From the Warnock Report (1978) to an Education Framework Commission: a novel contemporary approach to educational policy making for pupils with special educational needs /disabilities

This is the final version. Available on open access from Frontiers Media via the DOI in this recordThis paper argues that the significance of the Warnock Report after 40 years goes beyond the impact of its deliberations and recommendations on UK policy and practice and its wider international influence. The Report’s significance also highlights the nature of provision for pupils with SEN and disabilities and the changing context of policy making in contemporary liberal democratic society. This paper shows the strong inter-connection between SEN and inclusion with other aspects of educational provision as the basis for proposing that future policy directions depend on general policy processes. It then argues that policy for pupils with SEN illustrates the democratic deficits in educational and policy-making processes in general. It uses this analysis to conclude that without grappling with these bigger policy issues we cannot expect some crucial questions in the field to be addressed more coherently and convincingly either conceptually or practically. Drawing on a post-democracy political analysis (Crouch, 2000). and contemporary ideas about deliberative democracy (Fishkin, 2018), with a recognition of the plural values that underlie policy tensions (Dahl, 1982). it proposes an Education Framework Commission (EFC). The Commission would set policy priorities as a settlement that has the potential to reconcile plural and sometimes contrary value positions. It would aim to design a ten-year consensual educational policy framework, within which political parties and governments will work; a framework that could be renewed after this period. An EFC would cover all key aspects of education including designs for including the diversity of learners. Finding common ground between different social and political value perspectives involves deliberative democratic principles and approaches that could influence representative democratic policy making. Though this proposal arises in an English context it has international relevance to the project of renewing ideas and values about the nature of schooling in a way that takes genuine account of SEN and disabilities

Interpreting RCT, process evaluation and case study evidence in evaluating the Integrated Group Reading (IGR) programme: a teacher-led, classroom-based intervention for Year 2 and 3 pupils struggling to read

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Taylor & Francis (Routledge) via the DOI in this record.Almost 20% of English pupils still experience difficulties in reading despite a predominantly phonics approach that works well for most children, but not for all; so other approaches need to be explored. The IGR programme involves an inclusive approach to targeted teaching led by class teachers using a group-based class organisation and the integration of diverse research-based approaches (language and phonics-based). IGR has been evaluated in thirty-four English schools in five varied local authority areas using a cluster randomised design and a process evaluation. IGR was found to support enjoyment of reading with as much reading gains as the more phonics-oriented programmes used in control classes. Following its use, there were gains in teachers’ self-efficacy in teaching reading, and no negative effects on the class pupils’ reading. This study shows what a more inclusive approach to targeted reading intervention can achieve with a well-resourced programme. Questions can be about the interpretation of RCT findings when it comes to classroom-based educational interventions, and about teacher choice in opting for alternate teaching approaches.Nuffield Foundatio

An innovative classroom reading intervention for Year 2 and 3 pupils who are struggling to learn to read: Evaluating the Integrated Group Reading Programme

Executive summary and project report - May 2018Nuffield Foundatio

Research about inclusive education: Are the scope, reach and limits empirical and methodological and/or conceptual and evaluative?

This is the final version. Available from Frontiers Media via the DOI in this record. This paper argues for a broader conception about research into inclusive education, one that extends beyond a focus on empirical factors associated with inclusive education and the effects of inclusive education. It starts with a recent summary of international research into the effects of inclusive education on students with SEN/disabilities and those without. On the basis of this review, it examines a model showing the complexity of factors involved in asking questions about the effects of inclusive education. This complexity reflects the ambiguity and complexity of inclusive education, which is discussed in terms of varied contemporary positions about inclusive education. The analysis illustrates how there has been more focus on thin concepts of inclusion (as setting placement or in general terms) rather than its normative and value basis, which reflects a thick concept of inclusion. The paper concludes by illustrating with the use of a version of the capability approach how there are value tensions implicit in inclusion about difference and about personal vs. public choice. This requires value clarification and some settlement about the balance of values, which is where deliberative democratic principles and processes have a crucial role. The proposed answer to the paper’s question about the scope, reach and limits of research in inclusive education is that such research involves both empirical, methodological, and evaluative matters. Educational research about inclusive education is not just empirical, it also involves value and norm clarification, a process which has been too often ignored

Thinking about the nature of educational research: going beyond superficial theoretical scripts

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Wiley via the DOI in this record.This paper questions the idea that there are two opposing paradigms of educational research, often called positivist versus interpretivist. It argues that the ‘paradigm’ term has been used to avoid philosophical discussions about the nature of educational research. This has been done by understanding ‘paradigms’ to reflect metaphysical positions about connect epistemological and ontological assumptions. Problems with this conception of ‘paradigms’ are discussed including how to justify combining different research methods. The paper also criticises treating pragmatism as a ‘paradigm’ by distinguishing between everyday pragmatism and philosophical pragmatism. Philosophical pragmatism is presented as a diverse approach that is naturalistic, fallibilistic and overcoming of false dichotomies, that can risk leading to a self-defeating relativism. How these have been addressed are then discussed. This has involved introducing some transcendental or impersonal elements into pragmatism without reverting to a metaphysical realism. This involves a discussion of various philosophical perspectives, pragmatic realism, evolutionary epistemology and critical realism, as relevant to educational research. The final section draws on a version of Dewey’s pragmatist model of inquiry informed by some of Habermas’s early and later epistemological ideas as the basis for thinking about educational research that encompasses flexible and combined methodological approaches. The paper places research methodology as having a central focus in educational research, with its links to epistemology and methods. It concludes that pragmatist assumptions contribute to understanding educational research, its methodologies and the design of plural and flexible research methods, even if there are continuing philosophical investigations

Academisation of Schools in England and Placements of Pupils With Special Educational Needs: An Analysis of Trends, 2011–2017

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available via the DOI in this recordThis paper aims to examine the changes in school composition in England from 2011 to 2017 by school type and school phase; the speed of academisation by region; and the changes in the proportions of pupils with special educational needs (SEN) at SEN Support and EHC Plan levels overall. We analyse publicly available school level data from the National Pupil Database (NPD) to document two simultaneous trends in English education between 2011 and 2017. First, we observe an increasing percentage of the schools that have become Academies, especially in the secondary mainstream sector, but also among primary schools, special schools and pupil referral units. Second, we document a decreasing percentage of pupils who were classified as having SEN. While the decrease happened across all types of schools, it was particularly steep in Sponsored Academies. This evidence does not necessarily imply that the academisation of English schools has had a negative effect on the inclusion of pupils with SEN. However, the findings have significance to provide the basis for a more in-depth analysis of these trends and the causal effects of academisation involving individual and school level analyses. They can also inform national and local policy review of how pupils are identified as having SEN and in the context of international moves toward greater inclusive education.Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC

An inclusive model of targeting literacy teaching for 7-8 year old children who are struggling to learn to read: the Integrated Group reading (IGR) approach

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Brill via the DOI in this recordThis chapter draws on the background thinking and research which has informed a current research project that has been evaluating an additional literacy teaching programme designed for 7-8 year old children who are struggling to learn to read. The rationale for the chapter is to illustrate challenges and practices in inclusive teaching in a very important area of teaching and learning. The framework of thinking that informs the design of the Integrated Group Reading (IGR) approach is the wave model (Griffiths & Stuart, 2013; Rose, 2006). In its UK form the wave model distinguishes between wave 1 (or universal or Quality First teaching), wave 2 or targeted teaching and wave 3 specialist teaching. In its typical presentation and use, the model is unclear about important questions in relation to what characterises each wave and what their relationship is to each other. One of the key issues is to what extent wave 1 teaching is meant to be adapted or differentiated for the diversity of children in a class. Is wave 1 teaching meant to provide for children who struggle to learn to read, for example for more than a year, and whose reading is well below some notional average? It is widely assumed that wave 1 teaching differentiates to some degree for different rates and styles of learning, but if some children cross a cut-off (say, well below average attainment for a year) and move to wave 2 (targeted teaching) how is this to be organised? In targeted teaching, designed to be supplementary to wave 1 teaching, are the identified children also participating in wave 1 teaching? Or does wave 2 teaching become their main form of literacy teaching? Also, how does the kind of teaching of reading in wave 2 (in terms of assumptions about reading and how to learn to read) relate to the kind of teaching done in wave 1? And, who teaches the wave 2 identified children and where does this teaching take place

Putting RCTs in their place: implications from an RCT of the Integrated Group Reading approach

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Taylor & Francis (Routledge) via the DOI in this record.This paper describes the context, processes and issues experienced over 5 years in which a RCT was carried out to evaluate a programme for children aged 7-8 who were struggling with their reading. Its specific aim is to illuminate questions about the design of complex teaching approaches and their evaluation using an RCT. This covers the early development by the originator and work to develop and design a RCT funded trial. The experimental, process evaluation and case studies findings are summarised. It is argued that if RCT is the only credible evaluation approach, that there is no strong evidence for IGR use. But, if RCT as the first-choice evaluation approach needs to be supplemented by process evaluation, then a positive process evaluation might save IGR for further development and evaluation trials. However, it is suggested that conceptualising IGR as a complex teaching intervention also raises questions about RCT as the method of first choice. It is argued that a Designed-Based Research approach to scaling up IGR, an example of a Design & Research approach, might have been tried. The reasons why this was not done are explored with implications for the place of RCTs in improving teaching and learning.Nuffield Foundatio

Parents’ experiences of choosing a special school for their children

This is the final version. Available on open access from Routledge via the DOI in this recordThis paper is about English parents’ experiences of making decisions about special school placements in the national context of rising special school placements and more parental choice and school diversity. The aim of this research was to investigate whether the current legislative focus on optimising parent choice operates as intended from the parents’ perspective. More specifically, it aimed to examine the views of parents of pupils in special schools in the South West of England: their reasons for choosing special school, the extent to which they felt they had an independent choice and their views on alternative provision. Fifty seven parents with children in special schools in three local authority special schools completed an online questionnaire that collected numerical and textual data. Analysis showed that the top three factors influencing decisions were school atmosphere, caring approach to pupils and class size, a finding that connected with their concepts of inclusive education. These and other findings point to the limitations of the choice-diversity model implemented over the last few decades in England. The research illustrates distinctive parental perspectives on schooling, inclusive education and the dilemmas they experience in choosing provision for their children

Addressing Dilemmas and Tensions in Inclusive Education

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from OUP via the DOI in this record.Inclusive education has become a prominent international ideal and value in educational policies and practices. It is a seemingly simple concept about opportunities, equality, and solidarity that has wide global appeal. However, inclusion as applied to education connects with various social and political values that have been contested over many decades. One issue that underlies inclusion as a value is whether it represents a single coherent value or multiple values that can come into tension leading to dilemmas that need to be resolved. This issue is often overlooked in considerations about inclusive education but does affect various key issues about differentiation in the design of curricula and assessment, the location of provision, and how difference is identified and labeled and about participation in the social interaction between students who are different. This is an issue that needs to be addressed