During my time as a Sendco, it has been evident that interpretations of special educational needs and disability differ significantly.
What one person would label as a special educational need another may label as low ability or just “naughtiness”.
During the September transition last year, my school had children from 31 feeder primary schools and there was a huge variation of both under- and over-labelled children, depending on what was seen as SEND at that primary.
Some children joined with significant need that was not identified and others were identified who didn’t require any provision.
It got me thinking about which children should be on the SEN register.
SEND: Assessing a child’s needs
We have to remember that what makes a child SEN is having a difficulty or disability that means they need additional or adapted provision that is different to their peers’.
Slow progress or low attainment is often mistaken for a special educational need but, although it is important to spot and respond to, it is not enough on its own to label a child SEND.
This is tricky, though. When we’re adapting provision and interventions and making personalised provision, how do we ensure there is a consistent approach?
We thought about this and how we could clearly distinguish who goes on our SEN register and - as it is a live working document - who comes off.
Establishing our criteria
To do this we set about creating well-established criteria for getting this right, which involved consultation between myself and my wider team, our educational psychologist from the inclusion support team and parents of children already on the SEN register.
I then reviewed who was on my SEN register and receiving provision above and beyond their peers’, and we came up with an entry/exit criterion.
Through these discussions it became clear that we could split the criteria on which we evaluated children into the four areas of need:
- Cognition and learning
- Communication and interaction
- Physical and sensory
- Social, emotional and mental health
From this, we have four columns against which we measure a child within each category: entry criteria, exit criteria, possible interventions and quality-first teaching strategies.
When we are at the review stage of a child’s provision, we cross-check that they still meet the criteria to be on the SEN register and look at the area of need they are currently on and see that they are still meeting at least one entry criteria, including being part of an intervention.
It’s important to note, too, that these interventions include internal interventions - for example, Fresh Start or Life Skills - and external Interventions, including therapy with child and adolescent mental health services.
Making consistent decisions
By having this document, it gives us something to refer to and base our SEN register on. It also ensures that every child is receiving what they need and their place on the SEN register is reviewed during each assess, plan, do, review (APDR) cycle.
Of course, while having a document like this to refer to is really important, we know that not every situation is clear cut and we retain the necessary level of flexibility and adaptation required for all pupils - rather than simply being at the mercy of the document’s criteria.
However, with the document in place, and despite it having only been live for a short period of time, we are already seeing a positive impact in terms of reducing the number of referrals where children are simply low achieving.
There are still procedures in place to ensure that this is not an indicator of a larger picture. But with staff being able to see what criteria we use to consider a pupil as having SEND, the more they are able to strengthen their quality-first teaching and see what they can do - as opposed to what I can do.
It has definitely saved on unnecessary paperwork, observations and testing in order to complete my referral process, as staff are taking more ownership of the provision and progression of all children in their classroom.
Improving provision for all learners
What’s more, when we first introduced the document, I went over my SEN register and children to ensure my register was accurate to my entry/exit criteria.
It helped me to recognise where my provisions could be stronger and helped me to reflect on whether all children were receiving provision above or different to their peers’. At this point, some children were removed from the SEN register following a telephone call with parents to explain the decision and agree it was the right course of action.
Finally, it’s been lovely to visit other schools within my trust where the Sendcos have chosen to use the document as a starting point for reviewing their SEN register, too.
This happened after I shared the document with other Sendcos during a trust-wide Sendco meeting in the summer term
Although it was just shared for information rather than specifically to be implemented, it was great to see it on the walls of other Sendcos’ offices and hear how it is helping provision in other settings.
By doing all of this I am more confident in the accuracy of our SEN register. As a result of introducing these entry and exit criteria, it means we are in a position to more properly meet the needs of all learners in our schools.
Laura Chamberlain is special educational needs coordinator (Sendco) at Q3 Academy at Great Barr in the West Midlands
