HEALTH & WELLBEING // SCHOOL EXCLUSION
Reducing school exclusion THE USE OF SCHOOL SUSPENSION AND EXPULSION TO EXCLUDE STUDENTS FROM SCHOOL PRESENTS A MAJOR DILEMMA FOR STAFF, WRITES STUDENT WELLBEING EXPERT, SHERYL HEMPHILL.
When a student engages in behaviour that threatens the safety of the student themselves or others, leadership teams need to use approaches such as exclusion. But excluding a student from school is inconsistent with the aim of school communities to be inclusive. There is also the risk that if the excluded student does not want to be in class (as is often the case), the problematic behaviour is rewarded. On top of this, research has shown that there are a range of negative consequences of suspension for the suspended student including increased antisocial behaviour, alcohol and drug
Sheryl Hemphill PhD is a freelance writer, presenter, and researcher. She has conducted research for over 25 years on the prevention of violence, antisocial behaviour, and cyberbullying, as well as school behaviour management approaches. Her current focus is on sharing research findings with schools and the broader community.
A recent systematic review and meta-analysis of 37 studies of school-based interventions found a short-term reduction in school exclusion.
26
education matters primary
use, delayed graduation, and not completing school. School leaders continue to use suspension and expulsion because they are the highest level of response available to them for serious problem behaviours. Sometimes, school staff find other ways of handling serious student behaviours that fit with the circumstances of their local communities. However, these approaches may not have been evaluated. To date, the research literature has not provided clarity on effective ways to reduce the use of school exclusion. This may now have changed. In a recent systematic review and metaanalysis of 37 studies of school-based interventions that aimed to reduce the use of school exclusion, a short-term (six months) reduction in school exclusion was found. Reductions in the use of school exclusion for 12 months or more were not found. In the review, school exclusion was defined as removing students from teaching for a period of time and included in-school and out-ofschool suspension and expulsion. The latter two approaches remove students from the school setting, whereas the former removes students from the classroom. Students included in the review were aged four to 18 years of age andattended mainstream schools. Published online in March in the Journal of Experimental Criminology, the review was conducted by Sara Valdebenito and colleagues at the University of Cambridge and the RAND Europe research institute. The review showed that 73 per cent of the interventions focused on changing students’ skills or behaviour, whereas 27 per cent focused on changes at the level of the school or teacher. On average, the interventions lasted for 20 weeks. Interventions were more effective at reducing
