The school had started a review of its Behaviour Policy just before making the bid. Peter Hook (of the Oldham DIETS team) had been involved in the school as a consultant/trainer. A review of the Behaviour Policy was presented to Year teams ready to be implemented in September 1997.

The objectives of the 1997-98 project were:

• To review the current school behaviour policy and associated procedures · To ensure consistency across the school in the management of behaviour and the associated communication systems
• To establish a clearly understood ladder of intervention
• To establish clearly defined criteria known and used by all staff to identify and respond to students who demonstrate disaffected and disruptive behaviour
• To enhance the current staff support system (staff patrol)
• To ensure that all staff, pupils and parents are fully aware of the school's set of rewards and sanctions
• To enhance the range of strategies to address and improve disruptive behaviour
• To increase the degree of planned contact with parents
• To increase, through INSET, the behaviour management strategies of all staff
• To enhance, through INSET, the expertise of pastoral staff working with students who exhibit particular signs of disaffection and disruption
• To establish a consistent, informative system of record keeping · To improve general behaviour in class and around the school, and in particular, to address more fully the needs of disruptive and disaffected pupils.

Central to the achievement of the above aims was the introduction of a `Ladder of Consequences' based on a set of `fair rules' which had been discussed with staff by Peter Hook. The rules related to working, talking, movement round the school, dealing with disagreements etc. The Ladder of Consequences uses a hierarchical model of sanctions related to the severity of the behaviour. The rules and the consequence for breaking them are known to all, agreed by all staff and therefore imply consistency in application so that everyone (staff, students and parents) is aware of the system. Use is also made of the Student Planner where parents and staff can make comments to each other on a student's behaviour. A `red' comment alerts parents to problem behaviour.

Where, after a warning from a form tutor (in non-contact time) unacceptable behaviour (as defined in the Ladder of Consequences) continues, a Red Slip is sent to the Form Tutor. This indicates the reason for referral and is the beginning (as it were the first rung) of "the Ladder".

A letter is sent home, inviting parents to the school. (This should not be a surprise to parents as they should have been alerted by an earlier comment in the Planner.)

The Form Tutor decided whether to issue a White Monitoring Card (marking a `higher rung). (In the case of more serious misbehaviours this could have been issued earlier.)

If a second red slip is given, then the student's name is entered in a Red Monitoring Diary and responsibility for monitoring the student's behaviour is then taken by the Head of Year. The student has to report in the Diary every day, commenting in relation to their own targets which have been jointly agreed by the student and Head of Year (and/or Form Tutor). The student has signed to show agreement to work on these targets. Parents are sometimes also involved, particularly where the plan involves offering rewards or sanctions at home.

It is, of course, possible to `move down a rung' when behaviours improve. If, however, after two weeks of this monitoring there is no improvement, a student will be interviewed by the Head of Year and Head of Site to discuss the situation further. A Behavioural Individual Education Plan (B.I.E.P.) runs alongside the use of the Red Monitoring Diary and this is clearly related to the SEN staged procedures.

Ultimately a student may be referred to a Head Teacher's Panel.

The procedures appear to have been carefully considered and are being monitored in order to evaluate effectiveness including ease of management. Staff are pleased with the graded approach and it is possible to "fast-track" to a high level in the case of very severe behaviours such as swearing or aggressive behaviours. The Project Director commented that now that staff understood the use of B.I.E.Ps there is greater consistency in behaviour management.

Whole school staff INSET had been funded by the project in January 1998 to consider factors involved in preventing disaffection and disruption. There had been help for staff to determine how to identify difficulties and decide what behaviours are serious. There had also been INSET on managing behaviour, teaching and learning styles and curriculum differentiation as means of preventing disaffection and disruption.

In addition specialist support had been introduced. Two classroom assistants had attended a course on challenging behaviours and were able to use effective strategies. A trained counsellor had also been employed to work with individuals and in groups as well as supporting teachers. This had been very successful and the school is able to retain her even after the end of the project.

A Senior Member of Staff has been on duty for crisis intervention, but this system has not always worked well as there are, of course, many occasions when he or she will be needed for other matters (e.g. when a child is ill). The objective of enhancing the current staff support system by a staff patrol has yet to be met effectively.

Similarly there still remains some work to be done on ensuring that all staff, students and parents are fully aware of the Ladder of Consequences. This will take place early in September 1998 when also a Ladder of Rewards will be introduced, because the school has adopted a similar staged approach to its reward system and is anxious to emphasise a positive approach.

The Project Director believes all other objectives have been met through INSET and the development of a coherent `Ladder' structure. This has involved putting an improved record system into place.

There has been an increase in involving parents, and those who have been involved have been pleased with system which they understand and support. The system has also been discussed at general meetings with parents. (The school offers half termly informal meetings with parents in year groups.)

It is too soon to evaluate the success of the system in relation to some of the performance indicators described in the original bid - particularly as to whether there has been a reduction in

• referral to outside agencies
• reduction in exclusion rates.

However, the system has now been put into place and can run without additional funding (the Monitoring Diaries/booklets are being funded from another source). This means that there can be evaluation after 1 and 2 years in relation to the above. What seems clear is that when there are referrals or exclusions, there will be a set of documentation available reflecting all the steps taken by the school within its own resources, to address the behaviours.