Children have a right to an education. This has been written into English law since the Forster Education Act of 1870, which began the process of making education compulsory for children aged between five and 13, and no one in their right mind would oppose that statement.
So when the number of permanent exclusions from schools is on the rise, the reasons behind this should be examined carefully. A child excluded from school is not accessing education, and therefore their rights have been violated. But is it really that simple?
A breakdown of the groups most often excluded does not bring up many surprises. In nearly half the cases, exclusions are for persistent disruption. Sex and drugs, bullying and racism come much further down the line. The types of children excluded are also, alas, not very surprising. Children over 14 make up more than 25 per cent of the number. There are three times more boys than girls excluded, four times more disadvantaged children than non-disadvantaged, and — this is perhaps the most concerning — children with special educational needs are seven times more likely to be excluded than those without.
Conspiracy theorists like to suppose that schools are keen to ‘move on’ students who are unlikely to make the grades and that this is why such a percentage of excludees (for want of a better word) are older. But how many of those conspiracy theorists actually work in schools? Might it not be the case that the older children are naughtier, more wayward and more aggressive than the younger ones?
I have to admit that when a child with persistent non-attendance, bad behaviour and a lack of interest leaves my class for whatever reason, I cannot help
but heave a sigh of relief.

Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in