Been doing a bit of informal research. Internal exclusion is in the rise. I think for the following reasons:
✔️ no rules or regulation from DfE
✔️ no data and unchecked by OFSTED
✔️no accessible information (e.g. parents can access fixed term and permanent but not internal
✔️ no rules or regulation from DfE
✔️ no data and unchecked by OFSTED
✔️no accessible information (e.g. parents can access fixed term and permanent but not internal
My research is on behaviour policies:
Lots on exclusions and lunchtime and after school detentions. Parents know where they stand and are even signposted to help such as SENDIASS. But internal exclusions rarely come with rules because schools can do what they like unregulated.
Lots on exclusions and lunchtime and after school detentions. Parents know where they stand and are even signposted to help such as SENDIASS. But internal exclusions rarely come with rules because schools can do what they like unregulated.
This has a knock on effects:
Schools can do this as much as they like - theoretically pupils could spend their whole time in there - no records
It’s easy and cheap to put children in there
No info needs to be passed on to governors or parents therefore no accountability
Schools can do this as much as they like - theoretically pupils could spend their whole time in there - no records
It’s easy and cheap to put children in there
No info needs to be passed on to governors or parents therefore no accountability
If a school say they use it as a last resort and it’s always different pupils it might be something to be considered. But, if it’s always the same kids and/or those kids are from minority groups, SEND, CiC, FSM or PP then it’s a problem. It means inclusion is not working.
And I don’t care if it’s called a nice name like nurture area, green space, flower garden, beanbag snug - it’s still exclusion if the result is long term use.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
