Last month Laura Trott, the shadow education secretary - and the MP for the constituency in which my school sits - said she believed we must be “honest about the need for permanent exclusions”.

And, she told Tes in a recent interview, she believes headteachers face too much “pushback” on exclusion decisions.

This argument is part of an ongoing - and often unhelpful - debate in which everyone from psychologists to politicians weighs in on the supposed crisis in behaviour, reducing the challenges of student conduct to a binary choice between punishment and leniency.

This discussion ignores the levers of fundamental change available to leaders. My decision to dismantle the isolation system at my school was one.

There were several reasons for this choice.

Why isolation doesn’t work

Firstly, the common argument for isolation is that it provides an immediate consequence for poor behaviour, a “breathing space” for both student and class, and a deterrent. But I see isolation as a strategy of avoidance, effectively warehousing disruption rather than solving it. It doesn’t work in fostering long-term, positive change.

When a child consistently displays challenging behaviour, it almost always signals unmet need. This need could be academic; emotional, stemming from trauma or anxiety; or environmental, a reaction to an unstable home life.

Placing a student in an isolation room does nothing to diagnose, let alone treat, that underlying cause. Instead, it often exacerbates the issue. The behaviour, once a temporary communication, becomes entrenched.

Secondly, isolation is an act of removal and rejection that tells the student they are not safe or valued within our learning community. What’s more, instead of requiring staff to learn de-escalation techniques, it allows them to pass the problem along, weakening capacity for effective behaviour management.

It’s not helpful for students, either. Typically, they sit stewing in anger. This negative emotional state is the antithesis of a learning-ready mind, while their return from isolation is rarely a fresh start but a continuation of the cycle, with the student often more determined to challenge a system they perceive as unjust.

Our solution

After removing our isolation room, we introduced a new system that has a clear, escalating structure of support.

Now, every instance of challenging behaviour is an opportunity for intervention. We maintain zero tolerance for disruption, but the response is proportionate.

When a student is removed from a lesson, they enter a crisis and intervention hub staffed by highly trained mentors. The focus is on providing emotional first aid, identifying the function of the behaviour, and actioning personalised support.

For students with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) and social, emotional and mental health (SEMH) needs, this is transformative. Isolation routinely penalised these students for behaviours that were a direct manifestation of their unmet need.

Our new system requires us to demonstrate due diligence before any escalation. We must show that we have tried personalised and evidence-based interventions to meet their needs.

When a situation reaches the point where a permanent exclusion must be considered, I now know I can proceed with integrity. I can stand before parents, governors and the local authority and demonstrate that we exhausted every resource available.

This is the responsible, moral and legally defensible way to manage the most challenging cases. We are not excluding a student because we couldn’t manage their behaviour; we are excluding them because we can show their needs are beyond the scope of a mainstream setting.

Proof that it works

This shift has required intensive staff training and strong communication with parents. The results, however, validate our approach:

1. Attendance is up

Students are more present and engaged because they feel safer, seen and valued. The fear of being isolated has been replaced by the certainty of being supported.

2. Behaviour is good

The number of serious incidents has declined because the environment is less punitive and more preventative. We are tackling the causes of disruption, not just the effects.

3. Student wellbeing and parent relationships have improved

When we call a parent, it’s not to report a punishment but to collaborate on an intervention strategy.

Students know we are on their side and their wellbeing is our highest priority.

4. A visible and accountable culture

Crucially, poor behaviour is no longer hidden away. It is dealt with properly by a team of committed professionals. This shows that we hold all students accountable, but we also hold ourselves accountable for providing them with the support they need to succeed.

Rejecting the easy fix

Isolation can be an easy fix, a knee-jerk reaction that satisfies the urge for immediate control.

But true leadership is about cultivating capability. By removing isolation, we can reject the idea that discipline is merely punishment, and embrace the complexity and deep humanity of education.

Hannah Carter is headteacher at Orchards Academy in Swanley, Kent

You can now get the UK’s most-trusted source of education news in a mobile app. Get Tes magazine on iOS and on Android