Exposure to bullying among students with autism spectrum conditions: A multi-informant analysis of risk and protective factors

Research has consistently shown that children and young people with autism spectrum conditions (ASC) are more likely to be bullied than those with other or no special educational needs. The aim of the current study was to examine risk and protective factors that could help to explain variation in exposure to bullying within this group. A sample of 722 teachers and 119 parents reported on their child’s experience of being bullied. This response variable was regressed onto a range of explanatory variables representing individual and contextual factors. The teacher- and parent-rated regression models were statistically significant, explaining large proportions of variance in exposure to bullying. Behaviour difficulties and increased age were associated with bullying in both models. Positive relationships and attending a special school were associated with a decrease in bullying in the teacher model, with use of public/school transport predicting an increase. In the parent model, special educational needs provision at School Action Plus (as opposed to having a Statement of Special Educational Needs) was a significant risk factor, and higher levels of parental engagement and confidence were associated with reductions in bullying. These findings are discussed in relation to the ASC literature, and opportunities for intervention are considered

A Reappraisal of Children’s ‘Potential’

What does it mean for a child to fulfil his or her potential? This article explores the contexts and implications of the much-used concept of potential in educational discourses. We claim that many of the popular, political and educational uses of the term in relation to childhood have a problematic blind spot: interpersonality, and the necessary coexistence for the concept to be receivable of all children’s ‘potentials’. Rather than advocating abandoning the term—a futile gesture given its emotive force—we argue that the concept of children’s potential must be profoundly rethought to be workable as a philosophical notion in education. In an era marked by the unspoken assumption that ‘unlimited potential’ is always a good thing, we argue that it might be necessary to think about the limitations of the notion of individual potential; namely, the moment when it comes into contact with other people’s projects. We propose a conceptualisation of potential as the negotiated, situated, ever-changing creation of a group of individuals, in a process marked by conflict, and which remains essentially difficult.This is the final version of the article. It first appeared from Springer via http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11217-016-9508-

Development of inclusive education in England: Impact on children with special educational needs and disabilities

This is an accepted manuscript of a book chapter published by Springer Routledge in the Handbook on Promoting Social Justice in Education, available online: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74078-2_151-1 The accepted version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Please refer to the publisher's terms and conditions for re-use.This chapter considers a historical account of the development of inclusion in England and the changes made to the education of children with SEND since the 1940s. The chapter details the development of inclusive education, the complexity of defining inclusion, and what inclusion has come to mean in current practice. This historical account is considered alongside the development and dominance of the standards agenda. In considering inclusion in this manner, the original intentions of its agenda are questioned against the practical implementation of inclusive education in current practice. The chapter concludes by proposing that significant progress has not been made with inclusion because it has not been possible to accommodate it within the competing political agendas replete in England’s education system

Self-Esteem and Education

Proceedings of the International Colloquium between the Graduate School of Education, Kyoto University (Japan) and the Institute of Education, University of London (UK): 25 March-26 March 2008 Clark Hall Institute of Education, University of Londo