Leading a school brings a multitude of daily difficult decisions. But one of the most difficult is when to suspend or permanently exclude a child.<\/p>\n
The weight of this decision must not be underestimated. The decision made by leaders will ultimately define a different life path for that child and family. It is a life-lasting landmark.<\/p>\n
I have been exploring how to make these difficult decisions \u201cethically\u201d in an educational landscape with growing SEN needs, trauma-informed advocates, a boom in parental complaints and DfE guidance directing nearly no external suspensions.<\/p>\n
Schools often use \u201cprinciple-based ethics\u201d. This states that an action is ethical if it aligns with universal laws, or in school speak, universal rules. And school are packed with universal rules.<\/p>\n
It has no regard for the consequences of applying the rules, only that they are universally applied and, if they are, then the leader has acted ethically.<\/p>\n
Whilst school staff hugely favour this model of consistency, clarity and guidance it\u00a0 often falls at the first hurdle.<\/p>\n
Many would argue that it is unethical to apply the same rules and sanctions to pupils with SEND, or to a first-time offence.<\/p>\n
After all, what is our end goal? Is it to punish for punishment\u2019s sake or is it to ensure the negative behaviour doesn\u2019t happen again?<\/p>\n
I have suspended pupils because it followed a school \u201cprecedent\u201d, or their behaviour \u201ccrossed a line\u201d, when I knew a strong talking-to and education from myself and parents would ensure it wouldn\u2019t happen again.<\/p>\n
One of the words leaders fear the most is \u201cinconsistent\u201d and yes, staff would probably call a leader inconsistent if he or she didn\u2019t follow principle-based ethics.<\/p>\n
If they did not, they would be following \u201cconsequential ethics\u201d.<\/p>\n
This states that the right action is one that brings about the greatest amount of good for the greatest number of people.<\/p>\n
Using this theory, a leader would take every case on its individual merits as long as they believed it would result in the best possible consequences.<\/p>\n
Advocates for SEND or looked-after pupils would probably back this \u2013 I have been pushed by those advocates to not sanction poor behaviour of pupils with certain needs or backgrounds.<\/p>\n
In reality, however, this would bring many issues around consistency, pupil bias and even behaviour analysis tracking.<\/p>\n
Moreover, it needs a strong leader to make a bold decision against the expectation and will of others in school because they believe it will bring about the best consequence.<\/p>\n
This strong leader may well be carrying out \u201cvirtue ethics\u201d. This is the theory that if the decision maker is \u201cvirtuous\u201d, then their decision will be ethical.<\/p>\n
How many school leaders truly have not only the backing of all staff, but a staff body that would describe them as virtuous? Who decides who is virtuous anyway?<\/p>\n
Finally, relational ethics. This in essence is \u201ctrust your gut\u201d. Listen to your heart pulsing faster, or the bead of sweat on your forehead, and act on it.<\/p>\n
I have been surprised by just how confident I was in some permanent exclusion decisions when I have used relational ethics. If my body is screaming out to me, then surely I know the decision is ethical?<\/p>\n
This approach, however, is fraught with the risk of bias, conscious or otherwise, by the decision-maker.<\/p>\n
So how do we make difficult decisions that are right for the child, for your staff and for the school as well as it being \u201cethical\u201d?<\/p>\n
Ultimately, the most ethical decisions come from leaders who can consciously balance these competing theories with transparency, humility and humanity.<\/p>\n
In a landscape filled with pressure and complexity, our responsibility is not to choose a perfect model, but to choose the path that most meaningfully protects the dignity, safety and future of every child in our care.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
It\u2019s vital leaders balance competing theories with transparency, humility and humanity<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":70,"featured_media":245565,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"post-theme":[],"class_list":["post-245742","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-opinion"],"acf":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t