Abstract
Within England there is a recognition in government documents that pupils with EBD are amongst the hardest to include in mainstream schools. Recently in-school centres have been advocated as a way forward. Evidence from an earlier tradition of this approach together with more recent evidence from mainstream schools suggests that key factors need to be in place for these forms of provision to be successful. There are also indications that they do not meet the needs of all pupils with EBD. Indeed there is some indication that specialist settings are necessary forms of provision for some pupils with EBD.
This seminar will explore these issues, drawing upon research conducted by the presenter in the late 1970's as well as reach evidence from the research team at the University of Birmingham of which he is a member.
Keywords Inclusion, Exclusion, Emotional and Behaviour Difficulties, Disaffection, Pupil Support, Social Exclusion.
Introduction.
This paper is based upon work carried out with colleagues within the University of Birmingham. In Particularly it draws upon the collaborative work between the author and Professor Harry Daniels and Dr Ted Cole.
The United Kingdom government issued a consultation Green Paper (DfEE 1997) which resulted a further document called a Programme of Action (DfEE 1998). These show that the UK government is committed to an increased inclusion of pupils with SEN in mainstream schools. This is reinforced by the recent consultation on the Disability Rights and SEN Bill which is to go before the British parliament in the autumn of 2000. Whilst it is not always clear as to whether inclusion is to be seen as a 'process' rather than merely as 'placement', it is clear in these documents that some pupils are seen as more problematic than most when it comes to inclusion. These pupils are generally perceived of as those whose special educational needs fall into the area of emotional and behavioural difficulties (EBD). Both documents (DfEE 1997, DfEE 1998) highlighted pupils with EBD as constituting a greater challenge for inclusion than all other areas of SEN.
Pupils with EBD have always presented a challenge to schools and teachers whether in mainstream or special schools. Yet some schools have a much better record of meeting these pupil's needs without the recourse to permanent exclusion or being seen as failing schools. Research by Daniels, Visser, Cole with de Reybekill (1998) and Cole, Visser and Upton (1998) set out to explore these features. This papers draws upon these studies to set out the features which I believe are associated with successful practice. In summation these are sharing, caring , learning schools.
These key features are not put forward as prescriptive. Successful practice is to be found in a variety of secondary and primary schools, with differing policies, practices and provision. There is not a dominant approach which if transplanted to all schools would meet all the needs of every pupil with EBD. There is not a single, one size fits all approach to the different needs of pupils with EBD. MacGilchrist, Myers and Reed (1997) in their work on school improvement similarly no blue print in terms of systems or particular approaches (such as assertive discipline) for the effective inclusion of pupils with EBD in every mainstream school.
Rather the features described provide teachers and schools with a way of examining policy, practice and provision against some key principles which interact with each other. These interactions are governed by factors intrinsic and extrinsic to the school, and are underpinned by the values, attitudes and beliefs held by staff and governors. The outcome of these interactions make up the unique features of each school's approach to meeting the needs of its pupils. The research team at the University of Birmingham are very committed to this understanding of schools as places where good quality individual practice emerges from the articulation of these values, attitudes and beliefs.
These features are not presented as though they were a suprise. They resonate with much the more general work on effective schooling (for example Sammons, Hillman and Mortimore, 1995). The research team at Birmingham emphasise the fact that good practice in meeting the needs of pupils with EBD is derivative of good practice in meeting the learning needs of all pupils.
Key Principles
The key principles found in schools which have an inclusive practice towards those difficult to include are:
These features formed the basis for an ongoing dialogue between key staff members and a critical mass of other staff in the areas of caring, sharing and learning. These schools were caring, sharing and learning, in so doing they created, maintain and sustain the ethos and structures which enable pupils with EBD to be included.
Leadership
Effective leadership is seen by a wide range of sources as a major feature in any discussion of good practice. These sources (for example Davies 1997, Prince 1997, DfE 1994) often list the features which create effective schools but are less explicit on those which sustain and maintain good practice. The maintenance of good practice lies in ensuring that the structures remain appropriate and meet the needs of all concerned. To sustain good practice the morale and commitment of staff has to be nurtured and acknowledged.
Structures, systems and organisations need maintenance to remain effective. Relationships, values, beliefs and attitudes need sustaining, they are key aspects of inclusion in meeting the needs of pupils with EBD.
These aspects of, creating, sustaining and maintaining good practice are to be found in leadership patterns which seek to consult and arrive at consensus while giving a 'clear sense of direction'. A collegiate approach to providing consensus which gives a sense of direction leading to consistency and cohesion amongst staff. Staff in good practice schools show an awareness of the need for consensus, consistency and cohesion of purpose. These three 'Cs' enabled schools to be more flexible and transparent in meeting the needs of pupils. This is of particular importance for inclusive practice where the valuing of diversity is high on the daily agenda of staff.
Teachers and schools meet the educational needs of pupils with emotional and behavioural difficulties, through the relationships they develop and the organisation strategies they employ (DES 1989, Gleeson 1992, Mortimere et al 1995, Ayers, Clark and Murray 1995, HMI 1987 Smith and Laslett 1993). There is considerable variation between teachers and schools in these relationships. A variety of styles of teaching, ways of motivating pupils and responses to behaviour found challenging can be observed. Common strands in these observations are the fostering of a climate of praise, high level of expectations in behaviour and academic progress, together with 'understanding' when these are not achieved by individual pupils.
Teachers need a clear understanding of EBD which they can differentiate from general 'naughtiness' and the transient misbehaviour all pupils engage in. These teachers show practice characterised by attributes and beliefs which show a professional commitment, engender a consistency in approach, and allows for flexibility in their skilled responsiveness to individual pupil's needs. They are constructively supportive of colleagues and have a problem-sharing and solving approach to issues which encouraged an open discussion of classroom management issues. Above all they believe in the inclusion of pupils within their teaching. They teach groups who are made up of individuals, rather than teaching individuals who are in a group .
These high quality leaders and staff formed a 'critical mass' in schools of good practice. In some schools this critical mass consists of a majority of the staff in others it is a smaller number of staff, but contains those who are perceived of as key players. The importance of this 'critical mass' lies in the creation, and ownership of the school's policy with regard to behaviour. This 'critical mass' of staff understand the emotional underpinnings of pupil behaviour and the sometimes fractured lives of some pupils with EBD outside of school. They also believe that pupils can alter their behaviour to an extent. Of importance in achieving this 'alteration' is the provision of an orderly, controlled yet relaxed atmosphere underpinned by a positive whole-school behaviour policy. This approach to behaviour is apart of the school's overarching aims. They are derived naturally from the school's mission statement or corporate aims, rather than separately established and bolted to them. They flow from the aims, values and beliefs espoused by the critical mass of staff. Often these are reflected formally in a behaviour policies and match criteria outlined as good practice by a number of sources (see for example Clarke and Murray 1996, OfSTED 1993, DES 1989).
Linked to behaviour policies there is a concern for educational progress; pupils with EBD are seen as pupils whose special educational needs does not preclude them from needing to, or wanting to achieve academically. Inclusive schools have staff with a wide range of classroom management techniques, where teaching and learning is viewed as important, and thus the curriculum and accreditation has equal status, or least was not accorded a lower status than that followed by other pupils. The emphasis for these schools is upon the learning needs of the pupils.
The need for multi-agency work in meeting the often complex range of needs which pupils with EBD have has been advocated over a long period of time and by many authors (Cole et al 1998). However the evidence suggests that formidable obstacles (a mixture of finance, time and inclination) face schools in achieving or taking part in a multi-agency approach. Even within education (intra agency approaches) schools struggle to achieve the services of support teachers and educational psychologists. Where this is achieved it is largely on the basis of local factors such as personal professional relationships rather than systems and structures which promoted collaboration in identification, assessment and provision for pupils with EBD.
There is some emerging evidence that this is changing as Local education Authorities move into a more collaborative form of service provision.(LGA 200).
These features give rise to three characteristic features which I refer to as caring, sharing and learning.
Caring Schools
The Inclusive school's care about their pupils. The rhetoric of inclusion was borne out in practice. Pupils are seen as part of a community which the school serves, as such they were valued by staff in all their diversity and individuality. Their emotional needs are recognised and addressed, often by staff spending time listening to what pupils have to say. Staff also show this care by setting achievable high standards in behaviour and learning, whilst being tolerant and forgiving of lapses by pupils. Caring is not a soft option, mis-behaviour needs to met 'head-on', never avoided, but it is the 'deed' which is confronted not the person. Such schools do use permanent exclusion on occasion but do so rarely, and always reluctantly. Their systems of rewards and sanctions are applied to meet individual needs while upholding widely agreed standards. They understand the need to provide pupils with 'cooling off space' when issues got out of hand, and model ways of coping with the strains and stresses of school life.
Sharing Schools
In schools which share the staff, pupils and parents are able to discuss openly between themselves and with each other issues of behaviour. In particular staff can discuss their concerns over incidents where pupils had been challenging. Collaboration between staff particularly in seeking positive ways forward to enhance their own skills as well as in meeting an individual pupil's needs is a hallmark of such sharing. This collaboration will focus on learning and teaching skills which can be addressed rather than upon difficulties perceived as being intrinsic to the child and thus beyond the control of the teacher. Sharing schools acknowledge that the solution to many emotional and behavioural difficulties lay outside the school's ability to combat, however they are equally confident of schools and teachers ability to make a significant difference to the lives of their pupils with EBD.
Learning Schools
Some version of Kolb's (1984) model of a do-review-learn-apply cycle is in evidence in all inclusive schools. These are institutions where staff frequently reflected upon their actions, decisions and organisation. Importantly these reflections take into account the planning of subsequent actions. These are not schools which proceeded in a linear fashion to plan-do-review. There is a genuine circularity to their educational activities where their reviews play an active part in planning. These actions are not seen as separate entities, where separate incidents or process are examined as if they have no wider consequence within the institution. Each action by pupil and staff while seen as important within its own context is also reviewed to ascertain its wider implications for the whole school. Including pupils with EBD is not seen as separate from meeting the needs of all pupils. Knowledge, skills and understanding developed from working with the child with EBD is used to inform policy, practice and provision more widely.
Conclusions
The lessons which schools can draw from these features to develop more effective inclusive practice for pupils with EBD are four fold and echo the work of Thomas, Walter and Webb (1998) and the Elton Report (DES 1989). Schools need to be communities that are open, positive and diverse, not selective, exclusive or rejecting. They need to ensure they are 'barrier free' where those pupils with EBD can have their pastoral, academic and special educational needs met. The development of a collaborative ethos is a key feature. Collaboration within school between staff and between staff and pupils, as well as with outside agencies. Lastly, schools need to develop the sense of equity in promoting every pupil's rights and responsibilities in all aspects of school life.
References
Ayers, M., Clark, D. and Murray, A. (1995). Perspectives on Behaviour: A Practical Guide to Effective Interventions for Teachers. London: David Fulton.
Clarke, C. and Murray, A. (1996) Developing a Whole School Behaviour Policy: A Practical Approach. London: David Fulton.
Cole, T., Visser, J. and Upton, G. (1998). Effective Schooling for Pupils with Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties. London. David Fulton.
Daniels, H., Visser, J., Cole, T and de Reybekill, N. (1999). Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties in Mainstream Schools. Research report RR90. London: DfEE.
Davies, L. (1997). Beyond Authoritarian School Management: The Challenge of Transparency. Ticknall: Education Now.
DES. (1989) Discipline in Schools (The Elton Report). London: HMSO.
DfE (1994) The Education of Children with Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties Circular (9/94) London: DfE.
DfEE (1998) Programme for Action. London: DfEE
DfEE (1997) Excellence for All Children: Meeting Special Educational Needs. (Green Paper) London: DfEE.
Gleeson, D (1992). School attendance and truancy - a socio-historical account. Sociological Review. V.40 no.3. pp.437-490.
H.M.I. (1987). Good Behaviour and Discipline in Schools. Education Observed Series. London: Routledge.
Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Local Government Association, LGA (2000) Has the LEA had its Day? Local Government Association, London
McGilchrist, B., Myers, K. and Reed, J. (1997). The Intelligent School. London: Paul Chapman.
Mortimore, P., Sammons, L and Ecob, R. (1988). School Matters. Wells: Open Books.
OfSTED (1993) Achieving Good Behaviour in Schools. London: HMSO.
Prince, L.P. (1997). The neglected rules of leadership: leadership and dissent in Coulson, A. and Baddeley, S. (Editors) Trust in the Public Service. New York: Policy Press.
Sammons, P., Hillman, J. and Mortimore, P (1995). Key Characteristics of Effective Schools: A Review of School Effectiveness Research. Report Commission by OfSTED.
Smith, C and Laslett, R (1993) Effective Classroom Management: A Teacher's Guide. London: Routledge.
Thomas, G., Walker, D. and Webb, J. (1998) The Making of the Inclusive School. London: Routledge.
 |
 |