Rising number of nursery and primary pupils excluded
Katy Morton
Thursday, July 25, 2013
New figures from the Department for Education show that 20 boys aged four and under were permanently excluded from state funded primary or special schools in England in 2011/12.
This is double the number of children the same age that were permanently excluded in 2010/11.
A further 40 five-year-olds, also boys, were permanently excluded in 2011/12.
The report, ‘Permanent and fixed period exclusions from schools in England for the academic year 2011/12’, also reveals that 60 nursery-aged children, mainly boys, were excluded from school for a fixed period.
The previous year, 40 nursery children were temporarily excluded.
The number of children in reception excluded for a fixed period in 2011/12 was 1,480, of which 1,330 were boys.
This is an increase of 290 on the previous year, when 1,190 primary pupils were temporarily excluded. Of these 1,060 were boys.
The average length of a fixed period exclusion in state-funded primary schools was 2.1 days.
The figures also show that the permanent exclusion rate for boys was approximately three times higher than that for girls.
Children eligible for free school meals (FSM) were nearly four times more likely to receive a permanent exclusion and around three times more likely to receive a fixed period exclusions than those not in receipt of FSM.
Dr Mary Bousted, general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers (ATL), said, ‘The exclusion figures make for sombre reading, particularly as we know that exclusions have a huge impact on the life chances of those pupils.
‘The rise is permanent exclusions mostly seen in primary school figures underlines the key significance of the early years sector and in early intervention strategies. Sure Start centres were the first casulaties in many local funding cuts and it may be the increase in primary school exclusions is one of the consequences of this.
‘ATL calls for a teacher training and continuing professional development system which better informs teachers about special educational needs and inclusive teaching practices. Furthermore, we need a school system which allows flexibility within a supportive local framework, with evidence rather than political ideology determining what happens in school. An increasingly narrow academic model and an excessive accountability framework reduces schools’ flexibility and capacity to meet the often complex needs of many of their pupils.’
