Exemplar Primary, Exemplartown.
Set within a very built up, deprived area of Exemplartown, Exemplar Primary School is an oasis of calm and purpose which has a significant impact on the lives of the children and families, from two years of age.

I can only hope to capture the essence of the school in this report, based, as it is, on one day in the school.
Exemplar Primary School can rightly see itself as a beacon of excellence in Inclusion working within a broad local group that is working collaboratively to improve opportunities across the area.

The school has a very clear vision, articulated by the head and visible throughout the school, especially within very high quality displays but also through conversation, plans and other visual evidence. The term “Team around the child (TAC)” can be used to summarise the staff approach to the individual needs of the children. The school creates informal, internal TACs to oversee the well-being and educational needs of vulnerable individuals. Parents are fully involved within this process.

The following poem is offered as a summary.
Unity
(author unknown)
I dreamed I stood in a studio and watched two sculptors there,
The clay they used was a young child’s mind and they fashioned it with care.
One was a teacher: the tools she used were books and music and art;
One was a parent with a guiding hand and gentle loving heart.
And when at last their work was done, they were proud of what they had wrought.
For the things they had worked into the child could never be sold or bought!
And each agreed she would have failed if she had worked alone.
For behind the parent stood the school and behind the teacher the home!

Care for children and their backgrounds underpins the Exemplar Primary ethos and exemplifies a fully inclusive approach:-

• Seeks maximum academic success for all children
• Is focussed on the pursuit of outstanding teaching and learning
• Is focussed in the interest of relationships for learning
• Understands and cares for each individual
• Is a loving, fun and humane school
• Works with parents and children to raise standards and achieve excellence

I would want to recognise the substantial volume of work undertaken by the Inclusion coordinator, supported fully by staff at all levels, in collating such a wealth of information available before the visit, that was thorough, interesting, informative and gave a rounded view of the school.  Many thanks too, to the different people, staff, Governors and parents who came to share their views during the assessment visit. I’d particularly like to thank the children for their welcome. They were a credit to the school.

The school building is bright, well lit, well equipped and well maintained with main teaching areas and separate withdrawal rooms. There are well used connecting corridors. The building is significantly enhanced by very high quality displays showcasing children’s activities. The children treat the school with respect, enjoying the facilities on offer. They move around the site sensibly.

The children, parents, Governors and staff were very welcoming, positive and ensured that openness and honesty were significant features of the visit.

The vision of the Head teacher, and the Senior Leadership Team is demonstrated throughout the school, as evidenced through the conversations with the school partners, staff at different levels, parents, Governors and children. The vision is enacted by staff who articulate and model expectations, treating adults and children with equal respect, ensuring that the ethos is enabled to grow. Children respond accordingly, evidenced through the classroom visits at different times of the day. The processes which embed the philosophy are developed, modelled and described to ensure that there is clarity across all staff groups. Aspiration is also tempered by realism; possibilities are generated, then careful choice is made. Action is monitored and evaluated. Exemplar Primary School is a reflective school.

The over-riding impression given by Exemplar Primary School is of a school that has an understanding of what it wants to provide to enhance the learning experience for children. There is an energy and enthusiasm within the school which is clearly visible in the attitudes and behaviour of the children. There is a values-based ethos, based on openness, honesty and humanity, which ensures that the Inclusion agenda is assured. It is enhanced by the Rights, Respects and Responsibilities approach, helping the children to articulate their place in the school. 

There is very clear leadership, with a number of key staff working together as the SLT, through which developments are shared, enhanced, tested in practice and reviewed to assess impact. As a result the school benefits from the drive and enthusiasm of a supportive management group, which is communicated through the children. Around these hubs is a group of fully engaged, interested and energetic staff, whose voices are being enabled to be heard, but also valued by decision-makers, who encourage thinking and engagement to ensure that all decisions are based on the most secure information. Within this organisation too, individuals are mentored, supported and developed through structured in-house and external CPD.

The school policy for teaching and learning can be described as a dynamic continuum, based within clear themes.

There is developing evidence of:-
1) Analysis of evidence leading to quality information being made available to support
2) detailed planning, including the provision of appropriate resources and staffing.
3) Children in the best practise, actively sharing in their learning journey, which is
4) tracked and reviewed at regular intervals with
5) records being collated and disseminated, allowing the process to be cyclic and developmental.

The school is one where continuous development as a result of self-assessment is an essential element of all processes, ably led by senior managers. Systems are being strengthened as a result of testing and adaptation to need. This process is evolutionary.

Children and their learning is at the heart of whole-school development, with significant work being undertaken to ensure that personalised approaches to learning are a reality for vulnerable children, with a differential approach to the aspiration for all learners. Learning is tracked throughout a child’s schooling. Systems are in place that will ensure that quality information derived from attainment data will be available to teachers to support target setting.

The children are a credit to the school. They were invariably polite, happy to engage in discussion of their own learning and their experiences through their time at the school, although a few found discussion more of a challenge. They are partners in the running of the school, some being given responsibility through a variety of means.

There is significant evidence of good practice in Inclusion, across all categories of need. Inclusion is evident in every aspect of school life, ensuring that Every Child Matters and, as an extension, that every person associated with the school is also fully valued.

The Governing body is a strong element of the development agenda, ensuring that the school is more able to articulate strong reasoning for improvements and initiatives before committing funding. There are a number of active members, with broad expertise which is made available to benefit the school.

Parents express their pleasure at having their children at the school and endorse the view that the school is open, honest and welcoming, to their children and them as parents.

Kahlil Gibran:      Teaching:

Then said a teacher, "Speak to us of Teaching." And he said:
No man can reveal to you aught but that which already lies half asleep in the dawning of our knowledge.
The teacher who walks in the shadow of the temple, among his followers, gives not of his wisdom but rather of his faith and his lovingness.
If he is indeed wise he does not bid you enter the house of wisdom, but rather leads you to the threshold of your own mind.
The astronomer may speak to you of his understanding of space, but he cannot give you his understanding.
The musician may sing to you of the rhythm which is in all space, but he cannot give you the ear which arrests the rhythm nor the voice that echoes it.
And he who is versed in the science of numbers can tell of the regions of weight and measure, but he cannot conduct you thither.
For the vision of one man lends not its wings to another man.
And even as each one of you stands alone in God's knowledge, so must each one of you be alone in his knowledge of God and in his understanding of the earth.

Significant strengths:-

• Open, honest and humane approach to the needs of the whole school community.
• Very self-aware, through review, quality assurance and good knowledge of school data.
• Planning being developed at different levels.
• Enthusiastic, supportive staff progressing the learning agenda.
• Motivated pupils.
• Parents, Governors and outside agencies able to provide broader support, but also appropriate challenge.
• A community where everyone’s personal and learning needs matter.

The level of discussion throughout the visit was of a high quality, with staff prepared to engage in discussion and debate. This openness is to be applauded as it allowed trains of questioning and a depth of thinking to emerge, which might support future developments. It is clear that teaching and learning are at the heart of the school thinking.

Area for reflection.

While there was evidence of differential challenge from teachers in lessons especially in English and maths, there was less clear evidence from children that they could articulate what they were seeking to improve in their learning.  It would be worth reviewing the detail of differential challenge across the ability range, where there is potential for less clear articulation of expectation, which in turn might lead to slightly reduced performance by significant class members. See the discussion topic below.
​
Consider the impact of peer to peer learning dynamics as a model of what is possible, especially the impact within setting, where a narrower ability range might limit visualisation of what is really possible, especially for less able learners.
 

Over the past couple of years, on Twitter, there have been many conversations about Inclusion and whether it is desirable or achievable.

The introduction of the new version of the National Curriculum, with a year group based scheme of work has sometimes seemed to bring the whole into one simple argument. While some argue that it demonstrates “high expectations” and suggest that “they” hold such expectations, others begin to argue that, where some children are failing to keep up with their peers that somehow they should be “elsewhere”. Any alternative argument is met with an accusation of “dumbing down”, or some other put down.

In the early days of the drafting of the NC, I was worried by the emergence of the term “mastery”, because this connotation could be equated to a proportion of more able children, whose needs might be argued as better met in a separate establishment; Grammar Schools keep hitting the headlines.

There is also the idea of a National Standard, that has been notionally set by the Government that, on a simple reading of the National Curriculum suggests that all children should “know and understand” the contents of the scheme of work. So it is arguable that where a child “knows and understands” less than 100% of the scheme of work, that there are gaps that will affect their future progress. Can we really get to a stage where 100% of children in a year group will achieve 100% in any test situation? Therefore, by definition, there will be a proportion of children who will be deemed not to have achieved. These children are likely to largely be those whose learning is less secure and may also have some kind of Specific Learning Difficulty that underlies this.

Anyone who has regularly read my blog will know that I have raised concerns about those children who will be judged to not be on track to achieve at the cohort expectation, especially when they get to transfer age, at 7 or 11, or to use and adjust a phrase used prior to 2015, “Secondary ready”, which could then be extrapolated to “Junior ready”.
Rather than worrying about the potential for creaming off the top, I am beginning to be more exercised by the potential for the argument that certain children “do not belong” in mainstream education.

This, to me, is being exacerbated by a developing narrative of Inclusion as being synonymous with integration of SEN, rather than the idea of catering for the needs of all children. It is then easier for some to start to articulate “otherness” and “not fitting”.

If there has been systematic, forensic internal analysis of individual needs, plans put in place that have had limited impact, despite best efforts from appropriate staff, advice sought from external expertise that has also been implemented, then a case study might be drawn up that seems to support alternative needs.

However, a class teacher may express the view that X “doesn’t belong” because they do not have the expertise to address the evident needs. Limited teacher expertise, understanding or tolerance, does not make a child into a special need case. So quality of teaching has to be taken onto account. Negativity towards the learner, once expressed, cannot be taken back and this rupture can become the real cause of the need to move the learner. If an internal move is possible, it is to be hoped that this will not be with a label that colours the receiving teacher view, or it becomes a negative cycle with it’s own dynamics.

It has, for many teachers, become more difficult to fully define individual learning needs within the current NC, with systems deeming children to be “emerging”, until they have completed the curriculum to be delivered. As this is likely to be in the summer term, there needs to be a greater clarity about ongoing security with the essential learning. The system could have an inbuilt delay in intervention.

Inclusion is just doing your job well, for each and every child in the class and the school. Systems should be in place that identify the vulnerable learners and those who are potentially vulnerable, as an aspect of ongoing assessment activities. The notion of TIC, TAC, TOE should guide decisions as concerns deepen (team including the child, around the child, of experts), with teachers knowing the level of concern, interventions planned and ongoing outcomes from these interventions, so that expectations are coordinated across all aspects of a child’s learning.
​
In the absence of any other methodology, here’s a crib sheet of SEN categories with some possible identifiers.

It is quite likely that a teacher will meet a child, or children, who test their ability to adapt and cater for their needs. To discuss the needs with a knowledgeable other is professional, not to do so, then to suggest that a child is wrongly placed, without a developed history, is bordering on unprofessional, in my opinion.
At an extreme, I am reminded of a radio programme that I listened to while travelling from an ITE observation, which was the story of Albert Goering, the brother of Herman, "The Good Goering". The term “unter-menchen” came up in discussion about the removal of those who didn’t fit.

Is it possible that the fate of children with Special Needs or Specific Learning Difficulties will be described as “not fitting” and to be removed to another place, thereby bringing back into reality the idea of an under-being? Of course, when one is removed, another takes their place at the “bottom of the class”, or as a higher concern. Becomes cyclic.

Unintended consequences?

​Better to build teacher expertise so that individuals, and the school can deal better with needs.
​
Inclusion ethos; everyone has value in and for themselves. Every child matters (and always has)

There’s not much point in schools talking of Growth Mindset or “learned helplessness” if the systems being used do not allow learners to start to use and apply what they are learning effectively and independently.

All of the trainees with whom I work are in Primary schools, some Infant, some Junior and one in Special. One thing that strikes me each time I visit to observe and support is often the number of adults in the room, sometimes the student, the class teacher and usually one (or more) teaching assistant(s).

During the lesson, each of the adults has to be effectively deployed to support learning; after all, that is what they are paid to do. This can mean, in an extreme case that every working group in the class has an adult, who needs to show that they are doing their job, so that no child is learning to work independently, thinking for themselves, making decisions. And yet, learning to think for yourself is a fundamental aspect of learning to cope in the real world.
​

In Early Years, up to the age of five, child directed activities enable an adult to join in as a participant observer, joining in with and ascertaining some elements of the child’s thinking. There will be teacher led activities, but with an assessment eye kept on children’s articulation of ideas.

Where the National Curriculum has become ever more prescriptive, in my opinion, since 1997, the transition to year one and beyond can often mean a significant difference in approach, more teacher/adult led, with, currently, the significant focus on English and Maths seemingly diminishing the roles of other subjects. I have argued in other posts that the wider range of subjects provides the bread and butter for English teaching, as they should all be taught through spoken, reading and writing based activities. 

Where there is a significant number of adults involved in the class, there is every possibility that in each group, the dominant voice will be that of the adult, unless each of the adults has been trained to elicit open-ended discourse from the children, rather than single word, “guess what’s in my head” answers, teacher “cloze” procedures.

If children are to learn to think, to develop a “growth mindset”, they need appropriate challenge, space and time to reflect, to think and plan, to make rational decisions, before acting. They need to take some control of their actions, not have them continually moderated, adjusted and vetoed by the adult, if they are to learn from their mistakes through evaluation. The recipe approach to teaching does not, of itself, embed the ability to think. It is more a follow instructions approach; a “good outcome” is often assured, but may not be repeatable. It can also be subverted by an adult who wants their own efforts to be applauded.

Children certainly need language and language models through which to understand their world and to be able to participate fully in discussing their current awareness. Without this essential, every adult can be left guessing, so that plans are based on assumptions.

Learning to think is a process; we talk of a thought process. Life is a series of experiences through which we pass, picking up information in passing, or as a direct result of being in a formal learning situation. This happens from birth. From this point, the life experiences that a child might experience will be determined by others for a large part of their formative years. If they have parents who travel, and take them to museums to theatres, galleries, parks, forests, the seaside, a farm, who share books and watch information programmes with them, they are likely to develop a broad vocabulary, with the opposite also likely to be the case. There are often statements about children from language rich environments having significantly greater vocabularies. Not only that, but they will have a store of visuals from which to operate in an abstract manner. So an awareness of an individual’s experiences outside school will inform expectations in the formal learning environment.

It was interesting to me, in visiting several London Primary schools during the summer of 2014, just how rich was the curriculum offered, with all of them taking advantage of transport and free entry possibilities, as well as arranging for local theatre, dance and music companies to visit to enhance the internal experiences. Coupled with “forensic knowledge” of each child, as described by one head, the only surprise was that they achieved 95%+ level 4 SATs with 35+ heritage languages. They offered much that was valued and reaped the rewards of effort.
​

Making Sense of Experience; building internal images and models.

The central premise of this model was initially created some thirty years ago, when I was a science coordinator in a Junior school, evolving from an earlier incarnation, created for a Primary school where I was responsible for the topic based curriculum, in a setting that valued first-hand experience where possible. The model seeks to describe how ideas are deepened from the initial experience through to checking things out and reappraising new information.

The whole is premised upon good communication in a variety of forms. The experience, explore, explain mantra was the essential shorthand, with picture it, test it and reform ideas as an underlying methodology. Whether everyone goes through, or needs to go through all the phases will depend on the teacher awareness of the individuals who make up the class. It does not presume a step by step linearity. In practice, some children might have been scaffolded through the process to instil the essence of exploratory thought, while other might have been challenged to plan the scaffold and execute the exploration for themselves.
 
It was not context, or knowledge free, as it overlaid most aspects of the Topic curriculum, covering pretty much everything apart from Maths, as English often took advantage of the exploratory aspects to provide the stimulus for talk or writing. It gave a clue as to what might be called a learning maturity, from dependent to independent approaches, with children challenged and expected to use and apply previously learned skills and knowledge.

That children can take some charge of their learning, from an early age, is an aspect of current practice that can be overlooked, within “delivery mechanisms”.

When you teach a child to tie their laces, you might expect them to practice and repeat the exercise each time with greater proficiency, not require them to be shown each time, nor to defer to the adult for an easy life.
Let them think, let them learn, then let them use what they can do for themselves.

That way they will learn to think for themselves, because they know that they can.

​A silent wish sails the seven seas
The winds of change whisper in the trees
And the walls of doubt crumble, tossed and torn
This comes to pass when a child is born.

While Twitter chunters away and argues volubly about the trad/prog dichotomy, or arguing that DI is the best way to teach, that there is the one true way to teach reading, writing, maths or any other subject.

While the Government pours more subtle, or less than subtle changes onto the system, making the whole harder to perceive or within which to make secure decisions that might last sufficient time to have  the desired impact.
​
While all this is happening, it is worth remembering that at the centre of everything a teacher does is children. Having had two new children in the family in the past year, it has been an opportunity to marvel, yet again about their development, from complete dependence to the ability to start to do things for themselves. One, at a year old, is close to taking independent steps.

From the earliest days, almost as soon as they open their eyes, they are taking in sights, their ears attune to sound, their nose smells, their taste buds developing from milk through a range of foods that are offered and their sense of touch. They are also experiencing proprioreception, a sense of movement. What they are making of all these stimuli, it is sometimes very hard to ascertain. Apart from smiles, frowns, screams, gurgles of different sorts, it can be a case of awareness and guesswork.

There are phases of movement, as they start to gain some muscle control, which allows them to sit up, to roll over, to rise on knees and hands and to begin to propel themselves as proto-crawling, often backwards to start, if arms are stronger than legs. Pulling themselves up, or being supported, strengthens their legs, until, one day, they do it for themselves. Walking takes another set of skills, muscular control and some self-confidence.

Interacting with people is done non-verbally for an extended time; lots of looking, listening and hand waving to signal, to point, to wave, to clap, to offer something to another and to seek it back. Interest in the things around them grows. When the cat enters the room and miaows, or someone new visits the house, to stop what they are doing and to show an interest in the novel is the norm. Going for a walk becomes less a bit of parent exercise than an opportunity to show the world around and to use that magical element of language, to offer the words that at some stage might become their own base for communication.

Children might enter some kind of collective experience early. There are so many opportunities available to families, through local libraries, those children’s centres that have survived, NCT and other parent-organised or more commercial groups. These are opportunities for parents to meet and talk, but also provide a vehicle for a lot of activity and talk; in other words, having a go accompanied by either a leader, parent or another child talking. Gradually and hopefully, children become socialised to others.

By the time children enter school, they have lived for at least four years; some will be almost five when they start. Their prior experiences will have a significant influence on their early progress into formal schooling; their ability to socialise, to listen and talk with others, to share and participate, to accept new ideas and opportunities.

You can’t see children learning; we haven’t yet learned how to open up their brains to see how the cogs are turning. We have to rely on their externalising how they are feeling, their focus as heads turn to see or hear, to watch their faces as they touch smell or taste something new. It can be a case of total guesswork, with many opportunities to get it wrong, as any parent will tell you. You can share, show and model things to children, encourage them to have a go and experience for themselves, as they move from gross motor activities to finer control, accepting that they may experience disappointment, but encouraging additional trying.

It is easy to see how parents are often described as their children’s first teachers, but very special teachers as there is an additional emotional bond, which manifests itself in celebrating the child’s ability to, literally and metaphorically, “take the next step”. These are also the magical classroom moments; when a child “gets it”. Play can be controlled with a focus on a particular activity determined by the parent, or free play with the adult joining in appropriately with the child.

Parenting can be a case of the romance of Rousseau, the stage noting of Piaget, the engaged other of Vygotsky, the linguistic developer of Bruner or Chomsky and the Growth Mindset encourager as Dweck, all rolled into one, but without the “baggage” of theory. Most parents respond as themselves, which is why some may need support and guidance, coaching and mentoring in order to offer the best possible opportunities to their children.

Parenting is not necessarily a natural state for every adult, which is why schemes such as Sure Start offered a great deal in the early years of development. But that's where politicians come in again...
 
Two additional posts look at learning from experience in the school setting.
Learning from experience
Experiential learning; a Teachmeet talk.

I recently had the great pleasure of working with a large group of TAs in a London school. Leading a day for such an audience means that, within the organisation and structure of the planned day, there needs to be an adaptability to allow for a wide range of needs.
​
There was a time when the group of people making up the TA group could be characterised, as they once were, as a “mum’s army”, interested, engaged and enthusiastic, but more often seen as classroom menials, washing paint-pots and sharpening pencils. Now it is not unusual to meet a mixed sex group, with a range of ages, not necessarily, but still with a large number of parents, as young graduates use the TA route as a means of determining whether or not to become a teacher. Their prior experiences will be varied, but each brings to the classroom a wealth of expertise that the class teacher may not possess.

A significant number will live within the school catchment and may have done for some time, so they have a fundamental understanding of the community and may know a large number of families very well. They can act as the eyes and ears of the school; often act as ambassadors and may, from time to time, act as go-betweens, where relations have become strained. They can become de facto emotional literacy staff.

Some will have subject or work backgrounds that could be extremely valuable to the school, for example modern foreign languages. If you have a native speaker of the language that has been chosen as the school approach, why are they not used to support small group development activity?

I have met, over my time in schools, artists, poets, writers, scientists of all shades, engineers, actors, athletes and other sports people; in fact I employed some. As we became aware of their expertise, it was not a huge leap of thought to wonder how best to use them to support the school as a whole.

One example was an unemployed dad who volunteered to support in class, whose background was in engineering. He soon showed a considerable aptitude when leading Design Technology activities, not in a copyist way, but in developing children’s ability to think and solve their problems. This expertise was shared among the staff, and almost inevitably, we employed him in this role, extended to small group science activities too. His key skill was his ability to think with the children and encouraging high quality communicate. His knowledge base was good, supplemented by his working for an OU degree, which we supported. The success of this encouraged us to think more in terms of specialist TAs, as a supplement to classroom based arrangements, as there was still a need for in-class support. Over time, we did find linguists, musicians, artists and sports people, each of whom added significant value to day to day opportunities.

TAs were seen as key members of staff, joined in with staff training opportunities, adjusted, by agreement, their working hours to enable discussions with teachers and, where their expertise was significant were enabled to share this with teacher colleagues. An example was an artist TA leading staff training. TAs need to have a grasp of the teaching and learning approaches used within the school, so that they can work within expected norms, including the need for quality information sharing after a lesson.

Communication within the school is key to ensuring that TAs are used to best effect. This is both at institutional and classroom level. TAs need to receive in-house communications and also have time to talk and understand what they should be doing. From time to time, there is a need for TAs to receive training in aspects of practice, if they are to be more effective. In this case, training opportunities can be created by release of the relevant in-house expert, maths, English or SENCo, to deliver the necessary training within the available time; a half day off-timetable is often sufficient. CPD for TAs is as valuable and necessary as for teachers.

Where TAs are used less effectively, it is becoming clear that the question of value for money has been raised, not least after the publication of the Education Endowment Foundation Report on Making Best Use of Teaching Assistants, in 2015. This report talks of drifting into situations where TAs are poorly deployed, although everyone acts with the best of intentions. If one considers that a team of 25 TAs could cost a school £250k or more, it is reasonable to ask for evidence that this money is being used effectively.
​
There are, to me a number of simplicities within this equation.

1. The school should have a clear rationale for employing the TA in the first instance; there should be a clear job and role description. This can be negotiated over time, to suit the needs of the school and/or the TA.
2. TAs should be entitled to an induction process as for any other member of staff. If this is the remit of the class teacher, then the teaching staff may need some training in mentoring others.
3. The teacher receiving the TA needs to see the role as complementary to their own role, and in developing the team ethic, needs to ensure that TA time is effectively deployed. For example, consider what the TA will do during the whole class input. They should be capable of being a “participant observer”, listening to the input while doing something else to help the class.
4. There needs to be time built in to ensure discussion enables essential information exchange.
5. The teacher should not give the TA the same group, so that the teacher never teaches them in a subject; the teacher is the senior member of staff and the responsible member of staff for class progress, in all subjects.
6. High quality staff training for TAs, as individuals or collectively, should be as much of a priority as for teachers.
7. Essentially, TAs, like teachers, need to know what they are doing, why they are doing it and what to do if it isn’t going to plan. They are often a significant part of the teaching and learning team, especially with regard to vulnerable individual or groups of children.
8. Reviewing the need for and number of TA roles should be a regular part of school review, to ensure that the resource is fit for purpose and cost effective, as is the case for all resources, human or otherwise.
9. And, in the absence of Government published TA standards, where a TA is in a teaching role, should they be judged against the lowest expectation of a teacher? See the diagram above for an example.

​

The past 24 hours have seen many hours spent in “discussing” the idea of inclusion. While there may be personal grounds to take a view at either pole of the debate, the reality is that children come to school and, once there, are entitled to receive the best that can be offered. This starts with the classteacher, who may find that the specific needs of a child are outside their experience. This is not uncommon.

Special needs come in all shapes and sizes, with a disparate range of needs. The skills that were developed in dealing with the issues of one child may not be transferrable exactly to another. It is therefore incumbent on each teacher to get to know the children as well as possible, to tailor challenge to the evident needs and to monitor very carefully the outcomes, as the journey constitutes the internal case study that may be needed as evidence of a specific special need.

While engaging with the Twitter chat this morning, my mind recalled a number of children with whom I have had the significant pleasure of spending time.

There was V, who was already in the school when I became a head. V was the most delightful child, full of life, always a ready smile, a befriender, especially of younger children during playtime, a real striver, whose have a go attitude was infectious. She had innumerable friends. V’s mum had taken thalidomide during pregnancy, so V was born without legs and one arm. Despite this, she got on with things, including the putting on and taking off of her prosthetic legs, or organising her wheelchair. It was often humbling to see how much extra effort she had to make just to get though each day. This had an inevitable impact on the children in her class and across the school as a whole.

I will never forget the school sports day where V was determined to take as full a part as possible. The skipping race was the highlight, as she “skipped”, with a friend each side turning the rope, while she “ran” without her prosthetics. There were many tears of joy at her success. It was inevitable that, when it came to the end of year celebrations, that the “contribution to school life” prize would go to V, simply for her example. This was grit, resilience, character and growth mindset, 1990 style.

R came to school as a Reception child, shy, retiring and not overactive in his approach. He would avoid physical activity at all costs, which was worrying, in itself. He was one of those children, who, very early, are on your “watch” list. It was during a visit by the school OT that I took her into the school hall, which coincided with Reception doing a PE lesson. She didn’t need R to be pointed out, as she turned pale and took me outside for a chat, concerned that there were undiagnosed underlying issues. A very painful few weeks ensued as hurried reference was made to medical services, several meetings with parents keeping each other in touch with developments and the final diagnosis of muscular dystrophy. R stayed with us for a few more years, first with the aid of crutches and then with a wheelchair, but, eventually, his physical needs moved to a point where it was clear that alternative provision was the better option. Visiting him there a year later, it was evident that this was the right decision. Sadly R died a couple of years after that. With a step brother and a cousin in school we were kept in touch with the news.

M was an excellent artist, could draw anything, from life and from imagination but M couldn’t make any sense of language. He could apparently speak well enough, albeit with a slightly limited vocabulary, but it became noticeable that he could not sustain an idea over several “sentences”. Working with the advisor for language, we were able to unpick aspects of his needs, so he was able to read, at a low level. His working memory was poor, so that needed some support and his comprehension, as an ability to make sense of what he had heard or read seemed to diminish, especially when linked to memory. He was living in a strange parallel world. We were able to use his artistic skill to advantage in creating storyboards from which he was encouraged to create oral stories that would be transcribed and turned into personal reading books. In the end, however, despite deploying every available resource and source of expertise available to us, the application for a statement was successful and, with a diagnosis of language disorder, M went to a specialist provision, where there was 1:1 teacher expertise available every day.

Each of these children, chosen to represent the many who passed through the school with individual needs, offered something in return. The ability to deal with physical or learning needs within the staff was enhanced with each child identified with a possible issue. This investigative capability, building within individual teachers and the school as a whole, enabled strengthened systems to be developed that supported others with lesser needs. Underpinning all this were very good relationships and communication, with no feeling of criticism if there was a need to discuss one’s personal needs as a teacher.

It can be the case that SEN issues push the limits of the organisation, on a personal and an organisational level. If external expertise is available and can be harnessed, the expertise can be grown through experience. There is a significant need to ensure record keeping of the highest quality, especially where there are concerns, as the primary need is to establish an internal case study to underpin discussions with external experts. These records can be premised on the questions that teachers have asked, then sought to follow up; analyse, plan, do, review, record is a useful simple mantra.

It is, however, really important to remember that you are dealing with the person first and foremost, with the need being a constituent part to be addressed, not the whole. It means knowing each child well, as a rounded individual, to avoid them becoming a “problem” child. The problem may be the teacher lack of expertise or experience, which has to be addressed first. There are also very concerned parents, who may be very fearful about what the future holds for their child. All factors have to be carefully considered.

Children may be similar, but they are not necessarily the same. SEN or individual issues provide a very good learning opportunity for teachers. Becoming a good investigator is a very good first step.