(SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS & DISABILITIES) SEND (SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS & DISABILITIES)

SEND and our school Why does SEND matter to our school? We have a moral duty to ALL pupils. Our ethos and culture are centred upon the belief that all pupils can make progress, regardless of their starting point. It is a statutory responsibility of all types of state school that provision is made for children with SEND. We must publish information related to SEND on our website and it is one of DCC’s 3 key priorities for this year.

send Special Educational Needs (SEN) if special/additional educational provision is required for a child to learn. Disability or a medical/specialist diagnosis (e.g. dyslexia, Autism Spectrum Disorder). Can be identified as ‘having SEN’ from the age of 2! Special Educational Needs are described according to 4 categories: 1) Communication and interaction. 2) Cognition and learning. 3) Social, mental and emotional health 4) Sensory and/or physical

The current picture All schools have a Special Educational Needs Coordinator (SENCO). Responsible for ‘coordinating’ the SEN provision in school. Our SENCO is Mr Green. Our governor with responsibility for SEND is Mrs Tomlinson. Ofsted analyse school attainment and progress data by grouping pupils according to certain traits (gender, age, SEN, EAL, Pupil Premium etc) and comparing their performance. Progress of children diagnosed with SEN is monitored and compared with the progress of ‘typically functioning’ children. Effective SEN provision is vital to any successful school. A significant gap in attainment or progress between two pupil groups can lead to a poor Ofsted rating, even when data is generally strong! The conclusion is that schools are not ‘closing the gap’ or ‘diminishing the difference’ between typically functioning and vulnerable children.

SEN provision until 2014 Three levels of SEN identification: School Action (lowest) School Action Plus Statement of SEN (diagnosis from professional - educational or clinical psychologist). ‘School action’ or ‘school action plus’: reading, writing or mathematics gaps or behavioural/social difficulties. Identified by class teacher/SENCO with no need for external validation. SENCO prepares an Individual Education Plan (IEP) to help these children to catch up with their peers. No money allocated to support these children. Significant additional needs necessary to qualify for a statement. A long application process requiring input from a range of specialists, with a high likelihood of being rejected. Decision to award a statement made by LA. The school receives a lengthy ‘statement report’ with targets/objectives to work toward and an allocation of money to support the child. An ‘annual review’ of progress meeting with parents and specialists.

Problems with the old system Consistency! What is the difference between school action and school action plus? No money to fund children who almost qualify for a statement. As a result, children with quite severe SEN left on school action plus. A conservative HT would encourage all children below expectations to be put on school action – gives an excuse for poor data or poor teaching. Could be argued to render category meaningless and meant colossal workload for SENCOs. Applications for statements took months and sometimes years.

SEN Code of conduct 2014 Protracted introduction. The big change: no more statements, no more school action/school action plus. In place of statements, ‘Education, Health and Care Plans’ (EHCPs). Essentially the same but can run from 0 up to the age of 25! In place of SA and SA+, a new (inchoate) category of ‘SEN Support’.

Principles behind the new code of conduct Described as a more ‘person-centred approach’ – humanistic psychologists of the 1970s unite! A greater role in decision making and provision planning for parents and the young person. Expectation of earlier identification of SEN and earlier intervention to support them. Greater collaboration between the child, their family, the school and specialists. A focus on inclusion/inclusive practice and removing barriers to learning. Applications for EHC plans must be responded to by the LA within 20 weeks…

The reality Very little change. EHCPs appear to be equivalent to old statements, but are harder to get. Good schools have always included pupil and parent voice in their provision mapping. The waiting period after application for EHC plan is no different to a statement application. Difficulties in ‘grading’ the SEN of children who do not quite qualify for an EHC, now SA and SA+ have gone.

Next steps In place of SA / SA+ is a pot of money called ‘GRIP’ funding. When new Code of Practice came out, ‘Graduated Response’ was an LA focus. GRIP (graduated response to individual pupils) is money made available if school can evidence that the child is two years or more behind their peers. A decision is made within 20 weeks and money is allocated to schools for one year to pay for interventions to help the child.

What governors need to know We have two children with EHC plans. Sarah Tomlinson is our governor with responsibility for SEND and Mr Green is the SENCO. Intervention strategies are planned for any child at risk of falling behind. These are reviewed on a half-termly basis. Our planning sheets identify all pupil groups (SEN, pupil premium, EAL, high achiever). We have no GRIP funding at present but we intend to make an application for one junior pupil. Our website contains our ‘SEND Offer’ – an introduction to SEND provision at our school.