Technique Is Not Enough (TINE) - British Psychological Society

More documents

Recommendations

Info

From this conference a commitment to develop the themes found there was immediatelyapparent and so we set about writing this paper in the same spirit to reflect both thecontent and the voice behind the issues. This is one reason why we have reported theexamples gained from our survey of parenting programmes verbatim, thus retaining boththeir concepts and their voice. We believe this gives the totality of the accounts richnessand we hope it also undercuts any concern that we might be promoting the effectiveness ofany one programme over another. Our choice of examples (reviewed and summarised bythe first author) was very inclusive and is not intended to imply any differential valuejudgements on our part nor is it necessarily representative of what might be available nor isit likely to be comprehensive. Our intent is simply to give a space to a reasonable level oftheoretical sampling of the kinds of good work out there and for the ideas behind them tobe shared openly across a diverse and creative field.As part of a wider programme of activities on developing socially inclusive practice, theSociety is taking a lead on these issues. It is seeking to work collaboratively withprofessional organisations committed to the inclusion of disadvantaged children andfamilies and work co-productively with service user parents to set priorities for enhancingchild well-being and mental health in the UK.2.3. The value of socially inclusive practice for our intendedaudiencesIn this paper we aim to support the widespread implementation of evidence-basedparenting and family skills training programmes by highlighting how the fundamentalpsychological principles that underpin socially inclusive practice can be used to enhance theoverall and cost-effectiveness of such programmes. Because of this our paper has twoprimary audiences. Our first main audience consists of professionals from health, educationand social care involved in the commissioning and implementation of local servicesdesigned to enhance child well-being. It is hoped that they will fund and successfully runevidence-based parenting programmes that can be culturally adapted by taking a sociallyinclusive stance towards implementation. We urge such groups to seek guidance from theirlocal educational, clinical, counselling, forensic, occupational and community psychologists.Along with programme developers themselves, psychologists from all backgrounds are oursecond main audience. Not only are psychologists developing and refining modelprogrammes they are also increasingly involved in local commissioning and implementation.We hope this paper will provide these two sets of stakeholders with a rich source of ideason how to make parenting programmes more socially inclusive as well as providing strongjustification for giving this agenda the attention it deserves.For commissioners and professionals implementing programmes this will mean putting inplace mechanisms that can assess whether local potential programme candidates candemonstrate a track record of addressing high attrition rates for low-income sociallymarginalised parents, and to determine if they can describe strategies that integratessocially inclusive practice from the outset. This could form a useful element in a localstrategy to Commission for Social Return on Investment (SRIO) (Cabinet Office, 2009).This will also have implications for the new Commissioning Boards to be developed byGeneral Practitioners as a result of the publication of the Health and Social Care Act (2012).12 Professional Practice Board
Bearing in mind that this work is in its infancy, this should be considered within a contextwhere there is still much to do to fully demonstrate the effectiveness of adopting sociallyinclusive practice within the fundamental research on establishing the evidence base forprogrammes in this field. We will go into the dilemmas involved in adapting the modelsused by such programmes in the four sections of this paper on inclusive practice. However,given what we know already, we should say at this point that this research is likely to showthat implementing parenting programmes using socially inclusive approaches will have nonegative consequences on overall effectiveness as long as those who implement parentingprogrammes take care to preserve their core effective ingredients. Programme developerstherefore need to be clear what these core elements are as they embark on supportinglocal adaptations to enable social inclusion. Further research on determining these isrequired but it is complicated work.We will attempt to demonstrate that supporting local implementation teams in codevelopingcultural adaptations with local parents also leads to greater local ownership andincreased social capital. We believe that this is more likely where local programmes areimplemented through co-producing teams that include both parents and localprofessionals in the fields of education, health and social care.We understand concerns about the potential costs of making such adaptations. We giveexamples of where co-productive parent/practitioner partnerships have taken the time toevolve their own culturally adapted version of their chosen programme then substantialbenefits follow. As well as increasing the likelihood of social inclusion, cultural adaptationalso increases the lasting impact of participants’ learning experiences. This is alsoincreased by building social capital between parents. In turn, the likelihood ofsustainability can also be greatly enhanced by socially inclusive processes whenprogrammes become embedded in locally valued social structures that build social capital.Programme developers and local implementers should report drop-out and retention ratesfor all families, especially the disadvantaged and socially excluded, as a quality measure. Wepredict the use of our recommended strategies could increase programmes’ currentestimated retention levels from as low as the 20 per cent found in traditional programmesup to the 80 per cent found in well evidenced socially inclusive programmes (McDonald &Sayger, 1998; McDonald et al., 2006; 2012; Kratochwill et al., 2004; 2009).As well as being informed on crucial issues relating to the effective use of learning theory(Bandura, 1977) and social contact theory (Pettigrew, 1998), psychologists wishing tosupport socially inclusive practice in parenting programmes will also need to examinetheories and research used in community and business psychology as well as from otherdisciplines such as sociology, anthropology, political science and social work. For example,a sociological perspective on family stress proposes that there are two major factors whichprotect families against the distress caused by severe economic disadvantage: social supportand hope. In turn we know that parental behaviour mediates change in children’sbehaviour (Gardner et al., 2010). This theory has been used to develop ways of reducingthe effect of these stressors on disadvantaged and low-income families when they engage ineffective family skills training programmes (Hill, 1958; McCubbin et al., 1995; Boss, 2002).Research into adult education strategies for empowering adults (Freire, 1995) haveengaged and demonstrated empowerment of socially excluded parents. CommunityTechnique Is Not Enough 13
Page 1 and 2: Professional Practice BoardTechniqu
Page 3: ContentsAcknowledgements ..........
Page 6 and 7: We also wish to thank Sarah Fitzroy
Page 8 and 9: alienation and sense of isolation f
Page 10 and 11: A range of these programmes are rec
Page 12 and 13: 2. Vision and purpose2.1. The brief
Page 16 and 17: development strategies have been us
Page 18 and 19: 3. The socio-political context3.1.
Page 20 and 21: Box 1: UNODC compilation of evidenc
Page 22 and 23: cost-effective and it has caused so
Page 24 and 25: Positive ActionPositive Action was
Page 26 and 27: ■Programmes must have robust evid
Page 28 and 29: These principles are based on our a
Page 30 and 31: families who might benefit. This pr
Page 32 and 33: providers and partner agencies were
Page 34 and 35: Positive Parenting Programme (Tripl
Page 36 and 37: multiple approaches that also inclu
Page 38 and 39: need to learn English in their pare
Page 40 and 41: Parenting programmes that work in m
Page 42 and 43: 5. Principle 2. Cultural sensitivit
Page 44 and 45: Positive ActionPositive Action faci
Page 46 and 47: attitudes. Such attitudes can surfa
Page 48 and 49: developed purely from a theory-driv
Page 50 and 51: cultural heritages lecture at them.
Page 52 and 53: having reciprocal relationships to
Page 54 and 55: first started delivering the progra
Page 56 and 57: Strengthening Families ProgramWhen
Page 58 and 59: 7. Principle 4. Sustainability: Cre
Page 60 and 61: operate at different levels. Some a
Page 62 and 63: Incredible YearsAnother component o
Page 64 and 65:
commissioners can have more confide
Page 66 and 67:
Incentives for achieving model fide
Page 68 and 69:
8. A framework for ensuring that ev
Page 70 and 71:
9. Next stepsEvidence-based parenti
Page 72 and 73:
70 Professional Practice Board
Page 74 and 75:
72 Professional Practice Board
Page 76 and 77:
ReferencesAlinsky, S.D. (1971). Rul
Page 78 and 79:
Davidson, G. & Campbell, J. (2007).
Page 80 and 81:
Heindrichs, N., Bertram, H., Kusche
Page 82 and 83:
McDonald, L., FitzRoy, S., Fuchs, I
Page 84 and 85:
Spoth, R., Redmond, C., Hockaday, C
Page 86:
The British Psychological SocietySt
show all

Technique Is Not Enough (TINE) - British Psychological Society

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?