Lisa Jones

Education and poverty: mapping the terrain and making the links to educational policy

Although there is widespread agreement that poverty and poor educational outcomes are related, there are different explanations about why that should be the case. The purpose of this paper is to provide a conceptual synthesis of some of the research literature on poverty and education. From our readings the debates cohere, to a greater or lesser extent, around three different foci: ones that focus on the individual and that we have termed the ‘micro‐level’; some that focus on ‘immediate social contexts’ that might be located in families, communities, schools and peer groups and that we have termed the ‘meso‐level’; and others again that focus on social structures and/or are linked to notions of power and inequality and that we have termed the ‘macro‐level’. In addition, the various literatures highlight a fundamental difference in the way they understood the role of education in producing what we might call the ‘good society’ – and hence what counts as ‘good education’. These two broad positions we have termed as functionalist and socially critical perspectives and together with the micro‐, meso‐ and macro‐foci provide a mapping framework by which we organise the literature and through which we examine a number of educational policy interventions in England that have focused on educational outcomes and disadvantage/poverty. The analysis suggests that perhaps too much policy intervention focuses on the more accessible and amenable meso‐level (and to lesser extent the micro‐level) with too little emphasis on the macro‐level. At the same time many interventions appear disjointed, often lack coherence and seem to eschew issues of power. Different ways of responding to these apparent deficiencies are explored through current developments and potential in full service extended schools and through notions of democratic pedagogy and governance possibilities suggestive of the ‘new localism’ agenda.

The relationships between psychological mindedness, parental bonding and adult attachment

OBJECTIVESnThe aims of this study were to clarify the relationship between psychological mindedness and attachment relationships in childhood and adulthood.nnnDESIGNnThis analogue study examined associations between psychological mindedness and attachment using a cross-sectional design.nnnMETHODnParticipants completed questionnaire measures of psychological mindedness, parental bonding, and adulthood attachment relationships.nnnRESULTSnAs hypothesized, psychological mindedness was strongly, negatively correlated with attachment avoidance in adulthood. Psychological mindedness was also positively correlated with perceived maternal care in childhood, and negatively correlated with perceived paternal over-protection. However, a regression analysis found that attachment avoidance in adulthood was a more significant predictor of psychological mindedness than parental bonding experiences in childhood.nnnCONCLUSIONSnFurther research is needed to replicate associations between attachment and psychological mindedness in clinical samples and to explore additional constructs which influence psychological mindedness.nnnPRACTITIONER POINTSnHigh attachment avoidance may be a potential risk factor for poor psychological mindedness. Helping individuals to develop more secure attachments in their adult relationships may improve their psychological mindedness.

A mixed-methods evaluation of a pilot psychosocial intervention group for older people with schizophrenia.

BACKGROUNDnThere is a strong evidence base for psychological treatments in younger adults with schizophrenia, but limited work has been done on adapting these interventions for older people.nnnAIMSnWe describe a study of a pilot psychosocial intervention group specifically designed to meet the needs of older people with schizophrenia in NHS settings.nnnMETHODnWe used a mixed-methods approach to evaluate the group. We assessed feasibility and acceptability by monitoring uptake and retention in the study. We used a within groups design comparing participants on a range of potentially relevant outcomes at baseline and posttreatment. Treatment acceptability was also assessed by semi-structured interviews conducted at the end of treatment.nnnRESULTSnWe recruited 11 participants to the study and 7 of these completed the majority of the group sessions. At a group level participants made improvements in self-esteem and negative symptoms that were statistically significant even in this small sample. Feedback interviews suggested that participants valued the social contact provided by the group and made actual changes in their day-to-day lives as a result of attending.nnnCONCLUSIONnThe intervention could offer help with some of the secondary disability associated with the diagnosis of schizophrenia and is acceptable to older adults. Further evaluation is, however, warranted.