This seminar explores the process of formal and informal exclusion from the macro, meso and micro level to understand some of the complex interactions between policy, school and individual factors. Government statistics indicate that children and young people with special educational needs are five times more likely to be excluded from secondary schools, and account for just under half of excluded pupils. This seminar will explore the process of formal and informal exclusion from the macro, meso and micro level to understand some of the complex interactions between policy, school and individual factors. The significance of these on the lives of young people will be illustrated with reference to data drawn from the topical life histories of autistic girls. These portray the experience of having ones’ needs continually underestimated or misunderstood coupled with a lack of in-school support.

Combining legal analysis, theory, and evidence from practice, Lucinda Ferguson argues that the law is ill-equipped to support children at risk of permanent exclusion from school, particularly children with disabilities or other additional needs. The House of Commons’ Education Committee (2019) criticised the education system’s treatment of children with disabilities on the following terms:

“[C]hildren and parents are not ‘in the know’ and for some the law may not even appear to exist. Parents currently need a combination of special knowledge and social capital to navigate the system, and even then are left exhausted by the experience. Those without significant social or personal capital therefore face significant disadvantage. For some, Parliament might as well not have bothered to legislate.”

In this presentation, I combine legal analysis, theory, and evidence from practice to argue that the law is ill-equipped to support children at risk of permanent exclusion from school, particularly children with disabilities or other additional needs. I focus on the English experience, which is quite distinctive from that of other nations in the UK. I first outline the reality of permanent exclusion and introduce the legal framework.

I then consider the extent to which children’s rights arguments might support improvements in practice for these vulnerable children. I proceed to argue that much of the difficulty lies in our current conceptions of the nature of childhood, how we regard children compared to other ‘minority’ groups, and the implications of this for the legal regulation of their lives. I consider whether an intersectional perspective might assist here, and offer some concluding thoughts on how to bring about the necessary cultural shift and make the law work for vulnerable children at risk of exclusion from school.

This talk discusses the latest understanding of mental health needs in adolescent populations in the UK and the potential role that mental health services in schools can play. This talk will discuss the latest understanding of mental health needs in adolescent populations in the UK and the potential role that mental health services in schools can play. An example of current research alongside clinical service development will be discussed. The opportunities and challenges of mental health services working in schools will be explored, including how to navigate some of the ethical complexities of working in this areas as well as some of the main unanswered research questions that can be addressed through schools-research. A particular focus will be on how this relates to excluded children- what we know about their mental health needs and the role of services.

This presentation will discuss the place of Alternative Provision (AP) in the process of exclusion in England, with a particular focus on issues related to social justice. This seminar is part of our public seminar series on ‘Exclusion from School and its Consequences’, led by the Department of Education and convened by Harry Daniels (Professor of Education) and Ian Thompson (Associate Professor of English Education & Director of PGCE). This presentation will discuss the place of Alternative Provision (AP) in the process of exclusion in England, with a particular focus on issues related to social justice. Consideration will be given to some of the reasons why young people find themselves in AP. It will highlight the ways in which AP can serve to further marginalise young people who are already alienated by the education system. However, it will also draw on data from English AP sites to demonstrate how such sites can work to ensure that young people excluded from mainstream schools are retained in education. The choice is sometimes not between AP and the mainstream, but AP or no education. In some AP sites young people suggest that they are far happier than they were in the mainstream and, when it is provided can be engaged in meaningful learning. The presentation will consider why that it is and whether or not there are lessons to be learned from the AP sector which can help to make mainstream schools more inclusive. Throughout the presentation the voices of teachers and students in AP will be foregrounded. There will also be some discussion of international approaches to AP.

This seminar reports on the ongoing work of the multi-disciplinary and multi-site Excluded Lives Group whose work has led to the ESRC funds project The Political Economies of School Exclusion and their Consequences. There are great differences in the rates of permanent school exclusion in different parts of the UK with numbers rising rapidly in England but remaining relatively low or falling in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. For example, in the last available figures there were 7,900 permanent exclusions in England in 2017/18 compared to just three in Scotland in 2018/19. However, these figures do not account for many informal and illegal forms of exclusion. This seminar will report on the ongoing work of the multi-disciplinary (criminology, disability studies, economics, education, human geography, law, psychiatry, sociology) and multi-site (Oxford, Cardiff, Edinburgh, Belfast, LSE) Excluded Lives group established in 2014. This work has led to the ESRC funded project The Political Economies of School Exclusion and their Consequences (PolESE). In this research, home international comparisons of historical and current policy, practice and legal frameworks relating to school exclusion will be conducted for the first time. Previous research and official statistics show that school exclusions are far more likely to affect pupils with special needs, from low income families, and particular ethnic backgrounds. Exclusions have long and short-term consequences in terms of academic achievement, well-being, mental health, and future economic and employment prospects. PolESE is designed to highlight ways in which fairer and more productive outcomes can be achieved for pupils, their families, and professionals by comparing the ways in which policy and practice around exclusions differ in the four jurisdictions.

Released in May 2019, the Augar report was a result of a 6 person panel chaired by Philip Augar and was the first in England to have a remit for the whole of tertiary education. Parry argues whether its features are the nature of expert panels. The use of expert panels to advise governments is a favoured form of policy inquiry process. In higher education, especially in the UK, they have replaced committees of inquiry in the tradition of Robbins and Dearing. In further education, there were no such independent inquiries in the first place. Although sitting inside a government-led review and observing its no-go areas, the six-person panel chaired by Philip Augar (which reported in May) was the first, at least in England, to have a remit for the whole of tertiary education. In assessing the system of higher and further education in England, and making recommendations about how it might be strengthened, the panel needed to assemble and generate evidence on a wide front. The scope of the task was worthy of a larger and longer inquiry. The result was a report short on policy history and lesson-drawing but with data and analysis marshalled in support of its core contentions. Most of its recommendations were financial and regulatory. None were structural. The present architecture of tertiary education was deemed fit for purpose. Here also was an inquiry process aligned to existing government policy for a two-type system of academic and technical education. That policy was the creation of another government-convened panel (chaired by David Sainsbury). Two of its members subsequently served on the Augar team. Such features, it will be argued, are of the nature of expert panels. The work they accomplish should be judged accordingly.

Drawing upon three large studies in Australian higher education, this presentation sets out a case for the kinds of curriculum practices, as well as a range of pedagogic practices that can be enacted prior to, during and after students’ work placements. Increasingly, tertiary education institutions are providing workplace experiences for their students to achieve goals associated with occupational preparation and work readiness. However, without considering how best these experiences might be organised, enacted and augmented the full benefits of these learning experiences may not be fully realised. Drawing upon three large studies in Australian higher education, this presentation sets out a case for the kinds of curriculum practices (i.e. intended, enacted and experienced), as well as a range of pedagogic practices that can be enacted prior to, during and after students’ work placements, and the kinds of personal practices of students likely to support the effective integration and reconciliation of experiences in both the workplace and educational setting as directed towards developing robust occupational knowledge.

This lecture explores the different types of artificial intelligence systems in common use in education, before relating this to the covert use of algorithms in influencing educational journeys. The introduction of artificial intelligence in schools is likely to have a profound impact on relationships between teachers and their students. This lecture explores the different types of artificial intelligence systems in common use in education, before relating this to the covert use of algorithms in influencing educational journeys. This in turn is used to highlight data privacy rights issues for children and young people, particularly in relation to the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) introduced in 2018. The lecture then analyses the uncritical adoption of artificial intelligence systems in schools, discussing how this might inform future education policies. Achieving a balance between individual pedagogic rights, data privacy rights and effective use of data is a difficult challenge, and one not easily supported by current regulation. The lecture concludes by proposing a new framework for artificial intelligence use in schools.

With the rising interest in GCE, understanding the current research landscape could be useful for policy-makers, educators and scholars who seek to build upon the existing body of knowledge and develop it in new directions. The global increase of the incorporation of Global Citizenship Education (GCE) related contents in education systems in recent decades has generated a vast body of scholarship, both empirical and theoretical. An explanation for the rise in GCE internationally is often described as a response to economic, social and political changes that have made countries more interconnected through enhanced international mobility and financial interdependency. Globalization is claimed to lead to more diverse societies that require engagement with broader, more inclusive conceptions of citizenship, thus leading to the need of incorporation GCE into national curricula to various extents. As scholarship in this field had developed accordingly, there is a need for a systematic analysis of the topics and sub-fields that emerged and examined within this broad concept.

We performed a systematic review of research dealing with Global Citizenship Education (GCE) between 2006-2017 using Natural Language Processing (NLP) followed by network analysis to record and interpret the development of this field of research and highlight the trajectories of the current academic scholarship within teachers’ education. The analysis showed how studies surrounding GCE being discussed in the scholarship, forming intricate, and encompassing distinct areas such as education for sustainable development and critical thinking. We also highlight some notable omissions in the contemporary research, topics that appear to be under-represented in the research on GCE. Considering the rising interest in GCE, understanding the current research landscape could be useful for policy-makers, educators and scholars who seek to build upon the existing body of knowledge and develop it in new directions.

Naomi Eisenstadt presents evidence that low income itself reduces the chances of good outcomes for children and causes stress in families which exacerbates the risk. Much of the current discussion on children’s outcomes has focused on educational attainment, schools, and parental behaviours. This lecture will provide evidence that low income itself reduces the chances of good outcomes for children and that the stress caused in families by low income exacerbates the risk. While supportive and engaged parents, good early childhood education and good schools all reduce the risk of poor outcomes, money makes at least as much difference as parents and teachers.