Guidance on the self -evaluation of special educational ...

Self-evaluation guidance

1

Guidance on the self-evaluation of special

educational needs and disability (SEND)

How schools can evidence impact

Date issued

October 2019

Review date

October 2020

Prepared by

Linda Bartlett, Improvement Partner

Approved by

Head of Setting and School Effectiveness

E063


2

Contents

Introduction

3

Academic outcomes

3

Measuring academic achievement

10

Pupils with complex learning difficulties and disabilities

12

National comparative data

13

Measuring broader achievement

13

How the quality of SEND provision will be externally evaluated

19

The SEN Code of Practice ‘musts’ and ‘shoulds’ within self-evaluation

20

SEN Information Report self-evaluation

21

Evidencing impact of SEND provision grid

25

Case study template

33

SEND review cycle

34


3

Introduction

The self-evaluation of SEND provision must be aligned to statutory requirements in the SEN Code of Practice. It is also recommended that schools carefully consider expectations in the Ofsted Education Inspection Framework (September 2019). While there is a range of indicators to evaluate the effectiveness of a school’s offer for pupils with SEND; this guidance will support schools to measure the quality of support and the effect of this on the outcomes for pupils’ with SEND. A wide range of outcomes should be considered from academic to social and emotional development, and should include how well pupils’ specific needs are met. This includes communication and interaction, cognition and learning, physical health and development, and social, emotional and mental health. This guidance aims to provide headline information and some key questions school can pose when they self-evaluate. The ‘Evidencing impact of provision grid’ is detailed and should be seen as a reference document and not something to use in a single review. Academic outcomes:

Based on the Code of Practice schools are advised to evaluate the achievement of pupils with SEND according to a pupil’s type of disability

or special educational need, or whether or not they have been identified as requiring school support (SEN support) or an Education and Health Care Plan (EHCP), but for end of key stage data it is of primary importance to compare achievement with all pupils nationally. This ensures that gaps are closed between pupils with SEND and others. It is even better practice to compare achievement with those pupils who do not have a SEND.

A category of need does not by itself indicate expected outcomes that pupils would usually achieve given their starting points; for example,

a pupil with ASD could have very different potential outcomes compared to another pupil who is based on a different point of the broad spectrum of ASD. Pupils identified with SEN may or may not have a disability and pupils with a disability may or may not have a SEN.

The new Ofsted framework uses an updated concept of what progress means; predicated on the research evidence that pupils learn best

when they build new learning on prior background knowledge and that a secure knowledge base ensures that pupils are able to continue learning and get the best possible opportunities for the future. Having knowledge is seen as giving pupils power or ‘powerful knowledge’. So, the new Ofsted definition of progress is ‘knowing more and remembering more’.

Progress means knowing more and remembering more


4

Learning both knowledge and skills is important, but the acquisition of knowledge must be the starting point; with skills

developed to demonstrate understanding and apply new learning, or knowledge. When schools evaluate the progress of pupils with SEND they firstly need to carefully consider how well pupils are progressing in gaining new knowledge and secondly if the right skills are being taught and learned so that the knowledge can be used well.

It is also important that schools check that their assessment systems allow them to know if the information inputted meaningfully records whether new knowledge and skills have been fully embedded in pupils’ long term memory. Research has shown that ‘for a new skill to become automatic or for new knowledge to become long-lasting, sustained practice, beyond the point of mastery, is necessary’. This is challenging, and requires schools to think carefully whether their curriculum planning gives pupils adequate opportunities for ongoing retrieval and practice so that knowledge can be retrieved from the long term memory automatically (automaticity). The more pupils search for a memory, the easier it becomes to find it. This is particularly important for pupils with SEND who may have difficulties in using their short term memory.

Securing new knowledge depends on pupils having a broad language base and vocabulary. This is frequently a challenge for

pupils with SEND, who may either have speech, language and communication needs (SLCN) or language deficit because of environmental factors and lack of exposure to a rich and varied language experience. Schools need to evaluate if they are giving pupils with SEND frequent, planned and powerful exposure to new language, and opportunities to use it and retrieve it until it is embedded in their language bank.

Knowledge

Skill (capacity to perform)

Progress

Does the school’s monitoring and tracking system truthfully record whether

pupils with SEND have securely learned new knowledge and skills?


5

The new Ofsted framework uses the term ‘cultural capital’ to broaden expectations of pupils’ progress. There is an expectation

that schools will ensure that pupils have the essential knowledge and ‘cultural capital’ to be educated citizens and to succeed in life. This is particularly relevant for pupils with SEND, who may face very individual challenges in their next stage in education or in life afterwards. Cultural capital not only includes knowledge and skills, but also an appreciation of human creativity and achievement; indeed this is about aspiration holistically.

The curriculum is the vehicle for planning the acquisition of knowledge and skills. In the new Ofsted framework schools will be

evaluated around their curriculum intentions (intent), their implementation and the impact their curriculum has. How well the curriculum ensures that pupils with SEND make strong gains in their learning must be evaluated. Leaders need to have high ambitions for pupils with SEND, so they can take full advantage of future opportunities and receive a broad and balanced curriculum as much as and as long as possible.

When designing the curriculum leaders need to consider a range of types of knowledge: vocabulary and language, events, concepts and procedures. Selection of content is very important as it is the building block of future learning. What pupils know and can use gives them the capacity to succeed and progress. This ‘powerful knowledge’ is vital for pupils with SEND. Schools need to give serious thought to what knowledge is most powerful for its pupils with SEND.

Cultural capital is the essential knowledge that pupils need to be educated citizens, introducing them to the best

that has been thought and said and helping to engender an appreciation of human creativity and achievement.

Through the curriculum intent leaders need to have high ambitions for pupils with SEND, so they can take full

advantage of future opportunities and receive a broad and balanced curriculum as much as and as long as

possible.

Is the school’s curriculum aspirational enough and does it ensure that all pupils

with SEND receive a broad and balanced curriculum offer?


6

Curriculum implementation needs to be carefully monitored by leaders to ensure that the curriculum is moving from intent to actually meeting the needs of pupils with SEND. This means evaluating the quality of delivery and lesson planning, teaching, and the ways assessment is used to inform teaching in all subjects. All staff are responsible for delivery and making sure that pupils with SEND have the best possible chances of accessing the curriculum.

Staff need to have sound subject knowledge and particularly need to know which knowledge is most important when they are delivering both units and individual lessons. For pupils with SEND it is even more imperative that staff are clear about: the key concepts they want pupils to know and learn, the best sequence for teaching new knowledge and how they are going to check and assess if pupils are embedding new knowledge.

Remember that for many pupils with SEND their short term working memory may be limited and so teaching new concepts needs to be in small chunks; which are more easily understood and do not result in cognitive overload. Embedding new knowledge is further supported by continually making links with other learning so that pupils can retrieve previous knowledge and reinforce the understanding.

By breaking new learning into

manageable chunks pupils are able to

understand and remember more

information and retrieve it from their

long term memory to use in new learning

Do staff understand the importance of breaking down new learning into manageable chunks?

Do staff understand that some pupils cannot hold a lot of information in their short term working memory? When they are cognitively overloaded they ‘drop’ some information they may need to complete a learning task.


7

Leaders of SEND should use a wide range of self-evaluation evidence to check how well the curriculum is being implemented for pupils with SEND. Professional dialogue with all stakeholders gives rich information; which can be brought together with what is seen in lesson observations/learning walks, assessment data and scrutiny of work. Discussions with pupils, staff and parents/carers will clarify whether the intended curriculum is actually being rolled out so that pupils with SEND have access to new learning. It is a good idea to follow a group of SEND pupils to identify how well the curriculum is meeting their needs across subjects. This will enable the school to check that the curriculum systemically meets the needs of pupils with SEND.

Pupils with SEND should have access to high quality teaching across all subjects. Due to their needs and vulnerability it is vital

that subject teaching is finely tuned to their needs and is planned well for progression in learning new knowledge and that it is chunked to be accessible. Pupils need to know that they are learning subject specific knowledge and how it links with other learning so that it makes sense.

Leaders of SEND need to use a broad range of information to self-evaluate how well the intended curriculum is

being implemented for pupils with SEND and is leading to strong impact.

Implementation of subject curriculum should be progressive and strong across all subjects. Links across subject

areas should be strongly made so that new learning makes sense to pupils with SEND.

Music Reading

Writing

Maths

Science

History

Are effective links being made across

subjects?


8

The impact of the curriculum is not only measured by attainment and progress, but is also shown by how well pupils with SEND are prepared for their next stage in learning and in education or in life after school. This includes how well pupils are prepared for their destinations and in being able to fulfil their potential and reach their reasonable aspirations. This directly links to giving pupils the ‘cultural capital’ needed to succeed and participate fully in society. All staff are responsible for the curriculum impact for pupils with SEND. The measurement and assessment of achievement is further explained on Page 10.

Overall impact of teaching of reading is very important, as where at all possible being able to read securely provides

accessibility to future learning. The new Ofsted handbook has an expectation that all pupils will be reading at age related standards by the end of key stage 2. It is recognised that for some pupils with significant or specific SEND this is not realistic. Nonetheless, leaders of SEND need to check that there is adequate drive and planning to ensure that the acquisition of reading skills and a love of reading, stories and the language of the book is prioritised and relentlessly driven within the curriculum planning so that gaps in knowledge and skills are closed as well as possible. The systematic teaching of phonics should be at the core of teaching early reading for pupils with SEND. Strong evidence would be needed that a pupil was not able to access phonics before moving on to different strategies.

Is the curriculum successfully implemented to ensure pupils with SEND progress well in acquiring knowledge? Do they successfully ‘learn the

curriculum’?

Do pupils with SEND get equal access to the curriculum at a stage appropriate

level?

Does the curriculum enable pupils with SEND to go on to destinations that meet

their interests and aspirations?


9

Evidence from intent, implementation and impact across subjects can be brought together to self-evaluate the overall

effectiveness of the curriculum for pupils with SEND. Following the process for the same group of individual pupils with SEND across subjects is a powerful way of testing the school’s summary evaluation and the quality of the very real day to day experience of pupils with SEND.

The development of reading knowledge and skills should be a high priority within the curriculum for all pupils, and

particularly for those with SEND. Strong evidence would be needed that a pupil was not able to access phonics

before moving on to different strategies.


10

Measuring academic achievement: The judgement of pupils’ academic achievement should be based on evaluation of progress from starting points by bringing together a wide

range of evidence to build up a consensus on whether pupils know and remember more. This includes using: assessment data, lesson observations/learning walks, work scrutiny, pupil interviews, hearing readers, discussions with teachers, evidence from pupil progress meetings and feedback from parents.

Pupils know more and remember more; and so are

progressing

Assessment data

Lesson observations/learning

walks

Work scrutiny

Pupil interviews

Teacher discussions

Parent feedback

Hearing readers

Showing that


11

Schools should carefully consider if pupils whose attainment is below age-related expectations genuinely have cognitive difficulties. Assessment should make a clear distinction between underperformance which is related to SEND or conversely is linked to social and emotional factors/disadvantage, or where the quality of teaching has resulted in gaps in knowledge and skills. The correct identification of SEN support pupils is important; as under or over identification could skew both internal and end of key stage SEND outcomes data. Schools should be very clear about how they identify SEND.

There is no prescriptive way schools should evaluate the achievement outcomes of pupils with SEND. There are no national year group

expectations of progress. Schools’ success in securing positive outcomes for pupils with SEND is nationally evaluated at the end of key stages through schools’ progress scores. The progress scores of SEND pupils are expected to be at least in line with national for all pupils. This is to maintain high expectations that from starting points all pupils make at least the same level of progress as their peers with the same starting points. Indeed, to close the achievement gap schools should aspire for better than national progress. This poses a risk to schools’ outcomes data, because currently, at a national level, the progress of pupils requiring SEN support and those with an EHC plan is mostly lower than for all pupils. Analysing School Performance (ASP) end of key stage data provides comparative progress data for key groups, including SEN support, EHCP and no SEN. Schools can use this to check how the progress of their pupils with SEND compares with other groups in the school, as well as with all pupils nationally. See P 13. However, Ofsted is no-longer comparing SEND outcomes with national, local or in-school data; or indeed comparing different pupils within a school. This recognises that the needs of each pupil are very different.

If a school uses an assessment and tracking system which is based on year group age-related expectations (ARE) the majority of pupils

with SEND are likely to begin the year significantly below ARE. Unless, the school’s system is able to track steps in learning from previous years’ curricular learning, the progress of SEND pupils will not be demonstrated clearly enough. More importantly, vital gaps in learning may not be identified; which may mean the necessary building blocks for learning are insecure and progress may be further impeded. Checking that gaps in learning are fully reflected in a school’s monitoring and tracking system is vital. A wide range of evidence is much better than relying primarily on tracking data.

Does the school’s monitoring and tracking system adequately identify any gaps

in SEND pupils’ knowledge and skills?

The correct identification of SEN support is important; as under or over identification could skew outcomes data.


12

Whilst the national accountability measures for SEND pupils in primary schools are based around core subjects, and in secondary schools around Progress 8, schools should have a strong monitoring and tracking system across all subjects; including the collation of wider evidence from subject reviews. This is particularly important for SEND pupils who may excel more in some subjects in the wider curriculum than in, for example, English and mathematics or in technical subjects. Leaders need to know the impact of the broad curriculum for pupils with SEND. Nonetheless, there needs to be a careful balance between including focus on the wider curriculum and at the same time ensuring that skills in English and mathematics remain a high priority. It is important that assessment systems in primary schools truly identify gaps so that by the time pupils transfer to secondary school they have the basic skills in reading, writing and mathematics necessary to thrive in the very different secondary learning environment, where rapid use of basic skills is required. Primary schools should seriously question whether the monitoring and tracking system they use is rigorous enough in evaluating how secondary ready their pupils with SEND are. Secondary schools should query how well they know if their pupils with SEND have the knowledge, skills and qualifications to succeed in their next steps when they leave the school.

Pupils with complex learning difficulties and disabilities: From September 2018, following the Rochford review in 2016, for the assessment of pupils working below the KS1 and KS2 National

Curriculum tests, schools must use the pre-key stage standards to make teacher assessment judgements for pupils working below the standard of the tests, but above P scale 5. P scales 5 to 8 will no longer be used. For pupils working below the pre-key stage standards, P scales 1 to 4 will continue to be used for the statutory assessment of these pupils in 2019 to 2020. NB: The use of P scales is from Year 1 and should not be used in Reception. EYFSP should be used in Reception. A national engagement scale for pupils with complex learning difficulties and difficulties learning will also replace the P scales 1 to 4 for pupils who are not engaged in subject-specific learning, but has

Primary schools should seriously question whether the monitoring and tracking system they use is rigorous

enough in evaluating how secondary ready their pupils with SEND are.

Secondary schools should query how well they know if their pupils with SEND have the knowledge, skills and

qualifications to succeed in their next steps when they leave the school.


13

not been published yet, but will be in place for assessment in 2020/2021. Some schools have created their own or are using commercial engagement scales. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/757524/Seven_Aspects_evaluation_report.pdf

National data to support schools’ self-evaluation

End of key stage data is available in Analysing School Performance (ASP) and the Inspection Data Summary Report (IDSR), but the IDSR

does not include any data for SEND outcomes. Schools are able to request ASP logins for school leaders and there is specific access for

governors. Data is provided with national and LA comparators. Schools continue to be able to use the data set interactively to look at end

of key stage progress by SEND group (SEN support and EHCP) and to overlay with other groups. So, for example, schools are able to look

at the relative progress of disadvantaged SEND pupils compared to other SEND pupils. However, be aware that Ofsted will not compare a

school’s SEND outcomes with national SEND indicators.

Many schools take advantage of the local authority traded contract with Fisher Family Trust, which enables schools to track individual pupils

compared to the national data set by year group and needs.

Milton Keynes’ local authority mainstream primary schools’ comparative data for EYFSP, KS1 and KS2 will be sent to individual schools by

October half term.

Measuring broader achievement:

Schools should use academic assessment data alongside a broad and wide range of evidence. This will include quantitative and qualitative information on social and emotional development. For example, some schools use the Boxall assessment to measure social and emotional development. It may also include assessment of the growth of pupils’ engagement and independence in learning. Schools need to make evidence based decisions about which assessments they use and evaluate, and whether they effectively reflect the wider progress of their pupils with SEND.

Alongside annual curricular targets for all pupils, schools set short term small step targets for pupils with SEND. These are either part of the school’s own planning, reviewing and evidencing for SEN support pupils or part of the Education and Health Care Plan (EHCP) annual review process. There is a risk that while correctly focusing on the small steps which are necessary to improve learning; practitioners can lose sight of the full curriculum gains pupils need to make during the year. This is so that pupils remain on track to make strong progress

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/757524/Seven_Aspects_evaluation_report.pdf


14

from their starting points when they reach the end of the key stage. Schools need to evaluate how effective they are at balancing specific short term goals and wider curricular learning as part of their ‘assess - plan - do – review’ cycle.

Self-evaluation of how well pupils achieve their short term targets is an important part of the wider outcomes evidence used by schools to evaluate the effectiveness of their SEND provision. It must, however, be fully integrated into the wider SEND evidence base. Schools should also make sure that there is evaluation of how well pupils achieve EHCP outcomes.

Annual

curricular

targets

Core subjects

July

Core subjects

September

Short term targets

with small steps

How well is the school integrating its self-evaluation of the achievement of SEND

targets into the wider evidence base?


15

Analysis of pupils’ outcomes should consider the complexity of pupil groups and schools should evaluate how well they do this. A pupil may, for example, have SEND, but also be from a disadvantaged minority ethnic background. Schools should consider how they unpick and address the different background factors which present the greatest barriers for learning. See background factors below.

Schools should evaluate how well they ‘know’ their SEND pupils. Beyond academic outcomes data collection, it is the deeper understanding of a pupil with SEND and his/her family’s needs which is important. The background story of a pupil’s family and community experiences, health and wellbeing, preferred ways of learning and interacting, peer group interaction, aspirations and hopes for the future are vital. The ‘musts’ and ‘shoulds’ of the SEN Code of Practice will guide this wider evaluation of outcomes. See Page 20.

Pupil and

her/his

aspirations

Academic outcomes

Ways of learning

Barriers to learning

Family

Community

Socio-economic

background

Social skills

Emotional and

mental health

Friendships

Health

Wider interests

and achievements

Hobbies

Culture

Faith and

belief


16

It is also important to know how well all staff, who are teaching and supporting a pupil, have and use comprehensive understanding to plan

the most appropriate curriculum and successful activities which lead to optimum outcomes. This is most difficult to evaluate in secondary

schools, where teaching is delivered by a wide range of staff. Accountability measures across departments/faculties are imperative, so that

all staff are held to account for the outcomes of vulnerable pupils with SEND.

Trained support staff delivering interventions

Class/subject teachers

Middle leaders (subject leads)

SENCO/Inclusion

Leader (SLT)

Head

Governing

board/trustees

How well does the school really ‘know’ its pupils with SEND?

Who is responsible

for the outcomes of

pupils with SEND?


17

Senior leaders have responsibility for the outcomes of SEND pupils. It is the governing board, or board of trustees for an academy, which

have ultimate responsibility for outcomes and are accountable for the effective use of SEND funding. Schools need to evidence how the

additional funds are well used and how leaders are held to account by the governing board.

Aligned to evaluation of the quality of teaching by class/subject teachers and support staff, schools need to know how effective their

additional interventions are. Schools frequently track which interventions pupils receive, but they also need to quickly determine how

effective they are for individuals and groups both within an intervention and after an intervention is completed. This should be aligned to

costs and value for money. As a result of interventions progression should be increased in the targeted aspect of learning.

The evaluation of the effectiveness of provision for SEND pupils is also strengthened where schools have carried out comprehensive

moderation of assessments within and across schools. This is vital where schools have devised their own assessment criteria.

Evaluating the experience of individual pupils as case studies is also a useful way of securing information about the wider impact of the

school’s provision for SEND. Case studies may also be used for SEND initiatives. The case study could outline a brief description of the

context; aims of the provision; outline of activities; impact, strengths and weaknesses; and ways forward. Measuring impact is most

important. A decision to create a case study should only be taken because it will help the school to self-evaluate. It is not necessary to write

case studies for each pupil with SEND. See exemplar on page 19.

The attendance of pupils with SEND should be evaluated to determine any links between needs and attendance. For example, overall

attendance may be affected by pupils with medical needs, or there may be persistent absence because a pupil is anxious or their needs are

not being fully met in school. Schools need to evaluate if they are being sufficiently self-critical of their provision and if they are listening fully

Schools need to know how effective their additional interventions are.

Do pupils receive the right interventions and are they good value for money?


18

to pupils and parents’ views about their support. Part-time timetables should be a last resort and should have a timeframe for rapid re-

introduction to full time education. Schools need to carefully assess any external risk to a vulnerable pupil placed on a part timetable; such

as participation in gang activities.

Internal records of behaviour incidents should be analysed to identify if there are trends for individuals or SEND groups. It is important to

know what triggers and resolves behaviour concerns for pupils with SEND and if there is a link to attendance. The school needs to consider

how well it upholds its duty under the Equality Act (2010), including making reasonable adjustments so that pupils with a ‘disability’ (as

defined by the act) are able to have equal opportunities in learning and in wider school activities; such as after school clubs. There is also a

responsibility to evaluate if the school deals rigorously and effectively with prejudice based incidents; from the SEND perspective, to those

incidents linked to pupils’ specific needs.

The triggers for, causes and frequency of internal, fixed and permanent exclusions should be evaluated. It is vital to be sure that these

serious actions, which inevitably impact on pupils’ access to learning and wellbeing, are a last resort and that the school can evidence that

all possible measures were taken before exclusion was sanctioned. This is particularly important for pupils with SEND and those who have

social, emotional and mental health needs (SEMH).

Alongside evaluation of wider provision during the school day, it is essential to consider the equality of access of all pupils with SEND to

before and after-school activities, school trips and residential holidays; including opportunities to join in with pupils with no SEND.

Primary schools should consider how well they support the effective transfer and transition of pupils with SEND; particularly those moving to

the secondary phase. Secondary schools should carefully monitor the effectiveness of the induction of pupils with SEND and how well they

transfer into KS5 or to other education or employment. Secondary schools need to be sure that the subject options available to pupils with

Part timetables should be a last resort and should have a timeframe

for rapid re-introduction to full time education.

Have exclusions been used appropriately and in the best interests of the pupil?


19

SEND enable them to move on to the destinations which match their aspirations and abilities. Comparative national and local data on the

proportion of SEND pupils going to a sustained education and/or employment destination should be used.

The views of pupils and their families on the quality of provision for pupils with SEND and also giving opportunities for parents to share their

knowledge of their own children’s needs are central to schools’ appraisal of its standards. Schools should consider what additional

information they need from parents of pupils on SEN support, as the view of pupils with EHCPs are gained during annual reviews. Schools

may survey the parents of all pupils with SEND using consistent questions, alongside noting specific views in one-to-one meetings.

How the quality of SEND provision will be externally evaluated

There is a range of ways that SEND provision is evaluated. Local review is very important and is part of the Local Offer. Requests for

involvement and funding are addressed through the SEND forum and panels; which check that schools know the needs of their pupils, are

addressing needs appropriately and that they have the capacity to use additional funds well. Advice and guidance and partnership working

is central to this.

Local Area SEND Inspection by Ofsted is used to evaluate overall provision for SEND across the borough. Schools are able to benchmark

themselves against the outcomes of the area inspection. https://reports.ofsted.gov.uk/provider/44/80524

Do pupils have the cultural capital they need to succeed in their next stage?

How well has the school secured the views of pupils and their parents/carers?

https://reports.ofsted.gov.uk/provider/44/80524


20

Ofsted inspection of settings and schools incudes a significant focus on SEND. The ‘School inspection handbook’ includes an appendix in

Part 3 on applying the ‘Education inspection framework’ (EIF) in special schools and in mainstream schools’ provision for pupils with SEND.

There are seven key aspects which inspectors will gather evidence on. These have been included throughout this guidance.

The SEN Code of Practice ‘musts’ and ‘shoulds’ within self-evaluation

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/send-code-of-practice-0-to-25 Page 92

Schools ‘must’:

Identify and address the needs of SEND pupils. Ensure SEND pupils engage in activities alongside all other pupils. Designate a qualified teacher to be the SEN co-ordinator, or SENCo. Inform parents when they are making special educational provision. Prepare and publish a SEN information report.

Schools ‘should’:

School leaders should regularly review how expertise and resources used to address SEN can be used to build the quality of whole-school provision as part of their approach to school improvement.

The quality of teaching for pupils with SEN, and the progress made by pupils, should be a core part of the school’s PM arrangements and its approach to professional development for all teaching and support staff.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/send-code-of-practice-0-to-25


21

School leaders and teaching staff, including the SENCo, should identify any patterns in the identification of SEN, both within the school and in comparison with national data, and use these to reflect on and reinforce the quality of teaching.

The identification of SEN should be built into the overall approach to monitoring the progress and development of all pupils. A mainstream school’s arrangements for identifying and assessing pupils as having SEN should be agreed and set out as part of the local

offer. All schools should have a clear approach to identifying and responding to SEN. Schools should assess each pupil’s current skills and

levels of attainment on entry, building on information from previous settings and key stages where appropriate. Class and subject teachers, supported by the senior leadership team, should make regular assessments of progress for all pupils. These

should seek to identify pupils who are not making fast enough progress. It can include progress in areas other than attainment - for instance where a pupil needs to make additional progress with wider development or social needs in order to make a successful transition to adult life.

Teachers should set high expectations for every pupil, whatever their prior attainment. They should use appropriate assessment to set targets which are deliberately ambitious.

Potential areas of difficulty should be identified. Lessons should be planned to address potential areas of difficulty and overcome barriers. Consideration of whether special educational provision is required should start with the desired outcomes, including the views and

wishes of the pupil and their parents. This should then help determine the support that is needed and whether it can be provided by adapting the school’s core offer or whether something different or additional is required.

The outcomes considered should include those needed to make successful transitions between phases of education and to prepare for adult life. Schools should engage with secondary schools or FE providers as necessary to help plan for these transitions

All pupils should have access to a broad and balanced curriculum. Schools should keep accurate records of additional or different provision made under SEN support and the impact of any interventions.

SEN Information Report self-evaluation

The annual publication of the SEN Information Report is a statutory expectation within the SEN Code of Practice and must be published on the

school website. See pages 106-107 of the code https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/send-code-of-practice-0-to-25

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. The information published should be updated annually and any changes to the information occurring during the year should be updated as soon as possible.

The information should include the school’s evaluation of the effectiveness of the provision made for children and young people with special educational needs.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/send-code-of-practice-0-to-25


22

“The information required is set out in the Special Educational Needs and Disability Regulations 2014 and must include information about:

The kinds of SEN that are provided for

Policies for identifying children and young people with SEN and assessing their needs, including the name and contact details of the SENCO (mainstream schools)

Arrangements for consulting parents of children with SEN and involving them in their child’s education

Arrangements for consulting young people with SEN and involving them in their education

Arrangements for assessing and reviewing children and young people’s progress towards outcomes. This should include the opportunities available to work with parents and young people as part of this assessment and review.

Arrangements for supporting children and young people in moving between phases of education and in preparing for adulthood. As young people prepare for adulthood outcomes should reflect their ambitions, which could include higher education, employment, independent living and participation in society.

The approach to teaching children and young people with SEN

How adaptations are made to the curriculum and the learning environment of children and young people with SEN

The expertise and training of staff to support children and young people with SEN, including how specialist expertise will be secured

Evaluating the effectiveness of the provision made for children and young people with SEN

How children and young people with SEN are enabled to engage in activities available with children and young people in the school who do not have SEN


23

Support for improving emotional and social development. This should include extra pastoral support arrangements for listening to the views of children and young people with SEN and measures to prevent bullying.

How the school involves other bodies, including health and social care bodies, local authority support services and voluntary sector organisations, in meeting children and young people’s SEN and supporting their families

Arrangements for handling complaints from parents of children with SEN about the provision made at the school”

A number of additional key points must be considered:

The SEN Information Report should be seen as an evaluative document, which provides stakeholders with key information about the effectiveness of the school’s provision for SEN. It needs to reflect what is happening on the ground, rather than being about processes.

Special schools do not have a statutory responsibility to produce an SEN Information report, but it is good practice. It is very important that special schools have close liaison with families.

The SEN Information Report is not the SEN policy and ideally should be separate.

It should show how the school sets up appropriate support for children in care who have SEN.

The information should be in plain English so that pupils and families can access it. The choice of layout can make it more accessible.

There should be information about the SEN Policy. It would be wise to create a hyperlink to the SEN policy and all other relevant and linked policies on the school’s website. This would include the behaviour and physical intervention policies.

Information in the report might indicate that there has been a change in levels of need. In this circumstance schools should show what they have done to address this.

Parents need to be informed how they raise any concerns or how to make a complaint if they consider that the needs of their child are not being met. A web link to the information about the way the school identifies key workers would help and a web link to the school’s complaints policy is also good practice.


24

There should be information about how the school contributes to the Local Offer and there must be a web link to it. Some schools have created their own ‘Local Offer’, where all information around SEN in the school is located. This could be confusing to parents, as this information should be included in the SEN Information Report and there is only one local area, multi-agency Local Offer. If a school has used the term ‘local offer’ for its own SEN provision it is suggested that it is changed to the school’s offer, e.g. Brightside School Offer’.

Curriculum information for the whole school indicates how it is designed to be broad and balanced, but there should be consideration about how the curriculum is either adapted or is made accessible to pupils with SEN. This could either be located in the SEN information area of the website, or hyperlinked to the main curriculum information.

Schools are advised to make their SEN data available to the local authority to support strategic planning for SEN support. This is collected through the School Census and it is this data which is used to collate, for example, Analyse School Performance (ASP) data. In Milton Keynes SEN pupil level data is shared at support meetings with specialist teaching staff and Education Psychologists as a result of requests for involvement. Improvement Partners review SEND outcomes as part of the core offer for maintained schools and offer a comprehensive traded service linked to SEND outcomes to all schools.


25

KEY INFORMATION KEY QUESTIONS EVIDENCE

Pupil Characteristics Number of pupils with SEND in:

mainstream

alternative provisions

How many pupils with SEND are in the mainstream?

How many pupils with SEND are currently in alternative provisions?

What is the 3 year pattern?

What proportion of pupils in school have SEND? How does this compare with national?

What proportion of pupils with SEND is provided specific interventions additional to Quality First teaching (QFT)?

School assessment and monitoring systems SEND register/provision management

Age range of pupils with SEND

What is the age range of pupils with SEND? This means that the leaders need to have a clear understanding of the spread of needs across the school, as this may not be uniform across year groups. This is both in terms of numbers and level of need.

Are there more pupils with SEND in a particular key stage or year? Why?

School assessment and monitoring systems SEND register/provision management

Range of needs:

number of pupils with different SEND needs

levels of need

What is the range of needs (types and levels)? How does this compare with national census figures?

What are the specific needs of pupils within alternative provision, such as a pupil referral unit?

Can the school provide case studies of particular pupils as exemplification of provision for different levels of need?

Note that specific needs are the priority, rather than SEND labels.

SEND register/provision management

Quality of education - achievement

Progress and attainment for:

mainstream

alternative provisions

all pupils in school

comparison with national for all pupils

For all groups of pupils:

What is their progress relative to their starting points at particular ages?

How well do pupils know and remember more?

How well are pupils accessing the curriculum? For pupils with SEND:

What is their progress relative to specific assessment tools used by the school?

What is the in-year progress of pupils with SEND from their starting points? This depends on the monitoring and tracking system used by the school. It also depends on the specific needs of pupils.

Are pupils with SEND on track to reach end of key stage expectations of progress? If not, why? How do you know?

What is the end of KS progress score of all SEND/ EHC SEN/Other SEN pupils compared to the progress score of all pupils nationally?

What is the progress of pupils in alternative provisions compared to the progress of pupils

School assessment and monitoring systems ASP Interactive scatter-plots and charts using end KS teacher assessment Assessments for pupils below National Curriculum access

Evidencing impact of SEND provision grid


26

in school? With the additional support there is an expectation that progress will improve over time in the provision. What are the outcomes of pupils who are in alternative provisions and/or on dual placements?

What %/number of pupils with SEND are making more progress than the school would normally expect using its assessment system?

How do the % of pupils working below the level of the test compare with the national proportions at the same level?

What is the impact of this progress on overall attainment in the school? What are the implications of this for your school’s overall attainment and progress?

What is the learning and progress of pupils with SEND across year groups and across different more complex groups, such as those with social communication needs?

How accurate are baselines and do they draw on a wide range of information?

Does the school compare progress of its pupils with SEND with all pupils nationally, with similar starting points and is the gap narrowing?

Quality of education -teaching

Quality of provision:

planning for SEND pupils

briefing for specialist staff

feedback and forward planning

What have subject reviews shown about the quality of education for pupils with SEND? Is high quality provision consistent across subjects?

How strong is the quality of teaching in foundation subjects?

How well do individual pupils benefit from provision in school?

How well does the school respond to individual pupil’s needs?

Are the expectations for pupils with SEND high enough?

Is there a balance between challenge and praise? Are teachers planning for a wide range of needs, rather than focusing on a particular level of ability, such as middle ability?

How well is the school planning for and developing independence? Is there a possibility that some pupils have learned helplessness?

How effectively are pupils challenged to push their boundaries; for example, by travelling independently?

How do class/subject/specialist teachers plan for pupils with SEND within mainstream lessons, and for targeted interventions?

Unlearning is very difficult for many pupils with SEND; therefore, how does the school ensure that teachers “get it right the first time”?

How does the school ensure consistency in effective planning for pupils with SEND across all provision?

How does the school ensure that pupils are actively learning throughout the day? Has the school followed an individual pupil to review his/her experiences? Is too much time spent in support staff led interventions?

Are pupils really learning or are they being ‘occupied’ throughout the day?

Do teachers reinforce prior learning well or is there endless repetition which does not move learning forward quickly enough? Are the principles of the “forgetting curve’ considered?

Provision management Subject reviews Lesson plan scrutiny Lesson observations Pupil work scrutiny (outcomes, outputs, changes to pupil work) Pupils’ plans and review meetings Performance reviews/meetings Staff interviews/surveys Specialist staff feedback compared to forward planning


27

Are lessons planned so that learning is sequential and builds on prior learning?

How well do teachers plan the pace of lessons so that they are not too slow or too fast for some pupils?

Are lessons active, interesting, interactive and do they meet pupil needs? How effectively do teachers facilitate learning?

Does planning make best use of time, or is some learning lost by covering familiar and popular activities?

Is planning for pupils with SEND age appropriate and are they able to maintain their dignity?

How well do teachers draw on EHCP objectives, short term plans and knowledge of pupils to personalise planning to result in optimal learning?

Are short and long-term targets aspirational enough?

Do case studies indicate that targets and actions are appropriate and realistic? Is it possible to observe incremental improvements?

How well does the school know its pupils? It is normal for there to be “spiky” profiles for pupils with SEND.

How effectively do class/subject teachers brief specialist support staff before mainstream lessons?

How effective is the input of specialist staff in mainstream planning?

How is feedback from specialist staff used to inform forward planning and how do you know it is effective?

How does the school monitor the quality of teaching received by its pupils in alternative provision?

How well do the teachers in the school know the SEN Code of Practice and how do they apply it in their teaching across the school?

Use of:

approaches and strategies

specialist advice

equipment

language systems

What approaches and strategies are used to support the specific needs of pupils with SEND?

How do class/subject/specialist teachers plan to use these approaches?

How is value for money monitored in the employment of different approaches and interventions? How effective is provision management?

How does the school adapt interventions based on its self-evaluation and impact on pupil progress?

What training has been provided to develop staff skills and how effective has it been in terms of pupils’ outcomes?

What specialist advice does the school draw on to make improvements in provision? How effective has this been?

What specialist equipment is provided? What accessibility is there to the equipment? How does the school monitor its use and impact on learning and engagement?

What language systems are used to support pupils, e.g. British Sign Language, for

Provision Management Lesson plan scrutiny Lesson observations Pupil work scrutiny (outcomes, outputs, changes to pupil work) Performance reviews/meetings Staff interviews/surveys Equipment audits


28

Hearing Impaired (HI) pupils? How does the school know that the systems are being used effectively and that they are not impacting on provision and progress for mainstream pupils? Is it fit for purpose?

How consistently does the school use communication systems, such as signing?

Behaviour and conduct

Use of restraint and force How does the school record significant incidents where restraint or physical intervention has been used? How does the school ensure that this is systematic and matches the school policy?

How does the school know that the use of physical intervention is not a default position?

Is the school complying with current DfE guidance on force and restraint?

How does the school demonstrate that its use of force and restraint is reasonable?

How does the school know that intervention has not been excessive and that it is proportional?

How does the school know that the outcomes of restraint have been effective for the pupils?

What training has been provided to staff using physical intervention? Is this all up-to-date?

Do rises in the number of incidents of physical intervention correspond with staff training dates?

Are pupils able to flow throughout the school or are there instances where liberty is restricted? If so, is it appropriate to level of risk?

If ‘time-out rooms’ are used what checks are there and does use comply with legal requirements?

Behaviour incident log and overview School policy and procedures on use of force Child protection records Pupil review meetings Pupil surveys/questioning Parental surveys

Reasonable adjustments under equality Act 2010

How well does the school make “reasonable adjustments” for pupils with SEND who are covered under the Equality Act 2010?

How well does the school and staff understand its duties under the act?

What examples can the school provide of making such adjustments?

Provision management Pupil plans and review meetings Prejudice based incident reporting and log Staff training and evaluation

Behaviourally challenging pupils

Does the school have high enough expectations of behaviour?

How well does the school know its pupils and their triggers?

How well does the school support behaviourally challenging pupils with SEND?

What are the main sanctions for challenging behaviour? How does the school know that they are effective?

What procedures and policies are in place? How do leaders measure their impact on reducing challenging behaviour? Is the behaviour policy followed consistently across the school, and does it allow appropriate adaptations for vulnerable individuals?

What value has the school added to pupils’ social and emotional well-being from recorded

Behaviour incident log and overview; extracted information for SEND pupils (resource base & mainstream SEND) Exclusion overview Pupil review meetings Evidence of multi-agency working, with recorded outcomes


29

baselines?

Exclusions:

Internal

fixed term

permanent

How does the school ensure that levels of all types of exclusions are low?

Why is internal exclusion used? How effective is it in both improving behaviour and learning for individuals?

Are there any pupils for whom there have been multiple fixed-term exclusions? How are multiple exclusions by pupil monitored?

How can the school show that exclusions are a final resort after all other sanctions have failed?

How does the school’s exclusion rate compare with national averages?

Exclusion overview Average MK exclusion data Pupil plans and review meetings

Attendance How does the school ensure that there is strong attendance for pupils with SEND?

How does attendance compare with national attendance for all pupils?

How is absence of pupils with SEND monitored and what policies and procedures are in place to improve this? How effective are they?

What actions are being planned to address attendance issues?

How do the medical needs of pupils impact on attendance? What is done to reduce the effect of medical needs and appointments?

Attendance register and overview Attendance policy and procedures Action planning and evaluation

Leadership and Management

Strategic How well can the school describe/self-evaluate its SEN provision and is this replicated in the SEN Information Report?

Are the school’s SEN Information Report and disability access report up-to-date and published on the school’s website? Has the school checked that all statutory requirements are fulfilled in the report?

How well does the Governing Board understand the SEND provision? Is it uncompromising in its ambition for pupils with SEND?

Is there an SEND Governor?

Is the Governing Board monitoring the effectiveness of provisions, physical interventions and behaviour incidents? As a result of its support and challenge what changes have been made?

How well does the school evaluate the effectiveness of the EHCP process and annual reviews? Are they completed on time and does the school ensure that there is timely receipt of statutory paperwork from the LA in order to match provision to objectives?

How effective is the school’s own analysis of assessment data? Is it triangulated with wider information about SEND? This includes subject reviews, work scrutiny, lesson

SEN Code of Practice p 106-107 School website Governing Body minutes Annual review overview Individual support plans and EHCPs Assessment data linked to learning review data e.g. lesson observation overview Attendance data Pupil timetables


30

observations and learning walks, minuted pupil progress meetings and discussions with pupils, parents/carers.

How does the school ensure that there are consistent judgements about pupils’ progress and attainment and how does the school monitor this across/between subjects and year groups?

Do assessment measures match what leaders are saying about SEND? Is there consistency?

Are senior and middle leaders working together to ensure that the evaluation of the quality of teaching of SEND is moderated and is secure? Is what is observed typical?

How well do leaders plan for successful transition of SEND pupils between phases and for transfer to new settings?

Is the school unpicking the attendance of SEND pupils and what has been the response and impact of any initiatives? Is attendance linked to outcomes?

How well is the school ensuring that its SEND pupils are receiving a suitable full-time education? If a pupil is in a dual placement, is the school ensuring that the remainder of the time provides education?

Are there risk assessments if there are locked down areas within the school?

Are alternative provisions used by a school registered if they have 5 or more pupils either full-time or less or if they have one pupil with SEN or who is on an EHCP? Are the

alternative provisions used by the school registered? Are normal safeguarding checks in place?

How does the school check that an alternative provision has the appropriate skills to validate the quality of teaching and learning?

How well is the school linking to the Children Missing Education agenda? If the school has had incidents where it is not known where a pupil has moved to, it must record the actions it has taken. A pupil may not be taken off role unless the school has made reasonable enquiries.

Curriculum Does the curriculum offer meet the needs of pupils with SEND?

Do pupils with SEND receive a broad and balanced curriculum?

Are pupils with SEND being dis-applied from any curriculum areas because of timetabling constraints, such as availability of support staff?

Is the 16 to 19 offer appropriate to enable pupils with SEND to move to their next step in education, training or employment?

Are accreditations linked to next steps? Are curriculum pathways planned according to suitable destinations?

Are the destinations of pupils with SEND after school appropriate to their aspirations and abilities?

Do pupils with SEND reach their full potential because the curriculum matches their needs?

Are curriculum packages tailored to meet individual needs, rather than whole groups?

Curriculum plans Curriculum report on school website Destinations overview Individual pupil records and meeting notes for careers support


31

If the school continues to use the EYFS curriculum for older pupils, what is the rationale and what impact has it had in preparing the pupils for their next stage in learning?

How effective are transition arrangements from pre-school to reception and reception to Year 1 so that curriculum learning is progressive?

Is careers guidance sufficient to enable pupils to reach their chosen or appropriate destinations?

Pupil timetables in:

resource base

mainstream

What proportion of the timetables for pupils with SEND is within the mainstream versus in a specialist provision environment or withdrawal?

How much time is used by pupils with SEND for ad hoc “time out” of the mainstream classroom for nurturing or support?

How does the school know that the timetabled placement of pupils is most effective for the pupil, both in terms of academic outcomes and social and emotional well-being (especially related to their SEND needs)?

Timetables Analysis of timetabling Pupil surveys on engagement and well-being Parent surveys on pupil progress, engagement and well-being Pupil achievement

Staffing:

number/full time equivalent (fte) and type of specialist staff

deployment

How many specialist staff are employed across mainstream provision? (fte/number)

How does the school ensure that skills match need and that they are updated based on changes in pupils’ needs and developments in the specialist field?

How does the school ensure that specialist staff transfer knowledge and skills across mainstream staff?

How are the quality standards for specialist staff maintained, even when school leaders do not have that specialist background knowledge?

How does the school ensure that support staff are learning focused, rather than being task completion orientated?

Is there effective partnership teaching between mainstream and specialist staff resulting in good progress for all pupils?

Is there value for money in deployment of staff and other resources?

Is value for money ensured when using traded services? This should be linked to your provision management.

How effective is performance management of teachers and support staff in monitoring the quality of provision for SEND and how is it linked to pupil outcomes? What support is provided to staff where performance does not meet expectations?

Provision management Lesson plan scrutiny Lesson observations Pupil work scrutiny (outcomes, outputs, changes to pupil work) Professional development overviews and individual meetings Planned opportunities for joint planning

Engagement with and use of:

pupils

parents/carers

outreach services

specialist teams

How well does the school involve pupils and their families in decision making about their provision?

What changes has the school made as a result of consultation with pupils and their families.

How has the school been successful in engaging hard-to-reach families?

How effectively are outreach services and specialist teams used to secure improved outcomes for pupils in a resource base?

Which services and teams are used and in which contexts?

How does the school monitor the impact of therapeutic care? Is the school making

Pupil and parent/carer surveys Provision management Pupil progress Pupil plans and review meetings Joint observations Review of service-level agreements Joint planning meetings


32

decisions based on impact measurement, or is it responding to the marketplace?

Is the school following statutory expectations around Education and Health Care plans (EHCPs)?

Is the school ensuring that there is a signed representative of Health as part of the EHCP process? If there are barriers to this, what is the school doing about it and if this is documented? EHCPs should not be signed off without this. An email trail would validate that schools have done their utmost to ensure that this takes place.


33

Case study template

Name of pupil: Year group: …………..

Context:

Needs of pupil:

Aims of the provision:

Key activities:

Strengths (Impact): These may be quantitative or qualitative.

Areas for improvement:

Ways forward:


34

Guidance on the self -evaluation of special educational ...

Documents

Transcript of Guidance on the self -evaluation of special educational ...