SCHOOL WAITING LISTS PROGRAM PROPOSAL RESEARCH

SCHOOL WAITING LISTS PROGRAM PROPOSAL RESEARCH

This literature review aims to identify successful approaches and models of programs for young people who are disconnected from

the community and on school enrolment waiting lists. A community partnership between The Pavilion School, HWLLEN, Kildonan

Uniting Care, City of Whittlesea and other Youth Connections providers (eg. Mission Australia, Salvation Army Crossroads, NMIT)

is essential for the success of a pilot program. This co-ordinated approach will further assist young people who have difficulty with

the transition to school, and aims to result in an increase of school retention and reconnection within the community. The research

seeks to obtain appropriate models of programs and the supports necessary for successful transitions of young people re-engaging

in education.

Throughout 2010 and the first term of 2011, Kildonan Uniting Care’s Youth Connections program had 26 participants on school

waiting lists. Evidence from Kildonan Uniting Care’s Youth Connections (Whittlesea region) program in 2010, and throughout the

first quarter in 2011 shows the most common barriers of young people’s disengagement from education as: bullying, inadequate

family support, suspected or diagnosed mental health, behavioural (including at-risk) problems, low self esteem, and low literacy

and/or numeracy (see Appendix 1 and 2 ‘Barriers Summary’). The program is regarded as successful and is proven by the

progressive* and final* outcomes of all participants in the program in 2010, and is as follows:

Type 1’s (@risk in school)– Registered Target 19, Actual 16, Program Target 0, Program Actual 3, Final Target 12, Final

Actual 11.

Type 2A’s(<3mths out of school) – Reg. Target 27, Actual 35, Program Target 9, Program Actual 8, Final Target 9, Final

Actual 16

Type 2B’s (>3mths out of school) – Reg. Target 8, Actual 8, Program Target 3, Program Actual 2, Final Target 1, Final

Actual 3.

__________________________________________________________________________________

* Progressive Outcomes = AOD, Mental Health, Anger Mgmt, Counselling, Activities, Housing/Health/Nutrition, Parenting, Sport/Rec, Strengths/Talents, Mentoring,

Learning/Connection to community/culture/ family, Career Development/Life Skills, Training/Programs.

* Final Outcomes= 13-26 weeks re-engaged/sustained accredited education/training, Reduced risk behaviour.

1Created by Eliana Deur, Youth Connections Caseworker at Kildonan Uniting Care 20/5/2011

The ‘Enrolment Waiting Lists for Youth Connections clients’ table (Appendix 3) solidifies the identification and thus the need for

programs to assist young people who are disconnected from work or school. The ages of these young people ranged from 13-18

years, with an average age of 15.65 years old. The highest number of days a young person waited to enrol or commence at a

school/TAFE was 176 days at NMIT. The Pavilion School had the second highest number of days where one participant waited 133

days to commence. The waiting period with the highest average was recorded at 89.6 days at The Pavilion School, compared to a

total average waiting period of 58.461days. These findings reveal a gap that must be addressed for Youth Connections clients who

are waiting to commence school. Regarding this and the additional findings outlined below, the research suggests that Youth

Connections clients and Pavilion clients would benefit from youth programs whilst waiting to commence school. Suggestions and

examples of successful transition program models are listed below in the literature review (Deur, 2009) and final conclusions of this

research document.

A Victorian student attendance and truancy reduction resource kit, ‘It’s not ok to be away’ (DEECD 2006) is an intervention plan for

schools and the wider community. It suggests that high risk students who struggle with attendance should be managed with the

following strategies: case management approaches, student support groups, student centred programs (individual learning plans),

programs (inside and outside of school), and planning for transition. These approaches best work when including a non-punitive

approach to students with challenging behaviours.

‘Moving Fwd’ (Hume City Council) is a free 8 week personal development and work readiness program for young people not

attending school or starting to look for work. All candidates are referred, and then interviewed to ensure their eligibility. Spaces are

limited to 10 young people (aged 13 – 18 years) per program and are for those who are ready (as opposed to those who prefer to

do nothing). It is situated in Craigieburn, Broadmeadows and Sunbury. The sessions are run every Wednesday, Thursday and

Friday from 10am – 2pm. It is funded by Salvation Army Crossroads and Hume City Council Youth Services, supported by Hume

Whittlesea LLEN and Victoria Police. Moving FWD is targeted for young people who have disengaged from school and would

benefit from a program developed to not only tackle practical job skills and education pathways, but to also address personal

development, confidence issues, resilience tools, living skills and team dynamics. A majority of participants are severely


disengaged, with low literacy skills. On interviewing the Project Officer further information was gathered. Session plans for a day

can consist of having guest speakers from Centrelink, Youth Law, AOD officer (considered Survival Strategy Groups), Boxing/self

defence, and visit to the Trade Expo. Participants have lunch with speakers to allow opportunity for further discussions. Another

example includes a day of visiting Youth Projects (JSP, training facility, YNot and Youth Connections), Living Skills (perceptions of

others, marketing self), Interviews/resumes, Talking to McDonalds manager (find benefits of employment), Attending Headspace

(raising awareness and recognising mental health concerns of others, dealing with anger). Each day participants have a budget,

and make their own lunch.

The challenges of the Moving FWD program are: not enough places for alternative schools in Hume, and participants aged 13/14

years are limited due to age requirements of appropriate alternative schooling options. Short days retain interest and deter

boredom, and groupwork rather than individual work are both regarded as a determining factor to success. Creating community

links and opportunities is highly regarded, ‘It’s about empowering them, but also trying to put them in the path of people and places’

(Virginia – Project Officer). On completion of the program each person is given a file with lists and details of contacts they have

met. Success of the program is evident in the Broadmeadows area with 86% of the young people on that program securing places

on VCAL/further education courses. Attendance in Sunbury was 90%, with 70% engaged into a course or other on completion of

program. Outcomes are sustainable in education, and each participant on completion has links to such places as Kangan Institute,

Brunswick Youth Services, with the assurance of a JSA or Youth Connections case manager. A suggested similar program to

Moving Forward is the Wheels program in Prahran, which is run as an interim school.

A Victorian activity based group educational program, REV (Return to Education and/or Vocation Program) is an Art and Craft,

Sport and Leisure, Work Education, and Community Access program. REV targets 14-17 year olds who are CAMHS clients, and

not attending school or at risk of exclusion from the school system. The program aims to identify educational and/or vocational

options, provides work experience, and develops practical skills, whilst assisting with the adjustment and transition of young people

into education and vocational settings. An interview was conducted with the program manager, and the following criteria and

information resulted: The young person must be a CAMHS client who is disengaged from school/with a case-manager (ie. those


with mental health problems). Each candidate is interviewed beforehand and asked to commit, this is very important. The group

aspect is emphasised, especially to anxiety sufferers prior to commencement, and findings have revealed there is such power in a

program doing groupwork. The program targets and capitalises on young people contemplating change to get them on a change

cycle. The program is activities based and is held with a maximum of 8 participants per group, for 3 days/ week for one term of 8

weeks. The session plans consist of a whole lot of art (ie. therapeutic), cooking, adolescent programs (psych ed), work readiness

for 4 weeks, vocational education (1 ½ hrs) then 4 weeks work experience (NB. not available for 14 year olds). The program is a

mix of personal, social and vocational skills learning, and is specifically not academic based. The program identifies that the current

school is not for the young person so a place is found in an appropriate/new school. In addition the program offers ongoing

outreach for those not ready after 8 weeks, then once ready, placed in a new school. REV also monitors clients during and post

completion of the program.

A report from Youth Pathways Action Plan Taskforce 2001 has found that young people at risk of becoming disconnected must

have access to an affordable range of broader cultural, recreational, sporting and community service activities. Such community

based youth development programs promote participation in the community and transition to independence. Especially where

young people fail to connect with education, ‘community involvement programs can provide rich and varied learning opportunities…

and develop and practise leadership skills’ (YPAPT, 2001). A variety of skills such as planning, teamwork and communication, with

the potential to enable learning in non-threatening environments are provided through sporting and cultural activities. Involvement

in developing projects and mere participation in these activities creates opportunities for young people to also develop literacy,

numeracy, and communication. A UK Changemakers program highlighted the value of planning and delivery of community service

activities (eg Green Corps), which in turn successfully involved young people in the life of their community. Schools, community

agencies, cultural, recreational and sporting body partnerships must create real opportunities for young people’s participation in

their programs for effective transitions.

According to Fernandes and Gabe (2009) disconnected youth (aged 14-24) who are detached from work, school, family and/or

social networks, may be ineffective in the transition to adulthood, and have ‘difficulty gaining the skills and knowledge for self

sufficiency’ (Fernandes&Gabe,2009, 6). Consequently, these youth lack access to health, disability, housing and financial 4

Created by Eliana Deur, Youth Connections Caseworker at Kildonan Uniting Care 20/5/2011

assistance, social networks, and limit the potential for wage increase and employability. It is suggested that particular focus for

interventions address multiple aspects of youth’s circumstances and provide family, community, schools, and job training

programs. School and job training programs assist youth to reengage by offering ‘counselling, child care, transportation, assistance

with attaining high school diploma, and preparation for the workforce’ (Fernandes, Gabe,2009,51). The Government Accountability

Office (GAO) in 2008 reviewed federally funded programs and reported elements which successfully re-engage youth. The

successful programs had ‘effective staff and leadership; holistic approaches to multiple and individual needs; design of the

programs, such as experiential learning opportunities and selfpaced curricula; and a focus on developing youth’s leadership

skills’(Fernandes, Gabe,2009,8). The challenges faced were reported as ‘the complex life circumstances of the youth, including

learning disabilities, violence in their communities, and lack of adequate transportation; gaps in services, such as housing and

mental health services; funding constraints; and managing federal grants with different reporting requirements’

(Fernandes,Gabe,2009,9).

After the introduction of a bill (110th Congress), the Higher Education Act meant disconnected youth (eg.underrepresented in

postsecondary education) became eligible for programs such as TRIO to provide college preparation for low income students. The

Federal TRIO Programs (TRIO) are outreach and student services programs designed to identify and provide services for

individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds. TRIO includes eight programs targeted to serve and assist low-income individuals,

first-generation college students, and individuals with disabilities to progress through the academic pipeline from middle school’

(Fernandes,Gabe,2009,9).

Roth and Brooks-Gunn researched specific aspects of positive youth development programs, by empirically evaluating 48 youth

programs. This research was developed from a recent opinion poll which found over half of the 14-17 year olds wanted after-

school activities ‘with enriching experiences that broaden their perspectives, improve their socialization, and enhance their skills’

(Roth, Brooks-Gunn,2003,176) in their community. The definition of youth development programs within this literature are, ‘places

where youths’ horizons can be expanded by providing them with opportunities they might not otherwise have, such as visiting a

museum or engaging in a recreational activity requiring equipment not readily available’ (Roth, Brooks-Gunn, 2003,176). Youth


Development is defined as improving ‘at least one context (e.g., family, school, or community) through parent activities (e.g.,

parenting classes), teacher training, modifying school climate or structure, or changing community attitudes or norms’(Roth,

Brooks-Gunn,2003,176).

Specific program goals promoting positive youth development were identified by 5 key areas of competence, confidence,

connections, character and caring. Outcomes reported in the evaluations show that considerably more youth development

programs succeeded in enhancing participants’ competency than did the youth programs. The evaluation outcomes find youth

development programs more successful at improving adolescents’ confidence and connections, but little difference in their success

at promoting character. Thus, youth development programs were more successful in improving participants’ competency,

confidence, and connections’ (Roth, Brooks-Gunn, 2003,179).

‘It was found that activities that capture the youth development philosophy includes, the opportunity for adolescents to build skills,

engage in real and challenging activities, and broaden their horizons (eg. community service activities with multiple opportunities).

An additional feature included increasing developmental supports, such as family, school, or community. Limited opportunities

were evident in academic instruction or homework (school related) skills. Competency based programs found to build skills were

those with building curriculum, life skills, direct academic instruction, homework help or community service. Employment, leadership

opportunities (such as tutoring or peer mediation), and community service were activities that provided youth with the opportunity to

engage in an authentic, real, and challenging activity’ (Roth, Brooks-Gunn, 2003,170-179).

‘It is suggested by the literature, youth development programs are those with youth-centered, knowledge-centered, and care-

centered goals, atmosphere, and activities. Youth Development requirements for programs would have to: (a) hold broad

developmental goals, striving to promote their adolescent participants’ competence, confidence, connections, character, and

caring; (b) last for at least a school year to create a supportive, empowering atmosphere in which youth are expected to behave in

prosocial ways and are recognized for their contributions; and (c) consist of activities that afford youth the opportunity to build their

skills, engage in authentic activities, and broaden their worlds. Only two programs, Quantum Opportunities Program and Woodrock


Youth Development Program, meet this most stringent definition of a youth development program’. (Roth, Brooks-Gunn, 2003,170-

179)

‘Counter to the promise of youth development to run programs in real and challenging way, a majority of programs fostered skill-

building opportunities. This was achieved through a curriculum, or series of lessons on problem-solving, decision-making, or social

skills, rather than actual experiences (such as community service, employment). Suggestions from the research considers youth

development programs consisting of those with field trips, cultural activities, community service, employment opportunities,

recreation, and mentors to expand participants’ horizons by exposing them to new people, places, and situations’. (Roth, Brooks-

Gunn, 2003,170-179)

‘The literature identified 17 programs that met all, or more, of their goals and reviewed their ratings on the five features of program

atmosphere (supportive, empowering, expecting, rewarding, and duration) and four features of program activities (build skills,

authentic activities, broaden horizons, and other contexts). Conclusions from this found that a variety of programmatic approaches

can promote positive youth development. Not surprisingly, programs with more modest goals were generally more likely to achieve

success. Critical elements of empirically successful youth development programs involved looking more closely at those programs

with broader goals for youth. Twenty-one of the programs in the database endeavoured and succeeded in altering at least three of

the areas of positive youth development, and thus can be considered successful youth development programs. The other 27

programs should more aptly be called simply successful youth programs’ (Roth, Brooks-Gunn, 2003,170-179).

‘The findings suggest that the atmosphere, rather than the opportunities provided by program activities, differentiates successful

youth development programs from other successful programs for youth. In particular, youth development programs provide youth

with a supportive and empowering environment. The findings also support the assertion that youth development programs aim not

only to improve youth, but to enhance their experiences in other contexts as well. Youth development programs see their mission

as more than building youths’ specific competencies; they hold broader developmental goals. Program atmosphere also seems to

be important. Thus, youth development programs seek to enhance not only adolescents’ skills, but also their confidence in


themselves and their future, their character, and their connections to other people and institutions by creating environments, both at

and away from the program, where youth can feel supported and empowered’. (Roth, Brooks-Gunn, 2003,170-179)

The Woodrock Youth Development Project (YDP) is an intervention and support program which aims to reduce alcohol use,

tobacco, and other drugs of at risk young people, while improving family, school, community supports. It also offers training in drug

resistance, while developing living and interpersonal skills. The two-year evaluation reports program outcomes for both the 1995

school year and for the following school year (1996). Data was obtained over 2 years, from the Kensington community in

Philadelphia (which is multi cultural, impoverished and prevalent with drug trafficking and consumption). These minority students

were aged 6-14 years, 60% were on welfare support, and 15% score above the national average in reading norms. Samples of

718 students were compiled for the research, with 244 in the treatment/activity group, and 474 in the comparison/control group.

The outcomes were measured through self-reported substance abuse, school attendance, and aggression and race relations

(HFRP, 2011).

The school based program aims to improve problem solving and coping skills, raising awareness of substance abuse, and

improving self-perception via academic achievement and fostering cultural pride. It is based on the Problem Behavior Theory of

Jessor and Jessor and Evan's Social Inoculation Theory of drug prevention programs. The program seeks to develop life skills and

drug-use resistance through the following components: (1) direct education via human-relations and life-skills seminars, (2) a

system of psychosocial supports including peer mentoring, (3) a program of structured extracurricular activities, and (4) family and

community supports including counseling and outreach’ (HFRP, 2011). The core component consists of weekly human relations

classes raising awareness and promoting healthy attitudes of AOD use, fostering self esteem, and appreciating ethnic and cultural

traditions. Mandatory attendance is required. The curriculum is structured while allowing for open discussion and role playing, and

tailoring according to class needs. Counselling (academic and psychosocial), goal setting and monitoring of monthly progress is

also provided. Another major component is a peer mentoring program where 10 peer mentors assist students at YDP with

homework tutoring, critical thinking and developing talents. Extra curricular activities are included to improve academic performance

‘to provide creative outlets to the students, to widen students' horizons by providing novel experiences and opportunities to learn


about other people and environments, and to provide a space for students to develop positive interpersonal relations in a less

structured and nonthreatening out-of-school setting’ (HFRP, 2011). Such activities include weekly after school clubs, and weekend

workshops at rural, wilderness retreats. Other elements of the program include monthly parenting classes, and community

support/role models from United Neighbors Against Drugs (UNAD). Approximate costs of the program is $500 000/year (HFRP,

2011).

Significant positive effects of the YDP program in terms of youth development included: reductions in alcohol/tobacco/drug use in

the last month, reductions in lifetime alcohol/tobacco/drug use, improvements in race relations, and increases in self-reported

school attendance. The most impact was through the multi-component substance use risk factors approach. It is suggested this

program is suitable for Indigenous Australians where high rates of drug and alcohol communities exist. The authors note that

'increased intensity and/or duration of exposure to a curriculum-based, multi-modal program like the Woodrock Youth Development

Project might further increase the magnitude of deterrent effects of alcohol/tobacco/drug use, while encouraging healthful

development of targeted youth' (HFRP, 2011). The program evidence also indicates it works to overcome indigenous

disadvantage.

FINAL CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR YOUNG PEOPLE ON SCHOOL WAITING LISTSWhen planning a program for disconnected youth, the research findings suggest integrating the following models of practice:

• Assurance of a JSA or Youth Connections case manager ie. ongoing monitoring or outreach on completion;

• Identify educational and/or vocational options with transition planning for work, education and independence;

• Knowledge of options and opportunity for links to community;

• Practical job skills training, work experience and education pathways;

• Broad/multi developmental goals for personal, interpersonal, social, literacy, numeracy, confidence and communication;

• Resiliency, living and AOD skill building;

• Leadership (tutor/peers) opportunities;

• Team dynamics and groupwork;


• Voluntary commitment must be emphasised.

Programs must be affordable, have a broad range of cultural, recreational, sporting, and community (including family) activities to

promote participation, with real and challenging opportunities to develop and deliver projects. It is suggested to avoid long days

with only half day sessions that run for a minimum of 6-8weeks but preferably last a school year. Programs must be self paced,

non-threatening nor punitive, with less structure, and more supportive, validating and empowering environments. Programs must

allow for creative outlets, problem solving and goal setting, and be youth, knowledge and care-centred. Models of programs for

disconnected youth are best practiced when they have places and spaces to grow beyond their own perspectives, to broaden their

horizons, improve at least one context of their life, and leave enriched.


APPENDICES

Appendix 1 ‘Barriers Summary 2010’.


Appendix 2 ‘Barriers Summary Q1 2011’.


Appendix 3 ‘Enrolment Waiting Lists for Youth Connections clients’

Enrolment Waiting Lists for Youth Connections clients 2010 - Q1 2011

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

RM

IT

Lalo

r Sec

onda

ry C

ollege

Dist

ance

Edu

catio

n

Wal

lan

Secon

dary

College

*

NM

IT

Lyna

ll Hal

l

The

Pavilio

n

Mill

Park Sec

onda

ry C

olle

ge

Spect

rum

Em

ploy

men

t Ser

vice

s

Kanga

n In

stitu

te

NM

IT V

CAL

Dox

a

Lalo

r Nth

Sec

onda

ry C

ollege

*

Employ

men

t Foc

us

Fore

site

Traini

ng *

Institution* Client did not at tend

Nu

mb

er

of

da

ys

dis

en

ga

ge

d

(fro

m r

efe

rral/e

nro

lment to

com

mencem

ent)


REFERENCES

DEECD, 2006, ‘It’s not ok to be away’Student Attendance Support Kit, State of Victoria, DEECD, Melbourne

Department of Education and Early Childhood Development (DEECD), 2008, Effective Strategies to Increase School Completion Report, State of Victoria Communications Division for Youth Transitions Melbourne

Department of Education, Employment and Work Relations (DEEWR), 2009, National Partnership on Youth Attainment and Transitions, State Government (http://www.deewr.gov.au/Youth/YouthAttainmentandTransitions/Documents/FAQ.pdf)

de Roeper, J; Savelsberg,H, 2009, ‘Challenging the Youth Policy Imperative: Engaging Young People through the Arts’, Journal of Youth Studies, Vol.12,Iss.2;p.209-225, viewed 19/5/09, retrieved from Ebscohost database.

Fernandes, A, Gabe, T, 2009, Disconnected Youth: A Look at 16- to 24-Year Olds Who Are Not Working or In School, Congressional Research Service, USA

Harvard Family Research Project (HFRP), 2011, A Profile of the Evaluation of Woodrock Youth Development Project, viewed 18/5/2011 http://www.hfrp.org/out-of-school-time/ost-database-bibliography/database/woodrock-youth-development-project , Presidents and Fellows of Harvard College Published

Jenkins, M, O’Malley, S, 2009, ‘The Federal Government has vowed to life education standards after national benchmarking showed 10% of schools students were still falling through the cracks in the system’, Australian Associated Press, 11 September

Lehman, C Ph.D, Clark, H Ph.D, Bullis, M Ph.D, Rinkin, J, Castellanos, L, 2002, Journal of Child and Family Studies, Vol 11, No 1, Transition from School to Adult Life: Empowering Youth Through Community Ownership and Accountability, Human Sciences Press, Inc

Roth, Jodie L Ph.D., Brooks-Gunn, J, 2003, Youth Development Programs: Risk, Prevention and Policy, Journal of Adolescent Health p170-182, cited http://leah.mchtraining.net/images/stories/Teleconference_Materials/RothBrooksGunn.pdf 18/5/2011

Youth Pathways Action Plan Taskforce (YPAPT), 2001, Footprints to the Future – Report from the Prime Minister’s Youth Pathways Action Plan Taskforce, Aus Info, Canberra Australia


http://leah.mchtraining.net/images/stories/Teleconference_Materials/RothBrooksGunn.pdf

http://www.hfrp.org/out-of-school-time/ost-database-bibliography/database/woodrock-youth-development-project

http://www.deewr.gov.au/Youth/YouthAttainmentandTransitions/Documents/FAQ.pdf

LITERATURE REVIEW (Deur, 2009)

Background This literature review identifies barriers to education faced by young people, and the best practice models and strategies as

suggested by the research in assisting young people at risk of or disengaged, to successfully retain or transition into education. It

includes research conducted by the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR), Department of

Education and Early Childhood Development (DEECD) i.e. specifically Victorian Schools and research projects targeted at

emotionally disturbed and socially excluded young people.

Main findings

The DEEWR’s (2009) new Youth Compact ‘earn or learn’ practice of streamlined services begins in January 2010. The Youth

Transitions agenda targets at risk and disengaged young people and each service must aim to maximize engagement, attainment

and successful transitions of mainstream, alternative or training pathways education and life skills outcomes. The new agenda

includes: multiple learning pathways Year 12 or equivalent; career development; mentoring; school, business and community

partnerships; and individualized, personalised support. Support mechanisms such as numeracy/literacy, low socio-economic

communities (SES) and quality teaching are part of the strategy. Supporting this notion is The 2009 National Assessment Program

Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) report which has revealed that 10% of school students are failing to meet the minimum

standards for reading, writing, and numeracy (Jenkins, M, O’Malley, S, 2009). Research shows that more boys drop out of school

than girls, and young people are most likely to disengage without completing Year 10. These are the types of barriers:

• low school achievement

• history of dissatisfying experiences at school

• history of truancy, suspension or exclusion from school

• self esteem issues

• behavioural

• low literacy or numeracy levels


• disability

• mental health issues

• undiagnosed mental illness

• disconnection from family

• homelessness

• carer responsibilities

• A&OD issues

• Contact with criminal justice systems

(Youth pathways providers 2007 cited DEEWR 2009)

According to DEEWR a good model is innovative, individualised and offers a genuine continuum of care within a case management

framework. A whole community approach to interventions should be designed to both keep young people engaged, educated and

connected with their families (DEEWR, 2009). A good model should be driven by the needs of the young people and include:

• Identification of personal barriers

• Development and implementation of a individual transition plan

• Intensive case management

• Group work

• Problem solving

• Motivation, skills building and counselling

• Mentoring and advocacy

• Mediation and assistance to employment opportunities

• Referral to specialist services

(Youth projects cited DEEWR)16

Created by Eliana Deur, Youth Connections Caseworker at Kildonan Uniting Care 20/5/2011

http://www.youthprojects.net/

Dr Tim Watts, Dr Bob Carbines, and Ms Leonne Robb found young people discontinued youth pathways if they did not receive full

service, or were not in school on commencement. A majority of participants were still in school, other education, or other training

because of a successful exit of Youth Pathways (61.9% in 2006 retained/re-engaged in school compared to 76.6% in 2008, 8%

other education, training compared to 10.9% in 2008 (DEEWR, 2009).

Those at greatest risk are regarded as: indigenous, refugees, disability and integration needs, low achievers, low SES, family

stress, neighbourhoods of high poverty or remote location, complex welfare needs (mental health, foster care, independent living,

and carers of parents). Young people disengage progressively for years, long before they actually quit school. DEECD literature

states that effective strategies must include targeted interventions of student focused support such as: mentoring, early intensive

pathways and careers planning, career guidance, co-ordinated welfare, family outreach, programs to improve social skills, tutoring,

targeted financial support, intensive continuum of case management, assistance for skill development among low achievers

(DEECD, 2008). Some Victorian school wide strategies include: smaller class sizes, early intervention to support numeracy/literacy

skills, mini schools, strategic team based teaching approaches, pathways planning and quality careers guidance counselling,

initiatives to improve parental connections, and broad curriculum provision. The most effective programs offer connectedness, trust,

tasks with tangible results, allowance of diverse needs, addressing poor achievement and personal obstacles. Research and

review across the board encapsulates case management as the major factor to ‘effective projects developed to help retain students

in education and training and promote successful transitions to further study and work (DETYA, 2001 cited DEECD, 2008, p25).

Further studies of disadvantaged young people (DYP) suggest access to relevant cultural programs and inclusion of higher level

needs into broader development policies. This research challenges youth policy dual orientations of DYP and argues that

‘engagement with the arts has the potential to foster identity and self-esteem and…facilitate broader and stronger connections with

education’ (de Roeper, Savelsberg, 2009, p212). Results from the Making Tracks research project found 4 out of 12 participants

had re-engaged at school and recognized strong personal development and future career planning. Another vital finding was

‘sporadic access to creative activities’ (de Roeper, Savelsberg,2009, p216) had negative impacts for DYP, while continuity of


programs and follow up after a project has finished had positive impacts in long term skill development. Exposure to art activities

for DYP tends to be within the school domain as opposed to others who experience creative opportunities with their families which

in turn increase skills, self confidence and self esteem (Heath,2005 cited de Roeper, Savelsberg, 2009). Research concluded that

art-programs inclusive of all social backgrounds ‘provided an invaluable connection and conduit into other educational and

developmental activities’ (de Roeper, Savelsberg, 2009, p223).

Best practices for youth with emotional disturbance (ED) focuses on self-determination, strengths-based approach and systematic

transition planning must begin in the middle school years. The barriers preventing successful transitions include uncoordinated

systems, socio-economic and community factors addressing life domains (i.e. education, employment, independent living, and

community adjustment). Professionals, youth and parent advocates and community leaders agree that these ED youth must have

provision of individualized services within a community coordinated support system (Clark & Foster-Johnson, 1996, Korologg,

1990, Lehman, 1996 cited Lehman, C Ph.D, Clark, H Ph.D, Bullis, M Ph.D, Rinkin, J, Castellanos, L, 2002). Findings revealed lack

of appropriate education, vocational training, and socioeconomic realities are contributing to antisocial behaviours and

maladjustment to adult life. Edgar and Levine’s, (1986, cited Lehman, et al 2002) research highlighted issues for ED youth as: high

unemployment and underemployment causing less independence; less likely to access post-secondary educational programs; and

lack of coordination and continuity between educational and adult services. Overall they struggled dramatically after school with

patterns of disconnectedness, and were least likely to be involved in clubs and social groups, have high absenteeism, and 55%

drop-out rates (i.e. double the rate of the general population). After 7 years of tracking 700 youth, half of those who completed high

school were employed and living independently, and 58% within the justice system once or more (aged 15-18) (Silver, Unger, and

Fiedman, 1983, cited Lehman, et al 2002). Analysis of social outcomes revealed many of them are unable to break the cycle of

poverty and function outside mainstream society throughout adulthood, therefore need continued support many years after leaving

school. For policy and service directions to have positive outcomes they should include: quality one on one intensive case

management; education system coordination with community services; support to break cycles of poverty; inclusion into

mainstream; continual support; current policies addressing successions into society; identified alternatives to effectively support

troubled youth, and youth directing the planning of support services post school.


Conclusions and evidence of effective practice in addressing barriers to education Summary of this literature concludes that successful youth transition models of practice requires all of the following: early

intervention, individualised continuity of care, identification of personal barriers, individual transition planning, intensive case

management, financial support, continuity of programs for skill development (numeracy/literacy/social/ personal/ independent

living), mentoring/tutoring or smaller classes, broad curriculum or alternative methods of delivery, co-ordinated partnerships of

welfare, schools and businesses, opportunities for community connectedness/adjustment post school, family outreach, assistance

with pathways to education/career, referral to specialist services and continual support throughout .
