Inclusive and Supportive Education Congress International Special Education Conference Inclusion: Celebrating Diversity? 1st - 4th August 2005. Glasgow, Scotland

home about the conference programme registration accommodation contact

WORKSHOP: Developing an Effective Pedagogy for Pupils with PMLD

The development of a route map for assessing learners with multiple disabilities

Pauline Loftus, Ysgol Pendalar, Gwynedd
Jean Ware, St Patrick’s College, Dublin
Verity Donnelly, ACCAC

Address for correspondence:
Verity Donnelly
Pentre Fron Cottage
Pentre Fron Rd
Coedpoeth
WREXHAM LL11 3BU
vj.donnelly@tiscali.co.uk

We wish to acknowledge the work of the other members of the project team:

Phil Martin, Headteacher Ysgol Crug Glas, Swansea
Lynn Alton, Deputy Headteacher, Ysgol y Bryn, Flintshire
 Wendy Jones, Actin Headteacher, Ysgol y Drindod, Wrexham

Aim

This workshop will:

• Provide information on the rationale and developmental psychology which underpins the Insight materials
• Give delegates an introduction to the materials through video/discussion
• Inform delegates about the potential of the materials to support effective teaching and assessment practice

Introduction

As part of the review of the curriculum and assessment frameworks in Wales, the Qualifications, Curriculum and Assessment Authority for Wales (ACCAC ) are working t o develop a “ fit for purpose” assessment for learners working at the earliest levels of development, whose needs may not be accurately assessed and whose progress may not be adequately reflected through the use of existing assessments such as W steps, P levels, In Step or Equals PACE materials.

Alongside the development of materials for the Foundation phase 3-7 , National Curriculum 7-14, and learning pathways 14-19, the route map will feed into the assessment of relevant areas of learning/common requirements/key skills to provide an inclusive framework. Following the review , there will be much greater emphasis in Wales on cross curricular skills, including “ learning to learn”.

The materials are also consistent with the increasing focus on the importance of teacher assessment and in particular assessment for learning which first and foremost is seen to make a contribution to better learning.

The materials are designed to support the assessment of learners’ priorities while supporting full access to a broad , balanced curriculum, including the National Curriculum. It is important to maintain realistic but high expectations and work towards both cross curricular and subject outcomes –    particularly as it is not clear where exactly “ subject specific” learning begins!

Current assessment practice

Due to the current lack of training opportunities in this area and the fact that many teachers do not have a background in early child development, developmental checklists may be relied on too heavily -   assuming that learners will develop in particular ways or according to a particular sequence when due to physical/sensory disabilities, this is unlikely to be the case.

In an effort to document progress, some materials break assessments such as p scales into smaller steps, despite the fact that they were never designed to support judgements about levels for individual targets/single pieces of work.

Although task analysis can be useful in teaching some areas, small steps from p scales will not support quality teaching of NC subjects .

This approach can leave highly significant learning such as contingency awareness or improvement of sensory function at the bottom of the hierarchy as attempts are made to measure progress through (wholly supported )   “experiences” loosely related to subjects which are unlikely to move learners on.

 P Scales were originally designed to generate school performance data by providing common criteria for school review. They were to be used as an end of key stage assessment but they are increasingly used annually or even more often due to a range of external pressures. Collecting school performance data for this group of learners is problematic.

Ofsted (2004) note that   comparing special schools is currently of limited value given the diversity of SEN, the small numbers in year groups, the often wide age range of classes and the range of assessment approaches in use. They also noted that it is difficult for special schools to set targets for 5 terms ahead, particularly for learners with PMLD.

Research by Durham University has shown that schools use p scales in different ways with some misunderstanding the “ best fit” model and requiring all criteria in each descriptor to be met before awarding the level.

A further difficulty is presented by the fact that levels of help given vary widely and such support is very difficult to moderate. Until moderation is firmly established, any results cannot safely be used for comparisons. Any – or all - of these factors may have an impact on teaching and curriculum.   

The rationale for our approach

One size does not fit all… Learning from the assessment practice outlined above, we felt that a different approach was needed. We set out to develop assessment materials which would overcome some of these difficulties – which would provide a more holistic view of children/young people, focus on abilities and reflect the fact that learning /progress is not always hierarchical. The materials would need to focus on relevant content/priority areas and focus on individual needs. We wanted to promote equity, develop a more inclusive framework and involve and empower individuals, school staff and   families.

In order to be “ fit for purpose” to assess the needs of learners with PMLD, we felt that the materials would need to take account of:

• the learners’ preferred learning channels/sensory modalities and ways of processing information
• the ways in which learners accommodate new information/experiences and remember routines
• the learners’ approach to problem solving
• the learners’ ability to form attachments and interact with other people
• communication modes and skills

The materials are founded in research on early development and atypical development – and take account of physical/sensory needs and need for a responsive environment. They recognise the need for close relationships and high quality interactions   and assert that communication cannot be assessed in isolation ( e.g. with a checklist) as much depends on the communication partner.

An effort has been made to combine best of behavioural and interactive approaches . From the behavioural side, we have noted the importance of systematic approaches, the need to have baseline data , to gather evidence, to realise the importance of context/environment and the fact that some specific techniques might be required in certain situations.

From interactive approaches, we have taken importance of good personal relationships, sensitivity to feedback from the learner, an emphasis on understanding as well as skill acquisition, and a focus on participation, negotiation and respect.   We stress the importance of the learning process, intrinsic motivation and the fact that teaching cannot always be divided into constituent parts.

(Discussion regarding advantages/drawbacks of these approaches and how these materials support effective practice)

The materials focus on relevant areas – communication, social interaction and early cognitive development – which are priorities for learners with complex needs.  Although the focus is very much on supporting the progress of individual learners, we also feel that the materials will support more rigorous evaluation of practice/provision.

Despite this, we have not attempted to score or summarise what is shown by the routemap as we feel that this does not reflect the complex behaviours of these learners. Figure 1 below shows the possible uses of the Insight materials and attempts to clarify the difference between ongoing assessment for learning and summary/summative assessment of learning.

Discussion on effective use of assessment information including:

• the focus on individual learners, taking account of the wider view of progress
• issues around school self review and whole school target setting and to what extent different approaches are required  

Figure 1

We believe that inclusion requires education for diversity not uniformity so if a different approach is required to meet the very specific needs of these learners – within the broad framework of the curriculum and assessment arrangements to which ALL learners are entitled we felt we should pursue this.

Using the materials

We hope that the materials will encourage staff to problem solve and examine their practice – and better match experiences to learners. The guidance contains questions to help schools take account of statutory requirements but make full use of the available flexibility. It also suggests ways of maximising learning based on recent research and provides information on reducing barriers to learning( e.g. reflexes, positioning, sensory development, communication issues)  

The materials are designed for use by teachers, support staff, senior managers, LEA advisers, ITET colleges and should be used in schools in cooperation with specialist services for learners with visual/hearing impairments, speech therapists and parents/carers/families.

The route map (Figure 2)   will support close observation of sensory function, preferred learning channels   and means of processing information. It will help staff to focus on how learners accommodate new experiences,   remember/anticipate new routines and develop approaches to problem solving. The ability to interact and form attachments and the development of communication skills is also shown clearly – although not in a rigid sequence.

On the routemap, the orange boxes are key milestones in communication/early cognitive development. These steps are considered crucial to future development and are the “ major junctions” which are significant in all routes. Early stages of development such as habituation, contingency responding, contingency awareness ( see Ware, Thorpe, Gray and Behan 2005 ) and more widely recognised milestones such as object permanence and shared attention are key to all future learning. Guidance on the importance of these milestones is provided in the guidance booklet.

The routemap shows visually a number of possible learning pathways – different routes between these major junctions. The big picture on the poster highlights  possible  links but does not provide pre determined small steps . We wanted to move away from being locked into the idea of readiness to move up a single hierarchy which may lead staff to miss some significant abilities or barriers to learning. We hope that the routemap highlights the importance of lateral as well as hierarchical progress.

The initial assessment using these materials will serve as baseline but from then on, progress can be tracked   and the materials should help individual target setting by highlighting next steps.

We suggest that staff start at a step within the learner’s capability– or for some new learners not yet assessed and apparently not responding, start at the beginning. The assessment booklet sets out “ Things to try” (see Figure 3)and all activities should be tried, working down the map from top to bottom.

 Staff should continue until well beyond steps where the learner appears not to respond . In trailling, the importance of completing items throughout the map was shown, as some learners picked up items a lot lower down the map and the gaps in between added to understanding about the way learners were learning or the possible areas which might not be realistic to target due to the learner’s disabilities.  Close attention should be given to the information under” what to look for”. Staff are encouraged to observe learners over time/in different situations and note variations which may give further information about learning.

Following the assessment, appropriate targets can be set with reference to the suggested teaching activities in the booklet (See Figure 4).  

Delegates will be shown   a video of  pupils with complex needs, showing for example habituation and early associative learning. They will be given the opportunity to use the routemap to assess the pupil, with guidance from members of the project team. Discussion will take place about the early learning processes shown on the routemap and how the Insight materials support the accurate assessment of these key milestones (showing the inadequacy of checklists etc)

Following this, a wider discussion will take place gathering feedback from delegates about their experience and linking this with the outcomes of our trialling.

Topics for discussion may include:

• How well do materials take account of sensory impairments and physical disabilities?
• How useful are materials in pin pointing learners’ appropriate developmental levels?
•  How might materials support the setting of more appropriate/relevant learning outcomes across the curriculum?
• Why is it important to work through the map to gain the “ big picture”?
•  Is the assessment   more holistic than checklists/other materials previously used?
• Might the Routemap be helpful in establishing where learners are on the hierarchy of skill development (i.e. acquisition, fluency, manitenance , generalisation, application?)
• How can these materials be used in the context of a broad, balanced curriculum, including the NC?

Conclusion

The materials will in their final form be a multi media package   – poster, guidance booklet, charts and DVD with video clips to support consistent assessment. The materials will also be available on CDRom to enable teachers to record   observations   and create individual programme/profiles. We anticipate that the pack will be launched in spring term 2006. It will be sent to all special schools in Wales and via SEN advisers in LEAs to all schools who have learners with complex needs on roll. There may be copies available for sale outside Wales – price not yet known.

It is hoped that these materials will provide a consistent approach and shared language for teachers of learners with PMLD across Wales and help them to develop a manageable system to record significant behaviours which are important to inform future learning. Schools may need to include some subsidiary outcomes but the route map should help staff to identify where the learner is and any gaps in development. There is a real need for quality assessment information for this group of learners – and this can’t be conveyed by just a tick. For school managers , the assessment may also inform decisions about quality and effectiveness of practice and provision in this important area of work.

References

Ofsted (2004) Setting targets for pupils with special educational needs Ofsted, London

Ware, Thorpe, Gray and Behan   (2005)   ISEC Symposium:   Developing an Effective Pedagogy for Pupils with PMLD

Figure 2:

Figure 3:

Figure 4:

home . about the conference . programme . registration . accommodation . contact