SEN0490
Written evidence submitted by Dr Stephanie King
I am Dr Stephanie King, based at the University of Derby. I recently completed a PhD at Nottingham Trent University which researched young people’s experiences of school exclusion. The title of the PhD is “You don’t go here anymore”: an exploration of school exclusion and it is available online at https://irep.ntu.ac.uk/id/eprint/52656/.
Prior to this, I was a teacher for several years in a pupil referral unit (PRU) / special school setting and am a qualified SENDCo with an MA in SEN and Inclusion. I am responding to this call as I have a passion for advocating for marginalised young people, practical experience in the field and an academic understanding of the school system.
In my research, I interviewed 14 young people who had been formally or functionally excluded from school and who were all educated solely in alternative provision (AP). I asked them about school and being excluded from school as well as about what support had helped them.
As is consistent with the national school exclusion statistics, the young people in this study tended to be from areas of disadvantage and entitled to free school meals, were identified as having SEND and several were classified as looked after children or had social care involvement. Due to the location of the fieldwork setting, these young people did not reflect the ethnic diversity often typical of school excluded young people and were mostly white British males.
Conclusion | Recommendation |
Young people with SEMH often feel unwelcome at school.
| Positive, respectful relationships. A flexible approach that links to the wider community. |
Many young people struggle to have their needs recognised or supported and so are set on a ‘behaviour’ rather than a ‘support’ pathway, leading to school exclusion.
| Inclusion needs to be built in by design, not an add-on when a young person is identified as struggling. Better understanding of SEMH. Quicker and easier access to support services. |
Often, support is linked to age-groups and can be lost at transition points.
| More flexibility in support packages attached to need rather than age. Better sharing of information and recognition of the need for continuity at transition points. |
Some young people with SEND, especially those from disadvantaged communities, have low expectations of school. Wider social inequalities related to poverty and marginalised identities can lead to disengagement, hostility to school and removal via disciplinary sanctions. | Addressing wider social inequalities is part of the job of improving inclusion. Positive engagement between schools and the communities they serve. |
School pressures to perform against measurable outcomes impacts opportunities for inclusion. | Realign how schools are valued to place more emphasis on relationships and inclusion. |
School seen as only about getting jobs. | School for exploration, discovery and personal growth. |
Most of the young people in my study were identified as having SEND, generally in the category of social, emotional and mental health needs (SEMH), with several having diagnoses of ADHD and Autism. They tended to find formal learning, in particular literacy-based tasks, difficult and some had previously had in-class support for this. Several of these young people had experienced early traumatic events such as bereavement and adverse family conditions. It is common for young people with this profile to be categorised as having SEMH and this is the group within the SEND areas of need that are most at risk of exclusion from school.
Most of the young people in this study were having difficulties in primary school and then did not make positive transitions to secondary. For some, moving between schools meant a loss of the support that had been in place. This sometimes also happened as they changed year groups or reached an age where they could no longer access support that they valued, which was particularly difficult for those who had suffered loss in the family.
This suggests that offering support that runs as needed rather than to age limits or time restrictions may be helpful in avoiding unnecessary disruption. It also demonstrates that whilst there is liaison between schools, more could be done to ensure that information and support are not lost at transition points.
Several of the young people in this study talked about having difficulties in having their SEND recognised. Some waited years for assessment or diagnosis. This often resulted in the young people being sanctioned for their behaviour before their needs had been fully acknowledged or supported. Some also talked about the burden on their parents (usually mums) who had to navigate the SEND system and advocate for their child over prolonged periods of time.
Given the context of social disadvantage and family adversity, this additional burden falls heavier on those young people from already marginalised groups. Some of the young people had had prolonged periods away from school and they talked about the financial implications of this as parents had to reduce their working hours.
To address this, earlier and more supported pathways to identify SEND would have made a difference to these young people. Recognition of the financial costs of school exclusion could offer support to families.
Often SEND support is individualised whereas changes to school systems and processes could make the classroom more inclusive without assessments or diagnoses. This would include making sound relationships with the young people and their families.
The need for schools to compete in a ‘market’ can put increased pressure on everyone in the school system to perform in ways that are measured and comparable. Valuing the work of schools in creating a safe and supportive environment, especially for those schools whose intake are from areas of disadvantage would help to shift the focus from only outcomes performance and therefore help to build-in rather than add-on inclusion. This means not waiting until a young person presents challenges and then making changes for them, but anticipating what a more diverse and inclusive classroom could be like and planning this in from the start. Working in a trauma-informed way, (see for example Bombèr, 2020) and taking a whole school approach as Warin (2017) suggests would help to realign school priorities to be inclusion-first in their approach. Making inclusion a part of daily practice that involves the whole school community, such as for example at Carr Manor School (2024) where all staff and students are members of a supportive coaching circle would help to address the need for a consistent care with trusted adults and peers that often those identified as having SEMH are especially in need of.
The young people in this study had experienced a mismatch between their own home life, communities and values and those at school, which created a barrier to learning or feeling wanted or safe in school. These young people tended to accept the idea that the purpose of school is getting jobs in the future, which reinforced for them that they did not belong as they did not plan to stay in education or aim for professional jobs that required qualifications. They planned to take manual jobs in familiar areas that had low entry requirements and so did not see school as necessary for their own ambitions. As schools try to promote what is seen as aspirational ideas of progression, they widen the gap between these young people and school. An education that is based on discovery, liberation and flourishing would avoid some of these barriers.
Whilst some had experienced long waits for provision, unsuitable or unreliable and inconsistent provision, most were positive about AP in contrast with schools. This was primarily due to the positive relationships with staff, the flexibility offered in AP in terms of choices of activities, a greater recognition of when they were having good or bad days, what they felt capable of managing, more opportunities for active learning and getting out of the classroom and a different approach to qualifications and academic work. They appreciated the low-pressure environment of AP where their wellbeing and engagement were seen to be prioritised over grades and task completion. This environment tended to help them to feel more confident about their ability to attend and engage, although it could also reinforce their belief that they did not belong in school or that formal education was not for them.
Although the staff in AP are skilled and committed to working with school-excluded young people, there is no specialist equipment, skills or knowledge in AP that could not be replicated in mainstream schools. Several of the young people expressed a preference for smaller groups, allowing them to have a closer relationship with staff and to have more attention and support with their work. Flexibility and choice allowed the young people to feel that they had opted in to learning and that they could retain some control over what happened to them. Prioritising relationships and support over curriculum and outcomes helped the AP staff to create the sense of belonging that helped these young people to attend and engage in education. Relieving the pressure on schools to demonstrate ‘levels of progress’ in favour of more relational approaches that acknowledge that people learn at different paces and through different approaches, when they feel emotionally safe would allow schools to recreate some of the benefits of AP. This would need to be appropriately resourced to allow smaller groups and more options. Whilst much AP achieves these outcomes for young people, the segregation into specialist units and alternative provision reinforces a sense of othering that many of these young people experienced in school. Helping schools to become more inclusive in the ways suggested would remove the need for the rising number of school exclusions and increasing dependence on the patchy and less-regulated AP sector.
In recent years, there has been a de-professionalisation of teachers, who are expected to perform to ever higher standards with ever higher levels of scrutiny. This system does not encourage teachers to use their professional judgement, to adapt their teaching to what they assess as the needs of their class or to be creative in their approach. Teachers need to have a better understanding of the emotional aspects of learning, how to support students with SEND and more generally how to create inclusive classrooms. Reinstating a belief in teachers as education professionals and creating supportive communities of practice helps to foster the confidence and skills base needed to be more adaptive and open to new ways of working. Giving teachers and school leaders permission to do this by moving away from competitive, marketplace models of school would allow more pedagogical innovation.
Finally, the difficulties faced by the young people in this study were compounded by the impact of poverty, lack of access to services or meaningful work within their communities. To address the barriers they face in education, we need also to consider how these broader social issues can be addressed. Supporting families and communities to access the help that they need, to feel valued and connected not ‘left behind’ but without an assumption of deficit or blame would also help young people identified as having SEND, especially SEMH and those attending AP to be brought back in to mainstream schooling.
January 2025
BOMBÈR, L. M. 2020. Know me to teach me. Differentiated discipline for those recovering from adverse childhood experiences, Derbyshire, Worth Publishing.
CARR MANOR COMMUNITY SCHOOL. 2024. https://carrmanor.org.uk/coaching/
KING, S. 2024. "You don't go here anymore": an exploration of school exclusion. Available at https://irep.ntu.ac.uk/id/eprint/52656/.
WARIN, J. 2017. Creating a whole school ethos of care. Emotional and behavioural difficulties, 22, 188-199.
6