Read on Twitter
4/12 Firstly, there’s no step in here about actually engaging with the child. Every step is a one-way flow of information from staff to young children who have just gone through the baffling, stressful and, in some cases, dangerous experience of lockdown.
5/12 Some will have suffered trauma and stress and will carry that back into school as disruptive behaviour https://www.tes.com/news/coronavirus-trauma-exclusions-reopen-prus-schools-lockdown">https://www.tes.com/news/coro...
6/12 If staff at no point have a two-way dialogue, how can they know whether there is a reason children are not following these instructions that are, let& #39;s face it, about an abstract threat difficult for a five-year-old to comprehend?
7/12 Lets also accept that the requirements of these rules involve a level of restraint that we’ve seen adults and government advisors struggle with, let alone five-year-old children excited to play with their friends.
8/12 the second point is that, even if you have a child who has gone through a calm dialogue with staff and refused to engage nonetheless, how does exclusion help teach anyone about the importance of social distancing?
9/12 Surely, it is prolonged isolation that is going to make young people so keen now to get back to playing and socialising. And children with SEND, particularly those with sensory difficulties or who struggle with routine change, are going to find this immensely difficult.
10/12 There is one inevitable consequence of policies like this – the disproportionate exclusion of children with special educational needs, children who have mental health conditions and children who have suffered trauma.
11/12 If we think that this is just the price of doing business, then we need to reflect on why we actually want children back in school, because further stigmatisation and disadvantage of students with SEN, when compared to their peers will not be in their best interests.
