| Notes |
Creating a Culture:
How school leaders can optimise behaviour
MARCH 2017
Tom Bennett
Independent review of behaviour in schools
2
Contents
Foreword 4
1. Executive summary 6
1.1 School culture: the way we do things around here 6
1.2 Commonly found features of the most successful schools 7
1.3 Strategy recommendations for school leaders 8
1.4 Challenges that frequently impede improvement 8
1.5 Policy recommendations 9
1.5.1 Recommendations for the Department for Education to consider 9
1.5.2 Ofsted 10
1.6 How data was gathered 10
2 Introduction 12
2.1 Better behaviour benefits everyone 13
2.2 All schools, not some 14
2.3 Is there a behaviour problem? A review of the evidence 14
2.4 Defining the problem 14
2.4.1 Evidence against 15
2.4.2 Evidence for 15
2.4.3 Teacher voice surveys’ key findings 15
2.4.4 Further evidence 18
2.4.5 Conclusions 21
2.5 What do we mean by ‘good enough’? 22
2.6 Reframing what we mean by good behaviour: negative and positive 23
2.6.1 Is expecting good behaviour oppressive? 23
2.7 Commonly found features of the most successful schools 25
3 Recommendations for school leaders 30
3.1 Designing the culture 30
3.2 Creating a vision of the school culture 30
3.3 Making behaviour a whole school focus 30
3.4 Social norms 31
3.5 Communicating that culture to the school community and beyond 31
3.6 Leadership team curation 32
3
4 Building the culture in detail 34
4.1 Managing staff through transition 34
4.2 Teacher training 35
4.2.1 High expectations and consistency 36
4.2.2 School routines 38
4.2.3 School rules 39
4.2.4 Consequences and recognising the considerations for pupils with SEND 40
4.2.5 Internal inclusion units 43
4.2.6 Using cultural markers and levers to create cultures 46
4.2.7 Using premises to support behaviour 48
4.2.8 Attendance and punctuality 49
4.2.9 Technology 50
4.2.10 Role models 51
5 Maintaining the culture 53
5.1 Reinforcing the expectations 53
5.1.1 Continuous professional development (CPD) 55
5.1.2 Sharing good practice with other schools 57
5.1.3 Parents, families and the community 58
6 Obstacles to developing cultures of good behaviour, and how to overcome them 60
6.1 Responses to these challenges 62
Appendix 1: Summary of ITT behaviour management recommendations: case study
method 63
Appendix 2: Behaviour audit survey for schools/inspectors 65
Appendix 3: Literature review 68
Appendix 4: Bibliography 72
Appendix 5: Acknowledgements 75
4
Foreword
School leaders are well placed to drive substantive, widespread school improvement in
England. The range of responsibilities are as broad as the
measures by which they are held accountable. Even in the
most difficult of circumstances, I have seen headteachers
who have transformed the life chances for hundreds or
thousands of young people.
A student’s experience in school remains one of the most
insightful indicators of later life success in any one of a
number of metrics. For many it is the best chance they will
ever have to flourish. How they conduct themselves at
school is crucial to that experience. Helping them develop
good behaviour is therefore one of the most important
tasks a school faces.
This report has developed from the previous work of the Initial Teacher Training (ITT)
Behaviour Review Group, led by me. The Group was commissioned in 2015 by Rt Hon
Nicky Morgan MP, then Secretary of State for Education, to review and advise the
Department for Education (DfE) on ways to improve the core provision for training
teachers in the initial phase of their careers. The resulting report concluded that there
were substantive opportunities for improvement in both the content and pedagogy of how
new teachers are trained to run classrooms and direct the behaviour.
As that review progressed, it became increasingly clear that while a highly skilled
workforce of teachers trained in a variety of reactive and proactive strategies was
desirable, strong leadership could offer even greater possibilities for driving better
behaviour in schools. How a school was run was an even greater determinant of school
behaviour than any one of a number of well-trained staff working in isolation.
My objective was to understand what common factors, if any, could be derived from
successful schools. Of particular interest was if there were any strategies or themes that
could be successfully shared, and to what extent such strategies were contextual. I
wanted to understand if there were any commonalities in successful behaviour systems,
suggest impediments to achieving that success, and then conclude with a brief series of
recommendations, both for school leaders and for policy makers. This report is the result.
I have seen some excellent practice in leading for good behaviour; we have some truly
inspirational leaders in this field. My goal in this report is to capture and celebrate what
they do, so that everyone can learn from it. This report showcases our school leaders at
their best. The situation across the system is not perfect but is vital that we get it right.
We should not settle for second best, we can build on the progress made to achieve
great things for our students.
5
It has been an honour and a privilege to meet so many expert school leaders, and to visit
so many wonderful schools as part of this process. In truth, there is a good deal of work
to be done to improve matters. But there is equally a great deal of talent and ambition in
the school system to meet that challenge. After several decades of relative neglect, it is
reassuring to see behaviour once more in the spotlight and I look forward to a better
future that we now have a chance to build.
I hope this report is helpful to school leaders. It is a distillation of some of the best of their
community’s wisdom, and I have tried to represent that as faithfully as I can.
Tom Bennett
March 2017
6
1.Executive summary
The national picture of school behaviour is complex, but numerous indicators suggest
that it can be better in a great number of schools and contexts. Every leader should
consciously aspire to the very best behaviour possible in their schools as a matter of
priority. There are a number of strategies that schools with outstanding behaviour use
frequently, and these should be shared and made available to all school leaders in order
for them to decide if they are appropriate for their schools.
1.1 School culture: the way we do things around here
The way students behave in school is strongly correlated with their eventual outcomes.
When behaviour in general improves throughout a school the impact is:
• students achieve more academically and socially
• time is reclaimed for better and more learning
• staff satisfaction improves, retention is higher, recruitment is less problematic1
Standards of behaviour remain a significant challenge for many schools. There are many
things that schools can do to improve, and leadership is key to this. Teachers alone, no
matter how skilled, cannot intervene with the same impact as a school leader can.
The key task for a school leader is to create a culture - usefully defined as ‘the way we do
things around here’ - that is understood and subscribed to by the whole school
community.
Schools vary enormously in composition and context. Their challenges are similarly
varied. It is therefore impossible to prescribe a set of leadership strategies that will
guarantee improvements in all circumstances.
However, many of the main challenges fall within a finite range of variety. There are
some strategies that have a much higher probability of being useful in more or most
circumstances than others.
Common to the schools visited for this report were many features, values and leadership
themes, which were expressed through a variety of strategies.
These strategies were often interpreted in different ways. School leaders should also
interpret these themes in ways that suit the idiosyncrasies of their school context,
demographic, resources and staff.
1 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-impact-of-pupil-behaviour-and-wellbeing-on-educationaloutcomes
7
1.2 Commonly found features of the most successful
schools
Features include:
• committed, highly visible school leaders, with ambitious goals, supported by a
strong leadership team
• effectively communicated, realistic, detailed expectations understood clearly by all
members of the school
• highly consistent working practices throughout the school
• a clear understanding of what the school culture is ‘this is how we do things
around here, and these are the values we hold’
• high levels of staff and parental commitment to the school vision and strategies
• high levels of support between leadership and staff, for example, staff training
• attention to detail and thoroughness in the execution of school policies and
strategies
• high expectations of all students and staff, and a belief that all students matter
equally
8
1.3 Strategy recommendations for school leaders
Design the school culture you
want to see
Cultures require deliberate
creation. A key role of
leadership is to design a
detailed vision of what the
culture should look like for that
school, focussing on social and
academic conduct. Expectations
must be as high as possible, for
all.
Build that culture in practice
with as much detail and
clarity as possible
Staff and students need to know
how to achieve this, and what
the culture looks like in practice
from behaviour on buses, to
corridor and canteen conduct.
This means demonstrating it, communicating it thoroughly, and ensuring that every
aspect of school life feeds into and reinforces that culture.
One key way this is achieved is by designing routines that students and staff should
follow. Any behaviour that should be performed identically, most or all of the time, should
be made into a routine, for example, which corridor side to walk down, how to queue for
lunch.
Maintain that culture constantly
School systems require maintenance. This is often where good cultures break down. It is
reasonably straightforward to identify what a good culture might look like, but like a diet,
the difficulty lies in embedding and maintaining it. This includes staff training, effective
use of consequences, data monitoring, staff and student surveys and maintaining
standards.
1.4 Challenges that frequently impede improvement
Challenges include:
• lack of clarity of vision, or poor communication of that vision to staff or students
• a lack of sufficient in-school classroom management skills
9
• poorly calibrated, or low expectations
• inadequate orientation for new staff or students
• staff over-burdened by workload, and therefore unable to direct behaviour
effectively
• unsuitably skilled staff in charge of pivotal behaviour roles
• remote, unavailable, or over-occupied leadership
• inconsistency between staff and departments
1.5 Policy recommendations
The following recommendations are presented for ministerial consideration. They are
designed to stimulate change and improvement in the field of school leadership for
behaviour. Further discussion is needed to investigate cost implications, feasibility and
strategic considerations.
In an area as crucial as school leadership, it is vital that these methods and levers are
explored. The potential for these to generate a wealth of improvements and opportunities
for countless children’s futures is extraordinary. Additionally, the implications they may
have on teacher recruitment, retention and professionalism are potentially very
significant.
1.5.1 Recommendations for the Department for Education to consider
1. Fund schools to create internal inclusion units to offer targeted early specialist
intervention with the primary aim of reintegrating students back into the
mainstream school community. This funding should be focused on schools with
higher than average levels of challenging behaviour, and should also be
focused on schools that have already demonstrated reasonable efforts to
create this provision using their existing budgets and resources.
2. Design a revised certification process for all headteachers that includes a
requirement to demonstrate an appreciation of behavioural cultural levers and
how to use them.
3. Support the use of a national standardised method, for capturing data on
school behaviour that goes beyond present formal recording methods. For
example, in order to capture staff and student experiences of behaviour in
school, an anonymised survey, with both quantitative and qualitative
yardsticks, could be trialled as a way to produce an anonymised data map of
school behaviour. This could then be used as a comparative metric between
schools, and over time. An example of questions that should be included in
such a questionnaire is given in appendix 2 of this report.
4. Ensure school leaders have access to training in a range of behavioural
strategies and examples of best practice in the school system, by the creation
of an optional training scheme. School leaders should be encouraged to visit
10
other schools of similar structure and demographic where excellent behaviour
is apparent.
5. A pilot scheme of the above to be trialled in areas of identified need, including
consideration of Opportunity Areas, and evaluated after one year.
6. Further discussion is needed about the way special educational needs and
disabilities (SEND) and alternative provision is funded, both inside mainstream
schools, and in specialist sites. Schools, particularly in clusters such as multiacademy trusts could be incentivised to pool resources and share expertise.
7. Provide greater guidance for schools about how to manage and support the
most challenging students. This could take the form of a follow up report, as an
annex to this, for example to investigate best practice in pupil referral units and
alternative provision.
1.5.2 Ofsted
8. Ofsted should review its arrangements for obtaining staff and pupil views on
behaviour and ensure those views are taken into account as part of school
inspections. This should include:
• considering how all sources of evidence on behaviour management, for
example the standardised behaviour survey in 3 above, can be taken
into account during inspection
• reviewing the coverage of behaviour related issues within Ofsted’s pupil
and staff questionnaires, and exploring ways to ensure that inspectors
have appropriate access to the views of the range of staff and pupils at
the school. Some suggested good practice in this area is in appendix 2
of this report
• maximising staff and pupil discussions to establish school culture and
practice in relation to behaviour levels, support and structures. For
example, the interview samples could target the most vulnerable and atneed staff: trainees, supply staff, NQTs, administrative support staff,
catering staff, as well as more senior members of the school. This would
provide valuable data from those who most critically require the school
system’s support
9. School leaders should be interviewed to account for the results of the staff and
student interviews and survey.
1.6 How data was gathered
This report is the product of a combination of several sources of data:
• Visits were made to a number of schools throughout England identified as having
very effective behaviour management. In some cases, schools were selected due
11
to their rapid improvement in Ofsted-rated behaviour. In other cases, they were
schools that had been singled out for recognition by, for example, Her Majesty
Chief Inspector. Some schools were selected because they had succeeded in not
only creating but sustaining good cultures of behaviour for long periods.
• Interviews were held with practitioners with recognised success in the field of
school leadership. A range of face-to-face interviews as well as phone interviews
were conducted in the period April 2016 to September 2016.
• Round table discussions took place with recognised experts in the field of
behaviour management leadership, in order to provide the opportunity to reflect
collaboratively with peers on data gathered throughout the process.
• A series of 20 independent case studies focusing on behaviour management
strategies were commissioned from ASK Research, and taken into account for this
review. This research is available in full as a supplementary document to this
report.
This report is an attempt to distill the experience and wisdom of practitioners, for the most
part still current in their field. As a result, it is authoritative but not definitive or exhaustive.
While its conclusions are a distillation of very broad experiential constituencies, it is also
a meditative document. Its observations and recommendations are designed to be
practical and represent the real issues faced in school leadership, and the very great
possibilities offered by improvement in the area of whole school behaviour.
12
2 Introduction
Behaviour in school is inseparable from academic achievement, safety, welfare and wellbeing, and all other aspects of learning. It is the key to all other aims, and therefore
crucial. Its correct direction is equally crucial, and should be viewed as an issue of the
highest strategic importance. Behaviour does not manage itself, except haphazardly.
‘Behaviour’ in this report means any actions performed by any members of the student
and staff communities. It includes conduct in classrooms and all public areas: how
members work, communicate, relax and interact; how they study; how they greet staff;
how they arrive at school, transition from one activity to another; how they use social
media, and many other areas of their conduct. It does not merely refer to how students
do or do not act antisocially.
Schools in all circumstances can achieve high standards of behaviour. The difficulty in
achieving these standards will vary from school to school, community to community,
depending on the challenges specific to the circumstances of that school.
‘Culture’ in this context means the ideas, customs, and social behaviour of a particular
people, society or community.
2
Cultures will occur whether attention is paid to their creation or not. It is unlikely that, left
to their own devices, the multiple members of the school community will decide
spontaneously to behave in such a way that learning, civility, good character and
flourishing are optimised. Any community or society must enter into a pact or contract
within itself, between all members of that community, so competing interests are not
allowed to conspire in such a way as to defeat one another’s mutual goals.
The school leadership team and in particular the headteacher are key to attaining this
culture. School leaders possess the widest and most influential levers to influence the
school culture. What they do or do not do - is crucial.
Schools vary enormously in their demographics, economic circumstances, staff
composition, histories, premises, location and multiple other variables. Looked at through
this lens, it seems axiomatic that the strategies required to drive school improvement will
depend enormously on these contextual factors, and the wholesale import of ideas and
strategies from alien school circumstances would be ill considered. What drives
improvement in an established, high-achieving coastal secondary school may not be
what drives a comparable improvement in an inner-city primary school facing closure.
2 https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/culture definition 5:b,c,d
13
On the other hand, the common factor between all schools, mainstream or otherwise is
children. Human behaviour is culturally specific but exhibits broad and deep
commonalities. All people exhibit behaviour, and inhabit psychologies, within a
reasonably definable spectrum. We depend on biological imperatives like hunger and
fatigue, and we demonstrate social and personal reactions that emerge from both our
homes and our cultures.
This report has attempted to examine both: to understand what leadership strategies are
contextually dependent, and which are reasonably consistent, portable and effective in
multiple arenas.
Behaviour means the physical actions of the agent. Behaviour flows from character,
intention and circumstances. School leaders should rightly aim to influence student
character and attitudes in order to help students to flourish as learners and individuals
and members of their communities. More directly, they have a clearer responsibility to
expect students to behave in positive ways (outward behaviour being a far more obvious
lever to address than internal mental states).
2.1 Better behaviour benefits everyone
The aims of education are contested, but usually revolve around one of a number of
candidates such as:
• the academic education of the student
• the nurturing of their best interests
• the inheritance of the best of what has been learned before
• the propagation of good character
• the training of a workforce and socialisation
Whatever one believes the aim of education to be, all of these are best realised in
schools where good behaviour is the norm, and antisocial, selfish, or self-destructive
behaviour is minimised. Staff well-being, retention and working conditions are also
optimised by the propagation of good behaviour. Time and material resources are saved.
Highly socialised communities where good conduct is common provide a more stable
and transparent environment where mental health issues can be observed, anticipated or
supported more effectively.
There is no substantial disadvantage to investing in a successful behaviour culture in a
school, apart from the effort expended aiming towards it. The dividend, however, is
potentially very great.
14
2.2 All schools, not some
A key consideration of this report is how can all schools improve? Not some, or the
fortunate, but all. How can all pupils achieve, not merely the ones showing most
promise? We deliberately sought out schools demonstrating success, sometimes in the
most challenging circumstances. These schools have shown that great progress is
possible in even the least amenable of contexts, through ambition, industry and good
strategy.
2.3 Is there a behaviour problem? A review of the evidence
This report is designed to convey an urgent message. A great many schools provide a
safe and supportive environment for their pupils, and a great many students enjoy an
excellent education because of it. Simultaneously, many pupils in many schools could
enjoy a significant improvement in their school experiences, if greater focus was made on
improving their school behaviour culture. Many children are expected to learn in
conditions that could be substantially improved. This section will address the evidence
bases that substantiate this statement.
No school’s behaviour should be characterised as entirely good or bad. There are
pockets of both that vary in duration, severity and extent throughout every school
community.
Some students endure very challenging school cultures where behaviour is broadly poor.
Many other schools have good overall behaviour but suffer persistent disruption
intermittently.
It is hoped that this report will act as a catalyst, a guide, and an inspiration to improve
leadership practice. We need a renewed and vigorous re-examination of what high
expectations look like, and how we best achieve them. The lessons we can learn from
the best schools in this field are proof that many already run behaviour well, and that
others can learn from their example.
2.4 Defining the problem
In many schools, possibly in most classes, at most times, behaviour is largely civil and
cooperative. Serious breakdown of school cultures are relatively rare, and truly chaotic
schools are not the norm. However, this should not be reason to dismiss the problem.
one burst tyre on a car using four is still a serious issue.
Is there a national problem with behaviour? The evidence suggests that there is. Just as
importantly though there are many schools that demonstrate it is possible to improve in
even the most beleaguered of circumstances.
15
2.4.1 Evidence against
Previous reports in this area have produced different answers to the question ‘is there a
behaviour problem?’ The Steer Report (2009)3 principally used data from Ofsted to
conclude that most schools were good or better in this regard. House of Commons
Education Committee, Behaviour and Discipline in Schools, First Report of Session
2010–11 (2011) found that because opinions varied so much about the nature or extent
of a problem it was difficult to say to what extent the problem existed (or even if there
was one).
2.4.2 Evidence for
However, other sources have been less optimistic of these conclusions. Surveys of
teachers and pupils routinely throw up data that contradicts the optimism of the Steer
report or the uncertainty of the Education Committee’s findings. There is a striking
contrast between data gathered from school leaders or school inspectors, and the
experiences of front line teachers and students. This is partly understandable. School
leaders are held to account by their ability to demonstrate they have secured a safe, calm
school environment. Stakes for leaders are high. It is natural for the most positive
interpretation of one’s school to be presented publicly, especially in circumstances of
external inspection.
This report suggests that this is a significant issue and that there are concerns that need
to be addressed.
2.4.3 Teacher voice surveys’ key findings
The Teacher Voice Omnibus, May 20134
: Pupil Behaviour, conducted by the National
Foundation for Educational Research surveyed 1,700 teachers from a range of schools.
DfE submitted nine questions about teachers’ perceptions of pupil behaviour training, and
many other issues. The results showed:
• 77% of teachers felt that student behaviour at
their schools was good or better
• 87% felt that they were well equipped to deal with
student behaviour
• half agreed that there was appropriate training in
their schools to manage classroom behaviour
3 http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/wholeschool/behaviour/steerreport
4 https://www.nfer.ac.uk/publications/teachersvoicesurvey2013
16
• 61% felt confident using the powers they already had to discipline students
• over half (53%) felt that parents respected a teacher’s authority
• 93% believed that their school had a clear and comprehensive behaviour policy
• 70% said they would not be reluctant to talk about behaviour management with
other members of staff
In 2014, 74% of teachers considered behaviour in their schools to be good or better,
broadly the same as 2013 (76%) and up from 70% in 2008.
These figures present some obviously positive indicators. This is evidence that many
teachers often experience what they perceive to be good behaviour.
On the other hand, if these figures are representative, there is an obvious counter
narrative implied:
• almost a quarter (23%) of teachers believed that behaviour wasn’t at least good
• one in eight teachers did not feel well equipped to deal with student behaviour
• half felt that appropriate training was not available in their school to deal with
behaviour
• one in three (30%) felt they could not discuss behaviour problems with other
members of staff
It is also hard to measure the comparability of responses. What constitutes good
behaviour to one teacher may represent poor behaviour to another. Standards of
tolerance vary. Qualitative measures like ‘good’ and ‘acceptable’ can mean many things.
Even ‘acceptable’ needs some unpacking as a concept.
The Teacher’s Voice Omnibus 20155 indicated that 76% of teachers consider behaviour
in their school to be ‘very good’ or ‘good’. The pattern of responses for this question
(excluding the senior leader booster summer survey) were similar to previous years,
suggesting that there has been little change in teachers’ attitudes to student behaviour.
A similar result is shown in the latest 20166 Teacher Voice Omnibus, with some
interesting additional information:
• when asked to describe behaviour at their school, three quarters of the
respondents (75%) reported that it was ‘good’ or ‘very good’. Most of the others
(17%) described it as ‘acceptable’
• a higher percentage of all respondents in primary schools (41%) judged it was
‘very good’ than was the case in secondary schools (24%)
5 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/teacher-voice-omnibus-november-2015-survey-dfequestions
6 www.gov.uk/government/publications/teacher-voice-omnibus-may-to-july-2016-survey-dfe-questions
17
• at the same time, the percentage of senior leaders who responded that behaviour
was ‘very good’ (48%) was higher than was the case with classroom teachers
(21%)
• although this difference was evident among both primary and secondary school
respondents, the difference was most pronounced among secondary school
respondents
This indicates another divergence of perception between senior staff and classroom staff.
There is some cause for encouragement in this data but it should not inspire
complacency. If one in eight doctors felt poorly trained, and one in two said they could
not access training, few would settle for that. Our national education service could be
seen in this light. If we are to achieve any of our educational ambitions as a nation, it is
necessary to raise our bar.
18
2.4.4 Further evidence
To emphasise the case that there is a substantial opportunity to improve behaviour in
schools, it is useful to quote extensively from Professor Terry Haydn (2014)7 below, who
made a careful exploration of both the appearance and the lived reality of classrooms in
the UK.
‘For the past two decades, there have been differing views expressed about the
extent to which behaviour is a problem in English schools. In 1994, the then
Secretary of State for Education stated that poor pupil behaviour affects ‘a small
number of pupils in a small number of schools’ (Patten, 1994). In the same year,
Claus Moser argued that in inner-city areas, the problem of indiscipline in schools
was much more common and that ‘tens of thousands, perhaps hundreds of
thousands of children still have totally unacceptable educational experiences,
disadvantaging them for life’, because teachers were able to do no more than
‘crowd control’ (Moser, 1994). Michael Barber’s (1994) survey of 10,000
secondary school pupils in the Midlands appeared to lend support to Moser’s view.
The survey reported that 25% of pupils acknowledged behaving badly in school,
and 33% reported that they encountered disruption in class on a daily basis.
Barber argued that ‘a disruptive minority of 10–15% of pupils are seriously
undermining the quality of education in as many as half of all secondary schools’
(Barber, 1994). Citing the same study, he claimed that 92% of pupils in their
GCSE exam year (for pupils aged 16) suffered from disruption to their learning
through poor pupil behaviour. The Steer Report reported a very positive and
reassuring picture, stating that ‘the overall standard of behaviour achieved by
schools is good and has improved in recent years’, noting ‘a steady rise in
standards’ (Steer, 2009, p. 4).
However, there is evidence that questions the fairly rosy picture painted by Ofsted
and Steer, including recent surveys of teachers and headteachers in England.
A Times Educational Supplement 2010 survey of 400 heads found that 35% of
heads believed that pupil behaviour had deteriorated over the past 12 years, and
an Association of Teachers and Lecturers 2009 survey of over a thousand
teachers reported that 60% of them believed that they had disruptive pupils in their
classrooms, with 98% reporting that this had at times resulted in disruption of
pupils’ work. An earlier survey of teachers by the National Union of Teachers
found that 69% of teachers reported experience of disruptive behaviour ‘weekly or
more frequently’ (Neill, 2001).
Surveys of pupil perceptions of classroom climate also suggest that disruption is
not confined to a small number of inner-city schools. A recent Programme for
7 Haydn, T (2014), To what extent is behaviour a problem in English schools? Exploring the scale and
prevalence of deficits in classroom climate. Review of Education Vol. 2, No. 1, February 2014, pp. 31–64
19
International Student Assessment report stated that in England, 31% of pupils felt
that ‘in most or all lessons….there is noise and disorder’ (Bradshaw et al., 2010),
and Chamberlain et al. (2011) reported that a majority of pupils in England said
that they had experienced disruption to their learning.
The figure of 330,000 pupil exclusions in 2010–2011 (DfE, 2012b) also sits
uneasily with the generally positive picture presented by the Steer Report and
recent Ofsted judgements on the proportion of schools that were deemed to be
less than satisfactory in terms of pupil behaviour. Even though only 5,080 of these
exclusions were permanent, given that the most common reason for exclusions of
all types was persistent disruptive behaviour (accounting for 33.7% of permanent
exclusions and 24.8% of fixed period exclusions from all schools), it seems
unlikely that this disruption was limited to the 0.3% of schools where behaviour
was deemed by Ofsted to be satisfactory or better. Given the fact that Ofsted
figures on exclusions do not take account of ‘managed moves’ and ‘unofficial’
exclusions (Domokos, 2012), even these figures may understate the number of
exclusions from English schools.
Thus, over the past six years, ‘official’ reports on behaviour in schools (Ofsted
reports, and the government commissioned 2009 Steer Report on behaviour in
schools) have presented a very positive picture of classroom climate and pupil
behaviour, with Ofsted consistently reporting that behaviour was satisfactory or
better in over 90% of schools (Ofsted, 2006, 2010, 2012; Morris-King, 2011), a
figure rising to 99.7% in 2012 (DfE, 2012a). This portrayal of classroom climate
and pupil behaviour has been challenged by other sources. In December 2012, Sir
Michael Wilshaw, Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Schools painted a less positive
picture of behaviour in schools, which is at odds with the ‘99.7% satisfactory or
better’ figure cited by the DfE (based on Ofsted inspection reports) in 2012 (DfE,
2012a).
There is evidence to suggest that the very positive picture of behaviour in schools
presented by the Steer Report (2009), and the suggestion that behaviour is at
least satisfactory in 99.7% of schools (Ofsted, 2012a) seriously underestimate the
extent to which deficits in classroom climate and poor pupil behaviour are a
problem in English schools. Even Michael Wilshaw’s assertion that low-level
disruption may impede the academic progress of over 700,000 pupils in the
English school system may seriously underestimate the scale of the problem of
classroom climate and the working atmosphere in English classrooms (Ofsted,
2013). When looked at in conjunction with recent international evidence in this
field (see, for example, Elliott & Phuong-Mai, 2008; OECD, 2009), it is possible
that deficits in classroom climate (and as part of this, pupil and parent attitudes to
learning, and to the project of ‘education’ more generally) play a significant part in
explaining ‘in school variation’ in pupil attainment in English schools, differing
levels of attainment, as well as exerting a negative influence on educational
attainment in relation to other jurisdictions.’
20
‘Calm or ordered classrooms where effective learning can take place are what the
overwhelming majority of parents, pupils, teachers and policy-makers want.
However, until the scale, nature and complexity of this problem is acknowledged,
these deficits are likely to persist’.
Other sources of evidence: Below the Radar, practitioner surveys, Teaching and
Learning International Survey (TALIS)
Behaviour remains a serious concern in the UK school system. As the 2014 Ofsted report
‘Below the radar’8 report said:
‘A YouGov survey show that pupils are potentially losing up to an hour of learning
each day in English schools because of disruption in classrooms. This is
equivalent to 38 days of teaching lost per year. A large number of pupils,
therefore, are being denied a significant amount of valuable learning time. Many
teachers have come to accept some low-level disruption as a part of everyday life
in the classroom. One fifth of the teachers surveyed indicated that they ignored
low-level disruption and just ‘tried to carry on’. However, this behaviour disturbs
the learning of the perpetrators as well as that of others. According to the teachers
themselves, an average secondary school might contain five or six teachers who
lose at least 10 minutes of learning time per lesson as they struggle to maintain
good order. In primary schools, this averages out at nearly one teacher in every
school’.
The report also says:
‘The findings from that survey show that teachers, parents and carers are rightly
concerned about the frequent loss of learning time through low-level but persistent
disruptive behaviour. This report demonstrates that, in too many schools, teachers
are frustrated by this sort of behaviour and are critical of colleagues, particularly
those in leadership positions, who are not doing enough to ensure high standards
of pupil behaviour’.
The 2015 National Association of Headteachers recruitment survey9 indicated that many
headteachers felt that behaviour management was one of the most significant gaps in
new teachers’ ability: 70% said that this was the case, placing it in the top three
concerns.
8 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/below-the-radar-low-level-disruption-in-the-countrysclassrooms
9 http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/news-and-media/key-topics/governance/naht-recruitment-survey-showsgrowing-problems-in-schools/
21
An Association of Teachers and Lecturers behaviour survey10 in 2014 showed that
‘dealing with students’ aggression has caused 60% of staff who have experienced it to
feel a loss of confidence in their work, over a third (34%) to have mental health issues,
such as stress, anxiety or depression, and a third (33%) to refuse to teach the pupil
concerned. It also indicated that ‘The survey also found that 40% of respondents have
considered leaving the profession because of the poor behaviour of students’.
Similarly, a 2014 survey carried out by the The National Association of Schoolmasters
Union of Women Teachers11 said that ‘over two thirds of teachers (69%) believe there is
a widespread problem of poor pupil behaviour in schools and nearly four in ten (38%)
believe behaviour is a serious problem in their own school’.
The 2012 report Pupil Behaviour in schools in England12 found that data was pointing in
opposite directions at times, noting the positive picture from Ofsted reports, but also
noting that, ‘Surveys have shown that between a fifth and just over a quarter of children
report being bullied in school but violence or physical aggression are less commonly
reported’ (Hoare et al, 2011; Chamberlain et al, 2010; Green et al, 2010).
International inspection evidence also supports the view that significant problems remain
in pupil behaviour. According to the 2010 TALIS13, up to 25% of teachers in most of the
23 countries surveyed (including England) report losing at least 30% of their lesson time
to disruptions or administrative tasks, with an international average of 13% of teacher
time spent on maintaining order in the classroom (OECD, 2010).
And from Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) (OECD, 2010):
‘PISA results also showed that a sizeable minority reported some disruption in
classrooms – for example, 31% of pupils in England felt that ‘in most or all lessons’ that
‘there is noise and disorder’ (Bradshaw et al, 2010).
2.4.5 Conclusions
There is sufficient evidence to suggest that there is enough of a problem nationally with
behaviour for it to be a matter of concern. The existence of some very good practice
should not encourage complacency, but it can also catalyse and encourage our
ambitions to raise standards even further, reassured by the existence of living
demonstrations that improvement is possible.
10 https://www.atl.org.uk/behaviour survey 2014
11 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/9961182/Poor-parenting-leading-to-decline-inpupil-behaviour.html
12 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/pupil-behaviour-in-schools-in-england
13 http://www.oecd.org/edu/school/talis.htm
22
Although beyond the scope of this review, it would be useful to investigate if existing
mechanisms for collecting data about levels of classroom behaviour typically operate with
sufficient accuracy, given the disparities found between Ofsted reports and other, more
detailed investigations.
It should be noted that Ofsted has revised its own guidelines on behaviour inspection,
and made substantial and credible improvements in this area. This is to be applauded,
and further improvements are suggested in the recommendations.
2.5 What do we mean by ‘good enough’?
Poor behaviour can describe many things. It can describe behaviour that is distracting to
oneself, to others, or to the teacher. It can range from actions that insult, to ones that
endanger safety. This report considers any behaviour that detracts from the academic
and social success of the school community, along with behaviour that diminishes the
dignity of staff or students (for example harassment or name-calling).
Every school tends to have pockets where behaviour is more or less good. Certain
classrooms, or at different times, or in different areas or circumstances, for example,
lunch. In a great many schools behaviour could be far, far better, beyond compliance and
well into the realms of independent, mature student behaviour.
Additionally, in every classroom there will be good and less good behaviour, and indeed,
varying at times within the individual student’s school day. As any teacher will testify, it
only takes a few disruptive students to derail an entire lesson. Disruptive behaviour does
not need to be extreme such as fighting to cause real problems. Low-level disruption for
example, repetitive whispering can also prove toxic to a calm classroom.
The capacity and skill set to create a national system of high achieving schools exists. It
is well within our grasp to achieve. It requires will, persistence, wit, and a determination to
support one another until it is achieved. There are funding implications for some aspects
of reform such as improving alternative provision, but only minimal ones in other areas
for example, changing in-school strategies. This report argues that successfully
improving the behaviour culture of a school provides a dividend in both time and
finances.
Everywhere in the UK we can find excellent schools and leaders promoting exemplary
habits and strategies. The key is to learn from them so their success is replicated more
widely.
Success at school remains a key correlate to many metrics of later life success, from
earnings to health. A major factor in school success is pupil conduct in the school
community. Designing schools where good habits of conduct are encouraged, scaffolded,
reinforced and expected, must be one of the key aims of every school leader. There can
be few more important endeavours facing us in the world of education, and it is essential
that we stay focused on this most valuable prize.
23
2.6 Reframing what we mean by good behaviour: negative
and positive
Good behaviour is not simply the absence of ‘bad behaviour’ (swearing, fighting, or
retreating from classroom tasks). Good behaviour includes aiming towards students’
flourishing as scholars and human beings. So, while good behaviour does include the
absence of, for example, vandalism, rudeness and indolence (which we can describe as
negative good behaviour, loosely after Berlin’s Two Concepts of Liberty14) it also
describes behaviour is more broadly desirable. This could mean helping students to learn
good habits of study, or reasoning, or interacting with adults, coping with adversity, or
intellectual challenges (positive good behaviour). This could also describe the learning
behaviour we wish to see develop in students such as behaving as a scientist, an artist, a
mathematician. School leadership has the responsibility for creating circumstances
where both forms of good behaviour are encouraged and supported.
2.6.1 Is expecting good behaviour oppressive?
Directing students to behave in a specific way is often mischaracterised as an act of
oppression. This is both unhelpful and untrue. It is the duty of every adult to help create
in students the habit of self-restraint or self-regulation. This must be mastered before
students can consider themselves to be truly free. To be in control of one’s own
immediate inclinations or desires and fancies, is a liberty far more valuable than the
absence of restraint. Compliance is only one of several rungs on a behavioural ladder we
hope all our students will climb, but it is a necessary one to achieve first. Once obtained,
students can then be supported into true autonomy and independence, where they
reliably and consciously make wise and civil decisions without supervision or restraint.
This process closely mirrors the broader model of human maturation, in which schools
have a part to play.
In fact, the belief that directing student behaviour is harmful to their development is a
serious attitudinal impediment to developing schools with better behaviour cultures. It
inhibits the confident and assertive character of both teacher and school leader that is
required for the performance of both those roles.
Considering this, we must redefine our original question. When we say ‘is there a
behaviour problem?’ we must ask two questions: ‘is there too much misbehaviour?’ and
‘is there enough excellent behaviour?’ The first question, addressed by some of the
research already mentioned, can be answered with ‘yes’ and the second ‘almost certainly
not’. The mistake when considering the features of a behaviour system is to see it only in
terms of minimising poor behaviour that disrupts efficient and civil learning although this
is an important and vital aspect to expect. A more empowering and aspirational model is
14 Berlin, I. (1958) “Two Concepts of Liberty.” In Isaiah Berlin (1969) Four Essays on Liberty. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
24
to understand that good behaviour surpasses merely minimising the negative and seeks
to maximise positive behaviour.
A final note of caution. While increasing positive behaviour should be the aspirational
goal of school leadership, this must be realised in conjunction with the reduction of
negative ones. More straightforward student goals of calm, safe working environments
must be secured robustly before (or at least simultaneously with) attempts to build more
sophisticated models of behaviour. If students routinely verbally abuse one another
openly in class, for example, they will find it much more difficult to learn habits of
concentration, argumentation and discourse. As with academic subjects, mastery of the
basics is necessary before proceeding to more complex tasks.
25
2.7 Commonly found features of the most successful
schools
These were the features that were most routinely encountered in schools visited, or
described by school leaders in interview. There was a remarkably high consistency
between these schools, despite their wide variety of circumstances, intake, age groups
and ability ranges.
These features were the ones that schools and school leaders interviewed deemed most
significant. In some cases, attention was drawn to them by other school key partners
(teachers, students).
In most cases, they coincided closely with the findings of the ASK research which is
included as an adjunct to this report. There was a strong correlation between the
independent findings of that report, and the self-reported observations of the expert
groups, interviews and school visits. These similarities were found most clearly in the
common features of their behaviour policy, vision and aims. Where they differed most
noticeably was in the exact form their strategies took that allowed them to achieve these
aims.
This list is not exhaustive, and none of these features are by themselves sufficient
conditions for success. It should also be noted that some of these features are also
present in schools that are less successful at creating effective behaviour cultures. But
they represent a reasonably concise distillation of features that appear to be highly
important in the creation of robust cultures of good conduct.
Throughout this section, and subsequent sections, examples are used of actual practice
in a number of schools. These are meant to be illustrative rather than prescriptive.
Suggestions of how strategy should be executed rather than dogma.
• Committed headteachers, with high levels of focus, ambition, mission, altruism
and tenacity. These qualities were frequently mentioned by school leaders
themselves, their staff and the students. Sometimes leaders themselves were
unable to express what qualities they possessed that mattered. Some of them
expressed the belief that they ‘had’ to make changes in the school and that they
would not be persuaded otherwise. Many of them viewed challenges and
obstacles in a sanguine, pragmatic manner. All of them expressed a deep and
sincere commitment to the success of the school as a body, and everyone within
it. Many spoke of it as a very personal belief.
• Strong management teams with a balance of aptitudes, employed in areas
that suited those aptitudes. Due to the unique demands placed on leaders in
challenging circumstances, and due to the impossibility of any one person
managing all aspects of school culture, many leaders interviewed mentioned the
need for a highly effective team of senior leaders. It was clear that slavish
compliance to the principal was not required nor useful but committed acceptance
of their mission and vision was. More, these sub-leaders needed to be highly
26
effective themselves. Little room is permitted for sub-optimal performance at this
level.
Case study
The Ebbsfleet Academy, formerly Swan Valley Community School, is a co-educational
secondary school in a deprived area of north Kent. Alison Colwell, the principal, began
work in 2012. The school opened as a new academy in November 2013 as the The
Ebbsfleet Academy. 40% of its students were eligible for pupil premium and only 24%
of all students gained A-C in English and Maths in the last full year of the predecessor
school. All staff had their classes monitored and performance management put in
place. This resulted in many teachers resigning of their own accord and some being
dismissed. The former leadership team was made redundant. The school currently has
66 members of staff and only 2 teachers of these are from the former school. In 2015,
54% of students gained an A-C in English and Maths.
Alison attributes the turnaround to factors such as:
• clear systems in place, appointment of a new leadership team and creation of
middle-tier leaders
• a leadership team with a clear culture, standards and vision for the school
• banned whole class detentions
• rules, standards and expectations clearly communicated to both students and
parents
• clear systems in place, appointment of a new leadership team and creation of
middle-tier leaders
• people wanting to be part of the new school
• attention to detail – strict rules, weekly equipment checks, detentions for such
things as rubber or pen missing, uniform infractions, colour of hair
• mobile phones – any child caught with a mobile phone has it confiscated until
next school holiday
• meeting held with 50 of the most challenging students and their parents to be
clear about the behaviour systems in place
• banned whole-school detentions
• A clear and detailed sense of purpose and strategy. It is not enough to
possess merely a vague notion of how the culture should be. It is necessary for
school leaders to describe that dream with clarity. What are the eventual (or
perpetual) goals? What would behaviour look like when they were achieved?
What strategies will they require? How will the strategies be monitored? And so
on. None of these are unusual aspects of leadership, but the most effective
leaders carried out this crucial function with high levels of dedication and
attention to detail.
27
• A robust, firm communication of that purpose and strategy to all members
of the school community. In the best schools visited, all students knew in detail
what the school vision was, and exactly how that was being achieved, what the
school rules and values were, and who the senior team were. All staff
interviewed expressed sincere and positive regard for the school behavioural
policies, felt supported in their ability to carry it out, and crucially also felt
confident in communicating that to the students.
Case study
Charlie Taylor was the headteacher of The Willows School, a north London primary for
children with severe behavioural problems. When Mr Taylor took over The Willows
School it had lost its previous headteacher and a significant number of school staff. He
was clear at the outset what his vision and culture of the school was going to be. Key
actions included:
• high visibility leadership, ensuring he was seen at every opportunity, including
in the classroom, lunch, breaks, school gate
• setting up weekly meetings with each individual child and developed plans on
providing support and managing their behaviour
• expectations, sanction and rewards were made clear
• reduced the use of restraint as a first reaction
• Consistency between all staff and students about cultural and academic
norms. Many teachers spoken to highlighted their appreciation that school values
and rules were consistent throughout the school, and that expectations were
therefore simplified and more easily realised.
• Close attention to detail. In the most successful schools few things were left to
chance and every aspect of the school life, from break duties to library passes to
counting in the basketballs, was considered thoughtfully, and made to comply with
the values and processes of the school behaviour policy. That policy was itself
spelled out in sufficient detail and clarity, constantly referred to, and made explicit
throughout the course of school life. There was little chance that staff or students
would misunderstand the school’s values and routines when they were
demonstrated so thoroughly.
• Well-advertised, repeatedly demonstrated routines in every aspect of civil and
academic conduct. Just as classrooms run on well-designed routines, so too did
schools. They benefited enormously from clear, consistent expectations of habitual
conduct. Any aspect of school life that could successfully be made into a routine
should be clearly defined as such. Leaders should proactively seek to identify what
behaviour is universally required in every aspect of school life, and then strive to
make it clear to all stakeholders what the routine involves.
28
Case study
Charlie Taylor emphasised proactivity in planning for good behaviour:
‘Too often school leaders and teachers don’t think about behaviour when it’s good.
They only think about it when it’s bad, which is counter-intuitive. When they have
not thought about it and planned effectively they are disabled by the behaviour of
just a few students. Planning for each individual child is vital especially when
setting behaviour goals. Teachers just react to the child’s misbehaviour rather than
having planned strategies in place.’
Example
In some schools there was an expectation to walk on one side of the corridor only,
wear uniform in a certain way, attend assembly in silence, or row by row, or some other
procedure. What mattered was that there was a shared understanding of this
behaviour, embedded in the collective consciousness, and expected at all times.
• A commitment to staff development with the concomitant expectation that staff
reciprocate by contributing their best efforts. Continuing professional development
and performance management conspired to raise success in the staff’s collective
skill base in this area. Conversely, all staff were expected to be accountable for
their decisions, their adherence to the school routines, and their demonstration of
school values.
• Highly visible leadership were a normal part of the public life of the school. For
example, classes were unsurprised by seeing the headteacher turn up without
announcement, and disruption was minimised as a result. Leaders were present
on lunch queues, at breakfast clubs, at the school gates, and in every area of the
school community.
• Behaviour policies that were made a continual focus in every aspect of school
strategy and planning. Rather than referring to behaviour only when problems are
encountered, behaviour was one of the permanent agenda items on the best
schools’ planning cycles at meetings of the governing body, the school council,
faculty, department and leadership meetings.
• A commitment to every student’s wellbeing and success, despite the
challenges they may present. The schools demonstrated that they had a duty to
every student under their care, from the least to the most able. Every student was
seen as an opportunity for success rather than the vehicle for failure. When
students failed to behave, it was seen as a problem to be solved rather than
merely a nuisance. The schools had high levels of positive regard for every
29
member of their community, although this ran parallel with clear, high expectations
of student behaviour. Challenging students when they misbehave, reprimanding
them and setting sanctions, for example are consistent with having high regard for
students’ potential, as well as the dignity of their peers.
Case study
At Passmores Academy in Essex, due to a rebuild, the school leaders had a large say
in the school design. It was decided to build the inclusion unit at the centre of the
school, a starfish shaped building. Called ‘The Egg’, this large multi-storey unit is
staffed by full-time, fully trained teachers and support staff. Students with additional
learning needs can be temporarily based here, where they receive a targeted
curriculum comprise of core academic strands, and remedial social support aimed at
reintegrating them into the mainstream school community. In this way, pupils internally
withdrawn from lessons are still seen as members of the school.
• A focus by senior staff on supporting the most challenging students
appropriately. Pupils with the greatest behavioural needs, need to be proactively
supported rather than waiting for their difficulties to manifest themselves, and
require a response.
Example
At Robert Clack School in Dagenham, the principal Sir Paul Grant took a close interest
in the students with the biggest difficulties meeting the school behaviour standards,
developing a warm but professional relationship with them based on positive, high
expectations, focussing on what the students can do and what they could do, as well
as what they should try to avoid. He had a close appreciation of where they were in
their progress, and the students expressed high levels of respect and regard for him as
a result.
30
3 Recommendations for school leaders
This report suggests that the following strategies would have the most impact in creating
a culture that promotes excellent behaviour. These strategies can be interpreted in many
ways.
The recommendations have been separated into three categories. They reflect the three
stages of promoting a school culture that deliberately and carefully optimises conduct,
character and academic achievement - designing the culture, building the culture in detail
and maintaining the culture.
3.1 Designing the culture
A school culture will exist whether effort is invested in it or not. Therefore, it is sensible to
ensure that the prevailing culture is supportive of good conduct rather than one that
impedes it. Good school leaders are the conscious architects of their school cultures.
They have a clear idea of the behaviour they want to achieve, and the methods they will
use to achieve them.
3.2 Creating a vision of the school culture
Leaders have a responsibility to provide
their school with a clear behaviour vision,
commonly understood, and explained
point-by-point. This vision should refer to
permitted, prohibited and encouraged
behaviour, as well as attitudes, values
and beliefs. Visions are trivial unless they
are demonstrated in practice, and they
should be referred to constantly,
revisited, and revised when necessary.
The formal school behaviour policy is
merely a starting point. The leader’s role
is to unpack the values of the policy in
practice, throughout school life.
3.3 Making behaviour a whole
school focus
This means ensuring that school behaviour is
a high-status topic in every meeting, in public
discussions and at every level of strategy. The
creation of a mature and cooperative culture
of excellent behaviour should be one of the
31
fundamental goals of the school. Effort, finance and industry must be directed constantly
in its direction. This is far from the sometimes piecemeal and superficial importance that
some schools mistakenly assign to it, for example, dealing with misbehaviour as it
occurs, but having no strategy in place to minimise it in the first place.
3.4 Social norms
Creating school culture is about designing social norms that one would want to see
reproduced throughout the school community. Leaders must ask, ‘What would I like all
students to do, routinely?’ ‘What
do I want them to believe about
themselves, their achievements,
each other, the school?’ Once
these questions have been
answered, the leader can then
translate these aspirations into
expectations. Social norms are
found most clearly in the routines
of the school. Any aspect of
school behaviour that can be
standardised because it is
expected from all students at all
times should be, for example
walking on the left or right of the
corridor, entering the class,
entering assembly, clearing
tables at lunch. These routines
should be communicated to, and practiced by, staff and students until they become
automatic. This then frees up time, mental effort and energy towards more useful areas,
such as study.
3.5 Communicating that
culture to the school
community and beyond
Leaders are responsible for setting
the terms of what constitutes good
behaviour.
Shared values, behaviour and
practices do not happen
spontaneously. They must be
modelled, explained and promoted
carefully by school leaders.
32
Example
At Michaela Community School (Free School) Wembley, the headteacher Katherine
Birbalsingh decided that all students beginning year 7 should experience a week-long
induction ‘Boot Camp’ where they are socialised into the behaviour, rules, and
expectations of the school community. This serves as both an introduction to the social
norms, but also reinforces these norms with staff.
This process is repeated for the year 9 group (‘Boot Camp Rebooted’) to refresh or
update the procedures for them, or to unpick any lack of clarity.
Expectations must be exemplified in as much detail as possible. Many problems with
creating a strong culture are rooted in the misapprehension that a vision has been
demonstrated clearly when it has not, or that an expectation has been made clear but in
fact remains only vaguely comprehensible to its recipients.
It is easy to make bold and visionary demands on colleagues and students, but without
concrete examples of what that vision would look like in practice, leaders run the risk of
being misinterpreted. Audiences will have enormously different perceptions about what
‘high expectations’ mean, for example. To one teacher it might mean ‘recovering
homework from most members of the class, within a week or so of setting it’. To another
it could mean ‘all homework recovered from the class on time, and to a high standard’.
Many common terms in education are subject to interpretation. Leaders who wish to see
their expectations understood, then met, must attend carefully to this.
Example
Don’t only say ‘Assemblies should encourage good behaviour’. Say, ‘For example, in
every assembly I want to see merits given out to the best students for [behaviour x]’.
This should be at the end of the assembly, and the pupils should be asked to go on
stage to collect their certificates.
3.6 Leadership team curation
In many interviews, school leaders referenced how essential a highly committed
leadership team was, one that was ambitious, optimistic and bought completely into the
school vision. Some of them mentioned specifically the need for one loyal, talented and
dedicated lieutenant.
33
School leaders must ensure that their team is loyal, well-supported to perform their roles,
positive and ambitious towards the students’ well-being, and possessing skill sets suited
to their designated roles. In order to achieve this, leaders must focus on retraining
existing staff, recruiting new ones, or moving unsuitable members into different positions,
in order to achieve the leverage that an effective team can provide. This may involve
losing staff, as well as recruiting.
Example
At a headteachers’ round table for this report, it was agreed that building capacity is
essential and people should be promoted for the right reasons. Senior leaders should
effectively monitor the teachers to identify who they believe:
• has the personality and potential to be a leader and is ready for the next stage of
teaching and learning
• has the potential but are not utilising their skills
• can’t be bothered with engaging with the ethos/culture and
• are actively trying to destroy what the school is trying to achieve
Building a core team of effective, active leaders
The headteacher’s role is crucial to the success of a school. Their success is closely
associated with a close-knit team of like-minded individuals who believe in the school
values and vison, and are prepared to routinely put those values into practice. In some
cases, their roles will be to innovate and lead, for example, taking responsibility for
discrete areas of operations, and taking initiative within those roles. At other times, their
roles will be managerial such as the efficient maintenance of established systems, and
guaranteeing that staff roles are being fulfilled, projects are on schedule, and goals are
reached. The ability to discern when to innovate, and when to consolidate, is key to the
role of every leader or manager in the school. It is crucial to the success of an excellent
school behaviour culture.
34
4 Building the culture in detail
4.1 Managing staff through transition
School leaders involved in taking a school from existent circumstances to an improved
state must be ready to offer high levels of support to staff so they understand new
systems and expectations, and clear descriptions of the benefits to be obtained. They
should offer targeted training in order to achieve this. They must also be prepared to
‘fight their corner’, defending their policies and ideas. They must also of course be
prepared to see their ideas fail to land successfully with a minority of teachers who
cannot be persuaded. Once every avenue of support and reflection has been exhausted,
they must be prepared to move staff into other positions or ask them to consider other
options.
Case study
Seymour Road Primary School, Manchester, Executive Principal Sophie Murfin found
that staff transition was key.
Sophie was clear: ‘You cannot change the culture of a school overnight, and the
biggest challenge to win was the staff. You have to gain their buy-in and shared vision
and the fact that they want it to change as well. One size doesn’t fit all and you have to
take account about what you can introduce in the first instance and what you should
introduce further down the line’.
Many school leaders adopted a simple but important technique: publicly supporting staff
in their decisions in front of students, and holding them accountable in private in the
event of the need to correct practice. The leaders interviewed viewed this as the most
supportive way of building a team, treating staff with dignity and building capital with the
school body.
Leaders need to make sure that all staff appreciate this principle: behaviour is everyone's
responsibility. School leaders and their teams are not police, nor are classroom teachers
35
solely responsible. Leaders and staff have different roles to play at times in supporting an
effective school culture, but all staff have a role, from catering staff to governors.
4.2 Teacher training
Staff must be inducted clearly into the
behaviour culture of the school, as soon as
(and preferably before) they join the school.
Staff training in this area must be viewed as
a right rather than a perk, guaranteed by
membership of the school community.
Training should not be seen as merely an
optional staff offer, a burden or a
disposable feature of school life.
Front-loading staff training
Many schools find success by ensuring that all staff are trained in behaviour
management at the time of their induction or even before. This is to ensure that all staff
begin with a minimum understanding of the general principles of running a classroom, the
broad range of available strategies to them, and an understanding of the whole school
approach. In this way, the behaviour policy becomes embedded in practice and ceases
to be a merely administrative document.
To understand what constitutes good, core teacher training, school leaders could look at
the findings of the ITT behaviour review panel (2015)15 where a skeleton set of training
standards can be found. All new staff must be assessed, observed and trained up to the
school standard as soon as practical, as a matter of urgency.
The organisation Deans for Impact have written an excellent free guide to effective
teacher training ‘Practice with Purpose - The Emerging Science of Teacher Expertise’
16
that could be usefully used by school leaders or the relevant leader of teacher training.
15 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/initial-teacher-training-government-response-to-carter16 https://deansforimpact.org/resources/practice-with-purpose
36
Example
The ITT behaviour review (2015) concluded that all staff needed, at a minimum,
training in the following areas:
Routines
Knowing what classroom processes could be automated, taught and practised in such
a way that they were performed habitually, such as task transitions, lesson beginnings,
debating etc. Knowing ways of conveying, monitoring and reinforcing these routines.
Reactions and responses
Understanding when and how to react to inappropriate behaviour in such a way that
normal classroom systems are resumed, and further disruption is minimised. These
can involve a repertoire of possible responses such as sanctions, body language,
reminders, removals, summoning assistance.
Relationships
Understanding and consciously creating relationships of trust, dignity and support
between all students and oneself. This is a wide and diffuse area and involves how to
speak to parents and guardians, knowing about a student’s specific learning needs,
prior attainment and other data, understanding the effects of stress on decision-making
and many other factors.
These areas require continuous and intelligent reinforcement through the duration of
the teacher’s career. At all times, the teacher’s routines should aim towards supporting
the aims and outcomes of the school routines, which in turn demands that these are
robust, clear and aimed at a defined and public good.
Further detail is available in the original document, referenced on the previous page.
Case study
At Seymour Road Primary School, all the new qualified teachers undertake the OLEVI
accredited training package from a private provider. It includes watching good practice
sessions throughout the year with model teachers, peer teaching and being matched with
a mentor within the school. Training packages are also shared across the Wise Owl
Trust.
4.2.1 High expectations and consistency
These two qualities were the most frequently mentioned themes throughout this report’s
formation. Every leader agreed that together they represented the foundations of any
37
attempt to create a school culture. The school leader must embody ambition, aspiration
and high expectations for every member of the community. They must demonstrate
through their actions and words the belief that progress is not only possible, but
expected. These aspirations must be embodied and expressed by staff.
The school ethos, its vision, and the strategies used to achieve it, must be consistent with
one another, and must be consistently demonstrated. Rules and values that fluctuate too
much confuse what the school stands for. Exceptions may be permitted, but they must be
exceptional.
The vision for what constitutes acceptable and desirable behaviour should be clearly
communicated to all members of staff and students. Students must be made constantly
aware of the expectations required of them. Expectations must be not only high, but
demonstrated repeatedly, and consistently.
In both their school behaviour policies, and in their management of individual students,
schools do need to pay regard to the Equality Act 2010 (the Act).
In essence, the Act places a duty on schools to take into account the circumstances and
the needs of each student when managing behaviour issues. Thus, for a student with a
known disability, treatment must be proportionate, in the light of the student’s disabilities.
The same treatment cannot simply be given to everyone in the same situation.
A common feature of all high performing schools is pride, students and staff taking pride
in their school, valuing themselves and the institution they were part of. This consisted of
talking up the school’s potential at every realistic opportunity, being positive and
aspirational at all times in pubic ceremonies and conduct, showing appreciation to staff
and students in highly visible ways, and ensuring that the building however cosmetically
appealing or not, was treated with respect, kept immaculately clean, free from vandalism,
graffiti, and as professionally turned out as possible (via displays).
38
Example
Robert Clack School, Dagenham was built in 1955, and features design and materials
common to that period. Despite the age and relative difficulty of maintaining stock from
that era in good condition, the school is cosmetically immaculate. Litter and cosmetic
blemishes are tackled immediately with vigour. Walls emphasise student
achievements, school awards, and other opportunities. In this way, students are
reminded that they should aspire to success, regardless of circumstance.
4.2.2 School routines
The school must have well-established and universally known and understood systems
of behaviour, for example, student removal, consequences, and sanctions, corridor and
classroom expectations, behaviour on trips, arrival, transition and departure behaviour
and so on. Any area of general behaviour that can be sensibly translated into a routine
should be done so explicitly. This removes uncertainty about school expectations from
mundane areas of school life, which reduces anxiety, creates a framework of social
norms, and reduces the need for reflection and reinvention of what is and is not
acceptable conduct. This in turn saves time and effort that would otherwise be expended
in repetitive instruction. These routines should be seen as the aspiration of all members
of the school community whenever possible.
39
Case study
King Solomon Academy in North London, the Code of Conduct states that:
‘In the academy and the local community, I will do whatever it takes to help create a safe
academy and local community which respects the rights of others by:
• listening to members of staff and following instructions politely and calmly
• walking in single file, not running or shouting, and maintaining silence in corridors
• going straight to my lessons and holding doors open for others when the corridors
are busy
• never damaging school property, defacing the building, dropping litter or spitting
• never insulting, undermining or swearing at anyone
• remembering I am always an ambassador for the academy. Leaving school and
making my way home in an orderly, responsible way
• when travelling on public transport, I will respect those around me, speaking to
teammates, transport staff and members of the public quietly and politely
respecting the local environment, by being considerate to our local community,
obeying shop rules, and never dropping litter, defacing or trespassing on private
property
I understand that there will be consequences if I do not observe the Code of Conduct.’
These standards, and many others, are discussed, reminded, and lived constantly
throughout the day, and every student and member of staff is familiar with them.
4.2.3 School rules
Central to the concept of embedding routines, is the idea that there must be rules. Rules
can be explicit and implicit, but for the sake of good conduct, it is advisable that they are
explicit, as short as possible, compact and memorable.
They must be widely known and demonstrated throughout school life. When they are
broken, it is no trivial matter. There must be some form of consequence which is not to
say that exceptions should never be permitted, only that they must be exceptional.
Rules are a form of routine and the difference is that they are explicit, codified and
formal. Typically, their adherence or rejection are attached to some form of formal or
informal school consequence, which will be shared and agreed through school policy.
Rules are a reliable way of ensuring that conduct is communally understood. They should
be designed for the benefit of the many and the few, for example, they should have
maximum utility as well as promoting the rights of the individual. They help students to
learn, keep them safe, and feel secure. They assist staff every lesson, every day.
40
Not everything forbidden must be governed by a rule, and rules cannot cover everything.
But a core set of rules creates a skeleton for good conduct in a communal space where
the definition acceptable behaviour can often be in dispute.
Many schools have rules, but do not adhere to them. Some schools have bad rules.
Some prefer to believe that schools do not need them. All three of these approaches
should be avoided. Schools should have as few or many rules as they need. Older
students with a clear understanding of how to behave may require less structure and
guidance, for example, but no less or more than that.
There are no perfect lists of rules. School leaders must work out which rules are the most
important to their own school context. Schools only starting to improve their behaviour
may need to design extensive rules with breadth, depth and detail in order to facilitate
order and the creation of routine. Other schools with less challenging intakes may find
fewer rules are not only acceptable, but necessary.
Promoting character development
All of the schools engaged made the development of good character an important part of
their processes. Rules can neatly encapsulate values, but cultures are exhibited in
complex and subtle ways, and rules are often too inflexible or uncomprehensive to direct
every possible scenario. This is where character becomes a useful concept.
Particularly in the primary school context, students were encouraged to be a certain type
of person. The ‘ideal school student’ was frequently mentioned in several schools. The
qualities expected of these students frequently revolved around being kind, brave, hard
working and polite. In the primary schools visited, this was demonstrated by such
messages as ‘at school we have kind hands’.
4.2.4 Consequences and recognising the considerations for pupils
with SEND
In this context, consequences simply means ‘any reaction a student should expect in
response to their behaviour’. The most commonly understood forms of this term are
sanctions and rewards, both of which are an essential part of the school’s repertoire of
strategies to reinforce encouraged and discouraged behaviours. Other consequences are
possible - if a student is unable to complete an exercise in class because they are
becoming myopic and are too far from the front, the consequence of this is to support eye
testing, and perhaps move the student closer in the meantime. This is neither a reward
nor sanction, but a reasonable response.
At all times, leaders must consider if the consequences administered to the student are
purely as sanctions (to deter others and influence future behaviour), or form part of a
supportive response (where the student needs help which can only be given outside of
the mainstream classroom), or a combination of both. Behaviour is influenced by many
41
complex factors, and it is important not to sanction where help is the appropriate
response. A student with low literacy skills may misbehave in a class, for example, where
they are embarrassed to read aloud. A good school will acknowledge both the need to
act in a civil manner, as well as the student’s need to remedy their literacy impediment.
Failure to do so would be to simply punish a student without scaffolding a way into better
behaviour.
Of course, many students struggle to meet key school behaviour milestones for reasons
connected to an identified SEND, and as much assistance as possible should be given to
these students to do so. In particular, where a student has a disability that affects their
behaviour, the school must make reasonable adjustments. To use an example previously
quoted by the Equality and Human Rights Commission, if a school has a policy that if a
pupil breaks the school rules on three occasions he or she will automatically be given a
detention. Their legal duties over equality will be relevant. Some disabled students, such
as those with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, autistic spectrum disorders or
learning difficulties, are much more likely to break the school rules than other students.
Rigid application of this policy would be likely to amount to indirect disability
discrimination because, where a reasonable adjustment has not been made, a school will
find it very difficult to justify the treatment as a proportionate means of achieving a
legitimate aim. However, schools must still always aim high. A school should do as much
as possible to demonstrate high expectations of all students, and to scaffold the best
behaviour that a student is capable of, otherwise there is a risk that some students with
SEND will suffer from the poverty of low expectations. Schools must be careful to publicly
and consistently apply consequences to students’ actions. If a student misbehaves and
no response follows, the student is encouraged to assume that the school does not mind.
Worse, there is a possibility that the student will explore greater misbehaviour.
At all times, the school should scaffold ways towards better behaviour for students as far
as they are capable. It is unacceptable to accept misbehaviour from any student who is
capable of modifying their actions, and the best schools look for ways to equip students
with better skills, habits and qualities no matter their circumstances. Compassion, high
expectations and wisdom must
be carefully blended to decide
where this point lies for students
with SEND.
Consequences are a
conversation. The school
culture’s reply to the actions of
the individual. That reply can
either be to permit, to prohibit
and discourage, or to
encourage and praise. Without
42
consequences, this conversation between the students’ behaviour and the school’s
culture is lost.
The simplest and often most misunderstood method of communicating the concept that
actions have consequences, is through sanctions and rewards.
Sanctions and rewards
All schools should have a clear and clearly communicated policy on consequences, what
they are, how they are incurred and avoided. Most importantly, they must be used
consistently, across the whole community. The absence of this consistency is one of the
key factors in the failure of a school behaviour policy to sustain or support good
behaviour. Policies are only as real as their demonstration in practice. A policy that is
frequently ignored is one that will never succeed.
The reliability of the school system is a key factor in its success. This does not mean that
no exceptions can be made (particularly when there is good reason, such as an identified
SEND), but that exceptions must be exceptional, with good reason, and coherent with
other exceptions.
Sanctions need not be severe, as Bill Rogers states, their ‘certainty is more important
than their severity’. Rewards need not be material. In many circumstances, proportionate,
sincere recognition of the student’s achievement is the most valuable reward available.
Intrinsic rewards to good behaviour (better learning, the value of the subject in itself)
should be prioritised in order to avoid ‘reward fatigue’ where students become
desensitised to benefits. External indicators of intrinsic success can be powerful
motivators, and reinforce existing norms, for example, prize ceremonies, used
judiciously.
43
Case study
Passmores Academy in Harlow, Essex is a large mixed comprehensive secondary. Vic
Goddard, the headteacher, is a well-known figure nationally.
Goddard explained his school prides itself on its high standards of discipline and
mutual respect, which they have worked hard to build. The school has a ‘Relationship
Charter’ rather than just a behaviour policy, which has been created by the students,
parents/carers and staff, as well as canvassing the views of the local community.
The charter seeks to affirm rather than condemn, to reward as well as challenge. It
applies equally to all members of the school community and communicates the
behaviour they expect both school staff and student to model.
The charter includes the behaviour expected of pupils on their way to or from school
and when in uniform as well. Students and adults associated with the school have a
duty to protect its good name in the community and digital world, and to act in
accordance with the principles set out in the charter.
Should a student disobey the charter they may find themselves open to one or more
sanctions, depending on the severity or nature of the offense committed. Sanctions
could include:
• a student spoken to
• participation in a restorative justice experience
• after school detention
• isolation from lessons
• an offset school day housed away from peers
• fixed-term exclusion or permanent exclusion from school
Goddard believes a centralised detention system has many benefits. There was a short
period of time when he stopped using a centralised system and soon found the
behaviour in the school deteriorated. Detentions ensure the students are aware of the
consequences of their behaviour. Every student at the school has a SamLearning
account that gives them access to hundreds of activities in all subjects. It helps
improve the student’s skills and knowledge as well as encouraging them to be
independent learners. During detention, they use SamLearning for approximately one
hour. The centralised detention system itself is run by a full-time administration officer
costing around £9000 per year.
4.2.5 Internal inclusion units
The most successful schools value every student, and make ambitious efforts to include
children in mainstream lessons wherever possible. However, the mainstream classroom
is not always the best space for all problems to be addressed and needs to be met.
44
Mainstream classroom teachers will find it stressful to cope with multiple students of even
moderately challenging behaviour, or one with severely challenging behaviour. Once
available strategies have been exhausted, it can be necessary and in the student’s best
interests to be somewhere their needs and behaviour can be better provided for.
This may be for a number of reasons: aggressive or rude behaviour; a learning difficulty
that challenges the ability of the teacher to remedy without greater support or remedial
work needed for gateway skills like literacy or numeracy. The point is that removing a
student from a mainstream classroom when necessary should never be seen as a failure
but as a positive solution. If the teacher is unable to deliver a lesson due to the continued
behaviour of a student, removal is not only unavoidable, but right.
Removal can be temporary, or for a more
extended period. If the reason for the removal
is poor behaviour, then consequence systems
must be used. If circumstances warrant it the
school should consider if the student needs
more extended support.
However, what happens next to the student is
crucial. The response must be appropriate, fair,
and targeted at helping the student improve
their behaviour. This might mean time spent elsewhere in the school, away from their
peers, being instructed and supported by a variety of trained staff. In cases of extreme
misbehaviour, for instance, an assault on a student, they may even be excluded
externally from the school on a fixed or permanent basis.
If this is needed it should be considered when all other options have been exhausted and
only then. In all such cases, there must be a clear and robust administrative trail
demonstrating what has been done prior to the exclusion, in order to avoid spurious
exclusions. The government has outlined plans in the ‘Educational Excellence
Everywhere’ White Paper to give schools ongoing accountability for students that have
been permanently excluded. This is likely to make schools take action earlier where they
have concerns, and think harder about whether they have put the right support in place
for students who are at risk of exclusion. This will make it even more important that
schools are confident and skilled enough to minimise the need for exclusion, rather than
simply not exclude when necessary.
In rare circumstances, all prior steps to exclusion can be put aside if the offence is
serious enough, for example, some forms of assault, depending on the context.
The best schools seen during this review had mature, well-planned internal inclusion
units, where children with extreme behaviour could be supported in their journey back
towards education. Although out of the remit of this report, one of the suggested
recommendations is that a subsequent report could look into best practice in this area.
45
Cost was often cited by schools as a major obstacle to designing more muscular units of
this nature, although as one headteacher said, ‘the cost of not doing it was higher’.
Clarifying inclusion
This report defines exclusions as any form of removal from the mainstream classroom.
This can include fixed period, local exclusions to nurture groups for literacy support,
settling-in zones where new students become acclimatised to school culture in a lowstakes environment, or permanent exclusion (threatening a member of staff with a
weapon). These circumstances vary so much in detail, the word exclusion needs to be
understood carefully. In addition, the language surrounding its use often connotes in
inappropriate ways.
However, this report uses the word exclusion in a nuanced way: to mean an educational
setting out of the mainstream, more standardised environment that most students in
schools will experience. It is a recognition that many students will present behaviour that
cannot easily be assisted, or supported, unpacked or indeed challenged in the
conventional classroom where typically one adult directs the education of up to thirty
children.
Exclusions
Exclusions are not a necessary evil. If they are necessary, they are not evil, and the
belief that they are is a limiting one. They can be an important part of a healthy school
system, demonstrating that even tolerant supportive communities have red lines, and
terminal destinations when all else has been tried, or an acceptance that some students
will need the level or support provided by specialist settings.
Punitive exclusions are a last resort. Every school should aspire to their extinction, but by
making their use unnecessary rather than by simply refusing to use them. When they are
required, they should be used. Inspections must not unfairly deter schools from
meaningfully using exclusions by treating their existence as an exclusively negative
strategy. It is important to examine the patterns of exclusion carefully, and to consider the
context of exclusions in order to understand how appropriate they are. In some schools,
a temporary, high exclusion rate may be a sign of effective leadership, not weak or overpunitive.
All students have a right to learn. This means that if a student is making it impossible for
a teacher to teach or students to learn, and in-class strategies have been attempted, they
must be removed from the lesson temporarily until the situation can be resolved in some
way.
A restorative meeting or conversation to set the terms of reintegration should follow fixed
period exclusions (FPEs) or even temporary removals. FPEs must lead to meaningful
discussions about how to avoid recidivism, and to unpack problems that may provide
context to misbehaviour.
46
Exclusions should, wherever possible, lead to meaningful educational experiences within,
or as an adjunct to, mainstream schooling. Every school should invest in inclusion
facilities that separate (as far as possible) students attending for disciplinary reasons,
from those attending for remedial, restorative or re-integrative reasons.
Permanent exclusions are a necessary part of a functional national and local school
system. However, every effort must be made to retain and amend such students’
behaviour before that happens. Several schools reported that, while they attempted to do
so, other schools did not. These schools excluded too quickly in order to improve their
examination results and remove the need to deal with the challenging behaviour. But this
benefit to them came at the expense of other schools that had to admit disproportionate
numbers of very challenging students. It also failed to support the excluded pupil.
When schools are responsible for excluded pupils, and have control over alternative
provision funding, there will be a strong incentive to only use exclusions where they are
necessary.
To reiterate: schools with highly successful systems of behaviour made every effort to
support all of their students, even the most challenging ones. This attitude permeated
their whole school approach, and no students were seen as less valuable than another.
Where permanent exclusions happened, it was because the school had exhausted all
other options, and could no longer cope with the extremity of behaviour, meet the
student’s needs, or guarantee the safe learning environment in the school for other
students and staff.
While excessive levels of exclusion might appear to offer a short-term improvement in
school results and culture, they are ultimately corrosive as a long term or primary
strategy. This is because they indicate an instrumental approach to student behaviour
that treats students as a means to an end, as a credit or debit to the school balance. This
report argues that schools have a greater purpose than their summative data.
In summary, exclusions must be only used when they are needed. This means they must
be used when all else has failed, and not before.
4.2.6 Using cultural markers and
levers to create cultures
There are many ways that a school’s culture
can be publicly conveyed. These serve as
visible reminders that the school has a
shared identity with shared values. They are
also an opportunity to usefully instruct or
redirect students towards positive social
habits.
47
For example:
Assemblies
In several of the schools visited, assemblies were treated as very important. Core school
values were reinforced, both implicitly (through speaker and topic choice, rewards and
reminders) and explicitly (direct reference to school rules). Students were praised and
directed in good measure. Multiple speakers hosted the assembly. Students were
encouraged to treat it with the greatest respect, and they were staffed and run with
precision. The time spent in assemblies was seen as a valuable adjunct and scaffold of
the whole school life, rather than a bolt on or buffer between registration and first
lessons.
Additionally, such assemblies frequently followed clear routines with rigour, timings,
music played upon entrance, songs, prayers made if required, entrance and exit
procedures. In this way, the day begins with calm, a sense of structure, and a valuable
reminder to students and staff within the school premises that expectations began long
before the classroom.
Wall displays
Display work varies from school to school. It can send a powerful message to students
and staff. Of particular importance was the celebration of achievement school awards,
student certificates, lists of head students, names of honoured alumni. Work of the
highest standard was celebrated, as was recent as well as historic achievements of the
school. Letters of praise from parents and community leaders were seen in several
schools.
Other schools took a more utilitarian approach and preferred minimal display work. In
both circumstances, the guiding principle seemed to be that the practice was equally or
less important than how the practice was carried out.
Timekeeping
Perhaps unsurprisingly, successful schools paid close attention to, and made good use
of time, and saw it as a precious commodity as much as anything material. Particular
emphasis was placed on lesson transitions, public events (assemblies etc.) and
scheduled breaks. However, this attitude extends throughout the school day and into the
classroom: lessons were planned in most schools seen that were comprised entirely of
compact and useful activities. In some schools, this was emphasised strongly, and
students were aware that time was precious, and the school would not tolerate its
deliberate waste, nor poor usage through badly planned lessons.
Uniforms
There is no clear answer to the question ‘do uniforms aid school behaviour?’ Perhaps the
clearest answer is that it can be used as an effective lever of cultural change, but not
always. Many schools have some form of a uniform. Uniforms by themselves have no
48
power to modify behaviour. They are simply symbolic levers. Some schools use them to
good effect, by using them to help instill a sense of communal identity, by making their
neat execution a way of communicating a sense of self-pride, pride in their institutional
membership, and how they convey themselves to the world.
Even in schools that claim to have no uniform, most will have a dress code of some form,
for example, no jeans, no track lines in hair, no excessive make-up.
If the school does not reliably or routinely insist on good uniform, then there is little, from
a behavioural point of view, to recommend having a uniform policy in the first place.
Worse, it can perform the opposite effect. It can associate the school culture with low
standards, inconstancy or exemplify the chaotic way that other aspects of the school are
run. If uniform rules do not need to be followed, why follow any other rule? If uniforms are
not used, then the school can and must find other methods by which they exhibit or
signpost the communal identity alongside individual ones. Without an appreciation that
one is part of an institution, it becomes more difficult for that institution to expect
members to adhere to institutional norms.
Stationery/equipment
A lack of appropriate materials is an impediment to learning. The best habit is to have all
items to hand whenever needed. Habituating students to this routine expectation
prevents many misbehaviours and conflicts before they occur.
Some of the schools we saw had facilities for equipment to be purchased inexpensively.
Most of them had a policy where lack of equipment provoked a consequence from the
classroom teacher after the lesson rather than during it. In some of the schools, missing
equipment was automatically provided at the point of learning, but its absence was dealt
with later.
There are many other events and opportunities within the school to demonstrate the
cultural cues that say ‘this is who we are’. It is the responsibility of leadership to filter
every aspect of their school’s culture through the lens of their expectations, and decide
for themselves how they can use every opportunity available to convey the school’s
expectations, beliefs and values.
4.2.7 Using premises to support
behaviour
All schools should have an area where students
presenting temporarily challenging behaviour can
be housed safely, quickly and quietly without
fuss. This zone should be staffed with personnel
trained in its management.
These areas can be used for multiple reasons,
for example, to provide a cooling-off period after
emotional incidents, as a temporary way of
49
separating students presenting disruptive behaviour from their peers, as part of the
school sanction process, as a way to isolate students who are upsetting the calm, safe
environment that students and staff are entitled to. They also serve an important social
function, sending a clear signal to the student body that anti-social or destructive
behaviour will not be taken lightly by the school system.
These areas are not merely holding pens, and when used in this way are of limited
effectiveness. They are spaces that assist the school’s aim to reintegrate the student into
mainstream classrooms.
Students with the greatest needs, need the greatest focus. This can be inside or outside
of the mainstream classroom in nurture groups or other specialist and supportive
contexts. The aim of such environments should be to educate the student, as well as the
eventual reintegration of the student into the mainstream as soon as possible but not
before.
Locational, physical inclusion without strategies to create social inclusion (returning a
student to a classroom after a serious behavioural incident without any reintegration
process) is a punishment to all parties and the school community. Conversely, exclusion
without an attempt at remedy is an abdication of the school’s duty to the individual
student.
4.2.8 Attendance and punctuality
Attendance and punctuality are an important part of good behaviour. Students who miss
valuable time in classrooms fall further behind, and become more disengaged from the
work of the class, which in turn encourages misbehaviour. In successful schools, the
expectation is 100% attendance and 100% punctuality. This admittedly near-impossible
goal is embedded as an aspirational norm. Crucially, it is monitored and tracked in real
time rather than retrospectively. Administrative staff are allocated for this duty and just as
crucially, deviation from this 100% results in a school reaction, an investigation, a
sanction, support, whatever is needed. As with many other such structures, setting it up
is the hardest part. Once the expectation is clear, as are the consequences, the system
needed maintenance rather than constant reinvention.
It should be noted that many headteachers also
applied this to their staff expecting 100%
attendance where possible, and sympathetically but
robustly tending to this expectation. Staff quizzed on
this policy were remarkably sympathetic to it in
return, expressing the view that when staff contact
time is maximised (and cover minimised), workload
for all teachers was lighter.
50
4.2.9 Technology
Use of technology varied between all schools. Some emphasised the opportunities for
more efficient home communication. Other extolled the virtues of better and faster
systems of tracking, collating and analysing behaviour incidents in order to assist asset
management, communication and diagnoses of need.
Case study
Executive Principal, Wise Owl Trust, Sophie Murfin launched Seymour Primary School’s
Twitter and Facebook page to educate their students how to keep themselves safe online
as they all have mobiles and iPads. They also have clear guidelines on the use of social
media.
In-class technology covers a wide variety of
physical devices, apps and software. As far as
behaviour is concerned, teachers should not use
technology as a means to pacify or merely occupy
a class. It is easy to imagine that students are
meaningfully engaged by an online task, when in
fact they are merely distracted from the lesson
content.
All the schools visited had precise and fairly
restrictive codes of practice relating to student use
of personal technology, such as, tablets and
smartphones. All had a minimum default of ‘no visibility’ for smartphones and only
permitted their usage in closely prescribed circumstances. While some teachers found
utility in their integration, this was only in classrooms where high levels of self-regulation
and restraint were already evident. Most teachers and school leaders interviewed
believed that the possibility of distraction outweighed the possible benefits, and many
expressed that their usage was largely unnecessary.
This is supported by 2015 research from the London School of Economics17, which found
that after schools banned unrestricted access mobile phones, the test scores of students
aged 16 improved on average by 6.4%, and time lost in classes that permitted free
access to smartphones was equivalent to around five days of schooling per year.
17 http://cep.lse.ac.uk/_new/publications/abstract.asp?index=4639
51
Smartphones should only be used in circumstances where the teacher has clearly
defined a specific learning need they can satisfy. Many students find them irresistibly
distracting, and this has a damaging effect on their focus and learning. While some
students can reliably avoid using them irresponsibly, unless all students are equally
mature then some students will suffer from their availability. Research has shown that
this group is predominantly composed of the least able and furthest behind.
School leaders should decide for themselves where the line lies, but should be cautious
about the dangers as well as any perceived opportunities, weighing up the benefits and
costs.
Case study
Mobile phone policy
At Passmores Academy, mobile phones are not allowed in lessons or between lessons.
Phones will be confiscated and given to student services who will, in the first instance,
store the phone safely and return it at the end of the day. On the third instance of a
phone being confiscated, the phone will only be returned to the parent/carer.
Students are allowed to use their mobile phones during their lunch break. Vic Goddard
believes there needs to be a middle ground. Students need to be educated about the use
of technology and it can be very useful during subjects such as maths and science.
Enabling the students to use their mobile phones in these subjects empowers them to a
certain degree. As a precaution, the school’s wifi only works in certain areas and the
password is changed on an hourly basis.
4.2.10 Role models
Students need to see others behaving well in
order to emulate them. This is consistent with
the view that social norms are powerful
inhibitors and catalysts of behaviour. What is
seen commonly is absorbed as custom. In this
regard, it was important for staff and students to
see exemplary behaviour - both positive and
negative in their peer groups. Headteachers
spoke of the need for them to constantly display
the values and habits they wanted to see in their staff by setting a good example. This
not only builds the positive social norms for behaviour but also increases trust between
students and staff. They also agreed that senior staff were key role models for the staff
body, as well as students.
52
‘If the head isn’t bothered,’ said one student, ‘I’m not bothered’.
Good schools often have formal structures that reward merit in the student body, student
councils, prefect teams, helper programmes and similar. These students were keenly
aware of their responsibility as role models and regarded it as hard work as much as an
honour. Nevertheless, they did feel it was an honour and the school more importantly
treated it as such.
53
5 Maintaining the culture
Once routines, habits, and expectations have been conveyed and embedded, it is
necessary to continually patrol these expectations and aspirations. No system, however
well designed, can sustain itself without conscious and persistent maintenance. The
same level of supervisory effort should be maintained once systems are in place as when
they are being installed. As Charlie Taylor said, ‘schools need to be thinking about
improving behaviour when things are going well, not only when there are problems to fix.’
5.1 Reinforcing the expectations
Consistently high expectations are the only high expectations that have long-term impact.
School rules that are conveyed, but
never enforced or required, are no rules
at all, and students learn quickly the
difference between what boundaries are
supposed to exist, and which ones
actually exist.
All students need to meet the
expectations set of them. Any one not
meeting the expected standard must
expect an intervention of some form, a
reaction from the staff body. Any member
of staff not maintaining these boundaries
and expectations must be challenged,
retrained or otherwise engaged to aim
more closely to the standards expected.
54
Case study
Passmores Academy’s early intervention Students Towards Excellent Progress (STEP)
team.
The STEP team is designed to carry out early interventions for students who are having
difficulties in terms of their behaviour within school, and having troubles adhering to the
Passmores Relationship Charter. Alongside this, the team are also there to support
students who are having particular difficulties in school, either socially, emotionally or
academically by:
• carrying out early behaviour interventions for identified students
• working with particular students who have specific needs, which are preventing
them from engaging in learning through positive reinforcement booklets and
progress record cards
• managing the whole school sanction of ‘Ed Zone’ on Tuesdays and Thursdays
(when required)
• working alongside the senior leadership team, head of house, tutors and other
staff to identify problem areas and to assist in re-engagement with learning, carry
out student observations in classrooms, and offer in class support and advice
School rules and values must be lived, explicitly, constantly in every aspect of school life
in corridors, in the playground, on trips, with visitors, in games, on the way to school, at
assemblies, church services and awards evenings.
Everyone is responsible for behaviour, this message must be repeated and transmitted to
all members of the school community.
Case study
‘Boot camp Reloaded’ from Michaela Community School (Free School)
All students in year 9 are given a refresher course in whole school expectations at the
beginning of the autumn term. Shorter than the initial ‘boot camp’ of year 7, this
reinforces the school norms in a clear and public way, for both staff and students.
The leadership team and the headteacher in particular needs to exemplify and embody
the values of the school at all times, without complaint and with a missionary zeal.
The leadership team must be extremely visible. Their presence is an essential
component of building and maintaining the learning culture.
55
Case study
Robert Clack School
A good example of ‘practise what you preach’ is Sir Paul Grant, headteacher of Robert
Clack School in Barking and Dagenham. Everyone knows when Sir Paul is on the school
premises. He models the behaviour of an exceptional school leader. He is at the school
gate, school buses, and in and out of classrooms. Teachers and students expect to see
him frequently. Sir Paul addresses all students by name and knows some small detail
about them with which to prompt short conversations. He is, in all interactions,
relentlessly positive about the capacity and potential of his staff and students.
5.1.1 Continuous professional development (CPD)
While front-loading staff training for
behaviour is helpful, it must be a
continuous process throughout the
career. All teachers must have a
guaranteed right to access training
or retraining in behaviour
management. It should also be a
requirement of continued practice
throughout a career that teachers
display the ability to manage rooms
well.
If staff (as well as students) are to
believe that they are capable of
more than perhaps even they think
possible, it is crucial that they
experience high levels of support from their leadership. Providing them with robust and
effective CPD plays a substantial part in the formation of the professional identity.
Professional development does not only occur in discrete quanta such as external
training days or INSETs. It is a fluid continuum composed of every interaction between
professionals, particularly between the managed and the managers. Every line
management interaction is a potential moment of training, instruction, reinstruction or
correction.
Every interaction between school leaders and staff members must promote dignity,
positive regard and high expectations. Staff should feel (and be) supported, but also
acknowledge their responsibilities.
56
Example
New Rush Hall School is a special school in Ilford, Essex, for students with
behavioural, emotional and social difficulties. The headteacher John d’Abbro ensures
that all staff are trained continually throughout their careers in order to meet the needs
of the student body. From the 2016 Ofsted report18:
‘Staff receive safeguarding updates and training regularly throughout the year. Recent
updates have included information on the ‘Prevent’ duty, female genital mutilation and
online safety. Designated officers for child protection and looked after children carry out
their responsibilities effectively and work closely with other professionals and carers to
ensure that pupils get the support they need. Staff know how to report any concerns
that they may have and understand the needs of their pupils well. Important information
is shared on a daily basis to ensure that appropriate support is arranged and everyone
is kept safe.’
This can be difficult for some school leaders. Many schools visited or interviewed had
robust and extensive staff development programmes, or a clear vision of the contract
between leadership and staff in terms of what both parties should expect from one
another.
Nevertheless, many school leaders agreed that some schools needed to focus far more
on holding staff accountable for the way they direct their classrooms. Teachers displaying
poor judgement should receive extended and targeted support that is aimed at raising
their skills rather than simply sanction them. However, teachers who refused to
cooperate with the school ethos needed to be firmly directed themselves. Accountability
should be applied to all levels of the school system, students, teachers, support staff and
leadership. Failure to do so means that the school system is incoherent, inconsistent,
and ultimately weaker than it should be. Leaders should always remember that failure to
comply with behaviour policies may be the result of unreasonable workload issues, or
because in some cases the policy itself is too time-consuming to execute as intended.
18 https://reports.ofsted.gov.uk/inspection-reports/newrushhall2016
57
Example
The Teachers Professional Development Standards Group (2016)19 led by David Weston
produced a significant and positive framework for what constitutes effective continuing
professional development.
For example, the standard suggests that effective professional development is that
which:
• develops practice and theory together
• links pedagogical knowledge with subject/specialist knowledge, which draws
on the evidence base, including high-quality academic research, robustly
evaluated approaches and teaching resources
• is supported by those with expertise and knowledge to help participants improve
their understanding of evidence, and
• draws out and challenges teachers’ beliefs and expectations about teaching
and how children learn
5.1.2 Sharing good practice with other schools
School leaders must not be insular, or remote from their peers. They should observe and
copy good practice from other schools as long as they feel confident that the strategies
19 https://www.gov.uk/government/groups/teachers-professional-development-expert-group
58
are portable. They should share with other schools where possible. They should broker
staff training opportunities in these schools.
5.1.3 Parents, families and the community
Successful schools are aware that they are members of their communities, serve their
communities, and are composed of their communities. Their success rests on making
strong links between themselves, parents, local businesses, community groups and
institutions. This helps students to see themselves as members of both the school
community and the community at large, which contributes to their identity as social
beings.
Some schools visited had developed
deep and mature relationships with local
industry and business that informed their
enrichment programs, work experience
and nurture groupings. Local shops knew
the names of senior staff and in some
cases had hotlines to the headteacher in
case of any issues. Some schools made
sure that local buses to school had visible
staff presences, as well as local bus
stops and train stations. External visits
made good use of community resources,
and students were explicitly taught how
to conduct themselves while in any way
representing the school.
Case study
Passmores Academy has worked in close partnership with parents/carers. On entry to
the school, parents/carers, students and the school, sign a partnership agreement. The
following strategies are available to support parents/carers:
• termly reports
• annual academic review meetings
• frequent staff contact with parents/carers
• parenting skills groups
• parents on the governing body
• parent forums
• principal’s drop in sessions
This attitude often continued throughout the schools. Home communication was fast,
efficient, and treated with high importance. Files, names, and contacts were updated
59
frequently. Multiple platforms for home communication were used, for example, texting,
email, Facebook to ensure same day contact. Contact was made in response to positive
behaviour as well as bad, proactively rather than reactively, and to keep parents and
carers updated about school life rather than as a punitive function.
Students were encouraged to see their behaviour existing within the community, having
an impact and mattering to others. It ensured that local communities supported school
efforts to improve behaviour, created valuable goodwill, and helped students and parents
to feel a sense of pride in school membership.
Case study
Sophie Murfin, Executive Principal of the Wise Owl Trust successfully moved Seymour
Primary School from ‘requires improvement’ to ‘good’ within 2 years. Because of her
success and whole school approach/ethos it has led to her being appointed Executive
Headteacher across another three very challenging schools.
From the outset, they had clear sanctions/rewards and ensured they took the parents
on the journey with them. Parents were an important part of the process. At times, they
were difficult to engage in such a disadvantaged area, the parents viewed ‘parenting’ in
many different ways. Some found it hard to accept the strict sanctions and rewards
systems and the school trying to set boundaries within the school and at home. Murfin
said, ‘There is still a long way to go with getting some parents to actually come into
school. The school has had to adapt to diverse and changing demographics. There are
more than 30 different home languages spoken by students and a small minority of
students are at an early stage of learning to speak English as an additional language.’
However, the parents have been their main vehicle of support. They rely on Facebook
and Twitter. The school has used this to their advantage to engage with parents. They
have an open door policy for parents, a support worker who visits homes, and they
have held behaviour training sessions for the parents. They work closely with the
teachers to ensure the classrooms are conducive to learning.
60
6 Obstacles to developing cultures of good behaviour, and
how to overcome them
It would be easy for many school leaders to look at some of these recommendations and
assume that ‘they already do that.’ This is precisely why so often, the strategies that
many would say were common knowledge, or common sense, fail to be used correctly. It
is too easy to believe that one is being consistent. Consistency means many things to
many people and it is easy to imagine one is being consistent when others might
perceive your actions as capricious.
Therefore, in every category of recommendation this report makes, it is possible to
observe a false version of each strategy or principle that appears to be the thing it
emulates, but is a superficial imitation. For example:
• lack of clarity of vision
• poor communication of that vision to staff or students
• demonstrating values or routines contrary to the stated ones
61
• lack of perspective, considering low standards to be high
• inadequate orientation for new staff or students
• staff over burdened by workload, unable to plan for effective behaviour
• unsuitably skilled staff in charge of pivotal formal roles
• remote, unavailable, or occupied leadership
• inconsistency between staff and departments
• unfair consequence systems that punish industry or reward poor conduct
• staff unable or unwilling to promote the school routines
• lack of support for staff to promote the school routines
These examples are merely illustrative. Some of the successful strategies outlined in this
report can also prove to be unhelpful if pursued to excess. It is possible to map out a
vision for school staff that is too precise or too detailed. Detail must always be matched
by clarity, and detail with too onerous a burden of effort will exceed the capacity of even
committed staff to deliver.
There is a virtuous mean in every strategy, a point where the intervention or strategy is
applied to the correct degree, at the right time, for the right duration. Establishing where
this is, is a core responsibility of leadership.
Furthermore, it was observed that in some schools where behaviour was poor, the
following factors also appeared to have a significant relationship to the school’s lack of
success:
• Limiting beliefs. The belief that students cannot improve, or achieve, because of
their circumstances.
• Inadequate understanding. School expectations have not been made concrete,
demonstrated clearly, or repeated often enough.
• Lack of skills. Many schools have insufficient skill bases in behaviour
management to effectively maintain consistency of training. Additionally, some
schools have inappropriate staff in charge of behaviour, for at least one of the two
reasons given above. Executing a behaviour programme is a highly skilled and
difficult role, and should not be assigned to staff without the experience, character
or skills to deliver it.
• Poorly calibrated expectation. In some schools, it is necessary for leaders to
step out of one’s context and observe schools with similar contexts but better
behaviour, in order to re-assess what is possible in their own circumstances.
• Lack of resources. Additionally, there was general agreement among school
leaders surveyed that there is a resourcing issue for some schools with a
disproportionate numbers of the most challenging students. Even ambitious and
skilled school leaders can only do so much without funding, premises and suitably
trained staff.
62
Example
At one of the round table discussions, school leaders suggested that, in order to tackle
the issue of inadequate local alternative provision, schools could collaborate,
potentially through the free school route, to set up collegiate alternative provision.
Self-auditing
Some have suggested that schools undergo a form of self-inspection in order to ascertain
developmental needs. This is a sound idea, where capacity exists for critical reflection
along with the experience and skills to remedy their difficulties. The problem arises when
schools have inadequate capacity to do so, which may well be a factor for why they
experience problems in the first instance. In these circumstances, the school may well
have to rely on sharing practice with partner schools, members of multi-academy trusts
and other clusters.
6.1 Responses to these challenges
Awareness of these obstacles is crucial. If leaders rely on only their own instincts, or
experiences, it is possible to lack perspective on how the school’s behaviour compares
with other similar schools. Some strategies to overcome this could be:
Import experience. Visiting other schools, engaging new members of staff, participating
in professional social media, can all be useful ways to revisit the parameters of one’s own
expectations.
Staff survey. A non-judgmental, low-stakes, anonymous survey of staff and students
about their views on behaviour can be a sobering and powerful reconnection with the
cultural landscape of the school, experienced by those who inhabit it.
Re-prioritising behaviour as a whole-school ambition. Establishing that behaviour is
one of the school’s key progress targets, and designing success milestones across the
whole school year in every aspect of planning, helps to refocus minds on its promotion.
Re-visiting the school’s vision of what a successful culture looks like on a regular basis,
should be a key task of leadership.
Ensure workload permits core staff functions. If staff do not have time to monitor and
follow up on behavioural incidents, then they will not, or will not do so as efficiently as
they should. It is of utmost importance that school leaders design systems of practice that
free staff to perform their roles. When adding an additional burden to a member of staff’s
tasks, ask which tasks can now be safely deprioritised to free time. Ask if the new task is
worth the loss of time available to staff for other matters as a result.
63
Appendix 1: Summary of ITT behaviour management
recommendations: case study method
The following is an extract of the findings of the 2016 ITT20 working party tasked with
reformulating the core training offer for new teachers in behaviour management. It also
provides a useful suggestion for a basic framework that schools could use to design their
induction training, as well as continuing development leading on from this.
The full document is available at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/initial-teacher-training-governmentresponse-to-carter-review
2. Recommendations
2.1. Opportunities to develop practical skills
Behaviour management is an enormously practical matter; it is therefore essential that its
instruction must emphasise practicality. Three elements must be clearly evident in all
aspects of behaviour management ITT: observation; practice and review.
i. Observation of excellent practice: New teachers must be able to observe
outstanding teachers demonstrate what is possible, and how it is done, in order to
lock in high expectations early in their careers.
ii. Practise: New teachers should be able to demonstrate discrete strategies and
skills in an environment as close to classroom conditions as possible, on a regular,
frequent basis throughout the length of the course and into the first year of
teaching.
iii. Review: These demonstrations must be subject to routine, deliberate and assisted
reflection in collaboration with expert coaches and mentors.
Managing behaviour is best learnt by doing, by making those mistakes all teachers make
early in their careers and having the opportunity to reflect upon those mistakes and get
back in the classroom to try again as soon as possible. Consequently, trainee teachers
must be introduced to strategies, beliefs and skills with as much practical use as
possible. The initial phase of teacher training must focus on practical experience and
more abstract or complex material should be introduced after initial skills have been
consolidated.
20 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/initial-teacher-training-government-response-to-carterreview
64
2.2. High quality tutors with appropriate experience
ITT providers should be required to train or locate mentors, tutors and coaches with
demonstrable abilities in behaviour management. It is imperative that those training in
behaviour management are taught by those with highly developed skills and
understanding in this area. Evidence of current or recent practice should be preferred.
2.3. Guaranteed and evidenced training
ITT providers must provide the resources required for the new teacher to create a
tangible portfolio for them to demonstrate relative proficiency in behaviour management;
both as evidence that the course has been effective in helping the new teacher become
proficient in managing children’s behaviour, and as a tool for refinement for further
practice. This must include, digital recordings of the new teacher demonstrating his or her
behaviour management techniques with real classes
It is the provider’s responsibility to ensure that the trainee has access to suitable training
experiences, in a variety of settings, stages and scenarios.
2.4. The 3 Rs of the behaviour curriculum
Behaviour training should focus on three areas that are essential for the design and
maintenance of ordered, safe and productive classrooms. Providers must ensure that
trainee teachers can access a broad range of strategies in order for them to select the
most appropriate strategies for the classrooms and schools in which they find
themselves. By having a repertoire of strategies available they will be better prepared for
different classroom circumstances, and be more inclined to reflect professionally on the
relationship between their actions, and the impact of those actions.
i. Routines: classroom routines as a fundamental source of high expectation, a
scaffold for conduct, and a community vision of optimal habits and behaviour.
ii. Responses: strategies and interventions for de-escalating confrontation, resolving
conflict, redirecting unproductive (or destructive) behaviour, and reacting to
antisocial behaviour in a just, productive and proportional way. These include
formal interventions (for example: consequences described by the school
behaviour policy) and informal ones (for example: verbal/ non-verbal cues, body
language).
iii. Relationships: regulating one’s own emotional state; understanding personal
triggers in one’s own behaviour, expectations or reactions; how special
educational needs and disability (SEND) affects behaviour. Understanding for
example: attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism, dyslexia,
Asperger’s; the basic psychology of: motivation; long and short-term memory;
concentration; learning; cognitive load, spacing and interleaving; group dynamics.
65
Appendix 2: Behaviour audit survey for schools/inspectors
This is a guide rather than a template to audit a whole school cohort on behaviour.
School leaders can build upon and use as a starting point for a document that works for
their individual school circumstances and cohorts. A behaviour survey should be aimed
as broadly as possible to students and staff, aspiring to the whole cohort where possible.
Failure to reach this aspiration should be included as part of interpreting the data. Few
schools could manage a 100% success so where possible, a weighted sample should be
devised.
Survey response should be compulsory rather than optional for the selected group. The
questions themselves should be devised in such a way as to filter the qualitative
experience of staff and students into as quantitative a form as possible. Frequency of
incidents should be recorded, types of misbehaviours, time lost to misbehaviour, average
lateness of late pupils. A good example of such a set of questions can be found in the
2014 Ofsted report ‘Below the Radar’21
Sample suggested questions:
1. What types of misbehaviours occur in lessons and how often?
How
often
does this
happen
in
lessons?
Never Once a
day
1 or 2
lessons
a day
About
half of
the
lessons
Almost
all
lessons
Every
lesson
Type of
misbehaviour
Lateness to
lesson
Talking
inappropriately
Fighting
No equipment
Shouting out
Please add or delete types of incident as appropriate to the school circumstance. With
this we can assess what behaviours occur and how often in the average day.
2. How much time is lost on average in a lesson due to misbehaviour, teacher
dealing with misbehaviour?
21 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/below-the-radar-low-level-disruption-in-the-countrysclassrooms
66
No
minutes
1 or 2
minutes
3 or 4
minutes
5 minutes Up to ten
minutes
Up to
twenty
minutes
More than
twenty
minutes
3. How much impact does classroom disruption have on the learning of the class/
your learning? (this could be two questions)
None Low impact Medium
impact
Quite a lot of
impact
High impact
4. When misbehaviour occurs, do you feel you/ your teacher deals with it quickly
and efficiently?
Always Mostly Sometimes Occasionally Never
5. Do the staff/ students follow the behaviour policy?
Always Mostly Sometimes Occasionally Never
6. Does the school support you/ the teacher with class behaviour?
Always Mostly Sometimes Occasionally Never
7. How much do you agree with this statement:
‘If behaviour was better, I could teach/ learn much more’
Completely Mostly A bit Not at all
Other questions that might be useful include:
• When teachers in this school issue a student with some form of sanction for
behaviour, the student will reliably attend (at lunchtime or after school -
sometimes, rarely, never).
• When teachers in this school issue a student with some form of sanction for
behaviour, they can count on senior teachers to support their decision in front of
the student.
• When teachers in this school issue a student with some form of sanction for
behaviour, the parents of that student are supportive of the school.
67
• This school has an effective strategy for working with students who persistently
misbehave in lessons.
• This school has an effective strategy for dealing with low-level disruption in
lessons.
• This school has an effective strategy for dealing with serious incidents of
behaviour (fighting, swearing at the teacher).
The survey needs to be designed in such a way that it fits the school’s needs. It could be
online (using survey monkey or similar) or done manually, although the latter will require
effort to collate and analyse.
68
Appendix 3: Literature review
This is far from the first investigation into the link between school leadership and the
promotion of good behaviour. In Promoting the conditions for positive behaviour, to help
every child succeed - review of the landscape (2011) Professor Philip Garner makes this
clear:
‘Over the last 20 years or more, concern over levels of challenging behaviour…in English
schools has been a constant theme….and is a topic of substantial amount of academic
research and government guidance….a consistent perception remains that students
behaviour constitutes a significant and ongoing issue for teachers. Ofsted (2009) also
noted that schools are finding it difficult to deal with increasing levels of violence and
sexualised behaviour…all of these issues have been the focus of attention in the 2010
White paper The Importance of Teaching, further signalling their central importance in the
process of enhancing the role schools and other settings play in enabling all students to
be successful learners.’
Garner digested a wide range of materials in his review, including:
• government publications
• reports from professional associations
• other UK government publications (Welsh assembly, Scotland)
• specific papers in journals
• samples of international research
His concluding thoughts are revealing:
‘Little in this survey of literature presents as innovative practice in promoting positive
behaviour; much of what has been reported represents perceived effective practice in
school leadership
…effective leadership skills, like effective classroom skills appear to be generic and have
been recognised over time. …Leaders who emphasise educational attainment tend also
to place equal importance on appropriate social behaviour; both appear to have an
axiomatic relationship. Innovation does occur in context specific locations; it is uncertain
whether the strategies used in these instances are generalisable. However, evidence in
the literature is consistent in linking leadership skills and attributes relating to student
behaviour to positive developments in each of the four themes.’
Findings are significantly consistent over time throughout many of the reports and
literature reviewed.
On one hand, this is reassuring: there is some consensus, which assists in any
endeavour that seeks to transmit these findings. On the other hand, it prompts a further
question: if the knowledge base is so consistent, why don’t more schools exhibit high
standards of behaviour consistently? Some observations about this are summarised in
section 4: Why do schools fail to achieve good cultures of behaviour?
69
Garner found that the consistent features of school leadership that effectively promoted
behaviour were:
• School Culture and ethos. The ‘leadership processes which develop, maintain
and transform the culture,’ specifying ‘an emphasis on developing values, norms
and behaviour’. The Elton report, (DES, 1989) contained 138 recommendations,
86 of which specifically mentioned the headteacher’s role. Daniels, Visser and
Cole and de Reybekill (1999) noted that a positive school environment was one
where ‘leaders communicate explicitly their values, linked to the ethos of the
school’. Grundy and Blandford (1999) defined good leadership as ‘an ability to
communicate a positive vision which is coherent and consistent and where all staff
feel able to contribute to moulding the school’s positive ethos.’
• Community and partnerships. Schools must see themselves as members of a
greater community. The Elton report ‘presents specific recommendations for head
teachers to promote greater engagement between school, home and the wider
community.’ And as Garner mentions, ‘Much of what is covered in these materials
is consistent with subsequent studies on community engagement.’
• Personal and professional characteristics. An emphasis on what type of leader
or leadership is frequently associated with good behavioural practices. Information
directly relating to leadership qualities was usually tangentially inferred. For
example, some studies, such as MacBeath, Gray & Cullen (2006) 'noted the need
for leaders in such circumstances to have an explicit vision, but also to have an
apparently contradictory combination of flexibility and stubbornness.'
• Promoting inclusion and limiting exclusion. These schools tended to make
maximum efforts to retain the most challenging students by finding methods of
including them in the school community. Note that this has often been
misinterpreted - disastrously - as an oversimplified approach that returns students
to the classroom with no program in place to remedy their behaviour. The opposite
should be true; the most challenging children need provision that is often not
possible within a mainstream classroom, but can be provided more efficiently in
nurture units, until ready to return to mainstream education.
Garner concludes by saying:
‘It remains clear that successful outcomes for students in school, including the promotion
of good behaviour and learning, can be firmly linked to effective leadership.’
This report concurs. Good behaviour - even exemplary behaviour - is possible in every
school setting, whatever the baseline. This must always be the aspiration, no matter how
far the execution falls short at times, because without that aspiration, the goal can never
be realised. This includes schools with the most challenging intakes as well as the least.
Simultaneously it must be realised that school cultures are difficult and complex projects
to direct and maintain, and that schools facing lower baselines of initial behaviour will
have more work to do reaching an acceptable, let alone exemplary, plateau.
70
None of the recommendations in this report, or the identified strategies of scalable
success, are without cost implications, whether financially or through material or nonmaterial resources. However, there are several remarks to be made about to this
potentially insurmountable issue:
• Many systematic changes to behaviour policies involve a process of changing how
staff work and students learn; they incur an opportunity cost more than a financial
one; staff and students are invited to work differently, rather than additionally to
their existing workload.
• The cost of not improving the behaviour culture is far greater than doing so in the
long run.
• One implemented, the maintenance costs of behavioural programs are far less
than start-up costs.
• Finally, school behaviour is intrinsic, and essential to, the success of a school’s
core ambitions - the safety and educational flourishing of its students (and staff).
Given the benefits accrued in almost every area of school processes and
outcomes, it is difficult to see a better aspect in which to invest.
Other literature reviews have also found links between school leadership, culture and
behaviour in schools. Pupil Behaviour in Schools in England (2012) made the following
summary remarks:
• ‘Studies (mainly in the US) have shown that there is a positive link between school
climate (beliefs, values and attitudes) and student behaviour (LeBlanc et al, 2007;
Chen, 2007; McEvoy and Welker, 2000). However, the exact extent and nature of
the relationship remains disputed.
• Analysis of the Effective Pre-School, Primary and Secondary Education (EPPSE)
3-14 study showed that a poor school behaviour climate as perceived by students
was a significant predictor of poorer social-behavioural outcomes in Year 9 and of
poorer social-behavioural developmental progress between Year 6 and Year 9
(Sylva et al, 2012).
• School climate is also linked in the literature to the effectiveness of school
leadership (Day et al, 2009).
• In the literature, there is a distinction made between proactive approaches (those
that aim to prevent bad behaviour) and reactive approaches (those that deal with
bad behaviour after it has happened) to discipline. However, the evidence
suggests that combining aspects of both approaches is particularly effective. For
example, the use of both (proactive) clear and consistent rules and (reactive)
disciplinary polices are required to ensure that students know what behaviour is
expected of them and what the consequences are of not meeting these
expectations (Roy Mayer, 2002; Gottfredson, 1997, quoted in Skiba and Peterson,
2003; Scott, 2012).
71
• Gregory et al (2010) propose an authoritative approach to improving behaviour,
with both structure (involving consistent and fair enforcement of rules) and support
(making adult assistance available and students being able to perceive care and
concern), mirroring the effectiveness of authoritative parenting styles.
• There is evidence that in-school provision for student behaviour management,
such as learning support units, removal rooms and internal exclusions may result
in positive student outcomes (Ofsted, 2006; Ofsted 2003a, Hallam and Castle,
2001; Wakefield, 2004; Becker et al, 2004).
• A review of the evidence on effective strategies for children with emotional and
behavioural difficulties (EBD) in mainstream education showed some evidence of
effectiveness for children of primary age for strategies based on behavioural
models (including reward systems). Approaches based on cognitive behavioural
models showed positive effects for children aged between eight and 12 (including
counselling programmes, social skills training and a role-reversal programme)
(Evans et al, 2003).
• Other school-level strategies shown in the literature to improve student behaviour
to a lesser or greater extent include: the use of token systems for delivering
rewards and sanctions; arranging seating in rows and the use of seating plans;
and the use of support staff (Blatchford et al, 2009; Evans et al, 2003; Wannarka
and Ruhl, 2008; Ofsted, 2005). The evidence on the effect of school uniforms is
mixed (Brunsma and Rockquemore, 1998; Han, 2010).
• The direct involvement of parents with their child’s school (e.g. through meetings
with teachers or volunteering in school) has also been shown to be positively
related to student behaviour (Pomerantz et al, 2007). ‘
The author of this report would agree with many of these findings. As so often before,
there is a remarkably strong thread running through much of the literature, that
emphasises several key themes of effective leadership of school culture.
72
Appendix 4: Bibliography
Cockburn, A. & Haydn, T. (2004) Recruiting and retaining teachers: Understanding why
teachers teach (London, Routledge Falmer)
Clunies-Ross P., Little, E. & Kienhuis, M. (2008) Self-reported and actual use of proactive
and reactive classroom management strategies and their relationship with teacher stress
and student behaviour, Educational Psychology, 28(6), 693–710.
Department for Education (2012a) Pupil behaviour in schools in England: RR 218
(London, DfE).
Department for Education (2012b) Permanent and fixed period exclusions from schools
in England 2010/11. Available online at:
http://www.education.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s001080/index.shtml (accessed 8
January 2014).
Day, C, Sammons, P, Hopkins, D, Harris, A, Leithwood, K, Gu, Q, Penlington, C, Mehta,
P & Kington, A, 2007, The Impact of School Leadership on Pupil Outcomes, DCSF
Research Report 0018, London, DCSF
DfES, 2006, Learning Behaviour. The Report of the Practitioners’ Group on School
Behaviour and Discipline, London, DfES
Department for Education, Teacher Standards, found at
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/teachers-standards
Carter, A (2015), Department for Education, Carter review of initial teacher training (ITT),
(2016) A framework of core content for initial teacher training (ITT), Developing behaviour
management content, available at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/initial-teacher-training-governmentresponse-to-carter-review
Department for Education, (2016) Standard for teachers’ professional development,
available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/teachers-standards
Didau, D, Rose, N (2016) What every teacher needs to know about psychology. John
Catt Educational
Elton, R. (1989) Discipline in schools (London, HMSO).
Elliott, J.G. (2009). The nature of teacher authority and teacher expertise. Support for
Learning 24(4): 197-203
Garner, P., Kauffman, J. & Elliott, J.G. (2014). The SAGE Handbook of Emotional and
Behavioural Difficulties. SAGE Publications Ltd.
Garner, P (2011) Promoting the conditions for positive behaviour, to help every child
succeed: Review of the landscape. National College for School Leadership
Haydn, T. (2002a) The working atmosphere in the classroom and the right to learn:
Problems of control and motivation in British Schools, Education Today, 52(2), 3–10.
73
Haydn, T. (2002b) From a very peculiar department to a very successful school:
Transference issues arising out of a study of an improving school, School Leadership
and Management, 21(4), 415–439.
Haydn, T. (2004) The use of ICT in history teaching in secondary schools in England and
Wales 1970–2003. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of London.
Haydn, T. (2007) Managing pupil behaviour: Key issues in teaching and learning
(London, Routledge).
Haydn, T, 2001, From a very peculiar department to a very successful school:
transference issues arising out of a study of an improving school, School Leadership and
Management, 21(4), 415 39
Haydn, T. (2012) Managing pupil behaviour: Working to improve classroom climate
(London, Routledge).
House of Commons Education Committee (2011), Behaviour and Discipline in Schools,
First Report of Session 2010–11, available at:
https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmselect/cmeduc/516/51602.htm
Lemov, Doug. (2011). Teach Like a Champion Field Guide. Hoboken, NJ: Jossey-Bass.
Marland, M. (1975). The craft of the classroom: A survival guide to classroom
management in the secondary school. London: Heinemann Educational.
Marzano, R., Marzano, J. & Pickering, D. (2003) Classroom management that works:
research based strategies for every teacher (ASCD, Alexandria).
Marzano, R J, Waters, T & McNulty, B A, 2005, School Leadership that Works: From
Research to Results, Alexandria, Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development
Ofsted (2006) Improving behaviour (London, Ofsted).
Ofsted (2010) Annual report of Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Schools, 2009–10
(London, Ofsted).
Ofsted (2012) Pupil behaviour in schools in England (London, DfE).
Ofsted (2013) Annual report of Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Schools, 2012–13
(London, Ofsted).
Ofsted (2014) The framework for school inspection, January 2014 (London, Ofsted).
Ofsted, 2003, Leadership and management: what inspection tells us, London, Ofsted
Ofsted, 2003, Leadership and management: Managing the school workforce, London,
Ofsted
Ofsted, 2004, The primary leadership programme, London, Ofsted
Ofsted, 2005, Managing challenging behaviour, London, Ofsted
74
Ofsted, 2008, Good practice in re-engaging disaffected and reluctant students in
secondary schools, London, Ofsted
Ofsted, 2009, Twelve Outstanding Secondary Schools: Excelling against the odds,
London, Ofsted
NFER, 2013, Teacher Voice Omnibus: June 2013 Survey: Pupil Behaviour
NFER 2016, Teacher Voice Omnibus, September 2016: Pupil Behaviour
Rogers, Bill (2015) Classroom Behaviour: A Practical Guide to Effective Teaching,
Behaviour Management and Colleague Support fourth edition
Rogers, Bill (2007) Behaviour Management: A Whole-school Approach, SAGE
Publications Ltd; 2 edition
Ronfeldt, M, Loeg, S. & Wyckoff, J. (2013) How teacher turnover harms student
achievement, American Educational Research Journal, 50(1), 4–36.
Steer, A. (2009) Learning behaviour: Lessons learned, a review of behaviour standards
and practices in our schools (London, DCSF).
Van Tartwijk, J. & Hammerness, K. (2011) The neglected role of classroom management
in teacher education, Teaching Education, 22(2), pp. 109–112.
75
Appendix 5: Acknowledgements
I would like to thank all who have taken the time to contribute to the review and offered
their views and expertise by interview and attending roundtable discussions. I am also
particularly grateful to all who hosted school visits across England. It would not be
possible to name them all here, but I would like to express my sincerest thanks to:
• Charlie Taylor, Former Government Adviser, Behaviour Specialist
• Professor Terry Haydn, Professor of Education and Lifelong Learning, University of
East Anglia
• Professor Joe Elliott, Professor of Education, Principal of Collingwood college,
Durham University
• Katharine Birbalsingh: Headteacher, Michaela Community School
• Reuben Moore, Director of Senior Leadership, Teach first
• Professor Marilyn Leask, Professor of Educational Knowledge Management, De
Montfort University
• Philippa Cordingley, Chief Executive of Centre for the Use of Research
• Dame Sally Coates, Director of Academies South at United Learning
• Carl Hendrick, Director of research, Wellington College
• Professor Philip Garner, Professor of Education, School of Education, University of
Northampton
• Professor Mark Brundrett, Professor of Educational Research and Director of the
Centre for Educational Research, Liverpool John Moore’s University
• Dame Reena Keeble, Teaching School Council-: Chair, review of effective primary
teaching practice
• Nick Rose, Education Researcher, Teach First
• John d’Abbro, Executive Headteacher of the New Rush Hall Group
• Jason Ashley, Headteacher, Redbridge Community School
• Andy Prindiville, Headteacher, St Gregory’s Catholic Science College
• Mark Emmerson, Principal of the The City Academy, Hackney and Education
Strategy Director at the City of London Corporation.
• Dr Susan Tranter, Executive Headteacher, Edmonton County School
• Stephen Drew, Headteacher, Brentwood County High School
• David Didau, Educational consultant
• Sir Paul Grant, Headteacher, Robert Clack School
• Alison Colwell, Headteacher, Ebbsfleet Academy
• Martin Robinson, Independent Trainer and Consultant
• Garry Mellefont, Headteacher, North View Special School
• Vic Goddard, Headteacher, Passmores Academy
• Sophie Murfin, Executive Principal Wise Owl Trust – Seymour Primary School
• Mike Hamilton, Managing Director, Commando Joes
• Alan Clifton & Jane Pickthall - National Association of Virtual School Heads
• Amy Skipp, Director, ASK Research
• Dr Vicky Hopwood, ASK Research
• Pauline Myers, Department for Education
• Oliver Caviglioli, Educational Illustrator, How2
76
© Crown copyright 2017
This publication (not including logos) is licensed under the terms of the Open
Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. Where we have identified any
third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright
holders concerned.
© Copyright 2017 Oliver Caviglioli, Educational Illustrator, How2
To view this licence:
visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3
email psi@nationalarchives.gsi.gov.uk
write to Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London, TW9 4DU
About this publication:
enquiries www.education.gov.uk/contactus
download www.gov.uk/government/publications
Reference: DFE-00059-2017
Follow us on Twitter:
@educationgovuk
Like us on Facebook:
facebook.com/educationgovuk |