The use of exclusionary practice within England is increasing with government statistics suggesting a 71% rise in permanent exclusions in the past 7 years (Department for Education, 2022). More specifically, it was shown within the DfE (2022) report that the rate of primary school exclusions is on the rise, with 432 primary school children permanently excluded in the first two terms of the 2021/2022 academic year, compared to just 186 in the previous year. Amongst these figures, children with social, emotional and mental health [SEMH] difficulties are disproportionately (approximately four times more than their peers) more likely to receive a permanent exclusion from school (Graham et al., 2019). In fact, vulnerable children who meet one or two of the following criteria: have special educational needs (SEND), especially SEMH children who do not have an education, health and care plan (EHCP); experienced Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs); and/or in receipt of Pupil Premium Funding (PPF), are six times more likely to be excluded (DfE, 2022). Within John et al.’s (2022) population level study, which linked Welsh attendance and exclusion data to national demographic, primary and secondary health-care datasets. The research found that of the children aged 7–11 in the study, those with a neurodevelopmental disorder, mental health disorder or self-harm were much more likely to be excluded than those without. The proportion of excluded pupils without a disorder was consistently low at 0.5%. However, of the children with an ASD diagnosis, 4.7% were excluded and, of those with a conduct disorder, 8% were excluded.

This is concerning, as being excluded and/or suspended can have significant negative implications for children’s self-conception, emotional wellbeing, school belonging and academic attainment in the short term and has been shown to exacerbate existing social inequalities and lead to poor mental health, academic attainment and life chances in the long term (Tejerina-Arreal et al., 2020). Thus, the scale and importance of supporting children at risk of exclusion and/or suspension effectively cannot be over-stated, especially for our most vulnerable children, who experience an accumulation of risk factors at the individual, family, school and wider social and cultural level (Fielding, 2020).

Moreover, it is worth noting that exclusion and/or suspension can be conceptualised as key developmental and educational transitions for young people, which can pose heightened risk for the development of poor emotional wellbeing and mental health (Bagnall et al., 2024a). For example, when children are excluded they negotiate multiple, simultaneous changes, or as recognised in Jindal-Snape’s (2016, 2023) Multiple and Multi-dimensional Transitions Theory (MMT), “transitions”, in their educational environment, social interactions, sense of self and identity, to name a few. Negotiating multiple transitions simultaneously can have a significant impact on children’s ability to cope, especially if they lack sufficient support (Bagnall et al., 2024b), which unfortunately is common during exclusionary transitions where relationships with the school (including student-teacher relationships) are broken down (Macdonald & Marsh, 2004).

Positive student-teacher relationships are consistently shown to be a paramount protective factor for children who are at risk of exclusion and/or suspension (Fielding, 2020). Often underpinning positive student-teacher relationships (STRs) is trust. Although research has demonstrated the importance of trust within STRs (Cracknell, 2023; Fox et al., 2020; Zheng et al., 2024), the concept of trust has not received the theoretical attention which one might expect. This may be due to its complex multidimensional nature making it difficult to interpret and measure. The definition which will be used to conceptualise trust within this study comes from Rousseau et al. (1998) who defined trust as a ‘psychological state comprising the intention to accept vulnerability based upon positive expectations of the intentions or behaviour of another’ (P.395). There are however important debates within the field which must be discussed, for example, Jones and George (1998) believed an individual’s ability to trust can be impacted by factors such as developmental experiences, social and cultural background, and personality type. On the contrary some theorists believe the trustee characteristics are a better indication of varying levels of interpersonal trust than the trustor’s general tendency to trust (Jarvenpaa et al., 1998).

This study aims to investigate the potential impacts that exclusion transitions can have on trust within STRs. To do this, it is essential to firstly understand the importance of trust within STRs in the educational setting, and the role it can play in the positive development of children. Bryk and Schneider (2002) suggested that trust acts as a bonding agent between students and staff. Ennis and McCauley’s (2002) qualitative interviews and observations found that teacher’s commitment, persistence and shared experiences provide the foundation for educational trust amongst disruptive and disengaged students. The findings of this study suggest that the development of a trusting relationship between students and teachers is essential when creating a positive learning environment for marginalised students (Ennis & McCauley, 2002).

The work of Ghosh et al. (2001) places Rousseau’s definition of trust within the context of STRs whereby student’s willingness to be vulnerable towards their teacher is discussed in relation to their perceived openness and reliability. The literature indicates that building trust is a relational practice which enables growth within the educational setting, and therefore greater focus should be placed on this when attempting to form productive STRs (Frelin, 2015). This is especially important for children who have been excluded and/or suspended, as they begin transitioning into alternate provision (AP) education, the foci of the current study.

In line with Risk and Resilience theory (Rutter, 2006), trust has been conceptualised within research as a protective factor for vulnerable children within the classroom environment. Protective factors can be defined as moderators which enhance positive developmental outcomes (Shonkoff & Meisels, 2011) and it is thought that the presence of protective factors promotes the development of resilience within an individual. For example, Schwarzer and Buchwald (2000) who have conceptualised and operationalised interpersonal trust as a protective factor within STRs, found trust to predict coping mechanisms, such as seeking social support (Schwarzer & Buchwald, 2000) and increased feelings of safety (Mitchel et al., 2016). Risk and Resilience theory underpins the rationale and focus for the current study which investigates trust within STRs as a protective factor which helps to promote resilience, as children transition to AP education. Conceptualising trust in this way highlights the importance of understanding what influences trust within educational settings, and how to promote trust within STRs, which will also be explored.

Trust within STRs is particularly important for children who are at risk of exclusion and/or suspension, such as children who have experienced ACEs (Anda et al., 2020; Lacey & Minnis, 2019). Research has suggested a clear link between the presence of ACEs and a young person’s likelihood to be excluded and/or suspended (Giovanelli et al., 2020). For example, by examining the link between the presence of ACEs before the age of 5 and school suspension and exclusion, Pierce et al. (2022) found that children with a cumulative ACE score are almost four times more likely to be excluded or suspended from school several years later (Pierce et al, 2022).

Developing positive STRs have been shown to be particularly important for children with ACEs who may be at risk of exclusion or suspension. For example, Hunt et al.’s (2017) cross-sectional study, found the association between ACEs and ‘unemotional’ traits in children to be moderated by STR, in that the relationship between ACEs and unemotional traits was higher for children with high conflict/low closeness STRs. However, when the STR was deemed to have low conflict/high closeness levels, the association between ACEs and unemotional traits was significantly lower (Stoppelbein et al., 2020). These findings place emphasis on the notion that positive STRs may mitigate the development of these traits in children with a history of ACEs who are at risk of exclusion or suspension.

Similar findings have been shown within Michael and Frederickson’s (2013) interview research with 16 secondary school students with SEMH difficulties, attending a pupil referral unit (PRU) in the UK, which found the most identified enabler of positive academic, social and emotional outcomes, was positive relationships with teachers. Extending on these findings, amongst primary-school aged children, Bagnall et al.’s (2021a) case study research found STRs to be crucial in promoting feelings of safety and belonging for children with SEMH difficulties attending an SEMH special school. This particularly helped children to feel settled within the primary school, following breakdown in previous school placements. These findings further emphasise the importance of STRs, for another at risk group of young people, whom are also disproportionately more likely to be excluded and/or suspended than peers without a SEMH diagnosis.

Finally, it is important to acknowledge that exclusion and/or suspension is most likely to result from an accumulation of risk factors (Tejerina-Arreal, et al. 2020) associated not only with the child but also with the family, school and wider social and cultural setting. In line with the latter, children in receipt of PPF are also at greater risk of being excluded; with almost 50% of those excluded falling into this category (IntegratED, 2020). This can result in children in receipt of PPF making less progress, widening attainment gaps in the first three years of secondary education (Cook et al., 2020; Moore et al., 2020). These figures have increased further following the Covid-19 pandemic (Education Endowment Foundation, 2022; Thomas & Rogers, 2020), demonstrating the need to support our most at risk children (Garner & Bagnall, 2024).

Two themes were identified across the 4 interviews which address RQ1: ‘1. Students’ feelings of rejection following exclusion’ and ‘2. Trust in student-teacher relationships is essential for learning and development’. Two themes were also identified across the four interviews which address RQ2: ‘3. The importance of being trauma aware’ and ‘4. The importance of honesty and consistency when building trust in student-teacher relationships’. As demonstrated in Table 1 each of these themes encompasses 2–3 subthemes.

There has been a significant increase in the number of children experiencing exclusion and/or suspension (DfE, 2022), which can have significant short- and long-term negative academic, social and emotional effects (Tejerina-Arreal et al., 2020). In addition, educational transitions (especially unplanned exclusionary transitions) are emotionally demanding experiences (Bagnall et al., 2021a), which can also have further negative long-term implications on children’s emotional wellbeing and mental health (Symonds et al., 2023). Thus, the scale and importance of research within this area cannot be underestimated. However, to date there is little research available which explores the impact of suspension and/or exclusion on trust within student-teacher relationships (STRs).

Nonetheless, qualitative methods, such as the present study, have the potential to generate a richer understanding of teachers’ experiences and elicit personal viewpoints and attitudes. This is critical in the context of Alterative Provision (AP), and perspectives of STRs within this context, given the diverse needs of students and organisational and environmental characteristics, which can heavily shape these experiences. However, AP teachers’ perspectives have been significantly underrepresented within the literature (Cahill et al., 2020). This is despite, teachers’ experience of relationships with the children they support and the implications for changes in levels of trust within those relationships, being central to understanding how best to support children through transitions to AP and the practice required to enable children to re-build STRs. This necessitates further research of this population, which the present study overcame, by exploring AP primary school teachers’ perspectives of trust within STRs immediately following exclusion and/or suspension, and how trust is rebuilt.

In line with the first research question, pertaining to teachers’ experiences of trust in STRs immediately following exclusions and/or suspension, teachers described how exclusion can be a damaging experience for children. During this time, children are effectively removed from their school community and told they cannot be educated in this environment, and by their teachers, who they once trusted to look after them. In line with MMT theory, this leads to unplanned transitions in expectations and standards, interpersonal relationships, and/or identity, which can cause further stress, anxiety, and emotional instability. As shown within our findings, these transitions can lead to children experiencing significant feelings of rejection, which can have damaging implications on their self-esteem and ultimately their ability to form trusting STRs, impacting children’s feelings of safety, ability to be vulnerable, seek and accept help. This highlights the need for strategies and approaches which seek to reduce suspensions and/or exclusions and aim to support children to remain within their primary settings. The SEND and AP improvement plan (Gov, 2023) recognises the role that AP could play in supporting children to remain in mainstream education by offering early targeted support within their settings and intervention in AP schools followed by reintegration back into their mainstream school or transitions to a different setting.

Extending on the above, participants discussed the importance of communicating with mainstream schools during reintegration. This is consistent with the literature which cites individualised reintegration and clear channels of communication between AP and mainstream schools as an enabler for the successful reintegration of excluded children (Atkinson & Rowley, 2019). This communication could also allow for an attitudinal shift within the discourse surrounding a child’s exclusion as it may enable it to be viewed as providing access to support mainstream school struggled to provide, instead of viewing it as a rejection.

These findings also highlight the need for approaches which are underpinned by unconditional positive regard (UPR) within AP settings to counteract any negative effects exclusion may have had on the students’ self-esteem, and to develop trusting STR. In line with Risk and Resilience theory (Rutter, 2006), UPR has been shown to act as a protective factor within the classroom, in encouraging the development of trusting interpersonal relationships and positive self-regard (Brunzell et al, 2015; Corey, 2020). Adopting this approach allows children to be valued as unique individuals who are not defined by their behaviour. This is likely to leave students feeling reassured within the school environment, that relationships will not come to an end if mistakes are made, making them more likely to demonstrate trust (Swarra et al, 2017).

In line with research question two, teachers discussed the importance of honesty and consistency as vital in rebuilding trust within STRs following exclusion. However, as shown within this theme, participants described children having difficulties ‘opening up’ and asking for help following exclusion, which was discussed as “pseudo-independence”. This is where individuals are reluctant to ask for help due to a belief that others are not to be trusted to help, and that being dependant on another is negative, potentially putting the student at risk. These findings emphasise the priority AP staff need to place on building trust immediately following exclusion, to encourage feelings of safety and reduce negative learning and developmental outcomes for students. Although the literature explores the concept of help seeking and what influences it, it fails to link the impact of exclusionary practice to students’ willingness to be vulnerable. This unique finding therefore emphasises the need to train teachers on the importance of supporting and positively reinforcing help seeking behaviours when developing trusting STRs to improve learning outcomes for excluded children in AP settings. This suggestion is further supported by the work of Jobe and Gorin (2012), who found it is through trusting relationships with professionals that children in care settings are more likely to seek and receive help.

Drawing on the second research question, the study highlights the importance of consistency when developing trusting STRs following exclusion. In working to rebuild trust with children who have been excluded, participants discussed the importance of demonstrating consistency and honesty, for example by following through on actions as this counteracts the students’ experiences of inconsistency created by exclusionary practice. This is consistent with recent studies which suggest students who experience high levels of consistency within their interactions with teachers report more positive feelings about school as well as higher levels of trust and less conflict. These findings suggest that AP settings may need additional supports to ensure consistency in their environment. This could be achieved for example, through providing children with key adults or small teams of adults who can provide reliable, predictable, and nurturing interactions (Price, 2010). This was shown effectively within the ‘Check in/Check out’ intervention, which was shown to promote resilience through the development of trusting STRs, through predictable, consistent, and nurturing check-ins (Crone et al., 2010).

However, it is important to note that there is a high prevalence of ACEs amongst children attending AP settings (Asmussen et al., 2020; Pickens & Tschopp, 2017), and children’s ability to form trusting STRs may have also been affected by mistrust experiences within their home environment (Ennis & McCauley, 2002; Gold et al., 2023). This draws on Jindal-Snape’s (2016) MMT theory, which outlines the need to consider significant others within a child’s ecosystem, beyond the school, such as parents/carers and the community. Thus, as highlighted by the participants in the study, being trauma aware is critical when rebuilding trust within STRs following exclusion. Participants explained how an understanding of the students’ experiences and potential triggers helps inform ways in which to interact with them, increasing levels of student confidence and leading to more trusting relationships. To do this, teachers emphasised the importance of using assessments to determine the presence of environmental factors and triggers that are thought to be problematic for the child and working closely with mainstream schools to further understand these. These findings have significant practical implications for educational settings and is consistent with the discourse surrounding successful trauma informed education, which suggests it must be holistic and consider the whole learning environment including policy, curriculum, and relationships with staff (Cavanaugh, 2016; Nava, 2018).

In sum, the present study makes several original and significant contributions to AP research and practice. This is the first interview study which has sought the first-hand experiences of AP primary school teachers’ perspectives of trust within STRs immediately following exclusion and/or suspension, and how trust is rebuilt. This is a key strength of the present study and extends MMT theory (Jindal-Snape, 2016) in considering the experiences of unplanned transitions to AP. In doing so, the present study, suggests that exclusionary practice is a potentially damaging experience, which has negative implications for young people’s abilities to develop trusting relationships. Whilst the literature emphasises the importance of trust in the development of positive STRs and cites the vulnerabilities of excluded children, this study has presented a unique contribution by discussing the particular importance of trust within STRs for the learning and development of excluded children.

As well as this, the study highlights the compounding negative effects that feelings of rejection following exclusion have on young people’s self-worth, their emotional safety and subsequent need to protect themselves from vulnerability, and how these impact on the development of trust within their STRs in the short term and may affect trust in other authority figures in the long term. The current study presents suggestions for educational practice to support transitions to AP settings, which include the use of UPR strategies, supporting help seeking behaviours and providing consistency and nurture when building trust within STRs. Another main implication comes from the need for APs to be trauma-informed when interacting with students, particularly in relation to understanding triggers when developing trusting STRs following exclusion. This is especially important due to the increased number of children with high ACE scores within the AP setting, as Pierce et al’s (2022) study highlights that children with a cumulative ACE score are more likely to have different experiences and triggers to be aware of.

Overall, this study has found exclusionary practice to be transitions which can have negative implications on students’ ability to form trusting relationships. The study highlights the impact that these unplanned transitions can have on student’s self-esteem and willingness to be vulnerable. The researchers hope that providing an insight into these negative effects of exclusion and/or suspension helps to inform practice within the AP setting when building trusting relationships with young people, specifically through the use of nurturing and consistent teaching methods as well as being trauma aware.

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.