< Previous | Contents | Next >

Improving Our Schools: Responses to the Riddell Report

D: Other recommendations

Inclusion

There was a general welcome for the emphasis in the Riddell Committee report on an inclusive approach to children with special educational needs. At the same time there were differing interpretations of what is meant by inclusion. For some respondents integration of children in mainstream schools was essential to good inclusive practice, while others did not see special placements and inclusive approaches as mutually exclusive. Special schools, in particular, felt that not all children can cope with inclusion in mainstream.

The balance of responses was in line with Scottish Ministers current policies which are to encourage mainstream provision wherever appropriate, while recognising that the needs of some children may be best met through specialist provision. As reported above the Standards in Scotland's Schools etc. Bill included a presumption that all children with special educational needs will be educated in mainstream school education. From April 2000 Scottish Ministers established a £12 million Inclusion Programme over 2 years to assist local authorities to support inclusion of children with special educational needs in mainstream. At the same time, Ministers believe that decisions on school placement must take account of the needs of the individual child. For a small number of children their interests may be best met through specialist provision. Ministers consider it important, however, that even where children receive education in a specialist setting, that policies are put in place to ensure that children benefit from inclusion in the wider community and can link with their peers in mainstream schools wherever possible.

Views of children and Young People

Several respondents provided examples of ongoing research and work being undertaken by voluntary organisations and local authorities on ways of hearing what children and young people have to say and to encourage them to express their views. At the same time, there was a widespread feeling that more has to be done in this area. Suggestions included school councils and advocacy groups to facilitate children's voices to be heard and further staff training on allowing children's voices to be taken into account when decisions are being taken on their education.

The Scottish Executive is funding Enquire, the national SEN information and advice service, to involve children and young people in producing a guide to issues affecting their education. It is also funding a number of voluntary sector projects under its Innovative Grants Programme aimed at enabling children's views to be heard and taken into account.

Planning

The Riddell Report addressed several recommendations to local authorities on planning and the need to develop effective inter-agency and inter-authority working. There was some disappointment expressed that the Scottish Executive seemed to be passing responsibility back to local authorities and health boards and that it should be more pro-active in securing joint working arrangements. Nonetheless, local authorities generally indicated that they are taking forward the Riddell recommendations for children with severe low incidence disabilities through their Children's Services Plans. Several gave examples of joint working between local authorities.

Some respondents, including CoSLA, suggested that there were legal, procedural and financial barriers to joint funding between education and health agencies. Others suggested that there was a need for national guidance on funding responsibilities of local authorities and health boards for children who have education, social care and medical needs.

The interface between education and health agencies will be considered by the National SEN Advisory Forum which shall consider issues of strategic importance in the special educational needs area. Its discussions will be informed by the report The Same as you? A review of services for people with learning disabilities.

Therapy Services

There was a general view amongst education authorities that current funding arrangements for speech and language therapy should be extended to occupational and physiotherapy services. Some health bodies suggested, however, that these arrangements, which are aimed at children with Records of Needs, mean that non-recorded pupils who need speech and language therapy may be disadvantaged when decisions on provision are made. There was a widespread view that funding should be ring-fenced to ensure that the funding was spent on speech and language therapy provision.

There were differing opinions on the employment of therapists Some education authorities and several voluntary organisations argued that local authorities should employ their therapists directly. Health Boards and Trusts, however, do not take this view. Neither do some education authorities who prefer to see more funding for NHS services. Several respondents suggested that there was a shortage of therapists and more need to be recruited. Some pointed to lengthening waiting lists.

The Scottish Executive Education and Health Departments are examining the current funding arrangements in relation to speech and language therapy and considering how these and current arrangements for occupational and physiotherapy services might be improved.

New Community Schools

There was widespread interest and approval for the New Community Schools (NCSs) pilot programme, although several respondents commented that funding for NCSs would be needed for more than three years. The programme's emphasis on whole-child development and an integrated approach to provision of school education, social work and health services, was seen as a model of good practice for meeting the needs of children with special educational needs. Several local authorities indicated that they have special educational needs input to their new community schools, including South Lanarkshire Council which has based an NCS in a special needs establishment. The Council is considering how this model might be extended.

The Scottish Executive has commissioned University of London to undertake a national evaluation of the New Community Schools pilot programme. This evaluation will involve yearly reports over 3 years, as well as an overall report at the end of the initial 3-year period. The schools will also be inspected by HM Inspectors of Schools, whose reports will contribute further information about the quality and effectiveness of NCSs, including the benefits for children with special educational needs.

Play

The Riddell Report recommended that local authorities should examine opportunities for developing integrated play and learning services for children with severe low incidence disabilities. This recommendation was widely welcomed. Several respondents commented that it was important to consider opportunities for play and learning services in the context of local authorities childcare strategies and the wider needs of families. Some thought that greater emphasis was required within New Opportunities Funding to ensure that children with special educational needs benefited more fully from out-of hours opportunities for play, leisure and recreation.

Under its Out of School Hours Learning Initiative the New Opportunities Fund has £23.6 million to distribute in Scotland over the next two years. The intention of this programme is to benefit children and young people from all backgrounds and the Fund is particularly keen to encourage applications from schools serving pupils with special educational needs. (Application forms are available until 1 December 2000 from New Opportunities Fund, P.O. Box 2003, Aberfeldy, PH15 2YE)

Administration of medicines

Health Boards have a statutory responsibility for the medical inspection, medical supervision and treatment of pupils in schools. In carrying out these functions they require the assistance and co-operation of education authorities in the daily management of pupils requiring, for example, medication in schools. Local authorities reported that they looked forward to receiving promised national guidance. In the meantime, a few authorities had developed their own guidance and training for school staff.

National guidance on the administration of medicines in schools is currently being prepared by a working group which includes representatives from the Scottish Executive, the Association of Directors of Education in Scotland, health professionals and voluntary organisations.

Grant-Aided Schools

In their response to the Riddell Report Scottish Ministers indicated their support for the Committee's recommendation that current Government financial support for seven grant-aided special schools should re-allocated to the local authorities. Most responses to this recommendation also indicated support for the arguments behind re-allocation of grant-aid. The principle of re-allocation was accepted by CoSLA, most local authorities and professional and voluntary bodies within the SEN field. At the same time most respondents highlighted the need for fair transitional arrangements and several expressed the view that reallocated funds should continue to be used for educational provision for children with severe low incidence disabilities.

A small number of respondents disagreed with the proposal to re-direct grant-aid to local authorities. Some were concerned that local authorities will no longer use the schools, while others commented that they do not wish to see the specialist knowledge and expertise of staff in grant-aided schools lost. The seven grant-aided schools themselves, although not wholly convinced of the need for change, concentrated their arguments on concerns that the proposed transitional arrangements provided too short a timescale for introducing the new arrangements.

In view of this Scottish Ministers announced in December 1999 that, while the principle of re-allocation to local authorities remained firmly in place, grant-aid would continue for one more year to allow more time for discussion to plan the transition to new arrangements. The Scottish Executive has since undertaken a series of meetings with the seven schools and with CoSLA to discuss future arrangements.

Independent Sector

Responses from the independent sector welcomed recommendations which would provide them with an opportunity to be more involved in discussions at a national level on developments in the SEN area, in particular planning, training and sharing of expertise. Some independent schools considered that the adoption of inclusive policies by local authorities were being implemented in ways which excluded placing of children with SEN in independent or voluntary sector provision.

The Scottish Executive has agreed the appointment of a member of the Scottish Independent Special Schools Group (SISSG) to sit on the National SEN Advisory Forum.

Length of School Week in Special Schools

Riddell recommended that the Scottish Executive should issue advice to local authorities to the effect that the length of the school week in special schools and units should be similar to that in mainstream primary and secondary schools. Responses from education authorities and professional bodies generally agreed that the length of the school week in special schools should be brought more into line with mainstream schools. Some say they have already taken steps to do this while others are discussing taking this forward. A small number do not think that the length of the school day or week in special schools is a problem.

All however agree that there is a need for flexibility in any new arrangements and that, where appropriate, special account should be taken of the circumstances of individual children. Account should also be taken of issues relating to staff professional time, travel time and costs, and any health or medical implications.

Scottish Ministers have already announced that advice will be provided on the length of the school week in special schools in consultation with CoSLA and other interests.

Staff Development and Training

Education authorities widely welcomed the additional resources which the Scottish Executive has directed towards in-service SEN staff development and training. The doubling of resources to over £5 million in 1999-2000 had allowed authorities to considerably increase the number of staff undergoing further development and training. Several authorities found the new requirement for developing training strategies useful. In their responses some rural authorities suggested that the development of distance learning and local centre-based training should be a priority.

The Royal Blind School suggested that teachers working with blind or partially sighted pupils should have specialist qualification. The question of specialist qualifications is an area which is the subject of consultation as part of the wider look at the 1956 Schools Code. Improving our Schools: Consultation on the Schools Scotland Code invites views on this issue by the end of June 2000.

Voluntary organisations, such as Enable and Children in Scotland, suggested that there was a need amongst staff for basic knowledge and understanding on the rights of all children and that disability awareness should be a requirement of in-service training, particularly in the light of the extension of the Disability Discrimination Act to school education.

SEN Auxiliaries

Several local authorities reported that there was an urgent need to examine the pay and conditions of SEN Auxiliaries in the light of contractual arrangements for Classroom Assistants. Indeed, some authorities reported that they were moving to equalise terms and conditions of auxiliaries, support assistants and classroom assistants.

Alongside pay and employment conditions, several respondents suggested that there was a need to differentiate between the roles of classroom assistant and SEN auxiliary or learning support staff; for example that there should be a generic job description for classroom assistants, with additional training for special educational needs. Some respondents suggested that learning support staff played a different role in secondary schools dealing with more pupils, a broader range of curricular issues and wider use of technological aids than support staff in primary schools. Some argued for nationally agreed guidelines on training and employment rights for auxiliaries

The UK Local Government National Training Organisation (LGNTO) has been commissioned to develop National Occupational Standards for all paid staff in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland who work with teachers in classrooms supporting the learning process. These cover staff with a range of job titles, including teaching assistant, classroom assistant, general assistant, learning support assistant and auxiliary. Once the Standards are in place the project will go on to develop vocational qualifications based on them. It is expected that the development of these qualifications will be completed by Spring 2001. They are likely to include the Professional Development Award for SEN auxiliaries developed by the Scottish Executive-funded National SEN Training Co-ordination Project.

The development of occupational standards and vocational qualifications may have implications for the terms and conditions of employment of SEN auxiliaries and learning support staff. This is an important area for CoSLA and local authorities to consider.

Post-School Provision

Scottish Ministers were recommended to give further attention to establishing and resourcing appropriate post-school provision for young people with severe low incidence disabilities, with a focus on further education, training and employment. Several respondents commented that it was important to recognise that for a small group of young people training and employment will not be options. The focus for some with severe low incidence disabilities needs to be on their care and welfare. CoSLA considered that there was a need to develop care packages which can meet the needs and aspirations of young people and optimise their independence. Others commented that there was a need for joint or centralised budget arrangements between local authorities and health agencies to ensure that young people did not lose equipment, resources or facilities on leaving school. Some respondents suggested that there was a need to identify standards for successful Future Needs Assessments (FNA) for pupils with Records of Needs.

Some respondents called for better further education provision, for example, the Royal Blind School suggested that there is a need for specialist college provision in Scotland for young people with visual impairment. The National Autistic Society referred to work they were undertaking with Glasgow Nautical College in producing a transitions course for young people with Asperger's Syndrome, as well their involvement in supported employment services.

Scottish Ministers are considering responses to the consultation exercise on the Beattie Committee Report which reviewed the range of needs among young people who require additional support to make the transition to post-school education and training, or employment. They shall also be responding to the report The Same as you? A review of services for people with learning disabilities which looked at the development of social and health care needs of adults and children taking into account housing, education and employment.

The Scottish Executive will review how information is collected in future School Census exercises with a view to providing more accurate statistics across authorities.

< Previous | Contents | Next >