‘Inclusion – that word!’ examining some of the tensions in supporting pupils experiencing social, emotional and behavioural difficulties/needs

Abstract

This paper explores issues around stigmatisation and labelling as they pertain to pupils with SEBD. The paper draws upon an evaluative case study, conducted in two Scottish local authorities, of the implementation of support groups, and examines how the approach was experienced by pupils who participated within the intervention, drawing from a range of accounts. The study was implemented in upper primary (aged 10-12) and lower secondary (aged 12-14). It is principally qualitative and draws upon data generated from open questionnaires, interviews and focus group discussions. Pupil responses to intervention were largely positive, but there was evidence that a minority of children had experienced the intervention as stigmatising. Variables relating to the establishment of trusting and respectful relationships within the group, partnerships with parents, professional development for staff and the adoption of a whole-school approach emerged as key variables in determining how pupils experienced the intervention.

Student voices on social exclusion in general primary schools

“…Moreover, despite acknowledging that the views of students with SEBD are important, that they are experts on their own situation and can contribute to educational initiatives, policies and research which influence their education (Michael and Frederickson 2013;Rose and Asher 2004;Woodhead and Faulkner 2000), there is a lack of knowledge about the perspectives of primary school students with SEBD. Studies which do include the voices of young students with SEBD focus on the students' perspectives on the impact of inclusive education (Adderley et al 2015;Mowat 2015) or on the consequences of victimisation due to bullying (Brown Hajdukova, Hornby, and Cushman 2016;Messiou 2012), but have not yet considered what the students think about how social inclusion could be realised in the classroom.…”

Supporting the socio-emotional aspects of the primary–secondary transition for pupils with social, emotional and behavioural needs: Affordances and constraints

“…For him, early intervention (as a preventative measure) makes infinite sense both as a moral and an economic imperative. However, many professionals reject early intervention on a range of grounds, such as concerns about potential labelling and stigma (not recognising that many such children have already attracted derogatory informal labels by professionals and peers -'waste of space,' 'troublemaker,' 'loonie') (Kauffman, 2013(Kauffman, & 2014Mowat, 2015); and an over-optimistic sense that children will 'grow out of it' (Kauffman, 2014), amongst other issues.…”

“…For some, any removal of a child from the setting of the classroom for additional support may be seen as exclusionary, no matter the long-term objective. Within the wider study, this emerged as a tension for Sg Leaders (and how their work was perceived within the school) (Mowat, 2015) and may explain why this specific measure on the questionnaire was rated less positively than might have been expected, given that the principal focus of the work is to promote inclusive practice.…”

“You have to do something beyond containing”: developing inclusive systems in a partnership of primary schools

“…This approach is in direct contradiction to the disciplinary measure of FTE whereby students are prevented from entering their classrooms. Whilst much of the focus of the inclusion debate has surrounded children with Special Educational Needs (SEN) (Norwich 2014), a broader understanding of inclusion necessitates focusing more widely upon students who display challenging behaviour (Ainscow and Sandhill 2010;Mowat 2015). Ainscow and Sandhill (2010) argue that the most inclusive schools are those where the school culture encourages teachers to reevaluate and adapt their practice.…”