Exclusion


Who wants the excluded children?


If more and more schools do take on academy status and competition gets sharper, where will this leave the minority who hinder rather than help league tables? Headteacher Update examines the current policy for dealing with excluded pupils and wonders where this will lead


children and occasionally “flip” completely. With a child like this in your class you can never relax. No matter how much you might concentrate on Sally S or Darren T, it is always with one eye on what is going on in the corner. It is not surprising that schools are reluctant to admit children with


M


behavioural difficulties. Some will go to any lengths to make sure they are “full” or the head will be unavailable or there will be some other obscure reason why school X, Y, Z down the road is by far the better destination. The fact remains that these children must go somewhere and perhaps this is one of the biggest dilemmas for the free school and academy policy.


The facts After a gloomy introduction, there is in fact an improved outlook at the moment, though it is hard to find it in the media. Since 2003/04 the number of permanent exclusions has fallen by two-fifths. In 2003/04 there were 9,990 pupils permanently excluded from school. This dropped to 5,740 in 2009/10. Interestingly, in 1997/98 there were 12,300 permanently excluded pupils – almost double the number excluded in the latest round of statistics1


. Four-fifths of the permanent exclusions were boys and Black Caribbean


pupils are still four times more likely to be permanently excluded than White British pupils. Pupils with SEN are eight times more likely to be permanently excluded and children who are eligible for free school meals are around four times more likely to be permanently excluded. The statistic that many newspapers chose to report was that 900


children are “suspended” from school every day (one that does not come directly from the statistical release itself but has been arrived at by politicians). A less publicised fact from the data was that the exclusion rates in Scotland are much lower than anywhere else in Great Britain


10


ost teachers have had one at one time or another. The child who just will not do as they are told. Not only that, they wander around, tap on tables and chairs, disturb other


and neither is there mention in the Department for Education (DfE) press release that the number of exclusions is almost half of that six years ago.


Are pupils getting better? There seems to be something of a contradiction here between what the statistics are saying and what the message is from the politicians. This is the announcement from schools minister Nick Gibb that accompanies the release of the data on the DfE website: “With thousands of pupils being excluded for persistent disruption


and violent or abusive behaviour we remain concerned that weak discipline remains a significant problem in too many of our schools and classrooms.” However, the statistics actually tell us that behaviour, reflected through


the need for exclusions, is improving. In all other circumstances it is the statistical trend that would be used as evidence of the real state of affairs in preference to anecdote. Therefore, let us explore why things “according to the statistics” have improved. Among the many factors likely, three in particular come to mind: n Schools working very hard at behaviour. n Behaviour and attendance partnerships. n Creative ways of providing alternative provision.


Schools working hard The press may not like it, but schools have been working very hard at behaviour. They do not need people to tell them that a disruptive pupil in the class is bad news for academic standards and certainly for the teacher and pupils he or she works with. Ofsted is another incentive and, in the end, fixed-term and permanent exclusion data are statistics that you cannot argue with (unless you are Mr Gibb of course).


Behaviour and attendance partnerships They might not have been successful in all areas, but by and large behaviour and attendance partnerships did see results. Schools are


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40