ALT0033

Written Evidence submitted by Teens and Toddlers

“I used to go to school in North London before I got excluded. My attendance was really low. There were days when I would bunk off school and go to a coffee shop. I was suffering from depression and it was at a stage of my life where I didn’t want to be anywhere apart from my bedroom. Things changed after I did Teens and Toddlers.”

Farah*(18)

College student from North London and a Teens and Toddlers graduate

*A pseudonym has been used to protect Farah’s identity.

Executive summary

1.          Across England there are currently hundreds of thousands of young people like Farah* excluded from school on a temporary or permanent basis who end up in some form of alternative provision (AP). Many will be students who are disadvantaged or vulnerable and struggling with emotional wellbeing issues.  Young people who are being failed by a system that inadvertently thwarts their potential and fuels a downward spiral of underachievement.

2.          While a small proportion of excluded pupils who struggle academically are able to get back on track with their education in AP, there are many who end up falling by the wayside as a result of a system that cannot always provide learning support that best meets their specific needs.  Only one in a hundred pupils permanently excluded from school goes on to attain five good GCSEs, which is often used as a benchmark for academic success[i].

3.          Reengaging young people at risk of being excluded, leaving school without any qualifications, or those who are disengaged and struggle with low self-esteem is at the heart of the work of Teens and Toddlers. We have been working with pupils at risk of exclusion for 16 years. We are the only national youth organisation in England empowering young people at risk of being excluded (as well as those who have been excluded) by pairing them as mentors to children in nurseries. We do this as a part of a life skills and school engagement programme that is the only educational project of its kind in the country. A programme that has to date reached more than 9,000 secondary school young people (aged 13 to 18) since 2001.

4.          More than 90% of young people who graduated from our programme in 2015-16 were reported[ii] to be in education, training or employment. More than 80% attained an accredited qualification. Aside from young people’s achievements on our project, our programme is one of only two in the UK to have successfully delivered[iii] positive outcomes for social impact bonds commissioned by the Department for Work and Pensions.

5.          The results and effectiveness of our programme have also been championed by Project Oracle, a London-based hub for gathering evidence on projects and interventions making a positive difference to the lives of young people.

6.          Pupil reengagement and school inclusion underpins the work we do with young people in secondary schools, virtual schools, and schools for students with special education needs and disabilities (SEND) as well as pupil referral units (PRUs).  In addition, our programme targets pupils in areas with higher than average rates of youth unemployment, child poverty and permanent and fixed-term school exclusions. London and the South East, the North West and the West Midlands are the regions we currently work in.

Our view on alternative provision and school exclusion

7.          While we recognise the irrefutable necessity of high quality alternative provision for young people with complex needs, or permanent exclusion in cases where the severity of the situation warrants this measure, we strongly oppose the use of exclusion as an instrument for schools to remove underperforming pupils.

8.          From what we hear from teachers we work with, from the young people we reach, and from research[iv] conducted by education experts, we know investing in early intervention that is schools-based and designed to help young people remain in mainstream education, can be a very effective way of addressing disengagement and the underlying issues that may lead to pupils being excluded.

9.          At a time when approximately 35 school pupils –equivalent to an entire classroom of children – are getting expelled[v] from England’s state schools every day, the need for a meticulous and comprehensive review of alternative provision has never been greater[vi].

10.     At present there are more excluded school pupils and other school-aged young people in alternative provision (AP) than there are people living in the city of Winchester. According to Charlie Taylor's review of alternative provision[vii], commissioned by the Department for Education (DfE), there were 37,070 pupils in AP in 2012[viii]. Today approximately 48,000 young people are in some form of alternative provision representing a mammoth 30% rise over a five-year period.

11.     We welcome the Education Select Committee’s timely inquiry into alternative provision and the outcomes for young people accessing services delivered by providers within this sector.

12.     In our evidence outlined in this paper, we explain in detail why we oppose the exclusion of students who underperform or struggle to engage with their education, and why we believe schools-based early intervention, which we describe as alternative inclusion, is the answer.

Why Teens and Toddlers opposes school exclusion

13.     Scores of permanently and temporarily excluded school pupils are being educated in unregulated alternative provision run by untrained and unqualified staff.  Many will be attending private projects operating with little or no form of official scrutiny by schools inspectors. This is according to a report published[ix] by the IPPR in October this year. Research conducted by various experts over the past decade shows the knock-on effects of school exclusion on the life chances of young people can be devastating and long-term.

14.     Outcomes for the vast majority of young people who have been expelled from school have been diabolical in recent years. The cost to their communities and wider society is also enormous with permanent exclusions feeding a pipeline into our prison systems, our mental healthcare systems and youth unemployment. Statistics outlined below taken from a report published by the IPPR paint a very grim picture indeed.

1. A large number may end up in the prison system, it is estimated[x] that 63% of all prisoners in England and Wales were excluded from school.

2. A study conducted by University of Exeter revealed there is a bi-directional link between psychological distress in children and school exclusion.

3. The cost of school exclusion to the public purse is staggering with research revealing that a group of permanently excluded pupils are likely to cost the state around £2.1bn[xi] in education, health, benefits and criminal justice costs.

15.     These outcomes show that school exclusion has become one of the largest barriers to social mobility for young people who are disadvantaged or vulnerable and more likely to be excluded than their peers. Another challenge emerging as a growing concern within the education sector is the issue of some schools removing pupils who underachieve academically in order to improve their standing in exam result league tables. In an inspection update published in March this year, Sean Harford (the National Education Director of Ofsted) highlighted evidence[xii] that revealed underachieving pupils were being moved into alternative provision or other schools with places on their rolls.

16.     This practice, which Ofsted described as off-rolling, is reported to have led to the exclusion or managed moves of nearly 20,000 pupils[xiii]. School exclusion and off-rolling struggling pupils into alternative provision is fuelling a sequence of failure damaging the prospects of some of the most disadvantaged young people in our society. It is for these reasons, and the alarming outcomes for young people highlighted above, that Teens and Toddlers opposes the permanent exclusion of pupils who underachieve academically unless the gravity of their case justifies this decision. A strong example of this is an incident in Cambridge[xiv] in which an 11-year-old boy was expelled from a school after threatening two 12-year-old schoolgirls with a knife and attempting to set the hair of one of the girls alight.

Potential outcomes and destinations for permanently excluded secondary school pupils

17.     For 16 years Teens and Toddlers has worked with young people in disadvantaged areas. We reach pupils who are disengaged at school, struggling with their education, or at high risk of being excluded.  Some of the boroughs we work in include social mobility colds spots and disadvantaged areas affected by higher than average rates of child poverty. We currently work in four of the 10 boroughs with the highest rates of permanent exclusion in England.

Data sources:

Social Mobility Index (January 2016 - Social Mobility Commission)

Permanent and fixed-period exclusions in England (July 2017 - Department for Education)

Demographics of the young people we reach

18.     Our participants include pupils in care, young carers, students with disabilities or learning difficulties, and young migrants. Excluded school students are also represented among the cohort of young people we reach every year, which currently averages approximately 1,200. Many students who take part in our programme (which runs one afternoon a week for 18 weeks twice a year) match the characteristics of pupils who are more likely to be excluded from school. According to DFE statistics young people within these demographics are over represented in the current population of England’s excluded school pupils.

Data source: Permanent and Fixed Period Exclusions in England 2015 to 2016 (Department for Education) https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/645075/SFR35_2017_text.pdf

19.     We also work with pupils who self-exclude and become severely withdrawn or disengaged at school as a result of low self-esteem or because they may be victims of bullying.

20.     Our goal, when working with young people who are struggling at school, underperforming academically, or are on the verge of being excluded for low-level behavioural issues, is to help them realise their potential and to reengage with their education.

21.     Young people who take part in our programme become role models to under-fives in nurseries whilst receiving coaching that covers a range of essential life skills topics. Participants work towards an NCFE accredited Level 1 Award in Interpersonal Skills[xx].

22.     Being a role model to a young child in a nursery and mentoring them and supporting them with activities (such as counting, playing games and reading stories) is an essential part of this process. Throughout this experience we encourage young people to observe and examine the behaviour and engagement of their young mentees, whilst simultaneously exploring their own behaviour and engagement at school and other areas of their lives.

23.     To date more than 80% of the young people we have reached since 2001 received a national qualification in Interpersonal Skills.  Sixty-two per cent of teachers representing more than 60 schools we worked with in the past academic year believe that students who completed our programme are less likely to be excluded.

Teens and Toddlers Impact

2015-16

*A pseudonym has been used to protect Sabina’s real identity.

Alternative provision – outcomes and financial challenges within the sector   

24.       While Ofsted’s most recent alternative provision report[xxi] revealed a growing number of schools were working in partnership to commission quality AP, one of the biggest challenges within the sector are the instances when sub-standard services are delivered with minimal external regulation yielding poor results at an exorbitant cost.

25.       In the first instance there is the personal cost to many young people in terms of their personal and academic results, with only one per cent of pupils in alternative provision attaining five good GCSEs. Then there is the personal cost to families of young people who fear their child may have been unlawfully expelled from school (an issue that was the subject of a special report[xxii] into illegal school exclusions produced by the Communities Empowerment Network)

26.       There is also the financial cost to the public purse and schools themselves, with some spending £12,000 to £18,000[xxiii] on average for a placement in a PRU for one pupil for one academic year. The population of pupils in alternative provision has risen from 30,070[xxiv] in 2012 to 48,000 in 2017.  Based on the average £12,000 spend on a PRU placement for one pupil this increase in young people now being sent to AP works out as an extra £176million per annum.

27.       However this costing is probably the tip of the iceberg on alternative provision spending when the findings of past investigations into this issue are taken into consideration. An investigation into alternative free schools conducted by The Guardian in 2015 is one example. DfE data[xxv] obtained by The Guardian[xxvi] revealed that five “alternative provision” free schools received in excess of £100,000 per pupil in 2013-14, with the two highest-funded given an allocation of £430,000 per pupil.

28.       If school exclusion numbers continue to spiral at their current rate the money spent on alternative provision, some of which goes unregulated and produces poor outcomes for young people, is likely to increase considerably in the next academic year. Figures[xxvii] in the table below show the number of permanent and temporary school exclusions has risen by 10.5% since 2011-12. It also shows there are currently more individuals who have been excluded from schools in England than people living in Nottingham.

Pupils in alternative provision in 2011 and 2017 

Breakdown of pupils in PRUs, alternative provision academies and free schools and ‘other’ alternative provision settings in 2017

Total: 48,033

Data source: Schools, pupils and their characteristics SFR (January 2016)

Our call for action on school exclusion and alternative inclusion

29.     The surge in school exclusions and the number of pupils entering alternative provision presents a serious challenge to individuals and groups committed to ensuring every young person is given the best possible chance to succeed at school. This challenge requires an urgent rethink of the way alternative provision is utilised. It also requires a shift in the way the sector addresses school exclusions and the complex needs of young people at risk of being excluded.

30.     This is why we are calling for investment in and support for alternative inclusion. By this we mean investing in schools-based interventions (quality-assured and approved by schools and local authorities) that would enable young people at risk of being excluded to remain within a mainstream school setting. We know from our work in partnership with schools and local authorities who commission our programme that an alternative inclusion approach could help address some of the long-term, detrimental costs of permanent exclusion.

31.     We know some progress has been made in the sector since Ofsted’s 2012[xxviii] review of alternative provision. Back then inspectors reported that very few schools that took part in their study “were systematically tracking the impact of alternative provision on pupils’ personal development and wellbeing”.

32.     Since the publication of Ofsted’s report in 2014 (updated in 2016) [xxix] school inspectors found a greater share of schools were working together to robustly assess the quality of the provision they accessed and its impact on their students.  We want to see policymakers build on this progress by supporting all schools to adopt a more rigorous approach in quality assuring the provision procured for students.

33.     In addition, we also want to see provision aimed at pupils, whose behaviour warrants additional support, positioned as a key part of the local education system. This is a viewpoint shared by Charlie Taylor (a child behavioural expert and former head teacher). During his review[xxx] Taylor found that the most efficient form of AP was positioned “as an integral part of the wider local education system and not seen as something peripheral, but rather as another option available to local groups of schools who owned and shaped AP as a resource that was available to support them to help their most challenging pupils.”

34.     In this review Taylor also argued that:

1. DfE and Ofsted should consider setting up a more structured approach to monitoring alternative provision as part of Ofsted’s survey programme.

2. Ofsted should ensure that any concerns identified by inspectors regarding alternative provision are fed into the risk assessment for schools.

35.     We believe these measures would go a long way in helping AP providers, schools and local authorities to deliver high quality provision for young people at high risk of being excluded or underachieving. 

36.     In addition to these steps we would also like to see implementation of the following procedures:

1. Increased inspection of alternative provision sites led by local authority officials, schools and (and if possible) Ofsted inspectors.

2. All avenues for alternative inclusion measures explored before a final decision is made to exclude a pupil from school.

3. Governing bodies responsible for school exclusion decisions to ensure they adhere to Articles 6 and 13 of the Human Rights Act [xxxi]by guaranteeing the right to a fair hearing and an effective remedy for all parties involved.

4. The introduction of a DfE permanent exclusion pro forma that schools would be required to complete and evidence before a permanent exclusion can take place. 

5. School provision of evidence of the support they have offered pupils contending with behavioural, learning, wellbeing and behavioural challenges (particularly young people who are disadvantaged or vulnerable).

37.      Case studies - Examples of in-school alternative provision

37.1    Across the country head teachers in areas with high rates of fixed-term and permanent exclusions are coming up with dynamic, innovative approaches to school exclusion and schools-based alternative provision. These schools include Gloucester Academy in Gloucestershire and Harrop Fold School in Salford. 

38.      What school inclusion, pastoral care staff and local authorities say about Teens and Toddlers

38.1    “One of the students had much less truancy episodes after Teens and Toddlers and I was pleased with her progress. Another had improved his social skills and I could see his confidence had grown.”

Teacher, Oasis Academy, Oldham

38.2    “Our school has been working in partnership with Teens and Toddlers since 2007. During this time we have valued the positive impact we have seen with the students involved in the programme. For some students this has been the first time they have really stuck with something and seen it through to the end. We are all very proud of our students.”

Head of Pastoral Care, Egerton Park School, Tameside

38.3    “The Teens and Toddlers programme has certainly helped us with our NEET reduction agenda. The young people we reached had their own kind of perspectives on their futures and aspirations. When we evaluated the programme’s impact we found young people’s hopes for the future had greatly improved. In addition, our NEET figures on the borough have been going down steadily over the past four to five years.

Our local mayor, who was previously the Council’s lead member for children and young people, is really supportive of the programme. Even though we have been through periods of austerity we are keen to keep commissioning Teens and Toddlers projects. What we like most about our partnership with the charity is that our work is targeted and it allows us to provide other targeted services to young people covering emotional and mental health issues.”

38.4    Commissioning Manager, Halton Council