Listen to thisIntroduction
Youth Care Workers (YCWs) working within child caring environments often work with youth who have experienced complex trauma. YCWs working with these youth are tasked with creating emotional connections in a therapeutic manner to facilitate change within the youth’s life. Each interaction with youth should be focused on the needs of the youth, not the needs of the YCW (Garfat, 1998). It goes without saying, YCWs come into this line of work with the intent to work with a purpose to be helpers. However, within the first year of practice, the YCW’s interactions will sometimes focus on creating a safe space for self, instead of focusing on the youth (Phelan, 2015). This focus on safety for self is not only limited to the first year of a YCW’s development, as youth care supervisors also go through similar development (Phelan, 2016). The supervisor may also have their actions guided by their need to maintain safety for self. Without the ability to maintain their own safety, the YCW and youth care supervisor are more at risk to rely on others to create the safe space for them.
This research focuses on exploring if interactions within the first year of development are guided by a need to ensure safety for oneself, or if the interactions are focused on the YCWs or youth care supervisor’s role. With a better understanding of personal safety, the hope for this research was that it would promote learning, to enhance the YCW’s and youth care supervisor’s first year of development.
Literature Review
Self-awareness in Youth Care
Self awareness, through self reflection, is arguably one of the most important aspects of youth care. If we are not able to recognize our own needs, we will project those needs onto the youth in our interactions with them (Fewster, 2013). Without a level of self awareness, the focus will be on the behavior without looking at the underlying cause. An intervention should be an intentional act to facilitate change, as without the intention the act is just another behavior (Garfat, 1998). Each YCW comes into their new role with individual perspectives based on their past experiences and may not be able to experience the present moment due to their perspectives being tied to the past (Phelan, 2015). Due to different past experiences, each YCW makes meaning of each situation differently (Garfat, 2003). The way a YCW makes meaning of a situation may contribute to how they respond, thus the focus of the intervention may be based more on self rather than on the needs of the youth.
Youth Care Worker Stages of Development
Phelan (2015) proposes three levels a YCW experiences in their development, with the first level focusing on developing safety and trust. He goes on to say that until safety and trust is fully developed, the YCW cannot focus on facilitating change in others, as their own self interest comes first. When considering the same issue Garfat (2001) argues, a YCW’s development advances within the context of their relationship with the youth and identifies four stages in a YCW’s development: doing for, doing to, doing with and doing together. The author identifies the first stage of development as one where the YCW feels unsure and overwhelmed by the new experience and relies on external structure to guide their actions as they do not yet trust their own internal processes. What both of these models identify is the YCW focusing on their own needs during their first year of development.
According to Modlin (2013), Robert Kegan's Constructive Developmental Theory helps to explain why YCWs move through developmental stages of youth care at different rates. Kegan identified, as people grow and acquire more life experience, they move through a process of transformation in their ability to make meaning. Modlin also states most adults live mainly in, what Kegan has identified as the socialized stage in which individuals may have a solid belief system. However, they are unable to separate self from another and therefore may assume ownership of the actions and emotions of others. In a child care home setting, this means YCWs may interpret the actions of the youth as a measure of their own success or failure as a YCW. The YCW in the socialized stage may remain in Garfat's (2001) 'doing for' stage longer as they do not want the youth to fail, since they will view this as a reflection of their own failure as a YCW.
Supervisor Stages of Development
When YCWs are promoted into a supervisory role the levels of development begin again (Phelan, 2016). A supervisor's level of development can also be categorized in Kegan's model of adult development. A supervisor in the socialized stage measures their own success based on the success of YCWs they supervise. A supervisor who has moved through the socialized stage into the self authored stage can examine the situation as a whole and evaluate other's actions, without linking them to their own measure of success (Helsing & Howell, 2014). The supervisor can help the YCW in their own self reflection, as the supervisor understands the separation between themselves and the YCW. This process helps YCWs enhance their relationships with youth as the link between the relationship created in supervision and the relationship created in youth care is a parallel process (Delano & Shah, 2009).
The Role of Supervision for the New Youth Care Worker
Garfat (2007) identifies that the role of the supervisor is to evaluate each situation and interaction to determine if the supervisee requires support, education, or training to enhance their development, and therefore enhance the quality of service offered to the youth. Although both parties are responsible to engage in the supervision relationship, there is a responsibility on the part of the supervisor to create the conditions of safety to enable the supervisee to engage in a self reflection process (Delano & Shah, 2009). The supervisor must be aware of a YCWs stage of development in order to 'meet them where they're at', just as a YCW needs to be aware of the youth's capacity in order to 'meet them where they're at' (Fulcher & Garfat 2012). For YCWs at the beginning stages of their development, the supervisor needs to focus on issues of personal safety and build up trust in the relationship (Phelan, 2015). Once the trust is established, the supervisor can help contain feelings of anxiety in YCWs, which could possibly inhibit them from creating therapeutic relationships with the youth (Steckley, 2010). With good emotional containment, YCWs will be better able to make themselves available to youth emotionally to offer support (Steckley, 2011).
Research Methodology
Qualitative research is focused on the meaning people attach to things, as well as understanding how people view situations (Taylor, Bogdan, DeVault, 2015). I chose a qualitative method of collecting data from both youth care workers and youth care supervisors within my organization, which is comprised of five long term community-based group homes and one emergency stabilization centre, all for youth between the ages of 12-18. This was done with a mixed methods approach by asking for participation in both online questionnaires and semi-structured interviews. I also chose random sampling, as it attempts to diminish researcher bias by not limiting the data to a specific group (Shenton, 2004). Although random sampling helps to eliminate researcher bias, a disadvantage is little to no control over who chose to participate (Shenton, 2004). This was considered in data analysis. I chose to use a thematic analysis of the data. Thematic analysis requires the researcher to remain in touch with the raw data throughout the process, which helps to analyse the data in different ways and make links between the data and interpretations (Matthews & Ross, 2010).
Findings, Analysis and Discussion
The findings from this research were organized into the following three categories to best represent the experiences of participants during their first year:
Through a combination of surveys and interviews, data was collected from 29 participants who were mainly youth care workers within my organization. These participants were both YCWs and youth care supervisors, speaking about their first year of employment in their role. Themes that were identified within each category tended to be consistent with what was presented in the literature review.
Most Important Part of their Role During the First Year
In this category two primary themes emerged. The first was personal safety, and the second was relationships with youth and co-workers. Many participants identified relationship as the foundation of their role and identified these relationships, with both youth and co-workers, as having a direct effect on the level of safety for them. Some spoke about the development of relationship contributing to an increase in physical safety, while others felt they needed to obtain personal safety first, in order to develop relationships. These two opposing views generate the question: is safety obtained through relationship, or is safety needed first in order to obtain authentic relationship? Many participants spoke of the link between the increases in familiarity of the role, which came with experience, to the decrease in their own anxieties. This may mean youth care employees are unable to focus on relationships within the first year, as they must first attend to their anxieties. I was interested in exploring this further as an argument may be that despite wanting to focus on what's most important, new youth care employees find themselves, instead, focusing on the difficulties that cause concern during the first year.
Biggest Concern During the First Year
The primary theme that emerged in this section is that most participants identified their concern of how they, or their actions, were being perceived by others during their first year. By worrying about what others think during the first year, new YCWs or youth care supervisors may be acting to serve their own needs instead of the needs of the youth. This can be linked to ideas expressed by Fewster (2013) who states that an awareness of self is important in youth care, in order to be able to identify and manage our own needs. Without being intentional, the YCW may be putting their own values ahead of the youth's needs. This was illustrated by participants who responded that they felt once they knew they were accepted by their peers, they were more willing to introduce new concepts into their practice.
Fewster (2013) argues, we will respond to another based on the truth of our own experiences. Phelan (2015) argues the YCW may not be able to fully experience the present moment, due to their perspectives being tied to the past. Evidence such as this suggests that as the more experienced YCW creates relationships with both the youth and their colleagues, they gather more positive experiences in how their actions are perceived by others. This was identified by responses from participants who said the easiest part of their role was the part they were most familiar with or had the most experience with. Since the new YCW does not yet have these positive experiences within the organization, they are forced to draw from their own personal experiences. Modlin (2013) identifies that adults in the socialized stage will measure their own level of success based on others reactions. Many participants talked about not wanting to speak up during their first year as their main concern was being liked by their co-workers. They identified once they ‘got over’ a need to be liked, they were able to focus on creating relationships with youth. The new YCW will not be able to focus on facilitating change with the youth through relationship until they are no longer making decisions based on their own needs. Participants identified they were not able to fast track the ability to feel safe in their role as they needed to experience it in order to diminish anxiety. Garfat (2001) argues a YCW develops through the context of their relationships with others, therefore development often can't advance by learning alone. Participants were able to identify that this change comes about through a focus on self. One talked about getting a mentor in order to feel safe in their vulnerability with someone else. Another talked about actively working to diminish their own anxieties and insecurities.
What is Needed to be Effective in the First Year
In this section there was a strong theme of participants identifying their need for support for their own emotional vulnerabilities, and many used the words support and supervision interchangeably. Participants identified the benefits of having regular supervisions to address anything they find challenging, as well as to offer feedback on how well they’re doing. Some identified just having the structure of supervision helped to reduce anxiety, as they knew if they had an issue they would have someone to talk it through with. As the theme of emotional vulnerability emerged throughout this research, it identified a need for the supervisor to first create conditions of safety with the YCW before being able to help enhance the YCW's development. Participants also seemed to recognize the benefit of having a supervisor help them frame thoughts differently. In order to do this, there must first be trust established in the supervisory relationship. Participants identified this as they spoke about the difficulties in talking about themselves as they didn’t want to identify any faults. Phelan (2015) argues that YCWs who are in the first stage of development will need a focus on structure and trust in relationship in order to help diminish their emotional vulnerabilities to a point they can move forward in their professional development.
In order for supervision to be effective, the supervisor themselves must first go through their own stages of development to ensure their own emotional vulnerabilities are not projected onto their staff. Phelan (2016) argues level one supervisors strive to create personal safety, as they are also faced with their own anxieties in their new role. Participants in a supervisory role identified fear of new and/or difficult situations and also identified the need for support from others in order to help reframe situations and diminish anxiety.
Conclusions
The aim of this research was to explore the experience of YCWs and youth care supervisors within my organization during the first year in their development. In particular, the research focused on the importance of personal safety during the first year in a new role. Due to the small scale of the research, one must be cautious in generalizing the experience, and the needs of all youth care employees. However, this research may be used in supervision to help understand the possible concerns of new youth care employees that may hinder professional development.
The Importance of Personal Safety During the First Year
Within this research, participants identified relationships as one of the most important aspects of their role during the first year. It stands to reason then, the focus during the first year will be on creating genuine, authentic relationships with both youth and co-workers. However, this research appeared to identify participants focused more on maintaining their own emotional safety, than on being authentic in relationship. Participants identified a concern of how others would perceive their actions and decisions. This concern may result in the new youth care employee acting in a way, or making decisions, based on their own need of maintaining their own emotional safety, instead of meeting the needs of the youth.
Fewster (2013) argues the importance of self reflection to understand your own needs, so as not to project those needs onto others. The participants who were reflecting on their first year, were able to identify their actions during that time as being focused on self. They spoke about their need to be liked by the youth during the first year and recognized that need was diminished now that they were further along in their professional development.
Delano and Shah (2009) argue the supervisor is tasked with creating safe relationships with employees in order to promote self reflection. There may be a level of emotional vulnerability in the supervisory relationship as youth care employees may not yet be able to create their own emotional safety. This was identified by the participant who spoke about their perception of self-reflection, in supervision, as exposing their faults. The aim of the supervisor, then, may be to not only create the conditions of safety to allow for self-reflection, but to also promote the YCW’s and youth care supervisor’s ability to create their own emotional safety. Once the YCW and youth care supervisor are able to create their own safety they may no longer rely on others for this.
Phelan (2016) argues that, when a YCW is promoted to a supervisory role, the stages of development begin all over again. This appeared evident when participants spoke about their role during the first year as a supervisor. The same theme of emotional safety emerged as the biggest concern for participants in this role also. Helsing & Howell (2014) argue that it is not until a supervisor is operating from a self-authored stage that they can understand where self ends and the other begins. This research may indicate the importance of the supervisor also receiving support in their own supervision in order to enhance their own development. If the supervisor does not develop to the self-authored stage, they may continue to take ownership of others behavior and measure their own success based on the success of others. From this socialized stage, the supervisor may not be effective in enhancing the YCWs development. This may illustrate the importance of the supervisor working from a self-authored stage, in order to be effective in their role.
Although this research appeared to identify emotional safety as the focus for the new YCW and youth care supervisor within my organization, there may also be other anxieties within the first year. Once the supervisor understands these anxieties, they are better equipped to help support that employee in their professional development. As the YCW and youth care supervisor advance in their development, they will become more effective in their roles.
Delano, F. & Shah, J. (2009). Defining supervision in a professionally packaged way. Relational Child and Youth Care Practice, 22(1), 49-57.
Fewster, G. (2013). Relational child and youth care: Principles and practices. Canada.
Fulcher, L., & Garfat, T. (2012). Child and youth care in practice. Cape Town, South Africa: The CYC-Net Press
Garfat, T. (1998). The effective child and youth care intervention: A phenomenological inquiry. Journal of Child and Youth Care, 12 (1-2), 68
Garfat, T. (2001). Developmental stages of child and youth care workers: An interactional perspective. CYC-Online, 24. Retrieved from http://www.cyc-net.org/cyc-online/cycol-0101-garfat.html
Garfat, T. (2003). Four parts magic: The anatomy of child and youth care intervention. CYC-Online, 50. Retrieved from http://www.cyc-net.org/cyc-online/cycol-0303-thom.html
Garfat, T. (2007) Support-education-training (S.E.T.). A framework for supervision in child and youth care – CYC Online, 106. Retrieved from http://www.cyc-net.org/cyc-online/cycol-0711-garfat.html
Helsing, D., & Howell, A. (2014). Understanding leadership from the inside out: Assessing leadership potential using constructive- developmental theory. Journal of Management Inquiry, 23(2), 186-204.
Matthews, B. & Ross, E. (2010). Research methods: A practical guide for the social sciences. London: Pearson Education.
Modlin, H. (2013). Meaning-making: Another perspective. Relational Child and Youth Care Practice, 26(3), 5-13.
Phelan, J. (2015). The long and short of it. Child and youth care. Cape Town: The CYC-Net Press.
Phelan, J. (2016). The relationship boundaries that control supervision. In Charles, G., Freeman, J., & Garfat, T. (Eds). Supervision in child and youth care practice (pp.58-65) Cape Town: The CYC-Net Press.
Shenton, A.K. (2004). Strategies for Ensuring Trustworthiness in Qualitative Research Projects. Education for Information, 22(2), 63-75.
Steckley, L. (2010). Containing the containers: Staff containment needs in residential child care. CYC Online, 142. Retrieved from http://www.cyc-net.org/cyc-online/cyconline-dec2010-steckley.html
Steckley, L. (2011). Containing the containers II: The provision of containing processes for staff in residential child care. CYC-Online, 145. Retrieved from: http://www.cyc-net.org/cyc-online/mar2011.pdf
Taylor, S., Bogdan, R. & DeVault, M. (2015). Introduction to qualitative research methods: A guidebook and resource. (4th edition). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
From: Relational Child and Youth Care Practice, Vol.34, No.3
