The SENDCO role in a mainstream school is invaluable, especially when supporting pupils with complex needs. External specialists can be equally as invaluable.
Are there times though when the presence of a specialist – the SENDCO, an Educational Psychologist – can delay teachers and TAs from making good decisions for pupils? In relation to the use of specialists within SEND, care must be taken to ensure colleagues are supported but not disempowered.
The importance of a referral
I’ve had many times in my career when I’ve been called in to offer expertise, whether as a SENDCO or when working across a MAT.
Seeking support should be encouraged. The earlier a colleague flags a concern, the earlier we can arrange intervention, informed by early identification. The problem though is with this idea that the expert carries a magic wand. It’s the magic wand approach that I feel needs addressing.
Delay delay delay
Think of a child who is struggling in their year 8 class. A teacher raises a concern to the SENDCO. The SENDCO gathers the information they need to make a referral to their local EP service. The external referral is seen and a date is arranged for the EP to come in and meet the child. The visit goes well and a report follows. The SENDCO arranges to meet the teacher who made the initial referral and supports them to implement the recommendations.
Even if that process goes smoothly, the process I describe above might take 3 months. For many overwhelmed SENDCOs and LA services, it might be far longer. But at least we’re now giving some good advice to the teacher who requested support.
The recommendations
Look at a list of recommendations sent by a really excellent Educational Psychologist, for a boy in Upper Key Stage 2 (anonymised):
- Continued close liaison between home and school to support (pupil’s) emotional needs and ensure consistent transference of strategies
- Further exploration and intervention to support his reasoning skills
- Continued support and intervention to ‘catch up’ on his numeracy skills and literacy skills, especially his writing/recording skills
- Access to a social-emotional learning curriculum, for example an individualised emotional literacy programme such as ELSA
- Availability of a significant, consistent adult to deliver and review interventions and to prompt their use in class and in other contexts as appropriate
This is an excellent list. It has accurately captured his difficulties and suggested appropriate responses. But is there anything there that the school couldn’t have concluded themselves, if given the time and space to formulate such a plan? Is there anything in there worth waiting 3 months for?
Using our EPs differently
This blog isn’t looking to criticise Educational Psychologists, or any external specialist colleague working with young people with SEND. In every school I’ve worked in, I’ve ensured we have a budget to purchase additional EP days, such is the value of their partnership and their importance in the SEND system.
But we need to appreciate our own expertise as educationalists. Teachers and TAs need to feel they can notice what a child needs (or no longer needs) in a classroom and adapt their support accordingly. Similarly, SENDCOs need to feel skilled enough to quickly identify a challenge for a child, working with the family and young person at all times, and plan a response accordingly.
This approach will allow us to use our EPs in a way that provides greater capacity to drive outcomes for all pupils, especially our pupils with SEND. By valuing our own expertise, we can use EPs to share evidence-informed interventions, to deliver staff training, to audit our provision or to supervise and guide SENDCOs. We can use them to provide surgeries for staff, advice for parents and guidance to principals.
Intelligent trial and error
Getting it right for pupils doesn’t suddenly become easy – we’re still not possessing a magic wand – but it relies on our ability to implement ‘intelligent trial and error’; the ability to take the information we have, to try the most appropriate response, and to monitor its impact. What in SEND we often call the ‘assess-plan-do-review’ cycle.
Our ability to make informed and accurate decisions may come from:
- What has worked for this pupil before, and which we need to try again;
- What has worked for other pupils, and may work for this pupil;
- What the evidence shows has worked for other pupils (and other similar pupils, where possible), and may work for this pupil;
- What an external specialist recommends.
To talk of ‘error’ may sound flippant, especially to the families of children with SEND. No colleague ever wants their practice to be strewn with errors. The presence of specialist colleagues – whether an in-school SENDCO or an external Educational Psychologist – can help to reduce these errors, but it must never prevent teachers and TAs from reflecting on their own practice and making changes accordingly, in a timely manner, without always seeking external guidance.
It’s this ongoing cycle of reflection and amendment, from colleagues who reflect on their practice constantly, that will ultimately lead to better outcomes for pupils.
SEND Matters 