Welcome to the York Day and the University of York. Last year, we established the fact that all the areas of boarding and residential education and care for young people had much in common. It was demonstrated that there was a shared interest in training, management and research and that subjects such as: peer groups, family relationships, residential values, arriving and leaving, staffing ratios and group dynamics were of general concern. This year, following discussion with last year's participants, there is a theme: Group Size.

The aim of the day is to generate ideas related to group size and to examine the potential for the transfer of ideas from sector to sector.

We have now identified eighteen distinct sectors of boarding and residential education and care. In all of them young people aged 18 and under live away from home in groups. The papers to be presented consider those groups in which they live and focus upon the importance of group size. Broadly, the papers cover:

a. ideas from research;
b. comparable and relevant situations;
c. examples from practice.

The commonality of interest among the different sectors has been underlined by the development and successful trialling of a generic course for staff, comprising a certificate, diploma and degree level. This course, largely funded by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, is at present being examined for validation by the University of Newcastle upon Tyne. This is a particularly happy choice in that Newcastle is one of two universities traditionally associated with research and training in residential education.

Definition

Initially a distinction needs to be made between mono-size and multi-size establishments. A mono-size unit might be a small children's home, a ward in a children's hospital or even a children's tent in a camp. The point is that there are no sub-units and all operations occur with a group at that one size. Multi-size establishments have sub-units which usually vary according to function. For example, within a boarding school there are sub-units for living, education and a range of other activities. Therefore, depending upon the purpose, a young person will belong to several sub-units. Within the residential unit, there may be a further subdivision into dormitories or single rooms. There may be even further sub-divisions into tutorial groups. Thus, there could be at least four levels of sub-division in a boarding house. Much the same situation obtains in a secure training centre although numbers are less and there are fewer levels.

An important consideration for multi-unit establishments is the development and functioning of links between the various sub-units. Clearly, for any meaningful assessment of the progress of a young person, information is required regarding all the sub-units and their various levels. Apart from the complexity of line management involved, some sub-units at the lower levels may be only temporary.

Controls and Results of Group Size

Group size may be governed by buildings, economics, tradition or agency requirement. Of particular significance will be the type of young person and the supervision and treatment required. If intensive care in some form is needed, then the group will probably be small. There is likely to be a general relationship between function and group size in that, for education, relatively large groups are needed whereas for health groups should normally be relatively small.

Once, for whatever reason, the group size has been established, there are inevitable results. If for economic reasons it has been decided to have large size groups then there are likely to be problems of individual attention for the young people. If buildings dictate small groups, then viability for education may be a consideration. Clearly, some factors such as buildings or function may dictate either large or small size for groups. Other factors discriminate. Education and economics indicate a trend towards larger size whereas personal care, staff-young person contact and the development of relationships point towards the advantages of a smaller size.

The family model epitomizes the advantages, together with some disadvantages, of the smaller group. The formal model is at the other end of the scale, reliant upon relatively large groups. Most establishments will occur somewhere on the continuum between the two models depending upon the particular setting and its function. One particularly important issue which arises is the necessity, given costs, for large groups. The problem then becomes to transfer the advantages of small group living to larger units.

Other Factors

Group size also needs to be considered in the light of dynamics and the peer group. Is it possible to reduce bullying by having smaller groups? At what size do peer groups cease to share confidences? What is the relationship between gender and group size or culture and group size? Is there flexibility for group size? Are there thresholds for group sizes and above all is there an optimum group size? Clearly size is of particular importance in relation to staffing, costs and function. There is also a psychological dimension in that there is relationship between the size of group and personal space in the particular setting. The development of a sense of belonging must also be related to the size of the group.

All of these are preliminary ideas and, during the course of the day, it is hoped to enhance my initial thoughts and fill in many of the gaps which I have indicated.