£2

A voice for the Inclusion Movement in the UK

Summer 2016Issue 44

2

Contents

Inclusion Now occasionally includes adverts for products, services, courses or events offered by other organisations. This does not imply that we endorse or support the products, services, courses, events or organisations concerned. Readers are advised to check details for themselves and make their own judgements. Inclusion Now provides an opportunity for the exchange of information. All the views expressed are not necessarily the views of ALLFIE, Inclusive Solutions or World of Inclusion. We reserve the right to edit articles. Contact ALLFIE for advertising rates and policy.

Inclusion Now is also available on tape and pdf or text document via email - see subscription form on page 19.

You can also search past issues and view past issues as page-turning pdfs online at www.allfie.org.uk

Front cover: pupils and visitors at Wroxham Primary School

Editorial

This edition of Inclusion Now is tightly packed with news, opinion and personal experiences all of which serve as a reminder about how important it is to campaign for Inclusive Education. There are lots of new voices including a group of Year 6 students from Wroxham Primary school who talk about how important it is for young people to be listened to and feel included (p3)

We have a timely piece from Carl Parsons at Greenwich University (p12) who highlights the concerns that many of us have about the rapid growth in academies and the impact of academisation on those pupils and students that are most at risk from being excluded or segregated from mainstream - timely because just as we are going to press there is a media storm growing about the Government’s recently published “Educational Excellence Everywhere” White paper and whether in light of a huge public outcry, the Government may now backtrack on its original plan to speed towards 100% academisation by 2022.

It is clear from Bronagh Byrne’s excellent comparison of education systems across the UK (pp8) that there is still much to do in terms of establishing a consistent approach to building the capacity of our mainstream schools and colleges to be able to welcome a diversity of pupils and students. Usefully Marc Lorenzi from CEN sets out how we can and should make better use of the Equality Act 2010 to challenge bad practice (p16).

We also pay tribute to the Disabled film maker, Ann Pugh (p11) who had such a huge influence on the Inclusive Education movement. Ann’s creativity brought to life the vision of our movement and has captured it on film for now and future generations – we all miss her very much.

Enjoy the summer!

2 Editorial

3 School VisitWroxham Primary

6 Disabled Students OfficersThe role and its challenges

7 ApprenticeshipsA case study

8 Inclusion across the UKA comparison between nations

10 Parent voiceThe fight for inclusion

11 Tribute to Ann PughFilmmaker and campaigner

12 AcademiesAnalysis and discussion of the White Paper

15 News and events

16 Equality LawExclusions and the 2010 Equality Act

18 Legal question

Tara Flood

3

School visit

It seems incredible, but 38 years have passed since the Warnock Report (1978) published

its findings as to what euphemistically has been and continues to be referred to as ‘special’ educational provision. Thirty-eight years later, and we are currently witnessing an outcome that has involved the dismantling and fragmentation of education into component parts, and which has also involved economic business models wreaking havoc not only on those working in such settings, but also having a disproportionate effect on young people who are generally trusting of those who often claim to be working in their best interest. Segregation by type of school is here and is as dangerous and blatant as separation by individual characteristics. In this sense, the Warnock Report arguably has done little (and did not seek) to challenge deep-rooted problems, particularly those associated with disablism, poverty, socio-economic factors and racism.

Over these years we have also witnessed a shift in Europe as many European nations consider the changes they need to make to provide education

systems that are more welcoming of diversity. Readers of Inclusion Now will be aware of the significant shifts occurring more widely around the world - in particular the impact of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2008) and its aspirational goal of progressive realisation of Disabled people’s human rights.

Despite a challenging political climate, Inclusion Now still manages to find and write about the positive experiences of individuals seeking inclusive education, and this has been commented on by a range of individuals including young people, parents, teachers, head teachers, SENCOs, and support staff. Unfortunately, there have also been accounts of inequalities, prejudice and direct discrimination. Colleagues in associated areas of (community) work, have also commented upon the disparities and inequalities that disabled people have experienced.

Education has always been a battle ground in which young people, more so than ever, have become commodities, left to chance, ill-prepared to claim a stake in their own opportunities and life-chances. Current government educational policy has

Wroxham Primary School -listening to young people matters

4

School visit

intentionally neglected the ‘voice’ of disabled people and their organisations. Politicians with limited understanding of the real and lasting value of a good, person-centred education that is truly inclusive, seem hell-bent on social destruction, toying with dimensions of power, using competition as a veneer to fulfil their own political and financial ambitions.

Time and time again the notion of ‘human potential’ is used as a stock rhetorical phrase in government policy and is also evident in both the 2001 and 2015 SEN and Disability Code of Practice, and yet it is seldom realised in practice. Given divisive, competing, materialist and market agendas in current educational policy, there are still schools that are bucking that trend - resisting this onslaught of detrimental change to become a beacon of hope.

Wroxham Primary School rejects linear models of learning, and does not use ability learning labels. There is a refreshing opening sentence in ‘Creating Learning Without Limits’ (Swann, et al., 2012, p.1), namely that ‘human potential is not predictable’ and that children’s futures are ‘unknowable’. Given such unshakable convictions, I took a group of students from the University of Bedfordshire to visit Wroxham Primary School recently to see if the reality stacks up. We were able to meet with a group of Year 6 students and spent the afternoon with them discussing their ideas about schooling and what education means to them.

We spilt the group into two smaller groups and we asked “What do you think makes a good school?”

It was interesting that most of the young people talked about their teachers, referring to teachers who were ‘good’, ‘helpful’, with varying teaching styles and who are able to ‘put a twist on it, make it fun’. Those young people that talked about what else made their school good, talked about being able to ‘wear what we want’ and where ‘everyone is included’.

Friendships were really important to all the young people and a number referred to having ‘learning partners’, ‘different activities’, being able to ‘choose challenges’ and of course ‘food’.

5

Navin KikabhaiChairperson of ALLFIE

PS. Can I say a very big thank you to everyone at Wroxham Primary school who made our visit so enjoyable and to the Year 6 students who took time out of their day to share their thoughts and insights with such honesty.

The Year 6 students also highlighted group activities such as sports, which for Wroxham Primary young people includes drumming and knitting.

In relation to organising learning, both groups made reference to ‘liking not having the same lessons every day’, ‘sharing toys’, ‘colourful – split classrooms’, having ‘circle groups’, and a couple of young people talked about really liking that ‘children lead assemblies’. Both groups also talked about ‘talent shows’, ‘tree house’, ‘forest school’, ‘library’ and the ‘learning bus’ helping them with their learning.

We also asked the students ‘What advice would you give to teachers?’ Every group came up with lots of ideas including teachers needing to ‘add a twist to lessons’, having ‘refreshments (ie water)’, ‘getting creative’, ‘don’t be too strict’, ‘make the classroom look nice’, having a ‘reading corner’, letting individuals ‘pick challenges’, ‘have a range of subjects’, ‘make class fun’, be ‘friendly and happy’.

The young people also talked about how important it is to have ‘teaching assistants to help in the class’, for teachers to ‘have good explanations’, ‘be patient’, ‘be kind and help other teachers’, ‘find different ways to teach instead of using the same way (being more active)’, ‘make sure everyone is included’, ‘help children feel confident and not shy’, ‘make sure everyone has their say’.

The teaching and support staff at Wroxham are clearly doing a great job - no doubt Year 6 would have told us if this wasn’t the case! It is disappointing that more generally across the education system,

such insight from young people is seldom, if at all, listened to. Young people have a right to be part of their local communities, to share experiences with their peers, and to be listened to.

Is it not time that government learnt the lessons from young people who are at the very heart of the educational experience? Listening to the Year 6 students raises at least one interesting question: what are we to do with such human potential? One of the university students who came with me to Wroxham said afterwards:

“… thanks for arranging the opportunity for us to visit Wroxham School. They are a wonderful group of children and their confidence in and fondness for the school is inspiring. What a lovely way to spend a Thursday morning – it has left me with lots to reflect on.”

This university student is correct: there is ‘lots to reflect on’. Young people, including disabled young people, require us to prepare them for the future, to encourage and nurture their hopes and aspirations, for them to become active citizens, and to participate in a world where there is immeasurable ‘human potential’!

School visit

6

Student voice

Being a student is not always easy, especially if you have a disability. Sometimes

requirements or adjustments need to be met by the college or university to ensure the student is fully supported and able to make the most of their studies. These may not be immediately obvious to the college or university until brought to their attention by the student or students who need them. Alternatively a student might not be aware that they need additional support or what support they need until they have already started their studies. In any case, the student and college or university will need to work together to find out what the student needs and how their needs can be met. But where do you start? Who do you go to, and what should you say? Fortunately, most colleges and universities have a disabled students officer within their student union, who is an excellent first point of contact for all things disability-related. They are not staff members, but students who self-define as disabled, and so are often easier to talk to.

So, what exactly is a disabled students officer? What is their role? Why would someone want to be a disabled students officer? And importantly, what makes a good disabled students officer? These are the questions I asked myself when I ran for the position of disabled students officer of my student union at King’s College London in 2012. I knew I wanted to help other disabled students and learn more about the structure of the union and university in regards to disability so that they could be improved for future students. However, I also knew that there were a lot of things I did not know and would have to learn on the job. It is easy to forget that in most colleges and universities, the role is a part time voluntary position that must fit around the student’s studies, and for which there is little training. And the position is not a light one either – you are working on behalf of every disabled student in the college or university. Only so much can be done to prepare a student for the role, and its demands will vary each year, not only depending on your own goals and initiatives, but also on the current needs of the students you represent.

Another challenge disabled students officers often face is that they themselves have a disability. Having a disability often means additional time is required to learn material and complete assignments. However, as a disabled student themselves, the officer is also more in touch with the needs of their fellow disabled students and the difficulties that can be encountered at college or university. Students with disabilities may also feel more comfortable discussing issues affecting them if they can relate to the person they are speaking to. It is therefore important that the disabled students officer identify as disabled themselves.

I don’t think anyone begins their role as the “ideal” disabled students officer. Rather, it is something you should aim to become by the time your role is finished. There is too much you cannot know about until you are in the role and making those changes and decisions for real. Thus being able and willing to learn on the job is an important quality for any student officer. During my time in the role, I not only learned a lot about policy and the structure of my university and student union, but also became more aware of disability issues and how every decision taken by the university could have an impact (positive or negative) on disabled students, and how it was my responsibility to ensure disabled students got the best possible university experience by allowing their voices to be heard. This leads onto another quality I think is required by student officers – the ability to listen to others and work on their behalf. When we are elected, we muct remember that we are working on behalf of every student in the university. When one of them comes to us with an issue or problem, it is up to us to help them do something about it. This is how we succeed as student officers, and the more students we help, the more we succeed.

The role of disabled students officer is a huge responsibility, but also very rewarding. Changes to aspects of higher education such as changes to Disabled Students Allowance will make it harder for many students, and hence make the role of

The Disabled Students Officer

7

Student voice

disabled students officer more demanding than ever. Increasing responsibility is being pushed onto colleges and universities to provide and accommodate for disabled students, without the help or funding required to make these changes. It Keshi Chung

is likely that the role of the disabled students officer will become ever more important as more students turn to them for help and advice in enabling them to succeed.

The Government have announced a commitment to create three million apprenticeship opportunities during this parliament. However little has been said about the need for these to be inclusive of Disabled people. Apprenticeships can give Disabled people a real opportunity to participate in mainstream vocational education and training whilst being part of the workplace, and ALLFIE has been lobbying the Government to ensure their commitment includes Disabled people. As part of our work we have been identifying apprenticeship schemes that are working well for Disabled people.

Gloria Nweke, a Disabled person and support broker apprentice working with Inclusion Barnet, spoke to ALLFIE about her work experience whilst completing a Level 2 Diploma in Health and Social Care as part of a one year accredited apprenticeship. Gloria’s role is to work with disabled people to identify how they can best meet their social care needs and get the life they want within their personal budget allocation. She helps Inclusion Barnet’s customers to research activities they may want to undertake and provides information and signposting to other services.

At the same time, Gloria is doing a Health and Social Care Level 2 Diploma on day release at Southgate College. She has felt well-prepared for the NVQ course as she had already done a Level 3 course in Development Studies. She also had to complete a Functional Skills Level 1 in English and Maths.

Gloria feels her mental health is well under control and does not need support from the Access to Work scheme during her placement, but thought having a support worker could have helped at an earlier stage whilst looking for employment. She says it has been a great opportunity to pursue her interests - it has built on the existing administrative

and advocacy skills she gained through volunteering and she aims to gain paid employment in social care after her placement finishes in August. ALLFIE wishes her the best of luck.

Inclusion Barnet received funding from Barnet Council covering the college course fees, apprentice wages and running costs of the scheme. They have now advertised for their second apprentice – this time they have targeted Disabled young people.

ALLFIE has been working on apprenticeship issues for some time, focusing on existing apprenticeship requirements, particularly those related to GCSEs and stand-alone maths and English qualifications, because these can create barriers for some Disabled people. The Government’s own report, “Creating an Inclusive Apprenticeship Offer” (Little 2012), concluded that some of the apprenticeship standards would disadvantage Disabled people.

With the current Government’s determination to halve the number of Disabled people out of work, we thought it be worth another go at lobbying for changes to the standards. ALLFIE used the recent Enterprise Bill to raise the issue of apprentices requiring stand-alone literacy and numeracy qualifications, and suggested that instead, assessment of relevant skills should focus on the work context. More recently we met Nick Boles (Minister for Apprenticeships) to discuss our concerns and the opportunity the three million new apprenticeships creates for the large numbers of Disabled people who are not in employment, education or training.

We are hopeful that more flexibility will be built into the revised standards and that ultimately more Disabled people will benefit from the opportunities apprenticeships can offer – watch this space!

Inclusive apprenticeships

Simone Aspis

8

UK inclusion

The right to an inclusive education for disabled children and young people is firmly

established in international law. Article 24 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) (2006) requires countries who have ratified it to ensure an ‘inclusive education system at all levels’ without discrimination, ‘effective individualised support measures’ in environments that ‘maximise academic and social development’, and ‘reasonable accommodation of the individual’s requirements’. Further requirements include facilitating the learning of Braille, sign language and alternative means of communication; and staff training in, for example, disability awareness.

The CRPD Committee is currently drafting a general comment on the issue. The draft emphasises that inclusion is not simply a matter of access but of content, information and communication. It emphasises that placing disabled students in

mainstream classes without appropriate support does not constitute inclusion. Similarly, that creating isolated units within a mainstream school environment remains a form of segregation, and cannot be defined as inclusive education. The Committee urges countries to transfer resources from segregated to inclusive environments.

This signifies a positive approach to inclusion which embraces a presumption in favour of mainstream education, with support to ensure that education really is inclusive and not mere integration. The CRPD was ratified by the UK in 2008.

Policy and provision on special educational needs (SEN) is a devolved matter, with each UK region having a separate system under a separate government. The UK government is responsible for education in England; the Northern Ireland executive for education in Northern Ireland (NI); the

Scottish Government in Scotland; and the Welsh government in Wales. This would appear to open the way for some degree of policy divergence, but also opportunities for regions to learn from each other and to identify and harness best practice.

Similarities and differences can be identified across the UK. Each region has identified SEN as in need of reform. The general presumption in favour of mainstream education remains (although not without challenge) and there appears to be some agreement on the contemporary principles that should underpin these various reforms. For example, we can see a shift towards increased participation of children and young people and their parents in assessment processes, an identified need for greater collaboration and focus on outcomes, and a common desire for a much simpler system. However, there are differences in the measures each region has adopted, or is planning to adopt, to address these issues.

The presumption in favour of mainstream education has undergone the biggest challenge in England with the 2011 statement by Government that it wished to ‘remove the bias towards inclusion’. The Children and Families Act extends legislation to include children and young people 0-25, replaces School Action and School Action Plus with ‘SEN support’, and replaces ‘Statements’ of SEN with Education, Health and Care (EHC) plans. Critically, it emphasises the participation of children and young people and their parents in decision-making, and focuses on increasing aspirations and improving outcomes. In contrast to the 2011 statement, the 2015 Revised Code of Practice states that ‘As part of its commitments under… the CRPD, the UK Government is committed to inclusive education of disabled children and young people and the progressive removal of barriers to learning and participation in mainstream education.’ However, while those who do not have an EHC plan must be educated in mainstream settings, those who do have an EHC plan face conditions; they can be educated in a mainstream setting unless it is against the wishes of the young person or their

What does the right to inclusive education look like across the UK?

[Title goes here]

9

UK inclusion

parent, would damage the efficient education of others, or no reasonable steps can be taken.

The current SEN framework in Northern Ireland was introduced in 1986, in line with legislation in England and Wales. It was updated by the 1996 Education Order, providing a legal framework for assessment and provision for SEN (primarily through statements). The 2005 Education Order enhanced the rights of children with SEN to attend mainstream schools and, like its equivalents in the rest of the UK, introduced protections against disability discrimination in education. The NI Department of Education’s 2009 consultation, ‘Every School a Good School: The Way Forward for Special Educational Needs and Inclusion’, proposed extensive changes to SEN provision, including a new model based on Additional Educational Needs. However, the proposals were extensively criticised. A Special Educational Needs and Disability Bill received royal assent on 23 March 2016. This does not include many of the prior proposals and is scant on details. Many of these are expected to be introduced in a revised Code of Practice and amendments to regulations. The new SEN framework is premised on an inclusive ethos but maintains a role for special schools. It introduces statutory personal learning plans (PLPs) to replace statements, and emphasises early intervention and staff training. It also focuses on learning and outcomes for pupils with SEN, and on ensuring the views of pupils and parents are considered.

Reform has also been underway in Wales. In July 2015, the Welsh government launched a consultation on a Draft Additional Learning Needs and Education Tribunal Bill, confirming its ‘continued dedication to a fully inclusive system in Wales’, with a new draft Additional Learning Needs Code of Practice published at the end of September 2015. The draft Bill proposes new legislation for children and young people 0-25. At its core is the introduction of a single category of ‘Additional Learning Needs’ replacing the language of SEN. A single statutory plan (an individual development plan) is proposed to replace statements, Individual Education Plans, School Action and School Action Plus. There is concern that removing the statutory assessment places a general requirement upon schools to identify needs rather than a prescribed

system of expert assessments. Like England and NI, the Bill also focuses on improving outcomes and increased participation of children and young people and their families. The Bill is now on hold until after the Welsh Assembly elections this May.

In Scotland, reforms are less recent by comparison, but contain provisions that have been considered by other jurisdictions. The Standards in Scotland’s Schools etc. Act (2000) includes a presumption of mainstream education, unless this would: not be suited to the ‘ability or aptitude of the child’, ‘be incompatible with the provision of efficient education’ for other children, or ‘result in unreasonable public expenditure’. It also requires the views of the child and their parent(s) to be taken into account in decision making processes. This evolved with the implementation in 2005 of the Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Act 2004 and a Code of Practice. Here, the concept of SEN was replaced with that of ‘additional support needs’ (ASN). Records of Needs (RoNs) were abolished and Co-ordinated Support Plans (CSPs) were created, intended to apply to a smaller group of children with multiple or complex needs requiring significant additional support.

Inclusive education is not simply about attending a mainstream school but about the quality of educational experience and access to the curriculum. While there is a general presumption of mainstream education, it is clear that SEN policies across the UK consider inclusion in a relatively narrow, largely procedural sense. There is some evidence of movement with the weight now given in theory to the views of children and young people and their families, and to collaboration and improving outcomes, but it remains to be seen how these will play out. Devolution has affected the tools used to progress reforms across the UK, but beneath the buzzwords, it is not clear that the right to an inclusive education has undergone substantive change in and of itself. If anything there is concern that legal rights are being diluted at the expense of flexibility and efficiency. Irrespective of where in the UK you may be, the right to an inclusive education continues to fall considerably short of what is required by the CRPD.

Bronagh ByrneQueen’s University Belfast

10

Parent voice

About twelve years ago I went to an event in Nottingham run by Inclusive Solutions. At

the time, my son was a very unhappy person at a school in Leicester. He had been diagnosed as having Pervasive Developmental Disorder on the Autistic Spectrum so he had full time support. The conference helped me focus on him as a human being and his whole personality - with the idea that his difficulties were only one slice of the full pizza that makes him a full person - rather than on his deficits and impairment labels. I was like a born again Christian, trying to show people how the scales had fallen from my eyes - my son did have abilities, he would be able to cope with school and life.Unfortunately, the school did not agree with me and after years of fighting, they asked us to take our son away from the school at the end of Year 9. It was a particularly unpleasant parting of the ways - they were going to place him in a non-exam teaching group where he would be farmed out to a local college for ‘Life Skills’, whatever they are! We knew that he was able to sit GCSEs and because we asked for the decision to be changed, they gave us an ultimatum: “Accept what we have proposed and stop interfering or find another school for him.”

This isn’t very scholarly language but after hours of crying I thought, “Sod you - we will find somewhere else for Finn.”

He was attending a lovely youth group in a school twenty miles from our home so I rang the Head, and Finn started there the following September. (For four years my husband and I drove him there and back every day as the local authority refused to help with transport, saying he should have stayed at his previous school. My husband had to change his job and it cost us £50 a week in petrol - all his DLA money.) Their attitude was so different that Finn really thrived, achieving an amazing 5 GCSEs and 2 A levels. Six months after leaving school he had a part-time job with Leicester Tigers Rugby Club and he enrolled with the Open University. In October 2015 he graduated with an Honours degree in History at the Symphony Hall in Birmingham. It was one of the best days of our lives.

That same week, he started doing some agency work at the Santander Bank in Enderby, Leicestershire. He was on a temporary six month contract but after only three months his job was made permanent. This young man, who was considered ‘totally innumerate’ at school was now helping people to manage their money. Finn has a very rounded life - he plays cricket for a local team, supports Leicester City, goes to the gym and is very active in our local parish. When he finished his Open University degree he said that he no longer needed his DLA as he was able to live an independent life. DLA helped us for years but Finn no longer needs it and that’s his choice.

All those years ago Colin and Derek from Inclusive Solutions encouraged us to take the long view and I particularly remember from the event the story that a teacher told about the well known footballer, Rio Ferdinand. Rio’s mum had gone to the nursery to thank his original teacher there for accepting him and encouraging his creativity by letting him play with balls when he was so challenging as a little boy – that early belief in Rio clearly made a massive difference over the long term and the same is true for Finn and me as his mum. My advice to other parents is to be the best ally that you can be to your child – love and constant belief in a person helps build a future full of hope and aspiration.

Josephine Feeney

Taking the long view

11

Tribute

Ann died far too early from

cancer on 25th February 2015, aged 59. The memorial event was held in Bristol on 12th March 2016, next to the Redweather office. It was like her life, packed with projects, family, friends and many people whose life Ann touched.

Ann was born and brought up on the family farm at Nantmel in Central Wales. She went to art college in Cardiff and became a youth worker, trained at the BBC as a TV film maker and worked in the Community Unit of HTV in 1982.

Ann was committed to equality, especially for disabled people, and increasingly used her talents to make films reflecting this. Typical of her films was one aimed at pregnant BME women with no healthcare. Made in twelve community languages it reached its target audience and numerous women benefitted. Another was for ‘UKDPC Murals Project’, featuring disabled asylum seekers.

Ann was a founding member of the Avon Coalition of Disabled People, and through the Coalition learned of the campaign for inclusive education going on in the 1980s and 1990s. I remember in 1993 going with Micheline to a day the Coalition held on inclusion and meeting Ann. Ann managed to get the BBC Disability Programmes Unit to commission four, thirty minute films called ‘Old School Ties’.

Ann made many films on inclusion in Bristol including ‘Promoting Inclusion in Bristol Early Years’ (60 mins) and ‘Inclusion, Raising the Issues’, both excellent for practitioners. Knowing Ann’s expertise when I was commissioned by the Department for Education to show best practice in English schools for making reasonable adjustments for disabled children I asked her to work with me to film good

practice in 41 schools. The films were and are still cutting edge and can be found on You Tube - the guide to them is at http://bit.ly/1Rp5X0H. For the Alliance, Ann made several films, the first being ‘The Inclusion Assistant’. More recently she worked with the Alliance to film a group of disabled children and young people and parents talking about what it means to be an Ally. Ann also filmed a number of the interviews the Alliance used for their How was School project (www.howwasschool.org.uk) which documents, the school experiences of fifty disabled people across the last one hundred years – all interviews are also now archived in the British Library Oral History archives.

In 2008 I had some money left from DfID for developing inclusive education in Southern Africa. I asked Ann and Denis Green to accompany me on a lecture tour, which doubled with the support of the South African Government to filming in ten primary schools in four Provinces. Amazingly we got enough material to make the DVD Developing Inclusive Education in South Africa. This is used in teacher training throughout South Africa. http://www.redweather.co.uk/developing-inclusive-education-in-south-africa.html

Ann and I also made ten films about bringing disability into the curriculum for the Qualification & Curriculum Authority. This was abolished by the Government before they could be distributed. http://www.redweather.co.uk/disabilityinthecurriculum Because Ann was disabled and able to film sensitively her films are unique.

Ann had been a trustee of Firebird Theatre for people with Learning Difficulties and we were treated to extracts from their Bristol Old Vic production of ‘Breadhorse’. To quote one of the actors “Ann was always my friend”. Ann worked with the Misfits Theatre and was a supporter of Artists First.

Frank and Ann’s two grown up children and whole family shared a truly memorable evening with us. No one who worked with Ann will ever forget her calm and happy persona and no nonsense approach that often achieved the impossible. For everyone else we have her films to remember her by.

Ann PughFilm maker and campaigner Richard Rieser

12

Opinion

This is a piece about education structures and governance and the most marginalised

children. It raises concerns about educational provision in the context of increasing academisation, now, alarmingly, set to be universal.The education policy language in England in 2016 crackles with demands for standards, accountability, competition, compliance and markets – and profit, secrecy and rejection. Academies were an imaginative move under the Labour government to solve the problem of ‘failing schools’, where their local authorities could not raise standards. In 2010, there were 203 sponsored academies, all secondary. Like many ‘third way’ initiatives intended to break down the barrier between the private and public sectors, in health, criminal justice, youth work and family support, it may have offered some innovative and efficient answers in the early days – let’s say up to 2005. In particular, it may have offered solutions that were not arising from self-satisfied local authorities or state bureaucracies. The sacrifice was the loss of democratic control as exercised through elected local councils. Sadly, it was too easy to be critical and intolerant of LAs, their slowness, sometimes ineffectiveness, often lack of drive. But what have we now?

Anthony Giddens, intellectual champion of The Third Way, insisted that this third way ‘must reduce inequality’, and, if it does not, ‘is a betrayal of the social democratic ideals of collective provision for the poor and needy’ (1999, ‘Better than warmed over porridge’, New Statesman, 12 February, 25-26). We can conclude that it has not succeeded in these terms and is indeed a betrayal. The door was pushed wide open by Labour in the institutions of Health and Education. Ripped off profit and championing the easy wins is what private enterprise logic demands. Some academy federations are locally based arrangements, much like mini-LAs. These were set up with the full agreement of the

LA and they take on the full range of functions and responsibilities which were once the job of LAs. The Coastal Academies Trust in Thanet, Kent is one; this is a collective which explicitly and actively seeks to support its weakest or most challenged schools, even in partnership with its grammar schools.

Under the Conservative/Lib-Dem coalition, the number of conversion academies, primary and secondary, has risen to 4,676 schools (June 2015), approaching a quarter of all schools. Over half of all secondaries in England are academies. There are none in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (nor league tables or semi-private inspection systems).

It is difficult for an education system structured around national or regional academy chains to design collective provision for a defined area and population. It is more difficult still to ensure that those liable to exclusion, whether through disability, deprivation or ethnicity, are recognised and catered for. The chaotic mix of local authority schools, free schools, academies and then special schools, Pupil Referral Units (PRUs) and Alternative Provision (AP) means those once tasked with coordinating local services are left to fill the gaps, fund the costly and tailor provision for the exceptional and challenging.

Over eight million children are educated in England’s schools, one seventh of the total population. A particular worry about the increasing, and some say irreversible (not true), dominance of academies and the lack of oversight to which they are subject concerns the diverse ways of removing ‘unwanted pupils’. Those we can count are:

Academies: an indicator that we have lost the will and capacity to care and protect

13

Opinion

1. Permanent exclusions have reduced to around 5,000, 66% with some level of SEN (2013/14). Most go to PRUs and AP.

2. Fixed period exclusions numbered 143,000 instances, 10% with statements and 43% with SEN without statements

3. Pupil Referral Units (PRUs) accommodate 14,500 pupils and 27,500 are in Alternative Provision (AP); half are in Year 11. Most are on managed moves, dual registration or short-term placement. 79% of pupils in PRUs have SEN of some description.

4. Elective Home Education (EHE) is the formally recorded education for 27,000 children (July 2014); an increase of 65% over six years. An estimate of those pushed into this option is 9,000.

5. Reduced timetables, sometimes for medical reasons, reportedly used for some at risk of exclusion but it is recommended that it is short-term. Estimated numbers are 30,000 for at risk of exclusion pupils (2014/15).

6. Extended study leave, usually year 11 but reports are of its wider use. Estimated numbers 20,000 (2014/15).

7. Attendance code B - Approved Off-site Educational Activity - is a frequently cited location for some challenging pupils but difficult to differentiate those at risk of exclusion and pupils on courses shared with another school. Ofsted does not enquire about the former. Incidental reports, aggregated up, give us an estimate of 15,000 young people.

8. Children Missing Education (CME). This is a most worrying area with children completely off the radar. All local authorities have guidance on this but a child removed from a school’s register is not necessarily reported to the local authority and the child’s file is retained in the school awaiting a request from the new school. Again, reportedly, some academy chains are said to be

not reporting to the LA. Numbers estimated in the Telegraph, based on freedom of information enquiries, are 12,000 but it should be noted that 69 LAs reported ‘none’, which is difficult to believe! The DfE is consulting on improving reporting of CME.

In 2011/12, only 1.3% of pupils in alternative provision (AP) achieved 5 or more A* to C GCSEs, or equivalent, including English and maths; the national average was 54%. The proportion with registered special needs is around 75%.

Omitting fixed period exclusions, and accepting some estimating, we know of 51,000 school age children designated as needing to be educated outside mainstream education (3 and 4 above). More speculatively, an additional 77,000 are part of an unrecorded population outside mainstream in much less supervised circumstances (4 – 8 above). Missing mainstream education disproportionately affects children affected by other disadvantages and unmet needs, whether poverty or special needs.

Speedy assessment of children and speedily identified appropriate provision would help. Following SEND reforms in September 2014, 61.5% of EHC plans were issued within the revised deadline of 20 weeks. It still seems slow.

The special needs and exclusion terrain was always fraught with conflict and challenge and when local authorities were in control it was not uniformly well-run. Their claimed safety net role was sometimes unconvincing. Now there is a much weaker safety net scarcely deserving that label, and while formally reported exclusions are down to 5,000 per year, AP is the new ‘secret garden’. Can one point the finger at academies? In a poorly monitored system, it would be to the advantage of market-oriented edu-business, striving for positive results in what is measured, to use covert means of removing challenging children.

Anecdotes abound about academies excluding by the backdoor, offering inaccessible alternative provision as the option to pupils excluded (fixed term or permanent), placing barriers to the admission of special needs pupils, registering pupils as attendance code B (approved off-site educational

Those where we can only speculate, and estimate from informed professionals are:

14

The White Paper Educational Excellence Everywhere is a flawed and deeply ideological document which is the biggest threat we currently face to state education and inclusion. It seeks to academise all schools by 2022 and to downsize local authorities. These proposed changes are based upon no evidence. It claims a million more children are now in schools which are rated good or better by OFSTED, but ignores the fact that 930,000 (93%) are not in academies but in schools maintained by local authorities.

Multi Academy Chains (MATs) do not improve standards - only three of the top twenty MATs achieve the required school improvement targets and 85% fall below standard. Secondary schools are four times worse off if they become academies, while primary schools are eleven times worse off if they become academies compared to those who

Richard Rieser

comment: compulsory academisation

remain under local authority control (CASE briefing 2).

The removal of parent governors who are often the SEN governor and placing of accreditation of teachers entirely with headteachers will both significantly weaken SEN provision and inclusion.

The motivation is privatisation, and Nicky Morgan has not ruled out introducing profit for MATs. Evidence is growing of financial abuse and channeling of funds to consultancy and inflated salaries for the MATs.

This is no way to run a school system. Disabled young people and those with SEN provision will be squeezed, and segregation accelerated. Join the campaign to reject the White Paper and fight for a quality inclusive comprehensive local authority maintained and democratically accountable school in every locality.

Opinion

Carl ParsonsUniversity of Greenwich

activity), extended study leave and forced EHE when they have been required not to attend, stating when in local authority organised meetings that there is no reason for the academy to comply with any decision the LA makes. Add to this the public money to pay huge salaries to academy chain chief executives and their associated staff development businesses, designed for the academies under their control. Evidence is not convincing that academies are more successful in raising attainment levels than mainstream schools.

Academisation is seriously damaging and will be more so if government proposals to see all schools outside local authorities and local democratic control come to fruition. It is not a matter of blaming individual academies or academy chains, but the very rules and laws which have made their creation possible. The horror when all schools become academies will mean Giddens’ mild reservations in

• DfE (Nov 2015) Special educational needs: an analysis and summary of data sources, London: Dept for Education. http://bit.ly/1ToBy3t

• DfE (May 2015) Policy paper: 2010 to 2015 government policy: children outside mainstream education, London: Department for Education. http://bit.ly/1SAoJbA

• DfE (2015) Schools, pupils and their characteristics: January 2015, London: Department for Education. http://bit.ly/1HyMDhe

• Ed Yourself (2014) http://bit.ly/1SOzTbv• Telegraph (11 March 2016) http://bit.ly/1q1Exr6• DfE (January 2016) Improving information in identifying children

missing education Government consultation http://bit.ly/1UBahQH

Some sources:

1999 have come to pass with inequality certainly not reduced, and protection and care of the needy and vulnerable less assured than it has ever been.

15

News and events

A strong motion critical of SEND reforms and reiterating the need for support for inclusive

education was unanimously carried by delegates in Brighton representing 330,000 members of the National Union of Teachers at their Easter conference. The motion highlighted the decrease in students with SEN in mainstream as a result of the move away from School Action and School Action Plus, which has left many students without vital support previously available to them, noted the increase in students in special schools, and the detrimental impact on disabled students and those with SEN of the league table culture and raising the bar on tests and exams. This Government agenda is at odds with a democratic and inclusive education system. The motion also addressed the negative impact of reforming the Higher Needs Funding Block and called for a levelling up to current funding for poorly funded areas rather than taking money away, and action to highlight its negative impact. The motion committed the union:• To taking action to defend job losses in central

services, school support staff and restore funding to pre-austerity levels;

• To demanding all teachers, whatever route they take into teaching, receive comprehensive

training on SEND; • To campaign to end the testing regime and

compulsory retakes of CSE English and Maths;• To work with other interested organisations to

design an alternative, meaningful, inclusive curriculum, which celebrates the achievements of students with SEND.

The motion was moved by Richard Rieser of Hackney and seconded by Deb Gwyne of Halton (near Liverpool), a secondary SENCO who both drew attention to the negative impacts on students with SEND of the Government reforms.

The NUT conference had already voted to campaign against the unnecessary, undemocratic and dangerous White Paper: Educational Excellence Everywhere and to ballot on striking to protect national teachers terms and conditions which will disappear when all schools are academies. This will have a huge negative impact on students with SEND. The following Tuesday the ATL also voted to oppose the White Paper and the NASUWT were also highly critical and barracked Nicky Morgan, while she attempted to promote her flawed White Paper. Many conservatives and parents’ groups are opposing the White Paper. Make sure your energy and voice joins them.

NUT Conference defends Inclusion

Richard Rieser

The purpose of community circles is to bring people from a local community together to share their skills, talents, gifts and resources. We believe that everyone needs community, everyone needs to be heard and everyone needs to have fun.

Upcoming dates for 2016 are:• Wednesday 4th May 7-9• Wednesday 8th June 7-9• Thursday 7th July 7-9• Thursday 4th August 7-9• Monday 12th September 7-9At the Sumac Centre, 245 Gladstone St, Nottingham, NG7 6HX

Phone: 0845 458 9595 / 0115 960 8254. Any questions please email: inclusive.solutions@me.com

http://inclusive-solutions.com/circles/community-circles/

Nottingham Community Circles

16

Equality and law

Disproportionate exclusion rates have been a constant issue in Britain’s schools for

generations. More than half our referrals at the Communities Empowerment Network are of young black men, and between 70 and 80% of our caseload has SEND (Special Educational Needs and/ or Disability), diagnosed or otherwise. Most of the pupils that we support satisfy three of the nine protected characteristics recognised by the Equality Act 2010: gender, race and disability. The Department for Education’s (DfE) guidance on the Equality Act contains six paragraphs relating to the exclusion process. There are also six references to SEND and the Code of Practice. All this has statutory status. So it is disappointing that the Equality Act receives so little consideration during the exclusion process, and it’s no surprise then that disproportionate exclusions continue to have an impact on already disadvantaged communities.

In 2011 the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) replaced the previous separate public sector equality duties on race, disability and gender. The Equality Act and guidance state that when carrying out their functions, schools and academies must have due regard to the need to:

• ‘Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other prohibited conduct’ - it is not uncommon for pupils with SEND or from BAMER communities to experience bigotry leading to perceptions of poor behaviour and underachievement.

• ‘Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a relevant protected characteristic and those who do not.’ This could involve removing barriers to learning, meeting identified and less obvious needs and encouraging participation in all aspects of school life to ensure that the curriculum represents marginalised groups.

• ‘Foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not.’ Practically this involves promoting

understanding and challenging prejudice between members of a school community with and without a protected characteristic.

The Equality Act also says that public bodies must demonstrate:

• A proactive and organised approach to tackling institutional discrimination and to mainstream equality in their day to day business.

• That they have thought about the effect of their activities on marginalised groups and how the needs of these groups can be met.

• A continuing duty, entailing regular review of policies and services.

The inability of a school to evidence ‘due regard’ for these bullet points throughout an exclusion process would render the sanction unlawful giving strong grounds for appeal.

Due regard is more than simply giving consideration to each of the aims of the Equality Duty. School leadership, governing bodies, local authorities and academy trusts must show evidence that they adhere to the duty and consider the impact of exclusion on individuals, groups and communities. Underpinning this is the principle that exclusion must be in the best interest of the excluded pupil, and other relevant considerations should be taken into account such as causal or contributing factors or the pupil’s additional needs.

Schools must demonstrate that they have shown due regard throughout the exclusion process in the form of documents and data contained within the excluded pupil’s records.

These principles constitute a general duty that schools must demonstrate compliance with. The PSED also contains a specific duty.

Because schools and academies are amongst the public bodies listed in the Equality Act, there are specific duties to help them perform the general duty effectively, and these require that at least one equality objective is published every four years. The

School exclusion and the 2010 Equality Act

17

Equality and law

objectives must be SMART (specific, measurable, agreed-upon, realistic and time-based) and directly relate to the school’s community. Schools and colleges are also required to publish information every year demonstrating how they are meeting their general duty, including information on pupils with protected characteristics.

Failure of a school to demonstrate these duties would also render an exclusion unlawful.

‘Human rights’ are based on principles such as dignity, fairness, equality and respect, and inform the policy frameworks for public bodies. The Human Rights Act 1998 brought human rights into UK law.

Paragraph five of the DfE guidance states that ‘any decision of a school, including exclusion, must be made in line with the principles of administrative law, ie. that it is: lawful (the DfE guidance and the Human Rights Act); rational; reasonable; fair; and proportionate.’

Of the fourteen articles defined by the Human Rights Act the following five are the most relevant;• Article 2 (of Protocol 2): The right to an

education.• Article 6: Right to a fair trial.• Article 8: Respect for family and private life.• Article 10: Freedom of expression. • Article 14: Prohibition of discrimination.Direction to a Pupil Referral Unit (PRU) follows a permanent exclusion or more than five school days of exclusion. Only 1% of Year 11 pupils attending a PRU will achieve the average of five A-C grades at GCSE level and they will find they have gone from studying seven or eight subjects in mainstream to three subjects in a PRU. This is of particular concern for SEND and/or Black pupils who are overrepresented in school exclusion rates.

Often the exclusion hearing is unfair because the panel members and clerks are (consciously or unconsciously) biased toward the school and lack knowledge of the DfE guidance. Politicians would prefer us to see exclusion as an intervention for managing behaviour, but most pupils experience several terms of exclusion, demonstrating that as an intervention it is ineffective and applied without consideration to either the law or the principles of the guidance. Exclusions harm not only the excluded pupil but also their wider family, affecting

employment and health, to name but two factors.

Finally it is not uncommon for an exclusion to occur without the excluded pupil being given an opportunity to account for the incident which led to it.

Any advocate or family can put together a strong argument for the reconsideration of an exclusion by combining the PSED and the principle of law that exclusions must be lawful, rational, reasonable, fair and proportionate (and within the parameters of the European Convention of Human Rights). There are excellent resources online provided by the Equality and Human Rights Commission, who are the regulator. http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/advice-and-guidance/your-rights-under-equality-act-2010#h3

During my three years as a practitioner I have never seen evidence of due regard or heard reference to the PSED from a governing body or from the independent panels whose role it is to scrutinise the exclusion process. In the scores of meetings I have had with schools with the aim of preventing exclusion, I have never heard a reference to the PSED or protected characteristics, despite it being directly relevant to the excluded pupil. The same can be said of Ofsted inspection reports.

As concerned stakeholders we have a responsibility to champion the PSED and campaign for the re-establishment of equalities across the public sector including schools and other education providers.

To conclude, the Equality Act is dynamic but only as effective and powerful as the people implementing it. Schools appear to be struggling to implement the PSED, possibly due to conflicting priorities and responsibilities competing for time and attention. But by doing so they are dismissing

practical strategies which are aimed at ending discriminatory practices, educational and social exclusion and segregation, and ultimately the narrowing of life chances.

Marc LorenziMarc is an Education Advocate with The Communities Empowerment Network (www.cenlive.org)

18

Legal Question

My daughter requires Speech and Language Therapy as part of SEN provision which supports her participation on a Level 3 apprenticeship. The LA refuses to provide SALT on the grounds that she has completed her qualification, alhough she is still undertaking the work placement. She still has to complete the requirements of her placement in order to get the apprenticeship certificate. Is the work placement still part of education provision or something separate ie more of an Access to Work issue?

The Children and Families Act 2014 has significantly extended the legal special educational needs framework. Education, Health and Care plans (EHC plans) have replaced statements and should be maintained until a young person is 25 (whereas statements ended at 19), provided the young person has an ongoing need for education.

The new SEN Code of Practice emphasises that special educational provision should not focus solely on academic achievement, and that young people should be supported to achieve the best possible educational and other outcomes, including getting a job and living as independently as possible.

As a consequence, a wide array of post 16 provision – including school sixth forms (both mainstream and special schools), sixth form colleges, general further education colleges, 16-19 academies, special post-16 institutions, and vocational learning and training providers in the private or voluntary sector can all be named in a young person’s EHC plan. The range of available study programmes is broad and includes AS/A-levels, vocational qualifications at all levels, apprenticeships, traineeships, supported internships and bespoke packages of learning.

Apprenticeships can therefore be named in a young person’s EHC plan and the starting point is to consider your daughter’s Education, Health and Care plan (EHC plan).

Speech and language therapy should usually be recorded as education provision in section F of EHC plans. If it is set out in the plan it must be arranged by the local authority regardless of whether the college part of your daughter’s course has ended. If the local authority refuse to provide this you should seek advice as soon as possible as the failure to provide the support is challengeable by way of

James is a solicitor with Maxwell Gillott, who specialise in legal advice and assistance for clients facing difficulties with education, health and social services.

www.maxwellgillott.co.uk

judicial review and such claims must be brought promptly. If the wording in the plan is clear then the matter will usually be resolved following a strongly worded letter to the local authority advising them of this breach.

If you find that the SLT provision is not set out in Section F of the plan, or if it is but the wording makes it unclear what support is to be provided, it may make it difficult to enforce the provision. This emphasises the need to ensure that an EHC plan properly specifies and quantifies all the provision that is to be provided.

Young people are provided with a right of appeal to the Special Educational Needs Tribunal when a plan is issued and therefore advice should also be sought when a plan is issued if you have any concerns with the provision in the plan (or the placement itself). Again, there are strict time limits for these appeals so you should seek legal advice as soon as possible if you have concerns with the content of the plan.

Special educational needs remains in scope for legal aid and any legal work could therefore be publically funded provided your daughter is eligible. More information and contact details as to how to obtain legal aid can be found here https://www.gov.uk/civil-legal-advice

Finally, if your daughter does not have an EHC plan, I would advise that a request is made for an EHC assessment as soon as possible. If she has a Learning Difficulty Assessment this should be transferred to an EHC plan by the end of August 2016 at the latest and you should make a formal request for conversion immediately to the local authority SEN department.

James Betts

[Title goes here]

19

Subscribe

Our preferred method of payment is by standing order - please return this form to us at the address overleaf and we will send you a standing order form to sign. Otherwise, please

enclose a cheque made payable to the Alliance for Inclusive Education.

Subscription automatically entitles you to membership of the Alliance for Inclusive Education.

o £15 a year Individuals (UK)o £30 a year Organisations (UK)o £25 a year Overseas Individuals o £40 a year Overseas Organisations

I/We would like to subscribe to Inclusion Now

Name:

Address:

E-mail:

Phone:

I would like my copy:

o In Print o On Tape o As a PDF oText only (both options by email)

Date:

Signature:

Subscription Form

This magazine is published by:

In collaboration with:

DisableD people, parents anD allies, working together to educate, facilitate and empower everyone who wants to be part of the growing inclusion movement. Together we want to bring down the barriers so all young people can learn, make friends and have a voice in ordinary school and throughout life. For each and every young person, this is an essential human right.

The Alliance for Inclusive Education (ALLFIE)A national campaigning organisation led by disabled people. ALLFIE works to change laws, practices and procedures which discriminate against disabled young people and prevent inclusion. ALLFIE works together with allies to build a social climate in which everyone has a valued place.

Inclusive SolutionsA team of psychologists and associates who specialise in cutting edge practical strategies and ideas for developing effective inclusion in local mainstream schools and communities. We work with anyone who wants to bring about the real systems changes that are necessary to move towards a truly inclusive society.

World of InclusionA consultancy that provides advice, resources and training in the UK and around the world to develop equality for disabled people especially in education. Richard Rieser is an expert disabled international equality trainer, consultant, film maker and writer and teacher.

ALL MEANS ALL

336 Brixton Road, London SW9 7AA Tel: 020 7737 6030

Email: info@allfie.org.ukWebsite: www.allfie.org.uk

Tel: 0115 9556045 or 01473 437590 Email: inclusive.solutions@me.com

Website: inclusive-solutions.com

Basement, 78 Mildmay Grove South, London N1 4PJ Tel: 020 7359 2855 or 07715 420727

Email: richardrieser@worldofinclusion.com

Website: worldofinclusion.com

[FSC Logo]