Revisiting social workers in schools (SWIS) – making the case for safeguarding in context and the potential for reach
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JCS-04-2021-0015 |
| Published date | 20 April 2022 |
| Date | 20 April 2022 |
| Pages | 205-220 |
| Subject Matter | Health & social care,Vulnerable groups,Children's services,Sociology,Sociology of the family,Children/youth,Parents,Education,Early childhood education,Home culture,Social/physical development |
| Author | Jennifer Rafter |
Revisiting social workers in schools
(SWIS) –making the case for
safeguarding in context and
the potential for reach
Jennifer Rafter
Abstract
Purpose –Recently, there have been renewed callsto place social workers in schools. Although these
are not unchartered waters,contextual understandings of safeguarding have reaffirmedthe centrality of
schools in the lives of young peopleand keeping them safe. Yet, schools can only do so much to support
young people. Safeguarding practice reviews continue to highlight the shortcomings of contextless
assessment. This paper aims to make the case for a broader approach to safeguarding practice by
placingsocial workers in schools.
Design/methodology/approach –A scoping review was undertakento elicit social workers in schools
(SWIS) literature from the UK, as well as international examples. Keyword searches revealed a lack of
consensus on shared/agreementterminology for SWIS. The literature was organised thematically, as a
mechanismto open up the extent, range and nature of researchactivity in relation to SWIS.
Findings –Findings are presentedin three themes: misunderstandings of SWIS –what do they actually
do?; microversus macro interventions; and the concept of reach.
Research limitations/implications –The main implicationsof this study are to sharpen the focus on the
centralityof schools in the lives of children and young people;to expand school-based initiativesas a way
to reach young people at risk;to re-centre practice to local, community orientationwith an emphasis on
early help;and to bring together pockets of good practice and learnfrom successful partnership models.
Originality/value –Little attempt has been made to contemplate the past and present and rethread
school-basedinitiatives. There is an absence of attention affordedto the theoretical foundations of SWIS.
This paper identifies a gap in interest from the early iterations of SWIS, with a recent upsurgence in
attention.
Keywords Safeguarding, Schools, Reach, School-based social work, Social work in schools,
Social worker in schools, School-based practice
Paper type Literature review
Introduction
The central preposition of this paper is locating social workers in schools (SWIS) interrupts
risk and brings protection to children and young people.There are shared concerns among
professionals that many children are offered interventions too late, when they are already
trapped in exploitative situations. SWIS departs from the thin-red line of crisis to a more
contextual approach, wheresupport cascades through and across systems.
The literature review aims to revisit trends and advancements in SWIS in the UK and
internationally. In presenting the changing landscape of keeping children safe such new
threats, challenges and complexity, it aims to reassert the centrality of schools in
safeguarding efforts. The findings are organised and presented in three themes and
Jennifer Rafter is based at
the School for Social Work,
Anglia Ruskin University,
Chelmsford, UK.
Received 25 April 2021
Revised 16 August 2021
9 January 2022
Accepted 13 March 2022
DOI 10.1108/JCS-04-2021-0015 VOL. 17 NO. 3 2022, pp. 205-220, ©Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 1746-6660 jJOURNAL OF CHILDREN’S SERVICES jPAGE 205
concludes with implicationsfor further research and the significance for policy and practice.
An additional aim for this article is to provide the starting point for a wider debate about the
role of SWIS in child protection with particular attention paid to how contextual safeguarding
can enhance previous attempts for school-based practice.
Changing landscape of child protection
Schools are the largest universal service for children, with an unrivalled degree of influence,
yet debates continue to rage about how they should use this influence (Chapleau, 2020).
Many children face additional challenges outside of the classroom and schools have the
potential to mediate, mitigate andcan be a stabilising influence (Howard et al., 2019). Thus,
children and young people continue to tell practitioners that school is often one of the only
safe places they have, a place to escape chaos and ask for help (Donagh, 2020). In
addition to being “safe havens” for childrenat risk of harm, schools provide an extra layer of
monitoring and are important sources of referrals to children’s social care. After the police,
schools are the largest sources of referrals, accounting for 20% when “education services”
are included (Morse, 2019).
The recent care review “Case for Change” (2021) spotlighted teenagers as the fastest
growing group in both child protection and a group particularly failed by confused multi-
agency responses. Some lament that social work may now be unable to rise to
contemporary challenges (Maylea, 2020). Or that services are not keeping pace with the
complexity and sophistication of new threats facing young people (Wood Report, 2016;
Turner et al., 2019;Megele and Buzzi, 2020), leading some authors to question the efficacy
of the current child protection system, when social workers are tasked with new demands in
responding to ever changing forms of harm (Wroe and Lloyd, 2020). Within this landscape,
contextualised accounts of harm are gaining popularity (Wroe, 2021),upholding schools as
key players in keeping children safe rather than a peripheral safeguarding voice. For the
purpose of this article, contextual safeguarding is defined as an approach “that promotes
the assessment of and intervention with, peer group, school and community contexts in
which young people experience abuse”(Lloyd et al., 2020, p. 753).
Pioneered by Professor Carlene Firmin, contextual safeguarding offers the potential to
refresh current child protection, by providing a roadmap for how to respond to ever-
evolving risks and harms (Orr, 2021). Contextual safeguarding expands the objectives of
child protection systems in recognition that young people are vulnerable to abuse in a
range of social contexts (Hill, 2018). Consequently, the need to intervene with school
environments and to see broader engagement is a new feature of statutory child protection
guidance. The 2018 revisions of Working Together to Safeguard Children, for the first time,
recommended intervening withextra-familial environments such as schools (Firmin, 2020b).
Contextual approaches interrogate how adults can better understand the social fields
young people navigate such as schools.
Safeguarding practice reviews[1] firmly identify school as a key protective factorin keeping
children safe (Baginsky et al.,2015), with school exclusions strongly identified as a major
driver in exploitation (Wroe, 2021). School exclusion is highlighted as the tipping point,
which can propel and accelerate risk, meaning schools often work hard to “hold onto”
young people (It was hard to escape, 2020). For Gillies (2016), once excluded young
people are ghettoised, removed from sight and mind to invisibility, into the “sin bins” of
multiple vulnerabilities and a location of recruitment for gangs (Holtom, 2021). Brandon’s
et al. (2020) triennial review of SPRs underscores the sanctuary and safety of school years,
a time of everyday safeguards.
Good or bad, school is a milestone life experience in the lives of children and young people.
In Rewriting the Rules,Firmin (2020a) recalls how she heard about young people hanging
about outside of a school they have been excluded from, as they still want to be there and
PAGE 206 jJOURNAL OF CHILDREN’S SERVICES jVOL. 17 NO. 3 2022
To continue reading
Request your trial