Classroom Disruption: Pupil Exclusion (Hansard, 10 October 2000)

§ The Minister of State, Department for Education and Employment (Baroness Blackstone)
My Lords, the School Standards and Framework Act 1998 already gives head teachers the powers they need to maintain discipline in their schools and to exclude violent or very disruptive pupils. The Act carries forward provisions on discipline and exclusion introduced in earlier legislation by the previous government.
We have recently issued new guidance for exclusion appeal panels to indicate that the head teacher's decision to exclude should not be overridden in a range of circumstances, including where there is violence or the threat of violence.

Baroness Young
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer. Is she aware of the serious situation which exists in the teaching profession? I understand that because of the teacher shortage at least two schools are working a four-day week. Is she not worried that among the many reasons for concern is the plight of teachers who have been subjected to violent pupils: when their cases are considered everything appears to be weighted against teachers trying to do a responsible job and in favour of disruptive children? Does not that situation need a great deal of consideration and action?

§ Baroness Blackstone
My Lords, this is a difficult area and I am sure that the noble Baroness will agree that there is a difficult tightrope to walk. Of course the Government want to support teachers in what all noble Lords know is an increasingly difficult job. The Government have no intention of preventing head teachers excluding violent or potentially violent pupils. At the same time, everyone is agreed on the importance of trying to use every possible way to prevent exclusions. Many excluded children end up as damaged adults with no qualifications or ability to do a job. If we are not careful, they are also likely to end up on the streets.

§ Baroness Massey of Darwen
My Lords, does my noble friend agree that the prevention of disruption is more important than having to deal with disruption? What government initiatives are in place to ensure that pupils do not become disruptive?

§ Baroness Blackstone
My Lords, I accept the sentiment behind my noble friend's question. It is 153 important to have early intervention and prevention as a top priority and the Government have emphasised that in the guidance they have distributed to schools. There are many different forms of support, including working with parents, which head teachers and teachers take seriously. However, a common-sense answer to my noble friend's question is that really good teaching will in the first place reduce the amount of disruption and poor discipline because totally engaged pupils are less likely to be disruptive.

§ Baroness Walmsley
My Lords, does the Minister accept that, as the NUT has said, her national target for the reduction of exclusions of disruptive pupils from schools is a monitoring mechanism, not a strategy, and therefore could be seen as putting the cart before the horse? Does the noble Baroness also accept that the imposition of that target puts schools in an impossible piggy-in-the-middle position and sets them against their LEAs? On the one hand, the LEAs put pressure on schools to reduce exclusions to meet the Minister's target; on the other hand, the schools have an incentive to remove the most disruptive pupils to maintain their position in the league tables and to protect performance-related pay. What plans do the Government have to untangle this mess of conflicting pressures?

§ Baroness Blackstone
My Lords, I do not believe that it is a tangled mess of conflicting pressures. It is an attempt by the Government to ensure that there are goals as we try to reduce the number of children who are permanently excluded from school. That number rose very rapidly under the previous government, which is in no one's interest. I defend the Government's decision to have targets and goals as we try to reduce that number. That does not mean that proper guidance and support should not also be given to teachers. It is also very important that, through the learning support units that the Government are creating, we promote the possibility of removing disruptive children from the classroom without at the same time totally removing them from their schools as it is then much more difficult to reintegrate them later when their behaviour and performance have improved.

§ Lord Laming
My Lords, can the noble Baroness tell the House what progress has been made, first, to ensure that when children are excluded from school they receive proper education and, secondly, to help them to become reintegrated into mainstream education?

§ Baroness Blackstone
My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for raising a matter which is at the core of the Government's policies. When children are excluded, it is vitally important that we continue to educate them. That is what the learning support units within schools are all about. There must also be some offsite provision for those pupils who need to be excluded. The pupil referral units, which have been established for some time, are doing a relatively good job in trying to help children and parents to get back 154 into the system. I cannot give a specific statistic, but I am happy to write to the noble Lord about the number of pupils who have been reintegrated into their schools.

§ The Lord Bishop of Oxford
My Lords, does the Minister agree that there is an underlying problem? In recent years teachers have been asked to bear unfair burdens, which have been imposed on them by society as a whole as a result of the fragmenting of society and family breakdown, and those burdens have been compounded by the way in which teachers have been treated by the press. Does the Minister agree that teachers need all the support that we can give them?

§ Baroness Blackstone
My Lords, I believe that I indicated earlier to the noble Baroness, Lady Young, just how important it is to support teachers in an increasingly difficult job. For that reason, the guidance that we have issued about exclusion appeals makes it absolutely clear that where a child is persistently disruptive and violent, that child should not, on appeal, be sent back to the classroom.