Educators’ perspectives on supporting autistic children at Pupil Referral Units following their exclusion from mainstream secondary school

Key words: autism; educators; support; exclusion; inclusive practice

​

Evidence shows one-in-four children with a diagnosis of autism excluded from school at some point during their education (Brede et al., 2016). Mainstream secondary school signals major changes for autistic children compared to their experiences in primary school. The size and shape of the new environment, sensory exposure, movement around the building, timings of the school day, new people, new faces, and varying social encounters are just some of the many factors that contribute to the challenges faced (Makin, Hill & Pellicano, 2017). However, compared to other groups of SEND children, autistic children are being excluded from mainstream secondary in disproportionate numbers (DfE, 2017), with many ending up in the generalised setting of a Pupil Referral Unit (PRU). There is an expectation that educators should be able to support the learning needs of autistic children (Michael & Frederickson, 2013). However, with each autistic child being unique, it is often reported that educators regularly experience difficulties providing support (Trussler & Robinson, 2015). The main research question asks: ‘What are educators’ perspectives on supporting autistic children at Pupil Referral Units following their exclusion from mainstream secondary school?’

The study addresses this through four sub-research questions based on: (1) specific needs; (2) good-practice; (3) supporting educators; and (4) working with others. A total of 16 participants were recruited, drawing from a range of PRU settings. Educators’ perspectives were gained through a semi-structured interview conducted via telephone. This approach allowed for richness of data and convenience for participants (Cachia & Millward, 2011). Durations ranged from 12 minutes up to a total of 1 hour and 32 minutes. Following exploration of data through Thematic Analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2006), sub-themes were identified under the following themes: Understanding the needs of PRU-based autistic children; The enabling environment of the PRU; Effectiveness of support through systems & structures; and, Preparing for adulthood through the PRU provision.

Implications for educator practice are presented alongside those for EP practice. This is reflected in training, resourcing, reflection and supervision, amongst other areas key to these types of support. Recommendations relate to systemic considerations, promotion of good-practice such as joint-working, and strategies for support. Central to the outcomes of this study is the understanding of educators being facilitated through a PRU setting in order for them to provide holistic support for individual autistic children. This study concludes that educator support goes beyond the current unique needs of those autistic children attending a PRU, and embraces their future outcomes through inclusive practice. Finally, the benefits of EP involvement are recognised as being integral for promoting, maintaining and enhancing the support surrounding educators, as they in turn support those at the focal point - autistic children and young people.