How do we set up home-school communication that works for everyone?

A home-school book can begin as a bridge and become a daily burden. Staff rush to fill it in, parents read it at the most pressured part of the evening, and the child learns that adults exchange a verdict on them every day.

Communication works better when everybody knows what information is needed, what it will change and when the exchange can stop.

Give the system a purpose

Start with the decision or support question.

• Is a new lunch arrangement helping the child eat and enter afternoon lessons?
• Does medication timing appear to coincide with a change that the prescriber needs to know about?
• Does the child need advance warning at home after a timetable change?
• Are agreed written instructions available in the relevant lessons?
• Is a toileting, eating or healthcare plan being followed?
• What information would help the child transition between two settings?

"Improve communication" is not specific enough. One clear purpose tells you which fields and frequency are proportionate.

If the purpose changes, change the system. Do not add a new daily box every time another concern appears.

Decide what is worth sending

Useful information changes support, safety or interpretation. It might include:

• a significant change in sleep, pain, medication or health that affects the day;
• an unexpected timetable, staffing or transport change;
• whether the agreed provision was available;
• a direct observation relevant to the current review;
• what the child communicated and the source of the wording;
• an easier occasion and what support was present;
• a question that needs an answer from a named role.

Avoid a minute-by-minute account or generic judgements such as "good day", "poor choices" or "dysregulated" without context. Write what happened and what the child could or could not access.

After the fire alarm, P stayed outside the classroom for 20 minutes and returned when the corridor was empty. The written catch-up instruction was provided. Source: class teacher.

That gives the family information they can use. "P struggled this afternoon" leaves them guessing.

Choose the minimum workable frequency

Daily communication may be justified for a defined health, safety, eating, toileting or short-term support question. It is not automatically best for every child with SEND.

Consider:

• event-based: contact when a named event occurs;
• weekly: a short pattern summary and upcoming changes;
• time-limited daily: a few fields during a four-week support trial;
• scheduled check-in: a regular call or email for complex situations;
• formal review only: when routine teaching information is already available and no daily decision depends on it.

Match the frequency to the speed at which somebody can act. Collecting detailed information every day is wasteful if it is read only at the end of term.

Include a review date for the communication system. Decide whether to continue, reduce, change or stop it.

Use one agreed channel

School apps, email, paper books and phone calls each have strengths and problems. Choose a main route and state:

• who at school reads and writes it;
• who in the family receives it;
• when a response can reasonably be expected;
• where formal decisions will be recorded;
• what happens when the usual person is absent;
• which information must use another route.

Do not ask a child to remember and deliver sensitive adult messages. A paper book in a school bag may also be read by the child, siblings or peers. If it contains private health or family information, choose a more secure route.

For older pupils, involve them in what is shared. A teenager may reasonably want adults to exchange practical access information without receiving a daily account of every conversation or social difficulty.

Separate observation from explanation

Different settings can produce different accounts. Mark the source rather than merging them.

Child report: "I did not know where to sit at lunch."

Teacher observation: R entered the hall, stood beside the door and left without eating.

Parent observation: R ate immediately on arriving home and slept for an hour.

The information may support a hypothesis about uncertainty, noise or fatigue. It does not yet prove one. Keeping the accounts separate makes the next observation more useful and reduces arguments about whose version is correct.

In England, the SEND Code expects assessment to draw on pupil, parent, school and relevant professional information ^[1]. Wales's current ALN guidance also emphasises clear communication and person-centred involvement ^[2]. Other nations have different processes, but source clarity remains good practice.

Include the child without making them the subject of surveillance

Tell the child what the communication is for in a way they understand. Ask:

• What would you want home to know before you arrive?
• Is there anything you want to explain yourself?
• What information feels private?
• How should adults tell you about tomorrow's change?
• Do the messages make you feel helped, watched or blamed?

A child's privacy is not absolute where safety information must be shared, but that should be explained honestly. Do not promise secrecy and then pass on the information without warning unless immediate safeguarding circumstances require action.

Avoid behaviour scores as the main message. A traffic-light colour may describe whether the child met adult expectations without explaining access, effort or support. If a scale is genuinely useful, define what it measures and include the child's perspective.

Build a small shared format

For a four-week support trial, six fields may be enough:

1. date and relevant context;
2. direct observation or child report, with source;
3. support offered;
4. whether the child could access it;
5. what happened next;
6. action or information needed tomorrow.

Use short entries. The full support plan holds enduring provision; the communication record captures information needed between reviews.

If nobody uses one field, remove it. If one critical question is repeatedly missed, make that field more explicit.

Keep urgent and formal routes separate

A communication app checked at 4pm is not an urgent medical or safeguarding system. Agree who to contact for:

• immediate safety concerns;
• medication errors or health events;
• a child missing from an expected place;
• serious bullying or disclosure;
• same-day attendance information;
• a formal request, decision or complaint.

Use email or the school's formal process for significant requests that need a dated response. A note in a home-school book may not reach the SENCO, headteacher or governing body.

Review whether communication is helping

After the trial period, ask:

• Did the relevant people receive the information in time?
• Did it change support or prevent avoidable surprises?
• Were entries specific and source-labelled?
• Did the workload remain proportionate?
• Did the child understand and accept the arrangement as far as possible?
• Did the system increase anxiety, blame or over-monitoring?
• Which fields should continue?

If communication is failing, do not assume the answer is more messages. A simpler shared channel, one responsible person or a scheduled review may be more reliable.

The school support plan guide shows where enduring provision belongs. Communication should carry the small amount of information that makes that provision work across real days.

Agree response boundaries for parents and staff

Unclear availability can turn communication into an evening duty for teachers and a constant checking cycle for families. Write realistic boundaries.

• What time is the channel normally checked?
• Which messages need acknowledgement rather than a full answer?
• Who responds when the named person is absent?
• Which questions wait for a scheduled meeting?
• What should a parent do if there is no response by the agreed point?

A same-day reply may be necessary for a missing medication instruction but not for a broad question about next term. State the urgency in the subject or first line and use the correct route.

Parents can also define what school needs to know about home. A difficult evening may matter when it changes safety, health or access the next day. It does not automatically require a detailed account of family conflict. Share the functional information:

S slept for approximately three hours and may need the agreed low-demand arrival and reduced physical exertion. We are seeking health advice about the sleep change.

That gives school an action without exposing more private detail than is needed.

Use communication to prepare, not only report

The most useful message may arrive before difficulty.

School can share:

• a staffing or room change;
• an unusual fire-alarm test;
• a trip detail that affects clothing, food or transport;
• a deadline or assessment format;
• the language adults will use for a new arrangement.

Family can share:

• a health change that affects the plan;
• whether the child understood tomorrow's information;
• a known transport disruption;
• a question the child wants answered privately.

Advance information gives the child time to process and lets adults solve practical barriers before the school gate.

Close the loop after an incident

An incident message should do more than announce that something happened. Record the immediate facts, action taken, child's current state, who has been informed and what will happen next. Avoid detailed causal claims before accounts have been gathered.

If the event needs a fuller review, move it out of the daily channel. Set a time, preserve relevant records and include the child's account. Do not conduct a complex investigation through a sequence of hurried app messages.

At the next review, ask which communication prevented difficulty and which merely documented it afterwards. Keep the first and redesign the second.

Sources

1. Department for Education and Department of Health and Social Care, SEND code of practice: 0 to 25 years
2. Welsh Government, Additional learning needs: decision-making and communication