The system in England and Wales for young people with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) is frequently described as being ‘in crisis’. The Fabian Education group does not disagree. In this piece we give a broad overview of the problems, and make our own suggestions for how this crucial system can be generally improved for the benefit young people.
The problem in brief.
Recently, a small group from Fabian Education met to discuss SEND, the various problems in the system, and to think of some ways forward. Of course, we aren’t the first to grapple with these crucial issues. Things have not been right for some time and are well documented. In recent years calls for change have been growing louder. A number of groups with first-hand experience of SEND- from MPs, to charities, and parents’ groups- are all saying that things have to get better.
There are too many things that aren’t working in the current system. While the results of these problems are varied and complex, lots of the causes come down to the same old things: Lack of funding, lack of resources, pressure on existing staff, pressure on families, and downright bad practice in a variety of settings.
This overall bleak picture is made worse by a common feeling that the SEND system has become overly complex and adversarial. The general experience of too many families is that if you want anything out of the system, it will probably involve a fight. This fight can be long, is invariably stressful, and can often be very expensive.
The overriding impression is that our SEND system too often falls short. At its worst it stymies rather than enables progress, and leaves too many families feeling weakened rather than empowered. For too many it’s yet another ‘headache’ to be endured.
How can we tackle the problem?
The answer to fixing SEND is not simple, so there isn’t a single cure-all ‘magic pill’ anyone could prescribe to make all the issues go away (although a huge injection of cash would do the power of good, of course). However, our group did agree a set of six suggestions for general places to start, and these are listed below.
Before we get to those, there is one important thing to note. Because problems in the SEND system are widespread and deep, it is tempting to say ‘let’s rip it up and start again with a blank sheet of paper’. An approach like this might be well-intentioned, but our small group agreed early on that more widespread changes at this stage would be problematic. We aren’t the only ones saying this either.
The fact is that the SEND system has already been massively overhauled in the last decade. In 2014, the Children and Families Act was passed, bringing wholesale changes along with it. The effect of these changes, and how well these changes have been implemented, have been the subject of wider study by respected bodies (see ‘Two suggestions for further reading’ below).
This overhaul also coincided with a slashing of budgets across the board, as part of the Government’s wider austerity agenda. The 2014 Act was ambitious and promised a lot, but the timing was poor. Much of what it promises has turned out to be just words on the page that are not put into action, largely because of an abject lack of funds.
If government did try to impose yet more radical and rapid reform on the SEND system, there is a serious risk that it would cause far more harm than good. A more cautious- and therefore safer- approach would be to fix the system that we already have. This would not only fit in with the Fabian Society’s approach of ‘gradual reform’. It would also be less disruptive overall. What the SEND system needs is not more change, but greater consistency and focus on delivering what is currently asked of it. This is the best way of delivering higher quality services and of improving outcomes for young people.
In conclusion, we feel that a change in attitudes would go a long way to improving things. If government, local authorities, and society as a whole adopted a compassionate and realistic attitude to budgets and resources, then positive results would follow. The current system could be made to work more as originally intended, and we might end up with something that truly supports some of our most vulnerable young people and their families.
Our six suggestions
- Austerity has decimated the SEND system so that it is now grossly underfunded and not fit for purpose. Funding should be reset to a realistic level. The guiding principle should no longer be ‘how much do we want to spend?’ but rather ‘what do our young people need to get the best start in life?’.
- The application of existing SEND legislation needs to be more consistent. We need to ensure that the 2014 Children and Families Act is being observed in both the spirit and the letter of the law.
- The SEND system is hard to follow. Too many families find they are having to fight for the assistance their youngsters need. The system should be reset to make it not only less adversarial, but also less of a cause of stress for many families who are already under pressure. Genuine co-operation with young people, their parents and carers should be the norm. In addition, many parents and carers feel that they need more practical support and guidance, to help them navigate the system more easily.
- The general administration of SEND needs to improve. How local authorities administer SEND and allocate resources varies in quality too much. For instance, the quality of Education and Health Care Plans can vary wildly from one authority to another. There is a real danger that SEND is becoming another example of a ‘postcode lottery’.
- Teacher training and ongoing professional development needs a stronger focus on SEND. There should be specialist training and development routes for the workforce in specialist settings, and a requirement for training in inclusive settings.
- Realistic progress measures for young people with SEND should be agreed and applied. In a 2019 report the NAO noted that the Department of Education “has not specified, in measurable terms, the outcomes it wants to achieve from its support for pupils with SEND”. The Department for Education needs to be far clearer on what it wants and expects, and should communicate these to local authorities and educational institutions.
Two suggestions for further reading
The House of Commons Education Committee report into SEND (July 2019):
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201919/cmselect/cmeduc/20/20.pdf
The National Audit Office report into support for pupils with SEND in England (September 2019):
https://www.nao.org.uk/report/support-for-pupils-with-special-educational-needs-and-disabilities/
Mark Williams