A Summary of the Evaluation of Special Educational Needs Co- ordinators’ Views of Person Centred Annual Reviews Main Findings
Person Centred Annual Reviews (PCARs) are a way to run an Annual Review (AR) meeting so that children or young people are placed at the heart of the process. Through Person Centred Approaches, successes are celebrated and areas of difficulty are addressed with honesty and care.
This project is run by the Educational Psychology Service (EPS) and Special Educational Needs (SEN) Section with partner schools in the borough.
Two questionnaires were sent to twenty-two Special Educational Needs Co- ordinators (SENCos) or relevant professionals participating in the pilot project.
Person Centred Approaches are an integral part of the draft Special Educational Needs Code of Practice. There is an assumption that all planning for children and young people with SEN and Disabilities will be person centred. The outcomes of this evaluation will be used to support schools and professionals contributing to statutory processes to adopt person centred planning.
The aims of the project were:
a. To collate SENCo or relevant professional views on the advantages and disadvantages of the PCAR process compared to previous AR processes. b. To identify some of the advantages and disadvantages of the PCAR process. c. To use information collated from the research project to inform how EPs can continue to support schools to use PCARs or Person Centred Approaches (PCAs).
Project Questionnaires:
Twenty two initial questionnaires (see Appendix 1) were sent out of which seven were returned.
The advantages and disadvantages that were highlighted by respondents were then grouped together. The most pertinent advantages and disadvantages to this evaluation were collated and then reviewed by the project EPs.
An agreed number of advantages and disadvantages were then put in the follow-up questionnaire. Respondents were asked to rank from biggest to smallest the advantages or disadvantages of PCARs, when compared to previous AR processes (see Appendix 2 to see follow-up questionnaire).
Of the twenty two follow-up questionnaires sent to SENCos and relevant professionals eight were returned. See the Venn diagram in Appendix 3 to see the number of respondents who contributed to one or both questionnaires.
The project highlighted some overall advantages and disadvantages. It has informed how the EPS will continue to support schools to use PCARs in their practice.
1 Main findings What are the advantages of PCARs compared to previous school AR processes?
When comparing PCARs to previous AR processes a number of advantages were highlighted for key stakeholders in the meeting such as children and young people (CYP), teachers, parents, other professionals, peers and wider school staff.
Most importantly a number of the advantages highlighted the CYP being placed at the heart of the process.
SENCos and other professionals have noted the impact of PCARS on CYP with statements including being able to ‘celebrate their successes’ and observations of CYP growing in ‘confidence’ following participation in PCARs’.
CYP are also reported to be very interested in the views of their peers and have the opportunity to hear ‘These are all the things we like about….’. Whereas sharing views from class mates had not typically been done in AR meetings.
PCARs facilitate opportunities for parents to see their child as a whole person and not just as someone with additional needs.
Professionals noted that the paperwork from PCARs was quicker to write up and PCAR minutes reflected the meeting content more closely.
What are the disadvantages of PCARs compared to previous school AR processes?
Reported disadvantages were linked to some of the practical issues such as more time to set up and prepare for PCARs.
Other disadvantages were related to confidentiality when involving friends of CYP in the meeting.
Two out of seven respondents raised difficulty in appropriately including students with severe or profound and multiple learning difficulties, while this is a concern for many stakeholders, the PCAR guidance sees child participation in PCARs on a continuum. The aim is that participation should be tailored to individual needs and that increasing participation in a meaningful way should be a continual progression from year to year.
Three out of seven respondents said they could not think of disadvantages to the process. It is interesting to note that PCARs are viewed by some as completely positive. An alternative explanation is that the advantages of PCARs outweigh the disadvantages.
2 How can advantages and disadvantages of PCARs be used by EPs to further support partner schools and new schools who want to join the PCAR pilot project?
The results from the follow-up questionnaire showed that the biggest ranked disadvantage included in the follow-up questionnaire was ‘Difficulties in fully including pupils who are non-verbal or have significant difficulties’. While the advantage ranked lowest was ‘The paperwork reflects the PCAR meeting’.
Overall the rankings varied more for the advantages than disadvantages where there was more overall agreement on some disadvantages.
For respondents who had not experienced some of the disadvantages, ranking them appeared arbitrary.
This evaluation has highlighted the importance of EPs working collaboratively with schools to ensure that PCARs are appropriately supported to start in each individual school setting.
From reviewing the findings of follow-up questionnaire this evaluation will be used to support training. It will also contribute to materials developed for participating project schools and new schools to the project.
Also as a result of this evaluation’s findings Andrew Sutcliffe and Barley Birney will be delivering a session at the SENCo conference on communicating with children at the lowest levels of participation. The conference will be on 22nd November 2013 and this will be open to all SENCos attending. Guidance for PCARs will also be amended to include the information about working with these students.
Leanna Lopez Educational Psychologist in Training November 2013
3 4 Recommendations for EPS following review of evaluation findings
Advantages of PCARs Advantage Recommendation Rationale Suggested Action
Children and young Continuing use of PCARs and This evaluation can be used to Use of main findings at people being placed at PCAs. give an overview of some of the the SENCo conference the heart of the Use of this evaluation’s findings advantages and disadvantages and future PCAR training. process. to support schools currently not of PCARs. This could be used to EPs can jointly problem using PCARs. work in partnership with new solve with schools to . schools to adopt more PCAs. minimise potential disadvantages. Extend buddy system to new schools. Positive impact of Continuing to support children In light of the draft Code of Embedding PCAs from PCARs on children and and young people to participate Practice developing more PCAs the early years will mean young people. in PCARs. will be paramount for all schools that schools and young and professionals contributing to people can really benefit statutory processes. from the approach. Continuing to maximise on PCAR outcomes to contribute Individual Education Plans or other processes.
5 Children and young Continuing to include views of This is extremely meaningful to Sharing good practice or pupil valuing peer peers and relevant adults. CYP and was not always varying approaches to contribution to PCARs. possible with previous AR including views of others. processes.
Parents having the Continuing to work with parents Parents value the opportunity to Continuing to include opportunity to see their to maximise their participation in see their child as a whole parents and get feedback child holistically. PCARs. person and not just as someone on how to further facilitate with additional needs. PCAR meetings.
PCAR paperwork Continuing to use PCAR format. Paperwork was reported to be Reviewing paperwork advantages. Extend training or support to quicker to write up and reflected where appropriate at schools implementing PCARs. the meeting more closely. With termly PCAR meetings. forthcoming changes to move to Support and training for Education Health and Care new schools and Plans, the PCAR paperwork will professionals to complete be a valuable framework to use. PCAR paperwork. Continuing use of buddy or partner schools.
6 Disadvantages of PCARs
Disadvantage Recommendation Rationale Suggested action Practical issues related to Support schools to overcome Seeking advice or guidance Sharing good practice setting up PCARs. potential PCAR barriers. from schools who are already on how barriers are successfully running PCARs overcome by some can support schools in schools. overcoming practical issues. Continuing use of buddy or partner schools. Confidentiality when Ensuring confidentiality is not Positive problem solving will be Sharing good practice involving friends of children impacted through peer and helpful to ensure that CYP and on how barriers are and young people in the CYP attendance. friends can contribute to the overcome by some meeting. PCARs without raising issues schools. of confidentiality. Revisiting barriers at termly PCAR meetings. Use of videos or planning attendance to parts of meetings. Difficulty in appropriately Adapting participation to As this was the biggest ranked Training in relation to including students with individual needs and disadvantage PCAR project meaningful involvement severe or profound and progression. and school link EPs can to key professionals. multiple learning difficulties. support schools to encourage Revisiting barriers at appropriate CYP involvement. termly PCAR meetings. Meaningful involvement should EPs collate a list of be seen as a progression as different ways CYP can CYP go through school and meaningfully contribute other processes. to PCARs. Use of EPs to facilitate
7 Special schools in the borough PCARs and supporting who were not part of this in championing CYP evaluation have creative and views. effective approaches in Continuing use of buddy supporting CYP with complex or partner schools. needs. Working with special Use of ICT and assistive schools to share their good technologies to aid practice will be beneficial to participation. both project and new schools Working collaboratively developing their inclusion of with special schools to CYP with complex needs. share effective practice in seeking views of children with severe or profound learning difficulties.
8 APPENDIX 1- Initial Questionnaire sent to all SENCos and relevant professionals.
An evaluation of SENCos’ views of PCARs
An Evaluation of SENCos’ Views of Person Centred Annual Reviews (PCARs)
Please complete and return the questionnaire by email or post to [email protected] or by post to the above address by Friday 1st March 2013.
Name:
Your role:
School name:
1. What are the outcomes of an effective Annual Review (AR)?
2. What do you think are the main elements of PCARs?
9 3. What are the advantages of PCARs compared to the school’s previous AR process?
4. What are the disadvantages of PCARs compared to the school’s previous AR process?
5. Any additional comments?
Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire!
10 APPENDIX 2- Follow-up Questionnaire sent to all SENCos and relevant professionals.
An evaluation of SENCos’ views of PCARs
Date: Friday 22nd March 2013
Dear Colleague,
An Evaluation of SENCos’ Views of Person Centred Annual Reviews (PCARs)
Final Questionnaire.
Thanks to the contribution of SENCos working on the PCAR project, I have now finalised my research questionnaire. I hope that all SENCos working in the project will participate in this research by completing the very brief questionnaire overleaf. Thank you for your continued support and please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.
Findings from this survey will give us more information about the effectiveness of PCARs. I plan to give feedback to the project schools in the summer term.
Please return the completed questionnaire by post to the above address, or by email to [email protected] by Friday 26th April 2013.
Best wishes,
Leanna Lopez
11 Educational Psychologist in TrainingYour Name: Your Role: School Name: The 6 statements in the tables below highlight some of the overall advantages and disadvantages of PCARS. These were identified by SENCos through the first questionnaire. Please rank the statements in order of 1 to 6 on how strong of an advantage or disadvantage you view the statement as (1=I feel this is the strongest/biggest advantage of PCARs through to 6= I feel this is the weakest/smallest advantage of PCARs). Each statement must be given a different number between 1 to 6. 1 What are the advantages of PCARs compared to the school’s previous Annual Review (AR) process?
Advantage statement Rank given (1,2,3,4,5 or 6, 1= Biggest, 6=Smallest) a. More involvement for pupils. b. More involvement from parents, peers, school staff and other professionals. c. A more positive experience for all. d. A celebration of pupil strengths, success and progress. e. The paperwork reflects the PCAR meeting. f. An accessible and meaningful way to have an AR meeting.
2 What are the disadvantages of PCARs compared to the school’s previous AR process?
Disadvantage statement Rank given (1,2,3,4,5 or 6, 1= Biggest, 6= Smallest) a. Difficulties in fully including pupils who are non-verbal or have significant difficulties. b. More time is needed to organise and prepare for PCAR meetings. c. Some professionals do not engage fully in the process. d. Difficulties with permission to include a friend at PCAR meetings due to sensitive information being shared. e. Targets which are not ‘SMART’ being agreed. f. Not referring to previous targets or progress over time.
3 Additional Comments?
12 APPENDIX 3- Venn Diagram to show respondents and overlap in those who responded.
13