Our Forum Presentation - Curriculum survey results

On Friday 3rd March Hannah and I presented at the Best of British Special Educational Need Forum. Flo asked us to present on the influence Penny Lacey had on the development of our own curriculum model.

Hannah and I were currently following the National Curriculum and trying to make it relevant to our pupils. Yes it can be done, and yes it can be made sensory but it takes a ridiculous amount of hours sitting and racking your brain to make tenuous links and ‘think outside the box’. We approached our SLT about it and were met with concern about such a dramatic change. There were of course concerns about Ofsted, and we completely understood the pressure and importance to do well. There was uncertainty about the moral/ inclusion perspective. Is it right to change the children’s curriculum or do they have an entitlement to receive the same curriculum as their mainstream peers? Another concern was that an informal curriculum model provides less support and structure for teachers as the National Curriculum is a successful model that drives teaching. Hannah and I began to extensively research studies on the impact of the National Curriculum for pupils with PMLD, the meaning and morals of inclusion and other curriculum models used in outstanding schools across the UK.

The first step in our research journey was a quick google search of other curriculum models. The first we found was Castlewood School who devised their curriculum with Penny Lacey. They divide their curriculum into four key areas. These areas link well to EHCPs; cognition, communication, physical and self-help and independence. We loved this model and read through their online documents to further understand how such a model could work in our school. Another school that inspired me was The Children’s Trust school in Surrey, their resources are phenomenal. They now use the IMPACTs model. The IMPACTs model is very similar with the addition of environmental control technology.

We then read wider to find research that evaluated the impact of such models or to find evidence to support a move away from the National Curriculum. We found a journal entry by Imray and Hinchcliffe that highlighted the negative impact the National Curriculum can have for pupils with PMLD and how we should move towards personalised provision.

'Even to this day, there may be a large element of tokenism, with schools ‘pretending’ to teach what they do not actually teach in order to fit the model, and at worst not making a very good job of delivering a watered-down mainstream primary Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) National Curriculum' Imray and Hinchcliffe (2011)

Imray also quotes Ware (1994) 'There is however, a difference in emphasis between the SLD school curricula and the National Curriculum, with the National Curriculum concentrating on what society is thought to need from the individual rather than what the individual needs to cope with society. This emphasis is [a major] source of conflict with good practice in SLD schools where the needs of the individual are seen as paramount. It is important to realise that this is a problem for all special needs education and, indeed, all of education and not just concerned with pupils with PMLD'

' For those working consistently and over a number of years at P8 and below, the National Curriculum does not and cannot offer the level of personalisation of curriculum content that is required to meet individual needs' (Imray and Hinchcliffe, 2011).

When we were given this topic by Flo we decided to put together three surveys. We wanted to have a better understanding of head teacher’s opinions on curriculum models, the opinions of teachers and parents and see how they compare. We shared some of these results during our presentation and discussed the informal curriculum model for PMLD pupils, what it could look like and the positive impact on pupils.



Parents results – 250 responses. The parents who responded to this survey had children with SLD/ PMLD and ASD.        

Teacher survey - 112 responses. Responses are from teachers who work in an SLD/ PMLD setting.

If you teach the National Curriculum what is your experience of its impact? 

(a selection of the responses)


· Needs to be heavily amended to engage our learners - does have a positive impact but only in highly tailored areas.

· Not appropriate or geared towards SEN in anyway. Very rigid doesn't allow for creativity or learning at students own pace.

· It can be a bit hit and miss with regards to the topics we teach. Some are very easy to resource and plan for PMLD and SLD pupils, and some are very difficult. Thinking of activities that are appropriate for each pupil is tricky

· It has a great impact on the children's learning. We use the national curriculum to help us deliver a breadth of experiences and topics.

· I feel it is important to allow students access to a wide range of subjects, rather than limiting their experience just because they have SEND. Has to be adapted for our complex and PMLD. Based on mainstream levels of development keeps pupils engaged know what they need to do next.

· Sometimes doesn't focus on what we actually want (and students and parents) to teach- comes from a model of making the students 'like their mainstream peers' and doesn't always allow to focus on important aspects of the curriculum

· Sometimes vvvvvv tenuous, depends on the concepts etc. and how you make them accessible Nurses for Florence Nightingale Animals for Africa. However what do Tudors or Jesus 'the miracle worker' really have to do with their worlds, needs and next steps, for each individuals learning/communication etc I feel absolutely none.

· Transferring some subjects to our level is difficult at times Negative! I teach in an SLD school and some of the subjects e.g. MFL, History, Geography have little meaning for the children.

· It leads to a very limited timetable and offers no opportunity for the development of communication, physical development and self-help and independence skills. I feel that the children I teach deserve a curriculum designed for them and not be forced to fit one.

· It helps us ensure the students are not repeating the same thing / topic / book / ideas over and over for the whole school career ((hungry caterpillar anyone?) whilst still covering and generalising the actual learning that need to be developed. It is seen to be of second importance to social skills, which I don't believe is the right attitude.

· The National Curriculum does not work for lots of our pupils; it moves far faster than the pupils can manage and is lacking in engaging and interesting topics/skills.

· I feel that we are constantly trying to make tenuous links to prove we are teaching the National Curriculum rather than focusing on what our pupils should really be working on. Yes we can make sensory experiences out of Anglo Saxons as my headteacher repeatedly tells me but this isn't focusing on developing crucial communication, physical or independence skills.

· Does not cover vital skills our children need to learn, the curriculum is not accessible for all pupils, isn't tailored enough for SEN pupils, curriculum is restricting in some areas. For less able students the impact is minimal. I find myself trying to teach the skills that they need loosely tied to an area of the national curriculum. Recently my school has stipulated that we must follow medium term plans and long term plans that are published on our website for the sole purpose of Ofsted. This means that where a few years ago we had the freedom to teach a more topic based approach we now have to deliver lessons on for example, medieval times, parliament and elections and french pets with our most complex of students. Although we can make some lovely experiences - the opportunities for students to develop their specific and individual skills are minimal.

Head teacher – 48 responses. All head teachers of SLD/ PMLD schools

If your school follows an informal/ semi-formal curriculum what do you feel are the main benefits?

• Tailored to meet pupil needs
• Personalisation
• Relevance
• Flexibility
• Focus on communication and individual development
• Bespoke learning opportunities

These are just a selection of the results. If you would like the complete results please let us know.



After discussing curriculum models and our research we discussed 'WHY' we should move towards a more sensory needs based curriculum. We discussed sensory play. As a new teacher of pupils with PMLD we are often told they like sensory play. By searching the internet for ideas you come up with a lot of sensory play ideas. Hannah and I questioned why. We need to make sure there is a reason for everything we do, that we understand it so our TAs can. We will discuss the benefits of sensory play in a future post. 

We also shared this video with the delegates. I received this on the Thursday evening of the Forum. This is our amazing site manager who decided to have a go at being me doing tricky words with my SLD class. He’s not quite got call and response but he’s getting there. I think Keith Park needs to give us a visit!

He was just missing my new wig and glasses! I have also since added dollar rings! My class couldn't wait for our tricky words session because the loudest pupil got to be the rapper! 

Imray, P., & Hinchcliffe, V. (2012). Not fit for purpose: a call for separate and distinct pedagogies as part of a national framework for those with severe and profound learning difficulties. Support for Learning , 150-157.