Yesterday the Government published its long-awaited green paper on special educational needs and disability which sets out a range of proposals for widespread consultation with the sector. The publication of the green paper – entitled “Support and aspiration: A new approach to special educational needs and disability - a consultation” – has been keenly awaited for many months.
According to sources in and around Government the green paper has been the indisputably dominant priority for Sarah Teather and her officials for the last 2-3 months, taking precedence at times even over the development of the Pupil Premium policy, which is a prized flagship policy for the Liberal Democrats.
This is in part a reflection of the considerable slippage in the publication timeframe - It is widely understood that DfE officials and ministers had initially been optimistic about the prospects of having the green paper out for widespread consultation by the end of December 2010, but the deadline has had to be repeatedly rolled back throughout the New Year.
The issues it focuses on are of course are complex in both policy and political terms to grapple with, and the consultation paper tries to walk a fine line in trying to build cross-sector support for a number of its key proposals around statementing, professional development and greater parental choice and co-production.
Once I’ve had a chance to read through the green paper’s key sections and some of the supporting documents - all available on DfE's website - I will, in the next few days, provide a short analytical commentary on the potential implications and likely shape of the policy debate across 2011.
In the meantime I’m publishing a brief round-up of what some of the key stakeholder organisations in the education, children’s services and disability sector are saying:
Brian Lightman, General Secretary, Association of School and College Leaders
“(ASCL) welcome the proposals in the green paper to simplify the statementing process. The current system is much too bureaucratic, creates unhelpful tensions between schools and parents and often doesn’t address children’s needs. A single SEN category has the potential to streamline the process and allow more time for identifying and accessing support.
“However there are still many unanswered questions about the future of local strategic planning for SEN provision. SEN provision is very expensive and highly specialised and the proposed reforms will need significant investment. Schools cannot work in isolation and a principle of free choice for parents would be extremely costly. SEN is one area in which local authorities have an essential role to play in planning and locating provision and coordinating admissions. It is unclear how special schools becoming academies will contribute to the development of coherent provision.”
ASCL’s response is available in full here.
Tara Flood, Director, Alliance for Inclusive Education:
“The proposals in the Green paper will not makes things easier for parents, in fact, things will be made a great deal worse as the fundamental framework of support for disabled children and those with SEN is dismantled with no workable alternative – these proposals are ill thought out and will take education back 20 years for disabled children and children with SEN."
ALLFIE’s response is available in full here.
Srabani Sen, Chief Executive, Contact a Family:
“Many of the principles such as giving parents more control are to be commended. But there are questions that need to be answered on how these proposals would work in practice. The consultation provides a very useful starting point for discussion.
“We welcome, for example, plans to give families greater control and co-ordination of their child’s care through personal budgets. However we need to see if enough funding will be available to families through personal budgets to meet the needs of their child.
“The introduction of a simplified assessment process has the potential to make lives less stressful for families. However the Green Paper is not clear about where responsibility lies to ensure that a joined up package of support is delivered for disabled children and their families, and that those carrying out assessments have the right skills and knowledge.
Professionals must be made accountable if they do not deliver and there is no clear indication of how this would work in the Green Paper.”
Contact a Family's response is available in full here.
Lorraine Petersen OBE, Chief Executive, NASEN:
“We are pleased to see a clear emphasis on training and development for staff in schools - building on the schools white paper. We need our teachers to be well trained and confident to identify needs and barriers to learning and provide the right support early on."
“We need to acknowledge that some parents will need more support than others in ensuring that they have and understand all of the information they need to make the correct choices for their child. With the reduction in key personal at local authority level Nasen has a concern that those advocates will not be available for parents to turn to.
There also needs to be very clear guidance on how the personal budget option will work for parents. What will happen if the child’s current provision costs more than the budget allocated to parents? What about transport costs? Nasen welcomes the drive the bring children and young people back into their community but there will be a need to consider local provision and its ability to meet the future needs of the children it serves.”'
NASEN’s response is available in full here.
No comments:
Post a Comment