SEND reforms will make Sendco supervision vital

As reform of special educational needs and disabilities support places increasing expectations on mainstream schools to meet a wider range of needs, much of the discussion has understandably focused on what schools will have to do differently.

But there is another important question: how will we support the people expected to lead much of this work?

Arguably, Sendcos occupy one of the most complex roles in education. They support pupils and families, advise colleagues, coordinate professionals and navigate increasingly stretched systems.

With schools being expected to provide earlier and more inclusive support for a greater number of pupils, Sendcos may find themselves carrying even more responsibility.

My doctoral research explored Sendcos’ experiences of educational psychologist-facilitated peer group supervision.

It suggests that, while supervision is not a solution to the wider challenges around SEND, it could offer something that is often missing from busy school life: protected time to stop, think and reflect.

What supervision is (and what it isn’t)

The word “supervision” can cause confusion in education. Professional supervision is not the same as performance- or line-management. It is not an opportunity for someone to check whether a Sendco is doing their job correctly. Nor is it therapy.

Instead supervision provides a structured and confidential space to reflect on professional experiences.

For a Sendco, this might involve thinking through a difficult conversation with a parent, considering a challenging relationship with a colleague or reflecting on a situation involving a vulnerable pupil.

The focus is not necessarily on finding the “right” answer. SEND work is often complex, and there may be no straightforward solution. Sometimes the value lies in exploring different perspectives, making sense of a situation and deciding what it might be helpful to do next.

In my research, Sendcos valued having permission to acknowledge the emotional impact of their work. They described talking about frustration, worry and uncertainty with others who understood the demands of the role.

This is not about suggesting that Sendcos are unable to cope. It recognises that work involving children, families and complex situations affects the people doing it.

More than a wellbeing intervention

Supervision should not simply be viewed as an intervention to prevent burnout or something offered when a professional is struggling.

Participants in my research valued it because it supported their professional thinking as well as their wellbeing. Hearing how others approached similar challenges, considering alternative perspectives and having time to discuss situations in greater depth could increase confidence and support learning.

This may become increasingly important as Sendcos help their schools to respond to SEND reform. Supporting a wider range of needs in mainstream settings will require them to develop inclusive practice while managing difficult decisions and competing demands.

However, supervision should not be presented as a solution to structural problems. It cannot create additional funding, reduce waiting times or remove excessive workloads. There is a risk that reflective support becomes a sticking plaster if it is used instead of addressing wider pressures.

Supervision should sit alongside adequate resources, manageable workloads and wider systemic improvements, not replace them.

Why is it difficult to provide?

There are obvious practical challenges. Sendcos are already extremely busy, and finding time for regular supervision can be difficult when urgent meetings, pupil needs and administrative demands compete for attention.

Without protected time and clear organisational support, supervision can quickly become another meeting that is postponed when something more urgent arises.

There is also the question of who provides it. Educational psychologists may be well placed to facilitate psychologically informed reflective spaces, given their experience of helping school staff to think about complex interactions between pupils, families and wider systems. However, educational psychologist services themselves are under considerable pressure.

We therefore need to think creatively about how supervision could be provided. Peer group models may offer one option, allowing Sendcos to learn from and support one another, with an appropriately skilled facilitator.

Schools or groups of schools could work collaboratively, while local authorities and educational psychologist services might consider how reflective practice could form part of wider SEND support.

The precise model may differ, but certain principles are important: sessions need a clear purpose, agreed boundaries, confidentiality and, crucially, protected time.

Supporting the people who make inclusion happen

SEND reform provides an opportunity to think not only about what we want schools to provide but also about what the professionals leading this work need in order to do it well.

If Sendcos are expected to play a central role in developing more inclusive schools and supporting a growing number of pupils with additional needs, we cannot simply increase expectations without considering the support surrounding them.

Supervision will not solve every challenge around SEND provision. But regular opportunities to think, reflect, learn from others and discuss difficult experiences could help Sendcos feel more supported in a role that is likely to become even more demanding.

If we are serious about creating a more inclusive education system, we also need to be serious about supporting the people helping to make it happen.

Kristie Sullivan is an educational psychologist working in schools in Lincolnshire