Alternative provision: effective practice and post 16 transition (original) (raw)
Related papers
Investigative research into alternative provision. October 2018
2018
Scoping and screening Coding and appraising Synthesising Strength of evidence Question 1: What are schools doing to help pupils at risk of exclusion? Strategies focused on the student Strategies focused on the school Question 2: Why are pupils referred to Alternative Provision? Question 3: How do schools use Alternative Provision? Question 4: What does quality look like in Alternative Provision? Question 5: What are the processes of exclusion and referral to AP? Question 6: How are students reintegrated into mainstream? Gaps in the evidence Chapter 3: Identifying and supporting pupils at risk of exclusion Chapter summary Identifying pupils at risk of exclusion Assessing the needs of pupils at risk of exclusion or off-site direction Supporting pupils at risk of exclusion to remain in school Sources of support Varying assessment and support approaches for specific groups of pupils 2 DfE (October 2017), Destinations of key stage 4 and key stage 5 students, England, 2015/16 https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/destinations-of-ks4-and-ks5-pupils-2016 3 DfE (January 2017), ibid. 4 Ofsted (2016) Alternative provision. London: Ofsted. The findings from Ofsted's three-year survey of schools' use of off-site alternative provision.
This research project developed an understanding of how Alternative Education Providers (AEPs) in secondary education work through interviewing three educational professionals, one teacher from an Education Centre, one Assistant Head Teacher from an Academy and one teacher from an Emotional Behavioural Difficulties (EBD) unit, a survey was also utilised which took place within a Facebook group as well on Twitter to reach as many participants as possible. One of the key findings were, a behavioural management programme across AEPs and mainstream secondary education would not work due to the variety of students attending AEPs, most AEPs have their own behavioural management programmes. Another key finding was the widening participation gap between students within AEPs and those within mainstream education, these were discussed with both AEPs and mainstream secondary schools were both parties agreed that while the attainment gaps are wide, it is important to realise that students within AEPs are going through a hard time in life due to circumstances outside of their control, this has an effect on their development academically which is why it is important that they go to an AEP where they can get the help and support they need to learn how to deal with the circumstances in their lives effectively.
2013
Contents Table of figures v Glossary vii 1. Executive summary 1. Background 2.3.3 The costs of alternative provision 2.4 Aims and objectives of the evaluation 3. Methodology 3.1 Overall design 3.2 The samples 3.2.1 The trial sample 3.2.2 Comparison schools 3.3 Identifying pupils at risk of permanent exclusion 4. Pupils at risk of permanent exclusion-baseline findings 4.1 Introduction 4.2 The context: National Exclusion data 4.3 The overall size of the excluded and 'at risk' pupil populations in the trial and comparison schools 4.4 Modelling of pupils at risk of permanent exclusion using historic data 4.5 Baseline data relating to alternative and in-school provision 4.6 In-school support for pupils at risk of permanent exclusion 4.7 Alternative provision for pupils at risk of permanent exclusion 5. Arranging, monitoring and quality assuring alternative provision 5.1 Why do schools use AP? 5.2 What were the processes for commissioning, quality assuring and arranging AP? 5.3 How were arrangements for AP made? 5.4 Strengths of the arrangements 5.5 Issues arising relating to making arrangements for AP 5.6 What were the processes for monitoring AP? iv 5.7 Strengths and issues relating to current monitoring arrangements 5.7 Baseline data relating to financial arrangements, staffing and numbers of pupils supported with AP or in-school provision 6. Changes due to the trial Glossary
The UK 14-19 education reforms: perspectives from a special school
Support for Learning, 2010
The pilot research reported in this article is part of the Centre Research Study (CReSt) which evaluates the impact of the educational reform programme on schools, colleges and other centres in England. The article reports findings from one special school, based on interviews with teachers (including the headteacher), students and a parent. The aim of the article is to identify factors that appear to be having an impact on this special school, and these are presented under four headings: curriculum choice and flexibility; partnership challenges; concerns about Foundation Learning; and curriculum opportunities. This is a smallscale study, and the conclusions are tentative -future research will reveal whether the findings apply over time and to other special schools.s ufl_1463 172..178
British Educational Research Journal, 2018
This paper reports the findings of four separately commissioned evaluations of Alternative Provision (AP) undertaken in three Local Authorities in the UK. The evaluations were specifically predicated on the principles of children's rights and used a combination of qualitative research methods and documentary analysis to elicit the experiences of young people in conjunction with the viewpoints of key stake-holders. Data from each evaluation was gathered over a total period of 6 years. The sites and time scales for each evaluation varied from 6-month authoritywide strategic reviews, a 3-year evaluation of an AP Free School and an evaluation of pupil referrals in a large school partnership. The evaluations involved 200 participant children and young people, 30 managers and stakeholders, 8 parents of non-attending pupils and Local Authority Officers and School Governors. The evaluations report the complexity of needs amongst children and young people; the continuing problem of unsuccessful transitions between key phases/stages of education and the profound consequences of this for young people; assumptions around mainstream reintegration and managed moves; and the curriculum challenges of vocationalism and academic emphasis. While the research data confirms the positive value of multi-agency approaches in AP it also shows a more recent troubling increase in the number of young people now being referred to AP as a consequence of their exposure to performative school cultures.
What happens to pupils permanently excluded from special schools and pupil referral units in England
There is widespread consensus in the research and policy-related literature over the last decade that young people who have been permanently excluded from school are at a far greater risk of a variety of negative outcomes than young people who have not had this experience. These negative out- comes include prolonged periods out of education and/or employment; poor mental and physical health; involvement in crime; and homelessness. This article presents evidence from a small-scale qualitative study of destinations and outcomes post-exclusion for a group of young people consid- ered to be at particular risk of such negative outcomes: namely, those who have been permanently excluded from special schools or pupil referral units (now known as short-stay schools). The specific focus of this paper is on the 24 young people’s educational trajectories pre- and post-exclusion; the reasons for their exclusion from school; and on what forms of alternative provision were available to them after their permanent exclusion.
Frontiers in Education
This paper aims to examine the changes in school composition in England from 2011 to 2017 by school type and school phase; the speed of academisation by region; and the changes in the proportions of pupils with special educational needs (SEN) at SEN Support and EHC Plan levels overall. We analyse publicly available school level data from the National Pupil Database (NPD) to document two simultaneous trends in English education between 2011 and 2017. First, we observe an increasing percentage of the schools that have become Academies, especially in the secondary mainstream sector, but also among primary schools, special schools and pupil referral units. Second, we document a decreasing percentage of pupils who were classified as having SEN. While the decrease happened across all types of schools, it was particularly steep in Sponsored Academies. This evidence does not necessarily imply that the academisation of English schools has had a negative effect on the inclusion of pupils with SEN. However, the findings have significance to provide the basis for a more in-depth analysis of these trends and the causal effects of academisation involving individual and school level analyses. They can also inform national and local policy review of how pupils are identified as having SEN and in the context of international moves toward greater inclusive education.
Oxford Review of Education, 2021
Children 'in care' have, on average, lower educational attainment than their peers. This article tests the hypothesis that many of these children can 'catch-up', if in stable placements and secondary schools 'apparently effective' with other children with 'similar' difficulties. In a cohort of 542,998 16-year-old English children in mainstream schools, those in care for at least a year were on average 148,465 ranks behind their peers on measured attainment at age 7. At age 16, 21% of this group had 'caught up' improving their ranking by at least this amount. Allowing for covariates, we found that schools were differentially effective for disadvantaged pupil groups defined by eligibility for free school meals at age 7, in the bottom 3 deciles of attainment at entry to secondary school, or deemed 'in need' or as having behavioural, emotional or social difficulties. As predicted, the conditions for children in care catching up related to placement stability and measures of their school's apparent impact on these disadvantaged groups. In the 'worst' conditions 4% caught up as against 52% in the 'best'. The results support the hypotheses that best practice can reduce the educational gaps between children in care, other low attaining groups and their peers.