The correlation between socio-economic disadvantage and educational difficulties such as ‘emotional and behavioural difficulties’ dominated educational thinking in the mid 1900s(1). Environmental explanations for children’s educational difficulties were then subsumed by a focus on school performance and the improvement of academic standards, engendered by the quasi-market reforms of the late 1980s(2). Some research has indicated that the reforms led to negative outcomes for children with special needs(3), a rise in exclusions(4), and a reduced tolerance by schools of difficult behaviour(5). Current policy towards children with ‘behavioural, emotional and social difficulties’ (BESD) is one of inclusion, where possible, in mainstream schooling. Alongside this, the Government is committed to improving the educational opportunities and outcomes for all children as part of a cross-departmental programme to end child poverty. Local Authorities (LAs) have a mandate to reduce the gap in educational attainment for disadvantaged children, supported by targeted initiatives such as Education Action Zones, the Excellence in Cities programme and the universal Extended Schools programme. Alongside these broader policies of social inclusion, are initiatives targeted at managing and controlling behaviour in schools and developing the social and emotional skills of pupils to facilitate learning. These comprise the Behaviour Improvement Programme and most recently, the Behaviour and Attendance strand of the Key Stage 3 National Strategy and the Social and Emotional Aspects of Learning programme. While policies such as Every Child Matters and Full Service Extended Schools locate education in a broader social context, they have done little to disturb the long-established correlation between poverty and educational disadvantage in the wider population, although they have ameliorated the situation of certain individuals(6). According to Ainscow et al.(7), the Government is simultaneously pursuing the goals of excellence and equity in its education system; however the pursuit of equity is jeopardised by having been superimposed on policies of choice and competition, which appear to have reinforced inequity and social division. There is a concern that the pressure on LAs and school leaders to effect academic achievement at the highest grades may overshadow attempts to address the educational and other developmental needs of disadvantaged pupils, including those with BESD. Aims and objectives: The general aims of the study are to explore professional perceptions and interpretations of national policy approaches to the education of young people with BESD and establish whether these lead to differences in local implementation and practice. It will contrast the English educational experience with relevant examples from the European context to identify key differences and lessons.

This preliminary study combines quantitative and qualitative methods within a single case study approach of one multi-agency cluster in one LA in the Midlands, UK. It includes: analysis of school exclusion and attendance data, LA and school policies and service provision for pupils with BESD and semi-structured interviews. Twenty key informers were selected to represent a cross-section of professionals concerned with the development and/or implementation of educational policy.

It is anticipated that the lack of clarity from the UK government about the priority it affords to improving the educational experience of young people with BESD results in continued inconsistencies in provision, practice and attitudes for this historically under-served population.