The Scale Of England's Special Educational Needs Crisis

(MENAFN- The Conversation) A group of MPs has delivered a blistering verdict on the state special educational needs in England. In a new report , the public accounts committee call the system“unaffordable” and warn that the Department for Education (DfE)“risks a lost generation of children leaving school without receiving the help they need”.

Special educational needs support is administered by local authorities, and they are struggling to cope.

There has been a 140% increase in the number of children and young people with education, health and care (EHC) plans since 2015. EHC plans are reserved for those with complex needs.

ECH plans are designed to ensure that children get the support they are entitled to to meet their special educational needs. This may include personal budgets, specialist educational provision, transport or support from specialist staff or teaching assistants.

About 1.9 million children and young people have special educational needs and 576,000 have an EHC plan, which local authorities are required to fund. The rise in the number of children with EHC plans means that despite a rise in government funding, the amount given per plan has fallen.

Most local authorities spend more than their allocated funding for pupils with high needs. This has resulted in financial deficits. Some local authorities are at risk of going bankrupt.

Waiting times for special needs assessments to be carried out are lengthy, and in 2023, only half of children received an EHC plan within the 20-week target time. Parents often appeal when a local authority decides not to offer a child an EHC plan, and most of these appeals are upheld.

The increase in the number of children with special educational needs in England is seen in other countries. One reason for the increase in numbers is that more people are seeking a diagnosis. In some cases, changing diagnostic criteria has also led to an increase in diagnoses.

The Public Accounts Committee report makes several recommendations. These include the need to improve decision-making at local authority level, and understand more about why demand for special educational needs support is increasing. It recommends improving teacher training and continuing professional development, and improving earlier identification of special educational needs.

Improving decision making in local authorities is an important step in the right direction, but lack of funding to meet demand will mean that local authorities will still need to prioritise how resources are allocated. Improving knowledge about the underlying factors that result in special educational needs will enable the government to focus on systemic interventions that target the root causes of special educational needs and disabilities.

Teachers already working in classrooms will benefit from professional development that helps them to meet the specific needs of the pupils that they are teaching. It is also important to acknowledge that teachers have many competing demands on them, as they balance the needs of some children against those of others.

Adding more special educational needs and disabilities content to the teacher training and early career framework is a reasonable response, but this needs to be done with care. Evidence suggests that 35 hours of professional development is a reasonable time to have an effect. One-off professional development events are likely to have less effect.

New intensive training and practice opportunities in initial teacher training courses have been introduced to help new teachers put theory into practice. Focusing one or more of these on special educational needs seems to be a reasonable suggestion.

The government also intends to introduce an 18-month professional leadership qualification for schools' special educational needs coordinators. However, this is replacing a previous qualification, which was taught at universities . This suggests a move to a less intellectually rigorous programme of professional development, which undermines the credibility of the new professional leadership qualification.

In 2024 the DfE committed to investing £21 million to train 400 more educational psychologists. This builds on 200 trainees whose training has already been funded. However, given the current demand, this figure is far too small and will probably result in minimal impact.

There is no specific reference in the Public Affairs Committee report to the existing, and important, role of the Education Mental Health Practitioner (EMHP).

EMHPs are employed by the NHS and provide vital and timely in-school clinical support for children and young people. They carry out assessments of pupils' needs and work in schools to support pupils' mental health. They also help schools to develop a whole school approach to mental health.

However, most schools do not have access to an EMHP. The government has stated that in 2023, just over a third of pupils had access to an EMHP and there are plans to increase this to 50% by April 2025. This is not enough.

Extending this service to all pupils would ensure that all pupils can receive rapid mental health support in their school, thus reducing the likelihood of mental health problems becoming more serious.

What is clear from reading this report is that the current system is broken and has reached crisis point. Additional government funding is needed, but is unlikely to ever be enough to meet the demand.

Collaboration between schools, local authorities, government and education experts is vital in finding solutions so that young people get the support they desperately need.

MENAFN29012025000199003603ID1109145474