Provision for students with learning difficulties in general colleges of further education - have we been going round in circles?

This is a PDF version of an article published in British journal of special education© 2006. The definitive version is available at www.blackwell-synergy.com.This article discusses the current situation for students with severe learning difficulties in general colleges of further education. Findings are presented from a critical review of the literature and a small-scale preliminary investigation which set out to explore the idea that, despite radical changes to the special school sector and to the structure and organisation of further education, provision in colleges of further education for these students is poorly focused. Students with severe learning difficulties experience provision that is, at best, circuitous and repetitive and that, at worst, leads individuals back into dependence, unemployment and social segregation. Using the outcomes of interviews and the scrutiny of inspection reports, a searching critique of current practice and an interesting set of recommendations for ways in which the situation could be radically reviewed and improved is provided

‘Nowhere that fits’ – the dilemmas of school choice for parents of children with statements of special educational needs (SEN) in England

Giving parents a choice with regard to their children’s education has been central to the political discourse of school reform at least since the 1988 Education Reform Act (ERA) (DfE, 1988). With regard to children with a statement of special educational needs (SSEN), a plethora of policies and laws (e.g. ERA, 1988; Education Act, 1996, SENDA, 2001)have given parents not only the right to choose a school, but also to appeal to decisions in the best interest of their children. Yet, despite the discourse the implementation and practice of such reforms are neither assured nor simple. Participants in the study indicated that they have little choice of suitable provision and are having to compromise either the academic or the social aspects of their child’s schooling. This paper argues that for many parents whose children have a statement of SEN the choice of a school is often a dilemma as nowhere seems to fit

Problematising parent–professional partnerships in education

The value of, and need for, parent–professional partnerships is an unchallenged mantra within policy relating to ‘special educational needs’. In spite of this, partnerships continue to be experienced as problematic by both parents and professionals. This paper brings together the different perspectives of two disability researchers: one a parent of a disabled child while the other was a teacher for 20 years of children with the label autism. The paper deconstructs the concept of partnership and then, drawing on the expertise of parents, suggests how enabling and empowering parent–professional relationships might be achieved

Problematising parent–professional partnerships in education

The value of, and need for, parent–professional partnerships is an unchallenged mantra within policy relating to ‘special educational needs’. In spite of this, partnerships continue to be experienced as problematic by both parents and professionals. This paper brings together the different perspectives of two disability researchers: one a parent of a disabled child while the other was a teacher for 20 years of children with the label autism. The paper deconstructs the concept of partnership and then, drawing on the expertise of parents, suggests how enabling and empowering parent–professional relationships might be achieved

Needs or rights? A challenge to the discourse of special education

It is nearly 30 years since Mary Warnock's Report of the Committee of Enquiry into the Education of Handicapped Children and Young People introduced the phrase ‘special educational needs’ into the UK education system. In this article, Katherine Runswick-Cole, Research Associate at Manchester Metropolitan University, and Nick Hodge, Principal Lecturer in Research Development at Sheffield Hallam University, argue for the abandonment of the ‘special needs’ discourse, claiming that it has, in fact, led to exclusionary practices within education. Building on the work of early years educators in Reggio Emilia schools in Northern Italy, the authors advocate for the adoption of the phrase ‘educational rights’ and suggest that the positive impact of such a linguistic turn would be significant for the lives of young people currently described as having ‘special educational needs’ and for children's rights

Professionalizing school governance: the disciplinary effects of school autonomy and inspection on the changing role of school governors

Since the 1980s, state schools in England have been required to ensure transparency and accountability through the use of indicators and templates derived from the private sector and, more recently, globally circulating discourses of ‘good governance’ (an appeal to professional standards, technical expertise, and performance evaluation as mechanisms for improving public service delivery). The rise of academies and free schools (‘state-funded independent schools’) has increased demand for good governance, notably as a means by which to discipline schools, in particular school governors – those tasked with the legal responsibility of holding senior leadership to account for the financial and educational performance of schools. A condition and effect of school autonomy, therefore, is increased monitoring and surveillance of all school governing bodies. In this paper, I demonstrate how these twin processes combine to produce a new modality of state power and intervention; a dominant or organizing principle by which government steer the performance of governors through disciplinary tools of professionalization and inspection, with the aim of achieving the ‘control of control’. To explain these trends, I explore how various established and emerging school governing bodies are (re)constituting themselves to meet demands for good governance

‘We’ve got a few who don’t go to PE’: Learning support assistant and special educational needs coordinator views on inclusion in physical education in England

Britain’s 1981 Education Act stimulated a partial migration of pupils from special to mainstream schools. The onus has since been on teachers to meet the needs and capitalise on the capabilities of pupils with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) in mainstream school settings. The research analysed learning support assistant (LSA) and special educational needs coordinator (SENCO) views on inclusion in physical education (PE). Individual interviews were conducted with 12 LSAs and 12 SENCOs working in mainstream schools in North-West England. Open, axial and selective coding was performed on interview transcripts to identify reoccurring themes. The research found that SENCOs and LSAs considered PE to be an inclusive subject, the conceptualisation of which was left to them. However, developing PE provision that met the needs and optimised the capabilities of pupils with autism spectrum disorders (ASD), and supporting pupils with SEND during team games and competitive sports, were identified as key challenges to inclusion in PE. This may be of concern to some educationalists given that these types of curriculum activities have recently been repositioned at the heart of PE in England. A key challenge for all those involved in educating pupils with SEND in PE, especially teachers and LSAs, is to plan and teach team games and competitive sports in ways that meet the needs of and stretch all pupils, in particular those with ASD

The School Sport Co-ordinator Programme: Changing the Role of the Physical Education Teacher?

Over the last decade or so, young people have increasingly become a focus of UK sport policy. Fuelled in part by concerns such as the increasing levels of childhood inactivity and obesity, and the lack of international success in sport, a plethora of policy initiatives aimed at young people have been developed. In April 2000, the government published its sport strategy document, A Sporting Future for All, pulling together all the threads of recent policies, and in it, restating its commitment to youth sport, sport in education, excellence and sport in the community. One such policy initiative, the School Sport Co-ordinator programme, is the focus of this paper. The School Sport Co-ordinator programme, currently being introduced into schools in England, is an initiative that involves two government departments (sport and education) and a number of other agencies, reflecting the government's current agenda to ensure 'joined up policy' thinking. It aims to develop opportunities for youth sport through co-ordinated links between PE and sport in schools, both within and outside of the formal curriculum, with those in local community sports settings. The essence of the School Sport Co-ordinator programme is to free up nominated teachers in schools from teaching to allow them time for development activities, specifically to encourage schools and community sports providers to work in partnership. This paper draws on data from an ongoing research project examining the implementation of one School Sport Co-ordinator partnership, 'northbridge'. Drawing on in-depth interviews, it explores the perceptions of the newly established School Sport Co-ordinators of their changing role. The paper highlights some of the initial tensions and challenges for them in their task of working across different educational and sporting contexts

“you say… i hear…": Epistemic gaps in practitioner-parent/carer talk

© The Author(s) 2018. • Policy guidance has often focused on the need for strong partnerships between parents/carers and practitioners to support the learning of children labelled with Special Educational Needs and/or Disabilities (SEND). • Despite this policy focus, relationships between parents/carers and practitioners are often difficult. • This chapter explores the nature of these difficulties drawing on the work of Lipsky (1971) and McKenzie and Scully (2007). • In conclusion, there are suggestions for how partnership working between parents/carers, practitioners and children might be developed

Social capital theory: a cross-cutting analytic for teacher/therapist work in integrating children's services?

Reviewing relevant policy, this article argues that the current 'integration interlude' is concerned with reformation of work relations to create new forms of 'social capital'. The conceptual framework of social capital has been used by government policy-makers and academic researchers to examine different types, configurations and qualities of relationships, including professional relations, and how these may function as resources. Focusing on the co-work of teachers and speech and language therapists, this analysis introduces social capital as a means of understanding the impact of integrating children's services on professional practitioner groups and across agencies. Social capital theory is compared to alternative theoretical perspectives such as systems and discourse theories and explored as an analytic offering a multi-level typology and conceptual framework for understanding the effects of policy and governance on interprofessional working and relationships. A previous application of social capital theory in a literature review is introduced and analysed, and instances of the additionality provided by a social capital analysis is offered. The article concludes that amongst the effects of current policy to re-design children's services are the reconstruction of professionals' knowledge/s and practices, so it is essential that such policy processes that have complex and far-reaching effects are transparent and coherent. It is also important that new social capital relations in children's services are produced by groups representative of all involved, importantly including those practitioner groups charged in policy to work differently together in future integrated services