Crackdown measures at a troubled secondary school “won’t work in the long run,” according to a former teacher.

Teacher strikes over safety and pupil behaviour at Oasis Academy’s two campuses on Sheppey have seen trust bosses promise £500,000 for behaviour specialists and the introduction of five-day exclusion.

But one teacher, with direct experience of schooling on the Island, believes the measures will do little to change the school's current trajectory.

Swale council’s former leader Roger Truelove, who taught at the then Isle of Sheppey Academy during the 1970s, says the school’s fortunes will not change until it can attract “aspirational” students from the local community.

“Of course, there are good students at the academy but more children go to the schools in Sittingbourne. They also attract more teachers,” he said.

“There's a problem with recruitment and has been since parents on the Island have been able to choose to send their children to school on the mainland.

“The school has become a self-fulfilling prophecy in that because of its reputation many parents whose kids are aspirational won’t send them there. The local community at the moment do not see it as their school.

“So in the long term, the measures won’t work because the problems the school is facing are not short-term issues.”

Residents told KentOnline what they thought of the situation with Abbie, whose daughter is in Year 6, saying she “did not even put Oasis down as an option”.

She claimed: “Some parents have even said they will homeschool their children instead of sending them to Oasis.”

Earlier this year Oasis Charitable Trust confirmed it would be pulling out of the Island. In its place would be two new schools, with Leigh Academies Trust (LAT) and the Strood-based EKC Schools Trust taking over.

Mr Truelove hopes this change may keep aspirational students from going elsewhere.

He added that in the short term, the school had to do something to remedy the current crisis which saw National Educational Union (NEU) members take to the picket lines.

The package offered by Oasis was enough to see NEU members stop their industrial action despite the strikers’ demands of fixed exclusion tariffs of 10 days for assaults or threats of assaults against staff and pupils not being met.

Oasis chief executive Steve Chalke told KentOnline the 10-day exclusion would not have helped the situation as there is “nowhere for the children to go”.

The fact the Island has some of the most deprived areas in Kent is one reason why the school is the hardest to run in his trust, Mr Chalke claimed, adding you “inherit all the issues that go with” living in a poorer community.

“We know that sending children home makes our school safe,” Mr Chalke said “but it does not mean they are safer”.

“Instead, the introduction of five-day suspensions will “meet the children’s needs.

“What we can do over these shorter number of days is ensure the safeguarding for the children is there.

“Of course, what else do you do with this young person who is kicking off and aggressive?

“But at the same time, we have to stick with the kids so they learn. If we just throw them out what have they learnt?

“They have learnt that ‘I don’t fit in, I’m the kid that is always in trouble’ and so it begins to become a self-fulfilling prophecy.”

Former Gravesend grammar head and education expert, Peter Read, also says the suspensions will not be the remedy for the school’s problems.

He has urged the government to “urgently intervene” at the school to prevent a child or teacher from “serious harm”.

He adds he is not convinced that the five-day suspensions for children already rejecting school authority “will be much of a threat”.

Instead “it may give a break for those who wish to learn”, Peter added.

“Fixed five-day minimum exclusion periods for assaults and threats against staff are the norm in other schools.

“But I have no specialised wisdom to offer and like so many others have to look for answers elsewhere.”

However, there is some optimism surrounding the new measures with lead behaviour advisor to the Department for Education, Tom Bennett, saying short-term suspensions “are a necessary tool” to help improve behaviour.

“If a child attacks a teacher or a student,” Mr Bennett said, “or is swearing at staff or displaying extreme behaviour there is no way they can stay in school.

“This is the same principle in a workplace for example. If you were assaulted by someone you worked with then you would expect them to face the consequences.

“One reason for suspensions is that they can be a wake-up call. It tells them that they are going down the wrong path and can see a behaviour change.

“The other reason for suspensions is for the staff and the other children who deserve a safe environment.

“Suspensions don't always work but not everything works for everyone. In an ideal world, schools wouldn’t have to use them and they are a last resort.”

As part of the measures a NEU spokeswoman said that the agreement between members and the trust included “£500,000 for additional behaviour specialist staffing”.

However, Mr Chalke says that the real sum of money stands at £300,000 and has already been invested into the school.

He said: “I do not recognise the £500k figure. This is not new money but money that’s already invested in the school.

“Although I was not directly involved in the negotiation what I do know is that we did not have half a million quid in our pocket that we were withholding.”

But the intention of using behavioural specialists is seen as a positive step for the school.

John Murray, a behaviour support consultant for Jogo Behaviour Support and former Ofsted Inspector with more than 30 years of experience in teaching, says there is no reason why behavioural specialists shouldn’t work.

He said: “Of course, it’s not a black-and-white issue but as long as there is a very good working relationship between a service provider and a school there’s no reason why behaviour cannot be improved.

"Behavioural specialists go into schools and perform a range of functions.

“They can work with children one to one, although this is rare, train teachers to put plans and support packages in for the children with poor behaviour and also meet with families.

“If a school has identified a problem it is up to them to be honest to a service provider and then that provider to be honest themselves about what they can offer the school.

“As long as that’s there then there's no reason why it shouldn’t work.”