Our review of the Rochford Review and the Government's response

All opinions shared in this blog are our own personal views and do not reflect the views of our school.

What is the Rochford Review?

In 2015 a report was commissioned, chaired by Diane Rochford to review the statutory assessment frameworks for pupils working below the national curriculum standards.


The review was released in October 2016 with the following key recommendations:

• The removal of p-scales 
• Interim pre-key stage standards to be used to assess pupils working below the National Curriculum standards but whom are engaged in subject specific learning 
• Schools should assess pupils in 4 areas of need as outlined by EHCPs 
• Schools should have a statutory duty to assess pupils not engaged in subject specific learning in the area of cognition and learning using the 7 aspects of the engagement scale. However there should be no requirement to submit data 
• Schools should be free to decide their own approach to assessment in line with their chosen curriculum 
• The changes in assessment for pupils with SEND should be included in initial teacher training 
• Schools should work to share their good practice and seek support from one another 

Earlier this year there was a consultation period which received 594 responses. The Government analysed the initial report and the responses received and have this week published their response: Primary school pupil assessment: Rochford Review recommendations Equalities impact assessment

What are the main points that have been outlined?

Pupils who are engaged in subject specific learning but are working below national curriculum standards will be assessed using the interim pre-key stage standards as of the year 2018/19.

Pupils not engaged in subject specific learning and working below the level of the interim pre-key stage standards will be assessed in the area of cognition and learning using the 7 areas of the engagement scale: In recognising the complexity of need of these pupils and the inadequacy of a linear assessment framework, the government expects pupils to be assessed tailored to their personal needs and unique profile using the 7 areas of engagement however the school feel best fits their curriculum model.

The Rochford Review recommended that schools will not submit the data they collect for pupils not engaged in subject-specific learning when assessing them against the 7 areas of engagement. This is because the Rochford review placed a high value on schools having the freedom to assess pupils in a way that meets the needs of their pupils and in line with their curriculum model. Standardising an assessment model to submit results would not achieve this.

‘One of the Rochford Review’s guiding principles was that equality is not always about inclusion. Sometimes equality is about altering the approach according to the needs of the pupils. While an inclusive approach to assessment is desirable where it is both feasible and valuable, it is equally true that the fairest and most positive way to provide for some children is to use a different approach.’ I believe this statement reflects what professionals working in the SEND sector have been waiting a long time to read.


What is wrong with the p-scales?
Having used PIVATS to assess pupils with SLD and PMLD I have found limitations. Firstly, p-scales are a linear progression framework which outline what the children should be demonstrating and the next steps. A barrier of PIVATS is that the individual lozenges (targets or achievements) should be attained across one level before progressing to the next and at many levels there are lots of lozenges to achieve. I recognise that PIVATS has helped many teachers break down the often perceived as ambiguous statement jumps of the p-scales, however aren’t we just fitting our children into linear stacked boxes? Some children may also reach a peak with such an assessment system, they may be making progress in other areas however they don’t fit in any more of the boxes, or even worse teachers are seeking to find a very tenuous link to prove progress. Much research has been carried out that demonstrates that pupils with a range of severe, complex and profound needs have spiky profiles of attainment which doesn’t reflect accurately using a linear assessment framework.

Another problem I found with PIVATS was the need to show progress on a tracker. My pupils often made progress in areas related to their social, physical, sensory processing or independence skills as these were important areas of development personalised to the pupil, however they are not reflected on a tracker. With the pressure to make progress teachers often find themselves teaching to PIVATS targets. By doing this we are not teaching in a creative or innovative way and teaching around the needs of the child.

In an article written by TES they quoted Diane Rochford’s concerns that the p-scales are often used incorrectly to shape a curriculum which restricts schools in delivering a creative and innovative and pupil centred approach.

It is important to recognise the changing face of SEND. Our profile of children is becoming more and more complex with the advances in the medical profession in relation to premature birth, an increase in drug and alcohol use throughout pregnancy and the increase in undiagnosed neurological disorders. In our setting the lower end of the school has an increasing ratio of pupils with PMLD and complex medical needs. To meet their needs we should be aiming towards a personalised curriculum approach that meets the needs of these pupils. Following a lot of personal research, school visits and trailing in practice we feel an informal/ semi-formal approach is successful. However after p4 the p-scales are divided by subject based learning. This can often present schools with a dilemma and the questions, what curriculum are we expected to follow? Do you pupils have an entitlement to the national curriculum? What will Ofsted expect to see?

The fountain dale school highlights that pupils working at p5 are typically working at age 24 months, would you expect a 24 month old to be learning subjects. It’s even worse for KS2 and 3 pupils who are at this developmental level but expected to be learning complex subject topic. And this is not even the place for the argument ‘but you can make that topic sensory’ because I would have too much to say!

The p-scales were also designed as a pre-national curriculum assessment tool and were not updated when the new national curriculum was put in place in 2014. The p-scales do not follow on to the National Curriculum leaving a big jump between p8 and NC levels. 

Alternative assessment approaches

There are a range of other assessment frameworks used to assess the progress of pupils with PMLD/ CLDD/ SLD. Our survey results highlighted this in our previous blog post.

An assessment system we have found to be successful is MAPP. MAPP is a system that allows you to input personal targets and look beyond subject areas. Targets can be mapped around any development area that would positively impact on the child. MAPP recognised that is it not accurate to simply tick a target as achieved or met, as is the case with many assessment tools based on p-scales. They break down the acquisition of a target into four stages of which each stage has a progression. The stages are prompting, fluency, maintenance and generalisation. It is recognised that maintaining a skill and generalising it is just as important to record as them demonstrating it. It is a system that slows the pace of learning down to meet the child, not expecting them to continuously move forward in their development path to meet their expected outcomes.

Earlier in the year, we visited Chailey Heritage School. Simon Yates, the head teacher, accompanied by two members of his staff presented on their curriculum and assessment model at the Best of British Special Education Forum earlier this year. They left listeners with jaws on the floor at the concept of getting rid of data. Chailey strongly believe in their pupil case study assessment system. Their target setting, my next steps are designed around the needs of the children, similar to MAPP. They evidence progress using observation notes in a very thorough and effective system. There is no data to track, no pupils are compared but the journey of learning is still clear to see. 

What are the engagement scales?
The engagement profile and scale was devised by professor Barry Carpenter as part of his work on the Complex Learning Difficulties and Disabilities Project.

The project outlined the importance of engagement. They explain that engagement is not just being on task but being immersed in the learning activity in relation to the activity itself, their learning environment and those around them. Many children with PMLD/ CLDD/ SLD have difficulties engaging in their learning due to a range of barriers. The project outlined that a child must be engaged before any learning can take place.

The project highlights the 7 stages of engagement: awareness, curiosity, investigation, discovery, anticipation, persistence and initiation. The engagement scale is a tool to measure the progress towards engagement. It is a score based system that marks each area out of 4 and can measure progress over time.

Engagement is clear to observe and assess when working wit pupils with PMLD however, I have previously questioned the impact of measuring engagement with some of our SLD. I have looked through the PowerPoint below and found useful examples to aid my understanding of its application to pupils with SLD. However, I have worked with a number of pupils with SLD who are well engaged with activities, eager to learn and fully immersed in an activity. We may not be able to track much progress with these pupils.

Powerpoint found on Barry Carpenters website: https://barrycarpentereducation.com/tag/engagement/

Click on the link in the post: Interpreting Engagement ; pathways for children with Complex Needs

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Engaging-Learners-Learning-Difficulties-Disabilities/dp/0415812747/ref=sr_1_sc_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1505663272&sr=1-1-spell&keywords=barry+cerpenter

How we have implemented them at school?

Hannah implemented the engagement scales last year with her PMLD class and used them alongside PIVATS and MAPP. Hannah found them effective to use to measure engagement within a session. Hannah’s class uses a lot of repetition to support the needs of her pupils, therefore the engagement scales provided a tool to assess the progress of the pupils engagement with an activity over time. This may prove more difficult for pupils with SLD who have a more diverse timetable.

I have recently introduced them with my CLDD class. My team have been enthusiastic and committed to learning more about the engagement scales and are enjoying being able to observe the progress a child is making. By encouraging the whole team to use them, the team enjoy the responsibility and being included and can recognise the impact of the session and the support they are providing.

I would not like to use the engagement scales as a stand-alone form of assessment. I recognise the value in assessing the development in engagement, however they do not record the specific achievements of the child. In practice, I think using MAPP and the engagement scales complement each other.

We will attach two examples of the engagement scale progress sheets we have devised and have been using to our TES page: Sensory_dispensary or click here.


Things we like about the Government response to Rochford review:

• Supports that for pupils working below the interim pre-key stage standards a non-subject specific curriculum is supported 
• Recognises the limitations of the p-scales 
• Is not expecting engagement scale data to be submitted 
• There is still a freedom for schools to adopt an assessment framework that works for their children and their curriculum 

Things we are concerned about:

• The use of the engagement scales were never designed to be a primary assessment tool. They do not measure overall progress, only progress in engagement 
• We feel the SLD pupils have not been recognised; engagement scales work well for PMLD pupils. The interim pre-key stage standards are still recognised as above p8 but below NC which leaves out pupils working between p4 and p8. We need to be able to measure progress not just engagement. We recognise engagement is the pre-factor to learning however once a child is engaged how do we measure the progress then? Are we lowering aspirations by only measuring against engagement? Should the engagement scales be an option instead of statutory? 
• It is a very long process. Pupils working below interim pre-key stage standards will continue to be using the p-scales for another two years. There is confusion around this as some schools such as Chailey Heritage have already moved away from the p-scales. 
• The initial report highlighted the importance of assessing pupils with SEND in all 4 areas of need as outlined by the EHCP. The government report only touches on cognition as an area for assessment by use of the engagement scales but does not directly promote assessment in the 4 areas. 
• This only outlines primary assessment, can we assume it reflects secondary pupils too as many special schools are 2-19. 

 Sources used:

Carpenter, B., Egerton, J., Cockbill, B., Bloom, T., Fotheringham, J., Rawson, H., et al. (2015). Engaging Learners with Complex Learning Difficulties and Disabilities . Abingdon: Routledge .

Department for Education. (2017). Primary school pupil assessment: Rochford Review recommendations . London : Department for Education.

Phillips, S. (2016). Reflections on the Rochford Review & implications for our semi-formal learners with severe and complex needs - One school’s perspective. Retrieved September 17, 2017, from Fountaindale School: http://www.fountaindale.notts.sch.uk/library/documents/Reflections_on_Rochford_SF_%281%29.pdf

Rochford, D. (2016). The Rochford Review: Final Report. London : Standards and testing agency.

The Dales School. (n.d.). Assessment & Progression (MAPP). Retrieved September 17, 2017, from The Dales School: http://www.thedalesschool.org/attachments/MAPP%20case%20study%20e-mail%20PDF.pdf

Ward, H. (2016, October 20). Rochford Review: changes to SEND assessment could lower expectations, warns charity. Retrieved September 17, 2017, from TES: https://www.tes.com/news/school-news/breaking-news/rochford-review-changes-send-assessment-could-lower-expectations

Best of British Special Educational Needs Forum

In March of this year we were EXTREMELY lucky to have been invited by Flo Longhorn to present at the Best of British Special Educational Needs Forum in memory of the late, great Penny Lacey. By 'Best of British', it truly was, the names of presenters were authors of books we have read and creators of programmes we know of and then there was us… Hannah Underwood and Lucy Allen, practitioners really new to the world of PMLD. It was beyond an honour, it is something I’m not sure we will ever top!

This blog post will be a journey through our experience, briefly talking about the other presenters we had the pleasure of listening to but it will more be about the learning curve for us. We will write further blog posts next month to share what we learnt in more detail. There were many wonderful speakers who we will be writing about including Dr Jean Ware, Andrew Colley, Peter Imray, Chailey Heritage School, Castlewood School, Hilary Wainer (founder of TACPAC), Carol Allen, and the amazing Professor Barry Carpenter CBE who took us under his wing.

On Wednesday evening Hannah and I rushed to leave school hoping we had organised everything for our teams whilst we were away. We frantically got ourselves to Peterborough train station for the journey down to London. However, nothing is ever that simple for Hannah and I. We walked for a good half an hour to our hotel, dragging along our suitcases, and me not wearing sensible shoes, to find that our hotel had changed its name and was in fact another half an hours walk. Well it was time to call an Uber! We eventually arrived at our hotel just gone 11 o’clock at night and were hungry. We contemplated ordering take away to the hotel room but weren’t sure if we’d get away with that, so we ventured down the road. But nowhere was open. We hopped back in an Uber to kings cross to eat at Prezzo’s – familiar territory.

The morning of the forum came and we couldn’t contain our excitement. We wanted to get there early to see if we could help out in anyway. On arrival we were asked to sign in and told the lady we were presenting so we collected our presenter badges. We sat at the back of the room extremely overwhelmed by all of these faces and names we recognised, too nervous to speak to anybody. We were relieved to find Jo Grace, a familiar face who managed to reassure us! Then Flo who greeted us with a great big hug.

The first day was incredible, Hannah’s hands ached from the notes she was writing and my fingers ached from all of my tweeting. Jo Grace and I were tweeting using the hashtag BOBSEN to keep those who couldn’t be there up to date. The first presenter was Yvonne McCall, the head teacher of Castlewood school in Coventry, the school Penny worked with. Hannah and I had extensively read through the curriculum models on Castlewood’s website as they were our original inspiration for our curriculum model. It was a real privilege to listen to Yvonne speak of her schools journey with such passion. Yvonne invited Hannah and I to Castlewood. During the Easter holidays this year, Hannah and I went on a road trip to visit schools across the country and were overwhelmed by the hospitality and support we received by the staff at Castlewood, it truly is a fantastic school. But importantly we felt it was a school with a heart which is sometimes rare to find in a current climate with increasing pressure on school outcomes and performance. Casltewood is also a teaching school, delivering courses and offering bespoke packages. You can find more information on their website. 

Up next was Peter Imray who discussed the recent Rochford review. He discussed the opportunity for schools to look beyond the National Curriculum’s subject specific learning and think more about having a clear pedagogy that meets the needs of their pupils. It was great to listen to Peter having read his book on 'Curricula for Teaching Children and Young People with Severe or Profound and Multiple Learning Difficulties' which we filled with post it notes. We were going through the process of proposing a new curriculum model to our management at the time which wasn't being well received. He gave us hope and reassurance that we were on the right path. Peter has written a book with Andrew Colley from the University of East London. Colley presented on the second day and posed many thought provoking questions about the true meaning of inclusion. He debated the impact of 'full inclusion', why we strive for it and how it is often not full inclusion at all. Their book is called 'Inclusion is dead: Long live inclusion' and is available from amazon. We have it here waiting for a chance to read it. We will post our thoughts on the book hopefully by October half term. It's bound to be a good read as another of Colley's books is full of our post it notes too. 

Jo Grace explored the area of sensory stories in her earlier session. It was interesting to hear her discuss personal stories we are told and how they can form our identity. We have the opportunity to share such stories with our pupils and sensory stories are a great way to make them accessible. She also explored the 7 senses (though she did add that some suggest there are as many as 33 senses!) and how to incorporate them into stories. Jo’s later workshop session was focused on the particularly pertinent topic of mental health and wellbeing. This is often overlooked for those with learning disabilities but is no less applicable, in fact recent research into this put prevalence rates as higher in those with learning disabilities than those from the wider population. 

Jo spoke very movingly about how an individual with profound and multiple learning disabilities (Jo uses the term Sensory beings) may not have the ability to lift one’s head to look at the world around them or the words to interact with it and those in it despite being able to hear the melee of its goings on. She explained how this may lead an individual to become disconnected from the world around them and begin to feel that it is not something for them to experience; their world is reduced to the area from the small space between their face and the grey tray attached to their wheelchair. 

Jo had a wealth of resources to share with us that would show those special ‘Sensory beings’ that we work with that, “this world is for you- you may not be able to get to it but I will bring it to you” (Jo Grace’s own words at the BoB SEN forum 2nd March 2017). These included existing affordable resources that are easily attainable such as wrist bells together with some creative original ideas such as smell tubes (created by using a Pringles tube with holes in the lid, tumbles dried ball and dried herbs). Resources such as these allow independent exploration and allow the sensory beings we work with to begin to understand that they can effect change and something is different because they are there. 

If you would like to learn more about this I highly recommend that you attend one of Jo’s training sessions where she speaks in much greater detail and offers numerous resource ideas. I am also currently reading Jo’s new book ‘Sensory-Being for Sensory Beings: Creating Entrancing Sensory Experiences’ which offers greater detail about these topics together with resource ideas and is a great read for parents and practitioners alike.

At lunch time, as well as the very enjoyable lunch provided, we were fortunate to be presented with an array of chocolate sensory experiences by the Willows Sensory Service. Of course being PMLD teaches we got stuck in playing with the chocolate squirty cream (we were really disappointed when Sainsbury’s didn’t sell it when we looked that evening), chocolate playdough and even chocolate smash. Sarah was lovely and runs sessions with people with PMLD such as sensory drama, aromatherapy, reflexology and has her own sensory room. She also delivers training. You can find her on Facebook or email her at sarah.hall73@virgin.net for more information.

Another incredible speaker on day 1 was Dr Jean Ware the creator of routes for learning. Jean discussed how routes for learning came about and the purpose of it. She had some great videos for us to analyse and assess to highlight the true meaning of some of the more ambiguous milestones. We found this presentation really helpful as we have only ever explored the route-map for ourselves and it is often quite difficult to decipher without direction.

Flo came to talk to us at the end of the day and asked us if we’d brought any of our sensory goodies along that she’d seen us use in our training at school. A bit flummoxed, Hannah and I looked at each other and replied yes. Our topic for the forum was ‘Planning a PMLD Curriculum’. When Hannah and I received it, we thought, well this is a serious topic, we will need case studies and facts and figures.

That evening after the forum Hannah and I dashed out into Camden, not a clue where we were going to redesign our whole presentation. First, of course we went to Tiger and bought half of the shop. We then used our google maps to find a supermarket! We found Sainsbury’s to our relief. We filled our baskets with shaving foam, smash instant mash, corn flour, food colouring and mouldable soap foam.

(a couple of my purchases from Tiger, not for the training but because I got a little over excited filling my basket. I have since used them a lot with my SLD group doing my version of tricky words rapping based on Shonette Bason-Wood)

The time ran away with us and it was time to meet some lovely amazing people for dinner. 

Unfortunately, we hadn’t had time to go back to our hotel to change or leave our shopping. We went to meet up with Flo, Roger, Jo, Carol Allen, Sarah Hall and Professor Barry Carpenter CBE OBE looking very hot and flustered with 3 huge bags of shopping and 2 giant umbrellas! Well we were rather embarrassed. But I can say we had a truly amazing evening. The food was great but the conversation was even better. We had the chance to discuss the engagement scales we had read about with the man who created them. There were many great debates that evening and Hannah and I felt like we had an incredibly special, probably once in a life time evening sat amongst our heroes.

We had to excuse ourselves early to get back to our hotel, after all we had a presentation to re-write! There we were at 1 in the morning making pink instant smash in the kettle covering the  bathroom in cornflour (we realised how suspicious that could have looked after we checked out that morning!) and re-writing our PowerPoint.

Morning quickly came. We ventured down stairs for breakfast, neither of us hungry (not at all like us), contemplating why on earth we signed ourselves up to stand up and speak in front of so many people! 

We will discuss our presentation in our next blog post.

We will leave you with our favourite quotes from the Forum:

Children look into your eyes and search for empathetic connection. Teaching is a relationship based profession - Carpenter

The world is for you, you may not be able to get to it but i will bring it to you - Jo Grace

We need dynamic curriculum models and flexible teaching that goes where the child needs you to go - Carpenter

Initiatives to include all have largely failed to include those with complex needs - Carpenter

Many people who favour full inclusion have exclusion clauses - Andrew Colley

We're talking about 50,000 young people, working with them is a very significant job - Andrew Colley

All children should experience the outdoors - Yvonne McCall

We need to enable children to realise they are effecting change - Jo Grace

If somebody touches you then can send you a whole host of emotions - Dr Maria Robinson

Penny wasn't in it to make a name for herself she did it for you the teachers and the learners - Dr Jean ware

Insisting that all children must follow the steps in the same order is a barrier to learners with PMLD - Ware

Waiting for communication initiation is a good thing not a waste of time - Dr Lila Kossyvaki

I worry about how much time you spend on assessment and how much time you spend being a great teacher - Imray

We're all performers at the end of the day to engage our learners, we need to have energy - Imray about the time we spend on assessment

Assessment is not just to pass Ofsted, it needs to give useful information - Imray

It is not possible to say what is acceptable progress. If Rochford can't work it out how the hell can we? - Imray

I've not met a child with SLD or PMLD in 20 years that succeeded with the National Curriculum - Imray

Does learning have to take place around a table? - Yvonne McCall

I want my students to have fun. I want my staff to have fun - Yvonne McCall

Our focus is putting life in the days of pupils with PMLD - Jo Grace 

http://www.peterimray.co.uk/ - Peter Imray 

http://flopublications.com/index.php - Flo Longhorn 

https://www.bangor.ac.uk/addysg/Staffpages/Jeanware.php.en - Dr Jean Ware

https://barrycarpentereducation.com/ - Professor Barry Carpenter OBE CBE

http://www.castlewood.coventry.sch.uk/ - Castlewood School

https://www.facebook.com/WillowsSensory/ - Willows Sensory Service

http://www.thesensoryprojects.co.uk/home - Joanna Grace. There is currently a sale on Jo's sensory stories