Special Educational Needs and Disabilities: A review of the Literature

This literature review is produced within the context of a moral panic and sense of a broken SEND system and eroded parental confidence in processes to support children. The argument presented is that children are not having their needs identified, support is then not put in place, detailed assessments are not completed in a timely fashion and services that provide assessments or support are overwhelmed. The previous government produced a SEND and Alternative Provision Improvement Plan to address what it saw as these core issues. However, there is an alternative argument based on government statistics which is that mainstream education is not working as well as it could or has done in the past to accommodate all learners.

Part of the problem is that the education system in England has developed over time and the notion of special educational needs has changed. The wording in the official definition is largely the same as it was in 1944, though the interpretation is loose and the subgroups of learners who are considered to have special educational needs or disabilities has changed over time. The UK, like many developed nations, has signed up to various conventions such as the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. This has focussed attention and a rights-based approach to education. This leads to aspirational statements in the Incheon Declaration that supports the move towards inclusive education and that all children should attend their local mainstream school by 2030 (UN Sustainable Development Goal 4a). Compared internationally, England is not doing too bad in terms of the move towards total inclusion in mainstream, when headcount data is used, England is slightly above the mean for developed countries. There are processes for providing support early on without recourse to the complicated and detailed assessments needed in order for an official decision to be made that leads to an Education Health and Care Plan. These processes are set out in the Code of Practice for SEND and emphasise quality first teaching, differentiation, small group support and individualised support for a small number of pupils. For many pupils the level of SEND is transitory, for others it is low level, for a small number of learners the level of SEND is complex, severe and lifelong.

Yet these aspirational notions of inclusion are in tension with what has become known as the standards agenda. This has a narrow set of aspirational educational standards that schools are measured against based on how many pupils reach the set standard in English and Mathematics. This has the potential to lower the value of learners who have SEND and will not reach this aspirational target. This puts pressures on schools and makes inclusion more challenging. Evidence from government statistics shows that the number of children identified as having SEND is increasing, demand for EHCPs is increasing, the number of children with an EHCP is rising, while the majority of children with an EHCP attend mainstream schools the percentage of children attending segregated provision is rising, school suspensions are rising, the amount of children educated at home is rising, the number of pupils in Alternative Provision is rising. There is clear evidence of intersectionality of factors with some groups being more at risk of school failure than others. Many of the issues highlighted for England are also evident in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, despite the different educational policies in place within each jurisdiction and divergence of educational systems. At the national level, the statistical evidence is one that suggests that the mainstream education system as a whole is failing and marginalising more pupils that it has done in the past. This suggests that the focus on inclusion outlined in the SEND and Alternative Provision Implementation Plan is not being addressed in England (though it is too early to see any published research that explores this). There is evidence that local authority spending on SEND is increasing and reaching unsustainable levels. The Implementation Plan has led to a new National Professional Qualification for SENCos which is meant to increase the status of SENCos. The number of Educational Psychology training places increased; however, the majority of local authorities continue to report challenges with recruitment of sufficient numbers of EPs. Similar challenges exist for the recruitment and retention of Speech and Language Therapists. The number of Alternative Provision places has increased; however, this is not always fulltime, and providers do not all have to meet regulatory requirements. This is concerning since it may mean that some children do not have access to a good quality education. Yet Alternative Provision can offer a curriculum that builds skills needed to succeed in mainstream education such as resilience, improved interpersonal skills, improved self-management of emotional regulation and improved literacy and numeracy skills.

However, there is a substantial amount of research evidence that suggests that schools can make inclusion work. These schools consider all learners to be valuable members of the school community and work hard to reduce barriers to learning and engagement. The research literature identifies several features that help schools to become more inclusive.

It has long been recognised that SENCos play an important role within the school. As early as 2001 it was suggested that they should be funded through the school’s core budget and have a strategic role within the school by being part of the senior management team (SMT). Yet three decades later it is clear that not all SENCos are in this position and there is some evidence that some would not want to be part of the SMT. The range of tasks outlined for SENCos focusses more on responding to individual learners needs than strategically thinking about inclusion and preventative approaches. Given the high demands highlighted earlier for individual assessments it is not surprising that SENCos are under pressure and have high workloads. Despite this, there is evidence that SENCos are highly committed to their role and are in a good position to share expertise with colleagues within the school.