Transcript The special educational needs and disability review A statement is

Quality First Teaching for All
Quality First Teaching for ALL
The most effective way to narrow the
gaps!
A Top Priority for Schools!
Context and Background
Whose gaps are we attempting to
narrow?
• Pupils with special educational needs and
disabilities
• Disadvantaged pupils (Pupil Premium)
• White working class pupils (Girls as well as
boys)
And . . .
• Who have you got in your school?
Key Research
• The special educational needs and disability review. A
statement is not enough (Ofsted, September 2010)
• Improving the impact of teachers on pupil achievement
in the UK – interim findings (The Sutton Trust, September
2011)
• Unseen children: access and achievement 20 years on.
Evidence Report ( Ofsted, June 2013)
• Underachievement in Education by White Working Class
Children. First report of Session 2014-15 (House of
Commons Education Committee, June 2014)
• Cracking the code: how schools can improve social
mobility (Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission,
October 2014)
The special educational needs
and disability review
A statement is not enough
Ofsted
Published: September 2010
Reference no: 090221
•
The special educational needs and disability
review – A statement is not enough
The aims of the review were to:
• evaluate the accuracy and the equity of identification of special
educational needs across England and within local areas
• evaluate the extent to which the assessment of needs results in
high expectations, swift access to tailored services and so
improves outcomes
• establish, in different provisions and local areas, the
strength of outcomes for disabled children and young
people and those who had special educational needs as
well as for children reaching the lowest levels of attainment
• evaluate, as part of this, the effectiveness of legislation,
policy and the organisation of provision, following
identification and assessment, in focusing on the
improvement of outcomes for these groups of children and
young people.
The special educational needs and disability
review – A statement is not enough
• However, we also recognise that as many as
half of all pupils identified for School Action
would not be identified as having special
educational needs if schools focused on
improving teaching and learning for all, with
individual goals for improvement.
Ofsted, September 2010
The special educational needs and disability
review – A statement is not enough
• At School Action level, the additional provision
was often making up for poor whole class
teaching or pastoral support.
The special educational needs and disability
review – A statement is not enough
• Inspectors saw schools that identified pupils as
having special educational needs when, in fact,
their needs were no different from those of most
other pupils. They were underachieving but
this was sometimes simply because the
school’s mainstream teaching provision was
not good enough, and expectations of the
pupils were too low.
The special educational needs and disability
review – A statement is not enough
• . . . some pupils are being wrongly identified as
having special educational needs and that
relatively expensive additional provision is being
used to make up for poor day-to-day teaching
and pastoral support. This can dilute the focus
on overall school improvement and divert
attention from those who do need a range of
specialist support.
The special educational needs and disability
review – A statement is not enough
• The characteristics of the best lessons were:
– Teachers’ thorough and detailed knowledge of the
children and young people
– Teachers’ thorough knowledge and understanding of
teaching strategies and techniques, including
assessment for learning
– Teachers’ thorough knowledge about the subject or
areas of learning being taught
– Teachers’ understanding of how learning difficulties can
affect children and young people’s learning.
• These were the essential tools for good-quality
teaching with any group of children or young people.
The special educational needs and disability
review – A statement is not enough
• . . . further changes to the system should focus
on:
• Improving teaching and pastoral support early on so
that additional provision is not needed later
• Ensuring that schools do not identify pupils as having
special educational needs when they simply need
better teaching.
Special educational needs and disability
code of practice: 0 to 25 years
July 2014
• High quality teaching that is
differentiated and personalised
will meet the individual needs of
the majority of children and
young people.
Special educational needs and disability
code of practice: 0 to 25 years
July 2014
• Some children and young people need
educational provision that is additional to or
different from this. This is special educational
provision under Section 21 of the Children
and Families Act 2014. Schools and colleges
must use their best endeavours to ensure
that such provision is made for those who
need it.
Special educational needs and disability
code of practice: 0 to 25 years
July 2014
• Special educational provision is
underpinned by high quality teaching
and is compromised by anything less.
• Additional intervention and support
cannot compensate for a lack of good
quality teaching.
Special educational needs and disability
code of practice: 0 to 25 years
July 2014
• The majority of pupils can make
progress through such teaching.
• Schools should regularly and
carefully review the quality of
teaching for pupils at risk of
underachievement.
Special educational needs and disability
code of practice: 0 to 25 years
July 2014
• This includes reviewing teachers’
understanding of strategies to
identify and support vulnerable
learners and their knowledge of the
special educational needs most
frequently encountered.
Special educational needs and disability
code of practice: 0 to 25 years
July 2014
• The quality of teaching for pupils with
SEN, and the progress made by pupils,
should be a core part of the school’s
performance management
arrangements and its approach to
professional development for all
teaching and support staff.
Special educational needs and disability
code of practice: 0 to 25 years
July 2014
• The first response to less than expected
progress should be high quality
teaching targeted at their areas of
weakness.
• Where progress continues to be less
than expected the class or subject
teacher, working with the SENCO, should
assess whether the child has SEN.
The Sutton Trust
Improving the impact of teachers on pupil achievement
in the UK – interim findings (Sept. 2011)
• The effects of high-quality teaching are
especially significant for pupils from
disadvantaged backgrounds: over a school
year, these pupils gain 1.5 years’ worth of
learning with very effective teachers,
compared with 0.5 years with poorly
performing teachers. In other words, for poor
pupils the difference between a good teacher
and a bad teacher is a whole year’s learning.
Unseen Children: access and
achievement 20 years on
Evidence Report
Ofsted, 2013
Unseen children: access and
achievement 20 years on
• This report summarises Ofsted’s review
which aimed to understand the current
pattern of disadvantage and educational
success across England.
• In the report, the term ‘disadvantaged pupils’
refers to those pupils who are eligible for free
school meals.
Unseen children: access and achievement
20 years on
• In 1993, Ofsted identified seven urban areas
which suffered from geographical isolation.
Much of the provision in these areas was
described as inadequate and disturbing by
inspectors.
• According to this report, the quality of
education has improved in some of the areas
Ofsted identified in 1993. In others, however,
the rate of improvement has been slow.
Unseen children: access and achievement
20 years on
• The most successful schools recognise that
raising academic achievement cannot be
tackled in isolation.
• Teachers’ high expectations, consistently
high quality teaching and learning and a
relevant curriculum must be underpinned by
other interventions that increase pupils’
resilience and readiness to learn, as well
as developing strong partnerships with
parents and carers.
Unseen children: access and achievement
20 years on
• High quality teaching is crucial,
especially for disadvantaged
pupils.
• There are big regional variations in
the quality of teaching in schools
serving the most and least deprived
communities.
Underachievement in
Education by White Working
Class Children. First report of
Session 2014-15 (House of
Commons Education Committee,
June 2014)
Curriculum or quality of teaching?
• Professor Becky Francis called for “flex” within
a school’s curriculum so that students could
“pursue subjects for which they have a
passion”.
• In contrast, Dr Kevan Collins (Chief Executive,
Education Endowment Foundation) argued
that: “pedagogy trumps curriculum every time.
It is very clear that the way you teach and how
you teach is always more powerful than just
changing the curriculum”
Will school improvement alone
close the gap?
• Twice the proportion of poor children
attending an outstanding school will leave
with five good GCSEs when compared with
the lowest rated schools, whereas the
proportion of non-FSM children achieving this
benchmark in outstanding schools is only 1.5
times greater than in those rated as
inadequate.
It’s the quality of teaching that
counts!
• We agree that there is much that
schools can do to address white
working class underachievement.
Broader societal factors also have an
enormous role to play, but this should
not deflect attention from the central
importance of improving school and
teaching quality.
• Cracking the code: how
schools can improve
social mobility (Social
Mobility and Child Poverty
Commission, October
2014)
A changing pattern?
• Previous research has found that differences in
school quality can explain on average around a fifth
of the variation in children’s educational attainment:
most of the attainment gap is ultimately determined
by differences in the home environment, including
family background and parenting. But new analysis of
variations in outcomes for students in schools with
similar intakes suggests that schools can make a big
difference if more step up to the standards of the
best.
Variations across schools
Our analysis shows that:
• The best performers are helping three times as
many disadvantaged children to achieve five
good GCSEs including English and maths as
schools with similar levels of disadvantage.
• In the best performing schools, 60 per cent of
disadvantaged children achieve five good
GCSEs including English and maths compared to
only 25 per cent in the lowest performing.
Low Teacher Expectations
• We also found evidence that some teachers’
attitudes towards disadvantaged students could
act as a barrier to success. While it is clear that
most teachers did not think social background
had any influence on expectations at their
school, over one in five (21 per cent) overall –
and one in four (25 per cent) in secondary
schools - agreed that some of their colleagues
had lower expectations of students from
disadvantaged backgrounds relative to those of
other students.
Low Expectations
• There is also strong quantitative evidence showing
that there are real risks of unconscious bias and
stereotyping based on a child’s background
including their family income, ethnicity and SEN
status. This used results from the Millennium
Cohort Study to compare performance on reading
and maths tests at age seven to teacher
assessment of children’s ability. Students in
families on low incomes were 11 per cent less
likely to be judged above average at reading
compared to similarly attaining children in better off
households.
What works in the best schools?
• Building a high expectations, inclusive culture – this
means being ambitious and “sharp-elbowed” for all
children, with the school leadership team and
governors sending a clear message from the top
that they have high expectations of all staff and all
students. It includes implementation of a firm and
consistent behaviour policy and a ‘whatever it
takes’ attitude to improving standards and results
among all students: not tolerating lower standards
because of a mind-set that disadvantaged children
cannot do any better.
What works in the best schools?
• Incessant focus on the quality of teaching – this
means placing the provision of highly effective
teaching, perhaps the single most important way
schools can influence social mobility, at the centre of
the school’s approach to narrowing the attainment
gap and raising standards. This includes . . . ensuring
disadvantaged students have (at least) their fair
share of the best teachers’ time – not just
subcontracting the teaching of low attainers to
teaching assistants or focusing the best teachers on
students at the C/D borderline or on top sets where
disadvantaged students tend to be underrepresented.
Ofsted Inspection of Maintained Schools
and Academies from 1st September 2014
• Inspectors should consider the
extent to which the ‘Teachers’
Standards’ are being met.
Teachers’ Standards
September 2012
•
•
•
•
Adapt teaching to respond to the strengths and needs of all
pupils
Know when and how to differentiate appropriately, using
approaches which enable pupils to be taught effectively
Have a secure understanding of how a range of factors can
inhibit pupils’ ability to learn, and how best to overcome these
Demonstrate an awareness of the physical , social and
intellectual development of children, and know how to adapt
teaching to support pupils’ education at different stages of
development
Have a clear understanding of the needs of all pupils, including
those with special educational needs; those of high ability; those
with EAL; those with disabilities; and be able to use and
evaluate distinctive teaching approaches to engage and support
them.
Reflection Time
• Do all teachers in your school have high expectations
for disadvantaged pupils?
• Do disadvantaged pupils have access to the highest
quality teachers in your school?
• What is the quality of teaching and learning for
disadvantaged pupils in your school?
(Outstanding? Good? Requiring Improvement?
Inadequate?)
• How would your teachers match up to Section 5 of
the Teachers’ Standards?
• Do all teachers understand the difference between a
pupil who is ‘underachieving’ and a pupil who has
SEN – ‘a pupil who has significantly greater difficulty
in learning than the majority of their peers’?