Jun 11

Season 1 Episode 1 – Post Truth and Objectivity

I recently wrote a post looking at Steve Fuller’s ideas on post truth (Post Truth and the name of the game) and this first podcast takes some of ideas and relates them to our work as practitioners.

I set a charter for the podcast to keep things on the straight and narrow. We will be keeping things jargon free, brief, multidisciplinary and in each episode there is a call to action where we apply a new idea to our work in a practical way.

You can find the podcast on most platforms: Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music and Audible, Google Podcasts. 

or you can watch here:

Let me know how the ideas either resonate or jar with you and how they relate to your practice in the comments below or on twitter @cjfieldingcom.

Key references:

  • Fuller, S.  (2022) The Epistemological Compass and the (Post)Truth about Objectivity, Social Epistemology, DOI10.1080/02691728.2022.2150988
  • Fuller, S. 2020. A Player’s Guide to the Post-Truth Condition: The Name of the Game. London: Anthem

 

Dec 18

Post-truth and the rules of the game

This time, I am looking  at an article by Steve Fuller 1 which is part of an entertaining, ongoing academic argument he is having with Massimo Dell’Utri on post-truth, epistemology and the way we make sense of the world. Fuller has taken exception to Dell’Utri’s suggestion that we have an epistemological compass which provides a universal objectivity, an independent standard by which knowledge can be evaluated.

Fuller believes that the independent standard is not independent at all but rather created in a privileged context by those with influence and power. He believes that we are told how the world is and how it should be viewed.

What does that mean for practice?

It means that we need to beware when we find ourselves taking a common-sense position. When we attempt to make sense of the world, the term ‘common’ implies a generally accepted objective understanding. We need to ask ourselves where these ‘common’ views came from. They are the rules of the game (See Fuller’s 2020 book 2) and they create a level playing field in which we operate, however they are not universally definitive. They are simply the norms of our own ecologies of practice. The rules of our game structure our conceptual understanding. The give us a space to work but they are nothing more than that.

In work to develop my own conceptual understanding of our practice, I attempted to articulate the rules of my game and then found myself trapped within them. I was aware that there were other communities playing different games. Some were easy to spot and others were hidden. I work in education and I could see that sociology and psychology had different games going on. Their frameworks were different and their own epistemological compasses provided them with objective direction. I wanted to shake myself free of my own compass and find new ways to understand the world. I wanted to find those games which  were hidden. The unknown unknowns. I found my inadvertent, clunky use of language was a gateway to these worlds.

In analysing my own work, the concept of object language (the language of my game) and meta language (the language I used to discuss my object language) is useful here. Fuller daws on Meinong description of objectivity as a ‘homeless object’. It comes into being only when it finds a home. It exists only in relation to its context. An example of object language is the word ‘happy’ which finds objective meaning only when it relates to the context in which it exists. In this case, it is within my own articulated conceptual understanding of our practice. On re-reading this seemingly common-sense view of the world, I had a sense of unease. My epistemological compass was quivering. A portal to a new epistemological framework was through this word as I observed it finding objective meaning in the games of others. It was way of breaking free of the constricting conceptual framework of my own understanding. It is a forever project, however, and I am aware that we can never really step outside the loop as we make meaning. As we re-write our own rules, they begin to constrict us once more. There are always new games to find and ways of thinking to escape.

I believe that there is no universal compass and that they only exist within communities of practice. They do not show us the truth, they only give us direction and a ‘level playing field’ (Fuller’s term) in which to operate. They are our culture, our norms and bedded in language. I also believe that most communities of practice are unaware that they are operating in an artificially constructed objective reality where the rules of their game have been laid down by those with influence and power. They take their common understanding as universal truths. Fuller’s 2020 book takes a number of these communities and attempts to expose the rules of their games and how they affect their practices.

If objectivity only exists when an object relates to its home,  I want to challenge the landing zones for the language that I use.  I want to challenge true north. The word ‘behaviour’ might be a place to start. Followed on by words such as ‘success’ and ‘happy’. Challenging the common sense understanding of these words may begin to change the rules of our game and make life better for the children we serve.

Dec 03

Population level data shows association between exclusion and neurological and mental health disorders

Earlier this month, I wrote a post for the Mental Elf Blog looking at a paper published in Lancet Psychiatry1. Ann John and colleagues had used existing medical and educational records to see if there was any association between school absence and exclusion rates with children’s records of neurodevelopment or mental health disorders upto the age of 25.

 

For someone who has been tracking research into the profile of excluded children in the UK, this felt like a landmark study. There have been numerous studies looking at the characteristics of excluded children but they have typically included small numbers of children and often relied on the self-reporting of parents and families and had a corresponding attrition rate over time. This study included almost half a million children in Wales and did not rely on self reporting as it used data that was already available. It also tracked children to the age of 25. Even if a child was not diagnosed at the time of exclusion, the data picked up correlations which may otherwise have been missed. The study was also so large that it was able to look for correlations with a broader range of neurological and mental health disorders than previous smaller studies.

The study found largely the same things that we see in our centre. For primary aged pupils, children who at some point receive a diagnosis for autism were around 9 times more likely to be excluded than similar children with no diagnosis. Similarly there are links across other areas of neurological and mental health disorders as well as categories of special educational need. Last week, we had a visit from Dame Rachel De Souza, the Children’s Commissioner and she asked about the makeup of pupils in our centre. I told her that the majority had significant special educational needs alongside other significant challenges in their lives such as family breakdown, trauma and poverty. I was able to refer to this study alongside others to illustrate that the makeup of our centre is replicated at a population level in Wales. It has weight and is not easily dismissed.

Implication for practice

Many of the children in the study only had their needs identified at a much later date than their exclusion from school. Both being recognised as SEND and having a diagnosis were found to be protective factors against exclusion and absenteeism. This points to the need for better assessment at an earlier point in the lives of children at risk of exclusion and those with low attendance. Last week, I posted about a clinical psychologist2 looking at the feasibility of assessing pupils at the point that they reach their second exclusion (fixed term or internal) from their school. However, this type of testing relied on having timely access to a specialist for some parts of the assessment. In our experience, schools simply do not have this on the quantity that would be required. In our town, the Virtual School team plans to assess every Looked After child entering their service. That feels like a huge forward step and one that we should replicate for other children at risk, however we simply do not have the access to psychologist input at the scale required.

Our psychologist support is excellent, we just don’t have it in the quantity required. We need tools which can be used by experienced school staff to screen and assess pupils entering our centre and those identified by schools as being at risk of exclusion. It would be interesting to see trials of Hodder’s Special Needs Assessment Profile (SNAP) or the Reach2Teach Action for Inclusion Tool. 

We need to explore a systematic way of screening pupils which is robust, does not rely on the input of a psychologist and is scalable.  My feeling is that there are many who have come to the same conclusion and are working in silos across the country. It would be good to come together and share ideas.

 

 

 

 

Nov 27

Neurodevelopment and mental health screening of pupils following their second exclusion – Findings and Feasibility

This month, I am taking a closer look at this article from the Journal of Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties by Caron Lawson and colleagues.

Caron Lawson, Kate Prentice, Janine Jennings & Kate Johnston (2022): First steps towards a mental health and neurodevelopmental screening of secondary school children following two fixed-term school exclusions in the UK, Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, DOI: 10.1080/13632752.2022.2141871

The authors are clinical psychologists working with the children and families . They set the study in the context of worrying numbers of children with neuroodevelopmental and/or mental health difficulties being excluded from school. They cite Timpson’s (2019) UK government review which suggested that children with SEN were seven times more likely to be excluded from school that those without. A recent population level study involving 500,000 children in Wales (John et al. 2022) had similar findings.

Lawson et al. explore  whether routine screening of pupils following their second exclusion (internal or fixed term) was feasible in a school setting. They also hypothesised that children with two or more fixed term exclusions would show higher scores on measures of neurodevelopment and mental health difficulties than those without.

Methodology

Forty secondary school children (from two schools) took part in the study. Twenty with two or more exclusions and twenty without. All were screened using the six tools below and feasibility was assessed through questionnaire responses from children, parents and school staff on the acceptability of the process where 80% of participants would recommend others to take part in the process.

The screening tools used were:

The Strengths and Difficulties self-report, parent and teacher questionnaires (SDQ; Goodman 1999) – An often used screening tool looking at conduct, hyperactivity, emotional symptoms, peer problems and prosocial behaviour.

Revised Child Anxiety and Depression Scale – Self Report, Short Version (RCADS-25; Ebesutani et al. 2012) – RCADS-25 is a scale that assesses the frequency of symptoms and anxiety and depression.

Conners-3 Self Report, Parent and Teacher Short Forms (Conners et al. 1997) – Used to assess ADHD symptoms through 6 constructs: inattention, hyperactivity/impulsivity, learning problems, aggression, executive functioning (parent version) and peer/family relations.

The Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence – second edition (WASI-II; Wechsler and Hsiao- pin 2011) – The WASI-II is used to measure cognitive ability and gives composite scores estimating verbal comprehension, perceptual reasoning, a full scale IQ and an abbreviated IQ.

Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals – Version 4 (CELF- 4; Semel, Wiig, and Secord 2003) – The CELF – 4 can be used to assess both expressive and receptive language skills to identify a language disorder or delay.

Children’s communication checklist 2 (CCC-2; Bishop 2003) – The CCC2 is a parent report measure for language impairment, communication problems and autism.

Questionnaires were completed by children, teachers and parents whilst the cognitive and language assessments were conducted by the lead researcher with each participant.

Results

  • SDQ scores indicated that difficulties with conduct problems and hyperactivity were significantly higher in excluded pupils than the control group. This was similar in the parent reported data where there was a large disparity between excluded pupils and the control group.
  • Excluded pupils showed higher rates of anxiety and depression than the control group on the RCADS-25
  • On the Conners -3, excluded children scored significantly higher than the control group for ADHD measures
  • 80% of the excluded group had parents reporting that their child had communication difficulties of clinical significance. The control group was in the average range.
  • The cognitive ability of the excluded group was significantly lower than the control group with some children falling within the low average range and three pupils falling in the ‘extremely low’ range.
  • The CELF-4 showed that the excluded group had significantly lower language scores than the control group.

Conclusions

The authors conclude that screening excluded pupils is feasible and acceptable. However, they also report the poor response rate from parents in some cases and suggest collecting their views in a different way. They  also conclude that excluded children consistently show higher levels of need (cognitive ability, ADHD, ASD, language and communication disorders) than control groups. This is consistent with other studies in the field.

Strengths and limitations

This study builds on prior work and identifies an issue that is very much in need of further exploration. The data analysis is robust and the results of the screening are useful points for discussion and add to the body of working looking at the characteristics of excluded pupils in the UK.

When it comes to the feasibility of scaling this work, I found the conclusion of this study frustrating. Significant elements of the process were conducted by a clinical psychologist. There are a large number of pupils in the UK receiving suspensions and school leaders do not have the timely access to psychologist support that would be needed. I would have liked to see screening tools that could be delivered by school staff.

Implications for practice

As the head of an alternative provision, I would like to robustly screen pupils arriving at our centre for cognitive, neurodevelopment and mental health needs. I would also like to be able to work with schools so that this can happen at an early stage and prevent exclusion. This study is useful in that it adds to the body of work looking at the needs of excluded pupils and also provides a workable screening model. We have limited access to psychologist input and need to take this model and adapt it in a way that can be delivered by school staff.

Caron Lawson, Kate Prentice, Janine Jennings & Kate Johnston (2022): First steps towards a mental health and neurodevelopmental screening of secondary school children following two fixed-term school exclusions in the UK, Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, DOI: 10.1080/13632752.2022.2141871

John A, Friedmann Y, DelPozo-Banos M, Frizzati A, Ford T, Thapar A (2022) Association of school absence and exclusion with recorded neurodevelopmental disorders, mental disorders, of self-harm: a nationwide, retrospective, electronic cohort study of children and young people in Wales, UK. Lancet Psychiatry 9 23-34

Timpson, E. 2019. Timpson Review of School Exclusion. London: Department of Education Dandy Booksellers Limited.

 

Nov 20

Removing the Blindfold -Survivors’ stories from the US troubled teen industry

This month, I am taking a closer look at Lesley Kopsick’s thesis ‘Removing the Blindfold: Survivors stories of academic and social-emotional learning within the troubled teen industry’ . In the course of her study, she interviews 10 ‘survivors’ about their experiences and her thesis begins with an extract taken from her own experience.

I wound up blindfolded and transported by two strangers, by airplane and car, into the infamous troubled teen industry. The programs were abusive. They met all the criterion of what institutional child abuse outlines. They were not therapeutic, but instead incredibly harmful, and to this day, trauma remains that I must process daily. Luckily, I survived. I also found support groups of other survivors who attended the same programs as me, and survivors of other programs who endured nearly identical psychological and physical abuses. I began to read about trauma, and I learned that it could resurface after years, and even decades. (Kopsick 2022:2)

I keep coming back to it. The accounts are disturbing and as a piece of research, I find her approach a fascinating, albeit flawed, attempt at explicit reflexivity.

Kopsick’s study relates to what she describes as ‘the troubled teen industry’. She states that according to the 2018 US Census, 137,000 children were in some sort of residential care with 57,000 placed there by their parents. A large part of this industry involves the children of the wealthy. She states that there are currently more than 5000 congregate care programmes in the US with majority being in Utah. She reports parents being encouraged to use private transportation companies and children being moved forcibly during the night by car and aircraft. The picture painted is of a largely unregulated industry targeting desperate families worried about their children. It is eye opening

Method

Kopsick used a narrative approach. Participants were interviewed, their narratives condensed and re-ordered chronologically in order that emerging themes could be identified. All had resided in US wilderness programs and/or residential treatment camps for at least 6 months and had memories of their experiences that they were willing to share. Kopsick questioned how being subject to such programmes can have long term academic and social-emotional consequences. The accounts were presented as stories to make them more digestible for the reader. At all stages throughout the interview and writing up process, Kopsick journaled and her own accounts are provided as introductions to each section of her thesis.

Conclusions

It was hard to pull straightforward results from the thesis. It felt more like an opportunity for people to tell their stories and the research questions felt secondary. It is the conclusions drawn from these stories which are emphasised. The study recommends that teens are not pathologised as ‘bad’ to prevent them being sent away by their parents and that staff in these programmes should be trained in trauma informed practices and that both staff and programmes need regular evaluation. Those conclusions and recommendations were clear from the outset. This study uses narrative accounts to add weight to the case.

Strengths and imitations

I am drawn to the narrative methodology of this work. It would be easy to dismiss as a group of people with an axe to grind but I am fascinated by the reflexive aspect of the work. There are layers upon layers to work through. Why choose this topic? why those questions? why those participants? Kopsick is in the middle of this and attempting to handle these stories as a survivor herself. I am fascinated by that struggle because it is so obviously one that is needed in this case. Her journal extracts at the start of each section add context and Kopsick comments that

‘I remained unbiased during the interview process and analysis, and I believe that my dissertation journals added evidence of the reflexivity processes taken.’ (Pg99/100)

I don’t believe that the account is unbiased but I do believe that the journals show a real effort at reflexivity. I think that Kopsick feels that her journaling fulfils the need to be reflexive and to be seen to be reflexive. In the section where she describes possible limitations to her work, she states that:

‘The researcher’s own bias and experiences as a survivor of the troubled teen industry may be viewed as a limitation of this inquiry. However, it is also a benefit…’ (pg252)

This isn’t explored enough. I want to know what the limitations are. The continual use of the term ‘survivor’ is loaded.  There is a fantastic quote in which she states ‘I allowed myself to die so that I could survive‘(pg 20). This survival flavours everything that comes. She says:

‘My story is not unique. This is considered “therapy” and thousands of other children went through the same events and continue to every single day in America. This dissertation will tell their stories, uninterrupted, unedited. Their stories will tell the truth.’  (pg 21)

Kopsick goes into the study seemingly looking for children with the same story to tell as her . Here Kopsick states that:

‘Participants employed in similar fields may have a better understanding of the details and verbiage of each interview question.’ (Pg 105)

To me this feels like the author is not including the voices of another group. Over 20 participants were interviewed and only 10 were then chosen. Should the questions not have been more accessible?

Implications for practice

Through my English, primary school practitioner eyes, both the nature of the programmes involved and the experiences of the participants are shocking, however, I found myself drawing parallels with the systems that I know and work within. Parents desperate to help their children and accepting provision because they are at a loss as to what else to do. An industry set up to cater for need where companies need to make a profit. Kopsick implores parents to slow down before they place their child in some else’s care. It is hard to compare children being handcuffed, blindfolded and flown across the country to a child being transported across town to alternative provision each day but some of our children are very young and have little understanding of what to expect. It is daunting.  I found parallels with Evanna Lynch’s 2021 biography ‘The opposite of butterfly hunting‘ which describes her being taken from Ireland to London to a residential treatment centre in her teens. This is not simply a US thing

Researcher reflexivity

We are inextricably linked to the process and we leech into the fabric of it. The subject we choose, the questions we ask, the language we adopt, the participants we use and the ones that we don’t. I enjoyed Kopsick’s thesis because I was able to account for her whilst reading her work. She is invested in it. That is clear and she does not attempt to hide it. But should that not also be true for every piece of research we read? Every researcher has a reason for writing. Every researcher has a reason for structuring their work in the way that they do. The language that they used was chosen for effect. The same is true for the driest, empirical, quantitative research as it is for first person qualitative practitioner research. There is a researcher and author working with agendas, employers, funding agencies and motivations of which they may not be aware themselves.  Of course, the same is true of those of us reading the work. We all bring our life experience to bear on the way that we interpret the lines of text. That is another story. For today, I commend Lesley Kopsick’s thesis to you. These are stories that needed to be told.

Kopsick, L.L., (2022) Removing the Blindfold: Survivors stories of academic and social-emotional learning within the troubled teen industry PhD:Barry University

Lynch, E. (2021) The Opposite of Butterfly Hunting. Headline: London

 

Aug 29

Using interoception to reduce dysregulated behaviour and school exclusion

This month, I took a closer look at an article by Emma Goodall and colleagues1  which claims that phsyiological body awareness (interoception) in some pupils (particularly autistic pupils and those with ADHD) is undeveloped and that teaching a simple programme to improve that awareness can reduce dysregulated behaviour in those pupils and the exclusion that goes with it.

Goodall et al. (2022) state that ‘at the high school level, interoception activity interventions have a very particular influence on reducing the rates of suspensions for students involved in the interventions’.

As our centre returns for the new academic year, I already have a plan to work with staff and children to develop a consistency of approach around emotional literacy, however Goodall et al. argue that without the associated work on interception running alongside, the children’s ability to self-regulate will be hindered and I may not get the reduction in dysregulated behaviour that I seek.

How interoception can inform reasonable adaptations in the classroom

Goodall was the Manager for Disability and Complex Needs in the Department for Education, South Australia. and the article draws on her prior study 2  where an interoception programme was first piloted and then trialled in 11 schools. It included a set of easy to use, replicable activities3 which can be implemented by school staff. Examples include stretching the hands and being aware of the feeling in the muscles or being aware of the temperature of the hands compared to the temperature of the skin on the arms. Over time, the programme helps children develop an awareness of their body and how it is feeling – a skill that is necessary but underdeveloped in many. The study reported less dysregulated behaviour and fewer suspensions amongst those pupils taking part. This interoception programme is now being rolled out in 225 schools in southern Australia and  for those looking to make reasonable adaptations and improve outcomes for such pupils, Goodall et al’s article and associated publications (see references) are simple, practical and well worth a look.

What is interoception and how is linked to behaviour?

Alongside emotional intelligence and meta-cognition, interoception is a key component in the ability to self-regulate and is described as ‘ the processes by which an organism senses, interprets, integrates and regulates signals from within itself’ or more simply as a ‘physiological awareness of the body’. Goodall et al. (2022) draw a distinction between self-management (‘ongoing, dynamic, and adaptive behaviours which are made in response to internal states relating to biological homeostasis needs within the body’) and self-regulation (‘the individual’s ability to control his or her behaviour towards goals and helpfully express socio-emotional needs and wants’) where issues with self-regulation may emerge out of deeper self-management needs. The authors draw a link between the ability of a child the recognise the emotion they are feeling (a component of interoception) and their ability to regulate their response. They go on to highlight the higher rates of exclusion amongst autistic pupils and those with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and those with Oppositional Defiant Disorder and Conduct Disorder. They suggest a link with interoception and hypothesise that developing interoception in highly dysregulated pupils improves self-regulation and reduce rates of suspension and exclusion.

How a structured interoception programme may affect pupil behaviour and rates of exclusion?

Goodall’s  trial programme (2021) took place across 11 primary and secondary schools where each school implemented a structured approach to developing interoception. In secondary schools, the programme was embedded in year 8 and 9 with the most dysregulated pupils having access to interoception classrooms. The study found a significant decrease in challenging behaviour in the first 8-10 weeks and pro-social behaviour increasing after 16-20 weeks. This study also found a corresponding reduction in the rates of suspension and exclusion.

What implications does this have for practice?

Developing interoception is more than simply developing a pupil’s emotional literacy but also helping them recognise the deeper physiological changes in the body that may be eliciting those emotions. I recall working with a young autistic child presenting with extremely dysregulated behaviour at a time when he had toothache but no awareness of the physiological cause of his distress and therefore no way to communicate his need in an appropriate way. The programme materials (see references) are there to be used (Goodall and Brownlow’s book4  has also recently been published). It would be interesting to run the programme in the same way as those in the study for a group of pupils presenting with dysregulated behaviour. It would also be interesting to add some of the tasks to our whole class settling activities at the start of lessons.

Further reading

The South Australia Department for Education has a very useful advice and resource page for those looking to implement an interoception programme in schools.

References

Aug 07

Why did I write that? – How we relate and what it produces

As someone who journals with the aim of using reflexivity to improve my practice, I often look back at my writing and wonder – Why on earth did I write that? Why did I choose to write that particular something at that particular time and why on earth did I use the language that I did?

This post is the first in a series on reflexivity and a response to an article by Jacqueline Undurraga1 which argues that good quality reflexivity is about being aware of the complex weave of entanglements at play when we relate to the world and what this then produces. We do this moment by moment and taking this view, my writing is simply (or rather complexly) the product of a moment in time and if I am to understand it better, I need to consider how I related to the situation and the mechanisms or assemblages which brought that about.

This is in contrast to a more traditional view of reflexivity which authors such as Karen Barad (2007)2 find problematic. Barad describes reflexivity as an attempt by a previously formed subject to engage in a reflexive process and account for itself. This is a problem for those with a post-humanist view of subjectivity where subjects (in this case me) are not pre-formed but rather exist in relation to others. Barad (2007:342) describes how ‘The knower cannot be assumed to be a self-contained, rational human subject. Rather, subjects (like objects) are differentially constituted through specific intra-actions’. For this reason, those following Barad favour a move away from reflexivity. Undurraga, however, offers a way forward with the concept of performative meta-reflexivity. Performative meta-reflexivity asks us three questions:

  • How am I relating at this very moment?
  • What assemblages are bringing this about?
  • What is that producing?

It is performative in the sense that here, reflexivity is an ongoing, dynamic, forever process. Barad’s (2007) view of reflexivity is that it does not acknowledge that in knowing (including ourselves) that we are producing something. Undurraga (2022:5), however, states that in a performative meta-reflexive process ‘there is no moment of standing back and reflecting that is not already a way of relating and a productive action’. I am sympathetic to the view. My journal entries are reflections on a situation. I then engage with and relate to my prior entries and produce new reflections which are subject to a whole new set of mechanisms acting at that point in time. We cannot step outside of the process. As Jacques Derrida (1997:24)3 put it ‘We are within meta-physics, even when we are putting a critical eye on it’.

This is not about generating sweeping statements about who I am as a professional or researcher. It is about attempting to understand the writhing mass of ‘local entanglements’ (Undurraga, 2022) affecting the way I relate to a situation. Barad (2007) describes voice as not belonging to an organism but emerging from a ‘becoming that includes all of what is relating at that moment, human and non-human’. I find this useful when trying to answer the question about  why I wrote the things I did and rather to view the words as not my voice but more the product of a host of mechanisms acting at a moment in time.

Implications for practice

How might this help as I attempt to improve my practice. I love this from Undurraga.

‘Using meta-reflective questioning requires me to stay within the sometimes embarrassing, contradictory, troubling, constraining and enabling fact that at any given moment I am relating in ways that are very distant from my best intentions.’ 

Rather than shy away from these realisations, I need to seek them out and embrace them. In the course of my daily work, I need to continually ask if I am relating in ways that I find troubling. I need a way to capture those moments and then try and make sense of the entanglement of mechanisms that is bringing them about. When I re-engage with my writing, how am I relating to it? Do I feel troubled about something, do I feel constrained by the language or is there just something about it that is producing a feeling of queasiness? These are the moments that allow us to step through the portal and gain greater understanding of our ongoing, dynamic place as professional in the midst of the process we are trying to understand.

You can read Jacqueline Undurraga’s full article by clicking on the link below. I have also added it our list of useful resources here.

 

Jul 10

Do headteachers see a benefit in the use of exclusion? – Sarah Martin-Denham 2021

This month I am taking a closer look at Sarah Martin-Denham’s 2021 policy brief 1 for the University of Sunderland. It looks at the question of whether headteachers see any benefits to school exclusion. I am very much on the same page as the author, however, reading this brief had the unexpected effect of making me look hard at my professional position on the subject. Perhaps I am guilty of existing within a bit of an echo chamber.

Background

The author sets the brief in the context of high exclusion rates in England and data showing that pupils with SEND are significantly more likely to experience exclusion than their peers. In setting the scene, Martin-Denham draws attention to the DfE guidance 2 that ‘disruptive behaviour can be an indicator of unmet need’ and that exclusion is associated with both short and long term detrimental impact on children’s wellbeing and mental health.

Method

This policy brief is based on a thematic analysis of interviews with 46 headteachers from Sunderland. The headteachers were from across the authority and led nursery, primary and secondary settings and included alternative provision and special schools. Of the 101 schools in Sunderland, 46% took part. The analysis aimed to answer the question ‘Do headteachers see a benefit in school exclusion or not?’. The brief does not elaborate the interview process or the thematic analysis and I found myself relying on a similar article by the same author3 which appeared to use the same set of interviews to answer a different research question.  It describes a structured thematic analysis using interview data. My assumption is that the process for this policy brief was the same but began with a different research question.

Results

Martin-Denham found a 50/50 split in whether or not headteachers saw a benefit in the use exclusion. A number of themes emerged.

The safety of pupils and staff was seen as paramount  with headteachers describing the impact that a child’s behaviour has on others. They describe children being ‘stressed’ and ‘terrified’ by the behaviour of the excluded child as well as considering the impact that the excluded child’s behaviour may have on the learning of others. There was a feeling that fixed term exclusion gave children time to reflect on the seriousness of their behaviour. It was also felt that an exclusion could be used to impress the seriousness of a child’s behaviour to a child’s caregiver where exclusion was not likely to be effective unless it ‘really inconveniences the child and family’. Respite was another benefit seen by some headteachers. A fixed term exclusion was seen as a way of giving the other children and staff a break from the behaviour of the child. It may also be used let an ‘incident die down’. Some headteachers saw the benefit of using exclusion as a deterrent and to send a message to other children and reinforce what was expected in school. A significant benefit was the use of exclusion to seek external solutions where access to services may only be triggered following exclusion. Amongst primary headteachers, there was the opinion that exclusions were predominantly used to access external support and ‘crucial’ in a child obtaining a placement in another setting.

Where headteachers did not see a benefit to exclusion, it was where it was felt that the child was seeking exclusion as they did not want to be in school. Some headteachers had ethical concerns about what they saw was improper use of exclusion. Here it was felt that exclusion does not tackle to underlying cause of a child’s behaviour and simply delays the process of assessment.

 Conclusions

Martin-Denham’s recommendation is that the DfE update the statutory guidance on exclusion to change ‘the terminology from ‘should’ to ‘must’, to ensure schools are obligated to address any underlying causes of behaviour, including the use of a multi-agency assessment’.

Strengths and limitations

The study takes in the views of a broad range of headteachers from across one local authority. The views of nursery, primary, secondary, AP and special schools were all part of the study. It is difficult from this policy brief to understand the method used without drawing assumptions based on the author’s other work. Thematic analysis draws on themes identified by the researcher and this brief is best seen as part of a body of work and the author’s professional place in it. The introduction sets the background to the study which draws on high exclusion rates and the detrimental impact that exclusion may have on a child’s life. It also highlights the disproportionate percentage of excluded pupils with SEND needs. When considering the benefit or otherwise of exclusion, it may also have been interesting to also set in the context of the impact of excluded children on the safety, wellbeing of other pupils and staff. It is present in the interviews but not considered as part of the introductory backdrop to the study which may reveal something about the professional positioning of author and the brief.

Implications for practice

A time for schools to reflect on an exclusion

An exclusion is a significant event in the life of a child and their family. Some headteachers describe exclusion as being useful for giving children and their parents/carers time to reflect on their seriousness of the behaviour. There is no mention, however, about also giving the headteacher and school staff time to reflect on how things may have been done differently.  I am not anti-exclusion and have excluded children in my role as head of a mainstream primary school. There are times where it is necessary and appropriate. Children and staff need to be kept safe. Exclusion is not the norm, however, and should be used a a time for schools to also reflect. What situations is the school putting the child in each day? Are we putting a child in a situation where they are going to struggle to cope and then punishing them when they can’t? I know of instances where young children with learning difficulties and social communication needs are being repeatedly put in classroom situations which is academically driven and socially demanding and expected to cope. It is much easier to spot in young children but as pupils get older, they tend to mask those needs and the challenging behaviour is the only visible sign that things are not right.  I agree with the author that assessment should begin early and that if a child is beginning to pick up fixed-term exclusions, schools should be obligated to start the process. Otherwise, exclusion is being used as a sticking plaster to cover a wound that will never heal and is likely to get worse over time.

Should exclusion really be needed to access the support a child needs?

Some headteachers use exclusion to send a message to children and parents. It cuts through and also reinforces expectations of behaviour to others. Fixed-term exclusion, however, is also actively being used to send a message to the local authority about the seriousness of the situation. I can sense the desperation. Exclusion seems to be a gateway to services. From accessing assessment to securing alternative provision. As the head of an AP provision for young children, I recognise this. We run alongside mainstream provision and provide education for those children who need something different for a period in their lives. Mostly, they are SEND children going through a very tough time which is not of their making. Having to go through the damaging process of exclusion in order to access our provision just makes very vulnerable children more vulnerable. It is tragic but it is going on.

A polarising topic that needs balance

On exclusion, I am very much on the same page as the author. I have been vocal about the need for children exhibiting challenging behaviour to be assessed for underlying need. My unexpected reaction to this brief, however, was to take another look at my professional positioning. I do believe that many vulnerable children are being dealt with through exclusion processes inappropriately. There are children very predictably struggling to cope with the academically driven, socially complex world of mainstream schools and then being punished for not coping. That does not mean that I am anti-exclusion, however. Vulnerable SEND pupils are only part of the picture. Although some children receive many fixed-term exclusions and this may indicate their ineffectiveness, it is possible that for some children they are effective and a positive turning point in their lives.  I want to find out if this is the case and if so, I would like to hear their voices. Although the exclusion system is being used inappropriately to deal with vulnerable SEND pupils, that does not mean that it is not needed and not being used well in some cases. I would like to know more. Exclusion is a polarising topic and I need to listen and engage more closely to the a range of views, particularly from those badly affected by the challenging behaviour of others, and not simply exist in my own echo chamber.

References

Jun 11

Permanent exclusion in the words of the child

The majority of the children enter our centre having either been permanently excluded from primary school or have been moved because they are very close to that point. The children sometimes tell us about their experiences of exclusion but in the academic literature, the voice of permanently excluded pupils is not often heard.

Ricky Murphy 1(2021) interviewed 18 permanently excluded pupils (aged 6-16) and uses their stories to discuss the themes that emerged. As the head of a centre which receives excluded children, none are a surprise and I would recommend following the link to his open access article and spending some time reading their words. They are hard hitting.

Murphy conducted semi-structured interviews with children from 4 different alternative provisions. All had been permanently excluded from school at least once. Most pupils reported being physically or emotionally abused in the past. Almost all the pupils had a learning difficulty in addition to complex home lives and the majority had been subject to bullying at school.

The majority of pupils in our centre have some form of learning difficulty on top of all the other challenges that they face. Most have struggled to keep up with the academic pace of mainstream primary education. One main theme emerging from Murphy’s interviews was the way in which the children storied their academic experience. Children struggling to keep up in lessons do not do so in a vacuum, they struggle in a very public space and in the midst of a complex social environment. The majority of pupils Murphy interviewed also had some form of learning difficulty and they were each trying to cope with the daily experience of very visibly being an academically struggling pupil. In this public space, for some pupils, highlighting the learning need was more problematic than the learning need itself and the punitive experience of exclusion was less weighty than the ‘punitive social experience of being ‘stupid”.

On a first visit to our centre, a recently excluded child with a significant learning disability asked me ‘Do you have bullies at the Forwards Centre?’ I could hear the anxiety in his voice and answered as honestly as I could with ‘No…but we do have lots of children who have been bullied’. Almost all the pupils Murphy interviewed related stories of bullying at around the time of their exclusion. Most were experiencing challenges in their lives and Murphy found that the ‘exclusion- behaviour is repeatedly linked to how their personal problem stood out in the social context’. The challenges that they were facing made them stand out from their peers. Pupils said that the problems they were facing were difficult. They were also being mocked and ridiculed about the challenges they were facing. One child described her father becoming ill and dying of cancer. Other pupils ridiculed this and set up fake social media accounts to mock her. Ultimately, she threw a chair at one of those bullying her and was permanently excluded from school. It may be that her challenging behaviour was a coping mechanism used to protect herself. She had tried speaking to staff and the option for flight had been removed as she was required to attend and be in the same room as those publically laughing at her father’s illness and death.  ‘Fight’ may have been the only option left to her in an attempt make the bullying go away.

Before taking up the headship of our setting, I worked for many years in mainstream education and was the head of two primary schools. I understand the pressures of the curriculum and the requirement to move a whole cohort of children through an academic programme of work. It is relentless and for a small group of pupils facing multiple challenges in their lives, it may not be appropriate and their behaviour reflects being placed in this environment. Murphy discusses institutional inequalities in the education system where schools are simply an extension of the state. Murphy believes that there is a context of racial, social and disability discrimination where children bring ‘multiple social and educational inequalities into the school environment’ and ‘these inequalities are hidden beneath layers of challenging behaviour’. The danger is that challenging behaviour is seen intrinsic to the child rather than a symptom or coping mechanism related to underlying risk factors in their life. One of the main findings of his study is that ‘excluded children tend to experience school as misreading symptoms of social injustice, bullying and special educational needs as misbehaviour and non-compliance’. I find myself in agreement with that.

In our centre, we also worry about primary aged children dropping out of their social world and becoming detached from their communities as a result of their exclusion. Murphy felt the same.  Excluded pupils are no longer allowed to attend their school and are transported out of their community each day to be educated elsewhere. Schools are the centre of local communities and children soon lose touch with their friends and this seems to be long lasting. In the study, almost all pupils reported becoming isolated from the peers following their exclusion and that this was still the case. Murphy found a worrying trend where even in the age of social media, ‘young people tended to be alone for most evenings and weekends and described their lives as ‘boring’ or ‘lonely”. 

This is a small scale study, including only 18 pupils from 4 settings, however the words of the children ring true. We have an education system that is set up for the majority. Through no fault of their own, some children face multiple challenges in their lives and this means that they stand out. Standing out makes them vulnerable and children cope the best way they can. Tackling some of the underlying challenges that a child faces may be a long haul and take a lot of time. Whilst that is going on, if we choose to continually place them an academically charged public space where their learning difficulty makes them stand out even more then that is our choice as professionals and the resultant behaviour is down to us. Good quality alternative provision lifts children out of that environment for a period of time and we see children slowly become comfortable in their own skin and engage with learning at a pace they can handle and from the point they are at. The need for maladaptive coping mechanisms diminishes and their behaviour becomes settled. It is deeply worrying that many children have to go through a punitive exclusion route to get there.

Each month I will send out the way that the latest research and practice impacts on children excluded from school. Sign up below and let me know if you think something needs to be included – Chris


Jun 02

Finding truth in the way things go wrong – A Hegelian motto

In the introduction to his book ‘Hegel and the wired brain’ Slavoj Zizek (2020 ) writes that if Georg Hegel had a motto, it would be something like ‘Find truth in the way that things go wrong!’. I find great comfort in that.

In my attempt to be an academic practitioner, I aim to help people through knowledge. A rather grand aim and one that can sound trite. My problem is that acquiring knowledge is an ongoing, forever process. I can always know more and my explanations and models can always be just that little bit better. There is always one more article to read and one more theorist to explore. How do I put plans into action and not simply theorise about them when I know that they are flawed from the outset?

Strangely, Zizek (2020:11) gives me encouragement when he writes that all attempts to improve the world are doomed to failure. It is out of these failures that a new ‘form of being can arise’ .

In my own work (Fielding, 2020), I articulate my best understanding of the world through a hypothesis and use this as a basis to act and develop practice. In a Hegelian view of the world,  I would then smash my hypothesis together with an opposing hypothesis and out of the carnage a new hypothesis would emerge (Warburton, 2012).

I am not much of a smasher of hypotheses. I am more of a prodder and stretcher. I seek the vulnerable points, the bits that make me queasy and test the edges. I live actively alongside my hypothesis and notice when phenomena either resonate with it or jar uncomfortably and cause a sense of deep unease. I am continually checking whether every part of the hypothesis is necessary or was just the flavour of the month when I constructed it. Does each part stand the test of time? Am I comfortable with the language that I used to construct my conceptual understanding or do I get the sense that I was trying to cram a world of meaning into a word or phrase? Am I using a placeholder term as a substitute for a swirling mass that I have no way of articulating?

Those queasy words and phrases offer a tantalising, shimmering portal into another world. It is exhilarating. Standing on the edge before jumping into the void. It is a messy process full of fog and confusion.

This epistemological stance lends a forward momentum (Fielding 2020) and within this cycle of exploration and practice, comes a point where one’s best understanding of the world needs to be articulated again and a new hypothesis emerges. Plans are be amended, practice developed and the world moves on. We cannot wait for full understanding before we act. The value comes in the attempt. Zizek (2020:20) writes that:

‘the path to truth is a moment of truth itself’ and that ‘truth is ultimately nothing other than the systematic articulation of a succession of errors’.

I love that. It offers more than just encouragement. It is liberating. In attempting to do good in the world, we will make mistakes. This gives us the freedom to try.

References

Fielding, C. (2020) Inclusion for the excluded: Applying critical realism in an alternative provision academy for excluded primary school pupils. Ed.D MMU

Warburton, N. (2012) A little history of philosophy. Yale University Press: London

Žižek, S. (2020). Hegel in A Wired Brain. India: Bloomsbury Academic.

 

Nov 21

Factors Within a Primary School that are Perceived to Support Children Who Are ‘At Risk’ of Exclusion. – An appreciative inquiry

After working in many roles at schools in central London, Amy Herbert,  gained a lot of experience at working with children deemed ‘at risk of exclusion’. She then trained as an Educational Psychologist and felt that much of the research on exclusion was focussed on secondary pupils after the point of exclusion. She felt that this encourages a ‘deficit model’ often placing the causes of exclusion as being something lacking in the child or family.  Into this context, Herbert (2021) focussed her doctoral thesis on the positive ways in which the system around the child supported and prevented exclusion within a mainstream primary school.

Rather than use a ‘deficit model’, Herbert (2021) chose to look at the positive ways in which the system around a primary school child provided support and prevented exclusion.

Methods

Herbert used a qualitative approach with the aim of giving a voice to pupils, parents and school staff. The study was conducted in large London primary school where proportions of pupils with special education needs and free school meals were above average.

The participants included four pupils were who felt to be at risk of permanent exclusion, their main parent/carer and four staff from the school who knew these children well.

An Appreciative Inquiry (AI) (Cooperrider, et al., 2008) was conducted with each of these groups. This involved taking them through a three-step process resulting in a co-produced positive plan of action for the school.

Firstly, in the discover phase, each participant was asked to identify the factors that they thought were currently in place that supported the child in preventing exclusion. Secondly, each participant was taken through the dream phase where they were asked about the things they would ideally like to see.  A thematic analysis was used to identify similarity across the participants views and these were considered using Bronfenbrenner’s (1992) ecological systems theory. Finally, there was a design and deliver phase, where ‘proactive proposals’ formed the basis of a co-produced action plan for the school.

Herbert used Appreciative Inquiry (AI) to give a voice to pupils (at risk of exclusion), their parents and school staff in a large London primary school.

Results

The school action plan is a key outcome of the study, however, I found myself more drawn to the voices of the participants coming out of the discover phase for each group. The main themes and sub-themes are below:

Themes and sub-themes of children’s views on what supports them at school

The children’s views were based around the four main themes:

Support from teachers – This included supporting emotional regulation, support with learning and positive pupil teacher relationships.

Importance of peers – This included having friends as motivators and having positive peer reltionships.

Learning Environment – This included motivators, the availablity of a nurture room, having provision for special interests and good outdoor space.

Self-efficacy – This included being able to take responsibility and self-talk.

These are laid out on pg 65 of the thesis and are them looked at in much more detail. They are well worth a read and the pupil voice shines through.

Themes and sub-themes of parents’ views on what they think works to prevent exclusion.

The parents’ views were based around four main themes:

Staff knowledge and skills – This included having well trained staff, who adopt a flexible approach, have the time to understand and are calming and not controlling.

We work together – Here the parents said that they felt like part of the process, there was good communication and that the staff stood by you.

Whole school ethos/systems – The parents said that it worked well when the whole school took the same approach, staff go the extra mile and there is an individualised approach to inclusion. They felt that the school believed in social inclusion and was firm but fair.

Provision and support – Parents also mentioned the successful use of motivators and the availability of the nurture room. They felt that it was important that their children experienced consistent adults who supported emotional regulation as well as the opportunity for their child to work with speciclaists when appropriate.

Each of these points is expanded beginning on pg 71 of the thesis and again, is well worth a read.  One parents said:

“and they was just amazing with him. And I’d watched them like just manage to not control him but calm him. Control was not the word, they calmed him,” pg. 74

Themes and sub-themes of staff views on what they think works to prevent exclusion.

Staff views were organised around 5 main themes:

Whole school ethos – Here staff believed in a nurturing environment which prioritises wellbeing and a staff committed to inclusion.

Approaches to the curriculum – Here they mentioned being able to adopt a flexible approach to the school day, good quality differentiation, support for writing and the use of motivators.

Staff working as a team – Where things successfully supported pupils, staff felt empowered to make decisions, there was good communication and flexibility and that staff within the team had the skills and life experience to respond appropriately when needed.

Learning environment and provision – The availability of the nurture room was seen as positive as was giving pupils space to emotionally regulate. Having consistent staff, who understand the need for a small steps approach and who with the time to respond appropriately was felt to be important.

School systems supporting children – These included the way the school organises their staff roles, their approach to behaviour management, their engagement with outside agencies and the way they work in partnership with parents.

A detailed explanation of each of these points can be found starting on pg 84 of the thesis.

The positive voices of the participants shines through this work and is worth a closer look

Conclusions

Herbert draws the themes of the three groups together and concludes that:

‘The data analysis identified a number of interlinking factors that were successful in preventing exclusion. This included a strong leadership that created an inclusive, nurturing environment by prioritising wellbeing of the children. The staff team showed unconditional commitment to the children that they worked with and felt respected and valued. The support for the children was consistent and an individualised approach was key, including a differentiated curriculum. Restorative approaches to behaviour and a whole school approach ensured continuity and a sense of ‘fairness’. The way that the space was utilised within the school allowed the children to have the space to feel safe and supported to regulate their emotions, forming consistent relationships with the learning mentors. The outside space and use of nature were also a contributing factor.’ Pg. 136-137

Strengths and limitations

I was unfamiliar with Appreciative Inquiry (AI) and have found its use in this case fascinating. It had the feel of a structured, group coaching approach where participants described the current situation (albeit from a purely positive standpoint), create an image of how they would like it to look and then co-produced a plan of action in order to get there.

One criticism of AI is that as it focusses on the positive, some unhelpful negative factors may be ignored. In this study, the use of space to support the emotional regulation of children is seen as a positive. I found myself wanting to ask why the children in these situations needed to regulate in the first place. Was there something going on that could be stopped easily and the need for space then reduced.  I wonder if the structure of AI would allow for that to be picked up.

The voices of the children, parents and staff shine through this work and allowed the school to develop a co-produced plan of action in order to celebrate and promote the things that are going well. There should be celebration here. Herbert has a methodology that can be used in a range of situations to provide a positive approach to an issue causing concern.

This is a very small-scale study conducted under challenging circumstances and Herbert acknowledges all the limitations that come with that. She is making no grand claims. She has, however, done what she set out to do. She has added a range of positive, solution focussed voices in a field where it is sorely lacking.

Main Reference

Herbert, A (2021) An Appreciative Inquiry of Factors Within a Primary School that are Perceived to Support Children Who Are ‘At Risk’ of Exclusion. Prof Doc Thesis University of East London School of Psychology https://doi.org/10.15123/uel.89vxw

Other references

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1992). Ecological systems theory. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Cooperrider, D., Whitney, D. D., Stavros, J. M., & Stavros, J. (2008). The appreciative inquiry handbook: For leaders of change. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Each month I will send out the way that the latest research and practice impacts on children excluded from school. Sign up below and let me know if you think something needs to be included – Chris



 

 

Nov 12

My first week as the head of a Pupil Referral Unit – My world is upside down

It is my first week as the head of a primary aged pupil referral unit. Five children have just walked out of class and are wandering the corridor. None of the strategies that I employed as a  mainstream headteacher are working and I am at a complete loss. I am a long way out of my comfort zone and I can feel my anxiety rising. My world is upside down. Everyone is watching.

Then something unexpected happens. One of the children (year six) looks around and reads the situation in an instant. With a kindness that I will not forget, he decides to help. He approaches me and says:

‘OK – I will go back in but…can you please tell them [the teacher] that what’s in the past is in the past. They say it but then keep bringing things up’.

I nod and he quietly goes back into the room. Within seconds, there is a roar from the class teacher,  he comes back out giving a sad, resigned shrug as he walks past.

I spend the next couple of weeks in and out of our classes . I realise quickly that the majority of pupils have missed a lot of schooling and even when they have been in school have missed a lot of lessons and even when they have been in lessons have missed a lot of learning. A large proportion of pupils have special educational needs. The academic profile of each child is spikey and each child’s is different. Their profiles are like doilies. They all have big gaps in learning and everyone’s gaps are in different places.

Children arrive with academic profiles like doilies. Lots of gaps and everyone’s gaps in different places.

Over the next two weeks, I watch pupils struggle with the way their academic work is pitched. Their behaviour becomes erratic as they use their deeply embedded maladaptive strategies to manage their anxiety. I realise quickly that this is not really a behaviour job.  This is a teaching and learning job.  I believe that if we can get the teaching and learning right, the behaviour will follow.

Almost six years on and our centre is a calm and purposeful environment. We work hard to assess children properly, find where they are up to and plan their learning accordingly. We spend around three weeks assessing children when they first arrive and use very little formal testing. We use formative assessment to tweak each child’s plan as we go. There are no shortcuts. Good quality teacher assessment is time consuming and relentless…but it is worth the effort. Our children love learning just as much as their mainstream peers. We just make sure that it is learning from the point they are at without the pressure to keep up with anyone else.

The year six boy from the start of this tale is now around 17 years old. I saw him recently and we talked briefly about my first week and how his act of kindness set us on our path. I thanked him. He helped me realise that if I am going to ask excluded children  to re-engage with learning, then it is my job to make sure that what they experience in class is the best it can possibly be. It’s an equality thing. They deserve nothing less.

Each month I will send out the way that the latest research and practice impacts on children excluded from school. Sign up below and let me know if you think something needs to be included – Chris


Also, there are even men who don’t have any sort of professional viagra issue of ED or Erectile Dysfunction with ease and the product comes in sachet and also available in different flavors (Chocolate, mint, grape, strawberry, black currant, etc.). Once your viagra 25 mg my review here prescription has been verified, your order will be shipped out from the online pharmacies warehouse. It is appalachianmagazine.com levitra samples comprised of three stages of the male sexual organ. Aside from being a perfect source of nutrition and carbohydrates, the high levels of antioxidants and nutrients. acai berry supplements have been around for as long as candles have, but beeswax is expensive and isn’t the best medium for levitra 60 mg dispersing essential oils into the air.

Oct 24

How anxious children attempt to cope in mainstream schools

This post takes a look at the 2020 doctoral thesis of Eleanor Ann Gray (University of Sheffield) and considers what implications it may have for improving inclusive practice for excluded pupils #inclusionfortheexcluded. 

Gray’s work attempts to develop an understanding of both the coping strategies used by anxious children in mainstream secondary schools and the conditions within schools that increase the likelihood of a child needing to use them. In doing so, Gray draws on Carver and Connor Smith (2010) to conceptualise coping as the process that individuals use ‘in order to protect themselves from the harm and discomfort associated with a problem or stressor’ (pp. 12).

The study began as an exploration of the reintegration experiences of young people from a medical provision as they attempted to successfully return to mainstream secondary schools, however it became apparent early in the study that these young people simply wanted to share their experiences of their prior lives attempting to cope in mainstream education. Gray responded to her participants and the research question became ‘How do pupils, who self-identify as experiencing anxiety in school, try to cope in mainstream education?’  

Method

Gray used a classic grounded theory (CGT) approach and conducted her study within a medical provision for secondary aged school children. Her participants included four young people and one teacher from the provision and two educational psychologists. Data was collected using ten interviews which began with open questions and became more structured and probing as the interviews progressed. In line with CGT, although the interviews were recorded, they were not transcribed. Gray created field notes from these interviews which were then coded to elicit the main concern, core category and associated concepts for the study.

Those using classic grounded theory (CGT) are wary of forcing their preconceptions onto a study. Gray argues that creating specific research questions early in the study may be unhelpful and that ‘that relevant research questions will become apparent once the researcher enters the field’ (pp. 10). This clearly happened as the emphasis shifted from that which was thought initially important by the researcher to be replaced by that which was of main concern to the young people in the setting.

Results

Gray found three main category of coping strategy used by anxious pupils in mainstream schools. She describes them as Fitting in; Avoidance and escape; and School rejection.

The pupils described the lengths they went to attempting to fit in. They describe wanting to:

meet the expectations within mainstream education and to be able to do what their peers are doing. Pupils endeavour to meet a wide range of expectations, including academic expectations, to protect themselves from the emotional discomfort or harm of not doing so. (pp. 59)

In order to fit in, they adopt strategies such as not presenting their authentic self and adopting an identity which they believe will be accepted. Attempting to cope using avoidance and escape may include absenting themselves from lessons or not attending school at all. School rejection refers to the adoption of a position that mainstream education is futile, mistaken in its goals and therefore attending would be pointless. Rejectors use this as a reason to opt out altogether.  An important point is that children may not be aware that they are using these strategies to cope, rather their ‘underpinning need is to protect oneself from emotional harm or discomfort’.

Conclusions and Implications for Practice

Gray’s study concerns the often maladaptive behaviour children use to cope with mainstream school and protect themselves from emotional harm. She recognises that it will be helpful to work on giving pupils adaptive ways of coping but believes the origins of their anxiety are systemic and the responsibility for eradicating them cannot be laid at the door of the children. She goes on to discuss the main protective factors that may mitigate a child’s anxiety in a mainstream school. These school system conditional factors are described as Knowing the Environment: Enhancing Predictability; School Ethos; and Developing Positive Relationships’ (pp.1).

Knowing the Environment and enhancing predictability

Mast Mood the best sildenafil oil also offers the best ayurvedic erectile dysfunction treatment. Be sure your create tips decide on insures diablo 3 gold in greater detail along with there after india tadalafil tablets gifts good launch on the runestones you possibly can go with those people knowledge if you amount way up. These blood vessels gets widen and provides india viagra online more and more blood. It entails a number of high quality screening cialis on line australia examinations. Ensuring that the school environment, staffing and expectations are consistent and predictable  is important in reducing anxiety for some pupils. There is safety in routines. We would certainly agree with that. Anxious children need consistent adults, a calm environment where everyone knows what is expected and regular and reliable events which provide anchor points in the day. When our centre starts to wobble, we return to simple routines such as lining up. This is as much for the adults as the children and drives a consistency of approach. We can feel the heat reduce across the centre. We provide children with only a small number of adults to get to know at first and keep it as steady and consistent as possible.

School Ethos

Gray describes both acceptance the tension between pupil wellbeing and academic accountability. For us, this includes accepting children, giving them a place to be themselves and be happy in their own skin. It also includes an expectation that staff teach children from the point they are at without the need for them to keep up with anyone else. We hold teachers accountable for the quality of their teaching and not on rates of academic progress. We assess each child thoroughly but do not use testing to judge progress. We believe that testing is used when you do not have time to assess children properly.

Developing Positive Relationships

The pupils in the study describe the protective factor that comes with being part of a good friendship group. For many children, we believe that this will not simply happen and that time and effort needs to be devoted to developing good pupil/adult and peer relationships during the school day. This aligns with our belief that children with a good social engagement system (Porges, 2003) can prevent tipping into crisis if they are able to socially engage as they begin to feel a heightened sense of anxiety.

Strengths and limitations

The grounded theory approach taken in this study puts researcher preconceptions  under scrutiny and the study had the flexibility to adapt to the main concern of the pupil participants. Gray resisted the temptation to interview staff before students in order to prevent a skewing of the focus of the pupil interviews. Gray does, however, acknowledges the small sample size and the limited nature of literature review which may have benefited from going beyond journal articles to consider a wider pool such as doctoral theses.

You can link to Gray’s thesis below. 

Gray, E. (2020) Protecting oneself from emotional discomfort or harm: a Classic Grounded Theory study of how anxious pupils cope in mainstream education. EdD and Child Psychology. University of Sheffield [Online][Accessed on 19th October 2021] 

Other references

Carver, C. S., & Connor-Smith, J. (2010). Personality and Coping. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 679-704.

Porges, S. (2003) ‘The polyvagal theory: phylogenetic contributions to social behavior.’ Physiology & Behavior,79 pp. 503–513.

 

Feb 07

A parents’ perspective on exclusion – Parker et al. 2016

This post is my response to Parker et al.’s 2016 article1 about parental perspectives to their child’s exclusion published in the journal Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties. 

Their article discusses open ended interviews conducted (between Sept 2011 and July 2013) with the parents of 37 excluded children. Parents were asked about their child and school, why they thought their child had struggled with school, what support their child had and what they would like to have been done differently.

The interviews were coded and the common themes of a continuum of coping, the complex journey of exclusion and wider impacts of exclusions were identified. Hearing the stories told from a parent’s perspective highlighted the complex nature of exclusion. There were examples of informal exclusion being being sold to parents as being in the best interests their child and there were examples of fixed term exclusions being used by schools to build a case against the child. Other times, parents reported that exclusion had been the gatekeeper to accessing the support that their child needed. Support that was only available following exclusion.

Parents reported that their views were dismissed, they were talked down to and often felt that they were being blamed for their child’s behaviour. My reaction to this is one of frustration. The parents in the study described similar risk factors within both the child and family that often appear in other studies on exclusion (DFE, 2018 2 ;Paget et al. 20183; Tejarina et al, 2020 4).  They did not shy away from them. However, they also include a much longer list of risk (and protective) factors associated with the school than is present in other studies. My frustration is born out of the lack of insight that those in education have to the impact that they themselves have on pupil behaviour and associated exclusions.

It is not enough for schools to talk down to parents and lay the blame solely with them and their children. They need to examine themselves more closely and ask why a child may be presenting with extreme behaviour with them when they may not in another school. Parents talk about school ethos and their children fitting with some schools and not with others. Of course, there may or may not be a host of things within the domains of the child and family that need to be addressed but those providing education are working with the child in the moment.  They are responsible for the situation that the child is finding themselves in during the school day. Moment to moment. If they put a child in a situation that is too much for them to cope with, that is down to them. Simply, blaming the child and family lacks professional insight.

I have two points to make about research into pupil resilience in schools. The first is that when it comes to factors associated with schools, the research is often framed in the positive. It looks at children and asks what are the protective factors that enable one child to cope in a situation when another does not. The risk factors in the domain of the school are often just a re-framing of those found in the domains of the child and family.  Those associated with school policy are largely absent. I believe that this is because schools see their role as  mitigating for the risk factors the child may be experiencing in their family life. They completely miss out a reverse perspective where the family have to mitigate for the risk factors associated with schools. Parents cite their ability to advocate for their child as being an important protective factor in their child’s life.

The second point is that resilience research often looks at the effectiveness of an intervention programme on a child’s ability to cope in school. It does not stop to ask what the child is being asked to cope with and whether it is their best interests. There are a host of interventions aimed at enabling children to manage when it may be that it is the situation itself that needs to be changed. Policy makers may argue that is in every child’s interests to experience high levels of academic pressure and that all children simply need to be able to cope with it. I believe that this is so deeply embedded in the discourse of English education that it is not questioned. I want to challenge that discourse.  My belief is that for some children at some points in their lives, the academic standards agenda driving day to day life  in mainstream schools is not in their best interests. Currently the only way to lift children out of this academically charged environment is for them to be placed in special education or alternative provision and the only way to get them there in many cases is via a damaging exclusion process.

Their article concludes that there is a need to look behind a child’s behaviour and that the insight of parents into their child’s needs should be valued. I believe that schools should widen their view and look not only at how they may mitigate for a child’s needs and family life but also how they themselves may be contributing to the challenging situation the child is in. I am asking how we have ended up in a situation where some children are required by law to spend their days in an environment which is potentially damaging for them. What educational policy has led us there?  I would like to see such educational policy much more widely recognised as a dominant risk factor in the lives of many children at risk of exclusion.
The tree is eulogized as “mochaka” as it gives relief (mochana) from viagra sildenafil click for info many diseases. It is not that the medicine itself works our icks.org generic overnight viagra during sensual stimulation. This viagra samples cheap disease is been noticed nowadays in many men around. A patient should have a branded, genuine and right dosage of the drug, so that a successful sexual intercourse makes you able to enjoy the fun of life with using order cialis overnight discover for source.
You can find Parker et al.’s article in the journal Emotional and behaviour Difficulties here. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jan 30

Which children and young people are excluded from school? – Paget et al. 2018

This post is my response to the 2018 article by Amelia Paget 1 and colleagues. Their work uses data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) discussed in an earlier post. ALSPAC recruited around fourteen and half thousand pregnant women in 1990/1991 and tracked their children through their school years and is continuing to track them in adulthood. As part of the study, exclusion data was collected at the age of 8 and 16 years. Fifty-three children had been excluded by the age of eight. Using this data, Paget et al. concluded that:

‘The problem is unlikely to reside solely within the child or family, as is often the perception’. 

I agree and my belief is that educational policy and its impact on school leaders, staff and ultimately children is widely missed as a contributing risk factor to children presenting with SEMH needs. Studies into childhood resilience typically compare the different risk and protective factors a child may experience and then attempts to work out why one child may prosper in a certain situation when another does not. I believe that the issue here is that educational policy, such as the standards agenda, is seen as impacting equally across all schools and is therefore not included as a variable. My belief, however is that the standards agenda has a different impact on school leaders in different sectors such as mainstream, special and alternative provision and needs to be considered.

My experience as a headteacher moving from mainstream to alternative provision was profound. In mainstream, results were almost everything, particularly  SATS results. They drove the agenda in school. It was about taking a large group of children and working with them in such a way that their overall results were high enough to keep the leadership team in their jobs. As the head of an alternative provision academy, nobody is interested in our results. They don’t drive the agenda and we can work in a way that is free of the relentless, academic intensity that exists in English primary schools. The association between educational policy and children presenting with SEMH needs is under explored and rarely considered when considering the cumulative risk factors a child may experience.

An example of this under exploration comes from the DFE in 2018. In a previous post, I discussed the cumulative risk factors associated with exclusions and the Department for Educations’s (DFE, 2018) 2 lack of awareness of the impact of the academic standards agenda on the experiences of both staff and children.

In understanding how school life can impact on exclusion, Paget et al. describe how:

‘Exploring potentially modifiable risk factors in the school environment would be important.’

The impact of educational policy is entirely absent from the DFE’s (2018) thinking. For this to be explored further, the possibility of a link at least needs to be acknowledged by those driving educational policy. They create the social context within which schools are situated.

Paget et al. categorise risk factors into those relating the Family, the Child and the School. Within the family, the most strongly associated with exclusion were a history of maternal depression and suspension from school and living in rented housing. Within the child, the factors most strongly associated with exclusion at age eight were low IQ, social communication difficulties, language difficulties and child psychiatric disorders. Within the school, the factors listed were the presence of a child’s SEN and school mobility as well a poor child/teacher relationship (as reported by parents).

As with the DFE (2018) list of risk factors, the domain of the school is  populated but omits any risk that may have been brought about by educational policy makers. It is a blind spot. The ALSPAC study shows tantalising glimpses the need further exploration. It shows that children with learning difficulties and social communication difficulties are more likely to be excluded but it doesn’t tell us why.

Men would never believe it tadalafil generic cheapest if you tell your husband that you’re meeting some friends after work so that he knows not to surprise you with your favorite dinner tonight. A study has recently concluded that of the 12 most common medications being prescribed today, eight have “impotence” as their side effects. soft cialis pills Men are particularly wary about having erectile dysfunction because once the damage is done it is too weak? These jellies strengthen the muscles of the penis visit that pharmacy cialis samples and allow one to have firm erection throughout the sexual incitement. Access and Information For more information, or to refer a patient to the Center for aesthetics at Idaho falls also has a well developed program for mastercard viagra weight loss- tummy tuck and liposuction, the program is well supported by Endocrinologists, Dieticians and Rehabilitative professionals. Paget et al. (2018) found that:

Although children with a neurodevelopmental or psychiatric disorder may be more likely to be excluded, two systematic reviews found surprisingly few studies testing this relationship (Parker et al. 2014, Whear et al. 2014)

This paper is opening my eyes to the work of Parker 3 and a group of academics writing about the link between mental health and exclusion and the way that children may be being excluded rather than supported. Some children may be the collateral damage of a steamroller standards agenda which is going to press on regardless and leave them by the wayside.

This article was published in the journal Child Care Health Development. From a child health perspective, Paget et al.  (2018) had four main findings. They believe that all excluded children should have a holistic assessment that goes beyond their educational needs, particularly in recognising any unrecognised neurodevelopment disorders or mental health needs.

They believe in an integrated approach (education, health and social care) to supporting children at risk of exclusion due to their behavioural presentation. They believe that the risk factors associated with exclusion are identifiable early in primary school (or even before) and that this should trigger very early intervention. Finally, they believe that more research is needed into the links between mental health, neurodevelopment disorders and school exclusion.

I would echo all of those findings. As the headteacher of an AP provision receiving excluded children, well coordinated easy access to a full holistic assessment for each child would be helpful. Even more helpful would be if the assessments had happened before the child was excluded and that intervention was already in place.

You can find an open access copy of Paget et al.’s (2018) article here.

 

 

Jan 17

Mental Health and Behaviour in Schools – DFE 2018

This week, I was asked to speak on the subject of social emotional and mental health (SEMH) to a group of SENCOs and professionals working with young people in schools,  As usual, I began by referring them to the DFE’s  ‘Behaviour and Mental Health in Schools’. 1 

This post is a response to my re-reading of the guidance and my concern that the standards agenda in English education may be a large omission from the guidance’s list of risk factors associated with the wider context in which school staff, children and families exist. Particularly those with low attainment, language difficulties, social communication difficulties and SEND. I wrote recently about an article 2 describing the correlation between these groups of children and exclusion. In our setting, we notice a similar link and I consider the standards agenda to be a powerful underlying casual mechanism contributing to bringing this about. My concern is that the DFE guidance makes no reference to it.

The ‘Mental Health and Behaviour in Schools’ (DFE, 2018) guidance is a very good document. It describes behaviour as a symptom of unmet need rather than a need in of itself. It takes a social ecological view of a child’s resilience and lists the risk and protective factors which may contribute to them presenting with SEMH needs. Schools can go a long way to supporting children with SEMH needs by using the guidance. For the past two years, I have been using the table below (my own summary of that in the DFE guidance) to describe the risk factors a child may face in the the domains of the child, the school, family and the community.

However, I have always had an issue with it. The term ‘academic failure’ is placed into the domain of child. I think that speaks volumes about a discourse where policy makers omit the associated risk factors in the domain of the school and those associated with wider education policy. In what sense has the child failed academically? Is it simply that a child is not operating at the academic level which is typical for a child their age? Why would that be a risk factor in a system which values the efforts of all children? Is it a perception of academic failure experienced by the child? What would lead to that perception? Is it that they have spent their entire schooling in an academic environment where they struggle to keep up and are operating at a lower level than their peers? Is it that they are part of a school system that regularly tests children and provides them and their family with written confirmation that they have not met the standard?

Dosages of these medications differ as every levitra prices body reacts different ways. There are many buyers of viagra australia cute-n-tiny.com Kamagra jelly. It also cialis soft canada improves the count of red blood cells. Whether you’re looking for CM Lodestar electric viagra generico cialis chain hoists or, any hoists from Harrington ED series, you can pick some of the best options to suit your needs. The professional disturbance I feel comes from the absence of awareness or acknowledgement from policy makers that their policy may have associated risk which may impact on the daily lived experience of both the school staff and children.

My suggestion is that the standards agenda in mainstream education has created an environment in which children who struggle to keep up and fit into that academically driven world find it difficult. I believe that this is a risk factor which adds to the likelihood of them presenting with SEMH needs and behaviour which leads to exclusion. I believe that schools should look beyond adversity within the family, SEND and community risk factors and consider how they might themselves be adding to the cumulative risk factors experienced by the child.

 

 

Jan 10

Child and adolescent mental health trajectories in relation to exclusion from school from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children – Tejerina-Arreal et al.

This post is my response the 2020 open access article by Tejarina-Arreal et al. ‘Child and adolescent mental health trajectories in relation to exclusion from school from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children‘1 which appeared in the journal Child and Adolescent Mental Health.

I argue that it is time to take the lessons of children excluded twenty years ago and adapt our education system to better allow children to cope with everyday school life and reduce their risk of exclusion. 

Tejarina-Arreal et al.’s article opened my eyes to the ongoing Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC) which recruited around fourteen and half thousand pregnant women in 1990/1991 and tracked their children through their school years and is continuing to track them in adulthood. The ALSPAC data set has been used to inform over 2000 research papers to date.

As part of the ALSPAC study, exclusion data was collected at the age of 8 and 16 years. Data on mental health was also collected at seven points in childhood using a strength and difficulties questionnaire (SDQ) at the ages of 3,6,8,9,11,13 and 16 years. This data set was used by the article authors in an attempt to ‘disentangle the effect of mental health and exclusion on each other’ (Tejarina-Arrear et al., 2020: 218) and concluded that ‘that exclusion from school has a bidirectional relationship with childhood psychiatric disorder (Tejarina-Arreal, 2020: 220). Mental health has an impact on the likelihood of exclusion and exclusion has an impact on mental health.

A Family Adversity Index (FAI) was also used to focus on factors within the first two years of each child’s life. It included 18 items about ‘age of the mother at pregnancy, housing, mother’s education, financial diffculties, partner relationship status, support and cruelty, family size and care, social network, parent affective disorder, drug’s addiction and crime’ (Tejerina-Arrear et al., 2020: 218).

As the headteacher of a alternative provision for excluded primary school children, my interest was drawn to the data relating to the 53 children (40 boys and 13 girls) in the ALSPAC data reportedly excluded by the age of 8 years old. My initial response is that as these children were born in 1991/92 and that this data represents exclusions that happened over twenty years ago. I am sceptical (as are the authors) of how the finding relate to the present day.

The findings show that the main factors associated with exclusion within this group of children excluded in around the year 2000 included ‘male gender, lower socioeconomic status, maternal psychopathology, social communication difficulties, language difficulties, antisocial activities, bullying/being bullied, lower parental engagement with education, poor relationship with teacher, low educational attainment and special educational needs’ (Paget et al., cited in Arrear, 2020: 218).

To rejuvenate your love life and regain lost youthfulness, stamina, energy levels and strength, you need to consume Shilajit check availability viagra sans prescription ES capsules. The accumulation of blood in the cheapest cialis lungs attributable to bacteria. Seventh, better cost viagra cialis erection can be attained if the dose of the medication for enhanced effects; it may lead to permanent erection problems. However, premature ejaculation india cheapest tadalafil or lack of libido can also lead to poor erection or erectile dysfunction. In excluded boys, the FAI conducted in the first two years of their life was a strong predictor of them entering school with weaker mental health than their peers. Their mental health diverged from their peers with peak divergence in the latter years at primary school.

Despite the passing of twenty years, my experience of children entering our centre following exclusion from school allies with the findings from the study. It may not be a surprise to see that the majority of excluded pupils are boys from families with low socioeconomic status. Maternal psychopathology is also a factor. In our setting, involvement in anti-social behaviour is not common but is a factor for some children. Many of the children enter our centre having been involved in bullying (commonly as the vicim).

What stands out, however, is that language difficulties, social communication difficulties, low academic attainment and SEN were related to exclusion twenty years ago. In our experience, this remains the case. There seems to be an implicit assumption that excluded children have low academic attainment due to their behaviour disrupting their education. It is possible, however that children with low academic ability find the academic environment in an English primary school difficult to cope with, this impacts on their behavioural presentation and they end up excluded. I am wary of making assumptions. I raise it as it flies in the face of the prevailing discourse. I have found it difficult to find research that considers the impact of a highly academic curriculum on a child with low academic ability. We simply have a correlation between children with low academic ability and their increased likelihood of exclusion and it is difficult to disentangle the causal direction. It is worthy of further exploration.

My belief is that is the factors contributing the exclusion are the same as twenty years ago, now is the time to respond to that. As a country, we are still excluding children from mainstream education with language or social communication difficulties. We are still excluding children with SEND needs or low academic ability. If these ‘externalising disorders often impair children’s ability to cope with school (Parker et al. cited in Arrear 2020: 218) then our education system needs to change in order that they experience an environment in which they can cope.

Tejarina-Arreal et al. finish by suggesting that school staff are trained in positive reinforcement strategies. I would echo that. I work with trainee teachers on such strategies, however it is only part of the picture. I believe that school staff also need the training and crucially the permission, to differentiate for SEMH children by helping them cope with daily school life by modulating the level of challenge they face on a moment by moment basis. This is what differentiation for SEMH pupils means.

 

 

Jan 02

Children’s moral rights and UK school exclusions – Tillson & Oxley 2020

This post is a response to John Tillson and Laura Oxley’s (2020) article ‘Children’s moral rights and UK school exclusions’1 which appeared in the journal Theory and Research in Education. 

I argue that an education system in which the only way that vulnerable children can access the support the need is through a damaging exclusion process cannot align with the rights of the child.

Note – The above article is an output from the Pedagogies of Punishment Project (funded by the Centre for Ethics & Education). An interview with the authors talking about the article is available on The Emotional Curriculum podcast (Spotify, GooglePlay, Apple Podcasts)

The United Nations (UN) Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) 2 is the most widely ratified treaty in the world and Tillson and Oxley argue that the use of exclusion in UK schools may violate the moral rights of children as described by the CRC. This is against a backdrop where ‘the UK has a school exclusion rate that is 10 times greater than that of any other country in Europe’.3

They acknowledge, however, that there may be certain circumstances where it is necessary to exclude a child ‘ in order to safeguard the weighty interests of others in the school community’ 4. They describe this form of exclusion as ‘non-punitive’ 5 and put forward a broad set of recommendations including the use of exclusion as a last resort.

Whilst agreeing with each of the recommendations in the article, I would go further and argue that there is also an alternative to ‘non-punitive’ exclusion. I believe that many children needing high levels of support may be caught up in damaging exclusion procedures which were not intended for them. I contest the term ‘non-punitive’ in relation to school exclusion and offer an example of how an alternative to this system has previously worked in practice in one local authority.

Punitive and non-punitive exclusion

Tillson and Oxley (2020) describe punitive exclusion as being where the children ‘ (a) have a negative experience and (b) have committed the perceived wrong’ 6. Punitive exclusion may be framed as a form of moral education or as a deterrent to the child (or their peers) from acting in this way in the future.

The term ‘non-punitive’ 7 is used to describe an exclusion that is used solely for the reason of preventing harm (to themselves, other children or staff). It is a balanced decision and is a last resort. Tillson and Oxley8 describe a child (Sandra) being subject to a non-punitive’ exclusion where:

1. other strategies have been exhausted,

2. the detriment is not disproportionate to the interests others are protected in,

3. is as minimal as affordable and

4. is not for its own sake but a by-product (e.g., of the effective protection of others)

Here it is argued that the exclusion may be regarded as ‘non-punitive’ even if it is perceived to be so by the excluded child. There is no aim to stigmatise or produce feelings of rejection, however,  Tillson and Oxley 9 also acknowledge that ‘students subject to exclusion are likely to experience it as a rejection from the school community’. It is easy to go round in circles debating the purpose of the exclusion and how it is viewed by each party involved. I commend the efforts of all involved to frame the exclusion positively, however it is still an exclusion within a set of exclusion protocols and procedures. What I offer below is an account of an alternative system as part of a graduated response.

An alternative response (no pun intended)

As the headteacher of an alternative provision (AP) academy, I work to support children who need something other than mainstream education. For our setting, this is usually children who present with challenging behaviour in schools. In many cases, children arrive in our setting and the school has exhausted everything within their capacity in adapting to meet the child’s needs. Exclusion has been the last resort (with no punitive intention)and it is to the frustration of everyone involved that the only way for them to access alternative provision is for them to be permanently excluded.

For a period of time in our local authority, we had an alternative approach. Where a child was still struggling in school despite all adaptations and support being exhausted, their case was taken to a panel of local authority headteachers and professionals. This panel would consider the case and if they felt that as part of a graduated response, all other avenues had been exhausted, they would recommend that the LA commission a placement in AP for the child. If families were in agreement, then the child would move into AP without the need to go through any of the exclusion processes. School staff could stay in touch with both the children and families and relationships could be maintained. Children could return to their school if that was possible or may move on to access the specialist provision they need on a permanent basis. The child (Sandra) given as an example by Tillson and Oxley above would have been able to access the support she needed without the need to be involved in the exclusion process.

In conclusion

As the headteacher of an AP academy, I welcome this consideration of exclusion against the moral rights of children. The recommendations are sound and I agree that non-punitive mechanisms which allow children with SEMH needs to access support are required. However, I believe that exclusion is so firmly embedded in the UK educational discourse that some children (including those with SEMH needs) are becoming caught up is a system that was not intended for them in order to simply get access to the support they need. My belief is that where local authorities have the intelligence and data needed to judge whether a school has exhausted all other avenues of support, they should consider commissioning places in high quality AP for children without the need to resort to exclusion. Children with SEMH are often vulnerable and need high levels of support. A system in which the only way that children can access that support is through an exclusion process which damages them further cannot align with the rights of the child.

Unicef’s useful CRC summary can be found here. 

 

 

 

When any of the hormones flow beyond certain bulk buy viagra quantities, it can turn as problematic condition. Don’t think that women have generic viagra 100mg many demands, but if you go to regular chiropractic treatment, your body will be stronger and harder at the time of a sexual intercourse. Fibroids grow in any part of cialis generic cipla the body. Availability of blood near the genitals gets the organ inability to viagra without prescription http://cute-n-tiny.com/cute-animals/mouse-in-bread/ perform well.

 

Jan 01

Good education in an age of measurement – Gert Biesta

This is my response to Gert Biesta’s paper ‘Good Education in an age of measurement’.1 It was one of the first that I was introduced to on starting my doctoral studies at MMU and it stuck with me throughout. It opened up a new way of thinking. He describes the purpose of education as qualification, socialisation and subjectification. I hadn’t thought too much about the purpose of education before. It made me start to question in whose best interests we were doing things, particularly the overt socialisation of the children in our care.

I then saw Biesta speak at MMU. His views on educational research were refreshing and again stuck with me. His view is that there is too much focus on researching the effectiveness of programmes. He feels that we need to focus more on whether the effectively delivered programme is in the best interests of the children. He thinks we should do less effectiveness research and more research about the way we discuss education. I find that I agree. We are obsessed by how effective we are and don’t stop often enough to work out if what we are now doing effectively is the right thing to do for the children and society as a whole.

Working with excluded pupils has made me question our purpose. What is our job with these children? Throughout my doctoral work, I have gradually become more comfortable with the idea of the socialisation of children. At first, it felt like a top down imposition of values onto a group of young children but I no longer believe that this is necessarily the case. We are not simply looking for compliance but autonomous beings who can navigate their social worlds, make good quality relationships and enrich their lives. We can help them with that. It is a core part of our work.
An ED sufferer can get a range of health issues such as the flu, high blood pressure, diabetes, kidney disease, neurological problems, and should be treated promptly. discount sildenafil The one thing about happiness is that even though you give it away, there is always more to give. buy cheap levitra icks.org Sphincter of Oddi Dysfunction can be biliary type when pain brand viagra cheap is in the right side or pancreatic type when pain is predominantly occurs in the left side with irradiation in the left rib cage and back. The therapist or aesthetician is typically viagra sales france a cosmetologist with a state-administered license.
 

 

Jan 01

Giving the ‘nowheres’ a ‘somewhere’ – David Goodhart

This post is my response to David Goodhart’s book: The Road to Somewhere: The Populist Revolt and the Future of Politics.1

Goodhart’s contention is that we are split into two main groups. The ‘Anywheres’ are citizens of the world, accept globalisation as a force for good and make up about 25% of the UK. The ‘Somewheres’ are the group that are more rooted in one place and they make up about 50% of the UK. The remaining 25% are the ‘InBetweeners’ who are in both camps.

It is a simple to understand and useful concept that is useful when looking at the rise of populism. Power is largely in the hands of the minority ‘Anywheres’ but they cannot hang on to power without the votes of the ‘somewheres’. The ‘Road to Somewhere’ explores these ideas. In uncertain times, human nature means that we hold on to the things that bind us together. It helps us feel secure enough to press on. ‘Anywheres’ already feel that in the globalised world. It is already their ‘somewhere’. They feel safe and secure there.

I cannot get past the plight of some of our children and families. The ones who have been excluded from their schools and by proxy, their local communities. They are the ‘Nowheres’ in this creation. They do not have the social mobility or education to be an ‘Anywhere’ and do not have the connectedness to be a ‘Somewhere’. They are nowhere.
Ajanta Pharmacy brought this medication to cheap pill viagra assist those ED patients, who are deprived of treatment just because of its assured results. These men needs little help from exercise, yoga, healthy diet and tranquil sleep. generic cialis 20mg There is hardly anything that you cute-n-tiny.com commander viagra got to have a totally flat stomach or forget about this division. Just take the time to learn about the correct dosage and its side effects. viagra on important source
In liberal societies, the need to belong seems to get forgotten. It is part of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs but we get tied up with the whole liberal concepts of freedom and autonomy that we forget how important it is to feel that we belong. We jump on to higher order needs before we address this deep seated need to part of something. For these largely white, working class boys, what is it that they belong to? They are nowhere children in an anywhere world. They live in a northern, mill town where the need to belong is seen is xenophobic at times. How can we help them with that? The liberal discourse is preoccupied with these children becoming socially mobile but they need to feel rooted somewhere before they can do that.

It builds the case for a structured approach that helps children connect to society. Maybe it is one person at a time to begin with. The skilled way that a key worker builds a relationship with an excluded child. Then their classmates and the others in the centre before building bridges with their local community and what society at large is trying to achieve.

Maybe for excluded children,it is our job to help them on the journey from ‘nowhere’ to ‘somewhere’ wherever that might be. Wherever they feel safe, nurtured, accepted and connected. Giving the ‘nowheres’ a somewhere’