Internal exclusion as punishment for a mistake

[JQLine55]

DD, Yr 9, is being punished by being put in the school's exclusion room because she brought in some scissors that the school said were not appropriate because they were too sharp. She had no idea there was anything wrong with them. At worst she made a mistake, at best she did nothing wrong. I think the school wants to show a kind of 'zero tolerance' policy, but is it fair to exclude her - even if it is 'only' an internal exclusion - for two weeks?

Forgot to add, sorry, the fact that the school has NOW banned all scissors is irrelevant to your daughter's punishment prior to the ban. She can only be sanctioned according to the behaviour policy that was in place at the time.

Dd was set up because someone in her class doesn't like her. She never had an offensive weapon on her, not even 'technically', just the scissors she brought in to use as scissors for cutting things in class. She used them openly in front of a teacher - who would do that if they knew they were breaking a rule? If her scissors were an offensive weapon then all the kids with scissors were carrying weapons. They only became blades after the other kids broke them in two. School knows that this is what happened - they know she didn't break them herself. One of the children involved has already apologised to her and said she never meant for what happened to happen. My dd is not holding anything back from me - she is telling me the truth and I believe her 100%. Dd's letter of exclusion says the punishment is because she brought 'an inappropriate item' into school - not a weapon. Tomorrow will be her 7th day in exclusion, which she has borne with good grace and determination just to get on with it, and personally I am really proud of her for that.

Sounds ridiculous to me. Scissors are by definition sharp. Either they're allowed or they're not. They can't change the rules on her retrospectively.

To the extent I'd consider keeping my child at home until the meeting. Then I would not have coped nearly as well as your DD has if it was me as a child. Being shut up in an exclusion room presumably with the children who wished her ill and brought this down on her? Two whole weeks? They're in danger of creating a rebel where they didn't have one in the first place.

LockedOutofMN, thanks for your advice. I have read the behaviour policy and scissors are not mentioned - knives, BB guns (sorry, what are they?), catapults and fireworks are mentioned as offences that could lead to anything from internal to permanent exclusion. The problem the school has had is that her scissors were not 'normal' scissors, so they have had to figure out what to do without a precedent. I was told it was a 'unique' situation and I think the nearest thing in their policy they could find to compare it with was bringing in a weapon, simply because the scissors were sharp. But the comparison is all wrong, because surely there has to be some element of intent to actually use something as a weapon before it can be treated as such.

catkind, those are my thoughts exactly.

Your last post does give me some concern as to exactly what the school are doing here.
Schools are allowed to have an internal exclusion facility and this should be used for sharp short reminders for pupils who have transgressed. What concerns me is that if the school is referring to letters of exclusion that the school are confusing the status of this internal exclusion and fixed term external exclusions from the school. There is no connection between the two and I think that you do need to clarify exactly what the school is doing about recording this exclusion.

admission, I was specifically told that this was internal exclusion, would not be on her permanent record, and would be for 10 days. The letter confirms the reason (inappropriate item brought into school), and says it is as a result of 'a serious incident within the school'. I will ask about this as you suggest. Something I am hoping the head will tell me is what punishment dd would have got just for bringing the scissors in (eg if a teacher had seen them being used in class), as opposed to the punishment she has ended up with because of the actual way the scissors came to the attention of the school. The former (bringing them in) she is entirely responsible for; the latter was completely outside of her control. But I suspect the punishment is reflecting the drama of the incident, which I don't think is really fair.

This is ridiculous. Well done your dd for putting up with it.

What punishment is the child who took the scissors without permission getting for stealing and damaging someone's property?

What punishment is the child who broke the scissors getting for creating a weapon in school?

What punishment are the children getting who reported that your dd had a knife for deliberately trying to get her in trouble?

What is the school doing about all this? Sounds very much like bullying with the victim getting the punishment.

Please also check if the school specify equipment that the students should bring in (maybe a year 7 equipment list).
They cannot ask for scissors to be brought in as equipment and then handing out punishments if you possess them.
Lots of things can be used as weapons or inappropriately. The school are overreacting and totally bonkers.

The child who took the scissors and the child who broke them have also got 10 days internal exclusion. The child who engineered it has escaped punishment - but has a history of trouble and was back in exclusion yesterday for a different offence. When I asked what the school was doing about the bullying aspect of this incident they looked surprised, and then said they would investigate it separately. I did point out that the bullies had basically won - they set out to get dd into trouble and boy, did they succeed. Which is why the girl involved apologised to her, as she genuinely feels remorse.

Before dd began at her secondary school she was given a 'basic' equipment list - we checked back and scissors were not on it. But, as I have said, pretty well all the teachers ask the kids to get their scissors out because they usually only have about 5 pairs in the classroom. I don't think it's unreasonable to think that a child can bring in more than the basics. Scissors were never, until after this event, prohibited.

Meeting the head this afternoon. Am planning to ask her to explain which part of the behaviour policy they are applying, why 10 days, and whether they think they can make sure dd is safe at school after the evidence of what some kids will do. Of course will ask her to reduce the sentence (after today just three days left anyway), but tbh not optimistic as I think she would think that was showing weakness. I know it won't help to go in all guns blazing, so will try to be calm and reasonable.

I would get hold of the governors. You could ring and ask for the head of the governors to contact you ASAP. I would also write a letter for the head of governors and take it with you today and ask for the letter to be passed on as a matter of urgency.

Seems crazy. Your school has overreacted big time.

A girl in dds class who has major behavioural issues was bringing kitchen scissors into school and muttering that she was going to stab people. I told dd to tell the HOY as this girl can be quite violent at times and I was concerned. The scissors were taken off her but no exclusion of any sort.

A pair of dismantled scissors with a pointed end is technically on offensive weapon that she had on her. I'm afraid you can't dispute that.

Question is whether the heads response is reasonable and proportionate. Reasonable - probably, proportionate - highly questionable.

like me, she just can't understand why the punishment is so harsh

Because a blade, even from scissors, can kill.

A blade was taken from your daughter and used to get her in to trouble, it could have been used to stab someone.

But the comparison is all wrong, because surely there has to be some element of intent to actually use something as a weapon before it can be treated as such.

Possibly, but that intent might be someone else intending to use it.

Living where I do there are a lot of Sikh children, they are not allowed to wear a kirpan, not because of their intent, but because another person could take it an use it.

Even baptized Sikhs have severe restrictions put on how they wear it and what is allowed.

If you go to the exclusion guidance it says actual or threatened violence, so there need not be any intent to use required for a dangerous weapon to lead to an exclusion etc. Of course the school have some what shot themselves in the foot by saying it was an inappropriate item, which could mean anything.
Best of luck in your discussions with the head teacher.

Fgs the girl isn't responsible for having had broken scissors in her possession, she brought useable scissors as many other children had in their kit. The kids who broke the scissors are the ones responsible for the offensive weapon being in school. Unless you deem scissors themselves to be an offensive weapon in which case all kids with scissors ought to be in exclusion. Good luck talking sense into them OP!

You have to draw legal parallels - she was carrying something that could be used to stab another pupil. How she came to be carrying them is mitigation, the possession is unquestionable. Its the 'I was just holding the drugs for my mate' argument.

No, it really isn't. It's the someone else put them in an innocent person's bag in order to get them in trouble argument. Come to that a single scissor blade is an offensive weapon in real life too so we don't need a parallel. If someone was carrying that deliberately they could be arrested. If they were carrying it because someone else broke their scissors, or even because their scissors accidentally broke, the police wouldn't be interested.

You don't have to prove intent to charge someone for carrying an offensive weapon. Now the CPS would determine whether to prosecute based on the evidence.

School doesn't have to prove intent to break a rule. The rule was broken - that is without dispute. What is in question is the reaction to it - I don't think a 2 week internal exclusion was proportionate given mitigation and I think that's where my line of challenge/questioning would come.

Yob being chased by police, shoves knife into bag of innocent passer by. You think they could charge the passer by with possession? You think people would be talking about mitigation and proportionate sentences for the passer by? Bollocks, they'd charge the person who put the knife there.

Hi, thanks to the people on this thread who advised me, I went into the meeting with the head very clear about what I wanted to know. Head was lovely, really listened and gave honest answers. My questions were
(1) What did she believe actually happened? She said unequivocally she did not believe even for a moment that dd brought in a weapon, and for her scissors to constitute a weapon as opposed part of her school equipment there would have to have been intent by dd to use them to harm someone. Apparently all the teachers the head spoke to as part of her investigation said dd would never in a million years have done that. That meant she never had to even consider permanent exclusion.
(2) Which part of the behaviour policy was she applying by selecting 10 days punishment? She never exactly answered that question! But she stuck by her belief that dd's particular scissors were inappropriate to bring into school (and she accepted that school had no policy at the time but said they can't list every single thing that might not be appropriate - fair enough) and said in her opinion dd should have known they were inappropriate. She admitted the school was strict, but stood by 10 days as the right punishment. I did ask why a child who swore at a teacher, or truanted from a lesson would only get about 2 days internal exclusion, and I pointed out dd had learned the lesson to question anything that is slightly outside of normal in future before she brings it into school, but she still stood by 10 days as appropriate. I accept she has the right to be strict, and at least I can explain that to dd. The alternative was a short sharp shock (as she put it) in external exclusion, but she said that was really a punishment for the parents and went on the child's record so she didn't want to do that. Quite why the short sharp shock couldn't have been internal I don't understand, I guess they see that as the soft option.
(3) How can dd be safe knowing there is a child in her class who tried to get her expelled by stealing her equipment, breaking it to turn it into what looked like blades and then getting someone else to hand half back to her before alerting the teachers? He is in ER himself last two days, and has been trying to intimidate dd by pushing past her etc. Head took this very seriously and said she knew she still hadn't got to the bottom of his role. She said she would do so. I told her the girl involved had had the guts to apologise to dd and had said she never meant for it (dd's exclusion, and no doubt her own) to happen.
(4) Could she reduce the period in ER, at very least by one day because dd already had to forgo day when she would have volunteered at school with the yr 5s and 6s? She said she would make no promises but would speak to her assistant head who monitors behaviour in the ER and make a decision after that. I am hoping she will show some leniency as dd has finished each day in ER with an excellent report.
I feel a lot better for her listening to me so well, and for the positive feedback she gave me about what dd's teachers had said about her. I still think the punishment is disproportionate, but I suppose there are worse things than a school with a very strict approach to any matters of discipline.

Thanks for letting us know, OP. Yes, I hope the head reduces your daughter's punishment now and I can't see any reason why she wouldn't. Also I really hope the bullying issue is sorted out properly.

Yob being chased by police, shoves knife into bag of innocent passer by. You think they could charge the passer by with possession? You think people would be talking about mitigation and proportionate sentences for the passer by? Bollocks, they'd charge the person who put the knife there.

If the police witness this then no. If you are found to be holding an offensive weapon and say 'someone must have put it there' then you are open to being charged and prosecuted.

Have heard that today will be last day in ER, 8 days in total. Overjoyed !

Well done, JQLine55. As I said above, I hope the bullying is also sorted out properly.