% of pupils supported by school action plus or with a statement of SEN ,(13 Posts)
Can anyone advise me of why my local school should have such a massive increase in SEN pupils from 2012,2013,2014 ? School converted to Academy Status last year so no info on latest % but if going on previous 3yr trend would expect it to be even higher now. When I showed a work colleague who is a governor of his DC school he was shocked at such a massive increase / % . Is this a statistical anomaly or can anyone suggest reason why such an increase ? Have included link to school dashboard, click on school 'Key stage 1' tab then 'school context' tab. Am I missing something as it would appear that if my child 'doesn't' have a SEN (or 2nd sibling rule) then its unlikely they would get a place according to entry criteria. Thanks.
Seems wide range within highest level.
So maybe not such a big leap after all?
Oh hang on. Me being thick!
However, very small year groups so could easily happen with a cohort I think.
Ignore me- hung over!!
Someone more sensible will look at data!
School action (plus) and statements, as were, no longer exist. New EHCP very difficult to get, so this information is probably inaccurate
It says the year group % includes SA, SA+ and statements so aren't comparable to the school or national statistics as they only include SA+ and statements. The 61.7% is just one year group if you look at year 6 it's a lot lower.
It doesn't mean your child is unlikely to get a place because only statements or now EHCPs will mean they are in a higher admission category unless the school also has a social/medical needs category which some may come under.
Although the school average is higher than the national average that could be for any number of reasons including the school are on the ball with helping with SEN or that the area has a higher incidence of SEN.
I know it's not what you asked but SA and SA+ no longer officially exist.
School action and school action plus no longer exist and statements are being replaced /phased out so there will be no info for 2014 onwards
thanks for all the replies, v.much appreciated.
Shineyshoes10 re your comment "or that the area has a higher incidence of SEN" ...this would appear to be the case, what I can't understand is why ? What would lead to such an increase. Anyone else seen this sort of increase in a school they know ?
I don't think that it is such a sudden increase. Yes it has a higher than the national average amount of SEN but that's consistent over the 3 years. I think the 2014 year 2 cohort was just that year group as the school statistic stayed stable. You can't say there's a consistent big increase when from 2012 to 2013 the numbers of year 2s on SA+ or with statements went down. For all you know if information was available for 2015 it might be around the 2012/13 levels.
There's loads of reasons why an area might have a higher incidence.
Are there more boys in the school? Boys are more likely to have SEN than girls. Or at least more likely to have their SEN recognised.
It may be that the LEA are known for being one of the better LAs at providing resources for children with SEN so more people move there if they have children with SEN.
Or the LEA may be better at diagnosing/recognising/providing for SEN so it appears they have a higher incidence when in reality others areas have just as many children with SEN they just aren't diagnosed or recognised as such.
It could be harder to get a SS placement in that area so there are more children with SEN in MS when they wouldn't be in other areas.
Is the area a deprived area? Statistically deprived areas with a higher number of pupils eligible for FSM are more likely to have a higher number of children with SEN.
What's the ethnic spread of the area? Certain ethnicities are more or less likely to have SEN. Or again for them to be recognised whichever way you want to interpret the data.
There's loads and loads of reasons. See here slightly out of date now though.
The actual number of children with a statement/EHCP is (or was last year) 1.2% which is lower than the national average.
Oops that turned into a long post.
Dds primary had a high level of Sen, which increased in the years she was there. Reasons were-
They were proactive in noticing it. So kids that might not be identified as having Sen elsewhere were spotted and supported. And with more complex sn/ Sen, the school were v good at helping parents get statements etc
Another local 'outstanding' primary had a rep for being awful with Sen, hence a few transfers to dds.
School got a good local reputation for Sen provision, so became first choice for many parents of children with Sen.
Also, up to a few years ago it was always very undersubscribed, unlike the outstanding ones in wealthier private areas. So kids chucked out of other schools, often due to undiagnosed Sen ended up there as they had spaces.
Course, could be other reasons too, but the above are things I actually know for certain explained part of the Sen % at dds.
It is, possibly, a year on year increase but the percentage of SEN children in the last reported Y2 is massive. I do not know another school with such a high percentage. I too would wonder how this had happened. Clearly it is a school that has increasing SEN children because the overall school figure is around 15% so these younger cohorts have far more SEN children than the older ones. Does the school have a special unit for a certain type of SEN pupil? That's what it looks like.
Have you read the ofsted for any clues? Or visited and asked questions? It could be down to eg a reception teacher who is very adept at picking up a Sen that isn't usually noticed till kids are older. Or perhaps a parent who is very active in a local support group for sn being very impressed and telling everyone.
bojorojo The overall school figure is only for SA+ and statements though not SA therefore you can't compare the school/national averages to the year averages.
I doubt the school has a specialist unit attached because the % of pupils with statements/EHCP is only 1.2%.
The school % has remained stable going up then down not massively increased. You can't conclude the % has increased from that. The 12% could have been a low year and the 17.6% a high year with the school's True average somewhere between. You'd need more data from prior to 2012/2015 (which you aren't going to get) to conclude an increase.
If you remove the 61.4% as an anomaly and look at the rest of the data they don't show a massive increase.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now »
Already registered? Log in with:
Please login first.