1. Identifying Young People ‘At Risk’ Deb Hull

2. Workshop Research project Current models 2006 trial Evaluation Processes to support a ‘whole school’ model for MIPs

3. Research ‘At Risk’ of what? Not completing school? Becoming totally disengaged from education, training and work? Youth offending? Harm? Does everyone in your school agree on the ‘what’?

4. School-based indicators/behaviours Truancy Behavioural issues Low literacy level Low numeracy level Significant change in demeanour, behaviour or performance Attitude to schooling Does not value school completion Articulated intention of early school leaving Negative peer influence Aggression/violence

5. Community and family risk factors Poverty Low income household Parental unemployment Australian-born parents, English-speaking background Aboriginal or Islander Refugee Fragmented/reconstituted family structures Separation from family Low parental education attainment Poor family management practices Poor parent-child relationships Abuse High crime neighbourhood Incarcerated parent Frequent change of location/school High number of people in neighbourhood with vocational qualifications

6. Personal Risk Factors Poor health Low birth weight Ill health or disability Disruptive behaviours Passivity Low self esteem Low motivation Self-harming High level of aggression/violence Pregnancy/motherhood Offending Substance misuse Association with anti-social peers/adults Sex work Social isolation Male Non-metropolitan Working more than 5 hours of paid employment per week, especially for males Primary carer for parent or guardian with illness or mental illness

7. School-based risk factors Unsupportive school culture Repressive discipline Large class sizes Unstimulating content Competitive exam-dominated assessment Negative student-teacher relationships Negative peer relationships in school community Absence of school counsellors Lack of student participation in decision-making Poor school/home relationships Poor teaching quality Lack of clear relationships with the wider community leading to an absence of support and referrals

8. Pitfalls of identifying young people as ‘at risk’ Encourages focus on young person rather than school improvement Pigeon-holing does not allow for resilience No process to declare ‘no longer at risk’, no fresh start

9. Model 1: common practice Some combination of: Referral from teachers Referrals from parents Self referrals from students Review of literacy and numeracy levels Review of school reports and assessment outcomes Review of attendance patterns

10. Model 2: student survey Detailed questions designed to elicit extent to which student has experienced or exhibited risk factors All students complete Analysis and reporting

11. Model 3: school checklist Checklist/spreadsheet of risk factors Completed by teachers Access to complete and accurate information?

12. Model 4: staff-student connection School structure at centre Each student has one staff member who is responsible for their welfare, and for communication and maintaining positive relationship Staff member may ‘follow’ the student through successive years at school Staff member is first point of ‘at risk’ referral by teachers, parents, student School processes support action by these staff members

13. Model 5: data review Developed by Doug Smith – Brimbank-Melton LLEN Draw down data from CASES Identify list of ‘at risk’ young people Teacher review of list, add and remove names

14. 2006 Trial of Model 5 5 schools in Brimbank-Melton area in 2005 Up to 50 interested schools from Western Metropolitan Region and Grampians Region in 2006

15. Data review model See handout Includes capacity to map programs and services Includes capacity to monitor student progress Includes capacity to monitor effectiveness of programs and services

16. Evaluation How do you know if the system your school is using to identify ‘at risk’ young people is working? How can you improve if you don’t know?

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