1

SEN Policy Options Steering group

Specialist teaching

for special educational needs and inclusion

Policy paper 4

(third series)

Contents:

1. Introduction to Policy Paper

2. The national SEN specialist standards : Annie Grant, Teacher Training Agency

3. Is there a distinctive SEN pedagogy? Ann Lewis, Institute of Education, Warwick University, and Brahm Norwich, School of Education, Exeter University

4. Reflections; Olga Miller, RNIB

5. Summary of discussion and conclusions : Geoff Lindsay

Edited by Brahm Norwich

Chapter 1 :

Introduction to the Policy paper

1. Introduction

This paper is a record of the invited Policy Seminar held at the Institute of Education, London University (4th May 2000) which examined the question of specialist teaching in the area of special educational needs in the third round of these SEN Policy Option Seminar series. The aim of this seminar was to have a look at questions about what is distinctive, if anything, about teaching children and young people with special educational needs in the context of the new TTA National SEN specialist standards. This is a very topical issue at the centre of wider questions about the nature of special education provision and relevant professional development.

The two main papers were presented by Annie Grant from the Teacher Training Agency (TTA) and by Ann Lewis, Institute of Education, Warwick University, and Brahm Norwich, School of Education, University of Exeter. Olga Miller from the RNIB, acted as discussant, and presented a set of reflections on the topic. About 35 people participated in the day seminar, coming from schools, LEA support services, LEA officers, DfEE, Government Agencies, parent groups, the voluntary sector, health service professionals, educational psychologists and universities.

2. SEN policy options steering group

Background

This policy paper is the fourth one in the third series of seminars and conferences to be organised by the SEN POLICY OPTIONS STEERING GROUP. This group organised the initial ESRC - Cadbury Trust series on policy options for special educational needs in the 1990s. The success of the first series led to the second one which was supported financially by NASEN. (See the list of these policy papers published by NASEN at the end of this section). The Steering Group has representatives from LEA administrators, head teachers, voluntary organisations, professional associations, universities and research. The further success of the second series of policy seminars and papers led to this third round of seminars which has also been organised with further funding from NASEN. These events are intended to consider current and future policy issues in the field in a pro-active way. They are planned to interest all those concerned with policy matters in special educational needs.

Aims and objectives of the Policy Options Steering Group

1.to identify current and likely future policy problems and the options for solutions in special education provision following the Green paper 1997 through to the year 2000 and beyond ;

2.to organise conferences and seminars for policy-makers, professionals, parents, voluntary associations and researchers in the field and publish the proceedings for wider dissemination:

3.to enhance the two-way relationship between policy and service issues and research agendas.

Current Steering Group membership

Mr Keith Bovair, Head teacher Durrants School (NASEN representative),Mr Clive Danks, Advisor, Birmingham LEA; Mr Tony Dessent, Director of Education, Luton LEA; Peter Gray, SEN Policy Adviser; Dr Seamus Hegarty, Director of the National Foundation for Educational Research; Professor Geoff Lindsay, Warwick University; Dr Ingrid Lunt, Reader, Institute of Education, London University; Mr Vincent McDonnell, Director of Education, Richmond LEA, Mr Chris Marshall (OFSTED); Professor Brahm Norwich, School of Education, Exeter University; Mrs Margaret Peter; Mrs Philippa Russell, Director of Council for Disabled Children; Professor Klaus Wedell, Institute of Education, London University.

Current series

The current series aims to organise 4 full or half day events on special education policy and provision over the two years 1998/99 - 1999/2000 which are relevant to the context of considerable changes in the education system.

If you have any ideas about possible topics or would to know more about the events, please do contact a member of the Group or Brahm Norwich at the School of Education, University of Exeter, Heavitree Road, Exeter EX1 2LU (email )

Policy Options Papers from first seminar series published and available from NASEN.

1. Bucking the market

Peter Housden, Chief Education Officer, Nottinghamshire LEA

2.Towards effective schools for all

Mel Ainscow, Cambridge University Institute of Education

3.Teacher education for special educational needs

Professor Peter Mittler, Manchester University

4.Resourcing for SEN

Jennifer Evans and Ingrid Lunt, Institute of Education, London University

5.Special schools and their alternatives

Max Hunt, Director of Education, Stockport LEA

6.Meeting SEN: options for partnership between health, education and social services

Tony Dessent, Senior Assistant Director, Nottinghamshire LEA

7.SEN in the 1990s: users' perspectives

Micheline Mason, Robina Mallet, Colin Low and Philippa Russell

Policy Options Papers from second seminar series published and available from NASEN.

1.Independence and dependence ? Responsibilities for SEN in the Unitary and County Authorities.

Roy Atkinson, Michael Peters, Derek Jones, Simon Gardner and Phillipa Russell

2.Inclusion or exclusion : Educational Policy and Practice for Children and Young People with Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties

John Bangs, Peter Gray and Greg Richardson

3. Baseline Assessment and SEN

Geoff Lindsay, Max Hunt, Sheila Wolfendale, Peter Tymms

4. Future policy for SEN : Response to the Green Paper

Brahm Norwich, Ann Lewis, John Moore, Harry Daniels

Policy Options Papers from third seminar series published and available from NASEN.

1. Rethinking support for more inclusive education

Peter Gray, Clive Danks, Rik Boxer, Barbara Burke, Geoff Frank, Ruth Newbury,

Joan Baxter

2.Developments in additional resource allocation to promote greater inclusion.

John Moore, Co Meijer, Klaus Wedell, Paul Croll and Diane Moses.

  1. Early Years Development and special educational needs.

Sheila Wolfendale and Philippa Russell

Chapter 2

The national SEN specialist standards :

Annie Grant, Teacher Training Agency

Background – how we got the published Standards – moving from specialist teachers to specialist teaching

The TTA, working closely with teachers, headteachers, educational psychologists, LEAs, teacher trainers in HEIs and schools, SEN organisations and other agencies, including DfEE, Ofsted, QCA and BECta, developed draft national Standards for SEN Specialist Teachers. And in October 1998 we went out for national consultation on the first version of the Standards.

The draft Standards set down an inter-related pattern of core, specialist and role-based expertisefor teachers who regularly worked with pupils with severe and/or complex forms of SEN and for those teachers thinking of specialising in this area. They aimed to provide a basic framework which would help both schools and teachers, working in a variety of settings, to audit training needs, and from which relevant and effective training for these SEN specialists could be developed.

At that time they had three elements:

  1. core Standards
  2. specialist Standards
  3. Standards in relation to key roles and responsibilities

The core Standards set out the knowledge, skills and understanding common to the full range of severe and/or complex SEN. They constituted a foundation for the development of all specialist teachers’ expertise.

The specialist Standards set out a summary of the key additional knowledge, understanding and skill needed by specialist teachers who worked directly or indirectly with pupils with severe and/or complex forms of SEN. At that time the specialist Standards were set out under nine headings, organised under particular pupil needs.

The nine headings were:

  • autism
  • emotional and behavioural difficulties
  • deafness
  • deafblindness
  • physical disabilities
  • severe and profound learning difficulties
  • specific learning difficulties
  • speech, language and communication difficulties
  • visual impairment

TheStandards in relation to key roles and responsibilities undertaken by SEN specialists indicated some of the professional capabilities required by SEN specialists to work in such roles as advisory support, curriculum co-ordination and the management and co-ordination of support staff.

Responses to the consultation were positive in relation to the Standards as a whole but some serious concerns were raised too. These clustered around two main areas:

  • the definition of a “specialist teacher”
  • the way the “specialist” Standards were grouped

It was difficult to define a ‘specialist teacher’. The Government’s SEN Action Programme aims to achieve the successful inclusion of pupils with SEN by securing better training for teachers working with pupils with SEN, and deploying teachers with specialist knowledge more effectively across schools, units and services. However, it also wants to increase opportunities for pupils with severe and/or complex SEN to be educated in mainstream schools.

We therefore stopped thinking of the Standards as being just for “specialist” teachers. We began to think of them as providing a more structured approach to gaining specialist knowledge, understanding and skills in SEN, for any teacher, SEN specialist or not, wanting to increase their knowledge, understanding and skills in relation to teaching pupils with severe and/or complex SEN. The Standards would, therefore, need to be useful for a teacher of classes of pupils with hearing impairments in a special unit, as well as for a teacher in a mainstream class, who teaches one or more pupils with hearing impairment for all or part of a week.

Addressing this criticism resulted in a number of changes:

  1. a change in title for the Standards - they are now called: “National SEN Specialist Standards”.
  2. changes throughout the introduction and to the small “case study” type examples, to emphasise the Government’s inclusion agenda and the wide range of professionals who might use the Standards to identify training and development priorities, set targets, and to evaluate the success of the training and development undertaken.

The way the specialist Standards were grouped caused great controversy. Many respondents were clear that teachers’ and pupils’ needs do not fall into impairment categories. Others felt that the nine categories were helpful since they made it much easier to track teachers’ needs. Resolving the tensions between these two positions was not easy. In response to this, we re-grouped these Standards under five headings, incorporating, as far as possible, the content of the nine previous areas, which had broad support. The re-grouping was sent out, as a discussion paper, containing work-in-progress, for consultation with key groups and individuals, including the TTA SEN focus group, representatives of the Government’s National Advisory Group for SEN (NAGSEN), representatives of LEAs, HEIs and SEN organisations (including NASEN) and schools. Four meetings, in London and Birmingham, were also held to discuss the proposals.

The re-formulation met with positive responses from those who were most concerned about the original formulation, but raised considerable concerns among certain specialist groups, particularly those concerned with sensory impairments, including RNID, RNIB and BATOD. They felt that the new model:

  • did not give teachers the specificity about the nature and complexity of particular disabilities offered by the previous version;
  • made it difficult for them to be used by teachers who needed to “search” for relevant material across headings.

Further revisions were therefore made to the Standards in response to feedback.

Some relatively minor changes were made to the core Standards to reflect concerns raised at consultation – they were streamlined and made more active. In some cases they were re-worded to make sure they were “specialist”, rather than more generally applicable to any teacher. They now set out the specialist SEN professional knowledge, understanding and skills which teachers will need and which are common to the full range of severe and/or complex SEN under the following five headings:

The Core Standards

  • strategic direction and development of SEN provision nationally and regionally;
  • identification, assessment and planning;
  • effective teaching, ensuring maximum access to the curriculum;
  • development of communication, literacy and numeracy skills and ICT capability;
  • promotion of social and emotional development, positive behaviour and preparation for adulthood.

These core Standards constitute a starting point for the development of further, more specific expertise.

The specialist Standards werere-named extension Standards because this was a much betterdescription of their function.The extension Standards indicate the further general and more need-specific training and development that will be required by some teachers to:

-enable them to teach pupils with more severe and/or complex needs, and/or

-to help them to support and advise other teachers working with such pupils in mainstream classes or more specialised settings – or both.

They are now presented under four headings:

The Extension Standards

  • communication and interaction
  • cognition and learning
  • behavioural, emotional and social development
  • sensory and/or physical skills

Also listed under each of these headings is the specific knowledge and skills needed by teachers of pupils who are autistic, deafblind, deaf or have visual impairment. We were advised of this very specialist knowledge by the relevant SEN associations.

The Standards in relation to key roles and responsibilities undertaken by teachers working with pupils with SEN remained largely unchanged. They are presented in relation to three key roles:

  • advisory
  • curricular
  • managerial

2.Using the Standards: a flexible tool: everyone’s needs are different

The SEN Specialist Standards are not for all teachers but they are intended to be useful for any teacher in a mainstream or specialised setting who wants to increase his or her knowledge, understanding and skill in relation to teaching pupils with severe and/or complex SEN.

  1. identifying individual training needs

Teachers working with pupils with severe and/or complex SEN operate in a variety of roles. For example, some will be involved in direct teaching of classes, groups and individual pupils with SEN while others may work alongside colleagues. They will all have developed different levels of expertise in SEN in different areas. Their development needs in relation to SEN will, therefore, vary from teacher to teacher and from setting to setting. The Standards will not apply in their entirety to any individual teacher.

Although the Standards apply to all areas of specialist provision, they will need to be applied and implemented differently in accordance with the specific needs of teachers, schools and services.

The Standards constitute a flexible audit tool that can be used to identify training needs for those working in SEN in many different settings. In particular it is envisaged that the SEN Specialist Standards will be used to identify priorities for training and development by:

  • teachers in mainstream schools, for example, focusing on those Standards which support their developing role, as a result of increasing inclusion of pupils with particular SEN in mainstream schools;
  • teachers in special classes and units in mainstream schools, or in special schools, or PRUs, to gain further SEN expertise, for example, focusing on those Standards which help them to meet the needs of pupils who have more complex forms of SEN so that they can assist teaching colleagues, LSAs and parents;
  • teachers in support services, for example, focusing on those Standards which help them identify knowledge, understanding and skills which they will need in helping schools to work towards increasing the inclusion of pupils with SEN in mainstream settings, widening their access to the curriculum, assisting teachers to better differentiate teaching and learning, or supporting schools and parents/carers in establishing strong links between school and home-based learning.

The SEN Specialist Standards contain a number of case studies which illustrate how the Standards might be used by teachers in a number of different contexts to identify both their strengths and their priorities for development. These case studies emphasise the way the Standards can be used as part of the normal process of performance review.

Each case study:

  • sets the context in which the teacher is working;
  • identifies the areas in which the teacher could contribute to the school’s priorities for development in the SEN area;
  • shows the teacher using the SEN Specialist Standards to audit his/her knowledge, understanding and skills to identify development needs and to set objectives in relation to the school’s priorities;
  • shows the teacher and his/her line manager agreeing a development plan to meet those objectives:
  • setting SMART targets with the line manager in relation to the objectives,
  • agreeing action to meet the agreed targets,
  • considering how progress will be reviewed and how to check that the development or training has been successful.

The effects of this focused use of the SEN Specialist Standards is to:

  • tailor SEN training closely to the needs of the school and the needs of the teacher in their current post;
  • to make best use of the considerable training opportunities which are currently available through the Standards Fund and elsewhere. The case studies emphasise the need to consider the best form of training or development to meet the Standards specified. Going on a course might not always be the best solution. Other activities might be more effective in helping teachers to meet their training and development needs. These might include working with other staff experienced in the area concerned; membership of working groups; attachments to other workplaces, inside and outside education; school based activities and tasks, including taking on particular responsibilities. Where a short or longer course is the best action to take, the SEN Specialist Standards can form the basis of needs assessment to make sure that the course content and outcomes are well-matched to teachers’ needs.
  1. identifying training outcomes

The SEN Specialist Standards might also be used by training providers to identify the most appropriate outcomes for a particular form of SEN training. In the same way that the Standards in their entirety will never apply to an individual teacher, the Standards as a whole do not constitute a training syllabus. For example,The TTA are currently consulting on which of the SEN Specialist Standards should constitute the outcomes of the Mandatory Qualifications (MQs) for teachers of classes of pupils with visual impairment (VI), hearing impairment (HI) and multi-sensory impairment (MSI).