Category Archives: exclusions

EHCP requests and falling rolls

Posted on by
1

Have requests for EHCPs passed their peak? It might be expected that where a local authority was starting to witness a shrinking school population that this might also be noticeable in a decline in requests for an EHCP.

I have tested out this these for the London boroughs, based on the DfE’s data on total requests for an EHCP for each year from 2019 (pre-covid) to 2025, (the latest set of annual data published). Release home – Education, health and care plans – Explore education statistics – GOV.UK

Column 2 shows the growth in request over the period from 2019 to 2026 (in one case a small decline) Column 3 shows the percentage increase over the period, ranked from smallest percentage increase to the largest. Column 4 is my interpretation of whether the borough is an inner London or an outer London borough

LA2013-2019% increasesubregion
1-3-38%inner
2345%inner
3129%inner
48418%inner
511521%inner
619523%outer
77236%inner
88537%inner
921039%outer
1010041%outer
1117842%outer
1211447%outer
1340055%outer
1429757%outer
1524358%outer
1629865%inner
1727665%outer
1819568%inner
1932172%inner
2035273%outer
2131380%outer
2215786%inner
2314687%outer
2453491%outer
2548895%inner
2629297%outer
27497101%outer
28395101%outer
29392105%outer
30501110%inner
31432115%inner
32345117%outer
33376133%outer

Thirty-two boroughs showed an increase in requests over the period between 2019 and 2025. Increases ranged from less than 10% in each of two inner London boroughs to seven boroughs with increases of more than 100% increase over the period between 2019-2025 (5 outer London boroughs and two inner London boroughs).

In 14 of the boroughs, the number of requests received by the borough in 2025 was not the highest for any years during the period between 2019-2025. Is that enough to suggest a trend? Possibly so, especially if the key point for many requests for an EHCP is around the transfer point form primary to secondary school.

Does the  distribution of the boroughs suggest that inner London boroughs have a smaller percentage of pupils requiring an EHCP, or perhaps a smaller percentage of parents initiating the process of requesting an EHCP? It would be helpful to rerun this exercise for particular types of EHCP and the age of the child at which they were requested. Might this deeper analysis help to explain some of the differences in the percentage increases between boroughs?

It is interesting that some London boroughs with a mix of selective and non-selective schools feature among the boroughs with the highest percentage increase over the period.

If data for individual schools is not available, then measuring the percentage of the borough in each IDACII cell might provide data on any clustering. A simpler way might be to use parliamentary constituencies, but both of these measure of requests suffer from a possible ‘parental choice’ effect. The use of boroughs more closely ties requests linked to residence not to school attended.

If I have a moment, I will look at the data for the top and bottom 20 places regarded by the Children’s Commissioner in her recent report as the best and worst places for children to grow up.

Might there be another December general election?

Posted on by
Reply

The present opinion polling might make the possibility of a snap December general election more likely, especially if the Burnham Bounce continues, and both Reform and the Green Party drift downward in the polls. As a result, other Parties will be probably putting together a skeleton manifesto, just in case an election is called.

Here are my suggestions about an education section of a manifesto to the Liberal Democrats, the Party I support. These are my own views, and some are more controversial than others.

Raise free travel to school from 16 to 18

At present there is free travel to nearest school if over three miles, up to age 16. In London,  young people aged 16-17 can get free and discounted travel on all our transport services with a Zip Oyster photocard. 16+ Zip Oyster photocard – Transport for London In Birmingham, 16-18s get discounted tickets to and from an education establishment in term-time. In Manchester, Our Pass gives 16-18 year olds free bus travel* across Greater Manchester and Our Pass is not just a bus travel card – cardholders will have access to lots of opportunities, experiences and benefits.

Young people living outside the large urban areas deserve the same rights to access education.

An expert teacher in every classroom

Parents and pupils expect their teachers to be properly trained. Many are not, especially in schools in rural areas and disadvantaged areas where teacher recruitment is challenging. The policy would only grant certification (QTS) for limited areas, where a teacher has the appropriate knowledge and qualification. A school could use a teacher to cover a vacancy or long-term absence, but such teachers, if not qualified, would need emergency accreditation. This would last for no more than two school-years. During that time, the staff member would be expected to undertake appropriate certification through professional development paid for by the school. The DfE would be expected to publish a report to parliament each year on the use of uncertified teachers by schools. The term ‘teacher’ would be come a recognised reserved occupation term, in line with the situation on other professions

Free School lunches to eleven

All primary school children, and those in middle schools, would be entitled to a free school lunch. This extends the policy of free school meals for infant school pupils introduced by the coalition and announced at the Lib Dems Conference in Glasgow.

Renewable energy for all schools

Local areas would be offered matching funding for solar, wind and heat pump installations with the remainder of the funding coming from a ‘social’ bond’ open to local residents in the first instance.  Rural schools would be encouraged to become energy resilience hubs for their local community, providing emergency power sources when the grid isn’t functioning because of storms, flooding or other reasons. Rural areas already generate power for other parts of the country. This scheme would ensure a local payment scheme. As well as providing power for the school.

The curriculum

Any curriculum change would be fully staffed. The curriculum would ensure all pupils received the basic skills and knowledge, supported by funding to ensure all pupils, even with special needs, can achieve their maximum potential. The secondary school curriculum would reflect that fact that young people entering school in 2026 will be working into the 2080s.

Testing

Public examinations at sixteen would be replaced by cheaper national tests based upon sampling techniques. Pupil’s progress should not be determined by rigid rules. There would be a focus on raising standards by ensuring well-qualified teachers.

Testing for national standards would be retained at the end of Key Stage 2 and Foundation Stage to help identify the best use of resources.

School Funding

In a period of declining school rolls, and parental choice, funding schools on a per-pupil basis risks under-funding disadvantaged schools. This is especially the case in areas where there are selective schools. Many of these schools are over-capacity, while the non-selective schools are required to function well below capacity, and with less funding as a result.

All schools should be funded to a level where they can deliver an appropriate curriculum. Improvements in technology should allow for actual salary funding for schools, rather than the average salary funding that disadvantages some schools with experienced staff, but falling rolls.

There is a case to be made for a universal secondary school and college system to meet the needs of all 11-18 year-olds

Effective post-sixteen education

Consideration would be given to how pupils could be offered a choice of routes and subjects that best meet their needs in a planned manner. With falling rolls, not all schools and colleges would be able to offer and effective curriculum for all.

Enjoying school

Most primary school children enjoy school, but attendance and enjoyment both drop off between the ages of 11-16. The current DfE opinion polling would be widened to take more account of the views of young people, and the challenges they face in a rapidly changing society where they will be voters before they complete their education, if the voting age is reduced to 16, as we support.

Every child has a right to education

The state does not require children to attend school, but to be educated. Home Schooled children often receive a good quality education, but along with those educated in private schools there should be a system of inspection and support. No child should ever be without a school. A virtual school for pupils either moving into an area or excluded from a school should enrol such pupils from day one to ensure no break in their education. Much can be learnt from the best of the virtual schools for looked-after young people.

Inspection

Ofsted needs reform, but to underpin a national assessment of schools there needs to be a local framework of advisors and inspectors that can support and encourage teachers and school leaders. No school should be surprised by any national assessment if it has been working effectively with  local teams drawn from school middle and senior leaders. Such teams also provide a career path for those interested in progressing carers in teaching and learning and not school leadership.

An education system for all

Falling rolls, a fractured operating system of academy trusts, local authorities and dioceses does not make for an effective local education system. Decisions are haphazard, and may create competing and poorly funded outcomes. In the short-term the current Schools Forums would be reconstituted as a local education planning forum to ensure resources are not wasted, and young people can receive the best outcomes from their time in education.

A new deal for teachers

Teachers’ contracts have barely changed in the last 60 years, apart from the directed working time of 1,265 hours for those not on the leadership scale. While other graduates now expect four weeks paid holiday, up to 10 public holidays, and not to work between Christmas and after New Year, teachers still work an employer-driven flexi-time, where periods when children are not in school are expected to compensate for long-hours worked during term-time. Such an imbalance makes recruiting staff, and especially graduates challenging and needs a comprehensive review by the School Teachers Review Body (STRB).

Funding schools for needs not pupil numbers

Posted on by
Reply

Following on from yesterday’s post about the report from the Children’s Commissioner on children growing up, I talked this morning to a head teacher about some of the issues which faced them on a daily basis. According to the Children’s Commissioners report, their school is in an advantageous area for growing up. https://www.childrenscommissioner.gov.uk/resource/the-childhood-lottery-the-hardest-places-to-grow-up-in-england/

Yesterday’s report worries me because small pockets of deprivation within areas singled out as successful by reports such as that from the Children’s Commissioner may not have the mechanism to deal with their localised problems.

The school whose headteacher I was talking to is part of MAT, along with another school in the same postcode. Across that postcode, are two maintained schools, (one VA/one VC), and schools in three other multi-academy trusts, one with six schools, one with three schools and two MATs with two schools each.

How do you manage strategy for the area in such circumstances. No doubt health and social services can have area boards, but who has the power to bring together schools to work out a common approach to local issues?

Probably not at present the local authorities, both upper and lower tier, although through its Children’s Services the upper tier authoritiy does manage, social services, youth services and youth justice. Should it once again be given strategic powers for local areas? Central government has tried such an approach with ideas ranging from Blair’s Education Action Zones (EAZs) to the Conservative government’s Opportunity Areas policy. Most of these failed to improve education outcomes for the localities where they intervened. Would a more local approach have succeeded? Certainly not without resources.

I am led to wonder whether the present funding formula for schools is fit for purpose during a period of declining rolls.  Pitting schools against schools to recruit pupils doesn’t guarantee schools the resources necessary to ensure pupils achieve outcomes: some pupils need more resources than others. This was recognised with the Pupil Premium, but seems to have been overlooked in terms of the failure of local decision-making that has resulted from a fractured system of decision-making.

One example quoted to me was how trauma in pupils is addressed. This might arise because a parent was handed down a prison sentence, and the family name appeared in the local paper. How traumatic is that for a nine-year-old. Then, there are those living in overcrowded flats, sometimes in tower blocks. How traumatic is that to a seven-year-old.

All too often the simple administrative solution is to  create an EHCP for the child rather than to work with the school on funding to deal with the in-school issues resulting from the trauma, and to work to reduce exclusions that might result, even with an EHCP, and support better learning outcomes. Of course, all staff in all agencies are working under great pressure, so shortcuts can be an easy solution.

My thesis is that schools in a locality should once again be part of a system that acknowledges their needs, and that across a large administrative area, needs between schools may be different. Money is a help, but also a common set of values is also important.

What worries me is that a high percentage of schools in challenging areas are church or faith-based schools. What part are faith leaders playing in making sure that the schools they are responsible for serve their communities as effectively as possible. In the same vein, what part do local politicians play in ensuring the best outcomes for their residents?

Nationally as the Children’s Commissioner identified in her report, we need funding for targeted areas, but, in addition, we also need vision and the will to effect change on the part of both local and national politicians.  We need to create a school system capable of dealing with the challenges of all our children whether they are growing up in challenging area within a mostly great place to live or one of England’s deprived communities.

Growing up in England: The Children’s Commissioner’s Report

Posted on by
Reply

The Children’s Commissioner, Dame Rachel de Souza, has issued a comprehensive report on growing up in England. ‘The Childhood Lottery: The hardest places to grow up in England’ The Childhood Lottery: The hardest places to grow up in England | Children’s Commissioner for England The data comes from matrixes across the Commissioner’s six pillar of work

Health: health services and outcomes

Care: social care and outcomes

Community; policing, youth justice and services available to children in l where they live

Education: jobs and skills: schools and  post-16 plus educational outcomes

Family: housing, play , poverty and family life

Better world: the environment, children’s voices and citizenship

The data are for the 150+ upper-tier authorities, so London boroughs, metropolitan districts, unitary councils and the remaining shire counties. As a result, the authorities range in size from Rutland to Lancashire and Kent. Some areas are more homogenous than others: some are contiguous with health, police and other non-local government functions, while others are part of larger organisation for policing and health with policies set outside the local authority areas. Some functions are split between upper and lower tier authorities, such as housing and recreation facilities.

Despite these issues, that in some cases make the average for the authority not reflective of its different parts, and highlight some of the issues with dashboards, discussed in a recent post on this blog. Are dashboards useful? | John Howson this is a powerful report bringing together lots of useful data.

There are dangers here. Oxfordshire is ranked equal 11th with York, and the fourth best county to grow up in England. But, tomorrow, I will be at a workshop , initiated by an Oxfordshire-based multi-academy trust, aiming to improve the lives of children in the most challenging part of the county’s urban landscape. (The report classifies Oxfordshire as rural). The issues in this area would have been highlighted if district councils had been used as the data point instead of upper-tier authorities. Parliamentary constituencies, where most of this data is probably kept somewhere for MPs questions, might have been an even better and more equal frame of reference, allowing different between both Tottenham and Highgate within Haringey to have been judged separately.

Rural areas may also have a bit of a raw deal: you can’t count bus data where there are no buses. The data on childcare placement more than 20 miles from their home doesn’t discount kinship care that might be valuable, but not local in a large rural county.

However, it is easy to carp, and one cannot but praise the efforts of the Children’s Commissioner. The survey may also reveal how weakened local government has become. Take youth justice: how many councillors attend local committees to discuss approaches to this vital topic. Do cabinet members for Children’s Services even know that they often have this responsibility?

I was fortunate, when a Cabinet member, to have both a Director of Children’s Services and a Youth Justice lead that kept me informed, and allowed me to understand the importance of this area. On the other hand, the Health and Wellbeing Board was a challenge for me, as it covered so many different areas, and children’s health didn’t have a sub-committee. The fact that Oxfordshire is a Marmot County had nothing to do with me as a cabinet member for children’s services.

There are messages for politicians at all levels in this report, not only about childhood, but also into young adulthood. Sadly, many adults face the same problems, and solving those issues might also help future generations of children and young people growing up in a divided England.

Falling Rolls: a matter of urgency, but whose?

Posted on by
Reply

In 1977, Haringey council’s Chief Education Officer produced a plan to deal with falling school rolls: it was to cost him his job. His mistake was to be too far ahead of public opinion, for in 1980, school closures, and a reorganisation as a result of fewer pupil numbers became inevitable in Haringey. Among the changes was the closure of the secondary school in Tottenham where I had worked from 1971 to 1977.

This example from history is important for two reasons: firstly, we are living through another period of declining pupil numbers, and secondly, the mechanism for system planning is much weaker today than it was in the 1970s.

In the 1970s, education was often described as a ‘national system locally administered’. Boroughs, such as Haringey, had within the past decade received approval from the government at Westminster to introduce a comprehensive form of secondary schooling. Local planning ratified by government could be seen as normal practice, although not all schools were maintained schools and churches, city livery companies such as the Drapers and the Stationers, as well as other charities had a strong interest in the running of schooling in the borough. However, the ability of the local council to determine how schooling was managed across the borough was not really in question.

How different the world is today, a rump of maintained schools sits alongside the remaining voluntary schools and the block of academies, whether stand-alone of gathered together in Trusts or Committees in local authorities many facing an uncertain future.

Local authorities notionally still have responsibility for pupil place planning, but devolved budgets, powerful Schools Forums and the differing policies of academies and their trust leaders mitigate against local authorities being able to successfully plan the local school system, especially when for the past decade the focus has been on opening new schools.

Overlaying the weak position of local government is another difference from that faced by Haringey’s Chief Education Officer in the 1970s: parental choice: first enshrined in Section 6 of the 1980 Education Act, and now taken for granted.

To view the current  position, I have taken a random sample of secondary schools that have so far this school-year advertised for either a new headteacher or a teacher of music. In both cases, I have looked at DfE data on the notional roll and the actual roll, as shown on the DfE’s public website on 6th October 2026.

The results are interesting.

regioncapacityrolldifference
SE1440759-681
L1150795-355
WM785445-340
NW700364-336
SW1050714-336
L13301092-238
NW12001023-177
SE15601409-151
NE13501201-149
L12601115-145
EM625486-139
YH17501616-134
EE12101084-126
NW750661-89
SW1050990-60
L315272-43
L455436-19
WM11001084-16
EM860847-13
YH710699-11
L10071000-7
NW900894-6
L14501445-5
L121312141
SE4804822
L1164119127
WM60463228
L990102838
WM1253130653
EM1383145471
L12001302102
WM14141524110
L11401271131
SE12191354135
NW9891157168
EM13321809477

There are some very large differences between the ‘capacity’ as shown on the DfE site and the number on roll shown on the same site. There are 13 schools with more than 100 empty places, only three in London.

On the other hand, there are six schools with more than 100 over capacity, two of which are in London.

This was a random sample, so I wondered what might be the implications in selective systems if selective schools were taking more than their ‘capacity’ on other schools and their budgets. I will do a bit of research to find out and report back.

However, it does seem that there is a serious question around effective pupil place planning and the consequences of not doing anything on some children’s learning in the future, if schools are losing income while others are still over-capacity.

Social mobility and the far right

Posted on by
Reply

The announcement that that Social Mobility Commission is to be abolished was announced when I was on holiday. As a result, I have only just caught up with news of its demise – one of the few QUANGOs to escape previous culls. While the term ‘class’ for its replacement within the civil service may be more ‘in your face’ than ‘social mobility’, I suppose it fits better with the debate about ‘White working class boys’ that has featured in many discussions about educational attainment during the past decade.

I am sad to see the Commission abolished. Taking work back into government departments inevitably makes policy discussion less transparent, and places greater emphasis on the work of think tanks. The Commission has had something of a chequered history, as might be expected given its role and the fact that rt worked under a Conservative government for most of its life. I documented one such event in this blog post from 2017 Social Mobility Commission | John Howson that interestingly also mentioned AI, and the risk of the rise of the ‘far right’.

‘With the IT revolution once again picking up speed, and predications of massive job losses from the growth in Artificial Intelligence awakening the Luddite mentality in many of us, the Commission must act not only as the government’s conscience on social mobility, but also as a source of genuine new policies that are radical and forward thinking. More of the same just won’t work.

We have seen in Germany that the failure to ensure the success of the economy across the whole country has inevitably led to the rise of the far right in politics. Social mobility is important, but we cannot ignore those left behind. They must not become the poor relations kept, for ever, out of sight.’ Social Mobility Commission | John Howson Still, it is sad to see a Labour government abolish it.

I had a number of discussions with officials at the commission over the years, most notably about teacher supply matters. The following post followed the publication of one of the Commission’s reports in 2019  We cannot ignore those left behind | John Howson and also shows that, even under Conservative control, those of us from all political parties concerned about the issue of deprivation and education were able to have our voice heard: such is the value of good quality scrutiny.

One of the key outputs from the Social Mobility Commission was its annual State of the Nation Report. It will be a disappointment to lose that scrutiny, and I hope civil servants will either want to continue it or ask The Office for National Statistics to take it over. Here are a couple of links to my blog posts about the report:

Class rules: not OK | John Howson

Industrial revolutions alter a country’s geography | John Howson

Birds of a feather | John Howson

As I write this on a Sunday morning, I am reminded of the phrase in Matthew’s gospel at Chapter 26 and Verse 11: ‘The poor you will always have with you.’

That statement is not an admission of defeat, but a call to arms’. Abolishing the Social Mobility Commission must not weaken our mission for a more equal society. Now, I wonder where that advocation will feature any policy resulting from the spending of the £76 million pounds received by a political party this week?

Wearable glasses: a need for a new school rule?

Posted on by
Reply

This post on LinkedIn caught my eye recently. It adds yet another challenge to schools trying to keep pupils and staff safe in an ever-changing world, where technology is continually throwing up new challenges.

A small request as the new academic year begins. As Meta glasses and other wearable technologies become more common, ‘covert’ recording in classrooms is going to become increasingly easy. I get that it happens, maybe it shouldn’t but it does.

Personally, I really don’t mind being recorded; if a student genuinely thinks having a recording of part of a session will help them revisit an explanation or support their learning, I’m pretty relaxed about it. ,Indeed, if the reason was genuine, I’d probably be quite happy that there’s another way for you to digest the information I’m trying to deliver.

But please ask first.

Ater reading this post, and considering the debate around mobile phones in schools, I wonder if I can see a new school rule being developed, perhaps along the following lines:

Any pupils, staff and visitors wanting to wear glasses on school premises must register a photograph of those glasses with the school office, and notify the school office of any change.

Pupils and visitors should be aware that cameras at entry points and classroom doors check anyone entering the school wearing glasses to ensure that they are of the registered design.

The rule is to protect everyone (pupils and staff) from the use of unregistered recordings within the school premises. It is just an extension of the current photo pass rules, but adapted to cope with new technology.

If we are going to be wiped out as a species by AI, sometime before my 90th birthday, then is this issue worth worrying about. I don’t know, but I do know keeping vulnerable young people safe is an essential role for the State, and its agents, as well as private sector organisations that offer services to young people and vulnerable adults.

I would be interested to hear what others think? Over-reaction, as I think knife arches are in schools, or a sensible approach to a possible problem? What degree of risk are we willing to accept? I don’t want knife arches in schools | John Howson

It was the mass killing of pupils 30 years ago in Dunblane  that started the drive to ensure the safety of those in schools. So far, compared with what is happening around the world, especially in countries where guns are commonplace, England has avoided large scale attacks, but, as I know from personal experience, one attack is one too many.

London schools and challenging pupils: better outcomes than elsewhere?

Posted on by
Reply

Yesterday, I wrote a blog post about the rate of exclusions and suspensions from schools in London and the other regions of England of pupils eligible for Free School Meals as a part of a series about whether better funded schools were able to keep more of their pupils in schools. As promised in that post, I have also looked at the position with regard to the main ethnic, groups and a few of the less considered sub-grouping. Are London schools overfunded? | John Howson

As the following table shows, the picture for London is much more mixed with respect to the different ethnic groupings than for pupils eligible for Free School Meals.

London had the lowest rate of suspensions for five ethnic groups in the primary school sector, and four in the secondary school sector.

In respect of permanent exclusions, where rates are generally very low, and a single exclusion can affect the rate significantly, London had the lowest rate in six of the nine ethnic groups for the primary school sector and was joint equal in a seventh group. In the secondary school sector, London had the lowest rate in only two categories, but was joint lowest in another three groups- mostly were there were no permanent exclusions in this group in a number of regions, including London.

The position in special schools was somewhat different, as shown in the table.

London was not the lowest region in any ethnic grouping in ‘suspensions’ in the special school sector, and was only joint lowest in ‘permanent exclusions’. In most cases there were no permanent exclusions in these groups in any of the regions listed as ‘joint’ lowest, including in the London region. As pupils may attend some special schools from different local authorities to that where they live, and the funding for such schools is not through the  ‘School Block’ but was through the discredited ‘High Needs Block’, it is difficult to read anything into the results for the special school sector, except to say that no other region has the same level of outcome as the London region.

London schools contain a much more ethnically diverse group of pupils than schools in some other of the English regions, notably the North East and South West regions. Despite this fact, or possible because the familiarity of dealing with pupils from a wide range of different ethnic groups, often in the same classroom, and sometimes having come to school in England from war-tern or other challenging environments, have meant policies are in place to deal with situations that were less common outside the capital’s schools, London as a region still outperformed any other region in terms of being in lowest place of any region either on its own or in joint lowest position.

One can wonder: is this due to the funding being better than elsewhere? The funding formula school prevent that outcome for primary and secondary schools, if not for special schools. However, as I asked in the previous post in this series, is it the fact that funding includes a London allowance important, as the extra cash may go further if London schools employ younger, and thus cheaper teachers than in some other parts of England.

Do London schools use their cash for more classroom assistants and other staff likely to help reduce the level of suspensions and exclusions?

The data is intriguing, and worthy of more analysis than I have time to undertake. Are there also lesson to be learnt from London schools about how to reduce the number of pupils ‘kicked out’ of schools?

Finally, do academies or maintained schools exclude or suspend more pupils in different groups of pupils? What role, if any, do local authorities still play in helping keep down the levels of suspensions and exclusions? Time for me to go search the research literature.

Are London schools overfunded?

Posted on by
1

Let me be clear the answer is, of course they are not. However, as my previous post showed, there were significant differences in exclusion and suspension rates in the latest DfE data between many London boroughs and other local authorities across England. Do better funded schools exclude fewer pupils? Part 2 | John Howson with London borough having some of the lowest levels of both exclusions and suspensions.

This discrepancy between London and the rest of England, prompted me to explore the data at a regional level on two different factors: ethnicity and Free School Meals. At some point, it might be interesting to combine these two factors, but for now, they are treated as separate factors. This post deals with pupils eligible for Free School Meals. I hope, in a later post, to consider the data about ethnicity, where the are significant differences between different ethnic groups.

Firstly, here is the table for outcomes for entitle pupils for Free School Meals across primary, secondary and special school sectors.

Free School Meal – entitled pupils 2024/25 All school sectors

London stands out as the lowest rate for both exclusions and suspensions of any region in England. Permanent exclusions in the North East are more than four times higher than the rate in London, and even suspensions are more than four times higher than in the London region.

Of course, London schools may use other sanctions, such as in-school suspensions, but the differences do seem stark between the regions, with London schools using less than half the rate of suspensions of schools across any other region.    

In terms of pupils not entitled to Free School Meals, the differences between London and the rest of the regions are less stark.

Free School Meal – non-entitled pupils 2024/25 All school sectors

However, London still has a ‘suspension rate’ of less than half of that in the three regions with the highest rate of suspensions. Permanent exclusion rates for pupils not eligible for Free School Meals are generally very low across England, but, even so, London, along with the South East still had the lowest rate of permanent exclusions in 2024/25.

Free School Meal – non-entitled pupils 2024/25 Primary school sector

London doesn’t quite have the lowest permanent exclusions in the primary sector for pupils not entitled to Free School Meals: the rate in the south East is 0.01 better than in London. However, London does have the lowest rate for suspensions.

Free School Meal – entitled pupils 2024/25 Secondary school sector

Even with secondary school pupils entitled to Free School Meals, London has both the lowest rate of suspensions and of permanent exclusions o any region in England. Again, whether this is as a result other in-school measures, better staffing because of funding, or some other reasons isn’t discernible for the data.  

However, it will be interesting to consider the data for ‘ethnicity’ where London is one of the more diverse regions of England. This is because some London boroughs have low percentages of pupils on Free School Meals.

Does the funding of schools on a model of average salary funding model, with an additional London weighting in the National Funding Formula play any part in this data? For instance, does London employ more new teachers at below average salary rates.

Going forward, how will falling rolls affect the finances of schools in London and, hence, the possible rate of suspensions and exclusions in future years?

Do better funded schools exclude fewer pupils? Part 2

Posted on by
3

Earlier this week the DfE published the 2024-25 school-year data about temporary suspensions and permanent exclusions by schools. Release home – Suspensions and permanent exclusions in England – Explore education statistics – GOV.UK

The good news is contained in the headlines:

The rate of suspensions in the 2024/25 academic year was 10.88 (equivalent to 1,088 suspensions for every 10,000 pupils). This is a decrease from 11.31 in 2023/24. There were 913,000 suspensions in 2024/25, a decrease of 4% from 955,000 in 2023/24.

The rate and number of permanent exclusions also decreased from 2023/24 to 2024/25

The rate of permanent exclusions in the 2024/25 academic year was 0.12 (equivalent to 12 permanent exclusions for every 10,000 pupils). This is a decrease from 0.13 in 2023/24. There were 9,900 permanent exclusions in 2024/25, a decrease of 9% from 10,900 in 2023/24.

As the data are per 10,000 pupils, the outcomes are not affected by falling pupil rolls. However, since falling pupil numbers have yet really impacted on the secondary school sector, where most pupils are excluded or suspended, I wouldn’t have expected falling rolls to have had an impact in 2024-25.

A more interesting questions is whether funding for schools plays any part in the ability of schools to retain pupils rather than suspend or exclude them. Answering this question is slightly more complex than it might be because not all schools may behave in the same manner. for instance, Oxfordshire, a county I know well, has a higher rate of temporary suspensions, where it ranked 83 worst out of 154 local authorities in the 2024-25 data, compared with a ranking of 11th best of the 154 authorities for permanent exclusions.

However, as I have shown before, London schools are well funded compared with schools outside the capital. Thus, without a deliberate local policy to try to reduce either exclusion and suspensions, or indeed both, by schools outside the capital, it might be expected that London local authorities might rank as authorities with the lowest percentages of exclusions and suspensions.

The data for the rankings of London authorities in both 2023-24 and 2024-25 are shown in the table.

NUMBER OF LONDON BOROUGHS IN THE TOP 35 RANKED LOCAL AUTHORITIES
SCHOOL YEAR PERM EXCLUSIONS TEMP SUSPENSIONS
202324 19 27
202425 16 28

The figures for both years are impressive, with 28 of the London boroughs in the top 35 local authorities for the lowest temporary suspension per 10,000 pupils. However, this is not a new trend. In a previous post last year, I wrote the following:

As ever, I am struck by the funding issue. London, the best funded part of England has some of the lowest rates for exclusion and suspensions. There are 17 London boroughs in the list of the 25 local authorities with the lowest rate of suspensions in 2023/24, and 19 in the similar list for secondary exclusions. In the list of ten local authorities with the highest rates of exclusion are five authorities in the North East. I think that there may be something in this data that needs further exploration, especially as I would expect teacher recruitment to be easier in the North East than in London. Do better funded schools exclude fewer pupils? | John Howson

Once again, in the latest data, local authorities  in the north East fare badly, with five in the ten lowest rankings for permanent exclusions, and six in the ten lowest rankings for temporary suspensions.

Many London schools also have the benefit of Teach First in addition to their DfE funding. Even though they have to pay towards the Teach First trainees, the extra support is possibly another reason why London schools perform so well on this measure.

I wonder whether this issue is a concern to our incoming Prime Minister in view of the rankings for some local authorities in the north West of England.