School in Middlesbrough excludes 41% of pupils

My kids go to an Outwood school. It's the catchment school so there's little option - it wouldn't necessarily be my first choice otherwise because I'm not a fan of strict uniform and I don't particularly like the disciplinary scheme.

However - the school had been failing for twenty years. It's now outstanding. The exam results are improving. It's a deprived area with a difficult intake and in that sense they have done well. These kids haven't been excluded for uniform issues - the school provides free uniform in Y7 and has spares for pupils to borrow. They've been excluded for refusing to change/remove make up, and I suspect done so quite vigorously and got caught up in an escalation of the discipline scheme which can get ridiculously circular.

Exclusion is a fixed part of the discipline scheme and this is where I think they are on dodgy ground - my understanding of the guidelines is that it is supposed to be authoised by the headteacher each time and used as a last resort whereas it is being used as escalation and given by teachers. It will be interesting to see if this article changes anything as they already changed the sceme in the summer to add more levels. At the least I am expecting a very defensive letter next week!

It woukd also be interesting to see the data for the exclusions. I bet there is a higher rate of SEN pupils excluded than for 'all' pupils.

The fb thread does show that The Guardian has instigated contact with parents. Quite rightly. Much easier to turn around a school when the more difficult pupils have been moved on.

Catspyjamazzzz
Unless you've worked in a very challenging school I think you don't really know the full picture.

I remember what I thought I was going into when I went to work at a challenging failing school. My expectations barely scraped the surface. It's a whole different set of challenges and a very quick learning curve.

m.facebook.com/Outwoodparents/

A friend of mine has DD's at an 'Outwood' school. Two really nice kids, quiet, calm and polite. They are scared at school. They fear 'getting it wrong', they have become so introverted. Communication between school and home has been nearly none existent, no response to parent questions, no follow up to queries and worries.

Students on low incomes get their uniform cheaper. Children are not excluded for poverty reasons.
A majority of the children who go to this school are low income.

I know someone who works in an Outwood. Their school was ferel before it was taken over. Students running all over and no control. No one was getting a decent education.
It’s not perfect but it’s about giving these children a fair chance that otherwise they wouldn’t get.
I suspect a lot of posters have no idea of how bad behaviour can be in some schools.

I wouldn’t send my child to one but it’s not aimed at my child. It’s about giving children with little chance to succeed a way to get some exams under their belt.

I think uniform has to be implemented in this country as otherwise students won’t dress appropriately. If you seen the children in my daughters school on non uniform day you would understand why.

This isn't about uniform.
This is a way of 'offloading' children who are higher need so that results for the school improve. Great for this trust of schools, not so great for other local (maintained) schools that then pick up the same children.

IntentsAndPorpoises
I wouldn't want to work in an Outwood school. It's not a model that suits me as a teacher.

They do achieve better outcomes for students.

Some of their Middlesbrough predecessor schools were struggling to get 30% of their Year 11s 5 GCSEs and that had been going on for decades.
I had a look following the article.
If children in an area have a 30% chance of getting 5 GCSEs and someone improves the schools so more than half are getting a reasonable set of qualifications then I can set aside my personal feelings about their approach and say 'fair play'. They are starting to tackle long standing educational disadvantage.

I don’t know the school or chain, but it says in the article in the OP that it is not zero tolerance.

What is the big deal with wearing coats inside? I've never understood that even when I was a teacher.

Outwood turn schools into robot factories, they want robot teachers and robot children.

They have ridiculous rules on uniform, like no taking blazers off in the summer. (why the obsession with blazers anyway?)

There isn't much proof they improve the education of pupils, they improve exam results and are skilled at ticking Ofsted boxes. I wouldn't send my kids to an Outwood school.

That exclusion rate shows something is wrong.

@noblegiraffe who teaches these children how to behave when challenged? What research does show is that zero tolerance type treatment of this kind with no back up of discussing the reason etc leads to exclusions and often criminal records. Be abuse they go on to shout, create and abuse police officers instead.

Strict systems like this don't work long term. It's why America has such a crisis in justice system (not that ours is perfect)

RafaIsTheKingOfClay
One school near me was taken over by a chain and the chain provided new uniform for students and then had a fund they would use to assist parents.

You're right about some parents moving because they don't like simple rules. I've known parents remove students from schools because schools outrageously expect their child to follow simple rules and be polite and courteous to staff and fellow students.
More often than not the child is moved to a school in the area that is known for poor behaviour and poor outcomes. Why? Because the parent isn't really bothered about outcomes/can't see the link between behaviour and outcomes and would rather be at a school where the school won't pester them as much over their child's behaviour.

I’m not sure about the not being able to afford uniform argument. Suspect most of the parents who remove children from these schools do it because the schools are too strict. Sometimes it’s a joint agreement with the school that their child might be better off in a different school.

Fourfriedhas it right, strict uniform requirements allow Outwood to exclude children from less desirable backgrounds.
In an area where well the whole catchment area is deprived? In a town where they've taken over 2 schools in deprived areas that have been woefully failing for decades? The school at the top of that article is oversubscribed.

We can think what we like about whether we like Outwood's approach but when you've had schools with 2/3 of the cohort failing getting 5 GCSEs A*-C in total
(this isn't the 5A*-C including maths and English) for years, I'd say they're giving kids a better chance than they'd otherwise have got.

Sorry wasn't clear enough, Fourfried has it right, strict uniform requirements allow Outwood to exclude children from less desirable backgrounds.

Are you suggesting that this academy is permanently excluding kids because they can’t afford a uniform?

no what she meant was, I think, that if a new company takes over a school, turns it into a academy,, imposes a new uniform, there will be parents that cannot afford to kit their children out anew mid year. Therefore excluding those children is one way of getting rid of poor families from the school.
Cynical perhaps but you do wonder...
A bit like when the only school trip offered to us cost 2 grand per child. Therefore only the 'nice'' children can go.

uniform requirements is an excellent way to exclude 'badly behaved' children

Isn’t bad behaviour a good way to exclude badly behaved children? I’m a bit confused.

I agree that going to the press achieves nothing and is just as lazy as going the OTT rules route

Considering this story is based in some Guardian research into exclusion rates I suspect the parents didn't approach the press, the press will have approached the parents.

Rafa agreed, which is why I feel that parents who go to the papers have pretty much lost the argument already. However, I am suspicious of Academy chains with strict (and expensive) uniform requirements and very high exclusion rates. Everyone has a right to an education and there are schools which are gaming the system.

i dunno i understand we need rules amd kids should follow then but teachers could be a hell of a lot smarter in how they deal with the kids tbh these are teens with so many hormones to deal with anyway. i.e a child refusing to take off a coat, could be defiance could something else a long coat if a girls has 'leaked' etc i would ask nicely and if there was an issue, if i got a petulant and arsy response i would simply continue the lesson, the defiant 1 hr coat wearing protester will feel like a div soon enough

41% of pupils aren't getting properly educated

And if they’re in the classroom, are the other 59%?

An exclusion is usually a day or so.

The fact that you follow the rules even though you don’t agree with them puts you in a completely different head space to the parents complaining about uniform, pointy.

In most schools with a strict uniform policy it won’t be an issue for the majority of pupils and they’ll be perfectly happy. There are a group of parents who don’t seem to think the rules should apply to their children. It wasn’t uniform, it would be something else. Anything else. They’d be the ones complaining about their kids being sent home for dress code violations in schools with no uniforms.

CountFosco and that is my big problem - schools using uniform to manipulate their intake, selection by wealth. Which is why I would like to know the breakdown of the reasons behind this school and this chain's very high exclusion levels.

Outwood have a reputation about being excessive about uniforms (I'm in the region that they operate in). Considering they take over schools that are in deprived areas and then change the uniform it's hardly surprising that some parents can't (for a variety of reasons) get their kids to school dressed 'appropriately'. Maybe I'm cynical but I'm sure excluding children who can't meet the uniform requirements is an excellent way to exclude 'badly behaved' children and therefore 'improve' behaviour in achool but they are missing the point of public education whose aim is to provide an education for all children. 41% of pupils aren't getting properly educated and that is a failure to me whatever Ofsted say.

noble not at all - that's a behaviour issue and I'm all in favour of schools being tough on bad behaviour. I would just like to know why this school has such a very high exclusion rate compared to other schools, and why the same applies to this particular academy chain - because they are clearly doing something wrong if they need to exclude that frequently.

Having worked in schools similar circumstances to that school, the picture is rarely as simple as 'child had coat on so got excluded'.