Agenda item

Following the scrutiny panel’s 2021 review of Behaviour, Discipline and Bullying in Schools, it had been agreed that a comprehensive report on exclusions would be submitted to the scrutiny panel on a 6 monthly basis. Officers will be in attendance to present this data.

Following the scrutiny panel’s 2021 review of Behaviour, Discipline and Bullying in Schools, it had been agreed that a comprehensive report on exclusions would be submitted to the scrutiny panel on a 6 monthly basis.

 

The Council’s Head of Access to Education and Alternative Provision was in attendance at the meeting to present data on permanent exclusions, fixed-term exclusions, reasons for exclusions and information on how the Council was increasing the level of challenge and support.

 

Members were advised that the report provided a snapshot of data. It was explained that numbers of exclusions changed on a daily and/or weekly basis.

 

In terms of permanent exclusions, from September 2021 to March 2022:

 

·         no primary-aged pupils had been permanently excluded;

·         in Year 7, 8 pupils had been permanently excluded;

·         in Year 8, 10 pupils had been permanently excluded (13 permanent exclusions had initially been instigated and then 3 were subsequently withdrawn);

·         in Year 9, 8 pupils had been permanently excluded (13 permanent exclusions had initially been instigated and then 5 were subsequently withdrawn);

·         in Year 10, 16 pupils had been permanently excluded (17 permanent exclusions had initially been instigated and then 1 was subsequently withdrawn); and

·         in Year 11, 6 pupils had been permanently excluded (7 permanent exclusions had initially been instigated and then 1 was subsequently withdrawn).

 

The reasons for a permanent exclusions being instigated and then subsequently withdraw included a change in circumstances, an alternate solution being identified and/or enhanced support being offered to the school.

 

Historically, the majority of exclusions took place in the Year 10 cohort. However, it was commented that it was unusual to have such high levels of permanent exclusions in Year 7 and Year 8 cohorts. It was advised that the high rates in those two year groups could be due to the impact of the pandemic on the transition into secondary education.

 

In terms of the schools imposing permanent exclusions, the following information was outlined:

 

·         at Outwood Ormesby, 7 pupils had been permanently excluded (13 permanent exclusions had initially been instigated and then 6 were subsequently withdrawn);

·         at Outwood Riverside, 4 pupils had been permanently excluded;

·         at Outwood Acklam, 9 pupils had been permanently excluded (11 permanent exclusions had initially been instigated and then 2 were subsequently withdrawn);

·         at Trinity Catholic College, 13 pupils had been permanently excluded;

·         at Unity City Academy, 4 pupils had been permanently excluded (5 permanent exclusions had initially been instigated and then 1 was subsequently withdrawn);

·         at Kings Academy, 4 pupils had been permanently excluded;

·         at Acklam Grange, 4 pupils had been permanently excluded; and

·         at Macmillan Academy, 3 pupils had been permanently excluded (4 permanent exclusions had initially been instigated and then 1 was subsequently withdrawn).

 

It was commented that the data for the period of September 2021 to March 2022 demonstrated that Trinity Catholic College had the highest rate of permanent exclusions, and Macmillan Academy had the lowest rate.

 

In terms of the reasons for the 48 permanent exclusions, the following information was outlined:

 

·         4 pupils were excluded for damaging school property;

·         7 pupils were excluded for a physical assault on an adult;

·         9 pupils were excluded for a physical assault on a pupil;

·         20 pupils were excluded for persistent disruptive behaviour;

·         3 pupils were excluded for verbal abuse/threats to an adult;

·         1 pupils were excluded for verbal abuse/threats to a pupil; and

·         4 pupils were excluded for other reasons, which had not been categorised.

 

The highest rate of exclusions had occurred due to persistent disruptive behaviour.

 

To provide some context, permanent exclusion rates had been compared with those of a neighbouring authority.

 

 

 

The tables demonstrated that the neighbouring authority had a smaller number of permanent exclusions (39 in comparison to Middlesbrough’s 48). However, as Middlesbrough was a larger local authority area, its rate of permanent exclusions was very similar to than that of the neighbouring authority.

 

It was advised that the increase in rates of permanent exclusion was not unique to Middlesbrough and rates had increased for other local authorities, both regionally and nationally.

 

In terms of fixed-term exclusions, the following points were made:

 

·         the majority of fixed-term exclusion occurred in two of Middlesbrough’s secondary schools;

·         the submitted report did not contain accurate data for Trinity Catholic Academy;

·         by far the most common reason for a fixed-term exclusion was ‘persistent disruptive behaviour’; and

·         primary schools very rarely used fixed-term exclusion as a sanction.

 

The rates of fixed-term exclusion were reported as follows:

 

·         at Outwood Ormesby, there had been 1428 fixed-term exclusions;

·         at Outwood Acklam there had been 957 fixed-term exclusions

·         at Macmillan Academy, there had been 170 fixed-term exclusions

·         at Kings Academy, there had been 139 fixed-term exclusions;

·         at Acklam Grange, there had been 64 fixed-term exclusions;

·         at Unity City Academy, there had been 61 fixed-term exclusions

·         at Outwood Riverside there had been 54 fixed-term exclusions

·         at Trinity Catholic College, there had been 12 fixed-term exclusions; and

·         at Pennyman Primary Academy, there had been 11 fixed-term exclusions.

 

It was highlighted that the submitted data demonstrated high rates of fixed-term exclusions at Outwood Ormesby and Outwood Acklam. Work was being undertaken with the Outwood Academy Trust to understand the reasons for the high rates and to test whether the sanction was effective in improving the standard of behaviour.

 

Members were advised that the Local Authority had encountered issues with obtaining data from Trinity Catholic College, therefore, the data provided in respect of that particular school was inaccurate. Work was being undertaken with the school to improve that data flow and it was hoped that issues would be resolved shortly.

 

The three main reasons for fixed-term exclusions were persistent disruptive behaviour (1037), verbal/threatening behaviour towards an adult (186) and the assault of a pupil (82). The data demonstrates that persistent disruptive behaviour was a major factor in deciding whether a pupil should be excluded on a fixed-term basis.

 

Information on how the Local Authority was working to increase the level of challenge and support was outlined. Members were informed that:

 

·         an additional 0.5 fte officer had been appointed to allow more time to be spent on the case audit when a school submitted paperwork;

·         a temporary member of staff would be appointed to work with Headteachers and academy trusts to ensure that exclusion was the most appropriate course of action for every identified child;

·         additional staffing had been assigned to provide more parental guidance, as that was crucial if cases were to be taken to the Independent Review Panel (IRP);

·         oversight of the process was being increased via improved and more robust reporting tools;

·         regular meetings were taking place with Headteachers;

·         the issues reported had been raised with the Department for Education (DfE);

·         work would continue to raise awareness of the Council’s new Inclusion Model; and

·         work would be undertaken with all schools to undertake a SEN and Inclusion Peer Review (May - Dec 22).

 

A Member raised a query regarding comparisons with previous years. The Head of Access to Education and Alternative Provision advised that data to reflect a 3 year comparison was being prepared for submission to a future meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Board. It was confirmed that future submissions of the report would contain historical comparisons to provide some context.

 

It was clarified that the high rates of exclusion were being investigated further by the Overview and Scrutiny Board and the appropriate representatives from secondary schools (across the town) had been invited to a future meeting to discuss the issue. The board’s aim was to help challenge and support schools in finding a way forward to reduce the number of children and young people being excluded (both temporarily or permanently). A Member conveyed that there was a reluctance from Headteachers to attend the meeting. The importance of school leaders engaging with Scrutiny was highlighted.

 

A Member commented on the importance of receiving historical comparison data, to enable the scrutiny panel to determine trends. It was also commented that, given many of Middlesbrough’s young people attend Nunthorpe Academy, data from that particular school would also prove valuable. The Head of Access to Education and Alternative Provision explained that as Nunthorpe Academy was not located in Middlesbrough’s boundary, the school did not report its exclusion data to the Local Authority. However, data on those pupils from Middlesbrough attending Nunthorpe Academy, who had been excluded, would be included in future submissions to the scrutiny panel.

 

NOTED