through the ‘What Works Network’, the UK Government has championed a
programme of research activity. One of the central roles of the ‘What Works’
Centres (which include the National Institute for Health Care and Excellence (NICE)
and the Education Endowment Foundation (EEF)) is to provide a bridge between
the producers and the consumers of evidence. An independent review suggests that
the centres are well placed to play a pivotal role in their respective ‘evidence
ecosystems’ (Bristow, Carter & Martin, 2015). Evaluation of the ‘What Works
Network’, five years after its inception, found successful dissemination strategies to
include evidence comparison toolkits, practical written and digital guidance and
targeted communication over social and digital media e.g. Snapchat, Twitter (DfE
2018). Findings about research impact have been promising, for example, the EEF
Teaching and Learning Toolkit is reported to be used by two thirds of school leaders
to inform decisions about pupil premium spending. Data analysis shows that
practitioners accessing targeted communication through update bulletins,
notifications and apps are more likely to open links to guidance documents than
individuals reaching the NICE website through search engines.
Research has played a significant role in the multi-disciplinary field of adoption. Co-
ordinated programmes of research have been commissioned to examine how
government legislation has been translated into local policies, procedures and
88
practices (Adoption Research Initiative, 2001) and research findings have led to
direct changes (Hill, Lambert & Triseliotis, 1989). In a review of the issues and
strategies, involved in the dissemination of research findings in children’s services,
Bullock (2006), commissioning editor of the journal of ‘Adoption and Fostering’,
suggested that the dissemination of authoritative knowledge is an essential
component of professional development, for those working in the field of adoption.
However, he views the dissemination of research findings in children’s services as
problematic and proposes that the target audience is too wide to justify a single
approach and that different strategies are likely to be needed to influence policy as
opposed to practice. Writing more recently in ‘Adoption and Fostering’ Bullock
(2018) states:
‘But there is another viper in the nest, namely the culture of social work………
Social workers do not get promoted because of their research knowledge and they
are not held accountable for not having any. In 54 years of visiting social services
offices, I have never seen a copy of an academic journal, including this one’ (p.217).
Research dissemination and impact needs to be considered in context; changes in
practice are impacted by discussions with workmates and the examples of
colleagues who are held in high regard (Price, Ravenscroft & Nutley, 2006),
highlighting the value of dissemination strategies through supervision and
shadowing (Bullock, 2006). An organisational culture that supports the use of
research and provides best practice models (Walter, Nutley & Davies, 2004)
facilitates the use of research by teams and individuals.
The diverse backgrounds of professions within children’s services (Bullock, 2018)
combined with the rapidly changing nature of available technology (Axford, Little,
Morpeth & Weights, 2005) contributes to the difficulty in identifying the most
89
effective ways to disseminate research concerning adopted children. Traditional
methods of dissemination (e.g. journal articles) miss some intended recipients and
are claimed by some to be an ineffective way to mobilise evidence (Shepard, 2014).
The ability to visually re-model information, as required by social and digital media,
is a specialism seldom found in children’s services agencies and may require
engaging designers and journalists to translate research findings into dissemination
products (Bullock, 2006). Policymakers and practitioners require succinct, clear and
actionable accounts within supportive structures that are dedicated to the effective
transmission and uptake of evidence informed intervention and policies (Bristow,
Carter & Martin, 2015).
Section 3: A Summary of Policy, Practice and Research Development:
Implications from the Research
This thesis comprises Paper 1, a systematic literature review of ‘Evidence-based
practice in relation to post-adoption support in educational settings’ and Paper 2, an
empirical study using thematic analysis, ‘Continuing in post-16 education: The view
of adopted young people’. The researcher aimed to contribute to knowledge in the
field of post-adoption support, specifically within educational settings, to inform the
work of VSs and RAAs. The findings may also be of interest to adopted young
people and adoptive parents; special and mainstream schools; colleges, universities
and other providers of post 16 education. The following sections outline the
implications of the research at the personal, organisational and professional level.
Personal.
The process of taking part in the interviews for Paper 2, is likely to have acted as a
form of self-reflection for the participating young people as they considered support
that they experienced and that which they did not, but which they perceive may
90
have helped them. Paper 1 found that adopted children have a key role in
increasing awareness of adoption; it is important that the interview participants for
Paper 2 felt ‘listened to’ as this in itself may develop their confidence to share their
views in the future and be considered to be an impact of the research carried out.
The young people received the interview questions in advance and some
commented that they had discussed them with their adoptive parents; this may have
also prompted parents to reflect upon their child’s past experiences and the findings
from Paper 1 about pro-actively planning additional support at times of transition
may have an impact upon their planning for future educational transitions.
The staff members of the ASA at which the interview questions were trialled, and LA
staff who supported participant recruitment expressed interest in the research
process, particularly in relation to adopted young people having their voices heard.
Knowledge of the research approach, and the findings from Paper 1 which found
young people’s views to be absent from the research, may encourage staff
members to involve young people in planning, delivery and research about wider
post-adoption support.
Organisational.
The implications of the research are of relevance to many organisational settings.
The research in Paper 1 was set across a variety of educational settings and within
a range of organisations, including a CAMHS team and an EP service; the findings
from Paper 1 about the importance of a ‘shared understanding’ of need and
systems for ‘communication’ and ‘monitoring’ are relevant at an individual school
level and at a wider systems level. The research in Paper 2 was conducted with
young people who were accessing education through schools, colleges and
alternative provision; the ‘features of adoption friendly settings’ identified in Paper 2
may be particularly relevant to staff in schools, colleges and alternative provisions.
91
The Children and Social Work Act, 2017 recognises the needs of adopted children
in educational settings and extends the role of LA VSs to support their needs ; VS
staff, including headteachers, advisory teachers and sessional tutors, can benefit
from the research findings. An important role of the VS is to support and develop the
role of designated teachers with a responsibility for adopted children in mainstream
and special schools. Knowledge of good practice examples, identified through
Paper 1, and young people’s views and ideas, identified through Paper 2 could
inform dissemination of information and approaches from VSs to a range of
organisations involved in post-16 education, including colleges, universities and
procurers and providers of supported internships and apprenticeships.
ASAs, offer a range of support to those affected by adoption, adoptive parents and
families, adults adopted as children and birth families. Some ASAs provide a post-
adoption service which can include support groups for adopted young people and
adoptive parents. Knowledge of the ‘supportive people’ theme identified in Paper 2
can support ASAs to recruit and train staff who run post-adoption groups for young
people; understanding the importance of ‘a positive self-identity’ in supporting young
people to continue in education can help to plan the content and timing of the
sessions.
Adoption: A Vision for Change (2016) set out the English government’s ambition to
regionalise adoption services. The embedding of RAAs has reduced the number of
agencies providing adoption services from approximately 180 providers to 25-30
regional organisations, encompassing LA and ASA support, which are better able to
pool resources, plan strategically and share best practice. The findings of Papers 1
and 2, are likely to be of interest to The Centre of Excellence Project Teams within
RAAs; findings from Paper 1 showing the lack of an evidence base in relation to
post-adoption support in educational settings and the views of the young people
92
expressed in Paper 2 about the benefits of proactive planning, can provide a
catalyst for conversation which may influence future policy and/or practice.
Professional.
In line with the diverse professions within children’s services, the findings of Papers
1 and 2 can be considered by a variety of professional organisations including:
Chartered College of Teaching (CCT); The National Association of VS Heads;
British Association of Social Workers (BASW); Association of Educational
Psychologists (AEP) and National Association of SENCos (NASEN). One of the
high-quality research studies in Paper 1 provides support for the effectiveness of a
brief standardised intervention about adopted children within training; this is of
interest to providers of initial teacher and social worker training and those providing
continued professional development to other professions. The role of research and
evidence-based practice discussed in this paper may also be of interest to
managers of services and those providing professional supervision. In addition, the
research findings from Paper 2 about the characteristics of supportive people may
interest the Social Pedagogy Professional Association (SPPA), an umbrella
organisation which aims to promote a relationship-based approach to caring for
children and families. The Coram British Association for Adoption and Fostering
(Coram BAAF), which supports parents, agencies and a variety of professionals
who work with children in care and those who have been affected by adoption, is
likely to be interested in Paper 2 findings about the methods that the young people
suggest to broadcast messages about adoption.
93
Section 4: A Strategy for Promoting and Evaluating the Dissemination and
Impact of the Research
Bridging the gap between research and practice in the multi-agency field of adoption
requires a range of approaches (Bullock, 2018). The wide-ranging audience and
relevant dissemination approaches were carefully considered during the research
process and are outlined here using three stages of dissemination: awareness,
understanding and action (Harmsworth & Turpin, 2000).
Awareness.
This stage of dissemination involves creation of a general knowledge of the
activities and outcomes of the research and supports the building of an identity and
profile within the target communities of adoptive families and professionals.
Adoptive families.
Existing platforms will be targeted to build knowledge with adoptive families; as
recommended through the ‘What Works Network’, targeted communications will
include blogs, social media and websites run by ASAs for adopted children and
virtual and actual support groups for adoptive children and parents. A visually eye-
catching summary of the research findings, which uses clear and simple language,
could be produced to build knowledge with parents and young people about what to
look for in an educational setting and prompt questions about support. This
presentation of the research findings requires graphic skills and access to media
platforms which the researcher does not have and so involves working in
partnership with others, developing connections and investment of time. The use of
existing platforms has the potential to reach a regional and national audience with
an interest in adopted children but does not allow interaction between the
researcher and the target audience and it will be difficult to gauge research impact.
94
Professionals.
The researcher practises as a Trainee EP within a local authority educational
psychology service (EPS) and works with adopted children and adoptive parents in
schools. The research findings have already been referred to within school
consultations and a headteacher and SENCo at one school have expressed interest
in whole staff training, as they have a number of adopted children on roll.
The findings will also be shared during a continuing professional development day
within the EPS. The researcher is experienced in dissemination by presenting
research findings to professional groups. This is likely to be a short agenda item
with the aim of increasing EPs’ general knowledge of effective support for adopted
children in education and the role of local support services. Colleagues with an
interest in my research will be invited to make further contact at a later date. Other
trainee EP colleagues are aware of the research through the sharing of thesis
abstracts and there is likely to be some word of mouth dissemination which may be
shared with EPs within other LAs within the region where I practise.
Understanding.
‘Understanding’, involves communication between the researcher and target
audiences (other researchers, practitioners, policy makers and consumers of
services) that allows them to develop a further understanding of the research
methods, findings and implications. This research was developed following a
research commissioning process, in which the research commissioner (an EP within
an Adoption Psychology Service in the north west of England) pitched a research
proposal. The research commissioner has provided invaluable support during the
research process and will play a key role in promoting and evaluating the impact of
the research and the dissemination strategy. The following dissemination activities
95
will be delivered by the researcher and some may be replicated by the research
commissioner within her service:
Briefings.
The managers of the VS team and Adoption Social Work team in the researcher’s
placement authority have expressed an interest in the research and requested
presentation of the research outcomes at team meetings. This will allow for
interaction and discussion with individuals who are in regular contact with adopted
children, their families and educational settings. The findings are relevant and
applicable, but I am unsure of the practitioners’ motivation and competency to act
on them (Becheikh et al., 2010). It will be difficult to judge the impact of the
research going forward, however, through arranging this briefing the head of the VS
has expressed an interesting in hearing about the role of the research commissioner
as an EP within an Adoption Psychology Service as she is interested in changing
service delivery structures. Bringing people together to disseminate research can
have a secondary impact; research findings can be considered as a mediating
artefact which provides a stimulus for conversations within networks that may
produce other relevant changes in practice.
Training.
An EP within the researcher’s placement service runs training for Designated
Teachers with responsibility for adopted children and LAC. Following discussions
about the research outcomes, this training has been updated using data from Paper
1 about the lack of research available on effective intervention and methods of
awareness raising suggested by the young people in Paper 2, including the video in
which Ellie and Leo featured. Attendance at these training sessions will allow
interaction between the researcher and members of the intended research
audience; this is dependent upon my capacity and future employment within this
service. Longitudinal evaluations completed by the training development service
96
could provide me with a method to evaluate changes to practice within educational
settings.
Conferences.
Dissemination could take the form of attending local (e.g. LA Multi-Agency
Attachment Conference), national (e.g. Coram BAAF Annual Conference), and/or
international conferences (e.g. International Conference on Adoption Research) and
delivering a presentation or a workshop. To authentically reflect the voice of the
young people involved in the research, the researcher could co-produce and deliver
a workshop alongside one or more of them. This would generate interest, stimulate
thinking, and allow attendees to hear young people’s thoughts about the research
method and topic and consider young people’s role in planning services and
disseminating messages within their own organisations. It would be difficult to
establish the impact of attendance on professional practice unless future contact
was made or attendees were to undertake their own published research. The costs
and/or time required to attend a national or international conference may be
prohibitive to the researcher and/ or the young people.
Journal articles.
Although it has been established that journal articles often only reach an academic
target, rather than practitioner audience (Bullock, 2018), by publishing both papers
in academic journals, this increases the likelihood of the research being viewed by
researchers and professionals in the UK and beyond. Although information about
the numbers of views and citations articles have had is readily available, it would be
difficult to judge the impact of the research from this. By choosing to publish the
papers in the journal ‘Adoption and Fostering’ the researcher intends to raise
awareness of a research gap nationally and internationally with professionals and
researchers from a variety of professional backgrounds. Future research, which is
97
steered and co-produced by adopted students and Paper 2, will provide an
indication of research impact.
Action.
Dissemination for action involves targeting audiences that can ‘influence’ and ‘bring
about’ change to policy or practice within an organisation, as a result of adopting the
approaches offered by the research. In the context of this research, the targeted
audiences are VS headteachers and members of senior management teams within
RAAs. Through working with the local VS headteacher on other dissemination
activities, the researcher hopes to increase her understanding of the contribution
that the research findings could make to decision making groups and local policy
and strategy planning groups on which she sits, for example the 16-25 Steering
Group and Looked After and Previously Looked After Children’s Strategy Group,
whilst recognising the complexity of the interactions within a systems model
(Bristow, Carter & Martin, 2015). On a wider scale, sharing the research findings,
alongside the local VS head at the VS Heads National Conference could bring
about change in other authorities. The research commissioner is a member of the
Centre of Excellence Team within a north-west RAA, the researcher has been
invited to present the research findings to this group at a team meeting in summer
2019. The research commissioner believes that this will be useful to inform decision
making and provide evidence to support future policy and practice changes.
Following this presentation, which includes time for discussion and questions, we
will be better informed to decide how to disseminate the research to other RAAs and
how to prioritise and resource this aspect of dissemination to maximise impact.
Table 3 summarises the intended research outputs, audience, dissemination
approach, outcome and the perceived impacts and benefits.
98
Table 3: Key Impact Indicators and Success Criteria
Output Audience Dissemination Outcome Impact/ Benefit
Visually
eye-
catching
summary of
the
research.
Adopted children/
young people
(AC&YP)
Publication
through
media
platforms
linked to
ASAs, within
12 months.
Young people and parents download the research
summary, are better informed about effective support
and know what to look and ask for in a setting.
Increased numbers of AC&YP continuing in post
16 education, recorded in DfE figures.
Adoptive parents
Professionals with
an interest in
supporting AC&YP
in education
Staff in schools and post 16 educational settings
download/forward the research summary, and are
better informed about effective support for AC&YP
and put in place appropriate approaches and systems
Increased range of support and decreased
numbers of AC&YP represented in NEET figures.
Briefings Social Workers
(SW)
Presentation
delivered by
researcher/
research
commission
er, within 12
months.
Increased understanding of educational systems and
the needs of AC&YP within them.
SWs report increased confidence to discuss
AC&YP educational support with families and
setting staff; evidenced immediately through
briefing evaluation and on a medium-term basis
through supervision.
Educational
Psychologists
Increased interest and awareness of the unique
needs of and effective support for adopted children
within educational systems
EPs report increased confidence to have initial
conversations about the needs of and support for
AC&YP and know where to find more details;
evidenced immediately through briefing evaluation
and on a medium-term basis through supervision
VS staff Increased awareness of a range of research
outcomes, including the needs of and support for,
As evidenced through AC&YPs involvement in co-
production of post-adoption support services
through local C&YPs Plan.
Formatted Table
99
RAA Centre of
Excellence team
students and the role that young people can play in
co-producing services and research.
As evidenced through AC&YPs involvement in co-
production of post-adoption support services
through RAA plan and What Works Network.
Conference
Workshops
Local
professionals
Presentation
by
researcher
and AC&YP
involved in
the research
within 24
months.
Delegates at the local Attachment Aware Conference
and relevant national/ international events have
increased awareness of educational needs and
effective support for AC&YP through interaction with
the presenters and know how this can influence their
practice.
Workshop attendees asked to write down
something they will change as a result of attending
the workshop. A six-month follow-up email will be
sent to determine changes in practice.
National/
international
professionals
Journal
Articles
Practitioners Publication
of papers 1
& 2 within
appropriate,
academic,
peer
reviewed
journals
within 12
months.
Through publishing within ‘Adoption and Fostering’
the research will reach a wide practitioner audience
within the UK and internationally.
Downloads and citations will be tracked over a 36-
month period to gauge interest; however, it will be
difficult to make an explicit link between interest
and impact.
Researchers Through publishing within ‘Adoption and Fostering’
the research will reach a wide audience of
researchers within the UK and internationally.
Downloads and citations will be tracked over a 36-
month period, future research which cites the
findings of these papers will be viewed as evidence
of impact, further good quality research in this area
will be of benefit to AC&YP.
100
At an inter-professional level, and as concluded in Paper 2, the greatest impact of
this research and benefit to adopted children and young people, would be to
contribute to the impetus to develop;
‘A co-ordinated, cumulative and progressive programme of research which is
steered and co-produced by adopted students …….to ‘turn up the volume’ of the
voice of adopted young people, whilst broadcasting messages about what helps
them to continue in education.’
101
References
APA Presidential Task Force on Evidence-Based Practice. (2006). "Evidence-
based practice in psychology." The American Psychologist 61.4 271.
Argyris, C. (1989). Strategy implementation: An experience in
learning. Organizational Dynamics, 18(2), 4-16.
Axford, N., Little, M., Morpeth, L., & Weyts, A. (2005). Evaluating children’s
services: Recent conceptual and methodological developments. British Journal of
Social Work, 35(1), 73-88.
Barkham, M., Hardy, G. E., & Mellor-Clark, J. (Eds.). (2010). Developing and
delivering practice-based evidence: A guide for the psychological therapies. City:
John Wiley & Sons.
Becheikh, N., Ziam, S., Idrissi, O., Castonguay, Y., & Landry, R. (2010). How to
improve knowledge transfer strategies and practices in education? Answers from a
systematic literature review. Research in Higher Education Journal, 7, 1.
Best, A., & Holmes, B. (2010). Systems thinking, knowledge and action: towards
better models and methods. Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and
Practice, 6(2), 145-159.
Biesta, G. J. (2010). Why ‘what works’ still won’t work: From evidence-based
education to value-based education. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 29(5),
491-503.
Bristow, D., Carter, L., & Martin, S. (2015). Using evidence to improve policy and
practice: the UK What Works Centres. Contemporary Social Science, 10(2), 126-
137.
Bullock, R. (2006). The dissemination of research findings in children's services:
Issues and strategies. Adoption & Fostering, 30(1), 18-28.
Bullock, R. (2018). Where does research fit in?. Adoption & Fostering, 215-218.
Burnham, S. (2013). Realists or pragmatists? “Reliable evidence” and the role of the
educational psychologist. Educational Psychology in Practice, 29(1), 19-35.
Cabinet Office. (2013). What Works Network. Retrieved from
https://www.gov.uk/whatworks-
102
Network. Accessed on 20th February 2019.
Cabinet Office. (2018). The What Works Network: Five Years on. Retrieved from
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-what-works-network-five-years-on.
Accessed on 20th February 2019.
Department for Education and Skills (DfES). (2010). Adoption Research Initiative.
Retrieved from https://www.adoptionresearchinitiative.org.uk/initiative.html.
Accessed on 20th February 2019.
Department for Education (DfE). (2016). Adoption: A vision for change. London: DfE
Publications.
Department for Education (DfE). (2018). Evaluation of regional adoption agencies-
Inception and Scoping Report. Hadley Centre: University of Bristol.
Dunsmuir, S., Brown, E., Iyadurai, S., & Monsen, J. (2009). Evidence‐based
practice and evaluation: from insight to impact. Educational Psychology in
Practice, 25(1), 53-70.
Dunsmuir, S., & Kratochwill, T. (2013). From research to policy and practice:
Perspectives from the UK and the US on psychologists as agents of change.
Educational & Child Psychology, 30(3), 60–71.
Dutton, R. (1995). Clinical reasoning in physical disabilities. London: Williams and
Wilkins
Frederickson, N. (2002). Evidence-based practice and educational
psychology. Educational and Child Psychology.
Fallon, K., Woods, K., & Rooney, S. (2010). A discussion of the developing role of
educational psychologists within Children’s Services. Educational Psychology in
Practice, 26(1), 1-23.
Fox, M. (2011). Practice-based evidence–overcoming insecure
attachments. Educational Psychology in Practice, 27(4), 325-335.
Greenberg, L. S., & Newman, F. L. (1996). An approach to psychotherapy change
process research: Introduction to the special section. Journal of Consulting and
Clinical Psychology, 64(3), 435.
Hargreaves, D. (1996). Educational research and evidence-based educational
practice–a response to critics. Research Intelligence, 58(November), 12-16.
103
Harmsworth, S., Turpin, S., Rees, A., & Pell, G. (2000). Creating an effective
dissemination strategy: An expanded interactive workbook for educational
development projects. Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE).
Harrison, D. F., & McNeece, C. A. (2001). Disseminating research findings. The
handbook of social work research methods, 501-512.
Health and Care Professions Council. (2015). Standards of proficiency: Practitioner
psychologists.
Hill, M., Lambert, L., & Triseliotis, J. (1989). Achieving adoption with love and
money. London: National Children's Bureau.
HM Government UK (2017). Children & Social Work Act 2017. London: HM
Government.
Kennedy, E. K., & Monsen, J. (2016). Evidence-based practice in educational and
child psychology: Opportunities for practitioner-researchers using problem-based
methodology. Educational & Child Psychology, 33(3), 11-25.
Lane, D. A., & Corrie, S. (2007). The modern scientist-practitioner: A guide to
practice in psychology. Routledge.
Miller, A., & Frederickson, N. (2006). Generalizable findings and idiographic
problems: Struggles and successes for educational psychologists as scientist-
practitioners. The modern scientist practitioner: A guide to practice in psychology.
Monsen, J. J., Brown, E., Akthar, Z., & Khan, S. Y. (2009). An evaluation of a pre‐
training assistant educational psychologist programme. Educational Psychology in
Practice, 25(4), 369-383.
Price, L., Ravenscroft, J., & Nutley, S. (2006). Fostering Voices and fostering
messages. Adoption & Fostering, 30(1), 7.
Ramchandani, P., Joughin, C., & Zwi, M. (2001). Evidence-based child and
adolescent mental health services: oxymoron or brave new dawn?. Child
Psychology and Psychiatry Review, 6(2), 59-64.
Sackett, D. L., Rosenberg, W. M., Gray, J. M., Haynes, R. B., & Richardson, S.
(2007). Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. Clinical orthopaedics
and related research, 455, 3-5.
104
Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. Scott, A., Joughin, C., &
Shaw, M. (Eds.). (2001). Finding the evidence: A gateway to the literature in child
and adolescent mental health. RCPsych Publications.
Shepard, J. (2014). How to achieve more effective services: The evidence
ecosystem.
Retrieved from http://www.vrg.cf.ac.uk/Files/2014_JPS_What_Works.pdf.
Accessed on 20th February 2019.
Thyer, B. A. (2001). What is the role of theory in research on social work
practice?. Journal of Social Work Education, 37(1), 9-25.
Walker, J., & Sofaer, B. (2003). Randomised controlled trials in the evaluation of
non-biomedical therapeutic interventions for pain: The gold standard?. NT
Research, 8(5), 317-329.
Walter, I., Nutley, S., & Davies, H. (2005). What works to promote evidence-based
practice? A cross-sector review. Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate
and Practice, 1(3), 335-364.
Wilson, P. M., Petticrew, M., Calnan, M. W., & Nazareth, I. (2010). Disseminating
research findings: what should researchers do? A systematic scoping review of
conceptual frameworks. Implementation Science, 5(1), 91.
Wren, B. (2015). 'There is no room in Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services
(CAMHS) for providing intervention without an evidence base’: The case
against. Context, (139), 27-31.
105
Appendices
Appendix 1: Journal Submission Guidelines
Adoption and Fostering Submission Guidelines retrieved from
https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/journal/adoption-fostering#submission-guidelines
This Journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics
Only manuscripts of sufficient quality that meet the aims and scope of Adoption & Fostering will be reviewed.
There are no fees payable to submit or publish in this journal.
As part of the submission process you will be required to warrant that you are submitting your original work, that you have the rights in the work, that you are submitting the work for first publication in the Journal and that it is not being considered for publication elsewhere and has not already been published elsewhere, and that you have obtained and can supply all necessary permissions for the reproduction of any copyright works not owned by you.
1. What do we publish? 1.1 Aims & Scope 1.2 Article types 1.3 Writing your paper
2. Editorial policies 2.1 Peer review policy 2.2 Authorship 2.3 Acknowledgements 2.4 Funding 2.5 Declaration of conflicting interests 2.6 Research ethics and patient consent 2.7 Clinical trials 2.8 Reporting guidelines 2.9 Data
3. Publishing policies 3.1 Publication ethics 3.2 Contributor's publishing agreement 3.3 Open access and author archiving
4. Preparing your manuscript 4.1 Formatting 4.2 Artwork, figures and other graphics 4.3 Supplementary material 4.4 Reference style 4.5 English language editing services
5. Submitting your manuscript 5.1 Information required for completing your submission 5.2 Permissions
6. On acceptance and publication 6.1 SAGE Production 6.2 Online First publication 6.3 Access to your published article 6.4 Promoting your article
7. Further information
106
1. What do we publish?
1.1 Aims & Scope
Before submitting your manuscript to Adoption & Fostering, please ensure you have read the Aims & Scope.
1.2 Article Types
Articles may cover any of the following: analyses of policies or the law; accounts of practice innovations and developments; findings of research and evaluations; discussions of issues relevant to fostering and adoption; critical reviews of relevant literature, theories or concepts; case studies.
All research-based articles should include brief accounts of the design, sample characteristics and data-gathering methods. Any article should clearly identify its sources and refer to previous writings where relevant. The preferred length of articles is 5,000-7,000 words excluding references.
Contributions should be both authoritative and readable. Please avoid excessive use of technical terms and explain any key words that may not be familiar to most readers.
Letters to the Editor. Readers' letters should address issues raised by published articles or should report significant new findings that merit rapid dissemination. The decision to publish is made by the Editor, in order to ensure a timely appearance in print.
Book Reviews. A list of up-to-date books for review is available from the journal's Managing Editor.
1.3 Writing your paper
The SAGE Author Gateway has some general advice and on how to get published, plus links to further resources.
1.3.1 Make your article discoverable
When writing up your paper, think about how you can make it discoverable. The title, keywords and abstract are key to ensuring readers find your article through search engines such as Google. For information and guidance on how best to title your article, write your abstract and select your keywords, have a look at this page on the Gateway: How to Help Readers Find Your Article Online.
Back to top
2. Editorial policies
2.1 Peer review policy
Adoption & Fostering operates a strictly anonymous peer review process in which the reviewer’s name is withheld from the author and the author’s name from the reviewer. The reviewer may at their own discretion opt to reveal their name to the author in their review but our standard policy practice is for both identities to remain concealed. Each manuscript is reviewed by at least two referees. All manuscripts are reviewed as rapidly as possible, and an editorial decision is generally reached within 6-8 weeks of submission.
2.2 Authorship
107
All parties who have made a substantive contribution to the article should be listed as authors. Principal authorship, authorship order, and other publication credits should be based on the relative scientific or professional contributions of the individuals involved, regardless of their status. A student is usually listed as principal author on any multiple-authored publication that substantially derives from the student’s dissertation or thesis.
2.3 Acknowledgements
All contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in an Acknowledgements section. Examples of those who might be acknowledged include a person who provided purely technical help, or a department chair who provided only general support.
Please supply any personal acknowledgements separately to the main text to facilitate anonymous peer review.
2.4 Funding
Adoption & Fostering requires all authors to acknowledge their funding in a consistent fashion under a separate heading. Please visit the Funding Acknowledgements page on the SAGE Journal Author Gateway to confirm the format of the acknowledgment text in the event of funding, or state that: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
2.5 Declaration of conflicting interests
Adoption & Fostering encourages authors to include a declaration of any conflicting interests and recommends you review the good practice guidelines on the SAGE Journal Author Gateway.
For guidance on conflict of interest statements, please see the ICMJE recommendations here.
Back to top
3. Publishing Policies
3.1 Publication ethics
SAGE is committed to upholding the integrity of the academic record. We encourage authors to refer to the Committee on Publication Ethics’ International Standards for Authors and view the Publication Ethics page on the SAGE Author Gateway.
3.1.1 Plagiarism
Adoption & Fostering and SAGE take issues of copyright infringement, plagiarism or other breaches of best practice in publication very seriously. We seek to protect the rights of our authors and we always investigate claims of plagiarism or misuse of published articles. Equally, we seek to protect the reputation of the journal against malpractice. Submitted articles may be checked with duplication-checking software. Where an article, for example, is found to have plagiarised other work or included third-party copyright material without permission or with insufficient acknowledgement, or where the authorship of the article is contested, we reserve the right to take action including, but not limited to: publishing an erratum or corrigendum (correction); retracting the article; taking up the matter with the head of department or dean of the author's institution and/or relevant academic bodies or societies; or taking appropriate legal action.
3.1.2 Prior publication
108
If material has been previously published it is not generally acceptable for publication in a SAGE journal. However, there are certain circumstances where previously published material can be considered for publication. Please refer to the guidance on the SAGE Author Gateway or if in doubt, contact the Editor at the address given below.
3.2 Contributor's publishing agreement
Before publication, SAGE requires the author as the rights holder to sign a Journal Contributor’s Publishing Agreement. SAGE’s Journal Contributor’s Publishing Agreement is an exclusive licence agreement which means that the author retains copyright in the work but grants SAGE the sole and exclusive right and licence to publish for the full legal term of copyright. Exceptions may exist where an assignment of copyright is required or preferred by a proprietor other than SAGE. In this case copyright in the work will be assigned from the author to the society. For more information please visit the SAGE Author Gateway.
3.3 Open access and author archiving
Adoption & Fostering offers optional open access publishing via the SAGE Choice programme. For more information please visit the SAGE Choice website. For information on funding body compliance, and depositing your article in repositories, please visit SAGE Publishing Policies on our Journal Author Gateway.
Back to top
4. Preparing your manuscript for submission
4.1 Formatting
The preferred format for your manuscript is Word. LaTeX files are also accepted. Word and (La)Tex templates are available on the Manuscript Submission Guidelines page of our Author Gateway.
4.2 Artwork, figures and other graphics
For guidance on the preparation of illustrations, pictures and graphs in electronic format, please visit SAGE’s Manuscript Submission Guidelines.
Figures supplied in colour will appear in colour online regardless of whether or not these illustrations are reproduced in colour in the printed version. For specifically requested colour reproduction in print, you will receive information regarding the costs from SAGE after receipt of your accepted article.
4.3 Supplementary material
This journal is able to host additional materials online (e.g. datasets, podcasts, videos, images etc) alongside the full-text of the article. For more information please refer to our guidelines on submitting supplementary files.
4.4 Reference style
Adoption & Fostering adheres to the SAGE Harvard reference style. View the SAGE Harvard guidelines to ensure your manuscript conforms to this reference style.
If you use EndNote to manage references, you can download the the SAGE Harvard EndNote output file.
4.5 English language editing services
109
Authors seeking assistance with English language editing, translation, or figure and manuscript formatting to fit the journal’s specifications should consider using SAGE Language Services. Visit SAGE Language Services on our Journal Author Gateway for further information.
Back to top
5. Submitting your manuscript
Manuscripts should be submitted to the editor by e-mail attachment to:
Miranda Davies CoramBAAF Adoption & Fostering Academy 41 Brunswick Square London WC1N 1AZ Telephone: +44 (0)20 7520 0300 Email: [email protected]
5.1 Information required for completing your submission
You will be asked to provide contact details and academic affiliations for all co-authors via the submission system and identify who is to be the corresponding author. These details must match what appears on your manuscript. At this stage please ensure you have included all the required statements and declarations and uploaded any additional supplementary files (including reporting guidelines where relevant).
5.2 Permissions
Please also ensure that you have obtained any necessary permission from copyright holders for reproducing any illustrations, tables, figures or lengthy quotations previously published elsewhere. For further information including guidance on fair dealing for criticism and review, please see the Copyright and Permissions page on the SAGE Author Gateway.
Back to top
6. On acceptance and publication
6.1 SAGE Production
Your SAGE Production Editor will keep you informed as to your article’s progress throughout the production process. Proofs will be sent by PDF to the corresponding author and should be returned promptly. Authors are reminded to check their proofs carefully to confirm that all author information, including names, affiliations, sequence and contact details are correct, and that Funding and Conflict of Interest statements, if any, are accurate. Please note that if there are any changes to the author list at this stage all authors will be required to complete and sign a form authorising the change.
6.2 Online First publication
Online First allows final articles (completed and approved articles awaiting assignment to a future issue) to be published online prior to their inclusion in a journal issue, which significantly reduces the lead time between submission and publication. Visit the SAGE Journals help page for more details, including how to cite Online First articles.
6.3 Access to your published article
SAGE provides authors with online access to their final article.
110
6.4 Promoting your article
Publication is not the end of the process! You can help disseminate your paper and ensure it is as widely read and cited as possible. The SAGE Author Gateway has numerous resources to help you promote your work. Visit the Promote Your Article page on the Gateway for tips and advice. In addition, SAGE is partnered with Kudos, a free service that allows authors to explain, enrich, share, and measure the impact of their article. Find out how to maximise your article’s impact with Kudos.
Back to top
7. Further information
Any correspondence, queries or additional requests for information on the manuscript submission process should be sent to the Adoption & Fostering editorial office as follows:
Editor, Miranda Davies, at [email protected].
111
Appendix 2: Review framework for qualitative evaluation/ investigation research
D.Ed.Ch.Psychol. 2017 Author(s):
Title:
Journal Reference:
Criterion Score R1 R2 Agree %
R1 R2 Agree %
Comment
Appropriateness of the research design e.g. rationale vis-à-vis aims, links to previous approaches, limitations
1 0
Clear sampling rationale e.g. description, justification; attrition evaluated
1 0
Well executed data collection e.g. clear details of who, what, how; effect of methods on data quality
1 0
Analysis close to the data, e.g. researcher can evaluate fit between categories/ themes and data.
2 1 0
Evidence of explicit reflexivity e.g. impact of researcher, limitations, data validation (e.g. inter-coder validation), researcher philosophy/ stance evaluated.
2 1 0
Comprehensiveness of documentation e.g. schedules, transcripts, thematic maps, paper trail for external audit
1 0
112
Negative case analysis, e.g. e.g. contrasts/ contradictions/ outliers within data; categories/ themes as dimensional; diversity of perspectives.
1 0
Clarity and coherence of the reporting e.g. clear structure, clear account linked to aims, key points highlighted
1 0
Evidence of researcher-participant negotiation of meanings, e.g. member checking, empower participants.
1 0
Emergent theory related to the problem, e.g. abstraction from categories/ themes to model/ explanation.
1 0
Valid and transferable conclusions e.g. contextualised findings; limitations of scope identified.
1 0
Evidence of attention to ethical issues e.g. presentation, sensitivity, minimising harm, feedback
1 0
Total Max 14 Mean % agree
Mean % agree
References
Spencer, L., Ritchie, J., Lewis, J. & Dillon, L. (2003). Quality in Qualitative Evaluation: a
framework for assessing research evidence. London: Strategy Unit (Cabinet Office).
Henwood, K.L., and Pidgeon, N.F. (1992). Qualitative research and psychological theorising,
British Journal of Psychology, 83(1), 97-111.
Woods, K., Bond, C., Humphrey, N., Symes, W., & Green, L. (2011). Systematic Review of Solution Focused Brief Therapy (SFBT) with children and families. (DfE Research Report RR179). Retrieved on 18.9.14 from https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationDetail/Page1/DFE
113
Appendix 3: Review framework for quantitative evaluation research
D.Ed.Ch.Psychol. 2017 Author(s):
Title:
Journal Reference:
Criterion Score R1 R2 Agree %
R1 R2 Agree %
Comments
Use of a randomised group design
1 0
Focus on a specific, well-defined disorder or problem
1 0
Comparison with treatment-as-usual, placebo, or less preferably, standard control
1 0
Use of manuals/ protocol/ training
1 0
Fidelity checking procedure/ supervision of intervention
1 0
Sample large enough to detect effect (from Cohen, 1992)
1 0
Use of outcome measure(s) that has demonstrably good reliability and validity (2 points if more than one measure used).
2 1 0
Total Max 8 Mean % agree
Mean % agree
114
References
American Psychological Association (APA) (2006). Evidence Based Practice in Psychology,
American Psychologist, May-June, 271-285.
Woods, K., Bond, C., Humphrey, N., Symes, W., & Green, L. (2011). Systematic Review of
Solution Focused Brief Therapy (SFBT) with children and families. (DfE Research Report
RR179). Retrieved on 18.9.14 from
https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationDetail/Page1/DFE-RR179
115
Appendix 4: Ethical Approval
Environment, Education and Development School Panel PGR School for Environment, Education and Development Humanities Bridgeford Street 1.17
The University of Manchester Manchester M13 9PL Email: [email protected]
Ref: 2017-2620-4125
31/10/2017
Dear Ms Andrea Stother, , Prof Kevin Woods
Study Title: Support for adopted children to remain in education
Environment, Education and Development School Panel PGR
I write to thank you for submitting the final version of your documents for your project to the Committee
on 30/10/2017 17:22 . I am pleased to confirm a favourable
ethical opinion for the above research on the basis described in the application form and supporting
documentation as submitted and approved by the Committee.
Please see below for a table of the titles, version numbers and dates of all the final approved documents
for your project:
Document Type File Name Date Version
Consent Form Consent Form
Additional docs Dear Colleague
Additional docs Draft Interview Schedule
Additional docs Distress Policy
Additional docs Ethics Revisions- word
Additional docs Ethics Revisions2
Participant Information Sheet Participant IS5
Additional docs Ethics revisions3
This approval is effective for a period of five years and is on delegated authority of the University
Research Ethics Committee (UREC) however please note that it is
only valid for the specifications of the research project as outlined in the approved documentation set. If
the project continues beyond the 5 year period or if you wish to
propose any changes to the methodology or any other specifics within the project an application to seek
an amendment must be submitted for review. Failure to do so
could invalidate the insurance and constitute research misconduct.
You are reminded that, in accordance with University policy, any data carrying personal identifiers must
be encrypted when not held on a secure university computer or
kept securely as a hard copy in a location which is accessible only to those involved with the research.
For those undertaking research requiring a DBS Certificate: As you have now completed your ethical
application if required a colleague at the University of Manchester
will be in touch for you to undertake a DBS check. Please note that you do not have DBS approval until
you have received a DBS Certificate completed by the
University of Manchester, or you are an MA Teach First student who holds a DBS certificate for your
current teaching role.
Reporting Requirements:
You are required to report to us the following:
1. Amendments
2. Breaches and adverse events
3. Notification of progress/end of the study (if applicable)
We wish you every success with the research.
116
Yours sincerely,
Page 1 of 2
Dr Sarah Marie Hall
Environment, Education and Development School Panel PGR
117
Appendix 5: Consent Form
Consent Form
Adopted Young People identify positive experiences that have supported
them
to continue with their education post 16
and participate in planning how these can be shared to support others.
If you are happy to take part in this research please complete and sign this form.
Please add your initials after each statement
1. I confirm that I have read the participant information sheet and have had the
chance to think about and discuss the information and have had any questions
answered.
2. I understand that I am taking part voluntarily and that I am free to withdraw
at any time without giving a reason.
3. I understand that my data will remain confidential.
4. I understand that the interviews will be audio-recorded.
5. I agree to the use of anonymous quotes.
6. I agree to my anonymous data being retained for further research.
I agree to take part in the research
Name of Young Person
Date Signature
Name of Researcher
Date Signature
This Project Has Been Approved by the University of Manchester’s Research Ethics
Committee [UREC reference number 2017-2620-4125 ]
118
Appendix 6: Participant Information Sheet
Participant Information Sheet
Adopted Young People identify positive experiences that have supported
them
to continue with their education post 16
and participate in planning how these can be shared to support others.
You are being invited to take part in a study; I am carrying out the research as part
of my university course and will use the information that you provide to help me to
write my thesis. The aim of this study is to find out, from adopted young people: -
• the things which have helped you to stay in education at school,
college or university
• your ideas about what school staff should be told, and
• how you think school staff should be told in order to help other adopted
children who are still at school.
I have been looking for research about how to support adopted children and young
people whilst they are at secondary school and not found much. I hope that the
things you tell me can be made into some useful resources that schools can use to
help other adopted children.
It is important for you to understand why the research is being done and what it will
involve. Please take the time to read this sheet carefully and talk to other people
about it if you want to. Please ask if there is anything that is not clear or if you would
like more information. Take time to decide if you want to take part
Who will carry out the research?
My name is Andi Stother. I am a Trainee Educational Psychologist at the University
of Manchester. I have done lots of different jobs before doing this course. I used to
be a teacher, I have worked in youth clubs, run groups for parents and have had
meetings with some adopted children and the people who support them. I am
interested in Education and Adoption and I would like to know why some adopted
children do well at school, college and university. I work in schools, in offices and at
the university. When I am in university, this is the name of the building where I work
with the university tutors: -
School of Environment, Education and Development (SEED),
Ellen Wilkinson Building,
Oxford Road,
119
Manchester,
M13 9PL.
Why have I been chosen?
I am sending you this information because you have been adopted and have gone
onto post 16 education. I am hoping to carry out individual interviews with between
6 and 8 young people.
What will I be asked to do if I agree to take part?
If you want to take part that would be great and I would like to do a one to one
interview with you. I can meet you at your school, college, university, place of work
or another public place. I am interested in your knowledge, experience and ideas. I
consider you to be an expert and want to learn from you. There are no right or
wrong answers and the interview is not designed to make you feel uncomfortable in
any way. If you would like your parent/ carer to be with you that is absolutely fine. If
you do feel uncomfortable, the interview can be stopped at any time.
Do I have to take part?
It is up to you to decide if you want to take part, or not. If you do decide to take part
you will be given this information sheet to keep and be asked to sign a consent
form.
Are there any advantages in taking part in the research?
I know that young people are busy and that you have lots of things to do with your
time. If you choose to take part in the research I will give you a £25 Amazon
Voucher as a ‘Thank You’ for your time. This will be sent to you through the post
within 4 weeks of the interview date. Another advantage of taking part in this
research is that your knowledge and experience as an adopted young person may
be able to help schools to support other adopted children and young people to make
the most of their education.
How long will it take?
It depends on how much you have to say! I am planning that the interviews will last
about an hour.
What happens to the data collected?
The interview will be recorded and then the words that we both said will be written
down by a professional transcriber. I will look for patterns and themes in the
interview that I have with you and then see if there are any things that are similar or
different across all the interviews and write about these. Quotes from the interviews
120
will be used as part of my assignment but I will not include who said what. My
anonymised assignment may be published.
How is can I be sure that my information will remain confidential?
In line with Manchester University’s policy, the recording of our interview and any
other data collected will be saved on an encrypted data stick and stored securely. It
will be destroyed five years after I complete my training.
Who has reviewed the research project?
The project has been reviewed by my supervisor at the University of Manchester.
What if something goes wrong or you want more information?
Please contact me using the following email:
[email protected] or telephone me on 07932784216.
Alternatively, you can contact my supervisor:
Professor Kevin Woods
Academic and Professional Tutor, Doctorate in Educational and Child Psychology.
School of Environment, Education and Development (SEED),
Ellen Wilkinson Building,
The University of Manchester,
Oxford Road,
Manchester,
M13 9PL.
Tel: 07763 461813
What if I want to make a complaint?
If you have a minor complaint then you need to contact me or my supervisor to
begin with and we will talk about it.
If you are not happy and wish to make a formal complaint, please contact the
Research Governance and Integrity Manager, Research Office, Christie Building,
University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, by emailing:
[email protected] or by telephoning 0161 275 2674 or 275
2046.
This Project Has Been Approved by the University of Manchester’s Research Ethics
Committee (UREC reference number 2017-2620-4125).
121
Appendix 7: Distress Policy
Distress Policy
Adopted Young People identify positive experiences that have supported
them
to continue with their education post 16
and participate in planning how these can be shared to support others.
Who will be carrying out the interviews?
Interviews will be carried out on a 1-2-1 basis by Andi Stother, Trainee Educational
Psychologist at the University of Manchester. I will be supported by Professor Kevin
Woods, Dr Sarah McIntosh (One Education) and Dr Lucy Hatton (North Yorkshire
County Council) who are HCPC registered psychologists. I have over 20 years of
experience of working with children and young people as a teacher, children’s
centre manager and early intervention manager within a local authority.
Where will the interviews take place and who will be aware of the interviews?
Participants may be recruited through Educational Psychology Services, Local
Authority Adoption Teams, the Adoption Psychology Service in Manchester, the
University of Manchester and local adoption support services e.g. PAC. The
member of staff who has helped me to identify the young person (the ‘Recruiter’) will
be aware of when and where the interview is taking place. I will speak to them
before and after the interview to ensure that the young person is supported in every
way possible through the process.
Interviews will take place in the young person’s school, college, university, place of
work or home. I will ensure that an adult who knows the young person well (the
‘Identified Adult’ is aware that the interview is taking place and is present in the
building to speak to the young person once our interview is finished.
How will I plan for the possibility that young people may get distressed in the
interviews?
At the beginning of the interview, I will put the young person at ease and remind
them of the Participation Information Sheet and my research and the fact that the
Recruiter suggested that they would be a good person to speak to. I will explain that
the questions are not designed to be extremely personal or upsetting but that
sometimes people feel upset or uncomfortable when recalling past experiences. I
will reassure the young person that we can stop at any time and will only continue if
they feel comfortable. We will also agree what they should do if they feel the need
to leave the room e.g. go and sit in a particular place or go and speak to the
Identified Adult who knows them well and is in the building.
122
Throughout the interview, I will be sensitive to the young person’s feelings by
listening carefully to their responses, making eye-contact (which will be easier as
the interview will be audio-recorded and I do not need to make notes) and observing
their body language. If the young person appears distressed about a particular
issue I will alter the questioning and miss questions if appropriate. I will reassure
them and check that they feel they want to continue the interview.
At the end of the interview I will thank the young person. If they got distressed
during the process, I will ensure that they feel calmer and less upset once the
interview has finished. I will check with the young person that they are ok for us to
speak together to the Identified Adult in the building about any issues that they were
distressed about and any areas of additional support required that were raised by
the interview. If they appear reluctant, I will explain that I am trying to get them the
support they need and ask them if they are happy for me to speak to the Recruiter
or a member of their family. I will work in partnership with either of these people to
help the young person get some support. If the young person does not consent I
will respect their wishes, however, I will take advice from my HCPC registered
supervisors and, if appropriate, follow the Safeguarding Procedures of the relevant
organisation.
What if something goes wrong or you want more information?
Please contact me using the following email:
[email protected] or telephone me on 07932784216.
Alternatively, you can contact my supervisor:
Professor Kevin Woods
Academic and Professional Tutor, Doctorate in Educational and Child Psychology.
School of Environment, Education and Development (SEED),
Ellen Wilkinson Building,
The University of Manchester,
Oxford Road,
Manchester,
M13 9PL.
Tel: 07763 461813
What if I want to make a complaint?
If you have a minor complaint then you need to contact me or my supervisor to
begin with and we will talk about it.
If you are not happy and wish to make a formal complaint, please contact the
Research Governance and Integrity Manager, Research Office, Christie Building,
University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, by emailing:
[email protected] or by telephoning 0161 275 2674 or 275
2046.
This Project Has Been Approved by the University of Manchester’s Research Ethics
Committee (UREC reference number 2017-2620-4125).
123
Appendix 8: Interview schedule
Introduction
Thanks for talking to me today, I’m really interested in your experiences. I’m going
to ask you some questions and the interview will probably take about an hour. If
there is anything that I ask, that you do not want to talk about; don’t worry, just tell
me and we will move on. First, I need to understand what you are doing now. Then
I’ll ask you some questions about experiences that helped/ did not help you to get
here.
1 Briefly, tell me about what’s happened for you in school and education that has lead you to what you are studying at the moment. Maybe draw a map
2 How long have you lived with your adoptive family? Who lives with you in your family home at the moment?
RQ1: What helps adopted young people to remain in education?
3 What does it mean to you to be successful in education (school/ college/ university/ placement)? PROMPT- what does it mean academically? What does it mean socially?
4 Can you tell me about anything that HELPED you to get to where you are now (at school/college/ work placement university)? PROMPT- this could be people- what did they say and do? It could be systems- how did that help? Was there anything that school did? Did you have any workers who helped you? Who else?
5 What could have helped you at the time? Is there anything that you wish had happened to help you, that didn’t? PROMPT- was there anything that school staff could have done that would have helped you even more? Was there anything that they did that you wish they hadn’t?
6 Do you think that you, as an adopted child, had the same needs in school as everyone else? PROMPT- was there anything different that you needed? Or did not need?
RQ2: What should school staff be told about what helps and how should they be told?
7 If you were a teacher, what would you put in place for adopted children in your school? PROMPT Can you tell me about the main things that school staff should know and do to support children who have been adopted to continue in education? Think about yourself, think about adopted children in general
124
Appendix 9: Six stages of thematic analysis
Retrieved from: https://jvrafricagroup.co.za/six-simple-steps-to-conduct-a-thematic-
analysis/
Braun and Clarke’s Six Simple Steps
The six steps prescribed by Braun and Clarke (2006) to carry out a thematic analysis
are guidelines and should not be used as prescriptive, linear, and inflexible rules when
analysing data. They should rather be used in relation to the research question and the
available data.
The six steps are as follows:
1. Familiarising yourself with your data
This step requires the researcher to be fully immersed and actively engaged in
the data by firstly transcribing the interactions and then reading (and re-
reading) the transcripts and/or listening to the recordings. Initial ideas should
be noted down. It is important that the researcher has a comprehensive
understanding of the content of the interaction and has familiarised him-
/herself with all aspects of the data. This step provides the foundation for the
subsequent analysis.
2. Generating initial codes
Once familiar with the data, the researcher must then start identifying
preliminary codes, which are the features of the data that appear interesting
and meaningful. These codes are more numerous and specific than themes, but
provide an indication of the context of the conversation.
3. Searching for themes
The third step in the process is the start of the interpretive analysis of the
collated codes. Relevant data extracts are sorted (combined or split) according
to overarching themes. The researcher’s thought process should allude to the
relationship between codes, subthemes, and themes.
125
4. Reviewing themes
A deeper review of identified themes follows where the researcher needs to
question whether to combine, refine, separate, or discard initial themes. Data
within themes should cohere together meaningfully, while there should be
clear and identifiable distinctions between themes. This is usually done over
two phases, where the themes need to be checked in relation to the coded
extracts (phase 1), and then for the overall data set (phase 2). A thematic ‘map’
can be generated from this step.
5. Defining and naming themes
This step involves ‘refining and defining’ the themes and potential subthemes
within the data. Ongoing analysis is required to further enhance the identified
themes. The researcher needs to provide theme names and clear working
definitions that capture the essence of each theme in a concise and punchy
manner. At this point, a unified story of the data needs to emerge from the
themes.
6. Producing the report
Finally, the researcher needs to transform his/her analysis into an
interpretable piece of writing by using vivid and compelling extract examples
that relate to the themes, research question, and literature. The report must
relay the results of the analysis in a way that convinces the reader of the merit
and validity of the analysis. It must go beyond a mere description of the themes
and portray an analysis supported with empirical evidence that addresses the
research question.
126
Appendix 10: Example of a coded transcript
127
Appendix 11: Thematic Analysis: Photographic Evidence
Thematic synthesis
1- Units of meaning written on to post-it notes with associated codes
2- Example of initial grouping of codes within a theme
128
3- Example of revised grouping of codes within a theme
4- Example of a simplified thematic map for a theme
129
5- Example of a simplified thematic map showing how the themes for a research
question fit together
130
Appendix 12: References for the appendices
American Psychological Association (APA) (2006). Evidence Based Practice in
Psychology, American Psychologist, May-June, 271-285.
Henwood, K.L., and Pidgeon, N.F. (1992). Qualitative research and psychological
theorising, British Journal of Psychology, 83(1), 97-111.
Spencer, L., Ritchie, J., Lewis, J. & Dillon, L. (2003). Quality in Qualitative
Evaluation: a framework for assessing research evidence. London: Strategy Unit
(Cabinet Office).
Woods, K., Bond, C., Humphrey, N., Symes, W., & Green, L. (2011). Systematic Review of Solution Focused Brief Therapy (SFBT) with children and families. (DfE Research Report RR179). Retrieved on 18.9.14 from https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationDetail/Page1/DFE
Woods, K., Bond, C., Humphrey, N., Symes, W., & Green, L. (2011). Systematic
Review of Solution Focused Brief Therapy (SFBT) with children and families. (DfE
Research Report RR179). Retrieved on 18.9.14 from
https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationDetail/Page1/DFE-
RR179