Welcome to the

Breakfast Meeting

with

Malcolm Reeve

Natalie Packer

SEND Reforms – Spirit and Letter…

Joined up support across education, health and care from birth to 25

Children and young people at the centre

Participation in decision making

A whole school approach

Children and Families Act 2014

SEND Code of Practice 0-25

Transition to the new 0-25 Send System

2014-15 School Census Guide

Supporting pupils at school with medical conditions

Spirit Letter

Involving Parents, Carers and

Children

‘…..inform parents when they

are making special educational

provision for a child’

‘In particular, they (schools)

should ensure that children,

parents and young people are

actively involved in decision-

making throughout the

approaches set out in this

chapter (6).’

Many parents have observed

that SEN provision is ‘done to

them’ and that they are

insufficiently consulted

The implications of the Code of

Practice are that this is

unacceptable and

parents/young people will have

grounds for formal complaint if

they are not full partners

Information 6.2, 6.7 Implication

A whole school approach

Culture change – an issue of

leadership

Communication

Practicalities where large

numbers of young people are

on ‘SEN Support’

Challenge for class and form

teachers

Leadership of SEN starts at the

top

Effective communication and

consultation processes are

essential (not just desirable)

Re-structure school meetings

cycle, change the way things

are done

Relevant training and

commissioning of specialist

support

Challenge Solution

A Whole School Approach: 5 Key

Principles

Outstanding SEN

Provision

Leadership

Identification

Tracking & Monitoring

Progress

Effective

Intervention

Improving

Provision

Video insert here

SEN Policy, Information

Report/Local Offer

The governing bodies of maintained schools and maintained nursery schools and the proprietors of academy schools must publish information on their websites about the implementation of the governing body’s or the proprietor’s policy for pupils with SEN.

information on the school’s SEN policy

details of the school’s contribution to the Local Offer

Clarity about the SEN provision

agreed by all and

communicated to all

stakeholders – driving towards

a whole school approach

Clarity about the relationship

between the school’s own

provision and the Local

Authority’s Local Offer

Information 6.79ff Implication

SEN Information Report

file://localhost/Users/malcolm

reeve/Downloads/Anon letter

SENDINFORMATIONREPORT.d

ocx

Lampton video insert here

Letter Spirit

SEN Information Report

How is this not just a

bureaucratic exercise?

Ensuring that policy becomes

embedded in the practice of

the school

Is it just a re-statement or a

genuine shift in provision?

Lack of clarity between Local

Offer and SEN Information

Report and pace of reform

Whole school review of SEN

offer

Engagement with parents and

young people

Challenge Solution

The role of the SENCO,

leadership and governance

National SENCO Award

On the School Leadership

Team?

Oversee, coordinate, liaise,

advise

Time and resources

SEN governor

Quality of SENCO training

Culture change for leadership

SENCOs as strategic leaders

Competing demands on time

SEN Committee?

Information 6.84ff Implication

SENCOs as strategic leaders

Supporting SENCOs to become

strategic leaders

The culture change at the

leadership level

Widespread and endemic lack

of training in SEND

Equip SENCOS with the tools of

strategic leadership and ensure

these become part of SENCO

Award training

Continue the focus on

vulnerable children and in

narrowing the attainment gap

Ensure quality SEND training in

initial teacher training

Challenge Solution

In this slide the SENCO is

using a strategic overview

of pupils on the SEN

Register at a primary

academy to determine

actions

22

2833 31

20

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11

SEN Register - 134/624 pupils - 21%

126

8

SEND Support Status

No SEN

K

Statemented

40 1

8

06

2 06

0

35

1

68

3

AS

D

BE

SD HI

ML

D

MS

Oth

PD

PM

LD

SL

CN

SE

LD

SE

MH

SL

D

SP

LD VI

TOTAL

SEN Register Category of Need

11

77

35

5

No. of pupils by SEN Type

C&I

C&L

SEM

H

S&P

The issue of Identification

All schools should have a clear

approach to identifying and

responding to SEN

The first response to such

progress should be high quality

teaching targeted at their areas

of weakness.

There is a wide range of

information available on

appropriate interventions for

pupils with different types of

need

Screening and identification

procedures need to be clear

Training and developing

teacher skills to deliver high

‘quality first’ teaching to young

people with SEN

Partnership working needs to

be fostered and developed

further

Information 6.14ff, 6.27ff Implication

National Special Educational Needs Information

% of

pupils

with:

2011 2012 2013 2014

SEN 19.3 18.5 17.4 16.6

SEN

without a

statement

17.9 17.1 16.0 15.2

a statement 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4

% of

pupils

with:

2011 2012 2013 2014

SEN 21.3 20.2 19.0 17.8

SEN

without a

statement

19.4 18.3 17.0 15.9

a statement 2.0 1.9 1.9 1.9

Primary

Secondary

% of pupils on school action plus or with a

statement by type of need:Primary Secondary Special

Specific Learning Difficulty 8.7 15.6 1.2

Moderate Learning Difficulty 19.1 20.3 17.2

Severe Learning Difficulty 1.3 0.9 24.8

Profound & Multiple Learning Difficulty 0.4 0.1 8.8

Behaviour, Emotional & Social Difficulties 18.4 26.7 13.4

Speech, Language and Communications Needs 31.6 11.0 5.3

Hearing Impairment 2.3 3.0 1.4

Visual Impairment 1.3 1.7 0.8

Multi- Sensory Impairment 0.2 0.1 0.2

Physical Disability 4.1 4.0 3.5

Autistic Spectrum Disorder 8.3 10.7 22.5

Other Difficulty/Disability 4.3 5.8 0.9

National Type Of Need Information (source=DfE

2014)

Nationally, primary pupils at School Action Plus or

with a Statement have a range of needs.

Speech,

Language and

Communicati

on Needs, 30%

Moderate

Learning

Difficulty, 20%

Behaviour,

Emotional &

Social

Difficulties,

18%

Specific

Learning

Difficulty, 9%

Autistic

Spectrum

Disorder, 8%

Other, 4%

Physical

Disability, 4%

Hearing, 2% Severe

Learning

Difficulty, 1%

Visual, 1% Profound &

Multiple

Learning,

1%

Nationally, secondary pupils at School Action Plus

or with a Statement have a range of needs.

Behaviour,

Emotional &

Social

Difficulties,

28%

Moderate

Learning

Difficulty, 22%Specific

Learning

Difficulty, 16%

Autistic

Spectrum

Disorder,

10%

Speech,

Language and

Communicati

on, 10%

Other, 6%

Physical

Disability, 4%

Hearing, 3% Visual, 1% Severe

Learning

Difficulty, 1%

40 1

8

0

62 0

6

0

35

1

68

3

AS

D

BE

SD HI

ML

D

MS

Oth

PD

PM

LD

SL

CN

SE

LD

SE

MH

SL

D

SP

LD VI

TOTAL

SEN Register Category of Need

MLD Nat Av. % = 19.1%

School % = 52%

SpLD Nat Av. % = 15.6%

School % = 51%

The Broad Areas of SEN

Speech, Language and

Communication Needs (SLCN)

Autism Spectrum Disorder

(ASD)

Moderate Learning Difficulties

(MLD)

Severe Learning Difficulties

(SLD)

Profound and Multiple Learning

Difficulties (PMLD)

Specific Learning Difficulties

(SpLD)

Communication and Interaction Cognition and Learning

Social, Emotional and Mental

Health Needs (SEMH)

(Attention Deficit Disorder,

Attention Deficit Hyperactive

Disorder or Attachment Disorder)

Hearing Impairment (HI)

Vision Impairment (VI)

Multi-sensory Impairment (MSI)

Physical Disability (PD)

Social, Emotional and Mental

HealthSensory and Physical

Other (OTH)

No Specialist Assessment (NSA)

11

77

35

5

No. of pupils by SEN Type

C&I

C&L

SEMH

S&P

3 Key Questions:

1. What is the service?

2. Where is the expertise?

3. How are we improving the

quality of both?

Moving from Identification to

Intervention

Lack of training in screening

and identification procedures

Lack of effective training of

teachers

Has there been any

enhancement of services?

Some schools report a

reduction in services, many

report difficulty in engaging

them

The screening procedures required in mainstream primary and secondary settings need to be embedded in practice

Local and national training and professional development programmes

Bridge the gap between identification and intervention with impact

Reviews of SEN registers in autumn 2014 – DfE SFR Sept.2015

Challenge Solution

Progress of young people with

SEND

…..less than expected progress given their age and individual circumstances. This can be characterised by progress which:

is significantly slower than that of their peers starting from the same baseline

fails to match or better the child’s previous rate of progress

fails to close the attainment gap between the child and their peers

widens the attainment gap

Half termly reports on the

progress of all children (this is a

national norm)

The articulation of progress at

whole school level

The articulation of progress at

group and individual level

Understanding the Ofsted

subsidiary guidance on the

progress of children with SEN

Information 6.17-6.19 Implication

Key Issues in Progress

Progress based on age and

prior attainment v national

expectations

National data on the progress of

lower attaining young people

Understand and articulate a

very clear picture of progress at

individual, group and whole

school level

Deploy resources based on

data and progress

Challenge Solution

The Graduated Approach

SEN support should take the form of a four-part cycle through which earlier decisions and actions are revisited, refined and revised with a growing understanding of the pupil’s needs and of what supports the pupil in making good progress and securing good outcomes. This is known as the graduated approach.

Assess

Plan

Do

Review

Effective analysis of pupil

needs is required

SENCO/teacher/parents to

agree adjustments

interventions, support

Wider awareness of need

communicated throughout the

school/academy

Class teacher remains

responsible

Information 6.44ff Implication

Implications for Teachers

Teachers remain responsible and accountable for the progress

of children in their class (including where support assistants are

deployed)

High quality differentiated teaching is an expectation

Training in effective identification and strategies to support

vulnerable children is vital

The SEND Reforms have significant implications for all

teachers in English schools

Implications for the wider work

force

Education Endowment Foundation statement on teaching

assistants (June 2013):

‘The existing research base suggests that, on average, teaching

assistants do not improve the learning of the children and the classes

that they support.’

How teaching assistants are deployed, how they are trained,

clarity about their expected impact is essential to maximise

benefits – ie: greater PRECISION

The SEND Reforms have significant implications for the use

and deployment of support assistants in English schools

But this is all happening at the same time!!!

• Arm yourself with the law, a

policy and a model

• ‘Tool up’ with strategic

leadership tools for

identification and progress

• Use the data to inform

organisation and

deployment

• Establish a SEND

Committee

• Form partnerships to

improve provision

Dream

and……..

How you’re having a good

breakfast meeting………

Contact me at…..

mreeve@academiesenterprisetrust.org

@Malcolm_Reeve