New data about deaf children published

Image courtesy of http://images.clipartof.com

A few weeks back, the Department for Children, Schools and Families published a report with lots of data about children with special educational needs. For a geek like me, it was a dream come true. Pages and pages of spreadsheets and percentages and important footnotes to pore over. Sigh…

Anyhow, the report had its origins in the Special Educational Needs (Information) Act 2008. Sharon Hodgson MP pushed hard for this and NDCS was among a group of charities lobbying hard for it. The Act aims to shine a spotlight on special educational needs in the hope of galvanising Government to take action to improve outcomes. The report brings together lots of information for the first time on children who have been formally recognised as having a special educational need (i.e those who have a formal statement of need or who have been placed at ’school action plus’ and are getting extra help that way). So it doesn’t include information on all deaf children, and needs to be used with caution, etc. but what information it does have makes for fascinating reading (assuming you’re a geek like me). And also depressing, when you see the full extent of the poorer outcomes that deaf children experience.

A few of the interesting statistics that I’ve picked up so far include…

* In 2009, there were 14,770 deaf children formally identified as needing support. 500 more than last year.

* There are more boys recorded as having a hearing impairment: 7670 boys to 7100 girls.

* More analysis needed but it appears that children from an Asian background are more likely to have a hearing impairment. Of all Asian children with a statement, 7.8% were hearing impaired, compared to 2.5% for white children with a statement.

* The number of deaf children recorded drops dramatically at the age of 16. At age 15, there are 570 children with a hearing impairment with statements, dropping to 240 at age 16. We’re left wondering what happens to these children; whether they leave school, continue in further education with support or cease to receive any support at all.

* 4.9% of deaf children recorded are likely were defined as persistent absentees in 2007-08, compared to 2.4% of children with no identified need. Deaf girls are more likely to be defined as persistent absentees than deaf boys.

And that’s just for starters. Much of the data raises more questions than it answers. But this is not necessarily a bad thing before – the lack of any data before meant that we didn’t know what questions we needed to be asking.

I’m off on holiday next week – don’t worry, I won’t be taking the spreadsheets with me for holiday reading – but am looking forward to looking through the data in more detail and getting a full report on NDCS’s website. In the meantime, what do you think of the data so far? Anything surprising or particularly shocking in there? Anything missing you really want to know?

How the acoustics campaign victory woz won

Well, it’s been two weeks now since we won the campaign victory on acoustics and the Government announced a package of measures to improve acoustics in new schools. So how did it all happen? Having mused and reflected upon it, here are what I think were the five key ingredients behind the campaign success:

1) Getting good media coverage. We were fortunate that the Times Educational Supplement, which is read avidly by civil servants and Ministers at the Department for Children, Schools and Families, were keen to follow the campaign throughout the year and to keep highlighting the issue with stories popping up in January on the launch of the campaign, May about support from other disability charities and, more recently, in October about a new school with poor acoustics.

2) Getting the message out to MPs and peers. We invested lots of time and effort in making MPs aware of the campaign, encouraging them to sign a parliamentary petition and to write to the Department to demand action. We couldn’t have done this without our supporters taking action and writing to their MP to check they were on board. In total, nearly 600 emails or letters were sent to MPs and the Government on acoustics by our supporters. It helped that we had a simple message that was easy for MPs to understand and get on board, all of which ensured we had a cross-party army of supporters within Parliament…

3) Making sure deaf young people led the way. Of course, one of reasons why so many MPs were keen to support the campaign is that they had attended a parliamentary event we arranged in June and met with a group of deaf young people to hear about their own personal experiences of poor acoustics, and why action is needed. The same group also appeared on the telly on BBC2 programme See Hear to demand action. They made a powerful appeal for action which was difficult for MPs and the Government to ignore.

4) Making sure we developed a strong case for action. Whether it was doing our own survey of local authorities to confirm that too many new schools were being built with poor acoustics or commissioning research from a school in Essex to show the dramatic impact that improved acoustics can have, we were keen to make sure that our briefings to Government were backed up by a compelling set of facts, pointing to a problem that needs to be solved.

5) Negotiations over a possible law change. Having got lots of attention from MPs and peers, several were keen to try and get the law changed to improve acoustics. Baroness Wilkins, a member of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Deafness, tabled an amendment to the Apprenticeships, Skills, Children and Learning Bill. We were quite lucky in a way; the Government was already behind schedule on this Bill and were keen to reduce the amount of time spent on debates in the House of Lords. But a good campaign exploits any luck and opportunities that presents itself. And so we entered into a game of brinkmanship and a series of negotiations to agree to a deal whereby the Department agreed to acoustic testing in exchange for the amendment being withdrawn. We ended up getting a good package that surpassed our expectations of what we could realistically achieve.

All in all, a good result for deaf children and lots of lessons to take forward to the next big campaign! I can’t chose but any thoughts on which was the most important factor out of this five?

Campaign victory for deaf children on acoustics!

Happy day!

After months of lobbying and weeks of nail-biting negotiations, the Government has today announced a new package of measures to improve acoustics in new schools. We’ve been calling for a new legal requirement for all new schools to be tested. What we’ve got is:

* A new contractual requirement for all secondary schools to be tested as part of the Government’s Building Schools for the Future programme.
* A new condition of funding – no more money for local authorities for new schools unless they can show that recently built schools are compliant with government standards on acoustics.
* An intention to consult on a legal requirement for all new schools to be tested in the future.

So, in practice, nearly all new schools will end up being tested. We’ve been promised a list of the small number that aren’t captured by the above – so we’ll know their names, and where they live…

Lots of follow up work to do now to spread the word… But come back soon for the insider info on how it all happened.

End of term report on acoustics campaign

Parliament has now broken up for summer. As a campaigns officer, my initial response to this news is always “Praise be!”. As much as I love MPs, the summer months give us a time to reflect, strategise and do some blue sky thinking. Or some grey sky thinking if you’re enjoying the same weather as I am.

One thing we’ll be reflecting on is our Sounds good? campaign on acoustics. Looking back, I think we can point to some solid campaign ‘wins’, including:

* A recognition by the Government that there is a problem over poor acoustics, to which action is needed.
* A commitment to publishing guidance on how to achieve good acoustics.
* An unofficial clamp down on the use of alternative performance standards from those set out in government guidance, where there is weak justification.
* A recommendation of acoustic testing in new ‘minimum standards’ for new schools published by the Government.
* A reference to acoustic testing in new draft contracts for use by local authorities for new secondary schools.
* A promise to review the acoustics in new school buildings in future “post-occupancy evaluations”.

We’ve done this backed up my widespread support. Nearly 80 MPs have signed a parliamentary petition on this, 45 came to a parliamentary event, 16 organisations have endorsed the campaign and over 400 members of the public have contacted their MP to call for action on this issue.

All of this is pretty good. If we were to end the campaign tomorrow, I would do so with my head held reasonably high as I rush to buy some Pringles to celebrate.

But there is one very important thing missing that we think is needed: a hard mandatory requirement for new schools to be tested for their acoustics. Nothing has been put forward that would be a watertight requirement and which would apply to all new schools (and not just secondary schools). Without this, we don’t think there is any real incentive to make acoustics a top priority. It would fall off the radar as soon as we stopped our campaign.

Baroness Wilkins, a strong NDCS supporter, has been pressing to get the law changed to introduce this new requirement and her amendment will get debated after the summer. We had a meeting with civil servants last week to discuss this and we have a commitment that they will be seriously thinking about this.

In the meantime, we’ll be thinking about ways in which we can keep the campaign on the top of people’s minds when Parliament comes back from summer… Any ideas?

New strategy paper on education: what does it mean for deaf children?

The Department for Children, Schools and Families love to strategise. If I had a Krispy Kreme doughnut for every strategy paper that’s been published since I started this job, I would probably now be auditioning for the role of Jabba the Hutt in the next Star Wars film.

Their latest strategy paper is called: Your child, your schools, our future: building a 21st century school system. It’s a white paper, meaning that it’s a statement of intention to make lots of new laws in this area, probably later this year.

I read all through this morning and it was quite interesting. Critics will say it’s a desperate last gasp of a Government that’s running out of ideas, but I thought there was lots of sensible, useful stuff in it and a handful of references to the needs of children with special educational needs.

For example, pupils will now have a legal ‘guarantee‘ of what they will get out of school. It includes the right to additional support if children are falling behind. Assuming people are aware of it and that the guarantee has real legal teeth, it could be a useful lever to empower deaf children and their families to get the support they need.

There’s also a proposal that local authorities should survey parents to make sure they’re happy with the choice of schools in their area. Again, could be a powerful way of empowering parents of deaf children where suitable provision locally for deaf kids is not great.

A few concerns though. The white paper talks a lot of encouraging schools to work together and collaborate more to meet each other’s needs, with less centralised support from Westminster. Schools will also have more control over their own funding. This is fine – but we will need to make sure that schools don’t forget about children with low incidence needs, such as deaf children, and still make sure these children get the support they need. The white paper itself acknowledges there will still be a need for some centralised support services. We’ll be reminding them of this when it comes to sensory support services. We’ll also be reminding them of the ongoing need for action to close the gap in attainment for deaf children.

As always, the devil will be in the detail. And I need to find it, in true “Where’s Wally?” style.

What did you think? Is it good news for deaf children or do you think more needs to be done?

New sign language project launches

Back in February 2008, Malcolm Bruce MP, chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Deafness in Westminster, asked Gordon Brown during Prime Minister’s Questions about support for sign language users. Fast forward to today and a consortium of deaf organisations were formally launching the I-sign project and celebrating £800,000 of investment from the Department for Children, Schools and Families to undergo work to raise the status of sign language in England.

I think the i-sign project is a really important and innovative project. It’s been going since early this year and brings together various strands of work which different organisations are leading on, including NDCS, BDA, Signature, RNID and others. NDCS is leading on developing a family sign language website to help families of deaf children learn useful signs for engaging with their deaf child. And we’re taking a close interest in the work being undertaken by Signature to develop a qualifications framework for communication support workers. It’s a two year project with ambitions to become self-sustaining. It’s quite refreshing to see different deaf organisations joining forces in this way.

The new Minister for special educational needs, Diana Johnson came along to the event to lend her support and meet some families of deaf children. She was quoted as saying:

“Overcoming the communication barriers experienced by deaf children is key to ensuring they get the best education possible. The Government is committed to providing parents and the school workforce the communication support they need to ensure deaf children fulfil their potential. I am delighted that we are funding such an innovative and exciting project. Developing qualifications for teachers and providing interactive materials for parents to learn sign language will help deaf children communicate effectively both at home and at school.”

And our deaf work experience student, Paul, ended up giving a short speech in front of the Minister about his own experiences growing up as a sign language user. Probably not what he expected when he joined NDCS for the summer – but we like to keep our interns on their toes…

Overall, a good day for deaf children.

Catch 22 as NDCS challenges Government officials on acoustics

Attended a meeting at the Department for Children, Schools and Families today about acoustics. It went well… but no major breakthrough… Yet.

Some small steps are being made which bring us closer to testing acoustics in all new schools. But nothing is yet on the table that would guarantee that all schools would definitely be tested. The Department is suggesting there is no evidence that schools are failing to deliver good acoustics. This isn’t borne out by what our members are telling us. It’s also puts us in a catch-22 because if there is no testing, it is much harder to get evidence of non-compliance. And now the Department is saying it can’t introduce testing if there is no evidence of non-compliance. My head hurts from thinking about it.

There was a suggestion from round the table that it didn’t matter if the acoustics weren’t great because deaf children could use personal microphone systems. After 11 years of using microphones in schools myself, I feel confident in saying this is baloney. Microphones amplify all noises, not just the teacher’s voice. They make group work difficult. And not all deaf children use microphones anyway. It’s not to say they’re not important – but clearly they complement good acoustics. They’re not a solution to bad acoustics.

One thing that was clear from the meeting that all the letters that our supporters are writing is getting their attention and they have to spend a lot of time explaining what is going on to MPs. The more people that write in, the more it’s going to push the Government to making sure that deaf children get high quality acoustics in schools – so write in now if you haven’t already!

The Department is going to go away and think about what we’ve said, and there is a plan to meet again in around a month. In the meantime, the campaign for schools that sound good goes on!

DCSF consultation convulsions vol. 3: the primary curriculum

Another day, another consultation… The latest is the independent review into the primary curriculum Sir Jim Rose. An interim report was published late last year and the deadline for comments passed over the weekend.

So what did Sir Jim Rose have to say about children with special educational needs and the primary curriculum? Given that one in five children are reported to have some form of special educational need, it’s obviously going to be high on the agenda when considering how the primary curriculum should be reformed and made relevant to everyone. Yes?

Well, here’s the thing. There was virtually no mention. No mention of deaf children, and no mention of any other group who might have additional needs.

OK, so it’s only an interim report. But if you’re going to looking at major reforms of the primary curriculum, surely you’re going to want to consider how everyone is going to access this new curriculum, and make recommendations for how this will be met FROM THE OUTSET. Not afterwards. And definitely not after the whole thing has been implemented on the ground.

The Government has done this before – by introducing phonics as a new method of teaching literacy without considering how this would work for deaf children.

Our response has been to say you can’t get away with treating deaf children as an afterthought. No new curriculum initiatives should be introduced unless without first considering – at the very beginning – how the needs of all children can be met.

Here’s hoping someone in the review team heeds this point.

DCSF consultation convulsions vol. 2: Children and Young People’s Workforce

A second consulation that I’ve been working on is the Children and Young People’s Workforce paper. This is the Department for Children’s Schools and Families (DCSF)’s attempt to set out its long term strategy on the workforce in all aspects. It has attracted attention for recommending the creation of a social care workforce taskforce, following the Baby P tragedy.

It was a well written and clear consultation (unlike others I’ve been working on). The key point that we’re making in our draft response is that DCSF should move away from treating children who are vulnerable or who have additional needs as a homogenuous group and to think more carefully about how it can ensure that the workforce can meet the needs of ALL children including, of course, deaf children.

As part of this, we recommended that DCSF focus on training for mainstream teachers. I still can’t quite believe that at the moment – apparently – new teachers only spend one morning in a four year course on looking at the needs of children with special educational needs. No wonder so many teachers feel like they don’t know what to do when a deaf child enters their classroom.

And for staff who work in a specialist role, we spoke about different specific parts of the workforce that work with deaf children. For example, we highlighted the evidence that too many communication support workers are working to interpret the curriculum for deaf children without a proper qualification in sign language. NDCS’s position is that this is unethical and that there needs to be a Government programme to recruit more communication support workers – and ensure that they have the right qualifications.

We also talked about the need to address other specialist areas of the workforce, including teachers of deaf children, speech and language therapists, special educational needs co-ordinators and social workers for deaf children. All in the space of ten pages. Phew.

We’ve put our on the NDCS website to allow our members and professionals to take a look and let us know what they think – and we welcome any thoughts you might have too. Have a look and let us know what you think too.

Sounds good? An update on the acoustics campaign

So we’ve got a name for our campaign on acoustics – Sounds Good? – what else have we been up to? Here’s a brief run down:

1) My boss attended a conference in Manchester on building schools which apparently turned out to be a great networking opportunity with various local authority officials, designers and builders. Worryingly, my boss met quite a few builders who said that opt out from the Government standards on acoustics are widespread.

2) We managed to get the story covered in leading education newspaper the Times Educational Supplement.

3) We submitted a response to a limited Government review on the standards for schools that builders are *supposed* to be following.

4) We had a meeting with officials at the Department for Children, Schools and Families to talk about the scope for taking action on acoustics. The meeting was reasonably positive – but Ministers would need to get involved to push things forward.

5) And on that note, we have formally written to the Minister responsible for new school buildings, Jim Knight (the one that does all the typos), to set out our concerns and ask for a meeting. We’re hoping he’ll agree.

The more research we do, the more we get more worried about what is actually happening on the ground. For example, we’re getting a lot of feedback that school builders and educationalists are going gung-ho for open plan teaching areas – even though there has been no real consideration of how to ensure high quality acoustics in such settings.

A case of new policy ideas being pushed forward without a consideration of how the needs of children with special educational needs can be met? I feel a sense of deja-vu…

Our campaign is now moving to developing the logistics of our plans to engage with the media some more and with MPs. We have a few interesting ideas that we’ll be following up – so, as always, watch this space.