Moving school can be a daunting experience for any child. But for children in local authority care - already suffering instability in their home lives - school moves are not only potentially damaging, but also frequent.
A new report commissioned by Anne Longfield, the Children’s Commissioner for England, shows that one in 10 children in care move school in the middle of the academic year - three times the national rate.
This can sever vulnerable pupils’ ties with school friends, hamper their academic progress and, Longfield warns, leave them “anxious and depressed” (see box, below).
Sometimes such a school move can be explained by a change in where the pupil lives. But the Children’s Commissioner’s Stability Index finds that in the majority of school moves for looked-after children (56 per cent) this was not the case and other factors were at work.
The study argues that many moves could actually be down to schools, with “other factors (such as exclusions)” playing a “significant role”.
Shining a light
The index, launched today, links local authority and school data on looked-after children. Longfield says it “shines a light on how well schools are supporting children in care and whether the secure and stable education and relationships they need are in place”.
The report shows that there are significant regional differences in the proportion of children in care who experience a mid-year school move, even after controlling for children’s characteristics.
At this stage, it is not clear why these differences exist - but what is evident is that there is a great deal of variation in practice. Some local authorities, for example, now have a zero permanent exclusions policy for looked-after children, according to academics specialising in children in care.
The situation should have been improved by the requirement from 2014 for every local authority to appoint a “virtual school” headteacher - someone responsible for the results of all looked-after children in their area and who manages their pupil-premium funding.
Virtual school heads can negotiate with schools about the progress and needs of these pupils.
They need the security of a safe place where they feel comfortable and know people
Jane Pickthall, the chair of the National Association of Virtual School Heads, says: “Stability is key for these children. They need time to form good relationships with the staff in school.
“They need the security of a safe place where they feel comfortable and know people. A school move for a looked-after child is significantly harder because of their attachment needs.
“Their levels of anxiety are going to be much higher going into a place where they don’t know the people. Their sense of safety is compromised much more.”
But a 2015 study, from the universities of Oxford and Bristol, found that the rates of exclusion were still much higher for looked-after children - and that they were more likely to attend pupil referral units, alternative provision and special schools.
“That could be one explanation [for mid-year school moves] if young people in care are either being permanently excluded or are being moved to an alternative form of schooling,” Nikki Luke, one of the report’s authors, says.
Their study, funded by the Nuffield Foundation, found that a change of school for looked-after children was often associated with poorer exam results.
If schools understand attachment [theory] and what happens then they will be able to change how they work with those children
But Luke acknowledges that “a lot of virtual school [heads] have been putting in place efforts to reduce or completely delete any instances of permanent exclusions for looked-after children”.
“Some local authorities have a zero permanent exclusions policy for their looked-after children,” she says.
Pickthall argues that to reduce the damaging consequences of mid-year moves, schools should consider different thresholds when handling the behaviour of looked-after children.
She wants them to understand the difficulties that such children can have in regulating their behaviour because of the loss of attachment with a parent or caregiver earlier in life.
Pickthall says that school behaviour systems focusing on “rewards and consequences” can make the behaviour of children in care worse, particularly if they do not have good relationships with school staff.
“What presents itself looks like they are not following the school’s rules. But they are not doing it on purpose,” she says.
“If schools understand attachment [theory] and what happens then they will be able to change how they work with those children and reduce the need to move them on.”
Children ‘moved quickly’
Some schools currently move on children in care who continuously display low-level disruption before exploring why they may be behaving that way and any different approaches that could improve the situation, Pickthall says.
And without that kind of consideration, looked-after children often find their problems at school escalating quickly. Behaviour deemed inappropriate clashes with school discipline systems and the pupils are told that a “fresh start” in a different school would be beneficial.
“We are very keen to bust that myth and say that fresh starts don’t really work for many looked-after children as they have to start from scratch again with building relationships,” says Pickthall.
But heads say that schools already do a lot to support children in care.
“Schools are very sensitive to the needs of looked-after children and will whenever possible bend over backwards to ensure that they are giving stability to youngsters,” says Malcolm Trobe, the interim general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders.
“In our experience, schools would only look for a managed move under circumstances where they’ve exhausted all of the actions and activities that they’ve done in order to support the youngsters.”
