SEN Policy Research Forum Isos report: ‘Towards an effective and financially sustainable approach to SEND in England’: Commentary by the SEN Policy Research Forum Lead Group

Isos report: ‘Towards an effective and financially sustainable approach to SEND in England’: Commentary by the SEN Policy Research Forum Lead Group

Isos report: ‘Towards an effective and financially sustainable approach to SEND in England’: Commentary by the SEN Policy Research Forum Lead Group

by Peter Gray, Co-coordinator, SEN Policy Research Forum

This commentary on the Isos report has been produced by the Lead Group of the SEN Policy Research Forum drawing on a range of perspectives and experience. Although there are some differences in emphasis across LG members, there is broad consensus with regard to its conclusions.

While we welcome the broader analysis of system issues and recognition of the need to form stronger connections between SEND/Inclusion and mainstream education policy, we have a number of concerns regarding:

The proposed removal of statutory safeguards, in the context of limited detail about how alternative systems will ensure positive experience and outcomes for children and young people with SEND. We would argue that current safeguards should be retained until there is clearer evidence of more inclusive practice in mainstream schools and settings (and guarantees being provided through other means).
The proposal for ‘national levels of need’ as a basis for clarifying mainstream school and local authority responsibilities (and potentially levels of funding and support). National and international research highlights the significant issues associated with pupil-led funding approaches (not acknowledged as a contributory factor by the Isos report). This kind of ‘within-child’ model would be at odds with the Equality Act/removing barriers agenda. It also ignores the current rights of pupils with SEND to a mainstream school education and implies a lower level of mainstream responsibility for pupils with more significant needs.
The promotion of a top-down theory of change. While we recognise the need for national policy changes, we would argue that these should focus on broader areas of development (such as more positive value for pupils with SEND and relative achievement within the education system, stronger commitment to removing barriers to mainstream access, more inclusive and accessible curriculum with changes to the current assessment framework, clearer mainstream school accountability for SEND quality and outcomes and associated developments in national inspection systems). We are less convinced that top-down changes to SEND systems will be effective, especially given the current levels of mistrust at parent, school and local authority level. The best way of addressing these would be for the Government to support local development and extension of innovative good practice where these is already evidence of common commitment to alternative systems (and in which all parties are positively involved).

The Isos report proposes a significant period of transition while new systems and processes are established. We would argue that, with increasing costs and levels of dissatisfaction, work to develop positive alternatives needs to start now. Local initiatives could be supported through modification/extension of the focus of the current SENDAP Change Programme so that this is less constrained by national priorities (which may be less effective than initially imagined).

The detailed commentary is available here to download.