National Union of Teachers Policy
Statement on Meeting the Needs of
Pupils with Special Educational Needs
Teachers want an equitable education system with a wide range of
appropriate provision for meeting the needs of pupils with special educational
needs (SEN). Such provision must be fully and adequately resourced and
include a range of settings sufficient to meet the full range of need.
Introduction
Special schools provide an invaluable contribution to the education of young
people with SEN and disability within the wider continuum of provision. In the
NUT’s view, the issue under debate should not be their closure but the way to
develop co-ordinated provision where young people are educated in the right
place with the right resources.
Government SEN Strategy 2004
The NUT welcomed the Government’s SEN strategy published in 2004. It
gave special schools a clear role and pointed out that mainstream and special
schools should work together to support inclusion. The NUT believes that
only by such joint working will parents/carers be confident that local
mainstream schools can effectively support their children’s needs.
‘’Removing Barriers to Achievement’’1 said:
‘’Some special schools have felt threatened by the inclusion agenda
and unsure about what role they should play in future. We believe that
special schools have an important role to play within the overall
spectrum of provision for children with SEN- educating some children
directly and sharing their expertise with mainstream schools to support
greater inclusion.
Schools that are working hard to include all children will attest to the benefits
for all children of working in the way that they do. The NUT also recognises
the genuine challenges in developing appropriate mainstream provision and
welcomes the significant government commitments, set out in Removing
Barriers to Achievement to improve opportunities for disabled children and
children with special educational needs.
1
DfES (2004) Removing barriers to achievement: The Government’s strategy for SEN
1
There are particular issues for rural authorities who face barriers to providing
young people with access to a range of appropriate provision due to the
geography of the authority. The costs of out of county provision are high
OUT OF AUTHORITY PLACEMENT REPORT
In July 2005 the SEN Regional Partnerships carried out an analysis of Out of
Authority placements. The research found that there was a downward trend
in the mean number of Out of Authority placements but this was coupled with
a rising trend in the proportion of high cost placements, over £100,000.
It was found that boys outnumbered girls for all categories of special need
with regard to Out of Authority placements with a ratio of 3:5:1. Over half of
the boys in the research data fell into the categories of ASD and BESD, while
the girls were spread across the range of categories.
Most of the Out of Authority placements were in the Secondary phase of
education (80% of the numbers and 84% of the costs).
Ofsted2 reports that there has been progress in the overall numbers of pupils
included into mainstream schools over the last four to five years. Equally,
whilst a number of special schools have closed, there has been no overall
reduction in the proportion of the school population placed outside the
mainstream.
DfES advice to local authorities
It is important that the NUT at a local level presses Local Authorities to ensure
that they are not implementing unquestioningly DfES guidance. LEAs need to
distinguish between DfES statutory guidance and that which is non-statutory.
In particular, some LEAs seem to have adopted the position that the
Government’s “Removing Barriers to Achievement Strategy” tells them to
close special schools. This is not the case.
The NUT is concerned that there are alarming contradictions in the
Government’s White Paper, which advocates greater autonomy for individual
schools, greater diversity among schools, and a weaker role for local
authorities as well as the increasing number of City Academies while at the
same time pressing for coordinated child centred services. The NUT believes
that it is essential that all schools are able to work together to ensure that the
whole system meets the needs of children and young people with SEN.
2
Ofsted (2004) Special Educational Needs and Disability: Towards inclusive schools
2
Co-ordinated services and the Every Child Matters agenda
The Every Child Matters reforms and the Children Act 2004 signal a step
towards greater multi-agency co-ordination.
The Union advocates the establishment of co-ordinated services that link
together mainstream schools, units and special schools. Such links include
the sharing of teaching expertise by mainstream and special school teachers.
This should be a two-way process, as both sectors are increasingly engaging
in outreach work with each other.
The Union has long called for greater multi-agency co-ordination as a key to
supporting the needs of pupils in an inclusive manner. In particular, the coordination of services for looked-after children, should be considered a priority
when reviewing LEA SEN and behaviour support plans.
Baroness Warnock’s paper
In 2005, Baroness Warnock published a paper on inclusion, Special
Educational Needs: a new look. Baroness Warnock’s analysis of the
background to the current situation highlights the consequences of repeated
cuts through the 1980s. The position which Baroness Warnock appears to
adopt is that the nature of special educational need should determine
placement of children and young people.
The NUT believes that inclusion is not about placing all disabled children and
children with special educational needs in either mainstream schools or
special schools, ignoring difference and ‘treating all pupils the same’. It is
about appropriate provision to meet each pupil’s needs with the most
appropriate provision and reasonable adjustments made to enable each pupil
to access fully education and the life of his or her school or college. The
provision and the adjustments may be different for each pupil. Inclusion is a
process focussed on fulfilling each child’s entitlement to high quality
education. This is the essence of inclusion.
Statements for Pupils with SEN
The NUT shares Baroness Warnock’s concern about the confrontation
surrounding statements. Such confrontation would be minimised if highquality provision was made available by local authorities without the need for
parents/carers to request a statement.
The message from central Government to local authorities currently is that the
number of statements should be reduced because the statementing process
can cost between £6000- £8000. Teachers and SENCOs do not report a
visible impact arising from the delegation of SEN funding direct to schools and
this funding is not monitored. This can lead to a lottery of provision. Once
funding for low incidence SEN is delegated, schools can feel unsure how to
cope with the needs of specific pupils and teachers feel that they need to
advocate with the Local Authority for each pupil.
3
Forthcoming duty on schools to promote disability equality –Disability
Discrimination Act 2005
Schools already have existing duties under the Special Educational Needs
and Disability Act 2001. Governors are required to ensure that their schools
do not treat disabled students less favourably, without justification, for a
reason that relates to their disability, and must make reasonable adjustments
to ensure that disabled students are not put at a substantial disadvantage.
Schools are already required to produce an ‘accessibility plan’ which will
complement their local authority’s accessibility strategy to increase access by
disabled students over time: the first three-year plans and strategies run from
April 2003 to March 2006.
The Disability Discrimination Act 2005 requires local authorities and schools
under a new general duty to promote equality of opportunity for disabled
people. Under Section 3 of the 2005 Act, schools and local authorities must
have due regard to the need to:
 eliminate unlawful discrimination and harassment against disabled
people;
 promote equality of opportunity for disabled people; and
 promote positive attitudes towards disabled people.
Local authorities and schools will also have a specific duty to produce annual
plans and deliver progress reports on how they are addressing disability
discrimination. An annual report is likely to be required.
Local authorities and schools in England will be covered by the DDA 2005
from 4 December 2006. Schools in Wales will be subject to the new duty from
1 April 2007 and English primary schools will be covered from 3 December
2007.
NUT Conference policy
Recent Annual Conference resolutions have affirmed the Union’s position on
special educational needs. The Union has argued consistently that a range of
provision should be in place for pupils to ensure that their needs are met. The
NUT supports the inclusion of disabled children and children with special
educational needs in the most appropriate setting for meeting each pupil’s
needs.
The underlying theme of Annual Conference Motions on SEN and inclusion
has been that inclusion is a process that cannot be imposed. This range of
provision should be developed based upon a social model of disability. Such
provision should be integral to national and local development of educational
policy and practice.
The resolution on SEN at Annual Conference 2005 celebrated teachers’ hard
work to ensure that every child has the chance to fulfil his or her potential.
The resolution noted that in order for this work to be more effective and to
4
recognise the drive to reduce teacher workload, teachers must have access to
high quality resources, sufficient non contact time, appropriate PPA time and
well resourced support services to provide improved educational opportunities
and support for all their pupils.
Joint Statement on Inclusion by Teacher Unions
The NUT has agreed a joint statement on inclusion with the six teachers
associations. The statement reads
‘this Association supports the view of inclusion set out in the
Government’s SEN Strategy, “Removing Barriers to Achievement.”
This Association agrees with the Strategy that inclusion should not be
defined as all pupils being included in mainstream education, but as all
schools working together as part of an inclusive education service to
meet pupils’ needs in the most appropriate setting.
The NUT believes that, where required, special school provision should be
maintained and should be co-ordinated and linked with mainstream provision,
particularly those schools and units catering for children with EBD. Links
between special schools and mainstream schools are important, as is
developing special schools as resource bases, which mainstream schools can
access.
The NUT believes that all mainstream and special schools should operate as
a community of schools, with a reciprocal duty to support each other.
Case Study – Broomfield Specialist Inclusive Learning Centre (SILC)
Specialist Inclusive Learning Centres have been created in each of the 5
geographical areas of Leeds and Broomfield School became the South SILC
from January 1st 2005.
How do the partnerships work?
Broomfield SILC has 132 pupils on roll students with a wide range of special
educational needs, aged 2 to 19. Some of these pupils may have emotional
and behavioural difficulties, but this would not be their primary special
educational need. Many pupils have complex needs, including physical and
medical needs, and autism.
The partnership model means that pupils remain on the roll of the SILC, while
placed full-time at their mainstream partnership school. The SILC then
provides the staff team to support those pupils, who are included with
mainstream pupils for as much time as is appropriate for their educational
needs. Each partnership school provides a room or rooms, as a ‘base’. Each
school is fully accessible, usually with some additional facilities, such as a
hygiene suite.
5
This model provides opportunities for phased access to mainstream rather
than full-time for SILC pupils who are not, as yet, ready for full-time inclusion.
The SILC already provides a range of work placement opportunities for its
older pupils, in local businesses, supervised by staff as required. Obviously
SILC staff are very skilled at providing alternative curriculum pathways for
students with learning difficulties.
The SILC also offers work placements for local high school pupils, some of
whom may be disaffected, but respond positively to the work opportunity
Use of learning support assistants, teaching assistants and learning
mentors
The Union believes that pupils with special educational needs are entitled to
be taught by a qualified teacher. Sometimes pupils with SEN, particularly
those with the most complex needs, are taught by teaching assistants. The
Union believes all pupils should be taught by a qualified teacher, appropriately
supported by a teaching assistant or learning support assistant.
In a NUT survey of SENCOs in 2003, ninety six per cent of SENCOs reported
that the most significant benefit to them of teaching assistants was in
providing support in the classroom for individual or small groups of pupils.
Only four per cent of SENCOs said that the use of teaching assistants
reduced their workload.
Respondents comments about the work of teaching assistants in the
NUT SENCO Survey, 2003
‘Current pay policy provides no initiative for staff to increase
their knowledge.
I continue to be amazed by their
dedication. I’d like to use TAs in different ways but am
embarrassed/outraged at the low level of pay offered for
undertaking great responsibility’
‘It would be wonderful if every teacher had a full time TA.
This would make planning simpler and improve the learning
environment in many ways e.g. marking, displays,
photocopying, group work, supervision when called out of
class etc’
Ofsted have found that although teaching assistants sometimes have had little
specific training, they often received helpful supervision from the class or
subject teacher. This, together with good joint planning, generally results in a
successful working relationship between teacher, teaching assistant and
pupil. Where teaching assistants are less well supervised or supported, and
basically left on their own to work as effectively as they could, pupils’ progress
6
can be noticeably worse. The expectations of teaching assistants by teachers
should not be that teaching assistants undertake all the necessary
differentiation of tasks.
The pupils’ perception of the teaching assistant’s role is intrinsic to the
relationship. Some secondary pupils resent the attention given to them by a
teaching assistant. Where a relationship is working well, however, a teaching
assistant will be sensitive to this problem and provide support as and when
required. Pupils with a sensory impairment often rely upon teaching assistants
to make the necessary adaptations to curriculum materials, to facilitate
communication and to manage sensory aids.
Finding the opportunity for planning and debriefing is a common problem in
secondary schools. Some secondary schools adopt an approach which
involves teaching assistants working with subject departments rather than
always accompanying individual pupils to different lessons. This has
advantages, especially when teaching assistants were fully part of the
department’s information flow and training.
Additional support from teaching assistants, provided in a variety of ways, is
often important to the successful placement of pupils with SEN and to
successful assessment of pupil progress. Flexibility in its use and the quality
of the supervision of teaching assistants is among the keys to success. Apart
from time in lessons from teaching assistants, some school provided adult
help for certain pupils elsewhere in the school day – for example on arrival at
school or during breaks.
A wide range of provision
In responding to local authority reviews of SEN and behaviour provision, the
Union has advised that each LEA should maintain a range of provision,
including support services, Pupil Referral Units (PRUs) and special schools.
It is important that teachers in PRUs and special schools are given the same
professional development opportunities as those in mainstream schools, in
particular, the opportunity to visit other schools.
Outreach work between mainstream and special schools is demonstrably
effective. Opportunities for training for all staff engaged in outreach work are
required in order to ensure that staff are confident in how to effectively share
their expertise and engage colleagues in other settings. Some new special
schools are being built as part of a cluster near to mainstream schools. This
can be less feasible, however, with regard to rural schools and settings. One
aspect of visiting other schools should be the opportunity to follow through
pupils who have transferred to mainstream schools.
It is essential to maintain provision that is working and meets the needs of
pupils. Special provision should be specific to need and not perceived as a
‘dumping ground’. Local Authority (LA) reviews of SEN provision should
ensure that in the development of inclusive provision is included a range of
suitable settings for pupils for whom mainstream schooling is not appropriate
7
at a particular time. Research has demonstrated, for example, that special
schools and units often function well for pupils with sensory impairments.
Learning support units are increasingly used to provide additional support for
individual pupils. In addition, there should be a range of provision for pupils
with emotional and behavioural difficulties (EBD), including special and
residential school provision for pupils with EBD whose needs could not be
addressed successfully in mainstream schools. There are also a range of
complex needs where provision outside the mainstream may be appropriate.
Single sex EBD provision remains necessary but some local authorities have
been closing single sex provision. Increasingly, behaviour support is needed
for pupils at Key Stage 1 and co-educational and single sex EBD provision
and pupil referral units should cover all age groups and key stages.
Many PRU managers now work closely with mainstream schools when
reintegrating pupils or arranging dual placements. Many special school heads
work closely with mainstream schools and pupils remain on the roll of the
special school while attending a range of alternative provision and
participating in some activities at the mainstream school.
Curriculum
Teachers need professional freedom in order to respond adequately to the
needs of children and young people. Currently, the National Curriculum acts
as a barrier against such freedom. Research on pupils’ views, both from the
NFER and commissioned by the NUT from Cambridge University, shows that
the current Key Stage 3 curriculum is a powerful background factor against
encouraging young peoples’ enjoyment of, and engagement with learning. It is
a factor which does not encourage good pupil behaviour or allow teachers to
differentiate for pupils with SEN.
The NUT believes that the capacity of secondary schools to organise the
curriculum imaginatively, particularly for Year 7 pupils, would be enhanced by
a thorough review of the National Curriculum at Key Stage 3. There should,
therefore, be a review of the Primary National Curriculum aimed at the
enhancement of the capacity of teachers to respond creatively to children’s
needs.
The fundamental approach behind the NUT’s proposals for curriculum and
assessment reform is to enable teachers to shape the curriculum and its
assessment to meet the needs of their pupils. It is an aspiration which
dovetails with the concept of personalised learning for pupils with SEN. The
conditions for personalised learning can be in place only when the curriculum
provides a scaffolding for the development of teachers’ own creativity in the
interests of children’s learning.
8
Training for classroom teachers and special educational needs coordinators
Local Authorities should be responsible for ensuring that there is an equality
of entitlement for teachers to high quality continuing professional
development, and/or accredited training, both in terms of specialist training for
those going into the special school sector and continuing professional
development training for teachers working with pupils in SEN in both
mainstream and special schools.
There is increased pressure on mainstream and special schools to use
classroom assistants to substitute for teachers as a result of inadequate
provision for pupils with emotional and behaviour difficulties. The Union is
concerned that the quality of teaching for pupils with SEN is maintained at the
highest level.
The NUT has produced a SENCO Charter containing guidance for
schools about the role of SENCO. The NUT believes that: 
ALL SENCOs should be senior teachers, able to influence the
development of policies for whole school improvement proactively;

ALL SENCOs should be included within school discussions on financial
management and on SEN funding;

SENCOs should co-ordinate whole school strategies for building the
school’s capacity to effectively include learners by drawing class and
subject teachers actively into planning for pupils and into assessment
and identification of pupils’ needs;

SENCOs require ongoing support, encouragement and input from the
head teacher (where the SENCO is not employed in leadership group
posts) and the SEN Governor and active support, training and direction
from the LEA to enable a SENCO to carry out the managerial aspects
of their role, and to provide strategic direction and leadership in their
schools;

SENCOs not employed in leadership group posts require management
support from the leadership team, which should include sufficient
resources of time, space and administrative back up to fulfil the role,
and sufficient non contact time appropriate to the numbers of children
and young people with special educational needs within the school.
SENCOs need allocated time for planning with TAs and other
colleagues in addition to PPA time.

All SENCOs paid on classroom teacher pay scales should be awarded
the discretionary SEN allowance and teaching and learning
responsibility payments to reflect their responsibilities in managing and
leading
9

All SENCOs employed in classroom teacher posts paid on main/upper
scales should receive an appropriate TLR payment separately and
additionally to their SEN allowances. This should also apply to
teachers in mainstream schools who hold SEN allowances. SEN
allowances should not be affected by decisions on TLRs. The criteria
for SEN allowances are not being changed.

All SENCOs should receive training and induction on how to carry out
the role of SENCO, including training in managing other colleagues
and working with support staff. SENCOs work with a whole range of
professionals from outside the school and need to know where and
how to find further support from outside agencies or the local Authority.
The Index for Inclusion, which was first published in 2000, was distributed to
all schools. The Index for Inclusion adopts a view of inclusion as a principled
approach to education and society which its authors see as essentially about
putting values into action. The Index for Inclusion is aimed at helping schools
to be responsive to all members of the school community in a way that values
them all equally. It is intended to revitalise the planning process and help
those in schools to collaborate, and take control over their own development
ensuring that it is sustained over time.
The Union supports the use of the Index for Inclusion in schools as a way of
promoting discussion and planning around meeting the needs of individual
pupils.
There is further practical guidance available on making reasonable
adjustments
for
pupils
with
SEN
and
disabled
pupils
at
http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/wholeschool/sen/schools/accessibility/rap/.
Delegation of funding
The Union recognises that, with increased emphasis for schools to develop
more effective inclusive practices, additional funding needs to be made
available to every school in order to support School Action work. The Union
continues to argue for adequate and appropriate funding and resources at
school level. Training for school governors, SENCOs and members of school
leadership teams regarding the effective use of SEN funding should be
considered a priority.
The relationship of inclusion to resources and appropriate provision has
consistently been a critical issue for the Union. The Union continues to resist
local authority bureaucracy that impedes access to early intervention
strategies at a lower level. While the Union supports statements of SEN as
useful tools for planning for and supporting the specific needs of pupils with
SEN, statements of SEN should not be considered the first step to accessing
the right provision and early intervention at the right time.
10
Local authorities should focus equally on resourcing the needs of those pupils
assessed on the first stages of the Code of Practice for SEN.
The Union’s policy remains to resist delegation and to press for reversal of
any delegation that has taken place, although in practice this is proving an
extremely difficult trend to reverse.
Delegation of funding to schools is continuing without any corresponding
development in accountability for how funds are used to support the progress
of disabled children and children with special educational needs.
The NUT believes that there are a number of problems associated with the
delegation of SEN funding. These are set out below:

Funding for statemented pupils is targeted at the individual pupil rather
than at the school. It is difficult to forecast accurately the number of
pupils in each school who will have statements in a given year. In
addition, where such pupils move between schools within the financial
year it is easier to ensure funding follows the pupil by retaining such
funding centrally. This ensures that such moves will have a neutral
effect on the school’s budget. Central retention of the funding can also
avoid the situation where a school loses funding for a pupil during the
financial year when it has already set aside funding for the support of
that pupil’s needs for the whole year.

The role of SEN support services can be undermined by the delegation
of funding for statemented pupils. Support provided by these services
often becomes disjointed when devolved. Such support services
require guaranteed funding in order to be able to plan provision and to
provide the appropriate levels of support. Such services need to
employ a given number of SEN support staff and this will take up a
large proportion of their overall budget. Delegation of funding means
that it is not possible to be certain how many schools will buy into the
central support service, which means in turn that the provision of a
service staffed by permanent specialist teachers with the necessary
skills and experience could be threatened.

SEN support services at local authority level are essential in order to
provide the flexibility required in responding to the needs of individual
pupils at school level. Where SEN specialist staff are not available,
schools may find that they do not have the necessary specialists to
support these pupils.

Local authorities have continuing legal obligations in relation to the
provision of the support outlined in statements. This means that
delegation conflicts with the principle that funding should be aligned
with responsibility.
11

The many effective support services for SEN and behaviour support
have been essential in supporting inclusion and funding for these
should not be delegated.
SCHOOLS ACCESS INITIATIVE (SAI)
The Disability Discrimination Act requires schools to plan to increase over
time the accessibility of their schools to disabled pupils. This duty includes
changes to physical features, the provision of auxiliary aids and written
material in alternative formats to ensure accessibility.
Since 1996 the Schools Access Initiative (SAI) has provided funding to make
mainstream schools more accessible to children with disabilities and special
educational needs. So far over 6,000 schools have benefited from the
Initiative.
The SAI funds projects such as the installation of lifts, stair lifts, ramps and
disabled toilets to help physically impaired children; the carpeting and
acoustic tiling of classrooms to benefit hearing impaired pupils and the
provision of blinds and paint schemes to benefit visually impaired children.
How much funding is available?
£100M will be made available to LEAs in 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08.
Who can apply for funding?
All mainstream schools are eligible for support. The DFES allocates funding
to LEAs and then it is up to each LEA to decide its priority schemes within
the criteria of support.
Further information about the Schools Access Initiative is available at
http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/wholeschool/sen/schools/accessibility/sai/
The Union is calling upon the Government to ensure that the Building
Schools for the Future funding is deployed to create accessible schools
suitable for all pupils with SEN. It is essential that all new builds, either
Academies or school revamped under the BSF programme, comply with the
Disability Discrimination Act.
SEN Support Services
Pressure on Local Authorities to delegate resources for SEN and Behaviour
Support Services continues to increase from central government. The NUT
believes that these services are vital to School (or Early Years) Action work.
Support provided by these services often becomes disjointed when devolved.
An Ofsted report in July 2005 highlighted the need to protect Central Support
Services and prevent fragmentation of such services at a local level.
12
OFSTED Report - Inclusion: the impact of LEA support and outreach
services – July 2005
Key Findings




Support and outreach services promoted inclusion and improved the
life chances of many vulnerable pupils;
Other outreach and support service staff provided important
information and a thorough understanding of particular special needs
or disabilities, making a major contribution to pupils’ progress;
Insecure funding arrangements made long-term planning difficult for
many services; and
The delegation of funding for support services had a negative effect on
the provision for some pupils with SEN. It diminished the capacity of
many LEAs to monitor the progress of pupils with SEN and reduced the
range and quantity of specialist staff available to provide advice and
support.
The full report is available at www.ofsted.gov.uk.
The Union recognises, however, that there may be advantages to locating
behaviour or SEN support services within schools or clusters in order to
increase time spent working with pupils and reduce the time spent travelling
between schools and a central office. Support services sited in local schools,
such as the Newham visually impaired service, can provide a locally
deliverable service which is responsive to needs locally within schools. The
Union believes that expertise should be maintained locally but that the
location of the services remain flexible in order to provide the most
appropriate provision for pupils and staff in schools.
Behaviour support services
With unacceptable pupil behaviour at all Key Stages remaining a key feature
negatively affecting teacher retention and teacher morale, the Union believes
significant improvements are needed in the training and support available to
teachers in the area of behaviour management, including addressing the
needs of children with EBD.
With schools increasingly catering for pupils with a range of diverse needs,
teachers require a more in depth understanding of child development, so that
they can develop appropriately differentiated lessons and steer clear of
behaviour difficulties that arise due to a pupil’s inability to access the
curriculum.
The Union supports a range of provision for pupils with behavioural difficulties,
including EBD schools, residential schools and Pupil Referral Units. This must
include pressure on LEAs to consider and provide for the needs of pupils with
EBD (or potential EBD) in the primary sector. Early intervention must be
13
recognised as a key to avoiding escalating difficulties for these pupils. Pupils
requiring separate EBD provision should be enabled to access the right
provision at the right time, with the aim of returning to mainstream schooling
as soon as they are able.
The Union strongly supports behaviour support services, which should be
integral to the life of the school. The Union continues to press for central coordination of Behaviour Support Services. It is essential that a review is
carried out of behaviour support plans; in order to examine what is in place at
a local level, when local authorities develop their new children and young
people’s integrated plans.
NUT’s Charter on Behaviour ‘Learning to Behave’
The NUT has developed proposals on pupil behaviour which take into account
the factors which influence the lives of those working in and supporting school
communities.
This is exemplified by a passage in the study commissioned by the National
Union of Teachers from Cambridge University; ‘A Life in Secondary
Teaching’.
“Pupil behaviour, ranked as a number one issue (by teachers) does not
exist in a vacuum… not all of the obstacles to teaching and
professional development have an independent existence. They are all
closely interrelated and interdependent. While teachers’ talk of poor
pupil behaviour may be seen by some, including some policy makers
and media critics, as simply blaming pupils, what is plainly evident is
the intrinsic relationship of behaviour to class size, inappropriate
curriculum, pressure to meet targets and (the need to) keep up with
new initiatives …”.
The evidence that the NUT has received from its members and the emphasis
they place on the issue shows that teachers believe unacceptable pupil
behaviour to be one of the highest priority issues that needs to be addressed
in schools. It demonstrates that unacceptable pupil behaviour is the trigger for
many teachers to leave the profession.
Establishing the proper background conditions for encouraging good pupil
behaviour is vital. The factors which define an effective school are well known.
They include a positive classroom and school climate, support for teaching
and learning, equity, time and resources. They are predicated on effective
leadership. These factors provide an essential background influence in the
drive to tackle unacceptable pupil behaviour.
The NUT believes that to support good leadership and effective management
within schools, system-wide reforms are needed. These are fundamental to
the promotion of pupil enthusiasm for learning and eradicating unacceptable
pupil behaviour. The NUT calls on the Government to secure:
14





an independent review of the curriculum and its assessment;
a practical, personalised entitlement for all young people;
strong pastoral structures in schools, with teachers central to those
structures;
school ownership of the Every Child Matters agenda; and
a framework for a new system of accountability for schools.
The NUT opposes targets imposed at Local Authority level about exclusion
levels in particular schools. The NUT views exclusion not as a measure of
failure for which schools should be penalised.
Permanent exclusions signify that the current provision is not appropriate for
meeting an excluded pupils needs and that more appropriate provision is
needed.
The Impact of Health and Diet
The Union believes that healthy lifestyle messages should be promoted
across the curriculum. The hierarchy within the curriculum means that too
often schools do not have the time they need to focus on healthy eating and
exercise.
The impact of an unhealthy diet on children’s behaviour, learning abilities and
mood is revealed in research carried out by the Food Commission. The
research showed that artificial food additives such as flavourings, sweeteners
and colourings in popular sweets, biscuits and fizzy drinks can cause children
to suffer from hyperactivity, asthma, and other allergy-related problems. This
can have adverse effects on children’s learning and their ability to concentrate
in the classroom.
Current Government action
As part of implementing Removing Barriers to Achievement, the Government
is currently carrying out a national audit of low incidence SEN specialist
support, services and provision. This is not a review of the future of special
schools. The aim is to promote effective regional and sub regional planning to
meet the needs of children with low incidence needs.
The Government has created a Ministerial Group on behaviour and
attendance on which the NUT is represented.
During the last year, the NUT has:


provided local associations and divisions with advice on the
implications of the proposals in the Children Bill and on any
developments which would result in any loss of focus on education
services and their funding;
drafted a SENCO charter and is campaigning to secure specific
management time for special educational needs co-ordinators arising
15






from their duties under the SEN Code of Practice and in connection to
the Government’s SEN strategy;
pressed the DFES SEN division to meet termly with the teachers
unions to discuss how Government can embed SEN and disability
equality issues across all other education policy and within the Every
Child Matters agenda;
highlighted the increased pressure on mainstream and special schools
to use classroom assistants to substitute for SEN teachers as a result
of inadequate provision for pupils with emotional and behaviour
difficulties;
prepared a Special Supplement of the Teacher for autumn 2005
focused on the implications of the Every Child Matters agenda;
updated the Union Unacceptable Pupil Behaviour Guidance;
submitted both written and oral evidence to the House of Commons
Select Committee into SEN; and
published a Behaviour Charter called ”Learning to Behave: A charter
for schools”.
In response to the Government’s White Paper the Union will be calling for the
following issues to be addressed in the Education Bill, or other legislation,
where appropriate: 



local authorities to be placed under a statutory requirement to maintain
or secure access to a range of appropriate and well resourced
provision, including behaviour support services, special needs support
services and schools or dedicated units for pupils with emotional or
behavioural difficulties”;
Discussion about class size in relation to numbers of pupils with SEN in
light of the withdrawal by the DfES of Circular 11/90;
a change in the SEN Code of Practice to make it explicit that all
SENCOs should be qualified teachers and that they should have
sufficient non contact time; and
a role for local authorities in developing CPD opportunities to enable
teachers to differentiate the needs of pupils and to understand the
effects of different medical conditions.
Z:\e&eo-public\SEN\Policy Statement-SEN\Policy statement-Meeting Needs of Pupils with SEN.doc
16