Education CommitteeWritten evidence submitted by Christopher Robertson
Written evidence submitted by Christopher Robertson, lecturer in Special Educational Needs and Inclusion, School of Education, College of Social Sciences, University of Birmingham. This evidence is submitted in a personal capacity.
Key Points
1. The purpose, roles and responsibilities of school governing bodies, particularly mainstream maintained, academy and Free schools, should be strengthened in relation to special educational needs (SEN).
2. Recent policy developments pertaining to school governance could significantly weaken the quality of SEN governance.
3. It is imperative, in light of other government policy initiatives focusing on reforming the SEN “system” in England, that school governing bodies have strengthened roles and responsibilities in relation to SEN leadership in schools. This should involved providing well informed “support and challenge” to school leaders and the special educational needs coordinators (SENCOs). This is particularly important for schools no longer directly accountable to local authorities.
4. Good SEN governance should have a vital role to play—as part of a “local offer”—in enhancing parental confidence with regard to the provision made available for children and young people with special educational needs.
5. With the proposed introduction of a new “single school-based” category of SEN (to replace School Action and School Action Plus) in 2014 and the increased delegation of SEN funding to schools without clear ring fencing, governing bodies should have a clear role to play in determining and monitoring the appropriate expenditure of SEN funding. This role should also encompass the use of Pupil Premium funding (a significant amount of this is likely to be targeted at pupils with SEN who also qualify for Free school meals).
6. Any changes to governance should include a careful consideration of implications for pupils with SEN and their families. A positive response to this challenge would be to introduce a formal requirement for governing bodies to designate an SEN governor with appropriate experience and training.
The rest of this submission provides relevant background information to current SEN governance arrangements in mainstream schools and the pivotal role of SENCOs.
It also includes a response to proposals aimed at streamlining and improving governance from an SEN perspective*
Current Guidance for School Governors in Mainstream Schools: SEN Provision and the Role of the SENCO
School governors have a responsibility to ensure that SEN provision in their schools is effective and in accord with regulations introduced in 2009. These require that:
SENCOs are appropriately qualified;
governing bodies determine the leadership and management responsibilities of SENCOs; and
governing bodies determine the key responsibilities of SENCOs.
Governors are also required also required to monitor the effectiveness of the SENCO.
On 1 September 2009 the government introduced formal regulations designed to clarify and strengthen the role of SENCOs in community, foundation, voluntary and maintained nursery schools in England. These regulations were introduced following the expression of concerns to a parliamentary Education and Skills Committee about the status of SENCOs and the employment of support staff rather than teachers in the role. The background to the SENCO regulations is summarised as follows:
Until 2008 there had been a presumption, but no unequivocally clear requirement, in the SEN Code of Practice or elsewhere that those carrying lead responsibility for SENCO functions should be qualified teachers. The then Education and Skills Committee’s 2006 report on special education in England recorded a number of concerns about the role and status of SENCOs and recommended that:
SENCOs should in all cases be qualified teachers;
they should be in a senior management position in the school, as suggested by the SEN Code of Practice; and
SENCOs should be properly trained.
In their response to the Select Committee (October 2006), government ministers declared their intention to make regulations relating to the role, responsibilities, experience and training required of SENCOs and gave specific commitments to introduce a requirement that SENCOs should be qualified teachers. Section 173 of the Education and Inspections Act 2006 amended the SEN provisions of the Education Act 1996 to require governing bodies of community, foundation, voluntary and maintained nursery schools to designate a member of staff as the person responsible for co-ordinating SEN provision for pupils. It also provided a power to make regulations requiring those governing bodies to ensure that SENCOs have prescribed qualifications or prescribed experience, or both, and conferring on them other functions relating to SENCOs.
Who can be a SENCO?
The regulations require that the SENCO has to be either:
a qualified teacher working as a teacher in the school (and who has successfully completed an induction period where this is required); and
the head teacher or appointed acting head teacher.
When introduced the regulations also stipulated that a person carrying out the role of SENCO for at least six months prior to 31 August 2009, who would be taking steps to become a qualified teacher prospect of becoming qualified by 1 September 2011could continue in post.
The regulations did not, when first introduced, apply to academy schools, but requirements have now been “extended” to encompass academies that have signed a funding agreement after September 2011and Free schools. This means that academies and Free schools must employ a SENCO with qualified teacher status (QTS).
Senior Leadership
The regulations also require that a school governing body determines the role of the SENCO in relation to the leadership and management. However, this does not mean that the SENCO must be a member of the school’s senior leadership team (SLT). In an advice note accompanying the regulations, it was suggested that, where the SENCO is not a member of the SLT, a member of the team should be “designated champion of SEN and disability issues”. This person should liaise with the SENCO. Importantly, guidance about SENCO leadership status and the role of an SEN and disability champion is advisory and not part of the regulation. Ultimately, such matters should be decided by headteachers and governing bodies.
SENCO Responsibilities
In addition to clarifying the leadership role of the SENCO, a school governing must determine the key responsibilities and monitor the effectiveness of the SENCO. The regulations include indicative guidance on what key tasks a SENCO may need to carry out, but this is not intended to be prescriptive, nor does it impose any legal obligations on SENCOs. Rather, its purpose is to assist governing bodies in identifying with SENCOs which responsibilities the SENCO will carry out or arrange to be carried out, “reflecting the way that posts operate in practice”. Dimensions of the SENCO role: guidance for governors can be summarised as follows:
The key responsibilities of the SENCO, as determined by the school’s governing body, may include the carrying out, or arranging for the carrying out, of the following tasks:
(a)
(b)
identifying the pupil’s special educational needs,
co-ordinating the making of special educational provision for the pupil which meets those needs,
monitoring the effectiveness of any special educational provision made for the pupil,
securing relevant services for the pupil where necessary,
ensuring that records of the pupil’s special educational needs and the special educational provision made to meet those needs are maintained and kept up to date,
liaising with and providing information to a parent of the pupil on a regular basis about that pupil’s special educational needs and the special educational provision being made for those needs,
ensuring that, where the pupil transfers to another school or educational institution, all relevant information about the pupil’s special educational needs and the special educational provision made to meet those needs is conveyed to the governing body or (as the case may be) the proprietor of that school or institution, and
promoting the pupil’s inclusion in the school community and access to the school’s curriculum, facilities and extra-curricular activities;
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
Governing Body SEN Responsibilities
As the current SEN Code of Practice (paras 1.16–1.22) makes clear, governing bodies have an important strategic role in improving outcomes for children with SEN. This means taking a close interest in what the SENCO is doing and in the range of SEN represented at the school. This is likely to happening in most schools as part of normal good practice.
The monitoring requirement in the regulations is not intended to be onerous to governing bodies. In practical terms, it could be met by relatively straightforward steps. For example by the governors:
considering reports to the governing body from the head teacher reflecting the activities of the SENCO and any current issues;
considering reports from the member of the senior leadership team designated as champion of SEN and disability issues;
holding regular discussions between a designated SEN governor (or SEN committee) and the SENCO; and
inviting the SENCO to attend meetings at regular intervals to report in person.
SENCO Training Regulations
This evidence submission has summarised the The Education (Special Educational Needs Co-ordinators) (England) Regulations 2008 (N. 2945). These “Principal” regulations focus on the required qualifications for SENCOs and the responsibility of school governing bodies in relation to the leadership and management role, and key responsibilities of SENCOs. When these came into force on 1 September 2009 they were introduced with The Education (Special Educational Needs Co-coordinators) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2009 (No. 1387). This second set of regulations outlined training requirements for SENCOs, with particular reference to those new to the role.
The now defunct Training Development Agency for Schools (TDA) was commissioned by the government to develop a specification for the new training programmed, the National Award for SEN Coordination, to be delivered by a range of providers including local authorities, universities and private organizations. A key requirement of the training specification was that it should involve a partnership approach that made links between school, local authority and national matters pertaining to the strategic role of the SENCO. It was designed to be taught at Masters Degree level and to focus on the development of professional practice.
For school governors, the effect of the “training” regulations is that they need to ensure that the teacher designated as the SENCO in their school holds the National Award for SEN Coordination This applies to:
a SENCO at the school who has not been the SENCO at that, or any other maintained school for a total period of more than twelve months before 1 September 2009 (the date when the regulations came into force), or
A teacher who subsequently becomes designated SENCO at the school and who has not previously been the SENCO at that or any other school for a total period of more than twelve months.
A teacher to whom the above applies cannot continue to be designated as the SENCO at a school unless they have been awarded the qualification within three years of appointment for those appointed as SENCO after 1 September 2009.
Governors need to note that the training requirements are clearly aimed at teachers coming new to the SENCO role. This will be important when, for example, a school is seeking to appoint a new SENCO. Already, some schools are advertising post for SENCOs with a relevant qualification. Others will need to clarify training expectations when interviewing candidates for a SENCO post and express their commitment to supporting a newly appointed to SENCO who is required to gain the National Award qualification within three years of taking up their post. During the past two and a half years the TDA has funded places for new to role SENCOs to participate in the National Award programmed, and this includes SENCOs in academies, and more recently, Free schools. Whether the newly established Teaching Agency will be in a position to provide this level of financial support in the future is not yet clear and will depend on direction given by the government and the funding that the Department for Education makes available.
Experienced SENCOs, appointed prior to the introduction of new training requirements, are not affected by these when they are transferring schools. They may, however, wish to gain the National Award qualification, with a view to updating their knowledge and skills. Unlike new to role SENCOs, experienced SENCOs have not, to date, been eligible for a TDA grant to fund their participation in the training programme.
Special Schools and Pupil Referral Units
Special schools are not covered by the regulations outlined in this article. Nor are pupil referral units (PRUs). This does not prevent a special school governing body from designating a member of the teaching staff as having SEN co-ordinating responsibilities if they consider that is appropriate. PRUs may also wish to appoint a SENCO. Both special schools and PRUs may wish to encourage a designated SENCO to gain the National Award qualification. To date, SENCOs working in these settings have not been eligible for funding to participate in the training programme. However, this will change in 2012–13 when teachers in PRUs will be eligible for funding.
A Caution
The overview of SENCO regulations and their implications for school governors, headteachers and SENCOs in this article, is based on an interpretation of the regulations and is not intended to be definitive. It is also worth noting that changes to education legislation under the current government, as it seeks to diversify school provision, may yet have knock-on effects for any revised version of the SENCO regulations. For example, might training requirements be removed to reduce costs, or extended to enhance SEN teaching in PRUs? Will any formal monitoring of the regulations be introduced to ensure that they are being adhered to in maintained schools, academies and Free schools?
SEND governance: a stronger or weaker future?
The tradition of voluntary based school governance is regarded as outmoded by some influential commentators.
If this is the case, what are the implications for special educational needs and disability governance in schools?
Ofsted’s chief inspector of schools, Sir Michael Wilshaw thinks that school leadership and management could be improved if governors hold leadership teams to account. To ensure this happens he also thinks that the secretary of state for education should consider introducing paid governance for any schools that move into a requirement to improve category. This recommendation is not reflected in the current inspection framework and evaluation schedule introduced in January 2012, but could be incorporated into a revised version in the not too distant future. Inspection schedules do not stay on the books for long, particularly when a new chief inspector is appointed and keen to mark their arrival! In the meantime, is reasonable to expect that inspectors, have been told, during training and professional updating to scrutinise school governance. What will this mean in practice, and are there any specific special educational needs and disability (SEND) issues that we need to be aware of?
Leadership, SEND and Governance
As SENCOs and school leaders know, the quality of school leadership and management is a key judgement made during school inspections. When making this judgement inspectors must consider whether the school’s leadership, including, where relevant, the governing body, are meeting key criteria. This means, for example, that school leaders will need to meet criteria pertaining to the provision “of a broad and balanced curriculum that: meets the needs of all pupils” and “enables all pupils to achieve their full educational potential and make progress in their learning.”
Guidance for inspectors states that they should focus on how effectively leadership and management at all levels in a school enables pupils to overcome specific barriers to learning and how effectively it the promotes improvements for all pupils and groups of pupils in the context of the individual school. This means that they are likely to look closely at the ways in which a school:
identifies disabled pupils and those who have special educational needs and those who have other significant disadvantages;
supports disabled pupils and those who have special educational needs and those who have other significant disadvantages; and
ensures disabled pupils and those who have special educational needs and those who have other significant disadvantages make optimum progress.
This priority focus on disability, special educational needs and educational disadvantage highlights the importance of provision for a range of vulnerable learners as central to a school’s core purposes and the way in which it defines success. It also emphasises the importance of the SENCO’s role as one that involves strategic leadership and management responsibilities.
Just as importantly, this focus requires that a school governing body takes its SEND responsibilities seriously. Inspectors will evaluate how effective it is in relation to the way that it “acts as a critical friend and holds senior leaders to account for all aspect of the school’s performance.” This raises the issue of how well placed governors are, to challenge and support SENCOs and school leaders in the development of effective SEND provision in their schools. Do they, for example, know what good SEND provision looks like, and what constitutes optimum progress for pupils with a wide range of learning difficulties?
The National Governors Association (NGA) has a partial answer to these questions. Although it rejects the chief inspector’s idea that some or all governors should be paid, it does think that remuneration is important and that strengthened arrangements should be put in place so that all employers can give governors time off with pay. It also wants to make sure that governors’ expenses are fully met. The NGA would rather any available funding that might be earmarked for paid governance should be used to support more appropriate activity and the provision of training for governors in particular. This call for better training to support 300,000 governors in over 24,600 schools across the country is crucial. Of course, the NGA is commenting on training in general, but there is also a need to ensure that SEND specific training opportunities are available to governors. There is an argument that these should be mandatory for any governor taking lead responsibility for SEND provision in a school, but this might cause difficulties in small schools where governors may have multiple responsibilities. This raises a bigger issue about the future of governance.
Rethinking SEND Governance
Writing in the Times Education Supplement earlier this year (“Do-gooder governors must do better”, 24 February 2012), former schools minister Jim Knight argued in favour of introducing professionally recruited governing bodies, with paid members, who work across a group of schools organised in “hard federations” with a single governing body. In arguing this case, he noted that the “move [for schools] from local authorities is now unstoppable”. Not everyone will agree with this view, but the influence of local authorities is certainly on the wane in many parts of the country, and because of cuts to some of their key services, the capacity to provide good quality SEND governor training is likely to be under threat.
The NGA may be able to help governing bodies through the provision of advice and guidance but is unlikely to be able to offer SEND training for governors that is also tailored to the needs of specific schools and local contexts.
It would be helpful if the Department for Education could give consideration to this matter and look at ways that ensure the future quality of SEN governance in schools through the ring fenced funding provided to local authorities or a voluntary and community sector organisation with appropriate credentials, such as the NGA. Leaving matters to chance, or letting the growing number of academy schools determine the kind of SEND governor training that they want is unlikely to be fruitful.
* This section of the written evidence submission draws on material in two recent articles. References are as follows:
Robertson, C (2012) “SENCO guidance for school governors”, SENCO Update, 136 (June) 10–12.
Robertson, C (2012) “SEND governance: a stronger or weaker future for schools”, SENCO Update. 138 (September), 11.
December 2012