Pre-School Leadership and the Influence this has upon Outcomes for Young Children

This research focuses on pre-school leadership and the influence this has upon improving outcomes for disadvantaged children, situating it within a broader framework of social inequality specifically in regard to the educational achievements of disadvantaged children and their more advantaged peers. As the study is comparative in nature the findings are discussed in relation to settings that have been graded by Ofsted as ‘outstanding’ and ‘requires Improvement’. The research takes into account that the social inequality associated with childhood poverty has a negative impact on outcomes for children, particularly in their earliest years. It is premised upon the known importance of good quality early years provision as an effective means to ameliorate the effects of childhood poverty on outcomes for young children and that effective leadership of early years settings is a defining factor of good quality provision. A mixed methods approach was adopted to explore the influence that pre-school leadership has upon outcomes for disadvantaged children. Qualitative data collated from four semi-structured interviews, along with each setting’s most recent Ofsted report were analysed through a process of content analysis. School performance data were analysed to provide the contextual background of the participating settings. Descriptive statistics are used to situate the local authority’s performance in the context of other local authorities regionally and nationally and enable direct comparisons to be made between settings. Key findings from this study indicate that, in settings deemed by Ofsted to be ‘outstanding’ less affluent children made good progress towards the early learning goals, this demonstrates effective leadership within those settings. Where a setting was deemed to ‘require improvement’ children did not make good progress, this indicates that leadership in that instance was less effective

Discourses of service user involvement in meeting places in Norwegian community mental health care: a discourse analysis of staff accounts Discourses of service user involvement in meeting places in Norwegian community mental health care: a discourse anal

Points of interest • We are a participatory research team that explored meeting places in Norwegian community mental health care in relation to their larger contexts. • In this article, we report on an analysis of employees' group discussions that primarily focus on service user involvement. • In Norway, service user involvement is a legally protected right. • The dominant form of involvement looked less like a right and more a duty and responsibility for service users, and appeared to relate to management requesting suggestions and then making decisions on behalf of service users. Throughout the analysis, service users were portrayed as resisting such processes. ABSTRACT In previous research, meeting places have been favourably addressed by service users, but they have also been contested as exclusionary. In this participatory explorative study, we sought to perform a contextual analysis of meeting places in Norway based on a discourse analysis of three focus group discussions with 15 staff members. We asked the following question: how do meeting-place employees discuss their concrete and abstract encounters with service users and their experiences? We focused on service user involvement, which was largely analysed as neoliberal consultation and responsibilisation. Service users were positioned as resisting responsibility trickling down and defending staffed meeting places. Social democratic discourse was identified in the gaps of neoliberal discourse, which is noteworthy given that Norway is a social democracy. This relates to global concerns about displacements of democracy. We suggest that meeting places appear to hold the potential for staff and service users to collaborate more democratically. • The analysis also found democratic collaboration to be another form of service user involvement, but this alternative was in the minority. Our findings relate to global signs and concerns about threats to democracy. • We suggest that meeting places could offer opportunities for staff and service users to collaborate more democratically

A participatory discourse analysis of service users’ accounts of meeting places in Norwegian community mental health care

Since the 1960s, deinstitutionalisation has been salient in mental health reforms across the West. In Norway, this culminated in the National Action Plan for Mental Health (1999-2008), where meeting places in community mental health care were deemed a prioritised strategy to counter social isolation among people in psychosocial hardships. However, during the same period in England, meeting places were beginning to be contested for contributing to social exclusion. This is an inquiry of meeting places in Norway guided by the following research question: How do service users discuss their encounters with the spaces and people of meeting places? Situated in community psychology and participatory research traditions, we engaged in a participatory discourse analysis of four focus group discussions with 22 service users from meeting places. We detail and discuss four central discursive constructions of meeting places against the backdrop of a civil society identified as fraught with sanism that stigmatises and excludes service users: a compensatory public welfare arrangement positioning service users as citizens with social rights; a peer community positioning service users as peers who share common identities and interests; spaces of compassion validating service users as fellow human beings who are precious in their own right; and greenhouses facilitating service users to expand their horizons of possibility. This inquiry implies that meeting places could mean everything to the people who attend them by facilitating opportunities considered less accessible elsewhere in their everyday lives in a sanist civil society

A participatory discourse analysis of service users’ accounts of meeting places in Norwegian community mental health care

Since the 1960s, deinstitutionalisation has been salient in mental health reforms across the West. In Norway, this culminated in the National Action Plan for Mental Health (1999-2008), where meeting places in community mental health care were deemed a prioritised strategy to counter social isolation among people in psychosocial hardships. However, during the same period in England, meeting places were beginning to be contested for contributing to social exclusion. This is an inquiry of meeting places in Norway guided by the following research question: How do service users discuss their encounters with the spaces and people of meeting places? Situated in community psychology and participatory research traditions, we engaged in a participatory discourse analysis of four focus group discussions with 22 service users from meeting places. We detail and discuss four central discursive constructions of meeting places against the backdrop of a civil society identified as fraught with sanism that stigmatises and excludes service users: a compensatory public welfare arrangement positioning service users as citizens with social rights; a peer community positioning service users as peers who share common identities and interests; spaces of compassion validating service users as fellow human beings who are precious in their own right; and greenhouses facilitating service users to expand their horizons of possibility. This inquiry implies that meeting places could mean everything to the people who attend them by facilitating opportunities considered less accessible elsewhere in their everyday lives in a sanist civil society

Discourses of service user involvement in meeting places in Norwegian community mental health care: a discourse analysis of staff accounts

In previous research, meeting places have been favourably addressed by service users, but they have also been contested as exclusionary. In this participatory explorative study, we sought to perform a contextual analysis of meeting places in Norway based on a discourse analysis of three focus group discussions with 15 staff members. We asked the following question: how do meeting-place employees discuss their concrete and abstract encounters with service users and their experiences? We focused on service user involvement, which was largely analysed as neoliberal consultation and responsibilisation. Service users were positioned as resisting responsibility trickling down and defending staffed meeting places. Social democratic discourse was identified in the gaps of neoliberal discourse, which is noteworthy given that Norway is a social democracy. This relates to global concerns about displacements of democracy. We suggest that meeting places appear to hold the potential for staff and service users to collaborate more democratically

A participatory discourse analysis of service users’ accounts of meeting places in Norwegian community mental health care

Since the 1960s, deinstitutionalisation has been salient in mental health reforms across the West. In Norway, this culminated in the National Action Plan for Mental Health (1999-2008), where meeting places in community mental health care were deemed a prioritised strategy to counter social isolation among people in psychosocial hardships. However, during the same period in England, meeting places were beginning to be contested for contributing to social exclusion. This is an inquiry of meeting places in Norway guided by the following research question: How do service users discuss their encounters with the spaces and people of meeting places? Situated in community psychology and participatory research traditions, we engaged in a participatory discourse analysis of four focus group discussions with 22 service users from meeting places. We detail and discuss four central discursive constructions of meeting places against the backdrop of a civil society identified as fraught with sanism that stigmatises and excludes service users: a compensatory public welfare arrangement positioning service users as citizens with social rights; a peer community positioning service users as peers who share common identities and interests; spaces of compassion validating service users as fellow human beings who are precious in their own right; and greenhouses facilitating service users to expand their horizons of possibility. This inquiry implies that meeting places could mean everything to the people who attend them by facilitating opportunities considered less accessible elsewhere in their everyday lives in a sanist civil society.publishedVersio