Memorandum submitted by the National Association
for Special Educational Needs (T18)
1. NASEN, the leading organisation for special
educational needs (SEN), welcomes the opportunity to give evidence
to the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee inquiry into
the delivery of education in rural areas. NASEN, in its response,
notes the challenges and opportunities associated with the education
of pupils with SEN in rural areas.
PROVISION
2. A particular problem for small rural
primary schools is their potential isolation. This means that
there is a greater need for continuing professional development
(CPD) opportunities for the teachers in those schools.
3. There are major problems for staff that
would like to access award-bearing professional development but
who are not near to any higher education institution. Many staff
want to experience attending such courses rather than studying
through distance learning.
4. Small schools can also mean a lack of
economies of scale. An example of this is that the headteacher
often takes on several roles, for example that of the SENCO, in
addition to his or her existing duties.
5. It can be difficult for small schools
to make provision for pupils with high needs. There may not be
the flexibility in core provision, for example of learning support
assistants.
6. On of the biggest issues is the way in
which capital funding is distributed in rural areas. Classes can
be quite small in comparison to those of inner cities, and therefore
any per capita funding would cause immense hardship in
rural areas.
7. The historical provision for pupils with
SEN can be a barrier. For example, a NASEN member based has reported
that there are children in a village with special needs that would
like to attend the village school but because the support unit
has been based in the next village, any child who requires support
is allocated a place there instead of in their local school.
8. Clustering of schools for special needs
provision can give particular benefits to those schools in rural
areas. Clustering can provide CPD and resourcing benefits, as
can be seen in Nottinghamshire, for example. Clustering does allow
the opportunity to develop ICT approaches pupil learning and can
bring CPD opportunities for staff. Training has been arranged
to encourage the view that children with SEN need to be taught
with their friends at the local school, where possible.
9. Geographical factors have a particular
bearing on the provision of education for pupils with SEN. Special
school provision may be a long way from home for pupils living
in rural areas, for example. Geographical factors illustrate the
myth of "parental choice" as parents, children or professionals
may want a particular service or style of service but are unable
to access it for geographical or resource reasons. An example
is where a child may end up in a special school because none of
the schools geographically near to them are resourced to meet
their needs.
10. It appears that relatively more attention
is spent on sharing practice across cities and urban settings.
This is particularly true of case studies used to illustrate DfES
policy documents. NASEN congratulates the Government on some of
the recent initiatives, however, such as the DfES Training for
Inclusion that allowed creative solutions that matched local circumstances.
11. Another area of concern is the reluctance
of some governors to come to rural training events based on the
new disability discrimination legislation, partly due to work
and family commitments. Take up of training in the other support
areas has been high, however.
MULTI-AGENCY
WORKING
12. LEA support services have an important
role to play, particularly for low incidence SEN or complex needs
that small schools may only rarely encounter.
13. Rural poverty may exacerbate the situation
for families where a pupil has SEN. In addition, access to non-governmental
organisations can be difficult for some parents and families since
they are often urban-based. Face-to-face contact with professionals
can be difficult because of transport difficulties and the subsequent
time spent travelling for both families and professionals.
14. Some of the complexities of inter-agency
working may be diminished, however, as teams are relatively small
and such working happens at a personal level even if it isn't
in place at a structural level. NASEN members have noted, however,
on the variability of the quality of provision between LEAs.
TRANSPORT
15. There are particular transport difficulties
for pupils with PMLD. In some cases, children can be on a bus
for an hour before and an hour after the school day. Travelling
such distances, particularly before school, is not the best start
to the school day for these pupils. Such travelling times can
lead to stress and tiredness, and can exacerbate an existing special
need or disability.
16. Pupil participation in out-of-school
clubs and activities can be affected by the lack of access to
transport. Local authority transport using taxis can be inflexible.
17. Such transport problems can also affect
pupil participation at IEP reviews, Annual Reviews and parents'
evenings. Transport problems can exacerbate difficulties for sick
children who need to go home and for those with behavioural problems
that need parental involvement.
SOCIAL FACTORS
18. The social life of pupils with SEN can
also be affected due to, for example, parents' fears of letting
their child go into town. Parents can be concerned about their
child's ability to cope with the pace of town or city life and
their readiness to face some of the problems associated with urban
areas.
19. Such fears may also prevent pupils with
SEN from engaging in usual activities associated with friendships
such as overnight stays. More generally, rural isolation can make
it difficult for young people with SEN to engage in the normal
socialisation processes appropriate for their age.
20. Young people can also face bullying,
particularly if they are the only one in a village with a special
need. The anti-bullying project in North Lincolnshire found higher
rates of bullying in the surrounding areas than in the centre
of town.
CASE STUDY:
DEVELOPING INCLUSIVE
EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES
21. In one rural area, classrooms are being
built in two primary schools and the community college where the
children move to at 11. The aim of the classroom is to promote
social inclusion. The villages are very small and the school is
the main focus. It is hoped to encourage all members in the community
to use the new facilities, which should be accessible for disabled
people.
22. Some of the building works are innovative
and are very new concepts, in particular the "sesame"
platform lift (a prototype is fitted at the Merchant Tailors House
in Threadneedle Street).
23. It is hoped that using e-learning as
another teaching method can enable children to go to the village
primary for some of the classes and this would cut down on the
number of bus trips they need to make and the time spent travelling.
24. The foot and mouth crisis also had a
profound effect in some areas. For those living on rural farms
when the moving restrictions were in place, children had to work
in isolation using home computers and collecting and receiving
work at the farm gate. This may well have disadvantaged pupils
with SEN. One school in a rural area had the best results ever
following the crisis, although it was unclear if this was true
for pupils with SEN. The impact of this type of provision on both
academic and social progress merits further exploration.
24 January 2003
| 
