Painful invisibilities: Roll management or ‘off‐rolling’ and professional identity

Abstract

Off-rolling' is widely defined as the illegal removal of students from a school roll, unlike permanent exclusion, which involves sanctioned formal procedures. It is a practice that brings very different logics, political agendas, governmental imperatives and the associated matter of school leader professional identity into sharp relief. Deviant professional identities have already been discursively constituted, despite the current lack of research into the motivation of senior school leaders who engage in 'off-rolling'. This article draws on Foucault to explore tensions between a political standards and an inclusion agenda, and to consider how the professional identities of senior school leaders are shaped such that 'off-rolling' becomes possible. It is suggested that chronic underfunding of the inclusion agenda has combined with what England's Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills (Ofsted) now describes as an over-emphasis on academic performance to create unsustainable pressures on many senior school leaders. The descriptor 'contextual roll management' may therefore be more appropriate. The moral outrage which accompanies public and political discourse around 'off-rolling' is theorised with reference to Apple, Ball and Popkewitz. Such moral indignation distracts attention from the wider socio-political and economic context within which schools are now required to deliver academic progress and inclusion. We conclude the article by outlining key empirical questions that have yet to be addressed.

Think piece on parents, ‘off rolling’ and wavelength methodology: issues for SENCos

“…Both have a fabulatory component that, in poststructuralist philosophising, implies a re‐imagining of future developments in inclusive education and a desire to empower selected groups such that ‘moral injury’ (Bernstein, 2005; Nash et al ., 2013) can be pre‐empted through a more equitable distribution of power (Murphy and Done, 2015). Amplifying the ‘voices’ of the morally injured is intended to challenge discursive orthodoxies and incentives to exclude in the current educational culture (Done and Knowler, 2019).…”

“…To continue this wavelength analogy, a multi‐strand research project will contain numerous wavelengths and, previously, we have ‘tuned in’ to the competing demands made of head teachers in policy discourse (Done and Knowler, 2019). As Le Roux (2014) argues, in a somewhat different context, different groups have differing interests at stake in what they, and others, are to know or take as known.…”

“…The authors are currently investigating informal exclusionary practices in a research project which has multiple strands, including analysis of social media discussion among education professionals, interviews with head teachers and an online qualitative survey of parents. At its inception, a focus on head teachers was envisaged and, specifically, exploration of the competing discourses and pressures to which they are subject (Done, 2019; Done and Knowler, 2019). It seemed important to provide head teachers with an opportunity to explain the varied pressures that they must navigate at a time when those suspected of off rolling were being vilified in the public domain for not prioritising an inclusion agenda, for example, The Times (2019).…”

“…A notable feature of the negative parental responses was the level of detail provided by some participants, ensuring a rich data set that was, at times, distressing and chilling to read. Our involvement in university‐based National Award in Special Educational Needs Coordination accreditation means that we are very aware of the political and economic pressures that schools and SENCos must navigate (Done et al ., 2015; Done, 2019), including the continued emphasis on academic performance and the seemingly incontestable political presumption that the standards and inclusion agendas are entirely compatible and easily reconciled (Done and Knowler, 2019). We are very familiar with research narratives in which prospective SENCos underline their determination to counter any obstacles to inclusive practice in their school settings despite evidence of long‐documented ‘concerns’ around policy and its potential implications for teachers (e.g.…”

“…Our research into ‘off rolling’ (illegal exclusionary school practices) comprises several studies and, to date, has provided head teachers (Done and Knowler, 2019; Knowler and Done, 2019) and parents with an opportunity to articulate their views on, and feelings about, off rolling. In this think piece, we focus on parental experiences of off rolling and feature data relating, specifically, to their perceptions of their relationship with the school SENCo which clearly contradict hegemonic policy discourse.…”