“It was tough making sure it happened”: SENCo experience of the reality and risk of education and health care plan implementation

Abstract

In England, the Special Educational Needs and Disabilities Code of Practice (2015) was heralded as a significant reformation of provision for children and young people with additional and complex learning needs. Effective implementation of the Code requires the key implementers, Special Educational Needs Coordinators (SENCos), to develop and negotiate provision in their settings, to interface with colleagues, families and expert professionals, and to apply for and implement Education and Health Care (EHC) plans for the children and young people with the most complex needs. However, whilst this added to SENCo workload and responsibilities, systemic, resource and dominant discourse challenges remained the same. EHC plans have been described as a microcosm of the wider arena of policy and practice. Studies exploring SENCo perceptions of the enablers and challenges, which has import for commissioners and practitioners, are limited. This article presents part of a mixedmethods study which examined SENCo perceptions of the salient external and internal influences on EHC plan implementation. Integration of the analysed data sets uncovered themes related to purpose, support, communities of learning, and relationships. Key recommendations, whose enactment would support and develop SENCos, so they in turn can best promote the learning, development, wellbeing and inclusion of children and young people with SEND, and their families, are made. This article closes by proposing that the need for a professional information hub and support mechanisms for SENCos has never been greater

Parental experiences of accessing assessments for special educational needs

“…Parents are encouraged to report any concerns they have over their child's educational needs to the school's SENCO. There is evidence that many SENCOs find the demands of the process laborious and time consuming (Richards, 2022). A thematic analysis based on the perspectives of 16 SENCOs suggests that they felt the process was not transparent and that the reasons issued by the LEA for a refusal to assess can lack clarity.…”

Advocacy leadership and the deprofessionalising of the special educational needs co‐ordinator role

“…The research skills that the NASENCO aims to teach take time to acquire as does engendering the deep reflection that is testimony to an ethical sensibility. The less exacting NPQ will take less time and may therefore appeal to as yet untrained or prospective SENCos who are aware that SENCos are routinely described as having onerous workloads (Clarke & Done, 2021;Richards, 2022). In terms of evaluative practice, the green paper (DfE, 2022a) appears to draw on published studies, such as the national SENCo workforce survey (Curran, Boddison et al, 2020a;Curran, Moloney et al, 2018, that have documented an increasing proportion of SENCos concerned about the excessive workload and administrative duties.…”