The thorny issue of expulsion

With the possible exception of school admissions, nothing seems to get people riled more than the topic of "expulsions". I've lost count of the number of people who've posted comments on this blog, or emailed me, pleading for schools to be able to deal with difficult or badly behaved pupils more "firmly". This, many parents say, is why they won't even consider certain schools. And this, they argue, is why teaching is at the same time often so difficult, and so poor - you can't get rid of the disruptive pupils, which makes life incredibly hard.

Today it's reported that poorly performing schools (the ones which really don't need any more badly behaved pupils) are to receive extra funding and also be "spared" any new disruptive pupils - at least midway through the year. Hmm. A step in the right direction, or a drop in the ocean?

Miss Snuffleupagus recently wrote on her blog about the experience of one person who was badly beaten at his school, and yet did not see the aggressors expelled. Old Andrew has often written about this on his blog too, especially with this strongly argued post. It's worth quoting some of that one here:

"The fact that teachers are asked about provision for students who aren’t learning and are preventing others from learning is revealing in itself. If schools were seen as being for the purpose of learning then it would be ridiculous to have somebody who wasn’t learning attending school. Nobody would need to ask about the alternatives to having such a child in school because, as their presence is obviously pointless, all the alternatives would be no worse.

But clearly learning isn’t the purpose of sending kids to school. The powers that be, and I fear the public too, would prefer to see a child at school learning nothing than at home, or in the streets, learning nothing. Somewhere along the line schools ceased to be where children should be in order to learn and became where children should just be. Somewhere along the line teachers ceased to be people who taught and started to be people who supervise hordes of youth for no particular purpose other than to keep them off the streets and out from under their parents’ feet.

We need to rededicate our schools to learning. We should be permanently excluding more students, not just for violent or abusive behaviour, but for being non-learners?"

And yet, research does suggest that expulsions can be devastating for the child, and the family. Should there be more intervention, earlier, or is that a weak response which simply won't wash in reality? Do parents need to learn how to discipline properly? Should the education of well behaved pupils be prioritised over badly behaved? Or, as Old Andrew suggests, do we really need a whole raft of new schools set up specifically to deal with "problem" pupils...?

Update: There is news today that more and more under 5's are being suspended. But how dangerous can these young children be and who is to blame for their bad behaviour?

Read School Gate on:

I was bullied, and now I fear for my children

Should teachers be able to "touch" pupils?

Bring back the cane - how ridiculous!

Letters to the president - what do teeenagers want from President Elect Obama?

How the school gate can be a scary place

Comments

[Kennie]

What's needed is a nation-wide teachers strike. No other group would put up with violence and disruption in the workplace for two minutes!

[edward smith]

Internal exclusion might work if made harsher but i didn''t give a crap about it a punched a guy who had been bullying me knowing full well that the worst that might happen was a week suspension and my perants would back me for that because the school wouldnt th reason i didn't start any trouble was because my perants would punish me i knew anything they didn't find out about i got away with i shudder to think what it would be like with children who have lax perants there must be no dtererent of any kind the worst a teacher can do is expell you but thatnever hapens yet is the one thing we all dreaded suspension only matters if you have strict perants dentention is a joke no one cares about losing an hour its actualy a net gain you messs around five hours a day then lose an hour you get four hours you wouldnt normaly have.

i'm 18 and have only just come through the schools system and the only things i can think of that might have deterd me and my peer would be

Detention fails for two reasons one it has a limit of 60 minuets not much at all it goes like this
1. you lose 20min at lunch
2. 40min after school but luch is given back whicch makes no sense
3 hour efter school
4 If the teacher wants to bend rules lunch is gone again but this almost never hapens

After this there are no more consequences and no way to earn the time back.
Now two things need to happen one time can be earned back by exceptional effort but this must be hard earned not given away and detention must be far harsher maybee on saturdays and as late as school stays open.

Expulsion does work screws the one getting expeled but improves things for everyone els also it has a deterant effect behavior improves for a while maybee have small harsh sink schools they go to can be tempory or permanent but if they do well here they can work their way back up again must not be easy.

Failure to complete a year should have repercusions it curently dosn't

Disrupting other isn't punished beyond a talking too.

Bullying gets you a talking to and the odd suspenion if you beat someone badly i took maters into my own hads and got better results though this failed against the big bullies. all solutions are based on understand they dont work because the bully can just ignor them the bully should be begging for forgivness not the victim begger to be left alone.

Teachers need alot more power all the way up to suspension all kids know full well the absolute worst they can get a is a detention.

Also if you defend your self you get an equal though feeble punishment as the agressor and a lecture about how the guy that hit needs help and has problems if you can't see how stupid that is you are an idiot with no sense of practicality or any grasp on human nature simple as that.

Managers cover stuff upto meet targets clasifing thing as minor incidents ECT

Our curent punishments are feeble and permenant its stupid

[Whimsey]

What does anyone think of the head teacher who was in the press y/day for excluding about a milliong children a day? Good idea/bad idea?

(I was appalled that she manages a school of l800 children- FAR too large!)

[tommy cockles]

The attitude of the Senior Management Team is important in a school. However I taught at a school a few years ago where the Head decided that discipline should be down to each Teacher. Basically there were so many problems that he offloaded the problem to the staff. This meant he had more time for SMT meetings rather than wasting his time trying to sort out problem students. Eventually we had a riot and the SMT were out on a jolly on the Head's yacht in the Solent.

[madmarce]

I believe that much smaller classes, with (importantly) pupils at the same ability level, would reduce a lot of disruption.

[Arthur Atkins]

What we need is more Pupil Response Units. These could be staffed by ex-servicemen and run on the basis of boot camps. Any child who is disruptive in school, instead of having a holiday at home playing computer games, should be forced to attend the local PRU and should spend his day being drilled on the Parade Ground. I believe that a few days spent in the open air could change the attitude of the disrupter very quickly. In addition the other pupils would benefit immensely. Imagine the effect the return of a punished child would have on his peers.

[Andy]

Mhairi - I can tell you that as a human being, I find it quite hard to see kids who are violent, disruptive, and above all, doing their utmost to screw up their own lives, consciously or not. I can also say that as a special needs teacher, I would be failing in my duty (to the kids themselves) if I did not discriminate between that sort of behaviour and the sort of behaviour that will help them get on in life.

I have to say that it is quite hard not to be prejudiced against kids who swear at you, spit at you, assault you, and generally work quite hard, and deliberately, at being unloveable. Have you ever had a young person spit in your face? How did, or would, you react?

I work doubly hard to try and help the kids who need it. One of the things they need is to learn that people find unacceptable behaviour, well, unacceptable - this is what punishment is for.

I have a fundamental objection to schemes that call themselves things like "Learning Communities", because the very choice of name implies that they're the first people to discover The Truth and that everyone else isn't getting it. I don't think that anyone is arguing that kids should be chucked on the scrapheap for the slightest reason, but schools have a duty to every pupil, and that will always mean that some will have to be sent somewhere else.

[K Tyson]

I am a student teacher in the US and will graduate Summa cum Laude in December. Every day students curse me and fights are the norm.

I decided some time ago to teach at the University level--I have no interest in being abused by punks.

The schools refuse to enforce discipline at any level. The result? The students who want to learn cannot and the better teachers leave the system (or never enter it).

[Roderick Campbell]

Anybody remeber the cane?

I certainly do. Sure, it was abused on occasion. But nobody these days looks at the opportunity cost of banning corporal punishment. What is better: for a tiny minority of innocents to suffer at the hands of an abusive schoolmaster; or for a much larger number to suffer at the hands of their peers?

I didn't enjoy being caned, though I probably deserved it. But being beaten up, stabbed, prevented from learning or forced to live in fear from delinquent children would have upset me much more.

I can't believe I'm alone.

[pete uk]

isnt it ironic - if you behave badly at school and prevent others from learning, you get given more attention, a better pupil teacher ratio, more resources, more understanding and huge investment...so, what lesson do these pupils learn? misbehave and get rewarded !
my 2 kids got nothing extra at all at their schools for the 12/13 years they attended school - why ? because they did what they were supposed to at school - behaved an d got on with what they were there for .

The true reason for the disruption in schools is more often than not a reflexion in the community that the children live in .Economic and social factors are often discussed with teachers when a child is questioned on behavior. Over stretched parents ,divorced, or single have the more disruptive children .They try to mix and compensate their children more with friends outside of school and home often mixing with and attending school with marriage rivals and ex relationships other families ,there is often discussions of what each other have and demands for equality. some of these children are as young as 3/4 and are heard arguing the differences.Some of these discussions are quite advanced, they are seen then abusing each other and undermine each other.The parents are not often told of these events many teachers don't fully understand or know the background. The first child and marriage are always attacked and impoverished by the future or further relationships. This puts a strain on both the families status and finances. These conflicts are usually ignored, creating a bigger injustice to the family. It is only when the state is affected by the disruption that they are aware of the extent of the problem . Most officials do not want to admit that divorce and illegitimate children is the cause because there is a high proportion of officials in most countries that have corrupt marriages.When divorce was brought in it was done so on the understanding that the man could afford 2 wives. this is not the case. Many people like myself who are widowed are paying for these families and their welfare,as well as not being supported by an existing father. I did not have disruptive children and have had to go it alone. In many cases these families are to blame and should start to take the blame. They firstly can't get on with each other and then can't get on with anyone else. There is always some political smart a....who will say that they have other experiences, tall this to the teachers.

The true reason for the disruption in schools is more often than not a reflexion in the community that the children live in .Economic and social factors are often discussed with teachers when a child is questioned on behavior. Over stretched parents ,divorced, or single have the more disruptive children .They try to mix and compensate their children more with friends outside of school and home often mixing with and attending school with marriage rivals and ex relationships other families ,there is often discussions of what each other have and demands for equality. some of these children are as young as 3/4 and are heard arguing the differences.Some of these discussions are quite advanced, they are seen then abusing each other and undermine each other.The parents are not often told of these events many teachers don't fully understand or know the background. The first child and marriage are always attacked and impoverished by the future or further relationships. This puts a strain on both the families status and finances. These conflicts are usually ignored, creating a bigger injustice to the family. It is only when the state is affected by the disruption that they are aware of the extent of the problem . Most officials do not want to admit that divorce and illegitimate children is the cause because there is a high proportion of officials in most countries that have corrupt marriages.When divorce was brought in it was done so on the understanding that the man could afford 2 wives. this is not the case. Many people like myself who are widowed are paying for these families and their welfare,as well as not being supported by an existing father. I did not have disruptive children and have had to go it alone. In many cases these families are to blame and should start to take the blame. They firstly can't get on with each other and then can't get on with anyone else. There is always some political smart a....who will say that they have other experiences, tall this to the teachers.

[DH]

Old Andrew has a very good point. What, really, is the role that our politicians envisage schools fulfilling ?

the role of parents is crucial to manage disruptive children - as shown by the current problems !

But with the drive towards intrusion of the curriculum into every area of life from the earliest age, it seems to me that education is seen by politicians as not helping but displacing the role of parents..

I even heard someone on Radio 4 suggesting that one-to-one tutoring was the answer,... THAT USED TO BE CALLED PARENTING!!

The government should give back power to control and educate children to their parents... it's been made almost impossible by well-meaning but overly onerous laws - which are creating more problems, and more serious problems, than the ones they were supposed to prevent!!!

[Faustino]

As a high achiever, I was suspended from school for taking a packed lunch rather than have the loathsome school meals, without carrying a note from my mother!

More recently, my wife has worked in a "Special school" for those whose behaviour is unacceptable; violence rather than taking a packed lunch. Typically their parents, if any are to hand, are criminals and drug addicts - the home environment is clearly to blame. Most children in such schools act impulsively, with no thought of consequences. An approach similar to cognitive behaviour therapy, getting the children to recognise action/consequences, to be aware of and to modify their behaviour, has had some success, but it is clear that many will go on to be criminals and drug users.

The long term answer is early childhood intervention in dysfunctional families. A number of successful programs run in the US, the main benefits to the children and society come from reducing the chance of incarceration and increasing the chance of gainful employment.

[Faustino]

As a high achiever, I was suspended from school for taking a packed lunch rather than have the loathsome school meals, without carrying a note from my mother!

More recently, my wife has worked in a "Special school" for those whose behaviour is unacceptable; violence rather than taking a packed lunch. Typically their parents, if any are to hand, are criminals and drug addicts - the home environment is clearly to blame. Most children in such schools act impulsively, with no thought of consequences. An approach similar to cognitive behaviour therapy, getting the children to recognise action/consequences, to be aware of and to modify their behaviour, has had some success, but it is clear that many will go on to be criminals and drug users.

The long term answer is early childhood intervention in dysfunctional families. A number of successful programs run in the US, the main benefits to the children and society come from reducing the chance of incarceration and increasing the chance of gainful employment.

[Jim]

The point here is well taken but missed the final critical aspect of implimenting a successful expulsion scheme. That element is the creation of very highly structured, low pupil-teacher ratio schools for these students who have sufficiently demonstrated their lack of ability to learn in a standard social setting. These schools would be staffed by highly trained educators who know how to deal with behaviourally challenged students of all ages. And yes, I know, this scheme would involve added expense, but the expense whatever it was would pale in comparison to incarcerating these pupils later on in life (not much later on if research is to be believed).
There are quite a few systems world wide which can serve as exemplars for best practice in this regard.

[madame ping]

Way up in the messages is a reference to spain - as a good model. I taught there for 2 years and I delighted that the country had the feel of hte UK circa 1980. However due to TV influences mainly, young people are becoming a little surly. The reason children are so well behaved is that it is taken as read that your child BEHAVES, and you cause great embarrassment to yourself if the school calls you about little Jose. Parents apologise to teachers profusely, and then they punish their children. The message has been, since the rise of the "education failed my kid" syndrome oF POLITICIANS trying to win voters, that you, as a parent, are in a higher authority position than your school.

This does not happen with housing, where any offensive behaviour or destruction to property or not paying for the rent incurs eviction.

Ultimately to curb bad behaviour the children need a highly ordered small class kindergarten to nursery so that by junior school the RULES are enforced. IN Spain any adult, strangers, police in street, waiters...anyone has an attitude to a child that not only is very positive for good play, and interactive but also is negative about bad behaviour. If you tried it in London the police would be round on behalf of the race/religion/victim politician0 trying to score some political soundbite for the local rag "XXXX victim by XXX racists/relgion/etc".

In a democracy where a politician labelled another competing in an election a paedophile, to win, there is a hundred other stories where our society just isnt working.
Spain has many different cultures and languages but they all share the same joy of communal family spaces, children running about enjoying themselves, limits on massive homework and exam loads and a genuine desire that the teacher knows that they are pushing their child (and respects the teacher).

Give the power and status back to the teacher and police man, and take away the right to mistreat the teacher by setting up cameras in each class that records behaviour for analysis by child psychologists.do it when they are young rather than at 10 or 11.

I don't think any politician will ever do this, as they prefer their voters, salary and rhetoric.

[astrodog]

when i went to school with my daughter in august of this year to pick up her GCSE results i could not believe the attitude and behaviour of some of the year 11's. they where lauging that their grades spelt FUG or EGG and they didnt care. my daughter had told me how disruptive the classes had been and how the teachers can't do anything, they can send them out but they'll be back. playing their mobiles at top volume at the back of the class and shouting the teacher down at any opportunity.
when i left school and it was a comprehensive in a northern town, even right up to the end if the head or the head of year walked into a room you could hear a pin drop, not because we where beaten into submission but because we knew the rules and we knew that the cane was there and our head would use it if the need arose.we also knew that we'd get it off our parents when we got in, my mother would have never undermind a teachers word, if i misbehaved at school, then i got punished at home too, simple as, behave, don't get caned, mess around, get the cane, we had incidently, no one with ADH or 'behavioural problems' they just didnt exist, we had few lads who tried to break the rules, paid the price and never did it again. maybe this is the answer, oh no sorry, everything has to have a 'syndrome' or an excuse now doesnt it.

[RB]

Whimsey and Caz - Totally agree.

I went into teaching (secondary) as an ex-Army sergeant and an ex-copper. Not a soft touch you may imagine.
Did my background help?
Yes, me personally - but if the school's senior management and board of governors are "soft" then my efforts (in the larger context of the school) would be wasted.

A "tough" teacher may also find that they are given the "sink" groups with more than its fair share of unmotivated, disruptive kids. This is not a satisfying experience and in today's league charts for everything, poor examination results may hold back that teacher's promotion and pay.

Even though recognised as a strict disciplinarian, a minimum of 25% of each class contact would be spent in establishing and maintaining an environment appropriate to learning. In the worst groups little learning took place at all.

Without support from senior management and parents nothing will change and the only way to produce results is to make the examinations easier and easier thus lowering standards at a rapid rate.

Exclusion from school for disruptive students is a part of the answer. Ask the kids - they are fed up with two or three children in each class "spoiling it" for everyone else.

Parents MUST take responsibility for the behaviour of their kids or take the consequences.

Now, what should these consequences be?

[Paul]

The multicultural left, which includes the vast majority of teachers, should be telling US what they are going to do about unruly behavior.

[Whimsey]

Caz - agree with everything you say. Bottom line, it takes more money to deal with both the troublemakers and the 'falling by the wayside' children - primarily by employing more, specially skilled teachers who can take small, dedicated 'catch up' style classes, both (though separately!) for the troublemaker toughies and the falling by the wayside quiet ones. It probably takes more physical space, too, somewhere for these children physically to be, in school, but out of the normal classroom.

Keeping disruptive children in normal classes is the ONE thing we know we must not do, for their own sake and, especially, for the sake of the rest of the pupils.

[Caz]

I think that the majority of posters here have got it right. There are a lot of parents out there who see school as free childcare, rather than somewhere their kids go to receive an education. I teach in two pretty tough schools, both of them having more than their fair share of pupils with some form of SEN as well.
I have kids in my classes who are obviously unable to cope in mainstream education. They are either incredibly quiet and do very little work, or they're incredibly disriptive and do very little work. But when you've got a class of 25-30 and are expected to teach the rest so that they can achieve a certain standard, you just don't have the time to spend on those pupils. So, they either sit there quietly doing norhing, or they disrupt and incur the minimal sanctions that we can actually employ. Give them a detention. They don't turn up. Give them another one. They don't turn up. Pass it to the head of year, they hand out a detention, the kid doesn't turn up. Eventually, the pupil might get excluded for a day or so. But the thing is - these kids don't want to be in school so getting excluded for a day or two is exactly what they want.

I agree that we can't just abandon these kids - but it's not fair on the majority (and I think it still is a majority - just!) of pupils who want to learn to have to sit in lessons hour after hour getting bored and frustrated while they wait for the teacher to deal with the disruptive kids.

Something that no one has mentioned directly yet is the fact that in many cases the disruptive pupils are the less able ones; so when classes are setted, you end up with all the "rotten apples" in one place, and those kids who are less able, but who want to learn, lose out even more.

The sad thing is that I can't see the situation improving unless drastic action is taken, and soon. I can't pretend to know what that action should be, but as a teacher, I definitely think that removing the trouble-makers and placing them somewhere else where their behavioural and personal issues can be addressed would be a good way to start.

But until someone who can actually do something finally wakes up to the fact that inclusion is nothing more than a form of exclusion (i.e, including the three or four badly behaved kids in the class is effectively EXcluding the other twenty or so) and that one size doesn't fit all, it looks as though we're stuck with the status quo for the time being.

[Whimsey]

Mhairi - why not tell us how a non-expulsion policy works? I'm not quite sure why you call expulsion discriminatory and prejudiced. Would you apply those terms to, say, the judicial system that jails adults for crimes?

I think posters here have made allowance that some children behave badly for reasons that derive from appalling home circumstances, but otherwise, bad behaviour is something none of us should have to put up with, whether in school or adult life. Mutual respect is what is required - why should some children/adults be able to hand out bad behaviour that others have to put up with, and not be called to account for it?

[Whimsey]

"The problem is that these kids quickly work out how powerless teachers are to do anything about it"

I think it can be even worse than this - these sort of children know exactly that the 'law' is on their side, so if the teacher makes the smallest error of judgement, the kid knows they'll 'have him'. We see this in ordinary life too, where members of the public have ended up at the police station being charged because they took objection to rowdy, intimidating children, etc etc.

[Mhairi]

I cannot believe these discriminatory and prejudiced responses. Expulsion is NOT the answer. Look at the "Learning Communities" experience in schools in Spain and you will see that there are much better ways of improving both coexistence problems AND improving academic results without expelling pupils. Ignorance must be bliss.

[Hol]

Kids in school will inevitably push and then push again at the boundaries just to see where the line gets drawn (ask any teacher who joins a new school!). Some do it without malice just to work out how much freedom they have on the good side of the line- some do it precisely so they can head straight for the wrong side of it. The problem is that these kids quickly work out how powerless teachers are to do anything about it and that the punishments on offer aren't that bad. Teachers need to be able to follow through on threats of suspensions and even expulsion.

That's not to say that's always what's needed. Some kids act up purely because they want and need those boundaries to be drawn and they're not being drawn at home -disruptive kids aren't all necessarily trying to be bad, just lacking in understanding. Those kids are redeemable if teachers are given the power to reinforce their threats and provide those boundaries. Otherwise it's just a bunch of empty words (however sternly delivered); the kids know it and learn "well it can't be that bad or we'd be in real trouble" from it.

Worse, those kids who really are just aggressive/badly behaved in nature will jump on it. They of all kids need to suffer unpleasant consequences because they're the only deterent for them. The 'nice at heart but lacking in boundaries' type of disruptive child may be at least somewhat shamed by the notion that they've been bad and someone's disappointed in them. Others will take pride in it.

[Whimsey]

Kim, internal exclusoin sounds a really good idea. Hope it works.

[Andy]

RE the posts on different types of behaviour problems needing different solutions - the truth, as you might guess, is that kids tend to have some mixture of all these issues; jnrdoctor might care to consider what you do with a disturbed/mentally ill kid who has learned that aggression can get them what they want, 'cos believe me, they do!

[Kim]

"Somewhere along the line teachers ceased to be people who taught and started to be people who supervise hordes of youth for no particular purpose other than to keep them off the streets and out from under their parents’ feet."

I suspect this always was the case. Schools were instituted in Victorian times to allow both parents to work in factories.

Some schools use a method called internal exclusion which works well - you have an extra building on sit, staffed by qualified social workers and psychologists, set aside for disruptive pupils and you teach them separately until they are ready to return to normal schooling.

[Whimsey]

JNR Doc - completely agree with you, but with the proviso that there may well be cases of children who are actually 'in need of help' but whose distress displays as disruption, and for whom the 'kick up the backside' (which should always be reinforced with 'now you've earned respect, and will get it' etc etc) is not the answer, and will only damage them more. Yet they are not the 'full head cases' of the deeply disturbed children you rightly mention as being in care of very careful 'saving'.

For example, sometimes children who are carers at home, carrying a burden that is unbearable and utterly disgraceful that they should have to, release their tension and frustration and anger (at having their childhoods stolen from them) by being disrptive. No amount of sinbinning is going to help them, or 'cure' them. Only going back to the root cause of WHY they are disruptive.

However, I do quite a gree that there are simply children who think they can get away with it because, hey, they ARE getting away with it. They are horrible children, and will grow up to be horrible adults - unless some tough love and 'wising up' comes their way.

[Marc Sheffner]

"Somewhere along the line schools ceased to be where children should be in order to learn and became where children should just be. Somewhere along the line teachers ceased to be people who taught and started to be people who supervise hordes of youth for no particular purpose other than to keep them off the streets and out from under their parents’ feet." It wasn't a vague "somewhere", it was when going to school became a legal obligation.

[jnrdoctor]

Looking back to when I was at school, the most disruptive children fell into two camps

The first was the disturbed/the mentally ill (many of whom I suspect had suffered horribly at home - looking back, one girl clearly had been sexually abused from the extremely aggressive sexual behaviour and language she used even at 11. One refugee kid would cut himself in class and barely spoke and would sometime freak out and throw himself under tables screaming) or those with autistic type traits who could not cope in a normal school.

The second were kids who may or may not have had incompetent parents but who didn't actually have any mental disorder or learning difficulty but who had learned that aggression got them what they wanted - which was "respect" and the ability to refuse to do things they didn't want to do.

The last thing the first group need are to be put in a "special school" or "sin bin" with the second.

The first group need small, quiet special schools often with therapy, mental health professionals and counselling - none of which I think the kids in my school ever got. There should be a controlled transition from this special centre back to mainstream school or college if the child recovers or to adult mental health services at 18 if not.

The second group need a kick up the arse. Small classes, clear boundaries, punishments, strict teachers, some sense of payback for their crimes through community work, Saturday morning classes, a scary visit to a prison, maybe ex-military teachers? Possibly residential/boarding schools - kids in areas with gangs etc would do best being taken away from their peers to relearn the norms of behaviour in society. They should start attending this school the day after they are suspended/expelled so there needs to be enough spare capacity in the system to allow this.

But please don't lump all disruptive kids together.

Yes, they should definitely be removed from normal classes but the last thing we need is a one-size-fits-all solution for where they go next.

[Payne]

A disruptive student should be beaten into submission verbally if possible and physically when necessary or even expelled to a work station, garbage collection, etc., until obedience is achieved.

[Whimsey]

I doubt anyone thinks it's anything but economics, Andy! The old Jim Hacker/Sir Humphrey exchange works perfectly for special education too, as well as mental health -

"But, Humphrey, you can't just throw mentally ill people out on to the streets"'

"You can if you call it Community Care, Minister....."

becomes

"But, Humphrey, you can't just put children with special educational needs into ordinary schools!"

"You can if you call it inclusion, Mininister...."

As to cost, well, this is typical, isn't it, of a completely failure to do some TCTC - total cost to society - accounting. What is the total cost to society of children who are never educated to be productive citizens and responsible parents themselves?

£1400 a week is expensive - but it's cheaper than gaol, or even mental hospital (not that, thanks to Community Care, there are any left, of course....)

[Andy]

There are places set up for disruptive pupils - and these special schools have been closing down in large numbers due to the policy of "inclusion": which is supposedly based on the idea that children with difficulties of all sorts are better educated in mainstream schools.

Special schools are expensive (I work at one of the cheaper residential special schools, that's about £1400 per pupil per week) and there can be problems reintegrating kids after they get used to the level of support that comes with class sizes in the low single figures, not to mention 24 hour attention outside classtime (staff outnumber pupils).

But they do actually achieve genuine progress with the most difficult kids, and if nothing else, they keep these kids out of mainstream schools so that everyone else gets a chance to learn.

A lot of us suspect that "inclusion" is not so much motivated by ideology, still less any evidence that it works, but by good old economics.

[Whimsey]

Well, I'm definitely one of the people who moans endlessly that the problem with schools is behaviour, and that nothing can happen to improve UK schools while the goverment refuses to allow schools to deal effectively with disruptive pupils.

In one sense, expulsion is useless, as the expelled pupil just ends up being dumped on to some other poor damn school, where they will probably be just as disruptive, though yes, perhaps some will 'reform' when moved to a new school.

Exclusion, too, simply puts the children back on teh streets, doesn't it? I mean, where do they physically GO when they are not allowed into school?

To me, the answer has to be that an expelled or excluded child does not get put into a.n.other school, or out on the streets, but into a specific 'tough learning/behaving' environment.

Some schools seem to run sin-bins, which seem like a good idea. They are places which are unpleasant for the pupil to be in, withdrawal of privileges etc etc, and which are, presumably, in the charge of the 'tough teachers'.

One fundamental question has to be, however - do we just want to get rid of the troublemakers, and not give a toss what happens to them and hopefully they'll all end up 'out of the way' in prison etc, OR do we want to try and 'save' them, and stop them being a waste of space to themselves and society at large?

If we do want the latter, well, that costs money - it took years of bad parenting to make a child 'expellable', and so considerable effort has to be put in to turning such children around.

BUT, we don't want to end up by 'rewarding' them for their bad behaviour, and all those Daily Mail sotries about right little bastards being sent off on luxury holidays to 'cure' them, are rightly galling (if it happens, of course!)

As ever, it depends WHY they are disruptive, and if they are so because of learing difficulties, that's probably the easiest to crack - put them into a better suited learning environment, and that's that (roughly!). Whereas if they are disruptive because they are head cases due to not just bad parenting but psychotic parenting, then that's far harder.

I read, recently, that some LEAs are now hiring ex-servicemen who have the winning combination of being seriously tough, so they can handle the thug-kids, but also have training in how to build team spirit, etc etc. That sounds, from what I've read, like a good idea.

in principle, we CANNOT 'abandon' children who are the head cases, because it fundamentally isn't their fault they are so badly brought up (is it their parents fault either, in that they, presumably, were awful kids themselves, etc etc)(but I think we have to put that to one side). BUT it does need tough love.

Peronsally, I think Camilla Bhatmangali should be made government special advisor for schools - if anyone knows how to take on and turn around the most 'lost' children of all, she does. An amazing woman. I can't believe she's alone in that.

But, certainly, the immediate policy of all schools should be to physically remove disruptive children from normal classes. How to deal with them afterwards is the question.But there's no question a normal teacher should haveto cope with them in a normal way in a normal class.