CYC-Net

CYC-Net on Facebook CYC-Net on Twitter Search CYC-Net

Join Our Mailing List

Quote

Just a short piece ...

3 October

No 1225

Creating a sense of belonging to a community

Young people and adults living together can create a united community. This, in a way, puts into action the concept of quality residential care being defined as `Living together as a profession' (Jones, Courtioux, Kalcher, Steinhauser, Tuggener & Waldijk, 1986). In such a community, the prevailing atmosphere is of a group of people having common goals in living together, which is instrumental in avoiding the negative effects of the `total institution' (Goffman, 1961).

The fact that young people are living together and are supervised 24 hours a day in a well designed environment is a very powerful stimulation for achieving behavioral changes among children and young people; however, these behavioural changes are achieved through endless discussions and open negotiations between young people and staff members and by modelling of the staff, not by authoritative discipline. This implies that the relationships between youth and adults are symmetric, rather than the kind of relationship developed in programmes operating under the `medical model' (Eisikovits, 1983).

In order to enable every member of the community to feel at ease, the community is based on pluralistic and multicultural values. The youth population is composed of many new immigrants coming from very different cultural backgrounds. Some examples of countries are Ethiopia, the former
Soviet Union and Latin America. Other young people are Israeli born but come from peripheral areas and from families who are, culturally speaking, at the periphery of society. Therefore, creating a sense of `belonging' (Brendtro, Brokenleg & Van Bockern, 1990) in such a community is possible only if staff members apply a true and genuine cultural pluralism. This is possible only if the prevailing atmosphere emphasises the importance of every individual finding his or her place in such a community. It also implies staff members' commitment to the mission statement: `No child left behind'.

As an example, we can present the integration of Ethiopian youth in such communities. Many of these young people came to Israel without their parents and the youth villages were practically their first home in Israel. In order to give them the feeling that they are fully accepted in the community, and enable them to feel the sense of `belonging', some of their cultural traditions have been incorporated by the community as a whole, such as celebrating holidays like the `Segd' celebration, unknown to Jewish society until the arrival of Ethiopians in Israel (Grupper, 1999a).

Primacy of `education' over `treatment'
The Israeli residential model is based on the principle of normalisation. This means that a young person has to have the feeling of being in a 'normal' educational setting. This implies that a normative school is a central part in the residential programme and that the educational success of every child is a primary target of the whole staff. This is not easily achieved. Diverse support systems, both during school hours and also in the afternoon and evening, are used to help children experience success in their studies. Although the school is part of the `normal' secondary school system (and not part of the `special education' school system), it has to develop special tracks, special methods and train its teaching staff in order to be able to deal with all kind of students, and enable them to experience success.

This kind of orientation requires that in the everyday decision-making process, educational considerations are given priority over therapeutic considerations. Although the children often have special emotional needs and the interventions of social workers, psychologists or even psychiatrists are focused on these individual needs, they should not interfere with the overall atmosphere which deliberately stresses educational considerations.

EMMANUEL GRUPPER

Grupper, E. (2005). Creating stimulating environments for young people in residential care: The Israeli youth village ecological' model. Scottish Journal of Residential Care. 4, 2. August/September 2005.

REFERENCES

Brendtro, L., Brokenleg, M. & Van Bockern, S. (1990). Reclaiming youth at risk. Bloomington, IN: National Education Service.

Eisikovits, R.A. (1983). No exit: residential treatment and the 'sick-role' trap. Child Care Quarterly, 12(1), 36-45.

Grupper, E. (1999). The desired model for professional residential educator in Israel. Mifgash, No. 12-13, 11-27(Hebrew).

Jones, H.D., Courtioux, M., Kalcher, J., Steinhauser, W, Tuggener, H. & Waldijk, K. (1986). The Social pedagogue in Europe: living with others as a profession. Zurich: FICE-International publications.

The International Child and Youth Care Network
THE INTERNATIONAL CHILD AND YOUTH CARE NETWORK (CYC-Net)

Registered Public Benefit Organisation in the Republic of South Africa (PBO 930015296)
Incorporated as a Not-for-Profit in Canada: Corporation Number 1284643-8

P.O. Box 23199, Claremont 7735, Cape Town, South Africa | P.O. Box 21464, MacDonald Drive, St. John's, NL A1A 5G6, Canada

Board of Governors | Constitution | Funding | Site Content and Usage | Advertising | Privacy Policy | Contact us

iOS App Android App