A bold new approach to school discipline is being proposed by the government, challenging traditional methods and sparking debate. The core issue? Whether suspended students should be sent home or kept on-site.
Should schools keep suspended pupils in-house, or send them home? This is the question at the heart of a controversial new policy suggestion.
Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson has suggested that sending suspended students home may lead to them retreating into the online world, with potential negative consequences for their learning and well-being. Instead, she proposes on-site suspensions for non-violent incidents, aiming to limit the amount of learning missed and keep students engaged in their education.
But here's where it gets controversial...
The Department for Education (DfE) acknowledges that the number and rate of suspensions have been increasing, with a significant rise since the Covid pandemic. In 2022-23, there were 787,000 suspensions, which increased by 21% to 955,000 in 2023-24. This trend is particularly pronounced in primary schools.
Head teachers will have the final say on the form suspensions take, but the DfE is proposing a new "framework" to guide this decision-making. This framework aims to ensure that students facing suspension for non-violent behavior continue learning in a separate, supervised setting, away from other pupils.
Richard Walkden, head teacher at Ecclesfield Secondary School, acknowledges the complexity of the issue, stating that suspensions are never easy and cause harm, particularly in terms of lost learning. However, he also recognizes the need for suspensions at times, demonstrating clear boundaries for behavior.
And this is the part most people miss...
The proposed policy shift has implications for students with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (Send) and those eligible for free school meals, who have much higher rates of suspensions and permanent exclusions. The DfE aims to address this disparity by providing a structured approach to internal suspensions, ensuring meaningful learning and time for reflection.
The measure will be included in the government's delayed Schools White Paper, which will also outline plans to reform the Send system.
Pepe Di'Iasio, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, welcomes the consistency but emphasizes the need for greater investment and specialist support. Steve Chalke, founder of the Oasis Charitable Trust, questions the resources available for more internal suspensions but supports the move to include rather than exclude children.
Matt Wrack of the NASUWT teachers' union sees an opportunity for helpful clarity but raises concerns about schools meeting expectations without additional funding. Meanwhile, Paul Whiteman of the NAHT school leaders' union questions the physical space available for internal suspensions.
Marianne Lagrue from Coram Children's Legal Centre highlights the variability of existing approaches, with some children kept in isolation for months without formal suspension or exclusion. She hopes the Schools White Paper will improve support for these students, ensuring they receive stimulation and appropriate care.
So, what do you think? Is keeping suspended students on-site a progressive step towards better discipline and learning, or does it risk normalizing poor behavior? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
