Appealing against Permanent Exclusion

[McTemp]

Would love to pick some brains out there! A friend of mine has a daughter in Year 8 who has just been permanently excluded, and this exclusion has been upheld by the Governing body. Parents want to appeal this decision.

The reason given for the exclusion was "persistent distruptive behaviour", and they outlined a number of examples of this.

While parent doesn't dispute most of these took place, it is clear that this is a very high achieving school, and her daughter struggles academically (School Action Plus for dyslexia), and I think the school are keen to get rid of the child, as her grades affect their results.

The child in question is also deaf in one ear, and parents would like to appeal because they don't believe their daughters disabilities have been taken into account. The decision letter states:

"staff received training how to deal with deafness on an annual basis, but accepted that perhaps not all teachers were aware of X's hearing loss."

Parents believe that the child's misbehaviour in class arose because of her disability as it was likely that she couldn?t hear instructions given to her and was placed in the back of the class when she should have been at the front.

Has anyone got advice about what the exclusion appeal process is like, and what sort of things parents might need to prove?

My neice used to self harm, there was no reason for it, and ten years on and now she has stopped she still does not know why she used to do it.

However we got of the point of the OP, is there any more news.

Clearly this poor girl does not have parents to speak up for her, so lucky someone else is.

well done for speacking up for her mc temp xxxxxxxxx

just to say that my son was suspended for 3 days this academic year, i was really worried that it would happen again, only to be told by the dep head that he isn't the sort and that it would have to happen 3 times before he got excluded permanently, also it was the head that suspended him, imo went way over the top and did it just to make an example of him as it is a newly built school!

Another parent who wants to blame the school for her child's suspension. Perhaps you should spend some time addressing your son's behaviour at school which would lead to him having better outcomes.
Do you ever have a thought for the other pupils in your son's class/school whose education and lives are affected by the bad behaviour of other children in school?
I am sick of hearing parents bleating on about how their child is being victimised by schools and it's never the parents or child's fault.

There are some horrible attitudes on here. Makes me sad to read them. It is not a case of 'hanging head in shame' and walking away because of the exclusion but actively trying to seek methods which can rectify the situation. My son was internally excluded, he has a SEN statement, external support from Language and Communication team within LA and still school were unable to ensure that all staff were made aware of his language and communication issues. I think the schools behaviour was inappropriate - for a child who is already at severe risk of becoming further disengaged. My son struggles when his needs are not taken into consideration. He becomes anxious and panicky which of course he tries to mask, of course his behaviour then becomes inappropriate to an extent, however as one 'professional' suggested it would not actually be reasonable to expect a child/adult to change a behaviour over night but more to develop this new behaviour with support. It is often the case that a behaviour was not 'learned' immediately and that there is time needed to 'unlearn' it.

OP, you probably are crossing boundaries and probably do need to step away but with reference to the fact that you feel this situation has not been handled correctly I think it is understandable that you feel it necessary to be involved. At no point have I seen reference to the parents who 'wine' to the OP. More the OP feels there is a discrepancy within the actions of the school which she feels justifiably needs further examination. I very much do not see that she is actively promoting the rights of 'disruptive' children over those who are not.

Am sure there will be those on this thread that totally disagree with me, which is fine, you are entitled to your opinion of course, in the same way I am entitled to mine.

What annoys me is how people are so quick to judge. No parent wants their child to be excluded its not all down to the parenting or all their siblings would get excluded too.

How good of the OP to put herself out and help.

Marmalade what I see in schools is that some pupils seem to get excluded for not much and others get away with lots.

MCtemp did you get anywhere? or did they girl stay perm excluded ?

Voodoomonkey you are right I think some people on here forget it is an opinion site. Thing is she did not ask the opinion on the poor girl. She asked about the exclusion policy.

Unfortunately the appeal hearing won't be heard until September - they have 15 (school) days to arrange the hearing, and as we only submitted our appeal request on the 11th July, and school broke up for summer last week, the 15th school day isn't until the start of next term.

I'm still remaining positive about the outcome - it seems the school were involved in a massive legal dispute last year over their exclusions also (and I believe the case ended up with the Ombudsman), and it seems a common belief that this school does not follow their own policies in regards to exclusions. Regardless of what anyone might think about the girl's behaviour; it does not mean the school are above being held accountable for their actions also. They have a policy they must legally follow, and they haven't done this. The girl's behaviour is a totally different issue, and not one I need advice on.

No its not and I hope to god for the the other hildren who want to learn she gets booted out.

I hope she wins her appeal. Mctemp I so agree with you thank goodness you are speaking up for her. Everyone has to follow rules including schools.

Do get back and touch to let us know how it goes.

Crikey, there are some real charmers on this thread

Good luck op, and well done for standing up for this girl.

Is this a selective school?

I have heard of a similar situation but with a year 7 child. The girl had passed the eleven plus and therefore gained a place at the local grammar school. She was however classed as special educational needs and was disruptive in class. The school argued that they could not cater for the girl and that the other childrens' education was effected. The school wrote to the parents and advised that they wanted to arrange a managed transfer to a school that catered for the girls needs. The parents did not agree however the governors upheld the decision and the appeal was upheld as well.

One of the things to consider is would anyone want to be in a school where they are not wanted. If the parents feel strongly about their case and wish to proceed with an appeal fair enough, however sometimes it is perhaps better to start with a clean slate. Not knowing where the child is going to school in September is far from ideal.

Also is this school heavily oversubscribed, if this is the case and the place has already been allocated to someone else the panel is likely to take this in to consideration.

In all the years I have worked at schools I have never known an exclusion get overturned.

I have seen many cases where they decide the child does not fit in, when they decide this they will pick every tiny thing up that the child does wrong to get all their paperwork together.

The OP is very brave to stand up for this girl I hope it goes well . This thread proves how nasty people can be.

I'm sure I'm regarded as one of the nasty ones on this thread. However, can somebody who thinks this child should stay at the school please explain to me why one child (or a minority) should be allowed to disrupt the learning of other children and cause other physical and emotional distress at the same time preventing teachers from doing the job they are paid for which is to impart learning. 90% of a teacher's time should be spent teaching and encouraging learning and 10% on behaviour management. Never the other way round. Why do schools have to soldier on with children who are negative influences on the entire community. Why can't we create specialised units where such children can receive specialist help and the majority can concentrate on learning and developing socially in an environment that supports learning and achievement.

In no circumstances do I condone bad behaviour in schools or elsewhere for this matter.

However I do not wish to comment on whether this child should be booted out or not based on the information given in this post.

Is she really disruptive to the point where it effects other students or is she simply to much hard work for the school because of her additional needs and the effect her results may have on the schools rankings?

Sadly there are plenty of examples where children are made to move on because they don't fit the mould or are hard work and there are unruly children who get away with bad behaviour on the back of results, who their parents are etc...

In the event my kids were behaving badly at school, as a parent I would like the school to deal with unacceptable behaviour as I'm not there during the school day and can only speak to my children after the event. However, if they were put at the back of the class to just get on with it, I would not be amused and ask the school for an explanation however inconvenient that may be for them.

Well if the school is high-acheiving and has used the exclusion powers too soon and in a draconiam manner, perhaps she should go to a school that is less grades-orientated and more supportive of all types of children.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that one child should be allowed to disrupt the learning of other children. However, that doesn't mean that the school should be permanently excluding this child.

Permanent exclusion should be a last resort when all other possibilities for managing the pupil's behaviour have been exhausted. That is not what has happened here. On the information posted by McTemp this school has failed this girl in a number of ways including, it would seem, condoning sexual harrassment - not that I condone her actions in breaking her harrasser's nose but for the other pupil to go unpunished is, in my view, unacceptable. They have also failed to tell staff about this child's disability. This failure could have contributed to some of the problems, not least in that staff who were unaware of her disability may have misinterpreted her actions as disruptive when they were entirely innocent and caused by her inability to hear what the teacher was saying.

I am not saying this girl's actions were acceptable. They weren't. They needed to be dealt with. If the school had made proper efforts to deal with her behaviour and these had failed I would support the permanent exclusion of this child. However, it seems they have decided to throw this child on the scrapheap without bothering to do their job properly. That is not acceptable.

Ormirian,

If it was as simple as moving to a wonderful school, who can cater for this child perhaps this conversation would not be on these boards. Personally I would not want my child to go a school where she is unwanted and spent the summer not knowing where she is going to be next September. However, we don't know the options available to these parents. Perhaps their only option is the local sink school. In which case imho one needs to be fair and explore how bad the behaviour really was and how the behaviour was managed by the school.

In our area a move between good schools is difficult as all have good schools have endless waiting lists. Also if you have just been kicked out of your current school, the next school may not be inclined to put you very high up on the waiting list.

Although I agree with what Phr47Bridge is saying, my oldest was bullied at school when she was in reception. We went through all the appropriate channels and got absolutely nowhere, at one point the HT even said we made it all up despite the bruises etc. One day DD turned around and smacked the bully in the mouth. She had to miss her playtime as a result of this but the girl left her alone ever since. ( this is now 5 years ago). When the school told me about this I made it clear to them that we had addressed the issue but that in my opinion it was their failure to resolve the matter which had resulted in the incident in the first place.

Oh yes, I agree. If there is no alternative. But sometimes parents assume the 'good' school is the only option. The less good schools can be fantastic too but don't always have the reputation iyswim

prh47bridge puts it far more eloquently than I ever could. The school has made no effort to deal with her behavioural OR educational problems, and therefore have been negligent in their duty of care towards this child.

I personally agree that the school is no longer the best place for her - if the appeal is upheld and she returns to school, then I feel she won't ever fully receive the support and help she needs, and that a fresh start would be better. The school that has been lined up for the girl is a 45 minute bus ride away, and it is an all-girls school. Whilst the idea of a single sex school for her is fantastic, I think that as she is a traveller girl, her attendance is quite likely to drop as she gets older, and this problem will be massively compounded if she is attending a school some distance away, as opposed to her current school on her doorstep.

Also, she is in a school with all her friends, and to be uprooted from that is difficult for the girl herself, who just wants to be back with her friends. She enjoys her current school, and she hates the idea of a new school. If she has no interest in her school anymore, I can forsee problems. Its a sad story all round really.

It seems to be that at the appeal McTemp will also get to hear the school's version of events which may be rather different to the version she has been given by the girl and her parents. I wouldn't mind being a fly on the wall at that meeting.

Interestingly enough marriedinwhite, based on the independant appeal panels I have sat on (more than I care to remember) in the vast majority of cases the actual "sins" are not that often in dispute. It is usually the level of the "sin" that is in dispute and the action the school did or did not take that is at question. Which is exactly what we appear to have here from the posts from mctemp.
The panel have two main decisions to make. The first is whether the offences alleged did take place and the severity of them and the second is whether the offences as a whole, as it is persistent disruptive behaviour, justify permanent exclusion. within the later decision is what will be a key part of this appeal which is did the school do everything they could possibly do before making the decision to permanently exclude.

some real nimbys on this thread with vile attitudes. The Lamb enquiry found that a massive proportion of children who are permanently excluded have SEN. About 70%, although they compromise less than 20% of the population.

I think people did not read the OP properly. The school does not seemed to have followed rules so they are in the wrong.

Do not think we needed the unwanted opinons on the girl, the OP did not ask this.

Yes there are some nasty self rightious attitudes on this post and allthough it was wrong to break his nose, as I understand it the boy was trying to assault her in a sexual manner

The school is in the wrong for not following the rules on exclusion and I admire the OP for trying to help the girl.

As for the poster who says she would hang her heas in shame and crawl away if her child was excluded, I suggest she might have a very different attitude if it actually happenedIt's easy to make smug remarks when you haven't experienced a situation.