|
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
| About the GTC | |
| Registration | |
| Standards and regulation | |
 |
GTC Networks |
 |
Achieve |
|
Connect |
|
Get involved |
|
Learn from each other |
|
Access resources |
|
Find out what's happening nationally |
|
Engage |
| Teacher Learning Academy | |
| Continuing professional development | |
| Policy | |
| Research | |
| Parents | |
| Events | |
| News and features | |
| GTC Publications | |
| Teaching: the GTC magazine | |
| Video section | |
| Useful websites | |
| Find out what themes emerged from the literature search and the practice examples. These findings will help us make sure that GTC policy is informed by the professional voice of teachers. |
The CPD for SEN project considers what kind of professional education and development is needed by teachers in mainstream schools if they are to teach effectively and personalise learning for pupils with special educational needs (SEN).
This project is designed to complement other projects in this field, for example, the National Strategies, Initial Teacher Training pilots run by the Training and Development Agency for Schools (TDA) and other work being undertaken by the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF).
This briefing paper reports on the first strand of project. It reviews current evidence and practice through analysis and comparison of:
Evidence was collected through literature searches and school visits. The literature search was done in three sweeps. The first used search terms including: SEN; special education and teaching; teacher effectiveness and special needs students; career development; teaching skills and special needs; special education and mainstreaming.
A second sweep used the search terms: access to education; conductive education; individualised methods; outreach programmes; specialists; special schools and inclusion. The final search used medical databases to search for learning difficulties and causes; dyslexia and causes; dyspraxia and symptoms.
Evidence on the CPD practices of 10 schools supporting the development of SEN and disabilities expertise and its distribution within these schools was collected and analysed before comparing these with the outcomes of the literature search and analysis.
The main finding from this comparison is that similar themes emerged in both the literature review and CPD practice in schools. This suggests that the development of effective practice in schools and the findings of research are well aligned. However, as with the chicken and the egg - we cannot tell whether the research or the practice comes first.
The emerging themes for CPD for SEN are:
In schools this is characterised by head teachers presenting a strong statement on the ethos of the school in terms of inclusion and having regard to the moral purpose of education. Evidence from the visits suggests that this ‘vision and ethos’ is realised through strong positive policies and practices, for example, the use of inclusive language in displays and documents, and evidence of distributed leadership and expertise across the whole staff in relation to SEN and disabilities.
Effective teaching and learning for all children and young people is seen as central to developing an inclusive school. A holistic approach, with clear communication between professionals, is used particularly for those with SEN and disabilities.
Similar themes emerge from the literature. For example, the significance of an inclusive school ethos is emphasised. Diversity is a fundamental determinant in planning for and delivering inclusion. Inclusion is hampered when rigid and inflexible systems for the deployment of staff, curriculum and timetabling were in use.
The literature states that inclusion requires a much deeper consideration of teachers’ roles, how collaboration and coordination within the school, and with other professionals and agencies, is implemented. This is particularly relevant within mainstream contexts.
CPD for SEN is based on principles of effective CPD . The schools use a range of practices such as collaborative planning, observation, co-coaching, teacher enquiry and research. Training, professional learning and development is also inclusive of all staff.
A strong feature of these schools is the involvement of a wide range of staff, including teaching assistants (TAs), and the distribution of expertise across the workforce. Particular mention is made of the developing role of teaching assistants working in teams. They are well trained, supported and managed and hold relevant, specific expertise.
Further support for strategic approaches to CPD for SEN is achieved through effective and innovative strategies in using existing personnel and financial resources, as well as seeking out additional sources of support where possible. Multiple funding streams for different professionals exist but there is evidence that access to resources and professional expertise is still ‘tight’.
Successful strategies for information exchange within and between teams, both internal and external, are in use. Effective communication is, therefore, also found in these schools. All staff are informed and updated on all children’s needs. Particular needs are explained, strategies to meet these needs described and progress tracked.
There is an expectation that all staff have access to specialist knowledge and expertise (both internal and external). External expertise is valued highly. All schools mention local authority SEN advisers and advisory teams. Special schools that offer outreach support to mainstream schools were also greatly appreciated.
The teachers recognise that initial teacher training (ITT) programmes are crowded. They expect newly qualified teachers to have some experience of what an ‘inclusive school’ looks like in practice. Newly qualified teachers can then better understand their responsibilities to all children and young people, including those with special needs and disabilities.
However, for these teachers the skills, knowledge and expertise are best learnt and developed ‘in context’ and ‘on the job’. Some suggested that newly qualified teachers should have knowledge of more common conditions, for example, autism. However, all staff must keep up to date with different conditions, as and when the need arises.
The literature argues that children and young people are bringing more pronounced emotional, social and behavioural difficulties into mainstream schools. Many teachers are concerned about this. All staff, including TAs, newly qualified and experienced teachers must develop their expertise to meet these challenges.
The ‘curriculum of CPD for SEN’ suggested in the literature for both ITT and CPD is therefore similar.
Teachers need to know about theoretical frameworks to enhance theory-practice links, reflective practice and enquiry; child development, learning theory and behaviour management. They also need effective support to deepen understanding of learning and behaviour difficulties and how they are linked, and help to resolve difficulties in practice. The literature also suggests that teachers should receive knowledge of specific conditions or groups from specialists, as and when it is needed.
Much of the CPD for SEN seems to be located in developing excellent teaching strategies for an inclusive classroom. Teachers who are confident and have agency are able to experiment and innovate and thus meet the needs of all children and young people more effectively. Different schemes are brought into schools to meet different needs. In the schools visited there were also examples of adaptive practice, and increased risk-taking by teachers and others. This was particularly strong at Key Stage 4.
The literature also provides evidence that creating an inclusive ethos is more likely where teachers understand and are empathetic to all children’s and young people’s needs, being able to see a learning task through the eyes of children and young people who have different learning needs.
Approaches to inclusion in the literature emphasise fluid pupil grouping, cooperative teaching and learning, individualised planning, collaborative problem-solving and differentiated approaches. Delivery of the curriculum is team-based, where others, including TAs, provided some teaching, guidance and instruction.
The major concern arising within the schools visited is the apparent increase in SEN presenting within the mainstream. This is attributed to the closure of special schools and whether a mainstream school has the ability and capacity to cater for a broader range of need. The schools identify an increase in mental health issues, more autism, speech and language difficulties, and more ‘unspecified global delay’.
Within the literature other issues emerged which are not reflected within the schools that we visited. For example, teachers in the mainstream are more concerned with children and young people with behavioural difficulties than those with physical or sensory impairments. Significant curriculum differentiation is necessary to meet the range of needs presented. Some teachers appear to have major difficulty in achieving this.
The potential impact of greater survival rates for pre-term births and foetal alcohol syndrome on the incidence and type of SEN is not widely recognised in schools but does feature in the literature.
