Behaviour and exclusion
Education chapter 7. Who is excluded, for what, and how often — and the four-nation split on behaviour policy and phones.
There were 913,000 suspensions in 2024/25, but they fell on 326,674 pupils — an average of 2.8 suspensions each for those suspended at all.
How many
913,000
Suspensions
2024/25. Published rounded to the nearest thousand
326,674
Pupils suspended at least once
An average of 2.8 suspensions each
9,906
Permanent exclusions
A rate of 0.12 per hundred pupils
There were 9,906 permanent exclusions in 2024/25, a rate of 0.12 per hundred pupils. In 2006/07 there were 8,678.
What a rate of 0.12 means
Rates are per 100 pupils on roll, which is how the Department publishes them. A permanent-exclusion rate of 0.12 means twelve permanent exclusions per ten thousand pupils, not twelve per cent.
The latest suspension count is rounded
The suspension count for the most recent year is published rounded to the nearest thousand; every earlier year is exact. Charts mark the rounded year so it is not read as a precise figure.
One permanent exclusion is one pupil removed from a school roll, so this series counts pupils rather than episodes.
Source: DfE, Suspensions and permanent exclusions in England.
View as table
| Period | Permanent exclusions |
|---|---|
| 2006/07 | 8,678 |
| 2007/08 | 8,126 |
| 2008/09 | 6,546 |
| 2009/10 | 5,741 |
| 2010/11 | 5,082 |
| 2011/12 | 5,166 |
| 2012/13 | 4,632 |
| 2013/14 | 4,949 |
| 2014/15 | 5,795 |
| 2015/16 | 6,684 |
| 2016/17 | 7,719 |
| 2017/18 | 7,905 |
| 2018/19 | 7,894 |
| 2019/20 | 5,057 |
| 2020/21 | 3,928 |
| 2021/22 | 6,495 |
| 2022/23 | 9,376 |
| 2023/24 | 10,885 |
| 2024/25 | 9,906 |
Episodes, not pupils. Grey marks the year the Department publishes rounded to the nearest thousand.
Source: DfE, Suspensions and permanent exclusions in England.
View as table
| Period | Suspensions |
|---|---|
| 2006/07 | 426k |
| 2007/08 | 384k |
| 2008/09 | 363k |
| 2009/10 | 331k |
| 2010/11 | 324k |
| 2011/12 | 304k |
| 2012/13 | 268k |
| 2013/14 | 269k |
| 2014/15 | 303k |
| 2015/16 | 339k |
| 2016/17 | 382k |
| 2017/18 | 411k |
| 2018/19 | 438k |
| 2019/20 | 311k |
| 2020/21 | 352k |
| 2021/22 | 578k |
| 2022/23 | 787k |
| 2023/24 | 955k |
| 2024/25 | 913k |
The number that is easy to miss
Suspensions and pupils suspended are both published, side by side, without comment. The ratio between them is not published, and it is the figure that tells you whether suspension is a broad experience or a repeated one for a smaller group. In 2024/25 it was 2.8 suspensions for every pupil suspended at all.
For what
The most common reason recorded for a permanent exclusion in 2024/25 was persistent disruptive behaviour, cited 5,254 times.
Reasons do not sum to a whole
The reason recorded is the one the school gave for the decision. From 2020/21 a school may record more than one reason per exclusion, so reasons sum to more than the number of exclusions and cannot be read as a breakdown of a whole.
Shares are of all reasons recorded, not of all exclusions, because one exclusion may carry several.
- Persistent disruptive behaviour5,254 (39.6%)
- Physical assault against a pupil2,077 (15.6%)
- Physical assault against an adult1,593 (12.0%)
- Verbal abuse or threatening behaviour against an adult1,429 (10.8%)
- Use or threat of use of an offensive weapon or prohibited item766 (5.8%)
- Verbal abuse or threatening behaviour against a pupil620 (4.7%)
- Drug and alcohol related614 (4.6%)
- Damage383 (2.9%)
- Sexual misconduct143 (1.1%)
- Inappropriate use of social media or online technology102 (0.8%)
- Racist abuse87 (0.7%)
- Bullying77 (0.6%)
- Wilful and repeated transgression of protective measures64 (0.5%)
- Theft50 (0.4%)
- Abuse relating to sex or gender20 (0.2%)
- Abuse against sexual orientation or disability5 (0.0%)
Source: DfE, Suspensions and permanent exclusions in England. Category names are the Department's own.
View as table
| Category | Count | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Persistent disruptive behaviour | 5,254 | 39.6% |
| Physical assault against a pupil | 2,077 | 15.6% |
| Physical assault against an adult | 1,593 | 12.0% |
| Verbal abuse or threatening behaviour against an adult | 1,429 | 10.8% |
| Use or threat of use of an offensive weapon or prohibited item | 766 | 5.8% |
| Verbal abuse or threatening behaviour against a pupil | 620 | 4.7% |
| Drug and alcohol related | 614 | 4.6% |
| Damage | 383 | 2.9% |
| Sexual misconduct | 143 | 1.1% |
| Inappropriate use of social media or online technology | 102 | 0.8% |
| Racist abuse | 87 | 0.7% |
| Bullying | 77 | 0.6% |
| Wilful and repeated transgression of protective measures | 64 | 0.5% |
| Theft | 50 | 0.4% |
| Abuse relating to sex or gender | 20 | 0.2% |
| Abuse against sexual orientation or disability | 5 | 0.0% |
Shares are of all reasons recorded. One suspension may carry several reasons.
- Persistent disruptive behaviour553,831 (51.6%)
- Verbal abuse or threatening behaviour against an adult158,214 (14.7%)
- Physical assault against a pupil132,337 (12.3%)
- Physical assault against an adult63,846 (5.9%)
- Verbal abuse or threatening behaviour against a pupil41,900 (3.9%)
- Damage29,721 (2.8%)
- Drug and alcohol related20,695 (1.9%)
- Racist abuse16,434 (1.5%)
- Use or threat of use of an offensive weapon or prohibited item15,308 (1.4%)
- Inappropriate use of social media or online technology10,885 (1.0%)
- Bullying8,293 (0.8%)
- Sexual misconduct7,278 (0.7%)
- Theft6,068 (0.6%)
- Wilful and repeated transgression of protective measures4,973 (0.5%)
- Abuse relating to sex or gender3,226 (0.3%)
- Abuse against sexual orientation or disability532 (0.0%)
Source: DfE, Suspensions and permanent exclusions in England.
View as table
| Category | Count | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Persistent disruptive behaviour | 553,831 | 51.6% |
| Verbal abuse or threatening behaviour against an adult | 158,214 | 14.7% |
| Physical assault against a pupil | 132,337 | 12.3% |
| Physical assault against an adult | 63,846 | 5.9% |
| Verbal abuse or threatening behaviour against a pupil | 41,900 | 3.9% |
| Damage | 29,721 | 2.8% |
| Drug and alcohol related | 20,695 | 1.9% |
| Racist abuse | 16,434 | 1.5% |
| Use or threat of use of an offensive weapon or prohibited item | 15,308 | 1.4% |
| Inappropriate use of social media or online technology | 10,885 | 1.0% |
| Bullying | 8,293 | 0.8% |
| Sexual misconduct | 7,278 | 0.7% |
| Theft | 6,068 | 0.6% |
| Wilful and repeated transgression of protective measures | 4,973 | 0.5% |
| Abuse relating to sex or gender | 3,226 | 0.3% |
| Abuse against sexual orientation or disability | 532 | 0.0% |
To whom
These groups overlap
These are rates for groups, and the groups overlap: a pupil can be eligible for free school meals, have an EHC plan, and be in the age band with the highest rate. The published data does not separate the contribution of each characteristic, so nothing here shows that any one of them is the reason.
Rates differ sharply by school phase
Rates differ sharply between school phases, so every figure here names the phase it belongs to. A pupil eligible for free school meals has a suspension rate around eight times higher in secondary than in primary, and quoting an all-phase average hides that.
- FSM - Eligible26.66
- FSM - Not eligible5.41
Rate per 100 pupils on roll, all state-funded schools. Source: DfE, Suspensions and permanent exclusions in England.
View as table
| free school meal eligibility | Phase | Suspension rate | Permanent exclusion rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| FSM - Eligible | State-funded primary | 6.28 | 0.092 |
| FSM - Not eligible | State-funded primary | 1.22 | 0.013 |
| FSM - Eligible | State-funded secondary | 51.56 | 0.601 |
| FSM - Not eligible | State-funded secondary | 10.67 | 0.095 |
| FSM - Eligible | State-funded special | 18.57 | 0.098 |
| FSM - Not eligible | State-funded special | 6.37 | 0.061 |
| FSM - Eligible | Total | 26.66 | 0.316 |
| FSM - Not eligible | Total | 5.41 | 0.049 |
- EHC plan26.45
- No identified SEN6.78
- SEN support28.86
Rate per 100 pupils on roll, all state-funded schools. Source: DfE, Suspensions and permanent exclusions in England.
View as table
| SEN provision | Phase | Suspension rate | Permanent exclusion rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| EHC plan | State-funded primary | 19.58 | 0.311 |
| No identified SEN | State-funded primary | 0.52 | 0.005 |
| SEN support | State-funded primary | 9.25 | 0.122 |
| EHC plan | State-funded secondary | 57.17 | 0.507 |
| No identified SEN | State-funded secondary | 14.38 | 0.136 |
| SEN support | State-funded secondary | 55.55 | 0.719 |
| EHC plan | State-funded special | 12.17 | 0.079 |
| No identified SEN | State-funded special | 77.27 | 0.000 |
| SEN support | State-funded special | 42.91 | 0.130 |
| EHC plan | Total | 26.45 | 0.273 |
| No identified SEN | Total | 6.78 | 0.064 |
| SEN support | Total | 28.86 | 0.375 |
- Sex female8.17
- Sex male13.47
Rate per 100 pupils on roll, all state-funded schools. Source: DfE, Suspensions and permanent exclusions in England.
View as table
| sex | Phase | Suspension rate | Permanent exclusion rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex female | State-funded primary | 0.87 | 0.009 |
| Sex male | State-funded primary | 4.02 | 0.055 |
| Sex female | State-funded secondary | 17.17 | 0.151 |
| Sex male | State-funded secondary | 25.26 | 0.300 |
| Sex female | State-funded special | 6.31 | 0.025 |
| Sex male | State-funded special | 14.65 | 0.100 |
| Sex female | Total | 8.17 | 0.072 |
| Sex male | Total | 13.47 | 0.162 |
The same characteristic, by school phase
The all-schools figures above average across phases that behave very differently. Free school meal eligibility is shown here across all four, on the same measure.
View as table
| Phase | FSM eligible | FSM not eligible |
|---|---|---|
| State-funded primary | 6.28 | 1.22 |
| State-funded secondary | 51.56 | 10.67 |
| State-funded special | 18.57 | 6.37 |
| Total | 26.66 | 5.41 |
Suspension rate per 100 pupils on roll. Source: DfE, Suspensions and permanent exclusions in England.
Four nations, four frameworks
Exclusion is a devolved power exercised through four different legal frameworks, and the terminology alone diverges: England suspends and permanently excludes, Scotland has temporary and removal from the register, Wales has fixed-term and permanent exclusion under its own regulations, and Northern Ireland operates suspension and expulsion. The counts are not comparable, and this section does not compare them.
Different instruments, not one measure
Three nations, three legal instruments. England suspends and permanently excludes under the Education Act 2002 and its regulations; Scotland records temporary exclusion and removal from the register under its own guidance; Wales records fixed-term and permanent exclusion under Welsh regulations. They are counted on different bases over different populations, and no figure here is divided by another. The cards sit side by side so a reader can see what each nation measures, not so the numbers can be ranked.
England
2024/25- Suspensions (episodes)913,000
- Permanent exclusions (pupils)9,906
- Pupils suspended at least once (pupils)326,674
0.12 permanent exclusions per 100 pupils
Framework: Education Act 2002 and the School Discipline (Pupil Exclusions and Reviews) (England) Regulations 2012. A head teacher decides; governors review; an independent review panel can be requested.
Suspensions count episodes, so one pupil suspended repeatedly contributes several. The release publishes both episodes and pupils, and both are shown.
DfE, Suspensions and permanent exclusions in England ↗Scotland
2024/25- Cases of exclusion, all types (cases)10,647
- Temporary exclusions (cases)10,647
- Removed from register (pupils)0
15.2 exclusions per 1,000 pupils
Framework: Scottish statutory guidance, "Included, Engaged and Involved Part 2", under the Education (Scotland) Act 1980 and subsequent legislation. Local authorities exclude; there is no separate category equivalent to an English suspension.
Scotland records cases of exclusion. 'Temporary exclusion' is the near-universal form; 'removed from register' is the Scottish equivalent of a permanent exclusion and is now recorded as zero.
Scottish Government, Exclusions from Schools 2024/25 ↗Wales
2022/23- Fixed-term exclusions (exclusions)31,987
- Permanent exclusions (exclusions)415
0.88 permanent per 1,000 pupils · 67.9 fixed-term per 1,000
Framework: Welsh Government guidance "Exclusion from schools and pupil referral units", under the Education Act 2002 as it applies in Wales. Head teachers exclude; governing bodies and local authorities review.
Wales records fixed-term and permanent exclusions from maintained schools and EOTAS provision. Figures are for the academic year September to August.
Welsh Government, Permanent and fixed-term exclusions from schools ↗Northern Ireland
—Northern Ireland is absent. Its suspension and expulsion figures are reported within the Department of Education's school census outputs rather than as a standalone downloadable statistical table, and no machine-readable series was located. Recorded as a gap rather than filled by transcription.
Framework: Suspension and expulsion under the Education (Northern Ireland) Order 1998 and the Scheme for the Suspension and Expulsion of Pupils.
NI Department of Education, education statistics ↗
Each nation publishes its own rate on its own denominator: England per 100 pupils, Scotland and Wales per 1,000. They are shown in the units their publisher uses and are not converted onto a common scale, because converting them would imply a comparability the definitions do not support.
Scotland records zero permanent exclusions
Scotland recorded zero pupils removed from the register in 2024/25 — the published figure, not a rounding or a suppression. Removal from the register is the Scottish instrument closest to an English permanent exclusion. The number has fallen from 60 in 2010/11, and total exclusions from 26,844 to 10,647 over the same period. Why Scotland sits where it does is a question about Scottish policy, and the Scottish Government sets out its own position in the guidance linked below rather than being paraphrased here.
Europe
No comparable European series exists
There is no standardised European series on school exclusion. The full Eurostat catalogue was searched: every education-related result for “exclusion” refers to poverty and social exclusion, not exclusion from school. The OECD dataflow catalogue contains no dataflow mentioning suspension, expulsion or disciplinary measures at all. What follows is therefore a comparison of legal regimes and of what each country publishes, not a ranking.
The reason is structural rather than an oversight. Exclusion is a national competence with no EU reporting obligation attached, the instruments differ so much that a common definition would be difficult to draft, and in Germany school law is a matter for each Land rather than the federal government — so even a single national German figure is not a straightforward thing to produce.
England
Annual national count published- Legal framework
- Education Act 2002; School Discipline (Pupil Exclusions and Reviews) (England) Regulations 2012.
- Instruments, in their own terms
- Suspension (fixed period) · Permanent exclusion
- What is published
- An annual national statistical release with counts, rates, reasons and pupil characteristics, down to school level.
- Headline figure, on its own definition
- 9,906 permanent exclusions and 913,000 suspensions, 2024/25
France
No routine national count found- Legal framework
- Code de l’éducation, articles R511-12 to R511-19. Since the decree of 24 June 2011, only the conseil de discipline may impose a permanent exclusion.
- Instruments, in their own terms
- Exclusion temporaire de la classe (up to 8 days) · Exclusion temporaire de l’établissement (up to 8 days) · Exclusion définitive
- What is published
- No regular national statistical series on exclusions was located. The Ministry publishes the disciplinary framework and periodic analytical notes rather than an annual count.
Germany
No routine national count found- Legal framework
- School law is a competence of each Land, not the federation. Ordnungsmaßnahmen are defined in sixteen separate Land school acts, and the instruments and thresholds differ between them.
- Instruments, in their own terms
- Ausschluss vom Unterricht (temporary) · Überweisung an eine andere Schule (transfer) · Entlassung / Verweisung von der Schule (permanent)
- What is published
- No single federal series. Any comparable national figure would have to be assembled from sixteen Land collections that do not share definitions.
Italy
No routine national count found- Legal framework
- Statuto delle studentesse e degli studenti (DPR 249/1998, amended by DPR 235/2007). Suspension beyond fifteen days requires a decision of the competent collegial body.
- Instruments, in their own terms
- Allontanamento dalla comunità scolastica up to 15 days · Allontanamento beyond 15 days · Exclusion from final examinations in the gravest cases
- What is published
- No regular national statistical series on exclusions was located in ministry outputs.
Finland
No routine national count found- Legal framework
- Basic Education Act (628/1998). Compulsory education runs to 18 under the 2021 extension, and a provider must arrange teaching for a pupil during any fixed-period expulsion.
- Instruments, in their own terms
- Written warning · Erottaminen määräajaksi — expulsion for a fixed period, up to three months
- What is published
- The national education statistics portal, Vipunen, publishes extensive basic-education data. No routine series on fixed-period expulsions was located within it.
Where the headline column is empty, that means no routine national series was found — not that the country records nothing and not that its exclusion rate is zero. Schools in all five countries exclude pupils. Only England publishes an annual national count of it in a form this site could ingest.
Comparative academic work on school exclusion across Europe exists and is worth reading, but it is not an official statistical series: it typically covers a sample of schools or regions, uses definitions the authors have had to construct themselves, and is not repeated annually. This site cites official statistics as data and academic work as attributed viewpoint, so no cross-country figure from that literature appears in the table above.
View as table
| Country | Instruments | What is published | Headline figure |
|---|---|---|---|
| England | Suspension (fixed period); Permanent exclusion | An annual national statistical release with counts, rates, reasons and pupil characteristics, down to school level. | 9,906 permanent exclusions and 913,000 suspensions, 2024/25 |
| France | Exclusion temporaire de la classe (up to 8 days); Exclusion temporaire de l’établissement (up to 8 days); Exclusion définitive | No regular national statistical series on exclusions was located. The Ministry publishes the disciplinary framework and periodic analytical notes rather than an annual count. | No routine national count found |
| Germany | Ausschluss vom Unterricht (temporary); Überweisung an eine andere Schule (transfer); Entlassung / Verweisung von der Schule (permanent) | No single federal series. Any comparable national figure would have to be assembled from sixteen Land collections that do not share definitions. | No routine national count found |
| Italy | Allontanamento dalla comunità scolastica up to 15 days; Allontanamento beyond 15 days; Exclusion from final examinations in the gravest cases | No regular national statistical series on exclusions was located in ministry outputs. | No routine national count found |
| Finland | Written warning; Erottaminen määräajaksi — expulsion for a fixed period, up to three months | The national education statistics portal, Vipunen, publishes extensive basic-education data. No routine series on fixed-period expulsions was located within it. | No routine national count found |
Mobile phones
Four administrations, four positions, and none of them is a straightforward ban. England has the strongest instrument — statutory guidance carrying a duty to have regard — and even there the law does not prohibit phones; it obliges schools to have a policy and to justify departures from the guidance. Reporting that as “phones banned in schools” is the commonest error about this policy.
- Statutory guidance
England
Statutory guidance since 29 June 2026, which schools should follow from 1 September 2026. It expects schools to develop a policy prohibiting phone use across the school day, including lessons, break and lunchtime, with exceptions for reasonable adjustments and medical need.
Legal status: Section 36 of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act 2026 requires state-funded schools to have regard to the guidance. That is a duty to have regard, not a statutory prohibition on phones — schools that depart from it must be able to explain why, which is a different legal test from breaking a ban.
DfE, Mobile phones in schools (statutory guidance) ↗ - Legislation announced
Scotland
Non-statutory guidance published in August 2024 concluded a national ban was not appropriate or feasible, leaving restrictions to schools and councils. The Scottish Government has since confirmed it intends to legislate, with a consultation and refreshed guidance in 2026.
Legal status: Currently guidance only. Legislation announced, not yet passed.
Scottish Government, Mobile phones: guidance for Scotland’s schools ↗ - Non-statutory guidance
Northern Ireland
Guidance published in September 2024 recommends pupils avoid phone use during the school day, and that primary pupils should not bring phones onto school premises at all. Schools were asked to review their policies in light of it.
Legal status: Non-statutory guidance. The decision remains with each school.
NI Department of Education, Guidance on use of mobile phones in schools ↗ - No recent national guidance
Wales
No recent national guidance. The most recent guidance for secondary schools dates from 2010, which observed that almost all schools already prohibited phone use in lessons and recommended consistent enforcement. Policy is a matter for each school.
Legal status: No current national framework.
House of Commons Library, Mobile phones in schools (England), CBP-10241 ↗
This tracker records decisions, not effects
This tracker records what each administration has decided, not whether it works. Evaluations of phone restrictions are contested and the outcome measures used differ between them, so no effect size appears here. The behaviour and attainment statistics elsewhere in this section cannot be used to test it either: the policy is too recent, and nothing isolates it from everything else changing at the same time.
Related chapters
- In this sectionBritain vs EuropeThe wider European comparison of education outcomes, which summarises this chapter’s exclusion regimes rather than repeating them.
- In this sectionAttendance and missing educationThe other routes out of a classroom, and the Education Visibility Gap register.
- In this sectionSpecial educational needsSuspension rates are markedly higher for pupils with SEN.
- In this sectionEducationThe other chapters, and how this section is built.
- Leaves this sectionCrime and safetyWhere school exclusion is often raised in political argument.
Scope and definitions
England, not the UK
Education is devolved. Every figure on this page is England only. Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland operate different frameworks with different legal definitions, and their figures are not directly comparable.
Suspensions count episodes, not children
Suspensions are episodes, not children. The published figure counts each suspension separately, so a pupil suspended four times contributes four. The release also publishes the number of pupils suspended at least once, and the difference between the two is what tells you whether suspension is spread widely or concentrated on a smaller group.
Permanent exclusions and suspensions count EPISODES, not children. One pupil can be suspended several times in a year, so the suspension count is always larger than the number of pupils suspended, and the release publishes both.
Last verified 2026-08-17. Data: DfE, Suspensions and permanent exclusions in England.