Definición de indicadores y aspectos de interés

Parents, such as David’s father (see Chapter 4, Section 4.2.1.1) were concerned that their son or daughter would be vulnerable to bullying at college. As he said: ‘You do just worry slightly because you can’t be with them all the time and [college] is a big place’.

The College 4 lead said that the college was aware of the possibility that learners with autism could be a target for bullying and therefore ensured that there were staff around to guide and safeguard against this. The specialist autism tutor there also

99

talked about the importance of giving support around social interaction, of formally teaching young people who wanted to be able to interact more successfully how to chat and how to make friends (see Chapter 6, section 6.4). On the other hand, she was a strong advocate of the right of those young people with autism who did not wish to be sociable and who were happy by themselves to remain as ‘loners’. She argued that it was only if a young person wanted social interaction and did not know how to do it successfully that formal teaching of these skills would be appropriate.

Of the Cohort 1 students interviewed, two mentioned negative social interaction incidents that happened during travel to and from college (see Section 7.1). Kayleigh at College 2 was the only one to speak about being bullied in college. (Others

reported histories of being bullied at school.) According to Kayleigh, she was

sometimes pushed about and laughed at. She said her ‘one-to-one’ told her to ignore it but, in her view, ‘It’s very hard to ignore. I feel I want to take my anger out on them’. Despite this, Kayleigh reported liking college better than school. She said she had fun with her friends and enjoyed playing games in the common room. This theme, of new friendships and a bigger social circle, came up in most of the interviews with the young people. For example, Luke at College 3 talked about there being, ‘a lot more people to communicate with’ at college but reported that he had met new people and made new friends, ‘really good ones; I’ve made loads of new friends’. This was a typical comment.

7.6 Chapter summary

This chapter focused on five themes affecting access to college life that arose during the interviews with professionals, parents and young people. For each theme, there were examples where the Finished at School programme had led to progress in relation to previous barriers. In terms of travelling to college, school and college leads agreed that, where it was developmentally appropriate, opportunities to practice travelling safely on public transport were necessary to enable independent travel to and from college. Where independent travel was not appropriate, or had not yet been achieved, Cohort 1 learners had a support package that included transport to college. This was progress compared to the experience of Zara’s parents who had previously been told that Zara’s inability to travel independently to college indicated that college was not suitable for her.

Before the Finished at School programme, there was evidence that the environment of a general FE college could be a barrier to accessing college for some young

100

people with autism. Stimulated by the programme, each of the four college hubs made adaptations to the environment designed to minimise environmental triggers for anxiety and sensory overload and to maximise safe access for learners with autism.

The greater knowledge of college life built up for the Cohort 1 learners and school staff through the Finished at School programme also helped to prepare these learners for the increase in unstructured time at college compared to school. For example, the fact that college was not a five-days-per-week provision was discussed in transition reviews at school. College staff, too, became more aware of the needs of some learners with autism to have somewhere quiet to go during unstructured times such as at the start of the day and during the breaks and lunch-times. Providing a structured start to the day and providing quieter, autism-specific communal areas were examples of the adaptations made to remove this as a potential barrier to young people with autism thriving at college.

Any concern that autism-specific facilities would result in learners with autism not accessing mainstream facilities at the hub colleges proved unfounded. Across all four hub colleges there was evidence that the Cohort 1 learners routinely accessed mainstream facilities such as the library, cafes, canteen, and sports facilities.

Concerns about how young people with autism would fare in terms of social

interaction within the environment of the general FE colleges were recognised as a potential barrier to accessing college. Some experiences, reported by a minority of the Cohort 1 learners interviewed, indicated that this could be a challenge. Equally, it was one that staff in the four hub colleges sought to address: for example, through enhanced safeguarding and guidance, through tutor and mentor support, and through explicit teaching of social interaction skills. In most of the interviews with 12 Cohort 1 young people, the pleasures of new friendships and wider social circles at college were mentioned.

101 8 CONCLUSIONS

It is clear from the evaluation data collected that the Finished at School programme was a success. The training on person-centred planning and reviews was welcomed by the four hubs and was effective in increasing knowledge about person-centred approaches and in inspiring positive changes in practice, including a greater

involvement of parents and young people in person-centred planning. The hub-based work was valued for creating both new and enhanced relationships locally, and as an arena for sharing good practice and ideas. The programme increased understanding of the practical implications of the Children and Families Act 2014 and the new SEND Code of Practice 0-25. The opportunity, created by the programme, to focus on improving transition for young people with autism had a positive impact on day-to-day practice in the schools and colleges and also generalised to improve transition for young people with other special educational needs. Regarding Cohort 1, it was clear that young people who would not otherwise have done so, moved on from school to a general further education college. All 45 Cohort 1 learners moved on to positive post-school destinations. This was a major achievement, underpinned by improved person-centred planning.

For those Cohort 1 learners who moved on to the hub colleges, there was evidence that these colleges had improved assessment processes. College staff gathered more and better information earlier about the young people with autism who planned to move to the college. This enabled staff to plan ahead and to provide appropriately for these learners’ needs. There was also evidence of positive developments in the curriculum pathways available for young people with autism, and of a greater focus on preparing for adulthood. Aspects that had previously been perceived as barriers to college for young people with autism were systematically addressed: for example, where possible, autism-friendly adaptations were made to the physical environment to reduce sensory overload and triggers for anxiety.

In short, the Finished at School programme has demonstrated that, with locally coordinated person-centred transition planning, reasonable adjustments, and

appropriate support, many more young people with complex autism can access local college life successfully.

102 9 RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the data collected for the evaluation of the Finished at School programme, we make the following recommendations.