Disruptives in schools

I have changed my mind; something I don’t do often enough these days.
 
I’ve previously advocated removing any disruptive student from their classroom as soon as possible and excluding them to a specialist school for remedial help.
 
But in a lot of cases, the problem lies outside of the classroom and school may be the only consistent thing in the child’s live at that time. Indeed, for some children, school is a constant lifeline.
 
Would moving an unstable child to a brand new environment help or hinder? Does exposing them to other disruptives weaken or strengthen their misbehaviour?
 
The counter of course is that any disruption in the classroom is ruining it for those who want to learn. But is consigning the troubled student to a dustbin (as some might view it) the right approach?
 
How to square the circle?
 
What can we do to show the student that such behaviour isn’t tolerated whilst at the same time avoiding complete alienation?
 
The answer is I don’t know.
 
I’m not a trained educationalist nor do I work in a classroom or lecture space.
 
What I do know is that the current system isn’t working and disruptive behaviour is reportedly on the rise on an annual basis.
 
Excluding students from school so that they can spend time with their Xbox sounds more like a reward than a punishment and will only put them further behind their peers through missed lessons.
 
But if the student is actively avoiding learning what’s the point of trying to force the issue? The horse won’t drink and needs some form of intervention to persuade it otherwise.
 
There is an early years intervention programme called “Nurture Groups” which has shown some success for those children who, for whatever reason, cannot initially function in the classroom.  I notice have been extended into the secondary sector in the UK so they must be doing something right.
 
The aim is to give the children the security of a small and family like setting where the primary aim is, as the name suggests, to nurture the child and grow them to the point where they’re able to return to their usual school environment.
 
The “nurture child” will register with their own class and still join in with non-academic class activities, with support if necessary, so as to maintain a link to their school peer group. However, they’ll return to the unit for those times when the normal classroom is too much for them and they start acting up.
 
The temptation is to try to maintain their normal curriculum within the nurture group but the prime function must be to concentrate on the problems which are keeping the child out of the classroom. If these can be solved or at least moderated then the student can rejoin the class.
 
If this intervention isn’t working, then the problem is clearly outside of the reach of the school and highly specialist intervention is needed which in turn may require that the child moves outside of the school and into a different unit.
 
Nurture groups are by their nature resource heavy and produce no testable results other than the fact that the child can rejoin their peers if intervention is successful. The groups must be staffed by trained professionals but not necessarily teachers. In fact and because the aim is social reintegration rather than alternative education, a teaching degree might be wasted in these situations. 

Better to use trained workers with skills in teaching emotional literacy and dealing with behavioural issues. Give the children coping skills to work in their classrooms, or the time and space of the nurture group to explore and work on their issues with the necessary guidance.
 
Maybe these units are already working in the secondary system here; they do already exist in one or two primary schools although their future must be in question in these times of cuts. It is tempting to use these units to hive off those incapable of accessing the curriculum in their classes due to non-emotional problems and to attempt to teach them in nurture. After all, it makes additional use of scarce resources. It also misses the point of the groups. They are short term interventions designed to return the child to their classroom.
 
The education system is filled with bright people and there will already be lots of interventions going on both within schools and by peripatetic specialists. However, if we’re still seeing the problems and on a rising scale then something somewhere isn’t working and needs re-evaluation.
 
Maybe some of these interventions or professionals just aren’t producing the results. Maybe nobody is actually looking at this area with a results orientated mindset. Maybe it’s too difficult to admit that some less than effective people might need moving. That’s a dangerous idea which mustn’t be allowed to germinate as it might spread like knotweed and who knows where we’d end up?