Memorandum submitted by Ofsted
How to support and reinforce positive behaviour
in schools
1. Inspection evidence (section 5, section
8 and surveys such as the Improving behaviour report in
2006[229]
and The exclusion from school of children aged 4-7 in 2009)[230]
has consistently indicated that good teaching has a strong influence
on promoting good behaviour. Pupils' behaviour often varies between
different teachers, particularly in the secondary phase. Pupils
are less inclined to disrupt learning in lessons which are lively,
challenging and engaging. In schools where behaviour is positive,
there is a clear understanding that the school is a place in which
staff and pupils alike are engaged in the business of learning.
2. In schools which manage behaviour successfully,
senior leaders see this as an integral part of school improvement,
and train and support their staff accordingly. Teachers are well
supported by absolute clarity in school policy about the behaviour
that is expected of pupils and that which will not be tolerated.
The report Twelve outstanding secondary schools[231]
notes that outstanding schools manage behaviour issues very well
without instilling an oppressive atmosphere. They have incentive
and reward schemes; supportive and celebratory cultures and a
high degree of consistency in approaches and responses, regardless
of which staff member is involved.
3. The 2006 report (footnote 359) commented
that the main barriers for some schools in improving behaviour
were high staff turnover and reliance on short-term temporary
staff. In some schools, senior managers had become absorbed by
other priorities, or staff felt overwhelmed by the widespread
and deep-rooted weaknesses that had to be turned around. Similar
factors were present in many of the highest excluding primary
schools in the 2009 survey (footnote 360).
4. HMCI's annual report 2008-09 notes that
in the further education sector, not all trainee teachers are
developing the skills they need to manage more challenging behaviour
early enough in their training.
The nature and level of challenging behaviour
by pupils in schools, and the impact upon schools and their staff
5. Most behaviour causing concern in schools
is low level disruption that interferes with the pace of teaching
and learning, rather than severe anti-social behaviour. Responses
to the Tellus 3 survey[232]
indicated that children generally feel safer in school than when
they are out in their local areas.
6. In the minority of schools in which behaviour
is inadequate, learning is too often hindered by poor concentration,
persistent low-level misconduct and, sometimes, by more serious
disruption involving a minority of pupils. Some pupils lack respect
for adults and their peers and are boisterous and inconsiderate
in moving around the school site.
7. Areas of concern identified from survey
reports include:
— special educational needs or low literacy
levels not being addressed in mainstream lessons which results
in pupils becoming frustrated, misbehaving and sometimes being
excluded;
— pupils becoming disaffected because the
curriculum does not meet their needs;
— a strong relationship between weaker
teaching and increased incidents of inappropriate behaviour in
classrooms which can then have an impact on behaviour in corridors,
social areas and other classrooms; and
— some pupils' behaviour being influenced
by mental health difficulties.
8. In Ofsted's 2009 survey on the exclusion
of young children (footnote 360) almost all children responded
well to the school's expectations, but a small number found this
difficult. Schools that were excluding high numbers of children
listed characteristics of their behaviour, which included:
— persistent refusal to follow instructions;
— running away from staff;
— kicking or hitting staff;
— climbing over the school fence; and
9. Similar behaviours were also reported
by most of the schools that had not excluded any children but
these schools managed the behaviour differently. In addition,
the schools sometimes perceived a sexual element to a child's
behaviour. All the schools visited described young children who
had experienced trauma, for example a child who had come to England
from a refugee camp, having seen his mother killed. Many of the
children had experienced family breakdown. Many of the schools
perceived domestic violence as a significant influence on their
pupils' behaviour.
Approaches taken by schools and local authorities
to address challenging behaviour, including fixed-term and permanent
exclusions
Secondary schools
10. Ofsted's study of 46 secondary schools
where behaviour had been judged to be inadequate (footnote 359)
found that those that made the best progress tackled behaviour
as part of a whole-school improvement programme. They improved
teaching and learning through focused training and coaching, and
planned ways to make the curriculum more motivating. They also:
— involved students in the improvement
strategies and actively celebrated students behaving well;
— spelt out clearly to everyone what behaviour
was unacceptable and made its consequences clear;
— rigorously monitored and evaluated how
staff implemented the agreed behaviour policies and procedures;
— maintained high-profile monitoring of
behaviour throughout the school day;
— analysed incidents of unacceptable behaviour
to establish where, when and why they were happening;
— identified vulnerable students and provided
one-to-one mentoring to discuss issues and work on solutions;
and
— developed staff's skills in managing
behaviour.
Primary schools
11. The 27 schools in the 2009 survey (footnote
360) that had not excluded any young children used some of the
same strategies as the secondary schools above, and others which
were particularly relevant to young children. In particular they:
— valued each individual, evident in the
way staff spoke to children, the welcoming entrance to the school,
and the celebratory displays of children's work;
— had high expectations for all children,
which were understood by all, and helped children to meet them;
— dealt with small problems with behaviour
before they grew to be significant;
— knew each family well and worked closely
with them;
— listened to children, including seeking
the child's perspective following an incident of poor behaviour.
Sometimes, this revealed that the child had been a victim of surreptitious
teasing or bullying;
— ensured that staff provided models of
appropriate behaviour; and
— made sure that rewards were always more
prominent than sanctions.
12. Each of the schools had a wide range
of strategies to teach and encourage good behaviour, and additional
support for children who found it difficult to behave well. The
schools did not assume that young children would automatically
know or understand the behaviours they expected. What was meant
by "good behaviour" was explained clearly, sometimes
with reasons.
13. Behaviour policies were carefully structured,
with a clear emphasis on rewards. Sanctions were staged and age-appropriate
but used sparingly. Teachers sometimes adapted aspects of the
policy for their own classroom, but the core principles were still
followed highly consistently. Headteachers emphasised and demonstrated
the way in which engaging teaching and appropriate support promoted
good behaviour.
14. These schools understood clearly how
break and lunchtimes, if badly managed, could undermine children's
otherwise good behaviour. These times were therefore very well
organised, for example:
— children were taught how to play cooperative
games;
— lunchtime supervisors were well trained;
— senior leaders had a high profile; and
— there was a range of clubs and quiet
rooms.
Exclusion
15. Headteachers of the 30 high-excluding
schools in Ofsted's 2009 survey (footnote 360) gave various reasons
for deciding to exclude individual children, including:
— emphasising to the child's parents that
the behaviour was not acceptable, particularly when the school
felt that the parents were not being supportive;
— the view that the child's behaviour was
unsafe, either for the child or for other children;
— seeing exclusion as a way to trigger
support from the local authority;
— feeling under pressure from staff, or
from unions;
— the wish to bolster teachers' morale
when behaviour was poor;
— pressure from the parents of other children;
and
— pressure from governors.
16. Further analysis revealed five overarching
reasons for the high levels of exclusion:
— instability in staffing, leadership or
both;
— setting expectations on the arrival of
a new headteacher;
— as a strategy for managing an individual
pupil;
— difficulties with a particular cohort;
and
— as a reflection of the school's policy.
17. Ten local authorities with high exclusions
of primary pupils were also visited. Of these, where monitoring
and subsequent challenge and support from the local authority
had improved, exclusions from primary schools had fallen accordingly.
One ran a project focused on young children at risk of permanent
exclusion. The child attends a weekly session, as do the parents
and the teacher. Parents are also supported by weekly home visits.
Of the 140 children who had taken part in the programme at the
time of the survey, 132 were still in a mainstream school.
18. Another local authority concluded that
exclusions were high mainly because the schools lacked alternative
strategies. During a year-long project senior leaders received
training, followed by coaching, to help them to develop new ways
of working. Various professionals were involved, including the
educational psychology service. The local authority found that
a significant change took place in the understanding and attitudes
of these leaders. By the time of the survey, none of these schools
had a high rate of exclusion.
Ways of engaging parents and carers in managing
their children's challenging behaviour
19. Managing behaviour successfully involves
timely communication with families. An Ofsted survey in 2007[233]
found that clear communication of behaviour policies and procedures
gave parents and carers confidence in the school. The best schools
made sure that parents and carers were involved in developing
and updating policies. The parents and carers of pupils who had
misbehaved reported that they had more confidence in the school
when the consequences of poor behaviour were fully explained.
It was helpful if the school offered to meet them and provided
support to improve the child's behaviour in the future. Having
a named contact was important in establishing relationships. Immediate
contact with parents and carers, often using text messaging, also
worked well.
20. Many of the primary schools in the 2009
survey (footnote 360) found that there were considerable barriers
to break down before relationships could be established. Parents
were often under immense pressure created by family breakdown,
poverty, work, domestic violence or illness, and could react defensively
to a school's attempts to include them in discussions about their
children. The most effective schools saw parents as part of the
solution and not part of the problem and made every effort to
work closely with them. Parents were valued and welcomed into
school. These schools also set out clear expectations from the
beginning that parents should work with them to support their
children. Several of the schools also placed great importance
on building good relationships with grandparents when appropriate,
as this provided another layer of support for the child and the
parents.
21. The primary schools that were the most
successful in promoting good behaviour went far beyond involving
parents just when there were difficulties. They:
— established firm links before the children
started school, often visiting parents at home;
— let parents know when their children
had been successful, not just when there was a problem;
— helped parents to secure support from
other agencies, even for home-based problems;
— ran workshops to inform or help them
with aspects of their child's development; and
— provided an open and welcoming approach
so parents knew they could quickly find someone to talk to about
their child.
22. A recent Ofsted survey found that home-school
agreements provided a general framework for schools and parents
to work together. However, generally, the schools and parents
did not perceive them to be a helpful tool for developing a close
relationship between home and school and for reinforcing expectations
on both sides. Instead, success came about as a result of the
consistent efforts of schools and the positive relationships they
formed with parents and carers.
23. Some schools have used extended services
to contribute to improving behaviour. An Ofsted survey in 2006[234]
found that in settings providing extended services the range of
activities provided, the level of adult support and the involvement
of parents helped many pupils to develop a more positive approach
to their school work. Parents taking part in family learning spoke
positively about the impact these sessions had on their relationships
with their children. They were able to learn together and had
the opportunity to talk and interact in a context other than the
home.
24. In a recent survey[235]
inspectors met many young people in secure accommodation who were
more than 200 miles away from their families. Distant placements
restricted the number of visits by families and increased the
young people's unhappiness and sense of vulnerability. Distance
also limited the extent to which families could be directly involved
in planning and reviews. These young people were unlikely to have
the same level of support as those who were placed locally, on
either admission or discharge from the secure setting. This adversely
affected plans for successful transfer and reintegration into
the community.
How special educational needs can best be recognised
in schools' policies on behaviour and discipline
25. All the strategies mentioned in the
previous section "how to support and reinforce positive behaviour
in schools" are both relevant to and important for pupils
with special educational needs, and should form the basis of schools'
policies and actions. The following are particularly crucial:
— clear, consistent expectations which
are frequently reiterated;
— support alongside challenge;
— an emphasis on rewards rather than punishment;
and
— staged, clearly understood sanctions.
26. However, some pupils with special educational
needs will require support in understanding and responding to
the school's policy. Equally, some pupils, especially those with
social, emotional and behavioural difficulties or with autism
sometimes need flexibility. It is important that schools understand
the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act and how
this applies to behaviour policies and procedures, and that they
ensure that the policy makes this clear to staff. While consistency
of approach is important, this may mean making reasonable adaptations
to the policy and procedures for some pupils.
27. Inspection evidence indicates that there
is a close relationship between behavioural difficulties and unmet
learning needs. Where pupils have literacy difficulties which
are not recognised and dealt with, for example, this often results
in frustration which may be shown in disruptive behaviour. This
is the particularly the case for special educational needs. It
is essential, therefore, that schools' behaviour policies are
clearly linked to their teaching and learning and special educational
needs policies, recognising the need for good quality teaching
for all children and the identification of special educational
needs of all types. Equally, senior leaders need to consistently
reinforce these messages.
28. Where additional support is provided
for pupils with special educational needs, including those with
behavioural difficulties, it needs to be seen as part of the whole
provision for the pupil, and not in isolation. This is particularly
important when support which is provided away from the main classroom.
An Ofsted survey about learning support units,[236]
for example, emphasised that the success of additional support
for pupils was greatest when:
— strategies for improving learning were
given equal weight to those for improving pupils' behaviour and
attendance;
— teaching and curriculum programmes helped
pupils to develop their literacy skills;
— mainstream teachers were prepared well
for reintegrating pupils from the learning support unit; and
— well developed procedures were in place
for monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of the learning
support unit.
29. Staff need to have clear information
about the needs of the pupils they are teaching, and good quality
training to be able to identify and meet those needs. In-school
support, such as coaching, team teaching, mentoring and focused
support, is particularly effective in building the capacity to
provide for pupils with special educational needs who have behavioural,
emotional and social difficulties.[237]
30. The needs of pupils with social, emotional
and behavioural difficulties often cannot be met by the school
alone. Strong partnership working, for example with mental health
services and social care services as appropriate, is key to good
attainment and achievement.
31. All the above findings have been reinforced
by Ofsted's recent special educational needs and disability review
and by section 5 inspection evidence.
The efficacy of alternative provision for pupils
excluded from school because of their behaviour
32. Ofsted's evidence for this section refers
to pupil referral units.[238]
During this term (autumn 2010) Ofsted is carrying out a survey
of the effectiveness of alternative provision other than pupil
referral units. This is due for publication in the spring or summer
2011 and will explore both secondary schools' and pupils referral
units' use of alternative provision.
33. Successful teaching[239]
in pupil referral units is based on the swift assessment of pupils'
needs on arrival. The staff recognise that many will not have
been successful in mainstream schools and structure their teaching
to enable pupils to achieve academic and personal success in small
steps. Innovative approaches, interesting content and positive
relationships are also key. Good classroom management swiftly
extinguishes any emerging disruption and keeps pupils focused
on their learning, with judicious use of rewards and a focus on
individual targets.
34. In successful units, the provision is
flexible, often individualised, and effectively meets the needs
of the changing pupil populations. Pupils are well prepared to
return to mainstream settings or move on to vocational or further
education, usually within a year or less. There is an emphasis
on literacy and numeracy, as a result of which pupils leave with
much improved basic skills. These units are successful in addressing
particular behavioural and social difficulties which have previously
impeded pupils' learning. Productive links are made and maintained
with mainstream schools to support early reintegration and prevent
future exclusions. Importantly, successful pupil referral units
offer Key Stage 4 students a range of relevant accredited courses,
including GCSEs. The best units for secondary-age pupils have
a highly flexible curriculum, enabling those who are placed there
for only a short time to gain accreditation.
35. In units in which teaching and learning
are inadequate, pupils' opportunities and prospects for their
future economic well-being are limited. Three of the pupil referral
units inspected in 2008-09 were providing too few teaching hours
each week, therefore not meeting requirements. Surveys by Ofsted
have reported that pupil referral units frequently do not receive
information about the pupils that is adequate or timely enough
to support them in starting suitably planned learning programmes.[240]
Links between attendance and behaviour in schools
36. As with behaviour, there are strong
links between above average or high attendance and good teaching.
Schools where attendance is high also tend to have an engaging
curriculum which provides pupils, including those whose behaviour
is challenging, with a wide range of exciting extra-curricular
opportunities. Excellent relationships between staff and pupils
are a key feature of schools, at all phases, where attendance
is high.
37. Attendance is lower in pupil referral
units than in other settings. However, the best units considerably
improve the previously low attendance of their pupils. They carefully
assess each pupil's prior attainment and then tailor lessons to
meet their needs, which helps pupils to experience success and
feel motivated to attend. They set challenging targets for attendance
and monitor progress towards these assiduously. Consistent systems
reward good attendance, and procedure for first-day contact when
a pupil is absent are robust. Partnerships with parents, carers,
education welfare officers, social work teams, and other supporting
agencies are effective. Occasionally, attendance is low because
too many pupils are excluded or placed on part-time timetables
because the unit is unable to manage their behaviour.
The Government's proposals regarding teachers'
powers to search pupils, removal of the requirement for written
notice of detentions outside school hours, and the extent of teachers'
disciplinary powers, as announced by the Department on 7 July
38. In schools which have clear expectations
of staff and pupils, and which consistently communicate and implement
those expectations, the vast majority of pupils will respond.
Some pupils will need additional support to do so. The use of
the power to search should be used minimally, and any extension
would also need to be used with caution. Ofsted's report Twelve
outstanding secondary schools[241]
notes that outstanding schools manage behaviour issues very well
without instilling an oppressive atmosphere, something which could
be created by the over-use of such powers.
39. Ofsted has no evidence to suggest that
schools need to have the power to give pupils detentions without
giving written notice of 24 hours to their parents. Communication
with parents is very important. As noted in the section on engaging
parents and carers, timely and appropriate communication with
parents is important. Parents need to know where their children
are after school and to take responsibility for them. Schools
would need to approach its use with care.
40. The guidance on teachers' disciplinary
powers[242]
appears to be clear and Ofsted has no evidence to suggest that
schools do not understand these powers or that they need to be
extended. It may be useful to schools to have these reiterated
in succinct guidance.
October 2010
Annex A
DATA
41. HMCI's annual report 2008-09 indicated
that in 95% of primary and 81% of secondary schools, pupils' behaviour
is good or outstanding. For secondary schools, this represents
an improvement of nine percentage points compared to the previous
academic year. Behaviour was judged to be inadequate in less than
0.5% of schools overall, although in 1% of secondary schools,
2% of pupil referral units and 1% of special schools.
42. The new section 5 inspection framework
was introduced in September 2009. In the autumn and spring terms
3,990 schools were inspected, of which 86% were judged to have
good or better behaviour and only 1% found to be inadequate. There
is variation of behaviour across phases with nursery schools and
special schools having the highest proportions of outstanding
judgements (70% and 44% respectively) and secondary schools and
pupil referral units having the highest proportions of satisfactory
(32% and 21% respectively) and inadequate (3%) judgements. Overall,
these data show a less favourable picture than the full 2008-09
figures. However, these statistics are likely to have been affected
by the new inspection framework, and skewed by the new proportionate
inspection schedule, under which good or outstanding schools are
being inspected less often than those previously judged to be
satisfactory.
229 Improving Behaviour report 2006 Back
230
Exclusion of children aged 4-7 report (2009) Back
231
12 outstanding secondary schools-excelling against the odds, Ofsted
2009 Back
232
TellUs3 National Report Back
233
Parents, carers and schools, Ofsted 2007 Back
234
Extended services in schools and children's centres, Ofsted 2006 Back
235
Admission and discharge from secure accommodation, Ofsted 2010 Back
236
Evaluation of the impact of learning support units, Ofsted 2006 Back
237
Inclusion: does it matter where pupils are taught? Ofsted 2006 Back
238
Evidence cited in Ofsted Annual Report 2008-09 Back
239
The proportion of good and outstanding teaching and learning in
pupil referral units inspected was higher at 72% in 2008-09 than
in 2007-08 when it was 64%369. Comparisons should be made with
care, however, given the relatively small number of units inspected.
The proportion of units in which teaching and learning was inadequate
was slightly higher than that for mainstream schools. Back
240
Successful pupil referral units, Ofsted 2007, Day 6 of exclusion,
Ofsted 2009 Back
241
12 outstanding secondary schools-excelling against the odds, Ofsted
2009 Back
242
Summarised in "School discipline, your powers and rights
as a teacher", DCSF and NASUWT 2009 Back
| 
