It’s been 2 years since the government’s SEND and AP Improvement Plan appeared; a framework of national standards is expected imminently, and many of us have been involved in the consultation work between the DfE and the sector. The Improvement Plan sets out 5 key priorities: the establishment of a set of national standards; a focus on successful transitions; a focus on ensuring a skilled workforce and excellent leadership;establishment of strengthened accountabilities and routes for redress; a financially sustainable system. The Plan is considered and extensive but does not address a key issue in AP, which was identified in the Centre for Social Justice’s AP Toolkit in 2022, namely the difficulties involved in measuring children’s progress within an AP setting. Whilst national standards will provide a benchmark, work will be required on the part of providers to identify, record, analyse and report on students’ achievements against the standards, and in the light of their own diverse starting points.
Evidencing impact has always been problematic in relation to children with SEND. I worked for many years in a provision for students with social, emotional and mental health needs; for these children progress was often slow, especially at the beginning of their time with us; it could be disjointed and sporadic as the impact of developmental and ongoing trauma took its toll on attendance and engagement. Outcomes which are universal expectations in mainstream settings often represent substantial achievements for children in AP. The systems on the market were designed for mainstream schools and were not appropriate for smaller scale settings with children who experience additional needs. An example of the polarity between AP and mainstream requirements in identifying and measuring progress can be found in the area of attendance. Legally, unregistered settings are restricted to no more than 18 hours a week provision for each child. Clearly, full attendance at AP looks very different from what is expected at mainstream school. I remember staff needing to build their relationships with children with great patience; many learning journeys began with tiny, faltering steps which would not meet threshold for recording by any mainstream metrics. If we are to do justice to students in AP, It is important that there are mechanisms in place to capture these achievements, the traditional present/absent morning and afternoon marks in a register are unsuitable for the task.
Many of the systems available to buy are set up around mainstream expectations and do not take into account the very detailed picture needed for individual students in AP. In the setting where I worked we were lucky enough to be able to work closely with a web-developer on a bespoke system which allowed us to record attendance and engagement, behaviour and academic progress, by the session. In addition to the session by session attendance, the system was designed to record engagement on a 0-5 metric ranging from no contact when the tutor called at the home for pick up, to the student attending independently and engaging fully. In this way we were able to record, measure and analyse each child’s attendance in detail over time, and against a range of other indices including subject, staff member, day of the week and time of day; we were able to tweak provision accordingly where needed, and to make substantial changes in medium – long term planning.
In the provision I ran, a happy convergence of relationships enabled us to collaborate with a skilled web-developer who was committed to working with us pro bono. The software which emerged allowed us to track progress in attendance, engagement, behaviour and academic progress against curriculum, and to manage safeguarding; this in turn allowed us to evidence the impact of our service and the achievements of our students to families, professionals, commissioners, and, most importantly to the children themselves; it was a rare privilege which few APs can enjoy. Unfortunately the costs normally involved in designing a bespoke system are prohibitive for most small providers. The advent of the SEND and AP national standards framework will see this disadvantage more pronounced and impactful than ever for many settings. APs must prove they are meeting the standards in their work with children whose starting points and needs are as varied as the responsive strategies required to support them. There remain very few software packages available which will fulfil the requirements of small APs or to do justice to the achievements of the children they support. Without the appropriate systems, there is a risk that many providers who do excellent work with children will find themselves unable to demonstrate that they meet the required standards. Providers will need to address this or face local authorities and schools unable to refer; in many cases, that would be a significant loss to the field of education and to the children who depend on their creativity and dedication.
