How university student–teachers for primary school learn about Department of Education Policy on child sexual abuse, and mandatory reporting: the sources of their professional information

Abstract

Many regional and local Departments of Education in many countries now require their primary school teachers to be mandatory reporters of child sexual abuse. However, many student-teachers are not provided with courses on child protection and its policy requirements during their pre-service university education. So, how do studentteachers source, and develop, their professional information about this important role? This study examines an Australian university cohort of final 4th year bachelor of education primary school student-teachers, asking them to identify and clarify the nature of any relevant professional information they accessed over the 4 years of their teacher education. The results show that, in the absence of formal child protection courses, such professional information was scarce and sporadic. Student-teachers consistently indicated a pattern of not learning about essential Department of Education policies and procedures whilst at university. These results, although disappointing, provide a rationale for university curriculum planners to design appropriate pre-service university training courses that initiate, develop, and enhance student-teachers' professional competencies as mandated reporters of child sexual abuse.

Effectiveness of child protection training for pre-service early childhood educators

“…Unsurprisingly newly qualified educators can feel ill-equipped to deal with child protection in practice because they lack confidence in their responding and reporting knowledge (Rossato & Brackenridge, 2009) and many express concern about their direct response to a suspicion of child abuse (Clarke & Healey, 2006;Goldman & Grimbeek, 2009). This lack of knowledge and confidence was found in UK studies by Hodgkinson and Baginsky (2000), Baginsky and Macpherson (2005), and Rossato and Brackenridge (2009) who suggest that an inconsistent approach to pre-service child protection preparation can leave educators feeling anxious and concerned about their child protection role in schools.…”

External providers' sexuality education teaching and pedagogies for primary school students in Grade 1 to Grade 7

“…Many primary school teachers in countries such as Australia, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the USA, which may include but do not enforce or assess such programmes in school curricula, are reluctant, untrained, ineffectual, unconfident, or otherwise unable to teach quality sexuality education (see Baginsky and Macpherson 2005;Brossmann 2008;Gerouki 2007;Goldman 2008;Goldman and Grimbeek 2009;Veiga et al 2006;Winckle 2008). In Australia, little or no pre-service training in sexuality education or child protection appears to be offered to Bachelor of Education (Primary) student-teachers at many universities (Goldman and Bradley forthcoming;Goldman and Grimbeek 2009;Goldman and Torrisi-Steele 2009).…”

“…In Australia, little or no pre-service training in sexuality education or child protection appears to be offered to Bachelor of Education (Primary) student-teachers at many universities (Goldman and Bradley forthcoming;Goldman and Grimbeek 2009;Goldman and Torrisi-Steele 2009). Most Departments of Education in Australian States and Territories espouse sexuality education for students based on the social justice principles of equity, access, participation, and the rights of children and young people to maximise their health and educational opportunities.…”

Lessons on Child Protection: A Survey of Newly Qualified Primary‐Level Teachers in Ireland

“…() found from a review of UK and Irish research on child protection information and reporting systems, training in child protection must centre on the notion of teachers as the first line of defence against child abuse, with inductions focusing on achieving reasonable suspicion and responding. While such findings may challenge previous studies which call for improving knowledge and understanding of child protection procedures amongst trainee teachers (see Kenny, ; Goldman and Grimbeek, ), the argument is that expanding training provision on such grounds alone is insufficient. Consistent findings highlight that the mismatch between current training provision and child protection responsibilities may be addressed by highlighting child protection in training as a professional competency central to teachers' roles (Baginsky, ; Baginsky and Macpherson, ; Goldman and Grimbeek, ) as opposed to a mere module of training.…”