Backing the outsiders

BLAME-Storming. That was one of a list of office 'buzz words' published by a recruitment company last week. It was defined as the rush to point fingers at other workers when a vital deadline is missed.

But it can be used just as appropriately outside the workplace, where every 'scandal', from the death of a child on the at-risk register to a rise in the number of drugs deaths, is accompanied by dust clouds of blame-laying so dense they make it almost impossible to view the problem itself.

That is what happened when the Scottish Government announced that the number of school exclusions – for offences ranging from general disobedience to attacks on other pupils and teachers – rose by 4% to 44,974 last year (although, admittedly, only 248 of those exclusions was permanent).

The radio phone-ins that followed were a veritable study in the art of fault-finding: parents blamed teachers; teachers blamed parents; the bring-back-the-belt brigade blamed the namby-pamby liberals; the namby-pamby liberals blamed everyone else for giving up too easily.

So frenzied was this bout of buck-passing it completely distracted from the fact these figures mean a generation of school children is being failed by a system that has no better solution to pupils who hate school than to legitimise their truancy. It is ironic that an education system which places social inclusion at its core should end up excluding so many of the very pupils it claims it wants to embrace (a disproportionate number of those excluded are from deprived backgrounds or have special needs). Ironic, but also inevitable.

Social inclusion and an obsession with league tables pull schools in opposite directions, particularly if the social inclusion policy is under-funded. Diverting resources to dealing with disruptive children is laudable, but what if that threatens the number of Higher passes? No one wants to drop a place in the league table because of a handful of troublemakers. Don't forget the school will probably have parents banging on the door demanding to know what action is being taken against the boy or girl who is making it impossible for their child to concentrate in maths. Besides which, teachers should not be expected to tolerate verbal and physical abuse in any circumstances.

With all this pressure on them, it's hardly surprising if schools want to wave a wand and make disruptive pupils disappear. The problem is they won't. Disappear that is. Even if persistent troublemakers can be 'magicked' out of school – for a few days, a month, or for good – it won't be long before they surface in the real world. And the fact they have been made to feel extraneous to mainstream society is unlikely to have turned them into model citizens. The chances are it will have strengthened their view of themselves as outsiders with no stake in their own communities.

There has to be a long-term answer, because howling at the moon about the degeneration of society is getting us nowhere. In any case, it's more complicated than that. True, it is difficult to imagine, a generation ago, a child hurling a chair across a classroom. Many areas are beset by second generation unemployment and drug addiction. But there are ways in which changes in the system have aggravated the problem. It can be no coincidence that – at a time when it is recognised schools are geared more towards a female learning style – 78% of last year's exclusions involved boys.

Perhaps bringing back an element of competition and catering for kinaesthetic learners would stop some from becoming disaffected. As would easing off on the obsession with keeping children in the education system as long as possible. After all, there were always pupils for whom academic learning held no attraction; who sped out of the school doors as quickly as possible to take up apprenticeships. That was seen as an entirely respectable route to take – and why not? No point in trying to fit round pegs into square holes.

With New Labour insisting it wants at least 50% of children to go on to higher education, however, and the prospect of raising the school leaving age mooted down south, those who would rather learn to fix cars than read King Lear are made to feel like misfits and failures. Is it any wonder many of them go on to sabotage the education of others?

The funny thing is that in so doing many of them demonstrate a determination, resourcefulness and stamina that in any other context would be seen as assets.

'Spark of Genius' is one initiative that tries to harness those qualities. A private venture which provides difficult children with almost one-to-one schooling, it allows pupils to set their own timetables and study away from others so there is no audience to play up to. Many of Scotland's local authorities have signed up, but it is too expensive to be used for every difficult pupil.

In Brazil, the authorities have built integrated schools, with social workers and educational psychologists on-site, although it seems to me their presence might simply serve to stigmatise further those who are finding it difficult to cope.

Perhaps the most promising approach, however, is to teach disruptive pupils in learning support centres within schools. This allows teachers and fellow pupils a degree of respite from their aggression, while ensuring they continue to cover the same work as their peers. It also makes it easier to reintegrate them into the mainstream school when the time comes. Like the other initiatives, learning support is costly, but if it stops disaffected children turning into disaffected dangerous adults then surely it is a price worth paying.