Michael Tidd

Would be interested to see the correlation with disadvantage too

Important thread

I missed this article when it was first published but it hits a very important nail on the head!
We're building any SEND improvements on very shaky ground.

"teacher time" can't just be conjured

SEND reform plans ‘risk overwhelming Sendcos’ Experts voice fears about the proposed new duty on schools to produce a statutory support plan for every pupil with SEND

I think I would write this as FURTHER overwhelming SENCos
www.tes.com/magazine/new...

This 'correction' from @lewisgoodall.com regarding accusations from Reform and the Conservatives that the Greens engaged in sectarianism, deserves to be widely read.

#c4news

Developing this great sense of foreboding that we may soon end up with huge numbers of children with legally enforceable ISPs with things like fiddle toys on them.

Schools in 'eye of the storm' of SEND complaints Schools will have a duty to create individual support plans for all children with additional needs

Feels about right
schoolsweek.co.uk/schools-in-e...

This seems to be about two different things: 'independent' reading and class-based teaching.
If children are reading more independently, then guidance on selection is helpful; for class teaching, teachers can use more challenging texts because they can also scaffold and support

This made ne genuinely snort 🤣

Section F describing provision that should be universally available for all children…

And that's why we have an adversarial system, and any argument to increase such things is foolish

Oops. No... But in echoing you I can only confirm your wisdom 🤣

And often filled with stuff that would be ordinary part of practice, but now makes parents think you need an EHCP to get such support

What if EHCPs are actually not all that good anyway?

I predict that more resources into exisiting SEND orthodoxies will drive more demand and even further overwhelm schools. There will be less consistency and predictability in schools, which will make quality first teaching harder to achieve. This will also drive more demand for specialist help.

Every single person in the UK will think this is something else for a split second

Triangle, with apex at the top, showing four layers from 'All children' at the base, rising through 'School Action', 'School action plus' to 'Statement' (The pre-2015 SEND model)

Triangle, with point at the bottom, showing three layers of support, with 'Targeted' at the broad top of the diagram, then 'Targeted plus' and narrowing to 'Specialist'

Some cynics might have thought we'd seen all this stuff before, but clearly things have changed: the triangle is now upside-down. 😆

I think the issue is partly that we've had an explosion of expensive private provision rather than efficient LA-funded models

No, this is the issue. The system broke, and how do you persuade people that a fix will be better for them.

In truth, I do think the 2015 Code has created some of these problems

Worth adding, that leading with the cost of independent special schools was a wise move (and presumably quite popular), but the availability of provision (at great cost) is not always an indication of need.
Having cheaper schools who hand-pick the needs they meet is also not necessarily the best.

The narrative that parents have to fight for SEN support (which no doubt is sometimes true) has become a self-fulfilling prophecy, in that some parents now see fighting for diagnoses, support and different treatment as simply as an essential good parenting.

The difficulty is - as I suspect my post will demonstrate - that anyone who dares suggest that there is any such practice can easily be shouted down by someone with an anecdote based on their experience in which a child is portrayed as a victim of the system.

There will be a *lot* of noise on Monday about how any changes to SEND provision are unacceptable, or will leave children with SEND without support, or is cutting corners.

In truth, some SEND support is a sop to parents who feel something should be done, and some does more harm than good.

For those who think it important for the Nation to impose more tariffs, I understand that today's decision will be dis-appointing. All I can offer them is that most major decisions affecting the rights and responsibilities of the American people (including the duty to pay taxes and tariffs) are funneled through the legislative process for a reason. Yes, legislating can be hard and take time. And, yes, it can be tempting to bypass Congress when some pressing problem arises. But the deliberative nature of the legislative process was the whole point of its design. Through that process, the Nation can tap the combined wisdom of the people's elected representatives, not just that of one faction or man. There, deliberation tempers impulse, and compromise hammers disagreements into workable solutions. And because laws must earn such broad support to survive the legislative pro-cess, they tend to endure, allowing ordinary people to plan their lives in ways they cannot when the rules shift from day to day. In all, the legislative process helps ensure each of us has a stake in the laws that govern us and in the Nation's future. For some today, the weight of those virtues is apparent. For others, it may not seem so obvious. But if history is any guide, the tables will turn and the day will come when those disappointed by today's result will appreciate the legislative process for the bulwark of liberty it is.

These words by Supreme Justice Gorsuch should be printed, in full, on tomorrow’s front pages.

"SEND kids" are not a homogenous group

My interpretation was that any support put in place in primary wouldn't automatically carry over to secondary

We looked at loads of stuff because we're on the inside. Ofsted, outcomes, etc.
And the reality was, our choice was made by the availability of a breakfast club and ease of getting there.
Ofsted reports were no help.

Pupils' SEND support to be reviewed after primary, leaked plans suggest Leaks suggest plans for a complete redesign of special educational needs and disabilities support in schools.

This reads a lot like making more promises with teachers' time... And no resource to meet the promises
www.bbc.co.uk/news/article...

Perhaps.
Of course, a carefully written question would either include that (and then I'd imagine 31% is too low) or exclude it (in which case it's way too high).
This is the problem of vague questions like whether you've requested any assessment