Chris Chivers (Thinks)

  • Home
  • Blog-Thinking Aloud
  • Contact
  • Contents
  • PDFs
  • Sing and strum

When is SEND?

20/2/2015

4 Comments

 
I am sure that readers of my blog will wonder why I am asking such a question, but, after the recent SEND teachmeet in Oxford, I have been left wondering where we are heading in defining children as having Special Educational Needs.

There was quite a strong SEND school group represented, and who spoke during the meeting and I do follow a range of strong SEND advocates through Twitter.

It is clear, especially from Twitter exchanges, that the recent changes to SEND documentation was causing concern among the group, as reassessment of children with pre-existing statements was not always leading to expected outcomes.

Since the Warnock report in 1978 about the status of special educational needs and her definition that, during their educational lifetime, around 20% of children might exhibit some area of personal additional need, schools have had a duty to describe and cater for the needs of a group seen as potentially vulnerable if nothing was done to support them. Systems were set up around this group, by Local Authorities, to quality assure the systems of referral and decisions.

My concern is those children who are in mainstream schools who might yet not have any specific diagnosis of need, but whose needs are regularly evident to classteachers.

While locality could be a cause of issues, subject to available staffing, essentially a child described as having Special Needs in Cornwall, and with a Statement of Educational Needs applied, would be equivalent to a similar child in Newcastle. The constant across the authorities would have been the case studies developed by the school, in association with the available external experts, using the available tools to describe the child’s lack of progress against the National Curriculum Level Descriptors which were common across all schools, even if some difference might be evident in interpretation. A case study portfolio of evidence of description of the learning and other behaviours, together with interrogation of outcomes and successive decisions and adaptations/fine tunings to evident need, would show how the child was performing compared to peers.

Where Levels and associated descriptors have been removed from September 2014, I am left wondering how schools are now seeking to describe their concerning or evident children with educational needs beyond their peers. If they are being tracked against the new National Curriculum, as there are only end of Key Stage descriptors, it will inevitably just be the programmes of study for the year group that will be available, with attendant descriptors of can or can’t do…

Do teachers know what they are looking for? Here’s a crib sheet.

Picture
Do we wait until year end to describe a child as below their peers, suggesting a developing need, or perhaps after two years that they are well below their peers and might be on track to be “below National standard”? Will teachers undertake diagnostic assessments on children to explore their range of needs? Will they ensure that records cover the whole span of time and describe classroom adaptations used and support given to need? Will, over time, a Gap Analysis of needs emerge, that can describe the case to external experts, such as Ed Psych or Speech and Language Therapy or OT? Will the school be able to describe exactly where the child is in comparison with peers?  

Are there systems within the school where expertise is regularly shared between colleagues that ensures that the vulnerable learners receive appropriate support and challenge, and not just through the class Teaching Assistants?

Picture
We still have P levels, which, in some discussions, seem to be the only currency available to describe SEND children. So a child who might formerly have been described as a level 1c,b,a, but be in year 4 or 5 and, as such, significantly behind peers, alerting the school to a need for a request for Statutory Assessment, may now have a weakened case, if the school system is not sufficiently robust. Panels judging the merits of a case may well be looking even more closely at the quality of the school evidence. So a child could get turned down through poor school records or judgements.

It can read as if there are potentially insecure systems in place within which insecure and vulnerable learners could be and may well be failed. The lack of National models has enabled localities to develop systems that appear to be causing concern at best.

Sadly it is the potentially vulnerable who may suffer, but it is a case of “Watch this space”.

It could be a case of the law of unintended consequences at play.

 

4 Comments
Heidi singleton
20/2/2015 12:56:51 pm

this is a good point which I hadn't considered (ppa teacher not having to complete assessments at the moment). We have realised that SEND pupils can be assessed with P scales as before, but of course if they are older and not in Y2 or Y6 they might slip through the net if teachers wait toong before acting. It seems like the view at the moment is keep them in class and that there is not much help available unless they have extremely obvious need!

I will highlight your concerns to my SCITT trainees next month.

Excellent post many thanks

Reply
Chris
21/2/2015 07:02:04 am

Thanks Heidi,
Am continually going back to the dynamics of learning as my start point. It's the unpicking of the individual needs that causes issues. Honing investigative skill that strikes me as central to progress, moving forward with clarity, rather than guesswork and assumption.
Happy to contribute to your PGCE if appropriate; am near Portsmouth, so not too far.
Best wishes,
Chris

Reply
J
20/2/2015 02:12:38 pm

Chris,

I found this to be a helpful process map which could easily link to the school policies/legislation that should exist. Would it benefit from openly showing ownership of areas?

In the absence of levels your 3-book method would work very well for tracking (although move 'away' from levels looks like a 're-branding' exercise).

I think highlight that social/emotional requires better interfacing during transition periods/between class teachers - the role of parents is important here as they are more likely to identify a social/emotional change. With 'context' arrow, ensure links to anti-bullying policy to ensure a child is adequately supported (a temporary SEND need?).

My parent view is that it is better to nip a problem in the bud quickly and termly progress reviews should consider the social/emotional, too - it's a long haul back otherwise.

My view is that neural pathways/habits are harder to shift the longer they are established. For a more fixed problem, i.e. dyslexia eliminating simple problems with phonic delivery necessary to identify the dyslexia.

A minimum of a termly progress review should include social/emotional factors. SEND should be a termly review.

Reply
Chris
21/2/2015 07:07:11 am

Hi J,
Thanks for commenting.
There are a number of issues that I felt it would be difficult to capture in the diagram. Who does what and when being one of them. Am also clear that there is probably a 3d model in the making with the multiple individual needs in a classroom, not least EAL, as Di Leedham will point out on Twitter!
It is an area that I'll come back to. Please feel free to add further thoughts too, as I am very conscious that this needs to be looked at from a variety of angles.
Best wishes,
Chris

Reply

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    Chris Chivers

    Long career in education, classroom and leadership; always a learner.
    University tutor and education consultant; Teaching and Learning, Inclusion and parent partnership.
    Francophile, gardener, sometime bodhran player.

    Archives

    March 2021
    January 2021
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    September 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    October 2014

    Categories

    All
    Assessment
    Behaviour
    Differentiation
    English
    Experience
    History
    Home Learning
    Inclusive Thinking
    Maths
    Parents
    Science
    SEND
    Sing And Strum
    Teaching And Learning

    RSS Feed

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    Picture
    Click to set custom HTM L
Proudly powered by Weebly