Editor's view - Exclusion zones

'Twitter outrage over headteacher's EYFS comments' looked at the reaction to a video of the former head of St George's primary school in Battersea, explaining the 'structured teaching' approach in early years, even involving elocution lessons, that had led to excellent results. Her comment, 'What is the nonsense that we play every day in the early years?' gave rise to many angry comments. Her interview also had its defenders, however, with some agreeing that three was not too young to learn the tripod grip.

It was perhaps her claim to have 'eliminated' special educational needs that was most controversial, leading early years commentators to ask what the long-term effects would be on these children.

The second story, 'Hundreds of under-fives excluded for disruptive behaviour', also led to an outpouring of indignation about the system and environment in which it is seen as acceptable to have fixed-term and permanent exclusions for children of this age.

As one of our correspondents points out (see Letters opposite), surely this shows that children under five should be in a more informal environment with lots of access to outdoors and high staff:child ratios, not housed in conditions that confine and limit them. Will disadvantaged two-year-olds be featuring in the exclusion statistics if more are taken in by schools in future?

Or perhaps 'structured approach' head has the answer, and exclusions could be eliminated with plenty of phonics, tripod grip and elocution lessons!