We heard from Eilis and Emily about their personal highlights working on the timeline.<\/p>\n
As historians, it was fascinating to place NCB\u2019s achievements within the broader context of continuity and change in Britain over the last 60 years, such as the HIV\/AIDS epidemic, and the
\nDisability Rights Movement. Delving into the archives was a lot of fun, and we unearthed some absolute gems, like Disability Is \u2013 a 1995 animation made by young disabled people from the
\nGreater Manchester Coalition of Disabled People. The film challenged mainstream narratives of disability and centred young people\u2019s perspectives.<\/p>\n
Firstly, there was so much incredible material, and so many significant moments we wanted to capture. We ended up presenting far more material than could ever be featured in one timeline!
\nIt was also difficult trying to capture the joys experienced by young people in the past at the same time as drawing attention to the struggles that many children and young people dealt with in the past – and continue to face today.<\/p>\n
We hope that people viewing the timeline gain an understanding of how instrumental the National Children\u2019s Bureau have been in advocating for children over the last 60 years. They\u2019ve instituted critical research, such as the National Child Development Survey, and been crucial in shaping UK policy. The All-Party-Parliamentary Group for Children was established with the help of the NCB! To view the timeline and learn more about the work of the NCB over the past 60 years, visit NCB 60th anniversary timeline<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" We heard from Eilis and Emily about their personal highlights working on the timeline. What did you enjoy most about researching the timeline? As historians, it was fascinating to place NCB\u2019s achievements within the broader context of continuity and change in Britain over the last 60 years, such as the HIV\/AIDS epidemic, and the Disability […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":826,"featured_media":1245,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[589],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1717","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-blog"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/research.kent.ac.uk\/living-assessment\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1717","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/research.kent.ac.uk\/living-assessment\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/research.kent.ac.uk\/living-assessment\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/research.kent.ac.uk\/living-assessment\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/826"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/research.kent.ac.uk\/living-assessment\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1717"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/research.kent.ac.uk\/living-assessment\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1717\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1726,"href":"https:\/\/research.kent.ac.uk\/living-assessment\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1717\/revisions\/1726"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/research.kent.ac.uk\/living-assessment\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1245"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/research.kent.ac.uk\/living-assessment\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1717"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/research.kent.ac.uk\/living-assessment\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1717"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/research.kent.ac.uk\/living-assessment\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1717"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}