Since coming to power New Labour has made reducing exclusion from schools one of its key educational policies. But just how well have schools fared in tackling truancy and exclusions? Natalie Valios investigates.

"We don't need no education" might be an acceptable philosophy for wealthy rock stars like Pink Floyd, but most children won't get far in life without one. Reducing social exclusion has been a trademark policy of New Labour and the drive to promote educational achievement among disadvantaged children has formed an important part of that policy.

School is, after all, the first in a long line of situations in which individuals can become socially excluded, often with serious long-term consequences. Tackling social exclusion means reducing truancy and exclusions, and finding better solutions for excluded pupils.

With this in mind, the government set up the Social Exclusion Unit to co-ordinate research and policy development on countering social exclusion.

The first SEU report revealed that each year at least one million children truant, more than 100,000 children are excluded temporarily and about 13,000 excluded permanently.¹

Children looked after - and other children defined by the Children Act 1989 as "in need" - are among the most vulnerable to school exclusion and truancy. The report identified that children with special needs and African-Caribbean children were six times more likely than others to be excluded, while looked after children were 10 times more likely.

Three national targets were set, to be attained by 2002:

- a reduction of both permanent and fixed-term exclusions by one third;

- alternative full-time and appropriate education for all pupils excluded from school for more than three weeks; and

- a reduction in truancy levels by one third.

The report and its targets cover England only; the issues of exclusion and non-attendance of school in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are being addressed within the separate education systems.

The intention was for national targets to be turned into local ones and included in local authorities' education development plans. A more recent report from the SEU outlined progress on its entire remit; as far as education is concerned, permanent school exclusions fell by 18 per cent between 1997 and 1999 to 10,400, while the overall national truancy rate remained static during the same period.²

The key issues of pupil attendance, behaviour, the use of exclusion and re-integration were gathered together for local authorities and local education authorities in two government circulars in 1999. They encourage schools, local education authorities and outside agencies to work together to tackle multi-faceted problems and reduce exclusions and truancy.

So, has four years of trumpeting the New Labour mantra "education, education, education" amounted to anything? SEU targets are backed up by several initiatives - learning support units and learning mentors in Excellence in Cities areas; deprived areas receiving extra government money to fund their social inclusion policies; the social inclusion pupil support grant; and pupil referral units.

From April 2001, the investment from the Connexions service, the Children's Fund and the social inclusion pupil support grant will make £600 million available to tackle truancy and exclusion.

By the end of the year there will be 2,400 learning mentors: individuals employed by head teachers to follow up on truancy, help tackle disaffection and support children being bullied. They also act as a point of contact for bringing in specialists, such as social workers or probation officers.

Learning support units within schools enable teachers to remove disruptive pupils from the classroom quickly without excluding them from school. By 2003 there will be 1,000 units with the aim of re-integrating pupils into normal classes by combining behavioural issues with lessons; and pupil referral units will have 1,000 more places this year compared to 1997.

Positive measures. But there is concern that while the government promotes its school inclusion policy, league tables simultaneously give schools perverse incentives to kick out disruptive and disaffected pupils.

Jacqui Newvell, head of the National Children's Bureau's pupil inclusion unit, says: "Schools have been put in a situation where they have no incentive [to be inclusive], quite the opposite."

The thresholds on which schools exclude vary tremendously, she says, from assaulting a member of staff to dyeing your hair. And while the circulars are a good piece of guidance which could be adapted to support any young person, says Newvell, the problem is the extent to which it has or has not been implemented.

"Anecdotally there are some schools and local education authorities that are doing some good stuff and others who aren't. It's foolish to suggest it's all bad, but equally foolish to say that just because the guidance is there it's being implemented."

She is uneasy at the drive for learning support units in schools. "Our concern would be that youngsters are internally excluded. Good practice would be for children to go there for a planned programme of work to be rehabilitated back into school."

And although the support fund's purpose is to help vulnerable children in schools, only thriving schools will use it well, she says. "Things work well in successful schools. Chucking more money at bad schools won't necessarily make it a good school. There needs to be a fundamental rethink about what children go to school for. If it's only for measured attainment in GCSEs then it's not surprising that so many are switched off. I would like to see young people have a sense of personal achievement that counts."

In terms of one-to-one work, however, learning mentors have been a good thing, says Newvell, adding as an afterthought: "How that's going to fit together with Connexions, who knows."

Sue Howe, general secretary of the National Association of Social Workers in Education, agrees: "There is a lot of worry about this because there will be another person in the school with a role. It's still vague as to how the education welfare role will fit in with Connexions and its personal advisers. We have to be careful not to duplicate roles."

Howe, who is also principal education welfare manager for Surrey Council, advocates a plan for each child which names the most appropriate person for them to have most contact with to save complications, whether it's a personal adviser, education welfare officer or social worker. And although she is full of praise for the government circulars - "a godsend" - and learning mentors, Howe, too, is concerned about the whole school inclusion agenda gelling when head teachers don't want disruptive children in their schools.

To counteract this, head teachers in some local authorities have agreed to take excluded children from other schools. In Surrey, head teachers have signed up to points system whereby points are deducted whenever they exclude a young person. After the excluded child is assessed at a pupil referral unit, they are reintegrated into the next school with the lowest points.

Government measures to prevent young people being socially excluded at school are working, says Howe, but could do more if there were extra education welfare staff to carry out additional preventive work.

"There are a lot of initiatives around social inclusion, but unless we actually give teaching staff the time and resources to implement them, it isn't going to happen," warns Newvell. "We need to put some passion back into learning."

Otherwise, the danger is that pupils really will feel like "just another brick in the wall".

¹ Social Exclusion Unit, Truancy and School Exclusion, The Stationery Office, 1998

² Social Exclusion Unit, Preventing Social Exclusion, The Stationery Office, 2001

Case study

Last year, about 300 children looked after by Hampshire Council received Harry Potter books in recognition of their achievements at school. The books were presented at an annual prize-giving, alongside certificates signed by senior managers in education and social services.

Steve Love, assistant director of social services and head of children and families, says: "Our aim is that every child in care will be rewarded for an achievement, regardless of whether it is academic. For example, if they have attended school after truanting for two years, or have stopped being disruptive in class."

Extra assistance for looked-after children in secondary schools is provided by seven education support teachers each linked to schools, children's homes and foster homes in a given area. Their supervisor is the manager of the adolescent support service which is based within the social services department.

If the relationship between the child and the school appears to be breaking down - because of their disruptive behaviour, truancy, inability to cope with the curriculum, or a disability such as Asperger's syndrome - the teacher can refer the pupil to their education support teacher who works at keeping them from being excluded. The child's teacher or social worker can also contact the education support teacher if they feel the young person needs extra help. Education support teachers visit their children's homes or foster homes to work with children on a one-to-one basis.

In addition, the council has social workers working with children in schools who are disruptive or truanting, but are not likely to go into care.

Key to success is joint working between social services and education, says Love. He is concerned that the conglomeration of government school inclusion measures could lead to an unco-ordinated approach by those local authorities without joint management programmes - to the detriment of the child.

"There is a danger of duplication. You could have a mentor, a social worker, a support teacher, and before you know it this poor kid has four people moving about with it."

Hampshire's harmonised approach is working. In the last academic year, out of 76 school leavers looked after by the local authority, 28 per cent passed five or more GCSEs at grade A-C, 72 per cent passed five or more GCSEs at grade A-G, and 8 per cent passed eight or more GCSEs at grade A-C.