Behaviour battleground: isolation booths divide opinion among teachers

By: Richard Adams.

From a ‘lose the booths’ conference to ‘warm-strict’ policies, teachers are divided on how to tackle unruly pupils

The use of isolation booths in state schools has become one of the most contentious issues among teachers in England, even if public concern over pupil behaviour has faded from the headlines since the 1990s.

Social media has become an almost nightly battleground between teachers with conflicting views on behaviour management and the use of internal exclusion or removal rooms within schools, where disruptive pupils are taken out of class and sent to study elsewhere under supervision.

What the debate reveals is that the more than 20,000 state schools in England have wide variations in discipline and behaviour policies.

In some cases pupils are sat at booths, similar to cubicles used in call centres, with a desk and three high sides. It is the use of this furniture that has become controversial within the profession, to the extent that a “lose the booths” conference for teachers is being held this weekend in Leeds.

“Learn how to remove the booths from your school and still have great outcomes,” says the publicity for Lose The Booths Live!, which promises a conference with “children’s rights at heart”.

But in practice the use of “consequence rooms” or removal spaces, is just one potential tool in a school’s armoury. While some regularly use internal exclusion as a formal policy for misbehaviour, others reject it – highlighting the autonomy enjoyed by headteachers.

At one end of the scale are schools practising “warm-strict” behaviour management, which their critics deride as “zero tolerance”, with clear rules and sanctions. Those rules can be at a level of detail some parents may find disturbing: not only the lengths of skirts or type of shoes but also maintaining complete silence when moving between classes, and sanctions for what some regard as petty issues such as failure to bring a pen to class, or not keeping eye contact with the teacher during lessons.

But the defenders of this approach, including schools such as the Magna Academy in Dorset or King Solomon Academy in Paddington, say that a well-structured behaviour policy is liberating for teachers. By cutting out the background buzz of what the former Ofsted chief inspector Michael Wilshaw called “low-level, persistent disruptive behaviour”, the whole class can then concentrate on learning.

One maths teacher who moved to a recently opened “warm-strict” free school said he was astonished by the difference a successful behaviour policy can make.

“I’d worked at four schools before, but this is the first time I’ve been actually able to teach for the whole lesson. At the other schools pupils would arrive making noise and jostling, and take five or 10 minutes just to settle down. Here there’s none of that,” he said.

But on social media teachers regularly spar over the need for such detailed rules and sanctions for what in other, more relaxed schools would be minor infringements.

There’s little in the way of research to say which approach is more effective in terms of pupil behaviour or academic attainment – although supporters point to the strong GCSE results produced by the Michaela Free School in Brent, one of the flagships of the stricter approach.

While it is impossible to say if pupil behaviour has improved in recent years, statistics show that the rates of expulsions from state schools are well below their peaks of the 1990s. In the 1993-94 school year, more than 12,000 pupils were permanently excluded. By 2017-18, the latest year for which we have figures, just 7,900 were permanently excluded, although the proportion of pupils being excluded has been rising slowly over the previous five years.

But many teachers remain unconvinced by the stricter approach. The most recent annual conference of the National Education Union held a hostile debate over zero tolerance policies, with one delegate labelling the use of booths as “inhuman”, while others blamed budget cuts for the loss of school support staff.

But union surveys have also found that many teachers feel unsupported by their school’s management over tackling bad behaviour, with behaviour frequently cited as a key reason for leaving the profession.

The Conservatives went into the most recent general election vowing to improve school behaviour, seeing it as a vote winner. Its policies included giving school inspectors extra time to examine bullying and behaviour, while documents obtained by the Guardian before the election showed the government preparing to “back heads to use powers to promote good behaviour including sanctions and rewards” including the use of “reasonable force”.

Source of the article: https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/jan/17/behaviour-battleground-isolation-booths-divide-opinion-among-teachers

Comparte este contenido:

UK: ‘Wild west’ system of school exclusions is failing pupils, say MPs

Europa/Reino Unido/The Guardian

Resumen: Un número cada vez mayor de niños son excluidos innecesariamente de las escuelas y «abandonados» en la provisión alternativa (AP), que con demasiada frecuencia no les proporciona la educación que necesitan para prosperar, según un comité de diputados de varios partidos. Un informe crítico del comité selecto de educación de Commons dijo que las políticas de comportamiento de tolerancia cero significaban que demasiados alumnos eran castigados y excluidos por incidentes que deberían ser manejados dentro de la escuela. Si bien coincidieron en que un enfoque de tolerancia cero a las drogas o las armas era completamente razonable, los parlamentarios advirtieron a las escuelas que no reaccionaran de forma exagerada a infracciones leves del corte de pelo o políticas uniformes que llevaran a los alumnos a ser «castigados innecesariamente». El informe también identificó una «falta de responsabilidad moral» por parte de muchas escuelas, con poco o ningún incentivo para retener a los alumnos desafiantes. E hizo un llamamiento al gobierno para abordar el problema de la retirada progresiva, donde los alumnos son eliminados del registro antes de sus GCSE para ayudar a las escuelas a maximizar los puntajes de las tablas de la liga.


Education committee report claims too many children are punished for minor incidents. The number of pupils excluded from school rose to 40 a day in 2016-17, up from 35 the previous year. Photograph: David Jones/PA

An increasing number of children are being unnecessarily excluded from schools and “abandoned” in alternative provision (AP) which too often fails to give them the education they need to thrive, according to a cross-party committee of MPs.

A critical report by the Commons education select committee said that zero-tolerance behaviour policies meant too many pupils were being punished and excluded for incidents that should be managed within the school.

While they agreed a zero-tolerance approach to drugs or weapons was entirely reasonable, MPs warned schools against overreacting to minor breaches of haircut or uniform policy which led to pupils being “punished needlessly”.

The report also identified a “lack of moral accountability” on the part of many schools, with there being little or no incentive to retain challenging pupils. And it called on the government to address the problem of off-rolling – where pupils are removed from the register before their GCSEs to helpschools maximise league table scores.

The publication on Wednesday of the committee’s Forgotten Children report follows government statistics last week which revealed a sharp rise in the number of children excluded from state schools in England. There have been more than 40 permanent exclusions a day in 2016-17, compared with 35 a day the previous year.

The education committee described the exclusion rate as “a scandal” and raised additional concerns about “alarming” increases in hidden exclusions, where pupils are kept in internal isolation on school sites or informally excluded.

It also called on the government to look into whether financial pressures and accountability measures were preventing schools from providing early intervention and support, and therefore contributing to the “exclusions crisis”.

“The young people who are excluded are the forgotten children,” said the Conservative MP Robert Halfon, who chairs the committee. “Many already face a host of challenges, with children in care, children in need, children with Send (special educational needs and disabilities), and children in poverty, being far more likely to end up in AP. They deserve the best possible support but often they don’t get the education that they need to thrive.”

The report called for a bill of rights to ensure better support for parents and pupils who find themselves at the mercy of a system described as “a wild west of exclusions” and weighted heavily in favour of schools.

“We need much better provision,” added Halfon. “With teachers being encouraged to work in AP, and we need to strip away some of the stigma by renaming pupil referral units (PRUs) and genuinely seeing them as places for education, learning and support.”

Nick Gibb, the schools standards minister, said the number of children being excluded was lower than it was 10 years ago but exclusions should only ever be used as a last resort.

“The rules are clear that they should always be reasonable and justified. Where pupils are excluded the quality of education they receive should be no different than in mainstream settings.

“We are taking a range of actions to drive up the quality of alternative provision, and have launched an external review to look at how exclusions are used and why certain groups are disproportionally affected.”

Paul Whiteman, the general secretary of school leaders’ union NAHT, said a decision to exclude a student was always a last resort. “School leaders need the autonomy to decide when and how to exclude students to protect the health, safety, education or wellbeing of other pupils and staff.

“This is an area where prevention is better than cure, but budgets are at breaking point so many of the measures that schools take to ensure good behaviour and adequate support for pupils are under threat.”

Anna Feuchtwang, chief executive of the National Children’s Bureau, said: “The vast majority of disabled children, and those with special education needs, can and should be educated in mainstream schools. Yet the steep increase in exclusions comes as schools struggle to provide appropriate support for pupils that could enable them to retain their school place.”

Dr Mary Bousted, joint general secretary of the National Education Union, said: “The government needs to tighten the regulation of alternative provision so every child in an alternative setting has the same educational opportunities as pupils in mainstream schools.”

Fuente: https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/jul/25/children-abandoned-after-school-exclusions-say-mps

Comparte este contenido: