The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

Supporting pupils: A study of guidance and pupil support in Scottish schools

3: Overview of guidance in Scottish schools (local authorities)

3.1 Introduction

In the previous chapter, findings from a review of the literature on guidance/pupil support showed that there has been a general agreement in the UK that guidance should include educational, vocational and personal aspects of pupil support. In this chapter results from a postal survey of all 32 Scottish local authorities are explored to show the policies and structures which local authorities have developed in order to implement guidance within their schools. Despite overall similarities, policies and practices varied across local authorities. Some were based primarily on the deployment of specialist guidance staff, while others indicated that they had developed or were developing wider concepts of pastoral care or pupil support which included a role for all teachers. Finally, local authorities identified the major challenges which they face in ensuring that pupils are provided with adequate support during their school careers. Many referred to a period of general change and restructuring because of the implications of the McCrone agreement. Information about inter-agency working is presented in Chapter 6 and local authorities' provision of continuing professional development for guidance in Chapter 7.

3.2 Guidance policies and approaches

3.2.1 Policies

Twenty-six local authorities returned a completed postal questionnaire: many also attached copies of their policy statements for guidance. Eighteen (69%) local authorities indicated that they had produced guidelines for schools on guidance. By way of explanation, three local authorities which had no specific guidance policies reported that they subsumed guidance within a wider 'pupils support' policy. Six authorities (23%) had separate policies on various aspects of guidance, eg PSE, health, careers, and anti-bullying. Three (11%) mentioned that policies were produced by individual schools and five (19%) were reviewing their policies in the light of the agreement reached regarding the structure of the teaching profession in A Teaching Profession for the 21 ^st Century (McCrone, 2000). Eight authorities (31%) employed a guidance adviser. In two authorities (8%) their job title was not 'adviser', and in six (23%) guidance was only part of their remit. Seven of the authorities which said they did not employ a 'guidance adviser' had nevertheless located guidance as part of the remit of some other staff members, such as Education Officer or Curriculum Development Officer.

In addition, ten authorities (38%) indicated that they had formalised policies on providing parents with information; 14 (54%) on dealing with parental complaints; and 13 (50%) on involving parents in decisions about their children. However, 15 authorities (58%) pointed out that these guidelines on communication between parents and schools were general school or authority-wide guidelines and were not restricted to guidance staff or issues related to pupil support.

3.2.2 Differentiated guidance policies

Overall local authorities appeared not to have developed differentiated guidance policies for primary, secondary and special schools. Nineteen (73%) reported that they had no special policies for primary schools; and 17 (63%) none for special schools. However, ten (38%) had developed separate guidelines for secondary schools. Four local authorities which did not have separate primary school guidelines for guidance had nevertheless produced some guidance documents based on How Good is Our School (Scottish Executive, 1996, 2 ^nd edition 2002) and/or 5-14 PSD recommendations. Three local authorities which had not produced authority-wide separate guidelines for primary, secondary and special schools pointed out that they did have guidelines for all schools which implies some degree of differentiation.

3.2.3 Devolution to schools

The extent to which different aspects of guidance had been devolved to schools varied. As can be seen from Table 3.1 below, 24 local authorities (93%) allocated senior management responsibility for guidance completely to schools and a majority devolved guidance policy formulation, the appointment of teachers to promoted posts in guidance, and the formulation of PSE curriculum. However, only nine (35%) delegated liaison with other agencies completely to school level. (We will return to inter-agency working in Chapter 7.) These responses should, however, be placed in context: 13 authorities (50%) pointed out that although they delegated operational responsibility for guidance to schools, this remained within a framework of local authority guidelines and policies.

Table 3.1: Aspects of guidance provision devolved from the authority to schools

Local authorities were clearly distinguishing between the strategic development of a policy framework for guidance, which most saw as an authority responsibility, and operational implementation of guidance at school level. The differences between authorities seem to arise out of the extent to which these two responsibilities are perceived to overlap. This was elaborated further by two authorities which explained that:

Although most schools design PSE programmes to suit the needs of their pupils there are constant areas for all sectors, eg promoting self-esteem and anti-bullying strategies. Most programmes follow National Guidelines. Personal and Social Development 5-14. (LA 13)

There will be Authority involvement in the appointment of teachers to promoted posts. Although the formulation of the PSD curriculum is devolved to schools, the Authority has produced guidelines for the formulation of the curriculum, eg drugs education, sex education, health education. (LA 6)

Authority 1 pointed out that its answers to this part of the questionnaire did not really describe practices accurately because:

In terms of formulation of PSE curriculum and liaison with other agencies, schools and central services are both involved. We have guidelines centrally, which everyone seems to think are fine, but they leave schools some considerable flexibility in the way PSE is organised. The same applies to liaison with agencies. (LA 1)

3.2.4 Major aims

Twenty-four local authorities (93%) provided statements of the major aims of their guidance/pupil support policies. Eight (31%) referred to authority policy documents and three (11%) quoted or closely paraphrased the aims expressed in More than Feelings of Concern (Scottish Central Committee on Guidance, 1986). Other typical statements of aims included:

To support pupil development and welfare, to help them realise their full potential and prepare them for adult life, through: personal guidance; vocational guidance; personal and social education; provision for pupil welfare. (LA 10)

To provide personal, curricular and vocational support and advice to all pupils and their parents. (LA 21)

To provide support to pupils individually and in groups;

To support the mental, physical and emotional health of all pupils;

To provide appropriate experiences in personal and social development; health education and career education;

To assist pupils in developing an appropriate range of social and work related skills;

To liaise with other staff and parents regarding individual needs and progress;

To prepare pupils for life beyond school. (LA 8)

To support guidance staff and schools to provide high quality guidance and education for personal and social development. Guidance teams work in partnership with other departments and key agencies to provide personal, curricular and vocational guidance to meet the needs of pupils and their families. (LA 25 )

The significant point to note is that all the aims were wide, encompassing educational, vocational and personal aspects of guidance in order to support pupils in school and prepare them for their life after school.

3.3 Organisation of guidance

3.3.1 Good practice

Local authorities were asked to identify key features of good practice in guidance within their authority. In contrast to the unanimity of aims expressed by local authorities, no consensus of what constitutes good practice emerged. Five (19%) mentioned some aspect of personal/pastoral guidance provision; eight (31%), vocational/careers guidance; three (11%), educational/curricular guidance (including primary-secondary transition); five (19%), the teaching of PSE; one (4%), anti-bullying strategies; six (23%), the integration of guidance with other pupil support services; 11 (42%), some aspect of management and/or delivery of guidance, and seven (27%) some specific feature of guidance provision. Some examples of good practice identified by authorities included the following:

Local Authority 32 described how the restructuring of support had achieved real benefits for pupils.

We have examples in many of our schools of good practice in the above areas and evidence of how these revised roles are bringing about improvement in pupil attainment and achievement. These roles are, most importantly, undertaken alongside non-teaching, appropriately skilled colleagues within the school and wider community. Each secondary school has a dedicated Pupil Support Manager and team of Pupil Support Assistants (minimum 3) who deal with many of the pastoral issues which previously overwhelmed our Guidance teams. (LA 32)

Authority 7, covering a predominantly rural area, highlighted how the needs of children in small schools, especially when transferring to larger secondary schools, were being met by committed staff.

Guidance is in a stage of transition working towards a more integrated model within schools and across Council and external agencies. Successful practice in schools has been reported on by HMIE and is available. It is particularly important that in a rural authority transition stages take account of the needs and contexts of pupils and their families. As young people transfer from small rural schools to larger establishments within towns the role of Guidance and Learning Support is critical to enable as smooth and coherent a transition as possible. A key feature of Guidance has been the commitment staff have shown to their pastoral role often at the expense of subject work which has, as a result, had to be completed in their own time. (LA 7)

Other authorities pointed to a mixture of management structures, good working relationships, staff commitment and mentoring.

Sound management and delivery structures in all schools;

Promotion of positive ethos and self esteem;

A recommended programme for delivery of PSHE;

Individual school initiatives such as mentoring schemes;

Good working relationships with support agencies and delivery of key projects in partnership with for example, Careers Scotland, Health Promotion Department and Psychological Services;

Support systems for schools including telephone service, school visits, in-service courses and twice yearly business meeting for guidance co-ordinators. (LA 22 )

We are proud of all aspects of Guidance carried out in schools, and aim to keep in the forefront of developments. If we had to pick out some, they might be:

The expertise and commitment of our staff;

Full-time Guidance (or almost full-time in some cases PSE programmes. (We regard PSE as being an integral part of Guidance and so, in secondary schools, it is taught by Guidance staff);

Individual, student support;

Peer helping/Guidance;

Student participation (eg councils);

Professional development in Guidance-related areas by staff in all sectors. (LA 1 )

These demonstrate not only a belief in the expertise and commitment of staff and collaborative working, but also show that a number of local authorities have already begun to make significant changes to the ways in which they conceptualise and organise guidance/pupil support.

3.3.2 Staffing

The most common pattern of staffing for guidance reported by authorities was that there should be a member of the senior management team with overall responsibility for guidance, a group of principal teachers for guidance, and a general 'pastoral care' responsibility shared by all staff. Ten authorities (38%) mentioned that a senior manager had responsibility for guidance; 23 (88%) mentioned principal teachers for guidance; and 8 (31%) mentioned shared responsibility for all teachers.

Promoted staff at principal teacher grade are generally involved in the delivery of all guidance functions including support for learning, pastoral care and behaviour management. A depute headteacher will have a co-ordinating role. (LA 12)

However, that same authority went on to explain that the structure of guidance was beginning to change at school level as they embraced a differentiated definition of pupil support to include pastoral, behavioural and learning support.

Previously we had principal teachers of guidance. Now, we have principal teachers of pupil support (pastoral), principal teachers of pupil support (learning) and principal teachers of pupil support (behaviour). Schools are developing their pastoral support system and practices by building on existing arrangements. Formal pastoral support remains within the remit of promoted principal teachers of pupil support. However, there is still a significant role for all teachers, which will be developed by schools over the next few sessions. (LA 12)

Thirteen authorities (50%) indicated that they operated with a pupil to guidance staff ratio, although in some cases these were approximations. The average across all authorities was 198 pupils to one guidance staff member, but this ranged from 125:1 through to 270:1. These figures should be treated with some caution as many were based on local authority estimates. In addition, ten local authorities (38%) said they had no recommended pupil to guidance staff ratio; two (8%) reported that their staffing ratios were under review, and one (4%) operated a 'points system' to work out staffing, but it was not possible to translate this into a comparative staffing ratio.

3.3.3 Pupil entitlement

In most authorities, the local authority expected schools to decide the time allocation for guidance to which pupils were entitled. However, twelve authorities (46%) made recommendations but admitted that these were based upon national documents such as More than Feelings of Concern or Effective Learning and Teaching: Guidance. A mixed picture emerged about the aspects of guidance which local authorities recommended that schools provide. Fifteen (58%) recommended that pupils have the same guidance teacher throughout their school careers, and ten (38%) suggested that pupils should be included in a needs assessment process, three of which mentioned this in conjunction with the development of personal learning plans. The overwhelming majority (24 authorities; 92%) did not recommend having separate persons designated for personal, vocational and curricular guidance. Again devolution of responsibility for the implementation of guidance featured as a common rationale, with six authorities (23%) reporting that all these matters should be devolved to school level.

3.3.4 Quality assurance

Twenty-two authorities (85%) reported that they monitored the quality of guidance provision within schools. They mentioned a variety of ways in which this was achieved including local authority quality assurance officers, school visits, questionnaires, audits, and use of How Good is Our School performance indicator s. Two of these authorities (8%) said that their monitoring was 'informal' and two others reported that they did not monitor the quality of guidance. Specific approaches were described by three authorities. These explain how:

QA officer visits and monitor of self evaluation material generated from schools. (LA 20 )

(a) Through self-evaluation of schools - school development Planning Process;

(b) Through performance review meetings with headteachers;

(c) Through network meetings with Assistant HTs and colleagues with responsibility for elements of guidance and Health Careers;

(d) Visits to schools. (LA 14)

The Authority has a programme of Quality Assurance procedures involving the implementation of Self-Evaluation, School Development Planning and establishment review/progress in relation to the National Priorities. There is also a process of Review and Development for all staff closely related to the procedures for Continuing Professional Development. In addition there is monitoring of the quality of Guidance provision in schools through the well established "Taking a Closer Look" (TACL) programme for all establishments. This is a formal process of external evaluation. (LA 12 )

This is done through the Development planning (for which Education Officers are responsible) and through school self-evaluation and, of course, through an analysis of HMIE reports. We have also done some consultation on an authority basis with young people, parents and staff. School Guidance staff have also conducted evaluation, eg through questionnaires to school students and parents. We need to develop more specific evaluation over the next few years. (LA 1)

The role of school self-evaluation is clearly considered important, with many respondents implying that this is already developed, along with development planning, staff development and review and response to HMIE reports. This may very well be the case in many schools, but is beyond the remit of this review.

3.3.5 Peer guidance

Twenty-two local authorities (85%) reported that pupil mentoring, 'buddy' schemes, or some form of 'peer support' were operating in at least some of their schools. Three (11%) indicated that it was up to their schools to decide if they wished to implement a mentoring scheme and one simply reported that it had 'no specific plans'. Two authorities (8%) mentioned mentoring by adults (one with employer mentors, the other unspecified). Eleven (42%) made the point that such mentoring was not an authority 'policy', but was 'encouraged' or 'supported' by the authority. The examples cited below show how schools in some authorities have introduced 'buddy' systems to provide a variety of curricular and personal support for individual pupils, typically by encouraging older pupils to mentor younger pupils.

At school, support of this nature [mentoring] has been tried with varying success, though there is evidence that targeted support such as formalised Peer Support Group is a positive model. Buddy system also being piloted. (LA 23)

A number of schools already have established mentoring programmes - some linked specifically to curriculum developments, eg reading, skills, others of a more generic buddying nature. The Authority actively encouraged such programmes. (LA 14 )

No specific policies. Mentoring/buddying systems are well established in most schools. Further development of this is a priority in the authorities statement of Improvement Objectives (LA 26)

Schools currently make wide use of the pupil buddies and mentors. It is also a feature of circle time development. Pupil Councils are well developed and link with youth councils operated by Community Learning and Development. The Director and Chair of the Education Committee meet regularly with representatives of school councils. (LA 9)

The authority is actively encouraging senior pupils to act as mentors for junior pupils through an active citizenship agenda. (LA 28)

While some authorities seem to have positively embraced peer support and mentoring schemes as a way of engaging pupils, others are less sure and suggest that more evaluation of outcomes is required.

3.4 Specialist or generalist appointments

Throughout the literature reported in Chapter 2 and Appendix A2, there is a continuing debate about the specialist versus generalist approach to the delivery of guidance/pupil support. This is still a contentious issue for many local authorities in Scotland, and it may very well be that this survey was conducted at a point when concepts and systems of guidance/pupil support are in flux. Twenty-six local authorities (100%) operated a system of promoted posts for guidance. Nineteen (73%) mentioned the role of the Principal Teacher in delivering guidance; eight referred to their former use of Assistant Principal Teachers. Six authorities (23%) had appointed acting Principal Teachers on an interim basis pending decisions about the restructuring of guidance provision. One (4%) had formerly used Senior Teachers for some guidance functions. Four authorities (15%) indicated that they had abandoned the title 'guidance' and were now referring to Principal Teachers of 'pupil support' or 'pastoral care' instead. In addition to specialist guidance/pupil support posts, authorities also thought that other teachers should play a role in pupil support. Twenty-one local authorities (81%) reiterated that they expected all teachers to have a guidance role. Five (19%) added that this did not preclude a role for specialist guidance staff. Four (15%) specifically mentioned the role of teaching staff as 'first line guidance' and two (8%) indicated that they were developing the role of tutor teachers as 'first line guidance'. Four authorities (15%) described how they perceived guidance/pupil support should be delivered by a mixture of specialist guidance staff working in conjunction with other teachers.

… All staff have a duty of care and welfare. But we still envisage the need for specialised Guidance input as described earlier. (LA 32 )

… There is no expectation that 1st level guidance will become a replacement for the more traditional model. (LA 23)

… The workload is not possible for the pastoral Support PTs appointed. There has always been an expectation that all staff would fulfil a 'first-line' guidance role. (LA 26)

The overall number of promoted guidance staff has decreased. The authority in its attempt to ensure no diminution of care, has formalised first level guidance into a tutor system and has produced a remit for schools to use/adopt. Schools can shape their own system but it is based on the McCrone principles (Doc A and B). (LA 16)

Implicit in these responses is continuing support for specialist guidance staff, but recognition that the size of their workload now requires an input from all staff. It is also interesting to note that four authorities questioned what was meant by a 'guidance role'. As one pointed out:

The phrase 'Guidance role' is problematic; all teaching staff will be supported in responding to Annex B. Principal Teacher posts will be established to manage pupil support. As schools move towards Health Promoting School status and with the extension of new integrated responsibility and duty. (LA 7)

Two authorities (8%) wondered what was meant by 'all teaching staff' as they believed it would be unrealistic to expect all to be involved: they only expect around 80% of their staff to have a guidance role. However, 20 authorities (77%) made it clear that they did not expect only designated staff to have a guidance role as they sought the most effective way of supporting pupils. As one explained:

We are seeking the most effective means of supporting our young people and this means that the staff of all agencies must provide this. Guidance staff must concentrate more on the areas where they have the experience and skills as teachers to ensure that young people develop educationally, socially and emotionally. Others have equally important contributions to make and are more appropriately trained frequently to deal with other aspects of development. (LA 32)

3.5 Major challenges

3.5.1 Impact of the McCrone agreement

Most local authorities reported that the organisation of guidance had changed and was continuing to change, not least in response to the agreement reached regarding the structuring of the teaching profession (McCrone, 2000). Nine authorities (35%) had restructured guidance provision in schools and a further eight (31%) were in the process of restructuring, or had put interim agreements in place while they make decisions about future arrangements. Thirteen authorities (50%) said that the McCrone agreement had had an operational impact on their provision of guidance. This was usually expressed in the form of greater caseloads or fewer staff to cover the work. Six authorities (23%) believed that the McCrone agreement had had a negative impact on staff morale; four (15%) mentioned the job-sizing process as a factor in causing loss of staff morale. Eight (31%) reported that they were moving towards having full-time guidance staff, who would teach PSE but not a curricular subject. Authorities throughout Scotland had lost Assistant Principal Teacher posts and this affected the way guidance was being delivered in most local authorities. The only exceptions being Aberdeen City, Aberdeenshire and Moray Councils which were already operating without APT posts for guidance prior to the McCrone agreement. Four authorities (15%) mentioned that they had allowed former APTs to become Acting Principal Teachers on a temporary basis during the transition period.

Twenty-five authorities (96%) reiterated that they were reviewing and/or restructuring their guidance provision at the time the survey was conducted. Seven (27%) made some mention of making additional training (CPD) available for staff (including general teaching staff) to help them cope with new guidance/ pupil support structures and responsibilities particularly the requirement for all staff to take pastoral responsibility. Two (8%) reported that they intended to lobby nationally to air their concerns about the impact the McCrone settlement was having on guidance.

The proposed structures determined by schools will require staff to be clear on roles, responsibilities, purpose and communication within any new arrangements. Training will be made available to support new structures over the coming sessions. A key aspect of this will be effective use of ICT frameworks to facilitate effective transfer of information etc. A development officer is currently in post and part of her remit is to evaluate the capacity of schools to deliver and to support developments. The authority is keen to establish a policy framework for schools to operate within. (LA 7)

(a) Interim position - temporary PTs guidance in post until new management structures are in place by August 2004. Each school setting out management structures within the Authority parameters.

(b) A position paper re pastoral care and pupil welfare in line with Annex B has been drafted for negotiation with professional organisations.

(c) CPD programmes planned for all class teachers; input to probationers programme. (LA 14)

Each school has developed a structure of promoted posts to meet the needs of its pupils. All of these structures have between 4 and 6 Pupil Support Principal Teachers. All schools are developing tutor group systems for first line pastoral support. (LA 30)

One authority pointed out that it was proposing to develop full-time guidance posts which it anticipated would be a controversial step.

The most controversial proposal is that all Guidance teachers should be full-time, ie their only teaching commitment should be for courses in PSHE. While some of our Guidance teachers welcome this proposal, others are abhorred by it, and a large number is undecided and wracked by conflicting emotions. (LA 8)

It also envisaged that inter-agency working would help.

Pastoral services in school will be enhanced by multi-agency input based on School Referral Teams, incorporating in-school Social Workers, Youth Workers and School Nurses, with further outreach Health advice available. (LA 8)

3.5.2 Identifying major challenges

All local authorities were asked to identify the major challenges which they thought faced them as they sought to ensure that pupils had access to guidance. Twenty-three authorities (88%) anticipated that the major challenge facing guidance was adapting to the new structures within which it now had to operate. This included both structures internal to the school (ie, integration with Learning Support and Behaviour Support and the new structure of promoted posts), and those external to the school (ie, working more closely with external agencies). As one authority put it:

A practical model requires to be developed nationally to ensure that all teachers have a meaningful role in schools in terms of Annex B of the teachers' agreement, eg all teachers contributing to Care and Welfare and Health and Safety issues in their school. (LA 12)

Nine authorities (35%) were concerned about the need to provide training/CPD for both promoted staff and all other teachers as they assumed a pastoral care role under the McCrone settlement, a point we shall return to later in Chapter 7 when the training needs of teachers are considered in more detail. One articulated the problem as:

Involving the majority of staff in contributing to pupil support (guidance). Providing a range of relevant training opportunities. Convincing staff of their worth in the process and maintaining morale. (LA 22)

Eight authorities (31%) expressed worries about maintaining the quality of guidance provision in the face of all the changes which were occurring. Six (23%) were concerned about low staff morale caused by the changes, and by the job-sizing exercise. An additional two authorities (8%) said that they were concerned about recruiting new guidance staff in the future: one did not specify their reason for this worry, while the other thought that guidance might be a less attractive route into senior management because of the changes. As two respondents explained:

Staff morale and workload still to be 'tested'. (LA 23)

The recent job sizing exercise appears to have had a demoralising effect on a number of guidance teachers. It will be important for the future to ensure that teachers in promoted guidance jobs remain in post and that there is a healthy approach to recruitment of promoted guidance staff to meet the future needs of schools. (LA 12)

Five authorities (19%) saw a major challenge in the widening remit of guidance which was described by one as the 'ever increasing demands from society to undertake virtually all developmental tasks associated with young people growing up'. Five (19%) believed that tracking and monitoring pupil progress associated with Personal Learning Plans and target setting would be a major challenge and three (12%) thought that extending guidance into primary schools would be challenging. Others pointed out the need for continuing support to schools so that they could develop restructured services in response to the integration of children's services within the authority.

…. A medium term challenge will be supporting schools as the authority moves towards a universal service for young people integrating schools and children's services. In the short term the challenge is providing appropriate support to all staff so that the future shift towards a new way of working has a successful outcome for the pupils and students of the authority. (LA 7)

In order to achieve this, authorities argued for continuing commitment from the Scottish Executive and an active role for specialist guidance staff.

It will be important that principal teachers pupil support (pastoral) develop a balanced approach across their wide ranging remit which encompasses individual pastoral support, the development/delivery of Personal and Social Education and their management/leadership responsibilities. There will also need to be a continued commitment from the Scottish Executive to maintain promoted guidance posts in schools. In addition this commitment needs to extend to the continuation of the provision of appropriate training and certification in relation to Guidance/Pupil Support. Qualifications in Guidance/Pupil Support should also be linked to increased salary awards in a similar manner to the Chartered Teacher programme but recognising the need for a salary award in excess of Chartered Teacher. (LA 12)

Another summarised the needs as:

Even more partnership working with other support services both within and outside school;

Maintaining morale unless the job-sizing exercise is modified;

Developing more sophisticated ways of monitoring pupil progress and helping pupils to monitor their own progress;

Developing even more imaginative ways of doing PSE;

Involving young people more in doing Guidance with their peers;

Adapting Guidance to new curricular structure. (LA 1)

3.6 Summary

Twenty-six of the 32 local authorities in Scotland described their policies and practices for the organisation of guidance/pupil support in Scottish schools. Most produce either a policy or guidelines on guidance but few refer specifically to guidance in primary schools. From their responses it emerged that:

• Local authorities devolve most aspects of guidance to schools but retain responsibility for the strategic direction of guidance within the authority.
• All authorities had aims for guidance and identified features of 'good practice' which closely reflected core facets of guidance (personal/ vocational/educational/PSE) or reflected some aspects of the management of delivery of guidance.
• Only 13 authorities (50%) gave some indication of the pupil to guidance staff ratio in their schools. The average was 198:1, with a range from 125:1 to 270:1. These figures must be treated with some caution, as many were estimates.
• The most common pattern of staffing reported by authorities was for schools to appoint a member of the senior management team with overall responsibility for guidance, a group of Principal Teachers, and then a general 'pastoral care' responsibility shared by all staff.
• The aspects of guidance which authorities considered most important were 'Personal Guidance: individual support and counselling' and 'Personal Guidance: pastoral care'. However, eight authorities (31%) explicitly stated that they regarded all aspects of guidance as equally important.
• There is a mixed picture about what recommendations authorities make to schools about different aspects of guidance provision. Fifteen authorities (58%) recommend that pupils have the same guidance teacher throughout their school careers.
• The quality of guidance provision was generally monitored through a variety of mechanisms, including quality assurance officers, school visits, questionnaires and audits, and use of How Good Is Our School indicators. Most expected schools to be engaging in self-evaluation.
• Pupil mentoring, peer support, or 'buddy' schemes were widespread, but tended to be 'encouraged' by authorities rather than being official policy.

1. The major challenges which authorities see facing guidance provision were: adapting to the new structures following the McCrone agreement; providing training and support for all staff; maintaining the quality of provision; maintaining staff morale; the widening remit of 'guidance'; tracking and monitoring pupil progress; and extending 'guidance' to primary schools.

This chapter provided an overview of how local authorities organise guidance and the problems which they foresee. In the next chapter, we present evidence from the case study primary and special schools to show what pupils, teachers, parents and members of other professions think about guidance, the strengths of the current system and also areas which need improving.

« Previous | Contents | Next »