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…..
@Malcolm_Reeve