Memorandum submitted by Blackpool Council
High levels of transience and lack of socioeconomic
prosperity in Blackpool
The current guidance on SEN does not take social
deprivation or family background into consideration. Whilst it
is accepted that some of the approaches to addressing underachievement
as opposed to low attainment may differ, where transience and
an impoverished home background are features of the profiles of
significant numbers of pupils in a school, the impact of this
upon the children and the school are at least as great. Children
who are continually moving, living in households with multiple
occupancy, suffering abuse, have one or both parents who misuse
substances (as a significant number of our children do) are highly
likely to have a "greater difficulty in learning than the
majority of children of the same age" and are, likely to
need their schools to make a number of additional arrangements
to ensure they make progress. However, social deprivation and
family factors are not categories for PLASC SEN data collection,
nor do they feature as areas of need in the SEN Code of Practice
and schools are therefore not able to have their work recognised
in this way, nor justify any expenditure of their SEN funding
on meeting such needs. We have already moved a significant distance
away from locating learning difficulties within the child by looking
at what barriers to learning there may be in the school environment.
Surely we need to take a truly holistic approach and allow these
other more social factors to be considered?
The term "SEN" has probably outlived
its usefulness. We should be trying to demystify the terminology
we use and the approaches we suggest. What used to be deemed "special"
is increasingly argued to be what should be the norm. In this
sense, the term actually works against inclusion. Perhaps it is
time to find another term such as "additional needs"
and to reorganise our thinking to address the full range of children
and young people who need additional and/or different arrangements/systems
etc to be put in place for them. Some of our schools have already
appointed Inclusion Managers or Co-ordinators and have set up
Inclusion Registers, or ECM Registers.
Cost of certain models of provision
We are some way along the journey towards having
a continuum of centrally funded provision in Blackpool, with special
schools, a PRU that has 8 centres, Special Educational Resource
Facilities (SERFs) and some central support services. The 11 SERFs
include two that formalise the links between a mainstream and
a special school. The work of both these SERFs has been recognised
as very good practice by Ofsted. Although the benefits to both
staff and pupils have been enormous, in the majority of cases
the arrangements have not led to children from the special schools
transferring to the role of the mainstream school, as was originally
envisaged. Therefore, extra capacity in the special schools has
not been created to any great extent. Because the schools have
developed such good collaborative working arrangements, and have
been so creative in the way they have pursued this agenda, larger
numbers of children and staff have benefitted than was originally
envisaged, but this has taken up a lot of staff planning and travelling
time. These arrangements work both ways and constitute the sort
of model being proposed within the new role for special schools
agenda. However, the financial cost of such arrangements are high.
The funding formula uses the appropriate special school bandings,
with some additional money in recognition of the lack of economies
of scale. In addition to this, transport costs are soaring. Whether
the cost of transport between sites to allow access to the most
appropriate parts of the curriculum is met by the school or the
authority, it is huge and will continue to grow as the two-way
exchanges increase, particularly at K54.
Recognising inclusive schools
Three years ago Blackpool developed a process
by which local schools and settings could share and celebrate
their inclusive practice. This was an effort to recognise that
many of our schools and settings work very hard to improve outcomes
for pupils whose achievements are not always made obvious through
the publication of examination and national test results. We wanted
to identify and encourage innovative practice in removing barriers
to learning and participation and to this end the Blackpool Schools
Inclusion award was developed. Schools used a template to describe
aspects of their practice that had eg led to improved attendance
rates or engaged a child from a particularly vulnerable group
in an activity they had previously been excluded from or demonstrated
how they had adapted the curriculum to meet a particular child's
needs. Two schools received the award in the first year. Last
year and the year before, the Blackpool model was taken by the
NW and Greater Merseyside SEN Regional Partnerships and used as
the basis for regional recognition of how far schools and settings
have travelled on the journey towards more inclusive practice.
This year inclusive practice from participating schools from across
the 22 LEAs in the two regions was celebrated in a publication
with the work of seven Blackpool schools highlighted. We believe
that this work is vital and that some kind of inclusion kitemark
for schools and settings should be developed nationally. This
is not to suggest that schools should be required to submit evidence
or engage in a bureaucratic process. However, we feel that although
there are some efforts by Ofsted to check on inclusivity and inclusion
issues are being addressed by the national strategies, there is
a need to introduce a national benchmarking mechanism that will
enable schools like ours, who work creatively and successfully
with children living in some of the worst areas of deprivation
in the country, to be able to publicise their good work alongside
the outcomes of other national indicators.
Pupils who arrive in Blackpool with a statement
of SEN issued by another authority
An issue for some of our schools that accept
a higher than average number of non-routine admissions, is that
some children arrive with statements of SEN for high incidence
needs, such as MLD, SpLD or EBSD. These statements often specify
the number of support hours the child must receive. Blackpool
GSA delegated the money to meet these statemented needs to its
schools several years ago and there is therefore no centrally
retained funding with which to meet these requirements. It would
be very unusual for a statement to be issued to a child with SpLD,
MLD or EBSD whose needs could be met in a mainstream school in
Blackpool. Our schools often meet such needs through group arrangements
and interventions without the need for 1:1 support. However, they
find themselves required to attach specific teaching or support
hours to these children, often at the expense of much needier
children. This works against the notion of interpreting the SEN
Code of Practice within the context of the school, since the receiving
school is bound by the statutory nature of the statement to continue
to treat the child as if it were still in the context of its previous
school. The statement can, of course be amended through an annual
review, but this takes time and does involve cost. In addition,
parents are entitled to have their views taken into account and
altering the provision or ceasing to maintain the statement is
not straightforward.
Parental involvement
We recognise the value of working with parents
as partners. However, statistics show that Blackpool has higher
than average numbers of adults with mental health issues and drug
or alcohol problems. Coupled with this is the fact that few adults
in the town have experienced education at a higher level. Given
that we know that there is a link between social indicators and
performance of children in school, it is probably fair to say
that at least some of our children with SEN are likely to have
parents who are not the most capable of acting as informed advocates
for their child. This has implications for our children.
Provision for SEN pupils in mainstream schools:
availability of resources and expertise; different models of provision.
PROVISION FOR
SEN PUPILS IN
SPECIAL SCHOOLS
Raising standards of achievement for SEN pupils
It is recognised that there are strong links
between outcomes for children and socioeconomic prosperity. Blackpooll
was ranked 24th worst out of 354 districts on indices of multiple
deprivation. (2004 figures). 1,306 children transferred schools
in 2004-05. 4,409 children were eligible for free school meals.
System of statements of need for SEN pupils
Role of parents in decisions about their children's
education
It is generally understood that many parents
of children with SEN have special educational needs themselves.
We know that in Blackpool, levels of higher education of adults
living in all wards are lower than national average figures. There
are therefore likely to be many children with SEN in Blackpool
without strong parental advocacy.
How special educational needs are defined
Provision for different types of SEN, including
EBSD
Legislative framework for SEN provision and effects
of Disability Act 2001
February 2006
| 
