Silence from current Children’s Commissioner on school exclusions speaks volumes?

There was extensive coverage last week of a proposal, from a task force led by the former children’s commissioner for England, for a ban on permanent exclusions from primary schools.

The move had been put forward in a report from the Commission on Young Lives, headed by Anne Longfield, who was children’s commissioner from 2015 until last year.

Exclusions had previously been a concern for both Longfield, who had argued in a report published in 2019 that they should be used only as a “last resort,” and by Longfield’s predecessor Dame Maggie Atkinson, who published successive reports on the issue, highlighting what she said were illegal exclusions.

But where is the current Schools Commissioner on this? It was noticeable that Dame Rachel de Souza, Longfield’s successor as the current incumbent, as far as I can see was not quoted in the media on the issue.

Indeed, when this website put in a request for comment last week, asking de Souza’s office if she had any response on the primary exclusions ban proposal, or indeed on any of the Longfield commission’s conclusions on exclusion, there was no reply. (In case readers wonder if this is simply a product of de Souza’s office’s reluctance to talk to me, given previous reporting, I have had replies from her office in the recent past).

There was barely a mention of exclusions, too, in de Souza’s publication as Children’s Commissioner in March this year of her vision of what schools should look like.

So what brings about this reticence, on what is surely an important subject, exciting as it does a great deal of interest, on either side of the debate?

Well, de Souza’s own record, as the founding chief executive of the Inspiration Trust academy chain, might be a consideration.

In September 2020, Education Uncovered revealed how an Inspiration Trust primary, Great Yarmouth Primary Academy, had excluded more children permanently in a single academic year than any other primary on record.

In 2018-19*, Great Yarmouth Primary Academy had expelled eight pupils. So this move, which of course had happened while de Souza had been chief executive of the trust overseeing the school, would have been impossible for even one pupil if Longfield’s proposals had been in place.

And that academy had actually been one of two to be run by the Inspiration Trust which had finished in the top 10 of schools in England in 2018-19 ranked by the number of children permanently excluded among primary schools.

Even the following year, while de Souza was still chief executive at Inspiration, two of its primary schools – Norwich Primary Academy, and Cobholm Primary Academy – had three permanent exclusions each, updated official data show.

In March 2019, Education Uncovered reported how a former governor at the Inspiration Trust had resigned after receiving “regular” requests to sit on exclusions panels and becoming frustrated after asking for the reasons why, and, she said, not receiving answers. The governor had written, in her resignation letter: “As I have mentioned before, there is a worrying trend for pupils with additional support needs and looked after pupils to be highest in those excluded, whether partially or fully…I wish the trust every success with the future and hope that there will be some careful examination of [the] number of exclusions.”

The trust said at the time that the former governor had not attended any exclusions hearings.

De Souza was quoted by the TES last year, as she started her current post, under a headline “Exclusive: New children’s tsar wants to end exclusions.” The children’s commissioner “says her experience of tackling off-rolling [when children are removed from the school roll] and exclusions when she was chief executive of a multi-academy trust will help her to work with the rest of the profession in ending the practices altogether.”

She had been responding after it was put to her, at her appointment hearing in Parliament, that “there seems to be a pattern in your schools of off-rolling and exclusions.” This point had been made by Robert Halfon, the Conservative chair of the Education Select Committee, which was grilling her.

Dame Rachel had responded: “I challenge that – most of our children’s schools even at that point were below the national average [it is not clear for what] and now all of them are…there is no way off-rolling can happen in our schools now.”

Halfon had also asked de Souza: “How do you reconcile your track record [as leader of the Inspiration Trust] on exclusions – as a means to turn around your schools – with your ability to champion the rights of vulnerable children, who are more susceptible to exclusions, in line with the legislation that underpins the role of Children’s Commissioner?”

From the transcript, it appears that de Souza did not answer the question directly, instead returning to discussing the IT’s record in detail, saying that, after the 2018-19 figures had come through, the trust had committed to “trying to get to a zero exclusion position”.  

Overall, the evidence, including from last week’s media coverage of the Longfield report, would appear to be that de Souza has not been at the forefront of discussing this issue nationally. This suggests that  Halfon’s question remains valid.  

Interesting finding in Ofsted report about much-lauded academy flagship

To judge by its coverage in national newspapers, it is unreservedly one of the biggest current success stories in education in England. Brampton Manor Academy, in Newham, East London, sends more students to Oxbridge than Eton does, as reporting frequently reminds us.

However, there is another side to the school, as Education Uncovered readers will know, with a shocking employment tribunal verdict last year leading to a series of articles on this website about working conditions there, including an apparent “zero tolerance of staff absence” policy and one of paying only statutory sick pay.

One of these stories had documented how some former BMA teachers had notified Ofsted about concerns, on the eve of its inspection in 2018, which appeared to have gone un-investigated by the inspectorate, as it retained its “outstanding” rating.

It was interesting, then, to have learnt that the school was subject to a “no formal designation” Ofsted inspection in November last year, concentrating on leadership and management, and on safeguarding, after “some concerns had been raised with Ofsted in relation to these aspects of the school”.

The two-day inspection of the 2,800-pupil school – one of England’s largest - took place on November 17^th and 18^th, with Ofsted writing to Dayo Olukoshi, the school’s executive principal, with the official verdict three months later, on February 21^st, with the quote above coming from this document.

Ofsted took another month to publish the letter, meaning that the gap between the inspection visit and the letter’s publication was much longer than the national average – perhaps implying some unhappiness behind the scenes from the school about the inspection.

The school did, however, again come out well overall. Safeguarding was deemed effective. The school had had no permanent exclusions in the past five years, said Ofsted, a statement which is borne out by the official statistics viewable up to 2019-20.

“Leaders have taken action to reduce the most common behaviour issues. These are failure to complete homework and low-level disruption in lessons,” said the report. Of course this is impressive. But it may offer a contrast with what the inspectorate’s previous report on the school, in 2018, said, Ofsted stating then unequivocally that behaviour was “exemplary”. The latest report added that: “Pupils did report some instances of fighting at breaktimes, particularly in a specific fenced-off sports area known to pupils as ‘The Cage’,” while the school was told to address the “common” use of discriminatory language, “particularly among boys”.

“Staff share their views through the wellbeing committee,” added the report. It would be interesting to have information on these opinions, given the views shared with this website following the Yasmin Omar employment tribunal verdict.

Perhaps the most interesting comment in the latest report was that teacher turnover was said by Ofsted to be relatively low, as “around 10 % of teachers leave the school each year.” It is possible to be sceptical about this, given the tales of high levels of churn to have emerged from former staff members last year. Turnover is also very hard to monitor externally, given that no official data is published. Did Ofsted just take the school’s word for this?

This school remains very interesting to watch.

*Great Yarmouth’s holding of the record of the most ever permanent exclusions from a primary school in a single year, in a database going back to 2006-7, was reported by Education Uncovered based on figures going up to 2018-19. I’ve just checked using the figures for 2019-20 as well, and it is still the record-holder.