Written evidence submitted by The Disability Policy Centre

(SFC0003)

In November 2022, the Disability Policy Centre released the report ‘The State of the Nation in SEND Education’. This report highlighted the failings that are taking place in the SEND System.

Data was collected through speaking to disabled people of various ages and parents, carers and guardians. Freedom of Information Requests were also conducted on every local authority across the country that are responsible for SEND.

Some of these recommendations were picked up by the previous government, and were included in the 2023 ‘SEND and AP Improvement Plan’; including the headline policy of ‘National Standards for Alternative Provision’ - noting that there was little monitoring of Pupil Referral Units.

Our report was stark - highlighting that many children who are excluded from school are disabled, or have ‘Special Educational Needs’. Much more needs to be done to improve mainstream education to prevent this from happening. Focusing on sharing best practices, building local networks and supporting mainstream teachers is also key.

A summary of our report is below. We would be happy to give further evidence to support the committee where needed.

Report Summary

There are currently 1.5 million1 children in England who are recorded as SEND pupils - 16%2 of the total number of pupils. According to the government’s official definition3, special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) is commonly referring to a child or young person’s ability to learn. According to the official guidance, this may include their:

a)      Behaviour concerning socialisation;

b)      Reading and writing;

c)       Ability to understand information;

d)      Concentration levels;

e)      Physical ability.

In 2021, 36% of all year 11 pupils had been identified as being a SEND pupil at some point in their educational journey4. This number has continued to rise.

This term of ‘special educational needs’ has its origins in the Warnock Report of 1978, where a committee led by Mary Warnock argued that huge changes needed to be made to the educational system, to create a more inclusive environment for students. Some of these recommendations went unnoticed, and others formed the basis of the Education Act of 1981. Since then, legislation including the Children and Families Act of 2014, which introduced the Education, Health and Care Plans, and now the Government’s SEND Review of March 2022, have sought to push change forward to drive results.

The statistics show otherwise, however, and disabled students are still performing worse than their peers at several levels4, leaving school with fewer doors opened in life, fewer opportunities and a poorer experience than their non-disabled peers. On top of this, there are several people who go through their school years with an undiagnosed invisible disability, which can have a knock-on on their confidence, mental health and self-esteem. The feeling that is invoked from being told by teachers that they were ‘stupid’ or ‘incapable’ can stay throughout one’s life.

The Disability Policy Centre follows the Social Model of Disability. We believe that if the statistics are poorly reflected on disabled people, and those with special educational needs, it is not a reflection of their ‘ability to learn’, as quoted above from the government guidance. Instead, it is a reflection on the education system itself that is holding disabled people back from reaching their full potential.

As part of this research, The Disability Policy Centre spoke to 58 disabled people, of various ages, about their experiences of the education system. We interviewed a range of people, who had different levels and types of educational journeys, about their experiences in different establishments, from primary school through to college and university. Some that we interviewed were still studying, and some others had left school thirty or fourty years ago.

We also spoke to 50 parents, carers and guardians about their experiences of going through the system with their child. Through interviews, surveys and roundtables, we asked parents about school selection, their ability to have freedom of choice as to whether they sent their children to special schools or mainstream schools, the support they received from both schools and Local Authorities, and the process that they went through in acquiring an Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP) for their child.

Finally, The Disability Policy Centre conducted Freedom of Information (FOI) requests with Local Authorities across England. The contents of which can be found in the Appendices of this report. Overall, we sought to find out details about how many parents, carers and guardians were fighting the system through tribunals, how many SEND students had been placed in Pupil Referral Units, how many pupils had been removed from one school but not yet received a place, and how many pupils were accessing online learning only, which in doing so further isolated the pupils from their peers.

Through this research, The Disability Policy Centre found as follows:

●        46% of disabled people had their disability undiagnosed throughout school.

●        65% of parents, carers and guardians ‘had to fight’ for their child’s EHCP.

●        In some Local Authorities, up to 100% of the pupils in the Pupil Referral Units were registered as being disabled or having special educational needs.

These numbers, we found, were shocking, and a reflection that we still have an education system that does not work for all. For example, the Disability Employment Gap in the United Kingdom was 28.4% in 20215. To give every child and young person the education that they deserve, our education system must nurture their talents and abilities. This will allow them to enter into the world around them confident, capable and equipped with the skills that they need to all value the society around them, in whichever way that may be.

In this paper, The Disability Policy Centre will lay out our ideas and recommendations for what we believe these changes should be, and we will lay the foundation for our future work in Education. This issue is difficult and multifaceted, with decades worth of complexities woven into the system that will take many years to undo and restitch. Our recommendations to begin the journey to creating a truly inclusive education system can be found below.

Research Findings - Disabled People Surveyed

Research Findings - Parents, Carers and Guardians

Research Results: Freedom of Information Requests to Local Authorities

For the final stage of our research, The Disability Policy Centre wrote to every Local Authority in England and Wales to ask about their SEND Education for Children and Young People.

One topic that was notable was the percentage of the total number of pupils in Pupil Referral Units. For many Local Authorities, the pupils in these units often were in great numbers registered as disabled or having special educational needs. For SEND students, Pupil Referral Units are only ever supposed to be temporary solutions, and as discussed previously in this report, the outcomes of pupils in PRUs can be significantly worse than their counterparts in mainstream education.

An unusually high number of Local Authorities responded to our Questions ‘How many children and young people in the borough are there who have disabilities or Special Educational Needs who are currently in Pupil Referral Units?’ and ‘How many pupils in total do you have in Pupil Referral Units’? with the same figures. When questioned on this, as to whether these numbers were correct and all pupils in PRUs were SEND students, some of the responses were as follows:

"All have been registered as SEND when put in PRU."

“In response, yes – all pupils at our PRUs would have been placed there based on their ALN (or SEND).”

"We consider that most children and young people who attend our PRUs to have SEN Support Needs."

The Disability Policy Centre added up the data from the Freedom of Information Requests in each region for this answer, and these were then cross-referenced with the official Government data for the total number of pupils, and total number of pupils with SEN in PRUs.42

There may be anomalies in the data, such as some councils’ data not being entered properly on the system, or some councils not responding despite many attempts over several months. Some Local Authorities had data for both children with SEN support and children with EHCPs, but others just had one set of data and not the other. All of these meant that it was difficult to create a conclusive picture to be analysed.

Despite the anomalies, the overall percentage of SEN Pupils in Pupils Referral Units in the nine regions of England ranged between 42.8% and 80.8% of the total number of pupils.

This raises two important questions. Firstly, this interrogates the purposes of Pupil Referral Units, whether they are supposed to be specialist schools for children with special educational needs, and whether they have the teaching expertise and the facilities to do so.

The answer may be yes, and this may be the case for PRUs that are converting to, or have ambitions to convert to Alternative Provision Academies.

However, it is important to reiterate that the initial purpose of Pupil Referral Units was that they were not supposed to have permanent provisions for children and young people. If they are being used as such, the Government guidance should be updated accordingly.

Secondly, it raises the question as to the motivations of teaching staff for placing SEND students into Pupil Referral Units. If the reality matches what The Disability Policy Centre heard in our research, particularly when speaking to teachers, it may be the case that an increasing number of schools are expelling disabled students.

Placing these pupils in a Pupil Referral Unit may be seen as a suitable option, particularly if a teacher is struggling with the behaviour of a student who may be disruptive, either directly or indirectly as a result of their additional learning needs.

Lack of resources, uncontrollably large class sizes and inadequate accessibility training may mean that disabled students are not getting a fair chance.

This practice is not new, and was even reported to have taken place at the onset of special schools being set up. In Anne Borsay’s ‘Disabled Children and Special Education, 1944-1981’ presentation27, she remarked that special schools were ‘enabling educational authorities to exclude children who might obstruct or inconvenience the smooth running of normal schools’, adding that they ‘supplied a mechanism for excluding ‘disruptive’ pupils from ‘normal’ classrooms.’ It also matches up with the Department for Education report mentioned earlier, that showed that from the 2009/10 data, SEN pupils were nearly seven times more likely to be permanently excluded than their peers.

If mainstream, state-funded schools are unable to cater to their disabled children and young people, and Local Authorities are struggling to meet their legal obligations as set out in the Children and Families Act, it must beg the question as to whether the system is really fit for purpose. The Disability Policy Centre believes that each and every child must have the opportunity to live the most fulfilling life possible, by being given the best possible start through their education.

Recommendations

Recommendation 1: Each region in the country, led by the respective Local Authorities, should set up hubs of best practice. This will encourage co-creation as well as the sharing of ideas between both specialist teachers and mainstream teachers, ensuring that no child is in an institution where the teaching staff lack the skills, expertise and understanding required.

Recommendation 2: Each Local Authority should take responsibility for, and be accountable to the fact that there needs to be better data sharing, knowledge exchange and working across services - not just in social care and education, but including children’s services, disability services, mental health support, as well as those in the voluntary sector providing support for children and families in locality.

Recommendation 3: Acknowledge that the world around us has changed, with the past few decades bringing great technological, scientific and societal advances. However, the education system often adopts a ‘one-size for all’ approach and has room for reform. Academic attainment is not always reflective of ability. The national curriculum can be better shaped to allow all of our children and young people to flourish.

Recommendation 4: Gather evidence of what works in teaching and learning for disabled students, in both Further Education and Higher Education, as well as using international examples. Collate and share this best practice, and highlight this nationally, to be replicated in schools and establishments across the United Kingdom.

Recommendation 5: The Department for Education should continue to strive for smaller class sizes as a means of ensuring that each child is given the right support. Smaller class sizes mean that the likelihood of children with invisible disabilities being diagnosed will hopefully increase, as greater attention from teachers means an increased likelihood of detection and support at a younger age.

Recommendation 6: The Children and Families Act 2014 should be changed so that it is no longer the sole responsibility of the Special Educational Needs Coordinator in a school to coordinate the learning, planning, assessment and monitoring of the progress of SEND pupils. The legislation should be changed to reflect the shared responsibility amongst teaching staff.

Recommendation 7: The Government should continue to monitor Alternative Provisions, including Pupil Referral Units, and the number and percentage of pupils in these provisions who are disabled or have special educational needs, just as it monitors the statistics for other characteristics in PRUs, such as the percentage of pupils on Free School Meals. Alternative Provisions should be subject to scrutiny and accountability, with Ofsted style rating for these provisions to ensure high standards and fewer pupils ‘falling through the net’.

Recommendation 8: There should be a clear route for accountability for parents, carers and guardians who are not satisfied with the education system and the options that they are being given with their child. This includes an avenue for delivering guidance, support and advice, including legal support for those that need it. Modelled on the Citizens Advice Bureau, the Government should work with partners to establish an independent organisation that can support parents, carers and guardians with advice, advocacy and legal support.

Conclusion

These recommendations are a start, however, they are the first rung on the ladder for breaking down barriers, and creating an education system that is truly accessible for all.

With growing numbers of pupils who are classed as being disabled or having special educational needs, and so many people still being left undiagnosed, our ‘one-size fits all’ approach to education needs to change. From improved joined up working in Local Authorities, to sharing best practice across both SEN and mainstream institutions, these proposals will ensure that we take practical steps to ensuring that the staff in our schools, colleges and universities are best supporting in their teaching and learning for every student, and that best practice and evidence based research is shared across our nation, so no child goes without. 

Our research shows that not unfortunately not much appears to have changed over time - that our disabled young people are still facing the same barriers that they were forty years ago. They require bold thinking and collaborative action now more than ever.

We are pleased that the previous government included several of our recommendations in the ‘SEND and AP Improvement Plan’, particularly around sharing best practice amongst teachers, and monitoring Alternative Provisions. We believe that this government’s commitment to reforming the curriculum offers a key opportunity.

(November 2024)