We often cite the statistics, because they are signals of a failing system and they continue to perplex us. That means trust, understanding, security, safety, compassion, kindness, relationship – and it’s just as important with families as it is with students. Relational approaches are far more likely to be successful in reducing persistent absence and the type of challenging behaviour that then leads to exclusion. We thrive on connection and interconnectedness, we actively seek it out and need it in place in order to thrive. In contrast, our brains are far more highly evolved, with a frontal lobe responsible for reasoning, thought, philosophical thinking, cognition and expressive language.
We believe that behaviourism (rooted in observing and conditioning mammals to behave in a specific way) is exacerbating these problems in schools. It’s also the same fight/flight/flop-drop/fawn responses we see in children exposed to toxic stress (trauma). All are a response to unmet need a form of communication through what is often the only vehicle children have to express distress – behaviour, and withdrawal or anger. Square Peg refers to ‘barriers to attendance’ which includes both persistent absence, ‘truancy’ and exclusion under that banner.
What’s the difference between exclusion and persistent absence? As it turns out, very little. Please note that the views expressed here represent those of the author and not the Excluded Lives team
0 kommentar(er)
