House of Commons - Education Committee

Behaviour and Discipline in Schools - Education Committee Contents

Memorandum submitted by Department for Education

INTRODUCTION

1. For many teachers, dealing with poor behaviour will be a significant challenge in their career. For many pupils, their education will be impeded because teaching is disrupted by the behaviour of others. For some pupils, their own behaviour will lead to repeated fixed period or permanent exclusions and will seriously hinder their chances of becoming successful individuals contributing to society.

2. The Coalition Government wants to give teachers the confidence to exercise authority to promote and ensure good behaviour in the classroom. We recognise that heads and teachers want to improve behaviour and teach in a calm, orderly environment but are too often constrained by regulations which inhibit them from maintaining order. That is why our first announcement on behaviour on 7 July focussed on clarifying and strengthening teachers' powers to maintain order and instil discipline.

3. We have more to do on this, including measures to tackle bullying, head teachers' powers to exclude disruptive pupils, how teachers are trained in behaviour management and the reform of alternative provision for excluded pupils. We will set out our plans in greater detail in a Schools White Paper to be published later this year and legislate where necessary in the next Education Bill. We therefore welcome the Select Committee Inquiry and hope that its deliberations and recommendations can inform the Government's policy.

POLICY CONTEXT

4. We believe that the two essential prerequisites for successful educational attainment are effective teaching of literacy and high standards of behaviour. A higher proportion of children from deprived backgrounds have poorer literacy skills from an early age than those of their peers, and this deficit goes on to affect their later educational outcomes.[117] A higher proportion of children from poor backgrounds also have greater problems with their behaviour. One study[118] found that a child of parents in the lowest socio economic groups is around eight percentage points more likely to have behavioural problems than a child with parents in the highest group. Such children are also more likely to attend a school with behaviour problems. For example, data shows that pupils receiving free school meals (FSM) are more likely than other pupils to have been excluded for a fixed-period or permanently from school and the rate of fixed period exclusions is related to the level of deprivation of the school.[119] Our Pupil Premium will direct additional funds to schools to support pupils from poorer backgrounds in ways that schools judge to be best, giving them flexibility to help those pupils who most need it.

5. Tackling absenteeism in schools is also a crucial part of the Government's commitment to increasing social mobility and to ensuring every child can meet their potential. There is a demonstrable link between attendance and attainment with persistently absent pupils being around 6½ times less likely to achieve 5 A*-C grades at GCSE than those who attend school regularly.[120]

6. The recent fall in overall absence and persistent absence rates are welcome, but the overall level of absenteeism in schools is still too high. We need to do more to tackle the underlying factors that result in thousands of children being absent from school each day. Schools need to continue to be strict about authorising absence only when it is necessary, but need also to tackle unauthorised absence—which is still rising in primary schools.

7. Pupils identified as having special educational needs (with or without a statement) are more than eight times more likely to be permanently excluded than those pupils with no special educational needs (SEN). In 2008-09, 24 in every 10,000 pupils with statements of SEN and 30 in every 10,000 pupils with SEN without statements were permanently excluded from school. This compares with three in every 10,000 pupils with no SEN. Pupils with SEN are also more likely to receive a fixed period exclusion. In 2008-09, 810 in every 10,000 pupils with statements of SEN and 700 in every 10,000 pupils with SEN without statements received one or more fixed period exclusions. This compares with 140 in every 10,000 pupils with no SEN.[121] Pupils with SEN have consistently been more likely to be excluded from school than their peers; we hope that the Committee's inquiry will focus on the reasons why this is the case.

8. The recent Ofsted review of SEN and disability[122] highlighted that schools classify a wide range of pupils as having SEN, from those whose needs could be met through good quality teaching to those with complex and severe needs requiring significant additional support. Correct identification and appropriate provision for pupils with SEN is a priority for this Government and the Green Paper on SEN, recently announced by the Minister of State for Children, will look at this area in detail. The Government wants to look at how we can improve the services these vulnerable children, including those with behavioural, emotional and social difficulties (BESD), and their families, receive. The system needs to be more transparent for parents with more choice and involvement in the decision-making process.

BEHAVIOUR IN SCHOOLS TODAY

9. It is true that many schools have very good behaviour and that most children will behave well if they are in a school where there is a positive ethos and a strong behaviour policy that is communicated to staff, parents and pupils and implemented consistently at all levels. However a closer analysis shows that there remain substantial problems in too many schools. A significant minority of pupils are causing disruption which impedes teachers' ability to teach and other pupils' opportunities to learn. As at December 2009, while 78.6% of state-funded secondary schools were judged as "Good" or "Outstanding" for standards of behaviour at their most recent Ofsted inspection, there were still 20.2% that were judged to be only "Satisfactory" and 1.1% judged to be "Inadequate".[123] This equates to 677 secondary schools (21.3%) where behaviour was only satisfactory or inadequate.

10. In 2008-09[124] there were:

125

— 307,840 fixed period exclusions from state funded secondary schools. There were 39,510 fixed period exclusions from primary schools and 15,930 fixed period exclusions from special schools;

— 17,930 pupil exclusions for violence against an adult in primary, secondary and special schools, equating to approximately 11% of permanent exclusions and 5% of fixed period exclusions; and

— a further 79,060 exclusions for threatening behaviour or verbal abuse against an adult (representing 11% of permanent exclusions and 22% of fixed period exclusions).

11. In 2008-09, the average number of fixed period exclusions per enrolment was 1.9 exclusions. Of the 194,700 pupil enrolments with a fixed period exclusion, 119,420 pupils were excluded once (61%), 36,750 pupils were excluded twice (19%) and 38,540 pupils were excluded three or more times (20%).

12. The most common reason for exclusion was persistent disruptive behaviour (30% of all permanent and 23% of fixed period exclusions).

13. The latest TellUS survey shows that 28.8% of children say they have been bullied in the last year and almost half of children have experienced bullying at some point whilst at school.[126]

14. There is evidence to suggest that different groups experience bullying more than others. There is anecdotal evidence from pupils and teachers to suggest that homophobic bullying continues to be a problem in schools. Due to the nature of homophobic bullying accurate data on its prevalence in schools is limited. However a 2007 survey of 1,145 pupils who identified as lesbian, gay or bisexual conducted by Stonewall, reported that 65% of young lesbian, gay and bisexual pupils have experienced direct bullying.[127] A 2003 study, which compared survey responses from 1,200 lesbian, gay and bisexual people with those from 1,200 heterosexual people, indicated that 51% of homosexual men experienced bullying at school compared to 47% of heterosexual men and 30% of homosexual women experienced bullying at school compared to 20% of heterosexual women.[128]

15. The Longitudinal Survey of Young People in England (LSYPE)[129] showed that young people with a disability were more likely than those without a disability to be called names, to be subject to social exclusion, to have their money and possessions taken, to be threatened with violence and to be victims of actual violence.

16. There is violence and assault in our schools. NASUWT have estimated that there is one assault (verbal or physical) every seven minutes.[130] A recent poll by the Association of Teachers and Lecturers (ATL) found that 38.6% of respondents had dealt with physical aggression that academic year.[131] Most reported incidents (87%) involved violence towards another pupil, more than a quarter involved violence against the respondent, with 44% of incidents involving another teacher or a member of support staff (more than one answer could be given).

17. There is a growing trend to bully and harass teachers by making false allegations against them. A 2009 survey[132] of 1,155 ATL members found that a quarter of school staff have had a false allegation made against them by a pupil, and one in six have had an allegation made by a member of a pupil's family. In addition, the same survey reported that 50% of school staff reported that they or a colleague have had a false allegation made against them in their current school or college by a pupil or a member of a pupil's family. In half the cases the allegation was immediately dismissed by the school. The police were notified in only 16% of instances, and took no further action in 55 of the 67 cases they investigated.

18. Pupil behaviour has a significant impact on the recruitment and retention of teachers. Issues of workload and poor pupil behaviour are important factors in dissuading undergraduates from entering the teaching profession and influencing serving teachers to leave.[133] A 2008 poll of undergraduates found that feeling unsafe in the classroom was the greatest deterrent[134] to entering the teaching profession.[135] For teachers, workload is the highest demotivating factor (56%), followed by initiative overload (39%), a "target driven culture" (35%) and, pupil behaviour (31%).[136] Another study[137] found that 68% of 1,400 teachers agreed that negative behaviour is driving teachers out of the profession, with secondary teachers more likely to agree with this statement than primary teachers. Half of the sample (51%) felt that teachers with less experience were more likely to be driven out of the profession by negative behaviour, while 19% disagreed with this.

19. Not only can pupil indiscipline be demotivating for teaching staff, it can also be disruptive to other pupils. The 2009 Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) carried out by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) showed that of 23 countries researched, an estimated 30% of teaching time is lost due to poor pupil behaviour.[138]

20. In a one-week period in March 2009, NASUWT undertook a survey of teachers and headteachers working in primary and secondary schools, and over 10,000 responses to the survey were received.[139] The survey confirmed the OECD finding that the impact of lost teaching and learning time as a result of pupil indiscipline was acute. In primary schools, an average of 30 minutes of available teaching time was lost per teacher per day, whilst in secondary schools, the figure for lost teaching time increased to 50 minutes per teacher per day.

21. In international surveys of 15-year old students' beliefs and expectations by Elliott et al,[140] the belief that classmates had poorer behaviour and disrupted lessons was linked to lower levels of perceived work rates for pupils in both the UK and the US (Sunderland and Kentucky) compared with a Russian sample in which behaviour was perceived to be better. A similar pattern was shown in a later survey of nine and ten year-old pupils, although these students tended to be more positive in their ratings of their classmates' behaviour.[141]

22. Some poorly behaved pupils may face a bleak future. Studies have found[142] that exclusion is associated with: offending behaviour including offences classed as serious (drug use; possession of weapons); being NEET; academic underachievement; limited ambition; homelessness; and mental ill health.

23. Youth Cohort Study data for 2007 was used to compare, on various measures, those who had been excluded at some point to those who had never been excluded. This found that young people who had been excluded (for a fixed-term or permanently) from school in Years 10 or 11 were much less likely to be in full-time education at age 19 (20% compared to 45% of non-excludees) and much more likely to be out of work at age 19 (13% compared to 5%). Similar results for the negative outcomes for excluded pupils were also shown in the earlier Youth Cohort Studies.

24. Analysis of all pupils permanently excluded in Year 9 in the 2004-5 academic year data showed that pupils who entered secondary school with very low literacy skills (below National Curriculum Level 3 in English) had an exclusion rate five times that of pupils entering Key Stage 3 at Level 4 or above (0.5% of those with severe literacy difficulties were excluded, compared to 0.1% of those with at least average literacy levels).[143]

25. The DfES 2004 youth cohort study found that only 20% of pupils with a fixed term or permanent exclusion from school in Years 10 and 11 achieved five or more GCSE A*-Cs or equivalent, compared to 58% of non-excludees.

HOW WELL SCHOOLS MANAGE BEHAVIOUR

26. Good teaching underpins good behaviour. Pupils are more likely to behave well when they are interested and engaged. Analysis of the Longitudinal Study of Young People in England indicated that of the cohort of 14-16 year-olds, those classified as "disengaged" were far more likely to report misbehaving than other young people. 40% of "disengaged" pupils reported misbehaving in half or more of their classes compared with just 7% of "engaged" young people.[144]

27. Smith et al. (2005)[145] conducted a systematic review of research on what pupils aged 11-16 believed impacted on their motivation to learn in the classroom. The reviewers concluded that what teachers do can impact both positively and negatively on pupil motivation. There appeared to be a connection between pupil enjoyment of a task and the degree to which it engaged them cognitively. Across the studies in the review, it was found that engagement in learning was more likely if:

— the lessons were perceived as "fun";

— the lessons were varied and participative;

— teachers used collaborative approaches; and

— pupils perceived activities to be useful and authentic.

28. Qualitative research with primary school pupils showed that pupils disengage with their education when they feel bored with the general curriculum or specific educational tasks—something not mentioned by parents or teachers in their equivalent interviews. The pupils also described their behaviour when disengaged; this included disruptive behaviours such as play fights and throwing objects in the classroom.[146]

29. Against this backdrop, it is nevertheless clear, that most young people are well behaved most of the time and that most teachers and head teachers employ effective behaviour management strategies in their classrooms and schools:

147

however

— the same survey found that teachers felt that the behaviour policy was inconsistently applied by a range of staff, including the most senior;

148

but

— were less sure about whether the appropriate training and support was available to help them to deal with behaviour management issues.

30. We expect that schools' performance management arrangements will identify any difficulties individual teachers have in managing behaviour and that their CPD arrangements will address these.

31. We also believe that there is a minority of pupils who are persistently poorly behaved and need targeted support. However, any child may misbehave if their behaviour is not managed properly at school or at home and we expect parents to play their part in supporting the authority of schools and teachers.

OUR APPROACH

32. The Elton Report (1989) pointed to the growing body of evidence indicating that, while other factors such as a pupil's home background affect behaviour, school-based influences are also very important.

33. The most effective schools are those that have created a positive atmosphere based on a sense of community and shared values. There is now a well established professional and academic consensus on what schools can and should do to ensure good behaviour from their pupils. These include: clarity and consistency of approach (including towards rewards and sanctions) by all staff, led by a strong leadership team; good support and development for staff; and a targeted and differentiated approach towards some pupils and their parents.

34. Despite this consensus, poor behaviour remains a problem in some schools. We expect good behaviour from every child and in every school. Our guiding principles are:

— teachers should be trusted to find the approaches that work in their schools;

— government should free teachers by stripping away unnecessary regulation and prescription from the centre but hold schools to account for outcomes through a sharper inspection framework;

— teachers must be able to exercise authority in a manner that is clearly understood by pupils and their parents;

— government will give heads and teachers the powers they need;

— head teachers should back teachers' authority and support them in dealing with difficult pupils, or when facing allegations;

— pupils and their parents must take responsibility for attendance and behaviour and parents must support teachers when they insist on good discipline; and

— the most challenging children need extra support.

WHAT WE WILL DO TO SUPPORT TEACHERS

35. Informed by our research[149] on barriers to teachers using their powers to ensure good behaviour, we will work with teachers to set out a framework of rights and responsibilities, making clear that Government supports schools in ensuring good behaviour, and that we expect school leaders to support teachers. The framework will support heads and teachers in promoting positive behaviour and provide clarity around the use of powers of discipline, whether dealing with violent incidents or disruptive pupils.

36. We will:

— restore schools' authority by giving heads and teachers the powers and confidence to exclude students when poor behaviour warrants it;

— issue shorter clearer guidance on disciplinary powers, including on the use of force, to strengthen teachers' confidence to deal with violent incidents;

— extend teachers' powers to search for and confiscate items;

— abolish 24 hour notice for detentions, allowing teachers to tackle poor behaviour immediately;

— protect teachers from malicious allegations which will strengthen their authority in the classroom;

— ensure that teachers and heads understand their powers and are therefore able to use them; and

— ensure that parents and pupils understand the powers that schools and teachers have to maintain good order and deal with poor behaviour.

37. We will remove the disincentives to exclude, so that schools can make exclusion decisions based only on the pupil's behaviour and improve the quality of alternative provision by, amongst other measures, encouraging third sector and other providers with proven success in helping children and young people overcome behavioural and other problems, to expand provision.

38. Ofsted inspection of behaviour and attendance will underline the importance of behaviour management and incentivise schools to focus on good behaviour as part of their overall approach to school improvement.

39. We are committed to making bullying unacceptable in all circumstances. No young person should go to school dreading the treatment they will receive. We will raise schools' awareness of the importance of tackling homophobic bullying and other forms of prejudice based bullying. To do this we will:

— review the Department's guidance to ensure that schools are given the right message about tackling bullying effectively;

— work with Ofsted to ensure that tackling poor behaviour and bullying is given more prominence in planned changes to school inspection; and

— empower schools so that they can take a zero-tolerance approach to preventing and tackling bullying.

40. We will continue to collect and monitor data on overall absence, unauthorised absence and persistent absence rates. The emphasis, however, will be on persistent absence as the best indicator of problem absence.

41. We accept that there remains more to do and in some areas we are still considering how best to move forward. We look forward to a dialogue with the Committee and with other interested parties.

September 2010

117 In 2009 63.3% of pupils receiving free school meals (FSM) achieved a level 4 or above at Key Stage 2 English compared to 83.0% of pupils not receiving FSM. Back

118 Propper, C and Rigg, J (2007). Socio-Economic Status and Child Behaviour: Evidence from a contemporary UK cohort. Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion (CASE) paper 125, LSE. Back

119 National Statistics: DCSF: Permanent and Fixed Period Exclusions from Schools in England 2006-07-Amended, DCSF 2008 Back

120 DfE unpublished internal analysis based on 2009 KS4 attainment data and pupil level absence data from the School Census Back

121 National Statistics: DfE: Permanent and Fixed Period Exclusions from Schools in England 2008-09, DfE 2010 Back

122 A statement is not enough-Ofsted review of special educational needs and disability, Ofsted 2010 Back

123 Statistical Release NI86: Secondary Schools judged as having Good or Outstanding Standards of Behaviour at December 2009, DCSF 2010 Back

124 National Statistics: DfE: Permanent and Fixed Period Exclusions from Schools in England 2008-09, DfE 2010 Back

125 From a pupil population of over 7.4 million Back

126 The TellUS figures cover bullying in and out of schools, DCSF 2010 Back

127 Stonewall (2007) The experiences of young gay people in Britain's schools Back