Zero tolerance schools and slant techniques for send - good, okay or terrible

[Zerotolerancetofun]

Dd is starting secondary next year. The school has a zero tolerance behaviour policy so very strict about everything (uniform, homework, behaviour etc). They are also bringing in this new teaching technique called slant that the kids are meant to follow - about how they sit/pay attention/look at the teachers - it sounds very Draconian.

Dd has ASD and significant levels of anxiety and I am concerned how this environment will work for her. I think she will be terrified of making a mistake and getting detention for minor mistakes, but of course if this approach stops bullying etc then that is a good thing for her.

I'd love to know how other people's DC have got on with this type of school. Particularly if they have ASD, but also NT children too.

"Not terrible" if you're capable of conforming to those rules. If you are a neurodivergent child with situational mutism so cannot physically answer when spoken to and you know you are going to be accused of being "rude" and possibly punished for it I imagine that would feel pretty terrible.

My ASD DS would have loved the rigidity and the consistency of the discipline approach, but there's no way he could have managed SLANT. Eye contact/not fidgeting would have been impossible for him. It actually upsets me to think of him having to do it - it is a very old fashioned view that we have to 'train' people with ASD out of their stims to suit the world around them, when actually if allowed to stim then they are often more receptive to learning.

My DD is suspected ASD. She has been in mental health crisis for 3 years since starting in Y7. Her school is not as strict as you describe but it is similar. She found school overwhelming and stressful and has not attended for more than a handful of days.

She is currently on a managed move to a different school which is much more relaxed about everything and she is finding it much better - still a huge struggle to attend but possible...

That said her older sister is probably also on the spectrum and likes rules. She is stressed by those who don't follow them and would probably like a more draconian set of rules. She'd probably love Michaela tbh.

Child 3 is NT and doing fine there. Would probably be fine anywhere as they just get on with stuff. Compared to the other 2 who stress and over think everything dc3 is pretty oblivious which makes a nice change 😁

Sounds awful

How old is he?

Lots of children like clear rules and prefer the calmer environment

This is undoubtedly true, but I wish more people understood that it is possible for a school to have clear rules and a calm environment without resorting to behaviourist approaches that discriminate against those with SEN. I work in a school that has a nurturing and inclusive approach, but we also have high expectations and clear consistent boundaries. More and more schools are sending their SENCos and pastoral leaders to visit us to see how we do things, which shows things are moving in the right direction but there too many still believe that reasonable adjustments for ND children or those with SEMH needs means total freedom from consequences or that kids are allowed to run riot.

As soon as a school says 'zero tolerance' I write it off for DD. She wouldn't cope. She is continually anxious about getting into trouble (cPTSD).

Her school does have a zero tolerance approach - any disruption is dealt with. Not by punishment, but by understanding why behaviours are happening, recognising when a pupil is genuinely doing their best, by providing support according to need.

They don't call it 'zero tolerance' because that is now associated with a punitive approach based on out dated behaviourist models of behaviour management. But it is the school with the best academic results in the LA (by progress and by exam results). They regularly send pupils to Oxbridge and RG universities, and provide the support that less academic pupils and those with SEN need.

I can't comment on SLANT specifically but I think you need to talk to the SENCo or someone else from the SEN team to try to find out exactly how they deal with students like your child.

Implementation comes down to the individual school's culture and individual teachers. The "regime" will be sold as if there are no exceptions to anything but in reality there will likely be exceptions and reasonable adjustments made. Your child still has a right to reasonable adjustments. Some schools will make sufficient adjustments for your child, others won't, and you can't necessarily tell which is which from the headline behaviour policy they sell. Talk to them.

@neverbeenskiing

What sort of demographic is that school in?

Exactly.

It isn't 'anything goes' vs 'zero tolerance'

It is clear expectations and disruptive behaviour addressed - but not necessarily addressed by punishment.

Loving the SEN = disruption + trouble equation in so many posts here.

The truth is that some (many) children including those with SEN prefer schools like this to get away from noisy, disruptive children (many of whom don't have SN of any kind).

@sixfoot

He is in year 9. Very academic, very sporty. Friends are similar. He loves tests and high pressure. Actively excited to get into his GCSE years.

My daughter is more like me, and is not that way inclined 😜.

@Untitledsquatboulder

Unfortunataly those who are behavioural and disruptive are now put into the SEN umberella. May well be the case of course, but if you do have a huge percentage of the class with needs, whether that be special needs, behavioural ones, or MH etc, it can quickly become very chaotic.

@mixedrecycling

That is certainly the ideal. Why then, can this not be implemented easily? Certainly sounds ideal on paper.

I can see how it would be good for those who need a quiet, structured environment to learn. Too much of my school days were disrupted by other pupils being raucous and disturbing the classroom, shouting out, throwing things etc so I would probably have welcomed aspects of this. But re kids get detentions for things like loosing their pe kit rather than bad behaviour do you mean the 'bad behaviour' is allowed and not sanctioned?

I don't know. I would guess:

• different ideologies - just look at the statements on this thread and others about disruptive pupils. It is easier to write them off than put in the work to 'reach' them
• resources - DD's school has a higher level of FSM than the national average, and average numbers of SEN. But there is probably a tipping point where the level of need just exceeds resources, no matter how well managed. Having said that, DD's path to an EHCP was very smooth, and the school does seem proactive in getting those in place and getting the funding, and there are economies of scale in meeting needs - DD has a weekly small group intervention for SALT. There is no cost difference between meeting DD's needs in this respect and meeting the needs of the other 2 or 3 pupils that are also part of the group. So 3 or 4 pupils cost no more than 1 pupil, but can potentially get 3 or 4 times the funding.
• not every teacher is equally good, not every senior leader is equally good. There is a virtuous circle as well as a vicious circle. This school was not this good pre-the current head teacher. I got chatting to someone who went there 15/20 years ago, and there was a lot of low level disruption. Over the past 15/20 years the Head has built up a team and created a school that can take its pick of applicants when they have a vacancy. All the staff I have been in contact with has impressed me with their expertise and attitude - they seem to genuinely want to connect with DD (who is not 'easy' although genuinely wants to do her best) and understand her challenges. The school has no trouble getting teachers for maths and science, for example, and presumably can pick the best and those that fit their approach to behaviour

@mixedrecycling

Very interesting reply thank you. In regards to your first statement though I think it’s unfair to presume that schools simply just write off some kids with massive behavioural issues. They don’t, they just don’t have the resources. Schools can’t treat kids with issues stemming from long-standing and severe trauma. Some children are never ready to learn and will continue to disrupt. That’s a failing of other services of course and not schools, but you can’t blame some parents for choosing schools like the one the OP describes. For my son, he loves to learn with zero disruptions.

@mixedrecycling

And yes to school management. Crucial factor really. I have three states near me and geographically in the same two areas. One is as the OP described, one is quite nurturing and seems to bumble along okay and is somewhere where my daughter will go. The other one is feral with bad SLT and one I would never consider for either child.

@MichelleScarn they get detentions or isolation for bad behaviour. What I meant really was that a child who is generally well behaved can get a detention for a mistake such as forgetting their pe kit or loosing something. That is the sort of thing that will worry my DD.

One of my fellow adoptive parents also has a child with cPTSD. They thrived in the absolute certainty of a 'zero tolerance' school. If they got a detention for forgetting their PE kit is made them feel secure. DD would have fallen apart with the guilt and shame of making a mistake.

The problems I have with the 'zero tolerance' approach are a) it disproportionately disadvantages pupils with SEN because 'zero tolerance' and 'reasonable adjustments' have a fundamental conflict, and b) it is becoming touted as a cure-all for an under-funded system - get rid of the 'bad' pupils so the 'good' pupils can learn. Rather than provide the funding that will enable every pupil to have their needs met and receive a good education.

My DD went to a strict school, although they didn't use SLANT as far as I know. She has ASD, ADHD and dyspraxia and had an EHCP. It didn't work out for her, she developed massive school anxiety and missed a lot of year 7 and most of year 8. She's now in specialist provision, which was difficult to find as she is bright. I've never really forgiven the school for the way they treated her.

I do understand the reasons for this type of school and how it has transformed outcomes in particular in inner city areas of deprivation such as we live in - and I still have an NT child in the school who is thriving. He and his friends find all the rules a bit ridiculous but have no trouble following them and for the top sets there are some wonderful enrichment opportunities. The fact remains that it is not an environment that allows any flexibility or adaptation for the ND child and I know of others who have been effectively managed out to preserve the academic record, or who spend all their time out of the classroom in ‘ref’.

The thing is, there are many, many schools that DO educate (not 'treat') children with long standing and severe trauma. DD's is one. A friend is a teacher in another.

There are some schools that are simply overwhelmed by need, of course. But there are others that simply don't want to bother, and want those children to be separated off so they can educate the 'normal' children - e.g. DD's last school, which had the reputation of being 'nurturing', but when confronted by a child with significant trauma couldn't get rid of her fast enough. Compared to her current school where she is described as 'a pleasure to have in class', and have since day 1 recognised her need to feel emotionally safe before she was in a position to learn, and put in place measures to make her feel safe. She can walk out of lessons at any time without negative consequences, for example, as long as she goes to one of the identified adults/places. They trust her to not misuse that, and she doesn't. And they genuinely praise her for recognising that she needs to leave the class and find a space to regulate and then go back to learning.

Other pupils would have consequences for walking out of a lesson, because they wouldn't be doing it out of need, but out of choice. Which is where I have a problem with 'zero tolerance', and the implication that every pupil is treated in the same way.

For example, the friend who is a secondary school teacher had a pupil who was allowed to eat in class. The pupil was swimming at international level (has since won an Olympic medal), and training several hours a day around school. They couldn't get enough calories in unless they could eat in class, so of course that was allowed.

People with ADHD sometimes use the fear of getting in trouble to push themselves into doing things they are struggling with getting motivated for. So they are actively using this fear to drive themselves probably making the consequences seem worse than they really are, but this can lead to problems with anxiety. Especially when you think that a lot of the rules are things they might struggle with more than the NT pupils like remembering their equipment and paying attention at all times so it will be using a lot of mental energy. So it might seem like the child is doing well because they are pushing themselves along using the strict rules as a source of motivation, but this can come at a cost to their mental health

@mixedrecycling

I used the word treat because I do believe that some children’s trauma needs “treating” and by that I mean proper therapeutic treatment in place so that they could potentially be in a better place for learning. Even SEMH schools are failing because whilst the environment is certainly better for their needs, they are still not getting what they need from the likes of CAHMS etc.