“Of course we do,” they all scream! Let’s think about this for a moment and analyse what they actually do and the impact it has. I can’t think of an example of a SENCO who is always busy doing stuff. I just think that a lot of what they do is not necessary and does not contribute to improving achievement. If we consider IEPs as an example, in many schools they are produced religiously each term. There is a major event where meetings are held. SENCOs chase teachers to meet deadlines and what happens after all of this is done? They are put in a file until the next review. Even if they are used regularly by support staff, they are rarely referred to in teacher’s planning.
The quality of IEPs varies greatly. Targets are often relevant for short periods of time and therefore are out of date quickly or they are not linked to targets or objectives to achieve the next level or sub level of attainment, meaning that the approach is disjointed.
I think we need a major change in the ways that SENCOs work. There should be a move away from the production of paperwork for the sake of producing paperwork and a move towards the provision of specialist advice that leads to the regular modification of learning in light of high quality assessment. This would enable the needs of children to be met and evidence of impact to be provided easily. It would also ensure that teachers were constantly focused on the needs of IEP children through high quality differentiation. Intervention would become the exception rather than the rule and there would be a lot less paper floating around that only serves the purpose of filling time that could be better used for something else.
So do we need SENCOs? Yes, as specialists who enable teacher to adjust their daily approaches to teaching to meet the constantly changing needs of children who face the greatest challenges in our schools.
