'Speak To The SENCo' Isn't The Answer: One Line In The SEND Code

So, um, I want you to picture the scene. It is exactly 8 .43 in the morning. Right in the middle of the rush. Exactly. You're standing in the corridor, you've got this pupil in your class, and their reading has... Well, it's just gone completely backwards since Christmas. Right. And you've raised this issue twice already. And both times you received a very blunt four -word answer. Speak to the Senko. Speak to the Senko, which, you know, sounds like a reasonable plan. On the surface. Right. Except you're being redirected to someone who has essentially exactly one afternoon a week of dedicated time.

Yeah. And a full teaching timetable for the rest of the week. Yep. Well over 100 children sitting on their list. This is the education commute. this is the sixth episode in our run through the national leadership qualifications. Right. We're taking them step by step, really looking closely at the public evidence underneath them. And today's episode focuses on the special educational needs coordinator route. Which is a massive topic. It is. So we're starting exactly where that route starts, which is the statutory framework. And for this discussion, I'm firmly sitting in the chair of that redirected class teacher.

Okay. You know, the one who keeps being sent down the corridor at 8 .43 with a problem that they just... They can't seem to get help with. And I am sitting in the special educational needs coordinator's chair. Armed with the documents. Armed with the documents, exactly. Because, well, the reason we're looking at this today and starting right here is because there's a very specific sentence in the guidance that perfectly addresses your exact corridor scenario. Really? Yeah. But almost nobody actually quotes it. OK, well, before we get to the sentence itself, I kind of want to know exactly what we're holding here.

What are the actual names of the documents we're pulling this from? So there are two main documents and they essentially nest together. OK. First, we have the primary legislation and we need to state it exactly. The Children and Families Act 2014. The Children and Families Act 2014. Got it. Right. Part three of that act is the law itself. Then next, we look at the framework published in September 2023 by the Department for Education for the Special Educational Needs Coordinator Qualification. Right. And that framework states very plainly that Part 3 of that act is the legal basis for the SEND Code of Practice 2015.

OK, let me just clarify the architecture of that in my head. Yeah, go ahead. So the code isn't the law itself. No. It's the document that the law produced. Exactly. That's it. And, you know, the status of the code is a very, very common misunderstanding. How so? Well, the framework from the Department for Education summarizing the document states this. I'll read it exactly. OK. Local authorities and schools are required to have regard to the SEND Code of Practice 2015 and must identify and correctly understand the relevant provisions that it sets out.

Wait, I want to stop on that phrase for a second. Have regard to. Yeah, people love that phrase. They do. Because when people hear have regard to, they immediately hear it as optional. Like, it sounds like a suggestion. Like, I'll cast my eyes over it if I have a spare planning period on a Friday. They do. And that is just an incredibly common misconception. But it's entirely the wrong way to hear it. Right. Because the second half of that exact same sentence is why. Let me say it again.

It says you must identify and correctly understand the relevant provisions. Ah. Right. Which proves that not reading it or not understanding what applies to your specific setting is absolutely not a valid legal defense. Right. Okay. So the framework demands that we correctly understand the provisions. Yes. So where do I sit in those provisions as a normal everyday class teacher? Because I'm not the head teacher. I'm certainly not the coordinator. I just want to help the pupil sitting right in front of me. Right. Well, here is the sentence I promised you.

Okay. Lay it on me. And this is an exact statement from the Department for Education's framework summarizing what the code says. Let me read it nice and slow. Go for it. Teachers are responsible and accountable for the progress and development of the pupils in their class. Wait. I want to hear that again. Teachers are responsible and accountable for the progress and development of the pupils in their class. Wow. Okay, so when I'm standing in the corridor and I hear those four words, speak to this MCOMO, that is not a transfer of responsibility.

It cannot be. It legally cannot be. The coordinator coordinates. The teacher is accountable. That's a huge distinction. It is vital. First off, it stops teachers from outsourcing a child, you know, treating them as someone else's problem to go away and fix. Right. And second, it stops schools from treating over 100 children as one single person's caseload. The legal accountability stays right there in the room with the teacher. OK, so if I'm accountable as the teacher for the progress of that child in my room. What is the coordinator's job actually meant to be?

Like, let's use the framework's own words to define that role. Good idea. According to the statement in the Department for Education's framework summarizing the documents, the role is day -to -day responsibility, quote, for the operation of SEND policy and coordination of specific provision made to support individual pupils with SEND, including those who have EHCPs. I really want to highlight the words operation and coordination there because that draws a very, very clear line. It does. It means the coordinator does not deliver every child's education. Right. They operate the policy and coordinate the provision, including, as it says, for pupils with education, health, and care plans.

And furthermore, they do not set strategy. Wait, if the coordinator is just operating the policy, who's writing the strategy? The strategy belongs to the governing body or proprietor. Oh, really? Yeah. A statement in the Department for Education's framework summarizing the document says they, quote, are responsible for setting the strategic direction for SEND policy and for ensuring the school uses its best endeavors to secure special education provision to meet a pupil's need. Hold on. Best endeavors. That is an extremely heavy legal phrase. It's massive. Like it doesn't sound like, oh, we gave it a decent try.

It sounds like an absolute mandate to basically exhaust all the options. It is a very heavy legal phrase. And it belongs firmly to the governors, not the coordinator. Right. They are the ones holding that statutory duty. And then the guidance pulls everyone together. A statement in the Department for Education's framework summarizing the document says that senior leaders and staff, quote, should work with the Senkoan and other agencies to ensure provision meets pupil needs. Okay, let me just digest this setup for a second. Take your time.

So the strategic direction belongs to the governors. Correct. The day -to -day operation and coordination belongs to the coordinator. Yep. The actual progress and development of the child in my room belongs to me, the teacher. Exactly. And then senior leaders make sure everybody just works together. That is the legal architecture, basically in a nutshell. Okay. But there is a single sentence in the framework that makes this whole architecture actually possible. Yeah. Because without it, the whole system breaks down. It's a statement in the Department for Education's framework summarizing the document.

And it says, the school should ensure that the SNCO has sufficient time and resources to fulfill their role. Okay, I have to push back there. I thought you might. You just read me a sentence with the word sufficient in it. No. And the word sufficient is doing an enormous amount of heavy lifting there, completely without being defined. Like, what does that actually mean? I will concede that fully. Right. There is no number. None. None. There are no minimum hours. There is no set ratio of staff to pupils.

There's no mathematical formula and absolutely no floor. Wow. It leaves the judgment entirely to the school. Which means a school can technically stand there and argue that giving a coordinator one afternoon a week is sufficient. But if there's no number and no formula, I mean, it sounds essentially unenforceable. It does seem that way. How can you even challenge a school if they decide one afternoon is enough? Because while it lacks a strict number, the test isn't whether the coordinator is just coping. Okay. The true test is whether the time given is sufficient to fulfill the defined role.

Oh. And we just established what that role is, right? It's the day -to -day operation and coordination for every single pupil with SEND in the building. Right. So if the time allocated does not allow for that day -to -day operation to actually happen, then it is. By definition, not sufficient. Okay, that makes sense. So the accountability is clear, the roles are defined, and the time must be sufficient to meet the definition of those roles. Exactly. What else is in this section of the framework that, you know, a normal teacher wouldn't necessarily know?

Well, I'd highlight three hidden directives that often get overlooked. Okay, what's the first one? First is the mainstream right. A statement in the Department for Education's framework summarizing the document says pupils have a, quote, conditional right to be educated. within a mainstream setting where this is the family's wish. Notice the word conditional right at the front of that sentence. Yes, conditional. And both halves of that sentence matter, the condition itself and the family's wish. Right. In practice, people usually just drop whichever half they find inconvenient at the time.

Yeah, that happens a lot. Okay, what's the second directive? Second, we have accessibility plans. And these stem from the Equality Act 2010. Okay. A statement in the Department for Education's framework summarizing the document says schools, quote, must publish accessibility plans, setting out how they plan to increase access for disabled pupils to the curriculum, the physical environment, and to information. Okay. The word must publish. Yeah. And there are three distinct areas listed there. The curriculum, the physical environment, and information. Exactly. And information is the one that is almost always forgotten.

How do you mean? Well, the physical environment is obvious, right? Like a wheelchair ramp is very visible. Sure. But an unreadable school newsletter or a website that cannot be navigated by assistive technology. that isn't visible in the same way. Yet it is a legal requirement under the Equality Act 2010 to plan for its access. That is super interesting. I don't think many people realize that. And the third directive? The third is about safeguarding. A statement in the Department for Education's framework summarizing the document says schools, quote, must comply with statutory safeguarding guidance with the recognition that additional vulnerabilities may increase risks for pupils identified with SEND.

Which connects to a very grim reality, honestly. It does. Because a child with additional vulnerabilities may simply not be able to communicate abuse. So the risk profile is just inherently different. Precisely. Now, adding to the wider context of all this, the local authority also has a role. Okay. They are responsible for statutory assessment. Right. And on top of that, the UK is a signatory to international conventions, like the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Salamanca Statement, and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

Wow, okay. Yeah, these form the overarching international architecture. But, I mean, let's be honest. Those international conventions aren't really going to help a teacher standing in the corridor at 8 .43 on a Tuesday, are they? No, they won't. You're absolutely right. So let's pull all of this together and actually apply it to the realities of a school building. Please do, because I want to know what this core concept, that the teacher is accountable while the coordinator coordinates, what does that actually look like in practice? Okay, let's start with a primary setting.

Okay, a primary setting. How does it work? In a primary setting, the conversation completely shifts. Instead of a teacher walking in and saying, can you look at this child? as, you know, a transfer of responsibility. The teacher says, here is what I have tried, here is what happened, and here is what I think the barrier is. What would you add? Oh, I see. Yeah. That is the teacher actively exercising their accountability and asking for coordination. That makes a lot of sense. Okay, let's move to secondary then.

Yeah, that's trickier. It has to be harder to hold together because a single child might have a dozen different teachers across a week. Exactly. So how does coordination work when accountability is literally split across 12 different rooms? Secondary is definitely harder to hold for exactly that reason. Coordination there looks like the Entico providing one shared specific piece of information for all 12 teachers to act on simultaneously. Right. Instead of just. Right. Rather than the ENSECO receiving 12 separate referrals from 12 different teachers who are all trying to solve the exact same problem in isolation.

Yeah, that would be a nightmare. OK, and what about a specialist setting? Well, in a specialist setting. The dynamic changes again because every teacher teaches send. Of course. So the timetable itself is the coordination. In these settings, the governing body's statement on best endeavors does the most work. Because it's about the whole school. Exactly. Because the questions raised are usually about school level provision and strategy rather than just identifying the needs of individual children. Okay. So let's go back to where we started. It's 8 .43 in the morning.

You raise the issue about the people whose reading has gone backwards, and you hear those same four words from the corridor. Speak to the zen -kam. But, having gone through this framework... You now hear it completely differently. I really do. You hear it as an instruction to ask for coordination, not a rescue transfer. Right. And if there is no time for that person to actually coordinate with you, you both now know the exact sentence describing the systemic problem. Which is huge. It is. So I will leave you with a little staff room seed.

Ooh, okay. At break today, ask whoever is nearest the kettle who is accountable for the progress of a pupil with scent. Oh, that's good. Don't correct them. Just listen to how many wrongly say the SN cow. That's brilliant. And here is the walk -in for tomorrow. Yeah. Consider what you would actually show a governor tomorrow morning to prove the set income in your building has sufficient time and resources. Since there is no required number, no floor, and no formula, take a moment to really write your own answer down.

Also, check if your school's accessibility plan is actually published and make sure it explicitly covers information, not just physical ramps. So true. Let's do the four takeaways recap. One. The Children and Families Act 2014 is the legal basis. You must correctly understand its provisions, not just have regard to them. Two, teachers are responsible and accountable for the progress and development of the pupils in their class. Three, the coordinator handles operation and coordination. Governors handle strategic direction and best endeavors. Everything's linked in the show notes, the framework, and the code.

Both free to open. Read them. Wear the trailer. Safe trip in. See you at the gates.