Pupils who frequently miss class or are suspended during primary school should be assessed for special educational needs, a new report into SEND support recommends.
The report, by independent research group the Education Policy Institute (EPI) and funded by the Nuffield Foundation, has found evidence of “inequalities and blind spots” in SEND support across schools.
The EPI has made a string of recommendations, aimed to tackle the so-called “postcode lottery” and bring parity to the process of getting a SEND diagnosis across children from all backgrounds and schools.
The institute found factors such as “the fragmentation of the school system, prolonged school absences, language barriers and living in disadvantaged areas” are currently making make it difficult for pupils’ needs to be assessed consistently.
1. SEND should be considered if pupil frequently off sick
Pupils whose needs are hidden because of absence from school or frequent school moves are less likely to be recognised as having SEND in primary school, the EPI report, published on Tuesday, found.
For those in the top 25 per cent of pupils with the most sickness absence, their chances of receiving an EHCP in primary school are one-tenth that of those with the least sickness absence.
To tackle this, the EPI recommends “that the response to emerging school attendance problems should include consideration of whether the child may have unidentified SEND.”
2. Suspensions during primary school could indicate SEMH
The EPI also says closer attention should be paid to pupils who are suspended during primary school, and whether they may have Social Emotional and Mental Health (SEMH) needs or SEN.
Students suspended for just one day during primary school have four times the chance of being identified than those who have never been suspended, the report found.
Meanwhile, for those suspended for 11 or more days, the risk was 14 days higher.
The EPI says children suspended during key stage 2 should have their needs assessed to consider what support they could need during the transition to secondary school.
For those who don’t already have a SEND diagnosis, “consideration should be given to whether they have unidentified SEND”, says the report. Meanwhile for those with SEND diagnoses, “consideration should be given to whether they have SEMH”.
3. Research should be done into academy gap
Pupils attending academy schools or living in the most academised areas were less likely to be identified as having SEND compared with other similar pupils.
“This may be due to under-identification, fewer SEND pupils enrolling in academies, academies meeting needs without formal identification, or delays in EHCP assessments due to reduced local authority capacity,” said the EPI.
It has called for further research into the “causes and consequences of the lower rates of SEND identification for children attending academies”.
4. Identifying SEND in children whose second language English
The report also found children at all ages had a lower chance of being identified with SEND if they face barriers because English is not their first language.
In response to this, the EPI recommends that for children in this group who have low attainment, both language and SEND should be considered as “possible contributory factors”.
5. Government should consider new PSED tests
EPI also found that children with the lowest Personal, Social, and Emotional Development (PSED) scores at the age of five were 100 times more likely to receive an EHCP during primary school.
There is currently no universal national assessment of PSED after the age of five.
But the EPI describes they as a “critical early indicator for SEND”. It recommends the government, as part of the National Curriculum Review, should consider introducing further PSED assessments in early KS2 and soon after children join secondary school.
6. SEND training should be mandatory part of ITT
The report found the school a child attends “was more important than anything about the individual child in explaining who was identified with SEND”.
“This amounts to a lottery whereby SEND is identified or not according to which school a child attends,” it said.
To help address this is recommends training in child development and different types of SEND should be made a mandatory part of initial teacher training and early career development.
It is not currently part of the core content framework requirements.
7. Government should focus on reducing child poverty
The EPI found persistently disadvantaged children were three times more likely to be identified as having SEND than more affluent children in primary school, and one two two times those of other children when in Years 7 to 11.
Children living in the most deprived eighth of neighbourhoods had 300 times the odds of children in the least deprived eighth of neighbourhoods of being identified for SEN support, and 76 times the odds of receiving an EHCP.
To tackle this disparity, the EPI recommends “that the government pursues its priority of developing an effective cross-government poverty strategy”. “This must reduce the level of need in the population by reducing the proportion of children living in poverty,” it said.
Jo Hutchinson, EPI’s SEND director, added: “It is time for a renewed focus on the preparation of school staff to understand and support children’s social and emotional needs as well as their academic development.”
