The 'ticky statement' debate

[Helen]

We all know that we shouldn't be using the Development Matters statements as a ticklist; assessing children against them, ticking them off, and then using the ones following as next steps. Children deserve so much better than that!

But- the big question comes when we're educating children with SEND. How do we assess those children and demonstrate those smaller steps of progress that these children might demonstrate? Do we tick those statements then? Do we add lots of new ones? Do we refine them (emerging, developing, secure)? This is what we've introduced in the SEND assessment framework in Tapestry and we've been receiving lots of positive reviews, even though we're not entirely sure we have it right yet!

Do you set individualised targets and assess children in terms of how that skill is developing? For example, how much prompting the child needs to practice the skill, or how independent they are becoming with that skill? Do you note how the skill is consolidated over time, or remembered after a period of time? And do you think the generalisation of that skill is worthy of recording? Whether the child demonstrates that skill in different contexts?

We'd be more than a little happy if you could share your views ::1a

[Lois]

We've been using the SEND statements for one child who seemed to be achieving little in the way of the standard statements and whom we were monitoring for possible early intervention referral.  It's proved a great help in showing that progress is actually there, albeit slow, and provides some comfort/ reassurance for the parents.  Although we are only in the early stages of the referral process we feel the detailed information that the assessments provide will be of great help.

When we introduced the practitioners to the SEND statements they were enthusiastically received.  The rule is that, before they are used for any child, the practitioner  will discuss it with the manager and review the need for it at termly intervals.  So although we don't currently have any children with recognised SEND, in our view it has wider potential.