Please or to access all these features

Secondary education

Connect with other parents whose children are starting secondary school on this forum.

Exclusion from secondary school

60 replies

parentgov1 · 13/05/2016 14:55

Headteachers seem to have to much power to exclude with governors often supporting and Independent Review panels not able to reinstate. Schools and their leadership do not seem to recognise that if you address needs and get education right this may lead to improved behaviour,they focus too much on behaviour policies (often excessively even when not working) and not need/education. Schools don't seem to look at themselves enough to see if they have made mistakes and how provision could be improved instead they blame the child. If they can get it right for the most challenging child and saw it as an opportunity it would benefit the school. Would be interested to hear from other parents with similar concerns.

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
myfavouritecolourispurple · 11/02/2017 15:39

Schools will not exclude for behaviours that in any other environment would be regarded as unlawful. At work they would result in dismissal for gross misconduct; in society they would be likely to result in a criminal record

And I am glad for that fact. A school is a very artificial environment and kids are asked to put up with things that they would never have to put up with in the workplace (and at a time when they have not yet matured). And in my view it is far too easy for kids to get criminal records in this country. 10 is ridiculously young, in Spain it is 14, 12 should be the absolute minimum.

I am sure there are some incredibly challenging kids (with and without SEN) and it is too hard to exclude. But some parents would have kids excluded for very minor trangressions. I think the balance is about right at present - in my view we often expect kids to behave better than adults do.

prh47bridge · 11/02/2017 11:25

Agree with Wolfiefan.

Just to add a few thoughts to my previous post...

I presume by "special measures unit" you mean a pupil referral unit. These deal with pupils who have been excluded or are unable to attend a normal school for other reasons. It is not some kind of punishment. A PRU takes pupils with emotional and behavioural difficulties and should help them to return to mainstream education. They are sometimes referred to as short stay schools as pupils should only be there temporarily.

Unless you are educating your daughter at home you could face prosecution if you continue to refuse to send her to school. Your complaints about the teachers and school will not cut any ice if that happens, nor will your unwillingness to allow your daughter to go to a PRU.

Note that, even on your description, this incident started with the teacher asking your daughter to leave the office and her refusing to do so. That is unacceptable behaviour. If she had left when asked none of this would have happened. And apologies for repeating myself but, whatever the teacher did (and I do not believe your daughter's description which sounds like self-justifying nonsense), kicking the teacher is assault and the school is quite right to take action to protect its staff. You are not helping your daughter by minimising her behaviour.

Wolfiefan · 11/02/2017 10:07

Thread from May last year.
Mumkins taking a phone off a teen is not the same as chopping off a body part FFS. Perhaps you should stop minimising your daughter's behaviour as being a stroppy teen and tell her to start doing as she's told. Perhaps if she behaved she wouldn't have the phone taken off her and if she didn't barge into an office, demanding it be returned and probably act in a threatening way then she wouldn't be excluded.

prh47bridge · 11/02/2017 10:00

Mumkins94 - Your account of what happened may be true but it sounds to me like your daughter's self-justification. Pushing someone with your body, making contact with pelvis and legs only, is a very strange and unlikely contortion. From the description it sounds like your daughter kicked the teacher. Even if the teacher did make contact with her, kicking is not justified. Unless you have independent evidence (and NOT from your daughter's friends who will tend to support her version regardless of the truth) you perhaps need to listen to what the school says and address your daughter's behaviour.

VintagePerfumista · 11/02/2017 06:10

threads.

Wolfiefan nailed it about 3 posts down.

Mumkins64 · 11/02/2017 05:49

I completely agree. My daughter has been excluded and they are trying to railroad her into a special measures unit. I agree she can be a stroppy teenager but a teacher has accused her of assault. The teacher in question had asked her to leave the office, refusing to give my daughter her phone back (Like cutting a teenagers arm off). When my daughter didn't move she pushed her with her body, not hands, making contact with her pelvis and legs. My daughter automatically lifted her leg to remove herself from this inappropriate body contact then walked away.
In a kangaroo court style meeting the teachers decided this was a serious incident possibly leading to permanent exclusion unless I agree to place her in a special measures unit indefinitely. I emailed the child protection officer at the school and asked who protects the child against the teachers. No reply.
The teachers have the power to destroy a childs future with their allegations without any independent review. It is hard to find any school to take her when her last reported entry says assault against a teacher.
I currently have no school for my child as I am refusing to place her in a special measures unit.

BoneyBackJefferson · 15/05/2016 21:20

I think this would have gone better if the OP had been a little less general in their descriptions and a more forward in facts.

NicknameUsed · 15/05/2016 19:48

I find the OP's writing style rather odd and disengaged.

It is too vague and general.

OddBoots · 15/05/2016 18:15

I don't think the OP said if they were a man or a woman, I'm not sure why but I assumed they were male, not that it matters.

BeauGlacons · 15/05/2016 18:06

Do you really think the op's a journalist? I thought she was a mother with a spectacular badly behaved child or an educational liberalist in the bedales genre who thinks no social group, least of all adolescent children need boundaries because they need the freedom to set their own - like I Lord of the Flies. If she's a .journo, she or he can interview me and I'll give the run down on a great school where the boundaries were removed and she can follow its slide into obscurity in the press about how something great went rotten.

leccybill · 15/05/2016 17:53

Yes, perhaps best not to post again. This is a mutually supportive site, but it takes both parties to give their views and acknowledge others.
I can't see where you have shared any personal knowledge.
We don't take too kindly to journalists fishing for articles either.

BeauGlacons · 15/05/2016 17:48

I think that's a very pertinent observation oddboots

corythatwas · 15/05/2016 17:44

OP, you haven't actually shared knowledge, experience or anything else: just made vague statements not backed up by fact. We have a great number of parents on here whose children need behaviour management: some have got the support they need, others haven't. But unlike this thread, they actually contribute to our knowledge by explaining the situation when posting: you haven't told us a thing.

OddBoots · 15/05/2016 15:49

A study from America appeared in my twitter timeline today suggesting that the removal of a disruptive student meant a $100 000 increase in the lifetime earnings of the remaining students in that class. I didn't read the study closely enough to critically evaluate it but it did make me think that there hasn't historically been much focus on the other students in with a disruptive student - I wonder just how influential this factor is in independent school students achieving better exam results and lifetime earnings.

We need to have a system that is as much as possible fair to all students - the disruptive ones probably do have additional needs of one sort or another that mean they need to be taught in a different environment using different methods but it shouldn't take exclusion to get them into that different environment.

BeauGlacons · 15/05/2016 14:55

You see, I am very opposed to strike action. But I think the current status quo is an assault on teachers' terms and conditions because you are prevented from teaching and fulfilling the potential of the majority due to the behaviour of the minority and it impacts on the overall performance of schools. Ed's removal because behaviour was not managed cost the school her results and probable Oxbridge place. They preferred to keep the children who, with their mothers, were holding the SLT and cohort to ransom.

cricketballs · 15/05/2016 14:38

^^ timelytess; also my experience where behaviours displayed 10 years ago would result in an exclusion now its a day in isolation or a detention

timelytess · 15/05/2016 13:16

Just as well, OP. I was wondering if we were living on the same planet. 21 years teaching in inner-city comprehensives taught me that exclusions are very rare, unlike behaviour that ought to warrant exclusion, which is disturbingly frequent.

parentgov1 · 15/05/2016 13:11

This is my first experience of posting, I am not sure I would do it again, the intent was to hopefully share knowledge and experience on the chance since 2014 and the impact this is having , I hope that my initial posts may help some parents , I won't post again as it was not intended to be a debate about numbers , more the practical issues and soenimes injustice if you are involved in exclusion processes and IRPs and FTT.

OP posts:
NicknameUsed · 14/05/2016 08:46

Clearly the OP has a problem. The vast majority of answers here have confirmed that exclusions are pretty rare these days and only occur for the most serious transgressions.

BeauGlacons · 14/05/2016 08:00

What an interesting thread. My experience is quite the reverse. Schools will not exclude for behaviours that in any other environment would be regarded as unlawful. At work they would result in dismissal for gross misconduct; in society they would be likely to result in a crimina record. Sometimes the children concerned are already known to the police.

No young person should suffer due to the behaviour of another - physically, mentally or academically. Schools do not sanction unacceptable behaviour enough and I imagine that grades are affected by just continuous low level disruption that impedes thorough teaching and revision of the syllabus. It also has a significant impact on the motivation of the majority and the motivation of the teaching staff.

When my dd attended a state school behaviours that did not result in permanent exclusion were: assault, foul language (frequent at teachers), intimidation, severe disruption, theft, pyromania. After four and a half years (my dd had left the school by then because of the shocking standards) two of the young people were permanently excluded but not before they had been allowed to wreak havoc on the rest of the year group and school community.

The issue really is, in my experience, that Head Teachers have not fought for the rights of the majority to learn or done enough to safeguard the education of the compliant majority. Therefore an excuse culture based on unspeakable low standards of social expectation has sprung up with excuse after excuse being made for the anti-social behaviour of the minority. What of the compliant children from difficult backgrounds who want to work and do work and of whom there are far more than the non-compliant - why can't they be given every opportunity to maximise their potential and they are ones who probably suffer most because they have to watch their step on their home ground to keep themselves under the radar and don't have parents bolstering excellent teaching skills made inadequate due to classroom behaviour with private tutoring. They surely are the ones who need more than any other a safe learning environment where they can thrive and achievement will not be mocked. There is news this week about the failure of white British boys to succeed in education and there is surely a link here.

Ultimately society has to accept that one size doesn't fit all and that different types of schools for young people with different needs are required. Not all schools can fight for places in the league tables but all schools should be focussing on providing every child with the best possible education they are able to access and we as a society need to start making a distinction again between well educated and well qualified.

There needs also, of course, to be far more investment in things like pupil referral units and support and budget for children who cannot peacably cope with mainstream school. One size doesn't fit all; some children would be better elsewhere, somewhere that can meet their needs.

Nothing was done to ensure my dd's inclusion in a small comprehensive where behaviour was running riot and the school was declining and not delivering on promises made at admissions. Nothing was done to ensure her needs were met or that she was happy and thriving. The disruption upset her, the violence upset her, the yelling and shouting and mass detentions upset her. That wasn't inclusive and we voluntarily excluded her and sent her to the independent sector where she thrived and grew in confidence. It wasn't even a particularly academic independent but it had the basics in place and expectations in line with normal, decent behaviour and if a young person there had behaved in the same way as at the old school there would have been no second chances.

meditrina · 13/05/2016 20:55

Thanks, senac32, food for thought.

But my question was aimed more at what the processes should be for exclusion (as OP thinks HTs have too much power - so presumably has some idea of how this needs to change)

And I was under the impression that exclusions rates were falling, ever since the changes which meant schools still had to pay for pupils (even if attending a PRU) and still had their results attributed to them.

NicknameUsed · 13/05/2016 20:51

"I suspect not journalist, but parent of dreadfully behaved child about to be excluded"

I am beginning to think that the OP has an axe to grind as well.

TheFallenMadonna · 13/05/2016 20:23

Permanent exclusions are rare and becoming rarer. Schools are held to account for exclusions, permanent and fixed term. They are considered as part of the OFSTED judgement.

CrowyMcCrowFace · 13/05/2016 20:23

I suspect not journalist, but parent of dreadfully behaved child about to be excluded.

IME quite a few parent govs get involved in order to have their child's back in these circumstances.

Quicker exclusion & better provision for excluded children would be better for the vast majority who have lessons disrupted by the very small minority who cannot behave.

Lizzylou · 13/05/2016 20:17

I am a teacher in a secondary school and your views of willynilly exclusions are so far from the truth, really couldn't be more different to my (albeit limited) experience.

Swipe left for the next trending thread