This article was downloaded by: [University of Southern Queensland]

On: 06 October 2014, At: 19:25

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Pastoral Care in Education: An

International Journal of Personal,
Social and Emotional Development
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rped20

‘He comes to talk to me about things’:

supporting pupils experiencing
social and emotional behavioural
difficulties—a focus upon interpersonal
relationships
a
Joan Gaynor Mowat
a
University of Strathclyde, School of Education , Southbrae Drive,
Jordanhill, Glasgow, G13 IPP, UK
Published online: 02 Sep 2010.

To cite this article: Joan Gaynor Mowat (2010) ‘He comes to talk to me about things’: supporting
pupils experiencing social and emotional behavioural difficulties—a focus upon interpersonal
relationships, Pastoral Care in Education: An International Journal of Personal, Social and Emotional
Development, 28:3, 163-180, DOI: 10.1080/02643944.2010.504218

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02643944.2010.504218

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
 Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 19:25 06 October 2014
 Pastoral Care in Education
Vol. 28, No. 3, September 2010, pp. 163–180

‘He comes to talk to me about things’:

supporting pupils experiencing social
and emotional behavioural difficulties—
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 19:25 06 October 2014

a focus upon interpersonal relationships

Joan Gaynor Mowat*
University of Strathclyde, School of Education, Southbrae Drive, Jordanhill, Glasgow G13
IPP, UK
(Received 25 January 2010; final version received 3 April 2010)
Taylor and Francis
RPED_A_504218.sgm

Pastoral
10.1080/02643944.2010.504218
0264-3944
Original
Taylor
302010
28
Dr
joan.mowat@strath.ac.uk
00000September
Joan&Mowat
Care
Article
Francis
(print)/1468-0122
in Education
2010 (online)

This paper argues for the centrality of high-quality trusting and respectful relationships within the
school setting, particularly between teachers and pupils. It argues for the need to pay careful atten-
tion to the nature of the interventions that are adopted to support the social and emotional devel-
opment of young people and for the need to ensure that their theoretical underpinnings are
understood by those responsible for implementation. It centres upon the evaluation of an interven-
tion (Support Groups), devised by the author, to support pupils perceived as having social and emo-
tional behavioural difficulties with a particular focus upon the development of interpersonal
relationships. The case study is principally qualitative and draws upon the accounts of the first four
cohorts of pupils to undertake the intervention (n = 69), following their progress from the com-
mencement of Secondary 1 up to one to two years beyond intervention. The study draws from a
wide range of stakeholder accounts and from six in-depth case studies. The findings indicate that,
to varying extents, Support Group pupils had developed their capacities to form and maintain
effective interpersonal relationships but, particularly in respect of their relationships with teachers,
this was highly context-related. Peer relationships were still perceived as problematic by classroom
teachers. The supportive ethos of the group had enabled warm relationships to form between
Support Group Leaders and pupils, and this had fostered effective communication and empathy.
These more positive relationships were exemplified within a statistically significant reduction in
discipline sanctions (including school exclusions), which were maintained beyond intervention.

Keywords: interpersonal relationships; personal intelligences (Gardner); emotional

intelligence; pastoral care; social and emotional behavioural difficulties

*Email: joan.mowat@strath.ac.uk

ISSN 0264–3944 (print)/ISSN 1468–0122 (online)/10/030163–18

© 2010 NAPCE
DOI: 10.1080/02643944.2010.504218
 164 J. G. Mowat

Introduction
There is universal agreement within the literature that strong interpersonal
relationships lie at the heart of high-quality pastoral care. Grove (2004) identifies rela-
tionships as one of three key components of pastoral care, and Visser (2005), within
the context of working with pupils perceived as having social and emotional behav-
ioural difficulties, identifies building positive relationships as one of eight ‘eternal veri-
ties’ underlying such work. The relationships between pupils and teachers (other than
pastoral care teachers) are also crucial if children are to thrive in school, as are
relationships between children and their peers and between the home and school.
McLaughlin identifies teachers as ‘potentially very powerful agents in children’s lives’
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 19:25 06 October 2014

(2008, p. 357) who can help to foster resilience in young people (2008, p. 358). The
importance of trusting and respectful relationships lying at the heart of what the school
does and stands for is evident throughout the literature (Harris, 2008).
It is this fundamental belief in the importance of interpersonal relationships that led
me, as a former deputy head teacher (responsible for Secondary 2 pupils in a Scottish
secondary school situated in an area of multiple deprivation), to develop a group-work
approach to support young people who were perceived by their class teachers and
pastoral care teachers as having social and emotional behavioural difficulties. Pupils,
nominated by their pastoral care teachers, met weekly with a Support Group (SG)
Leader for around one-half of the school year for approximately one hour per week.
Whilst external agencies can fulfil a very worthwhile function in supporting vulner-
able young people, I considered it important to build upon the relationships within
the school not only in terms of building capacity but also in terms of sustainability
(Hargreaves & Fink, 2006). I wanted the intervention to be integral to the school and
what it stands for rather than a bolt-on, happening at the extremities of the school and
therefore having only limited impact upon it. As such, a team of staff acted in the
capacity of SG Leaders to lead groups of three to six pupils through a carefully
designed programme of activities. The majority of staff were drawn from pastoral care
and behaviour support staff but other members of staff (including probationers) also
participated. I acted in the capacities of both Project Leader and SG Leader. As
Project Leader, I supported SG Leaders in a variety of ways, including providing staff
training, setting up regular meetings to share good practice and mentoring staff new
to the approach.
This article focuses upon an evaluation of the intervention, carried out over a five-
year period following the first four cohorts of SG pupils to participate within it (69
pupils in total), with a particular focus upon the development of interpersonal rela-
tionships. It compares and contrasts the approaches adopted within England and
Scotland to promote the social and emotional development of pupils before providing
a brief description of the intervention. After a brief description of how the approach
was introduced and developed within the school, a description of the study
methodology is followed by the presentation of benchmark measures, leading to the
presentation and discussion of findings, drawing implications from them to inform
future developments in the field.
 Interpersonal relationships 165

Introduction and development of the approach within the school

In response to the daily contact I encountered with indiscipline within the school and
the distress this caused to staff, pupils and families, I endeavoured to be pro-active
rather than reactive in approach. After some initial reflection, I took a proposal to the
Senior Management Team that we should seek to promote positive behaviour more
generally throughout the school and, more specifically, we should seek to support
those pupils who had greatest difficulty in coping socially and emotionally with the
demands of school life. These proposals were agreed. I then shared these proposals at
a staff meeting and met with an intermediate treatment worker to give further
consideration to establishing a group work approach.
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 19:25 06 October 2014

At the time when SGs were initiated, there were no other interventions in place to
support pupils perceived as having social and emotional behavioural difficulties
within the school, with the exception of the Behaviour Support Base and this was
proving controversial with staff. Initiatives pertaining to promoting positive behaviour
nationally were in their infancy and there was little understanding that such pupils
should be considered as needing support. As such, whilst some staff were supportive,
others took the view ‘Why should we be using resources on these pupils when they
already take up too much of our time? What about the good kids?’ It was therefore
not an easy journey and it was only when staff saw the positive impact that SGs had
on pupils involved within them that attitudes began to change. Over time, 17
members of staff volunteered their services over a seven-year period and support was
offered to 150 pupils, almost all of whom completed the intervention (Mowat, 2007).

A comparison between the English and Scottish approaches towards the

social and emotional development of pupils
There is a very clear difference between the English and Scottish approaches towards
the personal development of children and young people. Within the English system,
a much more uniform and centralised approach is adopted, taking forward the
principles of ‘Every Child Matters’ (DfES, 2004), realised through the Social and
Emotional Aspects of Learning (SEAL) programme that draws heavily upon the work
of Howard Gardner (multiple intelligence theory) and Daniel Goleman (emotional
intelligence). In contrast, Scotland has embraced a wide range of different approaches
towards promoting pupil well-being, many of them under the auspices of the policy
‘Better Behaviour—Better Learning’ (Scottish Executive Education Department,
2001) and the work of the Positive Behaviour Team. Whilst there are commonali-
ties—for example, the use of Circle Time, nurture groups, restorative practice
(justice)—it is the principle that local authorities and schools should be able to select
those approaches that are most suited to their specific set of circumstances which
delineates Scottish from English policy.
Weare (2008) advocates strongly an evidence-based, uniform approach to the
personal and social development of pupils. Craig (2007), however, argues that there
is insufficient evidence to support the assertion that all children are in need of such a
 166 J. G. Mowat

programme. She describes the SEAL approach as a ‘deficit model operating on three
levels’ (the whole-school approach, small-group approach and individual interven-
tion) (Craig, 2007, p. 152) and identifies a range of potential dangers inherent within
the approach. As outlined also by McLaughlin (2008), Craig is advocating that the
emphasis should be upon the promotion of a positive ethos within the school, with
teachers modelling what it is to be socially and emotionally aware and competent. She
argues for a targeted, early intervention approach, meeting the needs of the most
vulnerable children and their families.
Other commentators are concerned that, both within the United States and the
United Kingdom, policy-makers have embraced the concept of emotional intelli-
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 19:25 06 October 2014

gence (EI) without having a strong evidence base to support its development in
schools (Qualter et al., 2007). Qualter et al. argue that there is insufficient knowledge
and understanding of the theoretical underpinnings of the concept and of the distinc-
tions between EI as ‘ability’ (as forwarded by Mayer and Salovey) and EI as ‘trait’
related (more in keeping with the literature on personality, as described by Bar-On).
However, the authors draw upon more recent research to indicate that programmes
of social–emotional learning can impact positively upon the development of ability EI
and therefore upon life success (academic success, life satisfaction and success in
social relationships) (Qualter et al., 2007, p. 16), whilst providing a cautious warning
about the methodological limitations of some of the studies within this field.
Humphrey et al., in their evaluation of primary SEAL small-group work, observed
that, whilst the programme acted as a bridge to the wider school context (fostering the
transfer of learning) (2009, p. 234), this was not the case beyond the school gates. There
was no evidence of positive impact of the programme beyond the school setting or of
parental involvement. This is of significant concern. Learning which fails to generalise
beyond its immediate setting (what Perkins would describe as ‘low-transfer’ bridging;
Perkins & Solomon, 1989) is of little value to young people in their daily and future lives
and calls into question the efficacy of the programme as described within this study.
At a more fundamental level, Wright (2009) raises important issues about the
discourses that underlie conceptualisations of children’s behaviour and that therefore
shape the approaches adopted towards their social and emotional development. She
argues that teachers (because of the limitations of their training) are not able to draw
upon the wider and richer explanations within the psychological literature to explain
children’s behaviour. This narrower conceptualisation encourages teachers to focus
upon systems and structures rather than upon the emotions of the child (or, indeed,
their own emotions) ‘which perpetuates the control agenda and paradoxically
disempowers them’ (Wright, 2009, p. 283). Teachers, drawing upon these limited
constructs, may react to pupils’ misbehaviour by either distancing the child from the
situation (through excluding them from the classroom) or by psychologically distancing
themselves from the child, perceiving the child as ‘other’ (Wright, 2009, p. 288) and
therefore not deserving of the care, respect and attention afforded to other children.
Within both the English and Scottish contexts, programmes such as SEAL and
Restorative Justice have been and/or are currently being evaluated, but it is not evident
at this stage that a more centralised approach is preferable to a more devolved system.
 Interpersonal relationships 167

The philosophy underlying the Support Group approach

The intervention was developed at a time when there was increasing focus upon the
work of Howard Gardner and Daniel Goleman but I was also very inspired by the
work of David Perkins and the team at Project Zero (The Harvard Graduate School
of Education), promoting teaching for understanding. Whilst I was initially interested
in the work of Daniel Goleman, in engaging with the literature, I became concerned
about the all-embracing conceptualisation of emotional intelligence, the unquestion-
ing assumption that it was ‘a good’ and the empirical basis of the claims that seemed
‘overblown’ (Zins et al., 2004). In contrast, the narrower conception of ability EI,
forwarded by Mayer and Salovey (with its more modest claims) (Cobb & Mayer,
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 19:25 06 October 2014

2000), attuned more with Gardner’s (1993) personal intelligences—intrapersonal

and interpersonal—with their focus upon understanding of self and others (respec-
tively), and resonated much more directly with what I wished to achieve and with
teaching for understanding. Thus, the main focus of the approach came to be
enabling young people to develop intrapersonal and interpersonal intelligences such
that they would develop an understanding of their interpersonal relationships,
impacting upon a range of outcomes relating to their capacities to regulate their
behaviour, form and maintain good relationships and for empathy, impacting, in
turn, upon the development of self-esteem and confidence and more positive
dispositions towards learning. These formed the aims of the approach and are
reflected within the research aims and questions of the study.
The approach, therefore, draws upon social constructivist theories of learning and
the activities are designed, through collaborative discussion, to foster understanding.
Pupils also complete a SG Diary that enables them to reflect upon their experiences,
fostering the transfer of learning to wider contexts (Perkins & Salomon, 1989), and
set weekly negotiated targets with the assistance of their SG Leader that are moni-
tored by class teachers, the SG Leader and parents.

Methodology
The study design
The study is an example of an evaluative case study (Bassey, 1999) and of action
research (Somekh, 2006; Mills, 2007). It is principally qualitative, drawing mainly
upon scheduled interviews and open questionnaires. The design of the study evolved
over time, with research tools being refined (whilst maintaining their basic integrity)
and added to. Research tools were piloted with my own groups.
In order to measure progress over time, SG pupils were monitored (retrospectively)
from the commencement of Secondary 1 (drawing from attendance, attainment and
discipline records) until one to two years after intervention, at which point retrospec-
tive interviews were carried out with one-third of SG pupils, selected by means of a
stratified random sample. In order to contextualise the SG population, comparisons
were made with wider populations—peer cohorts within the school, local authority
and nationally. The responses of SG pupils to a pre-intervention self-assessment
 168 J. G. Mowat
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 19:25 06 October 2014

Figure 1. Illustration of study design and stakeholder groups pertaining to it

questionnaire were compared with those of a comparator group of pupils (n = 110)

drawn from the same cohorts within the school, none of whom had been referred to
senior management for indiscipline (a purposive sample).
The study design is illustrated in Figure 1.
Figure 1.

Limitations of the study design

Bassey (1999) identifies within the literature criticisms directed towards the degree to
which findings from case studies can be generalised beyond their immediate context,
and the difficulties in building up coherent bodies of knowledge drawn from case
studies as they are often not disseminated widely or built upon. However, whilst
recognising these limitations, case study has a great deal to offer as it allows for a
much richer study of a specific situation, the findings from which can illuminate the
issues for others, leading to evidence informed practice.

Ethical issues
Whilst the ethical guidelines pertaining to educational research in schools were not
published until after the conduct of this study (Scottish Educational Research Asso-
ciation, 2007), the study conforms to these guidelines—although it should be noted
that permission from pupils was sought verbally. However, conducting action
 Interpersonal relationships 169

research within your own working environment raises ethical issues for researchers
and this is particularly the case when one is in a position of authority. No matter how
much one tries to make it clear that people have choices as to whether they participate
within the study and/or disclose information, they may feel more of an obligation to
do so than otherwise might be the case. There are trust issues—to whom will
information be disclosed?—and how does one deal with information that comes one’s
way in the normal course of one’s duties that may be sensitive in nature? Transpar-
ency and honesty in approach are key if one is to negotiate this potential minefield.
For example, I made it very clear when communicating to staff, parents and pupils
the reasons for the information sought and how it would be used and communicated.
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 19:25 06 October 2014

Research methods
An important aspect of the evaluation was that I did not want it to be perceived as an
‘add-on’—something to be done at the end of the intervention that was not integral
to the approach. I wanted the evaluation to be part of the normal processes under-
taken by SG Leaders and pupils as a means of not only informing the study but acting
as a mechanism for the SG Leader and pupil to be able to reflect upon learning and
progress. Thus, the decision was made that the interviews with SG pupils would be
conducted by the SG Leader (after having received training in conducting interviews
from Stuart Hall, Scottish Council for Research in Education) and after pupils had
had the opportunity within the group to reflect upon their learning—how had partic-
ipation within the group impacted upon their understanding, values, beliefs, motiva-
tions and actions? Whilst some might argue that pupils might have felt under
emotional pressure to give the answers which SG Leaders wanted to hear, this had to
be balanced against the fact that pupils would be more likely to talk honestly and
openly with an adult with whom they had come to form a bond and trust. Scrutiny of
pupils’ responses indicated that pupils were able to express and articulate negative as
well as positive feelings and views (and the interview schedules were designed in such
a way as to foster this). The process of triangulation serves to act as a means of vali-
dating responses to this specific research tool. Questionnaires were completed by
class teachers, SG Leaders and parents.
The case studies (n = 6) were selected by means of a stratified, multi-phase sample,
using different criteria at each stage (such as gender and the discipline record of the
pupil) to produce the final six categories from which one pupil each was selected by
a researcher independent of the study (Stuart Hall) who then carried out the interviews.
Qualitative data were analysed by means of content analysis with the categories
being generated from the data and quantitative data by means of non-parametric chi-
squared tests.

Research questions
The first two questions relate directly to the aims of the intervention as described in
the previous section. The research questions can be summarised as follows:
 170 J. G. Mowat

● Is teaching for understanding happening? What impact, if any, did the intervention
have upon the development of intrapersonal and interpersonal intelligences in SG
pupils?
● If so, does it make a difference? What impact, if any, does the development of intrap-
ersonal and interpersonal intelligences have upon the range of outcomes previously
identified? (refer to the SG approach and its philosophy)
● What are the strengths and weaknesses of the approach? What are the variables that
impact upon pupil progress?
● In which ways does the study add to the bodies of knowledge within the respective fields?
How does it illuminate the issues for policy-makers, theorists and practitioners?
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 19:25 06 October 2014

Establishing benchmark measures

A focus upon interpersonal relationships
Benchmark measures, in relation to the stated focus, were established by examination
of pupil responses to the pre-intervention self-assessment questionnaire based upon
a semantic differential scale as undertaken by two cohorts of SG pupils (n = 46) and
a comparator group of 110 pupils (refer to methodology).

Findings drawn from the pre-self-assessment and post-self-assessment questionnaires

In relation to the pre-assessment questionnaire, pupil responses are summarised in
Tables 1 and 2, setting out a comparison between the percentage responses of SG
pupils and those of the comparator group (CG) and the significance of such
(expressed in chi-squared values).
The scale of the difference between the perceptions of SG pupils and the CG is stark
and, is, in relation to pupil–teacher relationships, of statistical significance. For exam-
ple, only one SG pupil identified with getting on well with his/her teachers in compar-
ison with 61% of pupils within the CG. Also of concern is the low proportion of SG
pupils who tried to show respect towards their teachers (37%), and who were friendly
towards their teachers (35%), in comparison with the responses of the CG. Of concern,
is the proportion of SG pupils (between 20 and 30%) who clearly did not enjoy good
relationships with their teachers, expressed in feelings of not being respected, cared
about or treated in a friendly way and feeling unable to communicate with them. These
feelings, with regard to pupils ‘with’ social and emotional behavioural difficulties , are
replicated throughout the literature (Cooper, 2008). It is of great concern that so few
pupils (in both groups) considered that their teachers cared about them.
In contrast, when considering peer relationships, it is only in relation to pupils’
perceptions of their friendliness towards other pupils that a differential (of high
statistical significance) is observed between the two groups. What may be worthy of
further study is that the commonality between pupil–teacher and pupil–pupil
relationships (for SG pupils) is their perceptions of their outgoings towards others
rather than their perceptions of how others relate to them. It should be recognised,
 Interpersonal relationships 171

Table 1. Pre-intervention self-assessment based upon perceptions of relationships between pupils

and teachers (the figures in brackets indicate the responses to positive versions of these statement)

SG (%) CG (%)
(n = 46) (n = 110) χ2 value p value

I get on well with my teachers 2 61 45.5 <0.001

I try to show respect towards my teachers 37 84 33.5 <0.001
Most of my teachers don’t like me 30 (22) 2 (53) 28.5 <0.001
Most of my teachers don’t try to be fair 30 (54) 3 (58) 26 <0.001
I am usually friendly towards my teachers 35 75 23 <0.001
Most of my teachers are not friendly towards me 20 (41) 0 (73) 23 <0.001
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 19:25 06 October 2014

I can’t talk to any of my teachers 26 (52) 4 (58) 15.5 <0.001

Most of my teachers don’t show respect towards me 20 (48) 3 (60) 13 <0.001
Most of my teachers don’t care about me 26 (28) 9 (32) 8 <0.01
Most of my teachers give me a chance 59 77 5.5 <0.05

Table 2. Pre-intervention self-assessment based upon perceptions of relationships between pupils

and their peers

SG (%) CG (%)
(n = 46) (n = 110) χ2 value p value

I am usually friendly towards other pupils 37 84 33.5 <0.001

I make friends easily 67 64 1 NS
I get on well with my friends 85 86 0 NS
Other pupils are usually friendly towards me 61 62 0 NS

NS= not significant.

however, that our sense of self is formed through our interpretation of how others
perceive us, a process that develops from infancy onwards, described by Oatley and
Jenkins as ‘self-in-relation-to-other’ (1996, p. 180); thus, it may be the case that a
child, experiencing avoidant of ambivalent attachment in infancy (Oatley & Jenkins,
1996, p.194, citing Ainsworth et al., 1978, building upon the work of Bowlby) may
come to see himself/herself as being unworthy of love and not of a loving disposition
and, therefore, unfriendly in general—it may become a defence mechanism to protect
from further hurt.

Findings and discussion

The findings are drawn from the questionnaires and interviews completed by/
conducted with pupils, parents, SG Leaders and class teachers; from the post-
intervention self-assessment questionnaires based upon a semantic differential scale;
and from the progress reports prepared by SG Leaders for parents. They focus upon
a sub-set of Research Question 2: To what extent, if any, have pupils been able to demon-
strate the capacities to develop further, empathy and interpersonal skills?
 172 J. G. Mowat

The forming of warm, trusting and respectful relationships within the setting of the group
One of the most significant findings to emerge from the study was the warmth of
relationships that formed between SG pupils and their SG Leaders: ‘He made us
feel welcome. He wanted us to have a good education and achieve something with
our lives’ (SG pupil). In many cases, this amounted to a transformation in how
pupils and teachers perceived each other and led to each re-appraising their previ-
ous assumptions and beliefs held about the other. A SG Leader noted ‘On a day to
day basis they see me differently’, and the Deputy Head observed that the interven-
tion ‘Made staff think further about (the) qualities of disruptive pupils’. From a
personal perspective, I became very protective of the pupils within my groups,
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 19:25 06 October 2014

whilst still acting in the role of deputy head responsible for welfare and discipline.
A pupil within my group put it this way: ‘You listened to my version of things when
I was in trouble and that made me listen to what you had to say’. These findings
support the development of what Cooper (2004) describes as ‘profound empathy’,
which is characterised by ‘the development of positive emotions and interactions
which create the ambience for learning which enables and fosters open communica-
tion’ (2004, p. 16).
The safe, supportive environment of the group in which pupils were listened to in
confidence and encouraged to express their frustrations and anxieties (particularly
about the school context), re-inforced through a negotiated group pledge, was cited
by pupils, parents and SG Leaders as contributing towards this outcome for many
pupils. Pupils were generally described as more communicative, less anxious and
aggressive and with increased self-esteem and confidence. The importance of trust is
cited by both pupils and teachers and is replicated throughout the literature:
From a very negative and antagonistic start to the Support Group, … has gradually made
a more positive contribution and gradually become more trusting and open. He is much
more communicative and less aggressive. (SG Leader’s report to parents)

This quote indicates that, for some pupils, participation within the group was not an
easy process and trust took time to develop and form, highlighting the importance of
avoiding ‘quick-fix’ solutions and of the need for persistence. This is in keeping with
many studies of pupils perceived as having social and emotional behavioural difficul-
ties in which it is recognised that previous damaged and damaging relationships with
adults (particularly the caregiver) can impede the capacity to trust and to form
positive relationships with others (Wright, 2009).
Not all pupils, however, responded so positively: ‘… has very poor social skills. He
finds it difficult to make friends and to work in any way collaboratively’ (SG Leader).

Relationships with teachers

Reports of classroom teachers in respect of the development of interpersonal relation-
ships are much more ambivalent and, indeed, a few parents noted that some teachers
were not supportive of what was trying to be achieved. Reputations, once formed,
proved to be very difficult for some children to shift, despite, in some cases,
 Interpersonal relationships 173

statistically significant reductions in incidents of indiscipline (Mowat, in press): ‘… is

aware that, “some teachers really hate me”, and that his previous behavioural repu-
tation colours his opinion of himself and his teachers’ (SG Leader).
In examining responses to the class teacher questionnaire (n = 488), it became
evident that SG pupils’ relationships with their teachers were highly variable and
highly context-related, with pupils forming more positive relationships with some
teachers but not with others. This is not a surprising finding given the volatility of the
population under scrutiny and it highlights the crucial importance of the teacher–
pupil relationship.
An unexpected finding, however, was the degree to which some SG pupils had
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 19:25 06 October 2014

developed a greater understanding of the role of the classroom teacher and empa-
thy towards their teachers: ‘I’ve become aware that teachers are trying to meet lots
of needs within the class. I’m more patient now—I take it less personally’ (SG
pupil).
There were also some very positive outcomes (‘We seem to get on—have a laugh.
He comes to talk to me about things’; class teacher), and these more positive
outcomes are reflected in a statistically significant reduction in referrals to senior
management for indiscipline and days of suspension from school.

Relationships with peers

The intervention had helped some pupils to gain a better understanding of their
relationships with peers and insight into their behaviour, leading to positive
outcomes:
The group enabled … to realise that he doesn’t need to behave inappropriately in order to
gain friends. (SG Leader)

But, for some other pupils caught up in peer culture, these outcomes were less in
evidence: ‘His behaviour is somewhat dominated by what he regards as “street cred”’
(SG Leader). One of the case studies (Linda) (pseudonym) describes being involved
with an older group of teenagers who had led her astray. Such ties are very difficult
for young people to break away from, but some had succeeded. Stewart (a further
case study) had managed to break away from ‘bad influences’, including several
incidents with the law. This positive response had been attributed to a combination
of the SG and changes in family circumstances, which had led to a much stronger
network of support for him. His aunt attributed his success to the fact that he had not
been given up for ‘a lost cause’.
It is evident that class teachers view the relationships between SG pupils and their
peers much more negatively than do the pupils themselves. The vast majority of
pupils were categorised either within the ‘variable’ or ‘negative’ categories, indicating
that this was an area in which the intervention had not impacted as positively as it
could. This is reflected in the wide range of teacher comments from the positive to
the negative: ‘Becoming a lot calmer—not wanting to get involved in conflict’ to
‘Winds up the girls which causes major disruption’.
 174 J. G. Mowat

A focus upon family relationships

One of the surprising findings of the study was the positive impact upon family rela-
tionships, in contrast to the findings of Humphrey et al. (2009) as previously cited.
Perhaps the greater emphasis upon family involvement at all stages of the intervention
may have influenced this outcome. Indeed, one pupil noted that, not only had the SG
taught him about the importance of talking through difficulties, it had also taught his
step-father, leading to much less fractious family relationships: ‘Well, it got my Step-
dad to appreciate the fact that the Support Group helped you to talk instead of being
a tube about it—I’m getting on fine with him’ (SG pupil).
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 19:25 06 October 2014

Relationships between the home and the school

Parents were highly appreciative of the pro-active approach adopted by the school (‘I
think the Support Group has been very worthwhile and everyone involved in it
deserves a medal’; SG parent), and some parents and pupils self-referred to the
intervention. In particular, parents found the daily monitoring of pupil progress to
be highly beneficial, although it should be noted that not all pupils cooperated or had
the organisational skills to cope with it.
Parents recognised that the school was trying to provide support for families and,
whilst difficult situations arose, there was much more of a sense of the school and
family working together to resolve the difficulty and much less of a ‘them’ and ‘us’,
leading to a greater sense of community and improved partnership working:
‘Individual members of the family have been working with … to try to help her. We’ll
get there in the end’ (SG parent).

Returning to benchmark measures

Figures 2 and 3 summarise the responses of SG pupils to the post-intervention self-
assessment questionnaire. Pupils were asked to identify whether they felt the same or
more positively or negatively in relation to each statement.
While some areas remained resistant to change (e.g. pupils’ perceptions of their
Figure 3.
2.

teachers liking of and sense of caring for them), there are other areas in which
perceptions are rated more positively. The perceived increase in mutually respectful
relationships is of particular importance as it is the foundation of the school as a
community. Perceptions of peer relationships (which were largely positive in the first
instance) remain either unchanged or are rated more positively.

The effects over time

It is often the case that pupils may respond positively in response to an intervention
at the time of intervention but an important issue is the extent to which improvements
are sustainable. What are the effects over time? The retrospective interview was
designed to fulfil this purpose.
 Interpersonal relationships 175
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 19:25 06 October 2014

Figure 2. Post-intervention responses to the self-assessment questionnaire (N = 43) as they apply

to relationships between SG pupils and their teachers (expressed in their positive form)

Figure 3. Post-intervention responses to the self-assessment questionnaire (N = 43) as they apply

to relationship between SG pupils and their peers

It is evident from examination of pupils’ responses that, for many pupils, improve-
ments in interpersonal relationships had been sustained. Figure 4 summarises the
responses of SG pupils to the question, ‘Did involvement in the SG have any lasting
effect upon your relationships with other pupils, teachers and parents?’
It can be ascertained that the greatest impact had been upon relationships with
Figure 4.

teachers and, to a lesser extent, peers. Responses in respect of parents are more
 176 J. G. Mowat

Figure 4. The impact of Support Groups upon pupils’ interpersonal relationships as perceived
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 19:25 06 October 2014

one-to-two years after intervention (N = 22)

equivocal. However, it is important to recognise that such relationships may not have
been problematic in the first instance.
The quotes below illustrate the manifestations of the above upon individual pupils:
It taught me respect for others—to give pupils an equal chance to work in the class. I
stopped showing off—it attracts the wrong people. I hang around with the right people now.
Outside of school I get on better with people instead of wanting to bash all they ‘wee
moshers’ (a youth culture).

In drawing upon statistical data, sustained improvements in interpersonal relation-

ships are reflected within the reduction in exclusion openings of SG pupils that had
initially been observed over the period of intervention (χ2 = 10; p < 0.01) and that
were maintained in the year beyond intervention and were in contrast to the opposing
trend (χ2 = 20; p<.001) for other pupils within the year group, which indicates that
not only had the SG served to improve outcomes, it had staved off further potential
deterioration. The difference between the outcomes for pupils in relation to this
measure becomes even more stark when progress is measured from the beginning
of Secondary 1 until the end of Secondary 3: SG population (improvement) (χ2 = 6;
p < 0.01); ‘other’ (deterioration) (χ2 = 43; p < 0.001).
In addition, SG pupils in the year beyond intervention accounted for a much
smaller proportion of unauthorised absence than had been the case in either
Secondary 1 or Secondary 2 (Mowat, 2010), as illustrated in Figure 5, whilst still
disproportionate in relation to the size of the cohorts as a whole.
Figure 5.

Final discussion and conclusions

It is evident that interpersonal relationships lie at the heart of the school community
and determine the extent to which schools are inclusive in their practice. Key adults
can play a crucial role in determining outcomes for young people. The extent to
which teachers affirm (or not) young people and the extent to which young people are
listened to and are enabled to communicate within a safe environment and trust is
established are all key to success. This is not to minimise the difficulties faced by
 Interpersonal relationships 177
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 19:25 06 October 2014

Figure 5. The % of unauthorised absences attributable to SG pupils in S1–S3 measured over a

three year period

teachers in working with young people who may be experiencing difficulties in their
interpersonal relationships, many of whom reject the efforts of teachers to try to help
them. As previously discussed, experience of previous damaging relationships may
impede the capacity of young people to form trusting bonds with others. Therefore,
the challenge facing pastoral care teachers and others working with pupils perceived
as having social and emotional behavioural difficulties is to work with the young
person and persevere through the difficulties, conveying faith in the capacity of the
young person to effect change. Class teachers are at the ‘hard face’ and have the
difficulty of balancing the needs of the individual against the needs of the many.
Particularly within the secondary context, it is harder for them to form trusting
relationships with pupils and to get to know them as individuals. It is important
therefore that interventions should seek to help pupils to understand the classroom
context and the role of the teacher in creating a climate for effective learning. Young
people, whose needs for love, safety and security (Maslow, 1943) have not been met,
are likely to turn inwards and are therefore less likely to recognise and understand the
needs of others. A caring, supportive adult can help them to begin to perceive
perspectives other their own and to recognise that others also have needs, helping
them to form relationships based upon mutual respect. Once again, this task should
not be under-estimated.
However, there is a danger that, in recognising the crucial importance of relation-
ships within the setting of the school, the context in which those relationships form is
ignored. A problem is identified—‘pupils aren’t behaving’, ‘pupils don’t know how to
relate to each other’, ‘pupils can’t express their emotions’—and a solution ‘found’,
but insufficient attention may be devoted to understanding the nature of the problem
(Qualter et al., 2007; Wright, 2009). Further, as argued by Grove (2004), there is also
a danger of schools adopting approaches without having a sufficient understanding of
their theoretical underpinnings (or, perhaps adopting approaches that lack a clear
rationale), leading to an instrumentalist approach towards their implementation and
leaving schools open to faddism (Grove, 2004, p. 35).
 178 J. G. Mowat

Harden et al. (2001, cited in McLaughlin, 2008, p. 358) caution that ‘it cannot be
assumed that interventions will be effective’ and caution for the need for careful
consideration to be given to which programmes to implement, if at all. Wright (2009,
p. 285) observes that ‘more complex and challenging approaches’ that focus upon
helping young people to understand their interpersonal relationships and take respon-
sibility for their behaviour are largely missing. Qualter et al. (2007) note that
programmes which focus upon intrapersonal and interpersonal cognition can help to
develop social–emotional learning in young people. Thus, this author would argue,
the nature of the approach adopted to support young people is of crucial importance,
as is the need to ensure that staff responsible for implementation have a full
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 19:25 06 October 2014

understanding of the theoretical underpinnings and rationale of the approach, shared

(in an age-appropriate way) with pupils, as exemplified within the SG approach.
Relationships do not form within a vacuum. Young people asked to engage in activ-
ities that are not of value or worth are unlikely to respond positively. The SG
approach is not an easy approach. It encourages children to bring out into the open,
and therefore place under scrutiny, their values and beliefs, and for some children this
is a painful process. Yet, the vast majority of children persevered, including some who
struggled at the beginning (as previously described).
There is almost an assumption that, for pupils who are perceived as disaffected,
the solution lies outside the school gates and with adults who are not teachers. The
assumption is also made that young people will find it easier to communicate with
an adult independent of the school context. Whilst this may be true for some
young people, teachers, if they are truly reciprocal in their dealings with young
people, can help pupils to understand the school context and the dilemmas facing
teachers on a daily basis in their interactions with young people. Pupils have to
operate within the school environment, and any intervention which helps to build
crucial relationships within it—such as those between the pupils and pastoral care
staff—must be of value. Some of the pupils who responded most positively to SGs
were among the most disaffected young people within the school—those who had
been ‘written off’ by some of their teachers and even, in some cases, by their
families. Forming a trusting relationship with an adult with whom they will
continue to have contact throughout their schooling (not just at the time of the
intervention) is of vital importance. I am not arguing that all interventions should
be delivered in situ by school staff. As previously stated, external agencies provide a
very valuable and valued function (as advocated within the multi-agency approach
that is advocated within government policy (DfES, 2004; Scottish Executive
Education Department, 2005) but they should supplement (not replace) the work
of teachers and teaching assistants in supporting vulnerable young people, and
school leaders should support their staff in this process through their policies,
systems, structures and practice.
As stated within the Introduction, if developments are to be sustainable and to
become integral to the school, it is important that they impact as fully as possible
upon the whole school community, including parents. We sought to engage parents
as fully as possible, inviting them to information events and keeping them informed
 Interpersonal relationships 179

regularly of their child’s progress through the daily monitoring (target-setting)

process. Likewise, pupils are not passive recipients of programmes of intervention.
Without their active engagement, interventions will fail. As such, we considered it
important that pupils should be fully consulted about their involvement within the
programme, before parents were approached to seek permission, and that they
exercised agency through setting their own personal targets for improvement. When
it was recognised that some staff had not ‘bought into the approach’, we organised
staff training for all of the staff, including support staff.
It was also important to see the intervention within the wider context of inclusion
and the range of other interventions that the school adopted to try to meet the
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 19:25 06 October 2014

academic, social and emotional needs of its pupils and to recognise that change is a
highly complex process and takes time (Fullan, 2003). In order to have long-term
effect, change needs to impact at the level of values and beliefs (MacGilchrist et al.,
2004); and it is only through the development of a community of practice
(Sergiovanni, 1994), in which the ways of thinking and of being gradually become
internalised, that (I believe) such change becomes possible (Mowat, 2007).
Sergiovanni, citing school administrators Flynn and Innes, states, ‘… the children we
teach will not care how much we know until they know how much we care’ (1994,
p. 32). Even small changes along the way should be celebrated, as change is incre-
mental. This focus upon a whole-school approach and the ‘collaborative building of
communities’, based upon mutual respect (Sergiovanni, 1994, p. 37), is precisely
what Grove (2004) argues for in his discussion of ‘The Three R’s’ [sic] of Pastoral
Care’.
In conclusion, there is no ‘right way’, no panacea, but schools, and teachers
within them, with a strong moral sense and commitment to their pupils, do have
the capacity to make a difference to the lives of young people and, when the right
conditions prevail and the quality of leadership is such that teachers are supported
in their endeavours to support the young people in their charge, a great deal can be
accomplished.

References
Bassey, M. (1999) Case study research in educational settings (Buckingham, Oxford University
Press).
Cobb, C.C. & Mayer, J.D. (2000) Emotional intelligence: what the research says, Educational
Leadership, 58(3), 14–18.
Cooper, B. (2004) Empathy, interaction and caring: teachers’ roles in a constrained environment,
Pastoral Care in Education, 22(3), 12–21.
Cooper, P. (2008) Nurturing attachment in school: contemporary perspectives on social,
emotional and behavioural difficulties, Pastoral Care in Education, 26(1), 13–22.
Craig, C. (2007) Creating confidence (Glasgow, Centre for Confidence and Well-Being).
DfES (2004) Every child matters: change for children in schools (London, Department for Education
and Skills).
Fullan, M. (2003) Change forces with a vengeance (New York, Routledge Falmer).
Gardner, H. (2003) Frames of mind: the theory of multiple intelligences (2nd edn) (London, Fontana
Press).
 180 J. G. Mowat

Grove, M. (2004) The three R’s of pastoral care: relationships, respect and responsibility, Pastoral
Care in Education, 22(2), 34–38.
Harden, A., Rees, R., Shepherd, J., Brunton, G., Oliver, S. & Oakley, A. (2001) Young people and
mental health: a systematic review of barriers and facilitators (London, EPPI-Centre).
Hargreaves, A. & Fink, D. (2006) Sustainable leadership (San Fransisco, Jossey-Bass).
Harris, B. (2008) Befriending the two-headed monster: personal, social and emotional development
in schools in challenging times, British Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 36(4), 367–383.
Humphrey, N., Lendrum, A., Wigelsworth, M. & Kalambouka, A. (2009) Implementation of
primary social and emotional aspects of learning small group work: a qualitative study, Pastoral
Care in Education, 27(3), 219–239.
MacGilchrist, B., Myers, K. & Reed, J. (2004) The intelligent school (2nd edn) (London, Sage
Publications).
Downloaded by [University of Southern Queensland] at 19:25 06 October 2014

McLaughlin, C. (2008) Emotional well-being and its relationship to schools and classrooms: a
critical reflection, British Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 36(4), 353–366.
Maslow, A.H. (1943) A theory of human motivation, Psychological Review, 50, 370–396.
Mills, G.E. (2007) Action research: a guide for teacher researchers (3rd edn) (Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Merrill Prentice Hall).
Mowat, J. (2007) Using support groups to improve behaviour (London, Paul Chapman publications).
Mowat, J.G. (2010) Towards the development of self-regulation in pupils experiencing social
and emotional behavioural difficulties (SEBD). Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 15(3),
189–206.
Mowat, J.G. (in press) The inclusion of pupils perceived as experiencing social and emotional
behavioural difficulties: affordances and constraints, International Journal of Inclusive Education.
Oatley, K. & Jenkins, J.M. (1996) Understanding emotions (Oxford, Blackwell Publishers).
Perkins, D. & Salomon, G. (1989) Are cognitive skills context bound, Educational Researcher,
Jan–Feb, 16–25.
Qualter, P., Gardner, K.J. & Whiteley, H.E. (2007) Emotional intelligence: review of research and
educational implications, Pastoral Care in Education, 25(1), 11–20.
Scottish Educational Research Association (2007) Starting point for research in schools. Available
online at: http://www.sera.ac.uk (accessed 16 January 2010).
Scottish Executive Education Department (2001) Better behaviour—better learning (Edinburgh,
HMSO).
Scottish Executive Education Department (2005) Getting it right for every child: proposals for action
(Edinburgh, HMSO).
Sergiovanni, T.J. (1994) Building community in schools (San Fransisco, Jossey-Bass).
Somekh, B. (2006) Action research: a methodology for change and development (Maidenhead, Open
University Press).
Visser, J. (2005) Working with children and young people with social and emotional behavioural
difficulties: what makes what works, work?, in: P. Clough, P. Garner, J.T. Pardeck & F. Yeun
(Eds) Handbook of emotional and behavioural difficulties (London, SAGE publications), 225–244.
Weare, K. (2008) Improving behaviour, relationships and learning in our schools—what does the
international evidence say we need to do?, keynote address presented at the Positive Behaviour
Conference, Edinburgh, 18 March.
Wright, A. (2009) Every child matters: discourses of challenging behaviour, Pastoral Care in
Education, 27(4), 279–290.
Zins, J.E., Weissberg, R.P., Wang, M.C. & Walberg, H.J. (2004) Building academic success on social
and emotional learning: what does the research say? (London, Teachers College Press).