Mapping Of Professional Qualification Routes and Continuous Professional Learning Opportunities relating to Psychological Trauma, in the Children and Families Workforce

3. Metholodogy

3.1 This research involved phases of desk research, engagement, mapping, analysis of learning materials and synthesis. This was to explore to what extent some sectors of the Children and Families workforce are already learning about the impact of psychological trauma and trauma informed approaches. It is worth noting that through the recruitment for this project, many frontline participants and service providers were self-selecting and therefore those we engaged with may have a bias towards an interest in psychological trauma and trauma informed approaches

3.2 Across the project we engaged with 57 people using mixed methods, including in-depth interviews, group discussions and other forms of correspondence. Across Nursing we engaged with 3 higher education institutions, 3 team leaders and 8 frontline staff. We also engaged with to representatives from the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) and NHS Education for Scotland (NES). Across Social Care we spoke to 3 higher education institutions, 8 residential childcare service providers - one of which also provides Secure Care services, 4 frontline workers, as well as representatives from the Scottish Social Services Council (SSSC), Coalition of Care and Support Providers in Scotland (CCPS), and Social Work Scotland (SWS) including a group discussion with their Community Placement sub-group with 20 members present.

3.3 A combination of desk research and engagement informed the mapping of the learning journeys for each of the 5 areas of work. Learning materials (such as higher education programme content or continued professional learning training programme content) which were either provided by stakeholders we engaged or which were publicly available, were analysed in order to provide evidence of the extent to which the Children and Families workforce is learning about psychological trauma and trauma informed practice. It’s important to note the limitations of this — in many cases, learning materials were analysed using publicly available information, such as learning objectives or course module descriptions. Such content only provides a brief overview of the subject matter of learning, and therefore limits the effectiveness of any analysis.

3.4 Materials were analysed against Levels 1 and 2 of the NES Knowledge and Skills Framework for Psychological Trauma, based on the descriptions included in ‘Transforming Psychological Trauma: Knowledge and Skills Framework for the Workforce (NES, 2017), and The Scottish Psychological Trauma training plan (NES, 2019).

3.5 Where it is noted that there is ‘no explicit evidence of trauma informed practice available,’ this indicates that there is no evidence that the material covers any of the components which make up Level 1: Trauma Informed.

3.6 Where it is noted that there is ‘partial coverage of Level 1: Trauma Informed’ or ‘Partial coverage of Level 2: Trauma Skilled,’ this indicates that there is evidence that some, but not all components which make up these levels have been covered. In these instances, often language is used that is different to that within the Knowledge and Skills Framework for Psychological Trauma (2017) but the interpreted meaning of such language is aligned.

3.7 Where it is noted that materials align with ‘Level 1: Trauma Informed’ or ‘Level 2: Trauma Skilled,’ this indicates that there is evidence that all components that make up these levels have been covered.