Special Educational Needs Self Evaluation Form 2008 - 2009
The School: As of November 2008, Blandford St Mary had 154 pupils on roll and 44 (28%) of these were on the SEN register. Out of these pupils 27 (18%) were at School Action Plus and 17 (11%) were at School Action. The proportion of SEN pupils is significantly above the national average which was 18% in 2007. There is a wide range of needs in our SEN pupils, with no one need being more predominant than the others. These needs include:
Specific Learning Difficulties (SLD) Emotional, Behavioural Difficulties (EBD) Literacy Difficulties (supported by SENSS) Numeracy Difficulties (supported by SENSS) Speech and Language Difficulties (SALT) Specific Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties (SEBD) ADHD ASD
As of November 2008, the school has added 8 children (5.2%) to the SEN register. This is a lower percentage of children being added to the SEN register compared to last academic year, which was 10 children (18.1%). The slight fall in children on roll will play some part of this but it is also due to the development and implementation of our school provision map. It has allowed us, as a school and as professionals, to map our provision and the provision we are offering individual children. It has provided us with a more focused approach to what provision children are already receiving and where they should be in the CoP. Any movement between the CoP stages has been a direct result of implementing the provision map, following the provision and where necessary moving onto the next wave. However, from the SEN register it is clear that there has been movement between the CoP stages and this is directly due to assessments being introduced such as ‘Move To Learn, Learn to Move’, which has enabled us to create a more effective provision for those children. As well as this, 16 children have been removed from the SEN register, due to moving school or transferring to The Blandford School. Despite this, we currently have no system in place to monitor the number of children entering or leaving the school who are on our SEN list. This will be addressed throughout this year so that we have a clearer picture. In addition to this, we have no looked after children and one traveller child. 1.9% of our pupils do not have English as a first language and 3.9% (national average 7.9%) are children from ethnic minority groups. Both of these figures have increased over the past 3 years and are significantly lower than the national averages. There are currently no children with a statement at the school. Views of Learners, Parents/Carers and other Stakeholders Parents/carers are given a chance to discuss their child's IEP once a term and the child. The targets are discussed and new targets are shared. Teachers and the SENCO are also available to discuss these more than once if necessary throughout each term. Feedback from these occasions shows that they are satisfied with the provision made from children with SEN. However, to improve the provisions of SEN it would be useful to ascertain a clearer picture from all involved – including the children and governors so that the school can build on their successes and work at developing the areas of improvement. As a school we value feedback from the services we use and most importantly parents/careers and the children themselves. Some examples of these are: • Regular conversations with parents to ascertain and discuss problems • Encouraging parents to explain family history which resulted in a mental health referral • Our SENSS link has observed our SENSS TA delivering a 1:1 session resulting in feedback and strategies to improve the delivery • Children complaining that they could not see the board – this was followed with a discussion with the parents and an optician’s test Achievement and Standards This data has been taken from our Tracking and Forecasting from the end of the summer term 2007 to the end of the summer term 2008 as we are part way through this academic year. The average points progress for a child is two sub levels, which is equivalent to 4 points. However, this is aspirational, and this is important to consider when discussing the progress of SEN children who find aspects of learning and progress more difficult than the majority of their peers. Year One: SEN stage
Number of Children
Average Points Progress in Writing
Average Points Progress in Reading
Average Points Progress in Maths
Action
3
2.00
2.67
3.33
Action Plus
4
3.33
3.33
4.67
Children at school action have made below average progress in both writing and reading and slightly below average in maths. The children at school action + have made slightly below average progress in writing and reading and slightly above average progress in maths. Year Two: SEN stage
Number of Children
Average Points Progress in Writing
Average Points Progress in Reading
Average Points Progress in Maths
Action
4
3.71
6.29
6.00
Action Plus
8
5.00
5.25
5.00
Children at school action have made slightly below progress in writing and above average progress in both reading and maths. The average point progress of these is very high. Why is this? The children at school action + have made above average progress in all three subjects. Year Three: SEN stage
Number of Children
Average Points Progress in Writing
Average Points Progress in Reading
Average Points Progress in Maths
Action
2
2.00
3.00
3.00
Action Plus
4
3.75
2.00
2.00
Children at school action have made below average progress in writing and slightly below average progress in both reading and maths. It is a reversal for children at school action + as slightly below average progress has been made in writing and below average progress in reading and maths. Year Four: SEN stage
Number of Children
Average Points Progress in Writing
Average Points Progress in Reading
Average Points Progress in Maths
Action
1
4.00
4.00
2.00
Action Plus
4
3.00
3.00
4.50
The school action children have made slightly above average progress in both writing and reading, where as below average progress has been made in maths. For the children at school action +, slightly below average progress has been made in both writing and reading and slightly above average progress has been made in maths. Year Five: SEN stage
Number of Children
Average Points Progress in Writing
Average Points Progress in Reading
Average Points Progress in Maths
Action
5
4.50
3.50
2.00
Action Plus
2
3.33
3.33
2.00
The children at school action have made slightly above average progress in writing, where as they have made slightly below average progress in reading. In maths, below average progress has been made. For the children at school action +, slightly below average progress has been made in both writing and reading and for maths, below average progress has been made. Year Six: SEN stage
Number of Children
Average Points Progress in Writing
Average Points Progress in Reading
Average Points Progress in Maths
Action
8
2.75
2.44
3.00
Action Plus
3
2.00
5.00
For children at school action, below average progress has been made in reading and writing and slightly below average progress has been made for maths. For the school action + children, below average progress has been made in writing and slightly above average progress has been made in maths. Writing: Yr 1, 2 and 3: SA has less points progress than SA+ Yr 4, 5 and 6: SA has more points progress than SA+ This year, there is a key stage split between the average points progress. Throughout the year, key stage 1 and Year 3 have had more progress with their school action + children. This would suggest that there is more provision in place that support writing at an earlier age. For example: letter and sounds, active time (OT scheme they follow), OT based activities and writing corners/tables. These skills and interventions help children to hold the pencil correctly and form letters, improve spelling and prepare them to become writers. All important personalised skills to support writing. However, in key stage 2 there has been less progress at the school action + stage. This would suggest that the support to help these specific children is not in place as it is in key stage 1. Even though the children are older, if they haven’t acquired the skills at a younger age then the gap between the school action + children and their peers will widen if the support is not in place at key stage 2. Therefore, an area for development at key stage 2 is the progress of our school action + writers. The school will need to look at intervention and support that can be implemented as well as developing key skills as in key stage 1 that help to support our writers. However, it is also important to remember that the school action children at key stage 1 are not making as much progress. Perhaps key stage 1 need to look at their provision for these children as well as continuing the provision for school action +. Maths: Yr 1, 4 and 6: SA lower than SA+ Yr 2 and 3: SA higher than SA+ Yr 5: no discrepancy There is no distinctive pattern within the yearly points progress which suggests that the approaches across the school are perhaps not consistent. It raises some questions that would be interesting to investigate over the year. These questions are: •
• • • •
Is there an implication for how maths is assessed? How are SA+ being targeted more effectively in some classes? How are SA are being targeted more effectively in some classes? Are children having 1:1 session applying their skills in everyday maths? Are our intervention strategies inconsistent across the school?
For more information please see the SEN Development Plan, which is kept in the SEN file in Reflection Base. Reading: Yr 2, 3, 4 and 5: SA has more points progress than SA+ Yr 1: SA has less points progress than SA+ This would suggest that there is more support in place for the children at school action. For example: daily reading, toe by toe and Fat Sam’s spelling, which supports reading. It also suggests that the identification of children at the school action stage for reading is easier for staff and therefore, support and intervention can be put in place. This also suggests that our provision at the school action is effective. Throughout the year, there has been less progress at the school action + stage, except for year 1. This would suggest that our means of identification and provision for reading is not as efficient or effective as it should be. Last year, the introduction of Rapid Readers as an intervention was successful in Year 4, but it has so far been unsuccessful as the program is unreliable. One means of identification is to test children’s reading ages throughout the academic year as this will not only identify the children in need but also allow us to measure the effectiveness of the interventions. This will need to be an area for development this academic year.
On the basis of our evaluation, the key priorities for development are:
To ascertain a clear picture of our parents/carers, pupils and stakeholders views on our provisions of SEN To explore, research and trial reading interventions at the school action + stage To explore, research and trial writing interventions at the school action + stage in key stage 2 To evaluate and develop the interventions at the school action stage in key stage 1 To develop and use intervention programs in Numeracy to support children with concepts and strategies. To develop staff's confidence at implementing the intervention strategies for these children To develop a system of regular reading and spelling age tests to inform teachers and the SENCo of areas of need and possible implications To develop the provision map to measure the effectiveness of the strategies being used for a specific child To develop the areas of need highlighted through creating and using the provision map To develop a means of recording entrance, exit and movement of children on our SEN CoP list
Personal Development and Well Being The school considers that personal development and well being as good. At Blandford St Mary we monitor the development of pupils' behaviour, emotional and social development through:
• • • •
Positive reinforcement and praise Taking time to build relationships with the children so that we can read their body language to detect issues Observations by the teacher or TA Playing games and gauging their responses and actions to these Discuss observations with parents to receive a fuller picture Informal conversations with the children throughout the day Implementing and teaching the SEAL project Circle time in class Discussion of SEN children of concern weekly Use of sticker charts to promote positive behaviour Behaviour charts Using an ABC record form to log behaviours and needs Implementing time with the EBD TA EBD recording sheet to log the objectives/activities/discussion with the child. Creating discussion time with the EBD TA to discuss progress, targets and activities
The overall attendance rates are good and there have been no exclusions of SEN children. Neither have there been any exclusions of for children in vulnerable groups. There have been no racist incidents this year and this compares with no racist incidents from the previous year. On the basis of our evaluation, the key priorities for development are:
To develop the recording sheets so that they can be filled in and accessed on our Intranet (BLASMA). This will enable a more effective approach to keeping and maintaining the records.
The Quality of Provision The school's self evaluation indicates that the quality of teaching for pupils with SEN is good overall. Areas of need are identified early and strategies and interventions are put in place. Parents/carers are informed and their input is valued. Provision maps and IEPs are written at the beginning of
every term and the targets shared with the parent /carer. The targets are created by the teacher and at times, IEPs from outside agencies are provided as well. To ensure that children with multiple IEPs do not have too many targets to achieve, the IEPs are collated and monitored regularly. At Blandford St Mary Primary School provision maps and IEPs are viewed as working documents and members of staff annotate and date targets, observations as well as recording additional targets if needed. To ensure that these targets are being met the class teacher and class TA discuss progress with the SEN TAs on a regular basis. Time in the timetabling has been allowed for this. As already mentioned, we have implemented a provision map which has helped to map the provision we have in place for SEN children. This has also formed our IEP at the school action stage. As this is the first term we have used the provision map, it is constantly being adapted for use as well as identifying areas of our provision that need improving. The new SEN room has been completed and provides a light, airy space for our two SEN TAs to work in. There are displays being created in the room that clearly reflects the work that takes place with the children and there is also a quite corner with hanging curtains and cushions. There is the facility to play music and 2 laptops – one for our SpLd TA and one for our OT/EBD TA. This means that the children can use ICT based programmes to enhance and enrich their learning experience, although neither is yet networked. The SEN room has also enabled us to have all of the class SEN folders in one place, with all reports, IEPs and notes in one place. This has improved the consistency and availability of the information for members of staff. It also enables the SEN TAs to record and annotate IEPs only once, as opposed to twice. There is also an SEN audit on BLASMA, which details the resources found at the time of the move to the new building. This will be continually updated and hopefully provide a starting point for members of staff when teaching or working with SEN children. We have 2 qualified T.A s that specialise in SEN. One who works with OT and EBD pupils and the other who works with children who have difficulties with Numeracy and Literacy skills. The recording of our SEN work has developed over the past year and both SEN TAs have trialled and feedback on a selection of different forms. As a result of this feedback, they are now recording the session objectives, outcomes and any possible areas of concern. These are then used to help inform the discussion regarding a child’s progress with the teacher and TA. However, to develop this further, it is felt that these forms would be more effective on our Intranet system so that the teachers and TAs can access them quickly when needed. This would also mean that there would only be 1 form per child detailing their support sessions (should they have more that one form of support) rather than 2 or 3 different forms. SpLd: These children are assessed by the SENSS service, who visits the school at least every 2/3 weeks. The provision provided by SENSS includes the assessment of children as well as discussing SENSS IEPs with our TA, sharing different strategies and resources and feeding back test results and scores. Once assessed, these children work with our SpLd TA on a 1:1 basis, 2 or 3 times a week and are monitored and re assessed at 6 monthly intervals. The school has developed a feedback time for members of staff during assembly time with our SpLd TA to ensure the IEP targets are being met and the SENCo and the SENSS team have developed a feedback time when it is needed. Progress? OT: Children who are identified by staff or outside agencies to have gross or fine motor difficulties are assessed on the ‘Move to Learn, Learn to Move’ programme. This enables our OT TA to assess their level of need (green, amber or red) and then deliver a specific IEP, targeting areas of need. These children are re assessed every term and if no progress in made after 2 terms, a referral can be made to The Children’s Centre in Dorchester. The school runs small OT groups – two gross motor skills and two fine motor skills. The children take part in activities that develop their fine and gross motor skills, which are designed to be fun as well as effective. EBD: Children who demonstrate needs in EBD above Wave 1 are given TA support in a 1:1 basis. They are given a chance to talk about their feelings and take part in activities that are fun and creative using lots of different ideas. Throughout this year, the school hopes to develop a means of measuring the effectiveness of this provision so that strengths and weaknesses can be identified and improved. The school is also very lucky to have a group of dedicated and hard working TA s. Their quality of the provision is good and they work alongside the teachers to help the children to be confident and positive in their abilities. The TA s provision includes:
Small focused groups in Literacy and Numeracy Small focused groups in other subjects such as Science or PE Small groups for letters and sounds Working with identified children on support programs such as ELS 1:1 programs of work in the classroom such as SALT 1:1 work with an IEP Daily Reading with identified children Building confidence with pupils EBD support for individual children Support for focusing and ensuring the children are concentrating in class TA training by our Educational Psychologist (Precision training, Social stories and general SEN terms and knowledge) Time, energy and good will!
The school received £48, 448 in its budget for SEN and there is a further £2,000 to support the buying of resources. On the basis of our evaluation, the key priorities for development are: • Ensure that the discussion and feedback time is continuing for staff and TAs • To develop the recording sheets so that they can be filled in and accessed on our Intranet (BLASMA). This will enable a more effective approach to keeping and maintaining the records • To network the laptops in the SEN room to enable children to use online resources • To network the laptops in the SEN room to enable use of BLASMA and online recording • To explore and develop the use of an EBD assessment tool to ensure our provision is effective • To ensure that training received from outside agencies or from INSET are implemented in the classroom • To implement the Inclusion Development Programme to help raise staff awareness to specific difficulties, possible indicators and possible teaching strategies. Impact of Support from External Agencies: The school receives additional support for pupils with SEN and in other vulnerable groups from a number of LEA external agencies. These are: • The Behaviour Support Service
The Educational Psychological Service The Occupational Therapy Service The Speech and Language Therapy Service SENSS County Hospitals EAL Case Worker from DCC Outreach worker from Yewstock school School Nurse School Doctor Educational Welfare Youth Inclusion Programme (YISP) Horizons (Social Service Family Service) The Forum School Child and Adolescent Mental Heath Team (CAMHS team)
The school judges the support from the external agencies to be satisfactory as some agencies are not as efficient as others that we work with. Examples of this include:
Agencies loosing forms meaning that we have to re refer
Lack of communication between clinics and the school so we don’t know what has been discussed or achieved Work to support the IEP do not appear to support the needs of the child Re assessments taking a long time to be set up Reports not being sent to the parents
However, despite this some of the agencies are more than satisfactory with regular communication between the agency, the SENCo and the parents. Examples of this include:
Meeting with parents and the class teacher to discuss the issues Offering training to staff (Precision teaching, Social stories) Offering informal discussions with the class teacher to discuss worries, concerns and issues with specific children Offering observations of ASD classes/children Forms being received before the assessment is due which leads to a more effective assessment Reports being sent out within a short period of time which enables work to begin with the child.
Leadership and Management The school uses a range of approaches to track the achievement of pupils with SEN in the school. These include:
Tracking and Forecasting Analysis of the termly tracking and forecasting Class Profiles Salford reading test Spelling age test Regular assessment of small focused group work Use of behaviour and sticker charts to monitor behaviour Identifying target groups of children and monitoring their progress Discussion time with SEN staff to share and monitor IEPs Use of this discussion time to set new targets if appropriate Analysis of Summative tests Discussion time with outside agencies IEPs are discussed with parents and the child on a termly basis IEPs are monitored and notes recorded on the IEP
As mentioned earlier, we have implemented a provision map for the first time this year and this has helped map out the provisions for SEN across the school. It is also extremely helpful in identifying areas of need such as a reading recovery scheme at school action + and maths interventions at school action. The provision map has also identified areas of need for our resources. Through this provision map, the school will be able to identify and monitor the strategies we offer children. On the basis of our evaluation the key priorities for development are:
•
To identify and review strategies in place to monitor their effectiveness
•
To identify areas of need and resources on the provision map
•
To explore intervention strategies identified for the areas of need
•
To make sure that staff effectively use the comparative data that is generated from tracking and forecasting
Statutory Requirements and Policies: The school has regard to the Special Educational Needs Code of Practice meeting learners' learning difficulties and/or disabilities and uses staged approaches o provision
The school meet the requirements of the Special Educational Needs and Disability Act 2001 The school makes its policy and arrangements for SEN known to parents The school reports annually to parents on the success of its SEN policy and the progress made by improving accessibility The school has a written policy to improve accessibility which was last reviewed in The school has a written policy and procedures for dealing with the education of children with medical needs which was last reviewed in The school has a behaviour policy and policy for developing health and well being which addresses the needs of pupils with BESD which was last reviewed in The school has a Race Equality Policy and has developed an action plan The school has an up to date Child Protection Policy
Written by Rachel King SENCo December 2008 Shared and Adopted by Governors add date: February 2009