The report into educational exclusion argues that schools are using illegal or unscrupulous practices, such as convincing parents to home educate to avoid their children being expelled, even if the parents are unable to provide a proper education for the child.
The use of "managed moves" to other schools, dual registrations – where pupils are registered to attend both a school and a pupil referral unit (PRU) – and part-time timetables also fail some of the most vulnerable pupils, the report claimed, since children are often left without a structured education.
"Some schools are taking an ‘out of sight, out of mind’ approach to challenging pupils, and getting their behaviour ‘off their hands’," the report said.
"All too often their learning is not carefully or adequately structured. Neither is it tailored to their abilities, aptitudes or needs.
"Some schools are not monitoring their attendance, progress or behaviour. In the absence of pastoral or therapeutic support, many children and young people’s needs remain unmet and can become more entrenched."
The report argued that the Department for Education statistics on exclusion mask the true picture of what is happening in schools nationwide.
According to the latest figures, there were around 5,700 permanent exclusions last academic year, which marks a continued drop from 12,300 in 1997. But the number of children being educated in PRUs doubled between 1997 and 2007.
CSJ executive director Gavin Poole said unlawful practices in schools must be confronted head on.
"The money for these ‘ghost pupils’ is retained by some schools in circumstances where they have illegally excluded them and with some schools failing to provide any suitable educational support to these children," he warned.
The CSJ is calling on government to overhaul the exclusions system by restricting permanent exclusions to the most serious cases and requiring Ofsted to inspect the details of any exclusion to make sure that schools are complying with their legal duties. They also suggest that the definition and purpose of PRUs be clarified.
The CSJ report cites family breakdown and a rise in gang culture and violence as contributors to the increasing number of challenging pupils in schools. It argues that parents who refuse to accept support to help them improve the behaviour of their children should have their benefits cut.
