Stop / reduce suspensions for disruptive and vulnerable children

[HooverIsAlwaysBroken]

https://amp.theguardian.com/education/article/2024/jul/20/english-schools-to-phase-out-cruel-behaviour-rules-as-labour-plans-major-education-changes

I would be interested in what people think about this. Being shy and bullied (and very academic) as a child, I would be inclined to feel sorry for the children who just are trying to learn. I would also assume that this will make it much harder for the teachers…

of course the vulnerable and disruptive children need support but is this the right way? My DS is very disruptive and has had numerous detentions but never a suspension. I would assume that the bar for that already is very high? But happy to be told otherwise.

If ND children coped much better at school 20 odd years ago, why not just go back to that model? No ASD wings, no time out cards needed. Just 1 teacher, a TA, consistent routine and children being told off if they’re naughty.

I 100% agree with this I went to a really strict Catholic school and was almost permanently in isolation or detention for small things like not doing homework, looking out the window etc definitely didn't traumatise me like some are saying in fact I liked being out of class 😏

There should be a balance between giving out punishments for everything and not giving out punishments for anything.
Because jeez I've heard some horror stories about kids behaviour at some schools like throwing chairs at teachers and rampaging classrooms and not being able to punish those kids is only going to make it worse

Ok.

So let's look at Switzerland.

In Switzerland education varies by canton (like county) but there are broad similarities.

Children start compulsory education at 4. They do a "reception year".

Kids that have special needs can do the reception year at half time - so they take two years to do it. If after the two years they haven't reached the standard they are not
admitted to mainstream but go to special school.

Education is very much not childcare. Each year has a different schedule - so for example my friends who have two kids who live out there - one child might be in all mornings and Wednesday afternoon, the other child is in all
Of Monday, Tuesday afternoon, all of Wednesday and Thursday and Friday morning.

The secondary system is run like the English system used to be - there are grammars, vocational schools and technical schools. There's a real bun fight to get in the grammars.

So Swiss education is different from English in that:

Kids with special needs get more
Time at the start but then automatically go to
Special school at age 6 if they can't keep
Up.

This alone if done in England would
Massively, massively reduce disruption in mainstream classes but we don't have the spaces in special school so many kids who can't cope with mainstream are in mainstream and each special school place that becomes free is fought over by schools -

We want this place the kid at our school attacked a child last week
We want this place the kid at our school threw chairs at the whole class last week
We want this place the kid at our school was doing lord of the flies in English and replicated it by stabbing several children.

Also the students go to different schools at age 13. In the U.K. we keep all children who are not in special school in the same school and they do the same qualifications. It's a bloody nightmare trying to meet all
Their different needs.

Many Special Schools have been shut down. Twenty years ago, there weren't as many SEND students diagnosed and potentially there was less monitoring of Missing in education. It isn't as easy as saying go back to what it was, as there were issues then also.

Looking at Germany and France, they both still have repeating the year if they don't pass the required standard. I don't believe Germany, with its Foerderschulen (special schools for many additional needs all lumped together) necessarily works but teachers are held in higher regard there (Beamte/civil servant status) and pay is much higher. Furthermore, schools in Germany are morning only 8-12.30 and teachers are seen less as pastoral/social workers. If you don't do your homework that's on you, if you fail an assessment that's on you, if you have to resit the year, that's on you. There are many things about the system there that are challenging but personal responsibility and accountabililty are key. That independence is primed from an early age - they walk to school by themselves from six.

The other thing I’ve noticed about our school is that the disruptive kids are often losing their break time or play time for their behaviour and then earning rewards to get screen time. Those kids probably need more exercise not less of it so I don’t think that can be helping but it feels like they don’t have that many options. It’s crap for the kids who are getting their learning disrupted and it’s crap for the kids who are stuck learning in a corridor because they can’t cope in the classroom. My fear is that by y6 they could be very big and strong and if they already are aggressive at 7/8 and the consequences aren’t working what do you do with them at 11. In my daughter’s reception class, they’ve had to be evacuated a few times due to the meltdowns of a child. He seems to have disappeared but is still on roll so no idea if he’s going to suddenly reappear in year 1 with greater expectations. It seems like lots of kids do manage reception but then struggle with the transition to y1 which says something about the structure of learning/level of expectations.

So if demand is rising, we need more provision in place to support not only those children who can't meet reasonable behaviour or learning demands, but also to support and persevere the learning of the rest of a class of children whose education is being disrupted. Provision requires funding. If we are unable to get a diagnosis (despite often very very clear learning difficulties) then we cannot get any funding for any support. The SEN pathway is completely overwhelmed and not fit for purpose (at least in my LA).

I agree numbers of SEN children are rising. When I started teaching 10+ years ago (primary) in inner London, most classes would have maybe a couple of children with very difficult behaviour or pronounced SEN, now while working in a small rural school there are probably 5+ children like this in most classes. These children take up a disproportionate amount of TA time and adult resources, quite often literally being chased around the school and spending the majority of time working separately to the rest of the class. Not all schools are quite this full on but from speaking to other teachers it is very widespread. Equally when I first started teaching, we had specialist intervention teachers doing maths groups and reading groups throughout the day, alongside support from specialists like play therapists or learning counsellors. As far as I can tell, all the specialist intervention teachers are now regular class teachers because schools can't afford them anymore, and we can no longer secure funding for other therapy types. Maybe where I am is particularly bad, but the waiting list for SEN provision is extremely long and every part of the process of securing help is extremely slow.

The reason for numbers of SEN children rising could be parenting, could be screens, could be COVID impact, could be 'gentle' teaching disciplining methods, could be all the above and more. Regardless of the cause, the current situation needs action and change, to preserve the education of the many children who want to come to school learn and to make sure that the children who can't cope in a mainstream setting have a positive future ahead of them too. We need more alternative provision that will equip children and young people with the life and coping skills they need to ultimately function in society.

The solution definitely isn't to shunt all the SEN kids into a different school. That's what used to happen and it was awful for the kids who had potential to learn but just needed a bit of extra support.

Most of the kids who are being disruptive wouldn't be like that if they are properly supported. They can cope with mainstream education just needing a bit more time, or help to manage overstimulation or other neurodiversity issues.

Putting any but the most profoundly developmentally delayed children onto a stream of education that leads to no qualifications or career prospects at the age of 6 without first trying to see what kind of support would allow them to cope with mainstream would be criminal. The issue is that the budget isn't being provided to properly identify or meet those needs. The result is an overwhelming number of kids who can't cope and act out.

OpizpuHeuvHiyo
I think that there is a mismatch between the funds and staff available in our schools and the support needs of some children with send. There would need to be a significant increase and there is no evidence that the government are going to fund these increases. There is also a lack of understanding about the other demands on schools. Schools are expected to meet the needs of children who display EBSA or have other mental health issues. The bottom line is that complaining about school support for send is pointless without also recognising the money required to improve it.

This shows a major part of the issue. The fact specialist schools are seen as basically a write off of any chance of qualifications or success in life - is it any wonder many parents are reluctant to go down that route when the expectations are so low?

And the fact that it is true in many areas that it is hard to get any GCSEs in the specialist system is wrong. Just because a child needs the extra auooort doesn’t mean they have have academic ability.

Even with a 1:1 there is disruption - I had one such child in yr5 two years ago who was autistic with a PDA profile and ADHD. He would frequently shout out to other children during input time and exit the class, slamming the door multiple times. I tailor made work aligned to his special interest which engaged him for a day or two, then that no longer worked. He would occasionally come to the front of class and talk over me to teach everyone about his latest invention. He would run around the school frequently despite movement breaks. He would hit others if they didn't do what he wanted them to do. Mum was very resistant to specialist provision but mainstream even with a 1:1 did not work as he was in constant fight or flight. He did end up in special provision for secondary. To keep him in mainstream would've been cruel to him.

And during that I had a class of children who about a third had other needs including autism, adhd, EBSA, dyslexia, dyscalculia and anxiety. Then of course there were children from homes with DV, alcoholic parents, neglect and parents with MH issues.

Their educational needs ranged from around 3 years behind to a couple of children who were gifted.

As a teacher I could not meet all their needs all the time, how on earth could I? I felt I was firefighting all the time.

To me there is no easy and quick fix because it would take time and investment to identify the issues and then agree and implement any changes.

And during that I had a class of children who about a third had other needs including autism, adhd, EBSA, dyslexia, dyscalculia and anxiety.

Why does this seem to be so accepted as the norm on here?

Absolutely right, there is no quick fix, so many issues feed into a classroom. There should be a sense of realism over how much differentiation a teacher can offer given the workloads involved. There will always be a need for specialist provision and this is right to meet the needs of more complex pupils.

As a teacher, there is no ‘accepting it’ or not, that’s the class in front of you.

The problem is though. You have a child and a family in crisis (plenty of good parents, me included, find themselves in this scenario).

I'm talking Reception to Y3.

You then have headteachers resorting to fixed term suspensions and permanent exclusion, which is a punishment, and a form of managing out, while stigmatising the child and the parents. The issue is disability and inadequate provision, not behaviour per se.

And exclusion is sometimes seen as a gateway into specialist provision by these headteachers. They believe they are doing you a service when in fact they are traumatising your child.

Because exclusion doesn't lead to specialist provision at all unless you have sharp elbows and advocacy skills (few do). For most, it leads to the PRU, which is little more than a state sponsored dumping ground for "problem children" of all ages. And because that's unbearable, families end up with no provision at all, or attempting to home school but with limited support and no clue how to do it well.

And then the expectation of LAs is that parents accept this and roll over. With shame and stigma being deployed freely
to make sure to they know where they stand in all of this.

The whole thing is structured in a completely antagonistic way. But it doesn't need to be like this. SEND Children can be supported and sometimes moved between settings without the trauma of it being a disciplinary matter or an exclusion.

Good on the new government for tackling the issue. It will be hard because vested interests will oppose it. But in 15 years time, you will struggle to find any one willing to admit that they opposed these reforms.

What you are saying is not true.

I was given loads of training on SEND in my training course and obviously all teachers are trained on this.

@Pythag no. You were given an overview / introduction to a huge specialist area of practice during the short PGCE course and during shorter courses later for continuing learning.

One of the big problems in SEND provision is inadequate training, support and understanding of adhd and asd. This is coupled to a wide spread defensive about the reality of that problem in the teaching profession when it is raised.

A common experience for parents is teachers and schools saying they've done everything possible, but the specialists saying "well actually I'm not sure you've implemented x, y and z / given it enough time". In our case, once those concerns were raised by the specialists, it accelerated the pace to an unlawful attempt at PEX, because the headteacher, in my view, found that preferable to the scrutiny the school was under for the gaps in its teaching methods and capabilities.

I'm ready to be flamed by hordes of angry teachers, but that's how it was.

The problem is, the public actually isn't willing to fund it. Already howls about the proposed teacher payrises that are above inflation are being heard, howls that Labour is going to increase taxes, etc.

School budgets are on their knees now, with about 92% of a school's budget going to staffing costs. There is no money for more staff. TAs that leave aren't replaced in most schools anymore, and redundancies are being made in others. We can't have 1 TA in most classes and are lucky if each year group has a TA to work across classes to do interventions and/or cover PPA time, let alone 2 in every class!

Honestly, this sounds like our school ... many classes exactly like this and no staffing to deal with it.

I know of MANY teachers who have left the profession precisely because of poor unmanageable behaviour from pupils.
A SEN diagnosis is for a pupil to live with and deal with, my DS is in this category. I do not allow him to be defined by this at school. He has the same rules and boundaries as the others. He has turned out fine.
As soon as rules change for one group, there are no rules, chaos ensues.
politicians must stop using education as a political football

Either the government spends a vast amount of money to: increase the number of TAs in schools, solve the teacher recruitment and retention crisis, give loads more training to teachers and introduce masses of support for parents and children in the communities where it's sorely needed... or schools need to be allowed to continue excluding and isolating so that classrooms are safe and teachers can actually teach. Where wpuld this money come from?

Labour are making some of the right noises, but I'm still not entirely convinced they won't hamstring schools' ability to control behaviour and then just leave them to deal with the fallout.

Oh and I have no skin in the game. I work in a girls' grammar school with no real behaviour issues. I will stay until I retire. I wouldn't go back into the lion's den if they paid me triple my salary.

I trained as a teacher in 2012. I got one afternoon on SEND.

I've made up for it since, but pretty much entirely on my own initiative.

I have seen research suggesting that the old fashioned, predictable routines, in classrooms plainly decorated without all the displays etc and less sensory input from the all singing all dancing lessons is actually much better for many ND children and that makes sense to me.

Curious as to why behaviour has got significantly worse over the last 30 years or so while proportion of children living in abject poverty (going hungry etc) has declined (still at an unacceptable level).

I understand there's a lot more SEND now, but usually led to believe that's because of greater awareness/diagnosis.

Struggle to believe that it's just that these children were masking before when many seem completely unable even to mask now (eg where school isn't supportive, these children aren't behaving, they're still struggling).

I don't have the answers but I do think there must be environmental/ cultural reasons contributing.

@helpfulperson this is really interesting. I can see for a lot of ND kids this might be good.

I wonder if it would work in practice, now many kids are addicted to high stimulation in their out of school lives?