Let’s talk about how we can make changes in schools to improve them for everyone involved.

[SchoolsMustChange]

Having binge-read the WFH/attendance thread, I feel it important to have a positive discussion about changes schools can make that will improve things for everyone.

As a mother of autistic children, a couple of whom have school refused to the point of us being threatened with court and fines, and feeling totally unsupported by school, and ending up home educating because there felt like no other options, which also meant claiming more benefits to be able to do that.

I feel there are alternative options that would help schools become less chaotic, ease the stress on SN families (much of which comes from gaslighting and lack of support from within school) and improve outcomes for most children involved.

Lack of special school spaces is obviously an issue that must be addressed at some point, but for this thread let’s focus on mainstream schools, which seem to be really struggling right now.

At my youngest child’s school there was a high % of ND children, mainly because the local choice of schools is a draconian academy which manages out children with support needs, and this school, which is now riddled with attendance and behavioural issues. When I deregistered my son he was the 11th child in his year group to be removed, in a small school with under 60 per year group. My son’s attendance was nearing 50%.

What would have worked for him? Streaming lessons. Using technology already set up in the school during Covid lockdown. Allowing my son and others like him to login and register his attendance, and attend school and in a way that he could cope with. If he felt he genuinely had a choice to access education in this way he would have thrived. In days where stress levels were lower he could attend school and register as normal. If the day got too much he could come home and log in for afternoon lessons without it affecting his attendance and worrying schools, OFSTED and government. With this arrangement I know that his attendance, and that of loads like him, would be 100%. He wants to learn, but he can’t always do it in school.
Edited to add: this would also work for children who are ill who should be at home instead of spreading their germs to everyone!

I also think this plan could go further in dealing with increasing behavioural issues in the classroom, by being clear to parents that any issues (a lot which will be caused by unsupported SN) and their child will do lessons in a quiet room, streamed to a device with headphones (isolation room was often full of children who couldn’t cope in a loud classroom and who calmed down once there), and if the behaviour persists they can go home to learn there - if school is then not accessed they can be chased for their attendance, because a workable option is available.

Schools can then have a clearer line of acceptable behaviour with a real solution that’s not up for debate. At the moment lines are blurred and behaviour remains a big problem.

So rather than talking about the problem, can we have a discussion about potential solutions?

It’s depressing reading the frequent threads fighting teachers and/or children and/or parents.
Teachers are understandably not coping and are often blaming pupils and parents, children are not coping - as seen with rising rates of mental illness and poor attendance, parents are not coping because, especially those of us with SN children, we can see that they are not supported and we take the brunt of that once home. The system isn’t working for anyone.

So what can be done, because unless someone addresses the issues, instead of constantly pointing fingers at any other problem, this is only going to get worse for teachers, parents and pupils alike.

Any thoughts?

I've always thought a relatively simple change (yes, still incredibly complex but "simpler" than more and more special provisions) would be to scrap the "year by year" way that schools move pupils through the system and scrap year based forms. Let pupils move through the school more flexibly. I.e. if they are falling behind and have a bad year, then let them re-sit the year to catch up (and make different friends if their peers were what caused the bad year!), likewise if caused by the death of a close relative, or moving house mid school year, etc.

Why the obsessions with chucking them out at aged 16 having forced them to do GCSEs at age 16? Which just makes them someone else's problem if they didn't get the required "passes" for college/FE/jobs etc.

Stop the stigma currently experienced by the few who successfully apply to re take a year and who are bullied by school "friends", which causes it to be a very unpopular move. If a bit of flexibility became mainstream and there was more "shaking up" from year to year, the ones re-taking a year would barely be noticed. It also breaks up disruptive pupils and helps stop abusive "friendships" and reduces bullying etc. But it has to be more mainstream and less noticeable, hence scrapping the year form system.

If they've missed too many years to take GCSEs at 16, then let them do them at 17 or 18, or let them take some kind of alternative "school leaving" exam which just examines the life skill basics of literacy and numeracy.

Absolute insanity to keep pushing kids who are "behind" for whatever reason (disability, family death, bullying, abuse, etc), and trying to teach them things they've not got the basics to be able to do. I.e. pointless trying a foreign language to someone who can barely read and write. Pointless trying to teach physics to someone who is innumerate, etc.

An education is like a tree and it's roots. We need to get the roots right before any of the tree will grow. Whereas the schools, with their year by year progression, are trying to grow branches and leaves on a stem with no roots! And then we wonder why the kids who are "behind" turn disruptive and stop engaging with school!

I think two major factors have caused the increase in SEN. The first, most children with those kind of needs would not have been in mainstream (I'm thinking 90s). The second, the societal shift where children have less free playing outside, less socialising, less freedom, more screens, more junk food, lockdown etc. Both of these factors, along with a drive for more testing, less arts subjects and reduced funding over years is a recipe for disaster for all children in schools.

I was originally Early Years trained and physical development was always considered vital for other areas of development. Lots of taking learning outside, child-led activities, breaks. I trained in the 90s and we had long lunch play and afternoon play to break up the day. By the time my youngest was in infant school the school cluster had built an Ecopod on top of the Wildlife area, so Forest School stopped but staff from different schools could meet in the Ecopod, ironically.

That’s quite defeatist though. A different code on the register could easily allow for children to be “present” without being present.

We can’t fix any of this by doing the same things over and over again.

It might seem defeatist, but it is a real issue.
Just having a different code on the register isn't the issue... the issue is having a relationship with the child, monitoring progress, meeting individual need, being able to see if there are any concerns, safeguarding etc.
It is very hard to do these things when a child isn't there.

This makes me think... What about flip it, have the child registered as home educated, and have this be a mandatory register that is managed by education professionals who do the things you describe? Not just checking up, but also taking a co-ordinating role too? This obviously puts a time burden on parents, because I'm sure not every parent on this thread wants to give up their job and home educate, but if we're talking about children whose individual needs basically cannot be met in a school (which is designed for education en masse), then putting this on schools doesn't seem like the right fit either.

Its tricky, at present as soon as a parent says they will home educate, the onus is on the parent.
If school is still involved then the aim is ultimately to work on getting the child back into the school setting.
This can be a very long slow process, involving parents (so things like going to work can be tricky), possibly outside professionals and needs members of staff at school freed up who can work with the child (... and this then has to be funded). It also means that if any education is to happen, this will probably have to largely be done by the parents via things like Oak Academy... possibly with support from the school in what the curriculum is covering at that time.
I think if we were to have this sort of 'third way', then it would need a massive rethink of home education and where funding comes from in order for schools to have this co-ordinating role (because with individual children, in different years, with different needs it would take a LOT of co-ordinating...and other considerations would be things like home visits... which again would take up a lot of staffing time). Many children who struggle with coming into school do not have an EHCP, or any specific need which would bring funding.
Plus... would there still be that ultimate aim of getting children settled back into school?

It definitely sounds tricky, no easy answers. Just to clarify, my suggestion was for the school to have no involvement - it would be between the parents and some entirely new breed of home education officer employed by the council or similar. Whether this is at all practical or desirable, I don't really know - but I wanted to throw out the idea that instead of stretching the mandate of schools, we should consider expanding state involvement with home education.