Abstract:Objective: This pilot study examined the effect of structural family therapy (SFT) on children's impairment and depressive symptomatology and mothers' depressive symptomatology and anxiety for 31 families served by a community mental health clinic. Method: A one group predesign/postdesign, with a baseline and two follow-up time points, was used. Results: A series of repeated measures analyses of variance showed significant improvement for mothers' depression, F(2, 36) ¼ 6.93, p ¼ .003, Z 2 ¼ .278, and anxiety,… Show more
“…Despite their later visibility in the middle years of schooling, these students appear relatively invisible in the early years of primary (K-4); despite these being among the most crucial. While important steps are being made to provide quality early learning experiences for disadvantaged children through universal access to preschool and other measures aimed at equalising the startinggate (OECD, 2006), boot-strapping individual children for Kindergarten does not forestall the effects of exclusionary forces inherent to modern systems of schooling (Bouhours, 2006;Graham, 2007a). Ultimately, what policy makers appear to miss is the role of the academic school curriculum in the frustration and attrition of students who may not learn as quickly or easily as others (Teese, 2000).…”
This article examines the increase in segregated placements in the New South Wales government school sector. Using disaggregated enrolment data, it points to the growing overrepresentation of boys in special schools and classes, particularly those of a certain age in certain support categories. In the discussion that follows, the authors question the role of special education in the development of new and additional forms of being 'at risk'. In effect, they invert the traditional concept by asking: who is at risk of what? In focusing on the containment of risk, are modern practices of diagnosis and segregation perpetuating risks that already disproportionately affect certain groups of individuals? Do these perceptions of and responses to risk in local schools now place these students at greater personal risk of school failure and a future marked by social exclusion? And, finally, is that risk worth the cost?
“…Despite their later visibility in the middle years of schooling, these students appear relatively invisible in the early years of primary (K-4); despite these being among the most crucial. While important steps are being made to provide quality early learning experiences for disadvantaged children through universal access to preschool and other measures aimed at equalising the startinggate (OECD, 2006), boot-strapping individual children for Kindergarten does not forestall the effects of exclusionary forces inherent to modern systems of schooling (Bouhours, 2006;Graham, 2007a). Ultimately, what policy makers appear to miss is the role of the academic school curriculum in the frustration and attrition of students who may not learn as quickly or easily as others (Teese, 2000).…”
This article examines the increase in segregated placements in the New South Wales government school sector. Using disaggregated enrolment data, it points to the growing overrepresentation of boys in special schools and classes, particularly those of a certain age in certain support categories. In the discussion that follows, the authors question the role of special education in the development of new and additional forms of being 'at risk'. In effect, they invert the traditional concept by asking: who is at risk of what? In focusing on the containment of risk, are modern practices of diagnosis and segregation perpetuating risks that already disproportionately affect certain groups of individuals? Do these perceptions of and responses to risk in local schools now place these students at greater personal risk of school failure and a future marked by social exclusion? And, finally, is that risk worth the cost?
“…In accordance with this view of agency, genuine freedom only exists when people are informed, understand what choices are possible, and can choose from options of their own making. This is different from choosing from a limited set of choices, prescribed by others (Graham, 2007), or being provided with 'opportunities' that one cannot access or gain advantage from (Sen, 1992). For children with SLCN, there is the potential that SLPs and teachers determine the options from which children can choose.…”
Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression. However, due to difficulties in communicating, children with speech, language and communication needs (SLCN) are at particular risk of not being heard. Although it is recommended that children with SLCN can and should be actively involved as equal partners in decision-making about their communication needs, speech-language pathologists (SLPs) can lose sight of the importance of supporting communication as a tool for the child to shape and influence choices available to them in their lives. Building these skills is particularly important for SLPs working in mainstream educational contexts. In this commentary, the authors argue the need for a shift in emphasis in current practice to a rights-based approach and for SLPs to take more of an active role in supporting children with SLCN to develop agency and be heard. We also present some concepts and frameworks that might guide SLPs to work in a right-based way in schools with this population.
“…... the retreat from active social investment in the form of a social wage (for example, universal health care, quality childcare and preschool, and supportive labour market programs) means that education, as a public good, is left to do its work relatively unsupported—uninsulated by complementary ‘active’ redistribution measures. (Graham, 2007b, p. 542)…”
In his 2007 PESA keynote address, Paul Smeyers discussed the increasing regulation of child-rearing through government intervention and the generation of 'experts', citing particular examples from Europe where cases of childhood obesity and parental neglect have stirred public opinion and political debate. In his paper ('Child-Rearing: On government intervention and the discourse of experts', this issue), Smeyers touches on a number of tensions before concluding that child-rearing qualifies as a practice in which liberal governments should be reluctant to intervene. In response, I draw on recent experiences in Australia and argue that certain tragic events of late are the result of an ethical, moral and social vacuum in which these tensions coalesce. While I agree with Smeyers that governments should be reluctant to 'intervene' in the private domain of the family, I argue that there is a difference between intervention and support. In concluding, I maintain that if certain Western liberal democracies did a more comprehensive job of supporting children and their families through active social investment in primary school education, then schools would be better equipped to deal with the challenges they now face.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
