Search

IntroductionThis paper reports on a small-scale Citizens’ Panel pilot project using deliberative democratic methods to produce policy ideas about inclusion in school education of young people with special educational needs and disabilities (SEN/D) in England. The project had two aims: (i) to obtain information about modifying a Citizens’ Panel process to enhance the effective participation of young people with SEN/D; and (ii) to generate more nuanced, grounded and integrated policy ideas about inclusion than can be found in recent English school education policy.MethodsThe Citizens’ Panel was a two phase deliberative process. Phase 1 involved working with six young people with SEN/D and their parents/carers to shape the Citizens’ Panel agenda, and to obtain information about how they could participate and communicate their perspectives during the events. Phase 2 involved the delivery of the Citizens’ Panel itself, which comprised 28 people: the six young people from phase 1, plus four young people without SEN/D, 13 parents/carers, and five education professionals.ResultsThe process evaluation revealed the need for and impact of meticulous planning using a differentiated and strengths-based approach to design. While participants reported that taking part in the Citizens’ Panel was overall, a positive and worthwhile experience, the differentiated approach involved trade-offs that affected the experiences of some participants without SEN/D, though not detrimentally. The panel produced distinctive ideas about more inclusive schools, where almost all of the themes were about general school changes for everyone. Most general themes involved some specific SEN/D aspects, with only one theme being SEN/D specific. This paper illustrates how these ideas are more nuanced, grounded and integrated than those in current national policy.DiscussionThis paper provides evidence of how deliberative approaches can be used within and between schools, groups of schools (e.g., multi academy trusts), local networks (including local authorities), as well as at the national level. Lessons drawn show how deliberative methods used by advocacy groups, protest movements and non-governmental organisations in support of more transformational change can be developed in ways that enable young people with SEN/D to participate and have their voices heard.

This paper addresses an identified gap in research during the COVID-19 pandemic: how the disruption impacted on pupils with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) attending specialist (i.e., non-mainstream) settings in England. Estimates provided by around 200 special school and college leaders at two timepoints during the pandemic are used to provide overall estimates of the extent to which the pandemic and time spent out of school had on the academic and developmental progress of pupils in these settings. We find that the reported effects are greater than those reported elsewhere for pupils in mainstream settings. In line with research involving the mainstream school population in England, we find that the reported effects on academic and developmental progress were greater for pupils facing economic disadvantage. Additional data from our survey of leaders reveal that the reasons for the reported impact on pupils were: (i) limited access to school or college and the extended periods of non-attendance; (ii) the widespread disruption to the delivery of health and care provision for pupils with complex SEND; (iii) the particular way in which COVID protections and restrictions impacted the curriculum offer in specialist provisions; and (iv) limited digital access, which affected home learning. Looking to post-COVID recovery, special school and college leaders identify an urgent need for tailored support for their communities.

In just seven of its almost 400 pages, the Warnock Report set out an ambitious programme for research and development in special education. The Committee not only identified areas in need of further investigation, revealed via the Inquiry process, but went beyond this, with recommendations designed to improve teachers' involvement in and engagement with research, and the processes of translating research into practical tools and strategies for practitioners in schools and classrooms. Warnock's vision reimagined academic roles as being more applied and in-touch with practice on the ground, created spaces for teachers to contribute to and conduct research, and suggested an elementary architecture for a coordinated, and more democratized approach to research in special education. This paper explores the development of some of the Warnock Inquiry's key proposals on research and development in special education. In the first half of this paper, we consider how the progress made to improving teachers' relationship with research and usage of research findings. It is suggested that much of what has emerged in the UK in recent years regarding the principles and mechanisms for moving the mainstream teaching profession to adopting evidence-based practices are prefigured in the Inquiry report. The second half of the paper revisits the Committee's research priorities and describes how the specific proposals relating to improving school-based research were addressed. We then consider the research priorities of today, and in particular, how “big data” might be harnessed to improve our understanding and knowledge of the impacts of the more inclusive, less segregated, approaches to schooling that the Warnock Committee precipitated.