Making a difference to children, young people and families

What now happens differently for children, young people and their families as a result of your actions?
What were the outcomes? This might refer to national indicators for example

Parents have developed a greater understanding of how their children learn through play – co-operating, socialising and identifying people, places, objects and events using descriptive language. They have developed IT skills (some had very limited IT skills at the outset), self-esteem and pride in their own achievements. They are becoming confident to take the initiative and use resources independently.

There has been an increase in the number of parents becoming more confident in taking the lead in their child’s education. Parents’ involvement in their child’s education is to continue as a partnership into the reception year.

Practitioners work alongside parents as supportive role models, clearly taking into account the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) statement: parents as first educators.

What now happens differently for the services involved?

'The Children’s Centres and Childcare Service Delivery Plan 2008-2011' has identified parenting and family support as a key service priority. There is a wide range of programmes on offer across the local authority that focus on parenting skills, family learning, and parental engagement and involvement in children’s learning. However, many of these programmes have been developed in response to localised initiatives rather than in response to coherent authority-wide strategies on parental involvement. The PPEL programme is unique in that it is a universal programme. The programme has now been identified in Bristol’s Parenting Strategy as a targeted service.

Which of the changes will you maintain to sustain your achievements and how will you do this?

See above.

If you are not yet sure what difference has been made, what new measures could be introduced, or what could be improved, to allow you to determine the difference made?

At present, there are no national or city-wide data-collection systems in place that are consistent across all sectors to measure outcomes for children. Any measurable outcomes could only be achieved by tracking children’s progress in the long term.

Evaluation

How have you evaluated progress against outcome measures?
How have you evaluated the improvement in outcomes for children, young people and/or families?
Do you have any information on the cost of your programme? This would be really useful information for other areas who might wish to implement a similar programme.

Please provide evidence of the learning that has occurred, of how systems have changed as a result of the practice being implemented, and of how outcomes have improved.
We are interested to hear about how you have evaluated the practice and how you have encouraged feedback from children, young people and their families. The results of this feedback and evaluation can include external evaluation reports, internal reviews, children, youth or parent feedback surveys, other surveys/data, anecdotal evidence, budgetary and/or statistical information, and plans/timelines.

What ‘hot tips’ do you have from your experience for others?

We are particularly interested in any barriers you encountered and how you overcame these and in your views regarding the potential for replicability of your practice example.

Quantitative evaluation was based on:
• Records of numbers of parents attending the PPEL group.
• A questionnaire for parents relating to CLL in the EYFS (this will provide scale data).

Qualitative evaluation consisted of:
• Independent film evaluation.
• Learning diaries (children, parents, practitioners).
• Informal summative interviews and report from participating settings.

Qualitative evidence, including interviews with practitioners, parents and children, indicates clear positive outcomes.

Questionnaires: Parents’ responses
All responses returned (a small sample) were positive. Parents identified specific ways in which they felt their children had benefited from the project and the IT resources.
• Twenty-five per cent said the resources provided an effective social tool for sharing.
• Thirty-eight per cent said they thought the resources encouraged interaction, discussion and the development of language skills.
• Seventeen per cent said they thought sorting and matching enabled their children to develop a new skill.
• Twenty per cent said they thought their children had learned through play and increased their self-esteem.

Quotes from parents
‘She has been able to recall and talk about what she did in her books.’
‘You learn some ways how to do something with your own child.’
‘I hope to find some ideas of playing with my child and identifying with her.’
‘I learned IT skills and use the camera to make pictures of my children for us to share together.’

Questionnaires: Practitioners’ responses
Staff were clear about the potential benefits to children and parents.
‘….[parents are] more aware that talking and communicating with their children will benefit their learning.’
‘….demystifying the computer and giving them a taste for learning.’
‘Helps parents who aren’t naturally very vocal with their children to interact/talk/communicate with them’.
‘Making games and books where the pictures are relevant and familiar engages interest and encourages language.’

Hot tips for others
• Ensure there is capacity for internal staff to continue to support parents in continuing/leading the project once the initial IT training and support from the PPEL team has come to an end. It is advisable to obtain written agreement from the setting that they will commit to carrying on the project.
• The resources needed are: Photo Talk CD Rom, IT training for parents and practitioners, dedicated lead member of staff, dedicated room, ICT equipment (laptop, digital cameras, colour printer).
• Staff with limited IT skills may not be confident to teach others. Further training and support could be provided by the PPEL team.
• Staff capacity can be an issue: in five settings, staff predicted difficulty in providing sufficient support to parents once the PPEL team had left.
• The future cost of sundries (printer cartridges, laminating pouches) can be high. Sharing sundries with other settings taking part in the programme can help.
• Maintain a clear focus on using IT resources as a tool to support parental engagement in children’s learning.
• Settings that planned with a clear purpose with reference to the outcomes of the project; deployed a designated member of staff with IT skills; and targeted those children about whom there were communication concerns were more effective in providing a consistent focus on children and families in greatest need. On the whole, the Children’s Centres with a focus on nursery education were best able to do this, due to having experienced trained staff, family support programmes, dedicated space, and robust plans for improving outcomes for children.