Has your under 5 ever been excluded from school?

[AtheneNoctua]

How does a 5 year old get like this? Surely some parents aren't taking their jobs seriously.

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7713227.stm

I was obvioulsy not talking about special needs children when I suggested parents weren't taking their jobs seriously. I just don't understand how so many under 5's (so basically 3 and 4 year olds) could be exibiting behaviour that gets them sent home. I find the number shockingly high. If my 3 year was suspended I would be mortified. Obviously, some parents aren't and those are the ones to which I am referring.

SN children are of course not to blame for having special needs. In those cases, it is the school who is failing, not the parent, and certainly not the child.

I've only read the OP but wanted to say that its not necessarily anything to do with parents not doing their job properly. My ds was excluded from school 3 times in 3 months when he was just 4. At the time we didn't realise he had SN as we simply hadn't had major problems with him before he started school. He was a lively , challenging child but his behaviour was managed effectively at home and at his preschool.

Ds ended up being excluded because the school couldn't cope with him. I now realise that this was due to them being crap as much as anything else. I removed him from that schoo, after the 3rd exclusion and he started a new school where he had great support and did really well.

He is now 8 and has a dx of AS and ADHD but back in 2004 when he first started school we had no idea that he had these problems. I'm sure lots of other parents thought we were just crap but the truth is they had no idea about what was really going on. The same is true today. I am very open about my ds's dx as i would rather other parents realise that some of his behaviour is because he has SN and not just because he's a badly behaved child with crap parents. People are too quick to judge without knowing the facts. So often children with behavioural problems have unrecognised and undiagnosed problems and suffer as a result. Obviously soem kids are just naughty and this may well be down to parenting.

purpleduck I first aproached our GP who refered my DS to CAMHS - where he was assesed by a psychologist. He was put on a waiting list for an anger management course. He was on the waiting list for a year, during which time he was excluded from school 3 times.

We also found a school for him that reinforces to him that they do want him in school; they do want him to learn, but they cannot have him in school if his behaviour is dangerous. The school also have a very experienced TA in the class, and have spared no expence in involving Language and Behaviour specialist, and the educational psychologist. I am extremly relieved that we managed to find such an understanding and supportive shcool.

But Scaryteacher, if these children had been helped more when they were 3, perhaps they wouldn't be such a problem in secondary school.

Excluding just hands the problem onto the next person - surely its easier to help a 3 year old than a 14 year old?

You can exclude a child from school, but you can't exclude them from getting involved in crime so that they can fund a drug habit started to help them deal with all the emotions they never learnt to understand when they were young. And you can't exclude them from standing on the street corner when your teenager is coming home after a night out.

I think you can use the 'here to teach, not to be a social worker' argument to an extent at secondary school, but I don't think you can divorce emotional maturity, emotional intelligence from learning with 3 and 4 year olds. If a 3 year or 4 year old isn't in school to learn how to behave and get on with other children, what are they in school for?

"SN children are of course not to blame for having special needs."

But as others have said on this thread, how many children of 3/4/5 actually have a diagnosis?

I agree with scaryteacher, the majority of the class who want to learn come first; they have to be safe and know that an angry DC is not going to stab them with a pencil or throw a chair at them.
The teacher?s job is to teach, they shouldn't have to manage badly disruptive behaviour and it is the reason that many leave the profession. It can reduce them to tears and is emotionally draining.
Last term a badly disturbed 11 yr old boy was holding a metre ruler and threatening to bring it down on my head! As I stood there calmly telling him to put it down I thought 'if he brings this down on my head it is going to hurt'! I was about 90% sure that he wouldn?t do it but there was an element of doubt. As it was I calmed him down and he apologized, but it isn?t something that should happen.
I was teaching today in a year 5 class, one boy had a statement and his own TA. He was fine for the first session but after break I could hear a great commotion of crying and shouting. He didn?t appear and neither did his TA so I just got on without them. After about 20 minutes she reappeared with him and they caught up. She apologized but he had had a bad playtime and she had walked him around the school until he calmed down. I was quite happy with this! If he hadn?t had a TA he would most likely have disrupted my first lesson because he is the sort of child who can?t take change. I would have been left to sort out the playtime problem which would have meant abandoning the lesson and asking the DCs to read. I doubt whether I could have sorted it and so would have had to send a DC to find the Head. It would have wasted at least 20 minutes of the lesson and been distressing for more sensitive members of the class.
These DCs need help, either they are SN, with AS or ADHD or they have very poor parenting. They either need a special unit or support within the mainstream school. I favour the latter as we should be aiming to integrate them. It can be done, the unit I visited in a primary school the other day had an old pupil who had been back to thank them because he was off to university to study medicine-goodness knows where he would have ended up without help!
I don?t think Ritalin is the answer; we shouldn?t be drugging our children.
A normal teacher with a whole class cannot cope alone with such problem children; they need help which needs proper funding.
Excluding DCs under the age of 5 isn?t a teacher being pathetic. A kicking, biting, hitting and swearing 3 yr old who doesn?t respond to anyone cannot be managed without the appropriate resources. I doubt if even Mary Poppins could cope single handedly with such a DC in a class situation!
Age 3/4/5 is the time to get a diagnosis and then, with help, they wouldn't end up being such problems as teenagers.

AbbeyA - after reading your last psot I'm left thinking we need staff in school to teach children, and just as many, if not more, just to look after them, parent them if you like.

It's haveing 1 full time and one part time TA in my sons class with has made all the difference.

In infant school, DS was in the same class as an autistic girl who had 1:1 support. Just having this extra adult in the classroom made such a positive difference to the whole class, IMO.

Totally agree, Abbey.

Most parents on here probably find it incomprehensible that there are children as young as $or 5 who regularly disrupt the class with aggression above and beyond what you would expect froma child of that age.

Many do have an undiagnosed SN. Many others have parents who just don't know how best to support and discipline their kids. TBH, it doesn't matter which it is. The point is these kids a)need support b)are stopping the other children from leaning.

Either way, we need to sort it out at that age because by the time they are 11 it's often too late.

I have just seen that it is reported on in The Times today this page
Over 4,00 under 5s excluded, which is shocking!
I think to put the money in at an early stage would be a huge saving in the long run.
A lot of DCs have undiagnosed SN problems and there is also a lot of bad parenting, it says in the article that many parents just fail to ever say 'No' to their DC. This causes massive problems in nurseries when they find that there are boundries.

Re: "not saying No" and the effect of bad parenting on behaviour, I think that makes it sound as though there are lots of over attentive parents hanging on their child's every word. I think its more likely that after shouting No repeatedly, parents are directing their children towards the TV, a bag of crisps or the computer to shut them up. Its not so much letting your children stay up late and have a lovely family game of snakes and ladders/craft time (permissive, hippy parenting). Its saying 'whatever' when they make a fuss and plugging them into something electronic. Its not that parents can't be bothered to stand up to their children, its that for whatever reason they haven't got the resources to engage with their children.

Having said that, some children will do well whoever brings them up. Its quite possible to be an indifferent parent and have lovely children.

And another thing!

I thought the reason that children now received funding for nursery from age 3 and that there were things like surestart was to prepare them for school and to help with things like anti-social behaviour.

Also, when they talk about children being excluded from nursery, do they mean state funded pre-schools, day care nurseries, nurseries that get early year's funding? They need to be clear.

I disagree, MP.

Some parents engage perfectly well with their children but in effect are 'killing them with kindness'. They basically love them so much that they cannot bring themselves to have many rules or to say no and mean it. What they do not understand is that gentle but firm discipline is fundamental to a loving relationship.

I just can't believe that there is such a thing as a parent who over engages with their child (Yes sweety, I will read 'Alfie Gets in First' to you for the 100th time today, Yes my love, lets carry on squatting under this bush in the park for another hour because it is your wonderful shop) whose child gets excluded from school.

Interesting thread....
tbh...I don't think that exclusion from education is hte answer...at any age...no one wins then...the Kid won't get educated and most Kids see it as a bonus NOT to go to school...(sn different matter anyway, and not included in that generalisation), so, exclusion is not a punishment....and if it is parental failure than exclusion is only feeding into the chain. Because I see all these excluded Kids in our street, and most do not get punished, they get to roam the streets and play outside....!
I think Kids that can't be handled at school should be bootcaped with a very education aswell as physical outlet and be supported...especialy if it ids parental failure.
Kids with SN should not be included in the numbers, and they should receive the help they need and getting statements shold not be so difficult to Kids with sn...

Kids should not have o go to school this young...has always been a gripe for me....I think in that respect the british schoolsystem is really rubbish! And certainly age should not really be the mainfactor but readyness for school should be the deciding factor...

can't think of more right now!

Oh, and there are Jobs you know that you have a good chance to be truely assaulted....it's not just teachers...saying that as a teacher you should not need to expect to be assaulted...

oh, and 2 year old assaulting...that is the world gone mad...I thought 5 year olds being classed as asssaulting wrong...

sugar...first line was meant ot be exclusion is NOT the answer

I'm not saying they over engage, rather they find it goes against the grain to say no to their child. They want to give their child everything ( as we all do) but they often don't understand that children need boundaries.

A lot of parents want to be best friend rather than parent-if the DC says 'I hate you' they dissolve into tears! It doesn't help the DC-sooner or later they have to realise that they are not the centre of the universe.
I would agree with MadamePlatypus that a lot is down to the personality of the DC. Some children from dreadful backgrounds can be charming and some, with every advantage, are not very likeable.
Perhaps assaulting is the wrong word for a 2 year old, but whatever you call it, a nursery cannot deal with a hitting, kicking or biting DC unless they have sufficient, trained, staff.

but a 2 year old would not engage in assault, but just a natural thing they do at the time...to learn...lrasning is biting, feeling etc.....

FairLadyRantALot-we are not talking about normal 2 year behaviour! I would be surprised if you wanted your DC to be in a nursery if he was liable to have hard missiles thrown at him or be kicked in the head! Nursery staff can deal with tiffs over sharing toys, lashing out with the occasional tantrum but they can't deal with uncontrollable DCs, without high staffing levels. When my DCs went to nursery I expected them to enjoy it and be an a safe, loving environment.

I don't know, I 100% agree that children need boundaries but the truly extreme behaviour, the kind that gets you excluded (ie not just your run-of-the-mill naughty kid) I think is more likely to be attributed to social circumstances or an undiagnosed special need.

Perhaps it is different for littlies and primary, but speaking as a teacher of excluded secondary students, I have never seen anyone whose parents were 'killing them with kindness', sadly rather the opposite.

I don't think people realise that chldren are now being excluded for things, which 30 years ago would have been dealt with with a swift canning and forgoten the next day.

Their is a huge stigma atatched to exclusions, I think. It only happened to really naughty boys when I was at school, so when my DS was excluded, I was beside myself with shame.My attitude was very much "How on earth could DH and I have a child who is excluded from school?"
As his teacher pointed out to me though, it wasn't aboutabout me, it was about DS.

I would agree Umlellala. Those 'killed with kindness' often are little horrors for their parents but respond well to the the boundries of school. The problem ones don't have love at home, they are often sad cases which is another reason for not excluding them-it is further rejection. However one teacher can't do it alone. The other category are the SN who are also being failed if the school can't meet their needs.
I am glad you mentioned extreme behaviour-some people still seem to thing that merely naughty 2 yr olds are getting excluded! I can only assume that they have been lucky enough not to experience extreme behaviour problems.
I think schools and nurseries are failing the DCs they exclude but they have no choice if they can't cope. It costs money-they can't run inclusion programmes on fresh air!.

Their? I meant There , obiously!

In the CAMHs dept i work in it's really not a case o killing them with kindness a lot of the time, more the opposite in fact. Particularly the younger referrals which are usually for behavioural probs.

since working in liaison with schools I've been shocked on several occassions by the horrible unprofessional judgmental attitude of teachers towards parents. Always in more affluent traditionally middle class areas. most of the teachers who work in deprived areas seem a lot more accepting and empathic IME.

"The problem ones don't have love at home."
Mine did.