Policy in practice: Enabling and inhibiting factors for the success of suspension centres

Abstract

The overarching question for this research is: "What are the differences between 'espoused educational policy' and 'policy in use' in relation to suspension centres?" (Cohen, 2000; Schön, 1995). To answer this question, stakeholders were asked their opinions based on research sub-questions: what are the best things happening with suspension centres or what should be maintained with suspension centres?; what needs to be improved with suspension centres?; and what evidence is there that suspension centres are meeting the Purpose and Goals as outlined in the Guidelines? Disruptive student behaviour continues to be a serious issue in schools. Suspension centres are a recent government initiative to help address this issue in NSW government schools. The centres are for students on long suspension from school who have been identified as being likely to benefit from a structured program to assist their successful return to schooling. Schön (1995) makes the case for those people who design policy to "get interested" in what the policy means to practitioners in the field as the ways in which the policy is used can be very different from the "policy intention" (p. 33). Schön's concerns could be very pertinent in regard to the suspension centres which have never been formally evaluated. The research was conducted in two phases. Phase One, semi-structured interviews, were implemented with stakeholders including students, their parents, mentors, suspension centre staff, and regional personnel associated with the centres, while students were at the centres. Responses revealed that the best things happening or things that should be maintained were that: students were learning skills related to academic activities and behaviour and that suspension centre staff were using appropriate approaches and had good skills in managing students with disruptive behaviour. Such practices enabled the success of suspension centres.