Benefits for staff and carers

Training in social pedagogy supports and encourages the learning of professionals, including carers. Systemic support and consultancy ensure practice and organisational developments run in tandem and support the learning.

Each learning and development course is tailored to the needs and setting of the participants’ work and focuses on facilitating reflection. Through the use of social pedagogic methodology, participants gain further insight into their role and enhance their interactions with colleagues and others beyond, in the institution, community and society more widely.

One of the many benefits is that learners locate the theories that underpin tacit knowledge and their intuitive practice. And newly learned theories and concepts are applied to practice. Learners grow in confidence, apply theories to their practice and can discuss them with other professionals.

An Ofsted inspection for Derbyshire’s Children and Young Adults reported,

“For example, the social pedagogy model has resulted in reductions in the need for restraint and a reduction in the numbers of children missing education. It has also been effective in improving staff morale and reducing sickness levels.”

Learners find new ways of reaching joint goals with service users. Methods and concepts enhance their existing professional toolkit and social pedagogical thought informs how these are used. There is an increased awareness of their potential as facilitators of development and positive change.

In addition, values and beliefs become explicit and often shift during a social pedagogy learning and development course.

“Some things you tell me I have already done with my child. I can now make a conscious decision on when I suggest what, and what the purpose is. I never thought that something as simple as playing a ball game can be so powerful and educational until I reflected on all the things this can trigger in a person.”
Foster Carer – Head, Heart, Hands programme


But if the personal is seldom absent from their public writ-
ing, neither is a more public concern ever truly absent from their
most private composing. All four students speak of the wish, the
tendency, to write from personal experience toward something
more public, toward essays addressed to an audience capable of
understanding and for a kindred group capable of identifying
with them. Nor are these young writers — even “basic” writers —
so naively “self expressive” as student writers are often assumed
to be so you can check this link right here now A desire, need, or, in Francois’s terms, “struggle” to make
themselves understood in their writing and, quite literally, to re-
make themselves through the understanding achieved — to com-
municate and, through that act of communicating, to construct
coherent selves acceptable to others — links the four individual
themes. That variously phrased wish to compose a coherent, in-
telligible self intimates to us a discomfiting awareness these stu-
dents share with deconstructionists and poststructuralists alike:
a perhaps not quite articulated, yet no less real, knowledge that
in the absence of any intrinsic, fully formed “self” ready to be
communicated, writing becomes less a self-expressive performance
than a self-constituting, relational act. Meeting their wish im-
plies for us, in our relationship to them as teachers and as read-
ers, a different role that is neither Scylla nor Charybdis.